How are the Wahabis any different from the Europeans were say 200 years ago? How are their mindset any different from the "whitemans burden"? In due time they too will find a way forward, like humanity has in general throughout its existence in the world. I honestly see no difference between the radicals batllecries from those heard from other groups and people in the west in the past. The problem lies not in the faith, or the ideology itself but from peoples interpration of a certain ideology in a way where they use it to argue a moral high ground that is superrior to everyone else. For them being Muslims is a virtue in itself and is justification enough as to why they "must" help the heathen souls, not much anlike the mindset behind christian missionaries....

What you all fait to grasp is that as far as the Danish eppisode is concerned is that it has provided the spark for many to vent out their frusturations, in the west and the east alike. That's why you see rioting in not only Stockholm but also in Jakarta and Islamabad and various other placec over the issue. The rioting masses are not just about what that specific Danish newspaper has done but about the frustration they feel over the attack on Muslim identity as personified by the crusades, their experiences with imperialism and collonialism, etc. etc.

The Muslims ignorance of the west is as much to blame as the wets ignorance of muslims. The real issue is a lack of honest dialogue and communications between the peoples. For the average Pakistani the west is antimuslim to begin with, also they can off the top of their heads count hundreds of instances that "prooves" that the west is just pure evil and that is why they do everything they can to opress and demean muslims. That mindset has its prevalent counterpart in the western societies also. And until these issues are adressed and people come together in honest discourse and realize that at the end they are not all tat different from each other these kinds of problems will continue to surface at every opportunity, which plays right into the hands of the fanatics on both sides.

Yilmaz101 wrote:
how does the holocaust and the West's policy on Holocaust fit in with your so called civil liberties.

Very easy Yilmaz! and exactly the same way that the freedom of speech works. A Civil Court will say if you're guilty or not regarding the holocaust. It is the same with the cartoons.

Yilmaz101 wrote:
I honestly see no difference between the radicals batllecries from those heard from other groups and people in the west in the past.

But Yilmaz101, as you say, "in the west and in the past", that's the problem IMO. No separation between personal, religious and individual belief and Civil Law.
Muslims are still socially living in 1351 A.C.. From a technological point of view they live in the 21st century, just like us, but socially..................................
I agree with Jericoacoara when he says that perhaps he wouldn't have published the cartoons if he was in charge of the danish newspaper, but for sure it is covered by the freedom of speech.
Imagine in a Muslim country a TV network putting Mahoma into a microwave. I've seen a crucifix into an oven. If this is not consider as an insult for our western society, why the Mahoma cartoons must be considered that way. Why do I have to feel guilty because of the cartoons. Not at all. If anyone feel is against their belief just hire a solicitor and try to get a compensation


Terry wrote:
I have even less respect for the radical Islamists that believe every person not of Islam needs to be destroyed. These terrorists within Islam need to be hunted down and killed like the rabid dogs they are

This is for sure. I fully agree with Terry here. They must be hunted down or put behind bars for a life time sentence. Apart from these two options, I'm sorry to say this, but there is not any other IMO.

But God did bless you with water, which you dispese in the Mid-East. Therein lies your power.   


-Terry

Nobody is willing to pay anything but bullets for water. 

Jabato, they know people in other part of the world may speak freely. It is that they are afraid to speak out lest their own turn on them. 



-Terry

Jericoacoara wrote:
Jabato, I have a theory that some of the real fanatical muslims were born in western countries rather than the country where their parents were born.

Yes I agree with you, but then it is something deep inside the muslim religion itself. How can we explain that the third generation of Algerians in France are not integrated into the french society? How can we explain that there are neibourghoods in Paris where you just can't buy spirits? We shoudln't forget Salman Rusdhie and the death sentence that ayatolahs put over his head. It works, IMO, more or less the same way that socialism/comunism used to work: if you do not agree with them, you have to be beheaded. It does not matter where you are or the multiples reasoning you use to back your points of view, it is irrelevant. What is really important is that you disagree with them.

Jericoacoara wrote:
Many muslims living in islamic ruled countries are basically just trying to work and provide for their family.

This is for sure Jericoacoara. I know some of them who are really very nice people, but even those people still believe that there is some sort of offense in the danish cartoons, but they don't see that offense when christians are the ones insulted. What I mean is that the spanish muslim communty "boss" do not call journalists to make a declaration saying that freedom of speech is oout of any question, apart from Judge Courts

Saludos para todos, folks

Machio, to them you do, as they believe that Mohammad is the only true God and they want the whole world to be Islamic. 

Well it would depend on what type of muslim is answering, a moderate one or a fanatical one.

A moderate muslim would say that you are being disrespectful to their religion by drawing cartoons depicting a person of worship rather than the muslims who the cartoon is intended to depict.

A fanatical muslim would beat the issue up to enhance his personal agenda of jihad by promoting the "west is trying to destroy islam" angle of it.