Friday, February 24, 2006
Ta boo or Not Ta Boo
All this violence over nothing but a bunch of caricatures. I cant believe we live in the 20th century.I am not a person who typically typecasts people. I understand the cartoon was trying to do so and hence my initial opinion on the cartoon was that it was not the right thing.
But then again which sensible man takes cartoons seriously...thats it the precise reason they are called cartoons Duh...
Then the violence in the Islamic regions began, and it was I kept thinking to myself I guess the artist who sketched those caricatures did have a point. These guys are violent. Their religious leaders are the ones who call for killings of human beings. There is nothing wrong with the artist or the paper that carried the caricatures, if there is anything wrong it is with the people who protested against the caricatures and in turn burned down embassies.
I beleive it is a known fact that arab newspapers carry articles ridiculing Israel and the Jewish religion. Well for Islamists thats OK cause the Jews arent terrorists what are they going to do.
But it was ridiculous how editors got fired immediately after the Islamists protested, I bet the first thing the owner of the paper thought was, I dont wanna be on the wrong side of these terrorists.
I understand that drawings of Mohammed are taboo, but they are taboo to people who beleive in Islam, why do I have to believe in what Islamists beleive. I believe Christianity forbids the worshipping of any other God, so if Islamists think the rest of the world should respect their Taboos I guess they should start by respecting other religious taboos as well. Also slaughtering of the cow is taboo in Hinduism, can the Mslims in India which is a primarily Hindu country abide by those rules. No they cant but they still expect others to abide by rules that their religion prescribes. Aint that ridiculous!
We live in the 20th century, where I believe we all have the freedom of speech, if some person chooses to abuse that right, well you can speak up against that person but killing him or violence is not the solution. I understand that freedom of speech and similar liberal thoughts are not what muftis teach in madrasas, but then you can take your teachings and live in your 16th century world, why meddle with rational human beings.
I respect all the newspapers that carried the carricature, if more editors had the balls they would have too. We need to stand up to these fundamentalist bullies and let them know that "We are not afraid".
But then again which sensible man takes cartoons seriously...thats it the precise reason they are called cartoons Duh...
Then the violence in the Islamic regions began, and it was I kept thinking to myself I guess the artist who sketched those caricatures did have a point. These guys are violent. Their religious leaders are the ones who call for killings of human beings. There is nothing wrong with the artist or the paper that carried the caricatures, if there is anything wrong it is with the people who protested against the caricatures and in turn burned down embassies.
I beleive it is a known fact that arab newspapers carry articles ridiculing Israel and the Jewish religion. Well for Islamists thats OK cause the Jews arent terrorists what are they going to do.
But it was ridiculous how editors got fired immediately after the Islamists protested, I bet the first thing the owner of the paper thought was, I dont wanna be on the wrong side of these terrorists.
I understand that drawings of Mohammed are taboo, but they are taboo to people who beleive in Islam, why do I have to believe in what Islamists beleive. I believe Christianity forbids the worshipping of any other God, so if Islamists think the rest of the world should respect their Taboos I guess they should start by respecting other religious taboos as well. Also slaughtering of the cow is taboo in Hinduism, can the Mslims in India which is a primarily Hindu country abide by those rules. No they cant but they still expect others to abide by rules that their religion prescribes. Aint that ridiculous!
We live in the 20th century, where I believe we all have the freedom of speech, if some person chooses to abuse that right, well you can speak up against that person but killing him or violence is not the solution. I understand that freedom of speech and similar liberal thoughts are not what muftis teach in madrasas, but then you can take your teachings and live in your 16th century world, why meddle with rational human beings.
I respect all the newspapers that carried the carricature, if more editors had the balls they would have too. We need to stand up to these fundamentalist bullies and let them know that "We are not afraid".
Comments:
var zgi_url = 'http://www.flickr.com/apps/badge/badge_iframe.gne?zg_bg_color='+zg_bg_color+'&zg_person_id=63313892%40N00&zg_set_id=72057594077179943&zg_context=in%2Fset-72057594077179943%2F';
<< Home
well thats what the qhle quip was about. I could tolerate the politicians apologizing, thats what they do. But the fourth estate bought to its feet, what kind of hooliganism is this that make leaders of the Print media apologize for something that is their right and their responsibility to do.
@elf: I agree that the paper should have also displayed the caricatures of Jesus, although the refusal to publish caricatures of Jesus is just speculation. The west is not holier than thou, but it is far more open.
All forms of media have an agenda, exactly my point but that does not give someone a reason to commit arson.
Post a Comment
All forms of media have an agenda, exactly my point but that does not give someone a reason to commit arson.
var zgi_url = 'http://www.flickr.com/apps/badge/badge_iframe.gne?zg_bg_color='+zg_bg_color+'&zg_person_id=63313892%40N00&zg_set_id=72057594077179943&zg_context=in%2Fset-72057594077179943%2F';
<< Home
