------=_Part_19951_661937.1139107710974
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
i recently wrote to my friend who is a devout muslim and sweet as sweet can
be to ask about how he feels about the issue. i have a hard time knowing
how i feel because i can't really gauge how offensive it is to have a
picture of the prophet mohammed. as chris said, the way i understand it
it's blasphemy. blasphemy like using the lord's name in vain? i'm sure
it's more than that. blasphemy like a cartoon of jesus masturbating?
maybe. the offense is somewhere in that spectrum and probably leaning
towards the latter. free speech is a tough thing. there is a line. i'm
not sure where it is, but there is. especially for a newspaper. they have
a responsibility to be truthful but also not hateful. i can't decide if
they were being hateful. or just really really stupid.
but certainly, i agree with all that burning embassies is obviously the
wrong way to respond, and just further deepens the misunderstanding between
the muslim and western worlds. arrrrrrgh. it's frustrating to read about
in the news.
i'll forward any relevant info from my friend to you guys.
On 2/4/06, Vishal Soni wrote:
>
> This is off topic but of potential interest to this group: How people view
> various countries
>
> http://www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbcpoll06-3.html
> I know I know. They only polled about 40,000 or so people so the results
> are to be taken with a few grains of salt. Nevertheless, thought provoking .
>
> -V
>
> On 2/4/06, Vishal Soni wrote:
> >
> > I found those cartoons to be in extremely poor taste. I agree that from
> > a free speech perspective those newspapers can print anything they want .
> > But exercising this right to offend so gravely someone's sensibilities for
> > nothing more than cheap laughs is abusing the right to free speech.
> >
> > Burning down embassies is no way to respond either. It's ... infantile.
> > But I worry that this behavior will, once again, be generalized to all
> > Muslims. Just like the people that burnt these emabssies attributed the
> > cartoons to all Danes.
> >
> > -V
> >
> > On 2/4/06, John Kapusky wrote:
> > >
> > > I don't see the humor, so probably don't get it. Like Seinfeld humor
> > > in England, it just doesn't work here. Its a shame that in the world
> > > something can get someones ire up some much that they would want to kill
> > > another person over it or burn down their embassy... Its just a drawing
!
> > >
> > > On 2/4/06, Matt Rudary wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I completely agree with you that newspapers shouldn't be intimidated
> > > > into not printing this. It's a real shame, though, that the cartoons
> > > >
> > > > aren't terribly clever or funny. This may be the reason that they
> > > > haven't been reprinted in US newspapers -- why print something
> > > > insulting
> > > > to people without making a point? Further, I don't think US
> > > > newspapers
> > > > have as much to worry about with respect to freedom of the press as
> > > > European papers do. It's thus more important to the European papers
> > > > to
> > > > assert that right.
> > > >
> > > > Matt
> > > >
> > > > Daniel Reeves wrote:
> > > > > And by the way, I'm completely serious about this. I think this is
> > > > a way
> > > > > that improvetheworld can literally improve the world.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, please don't be shy about chiming in on this. Once the
> > > > first
> > > > > message is sent it's really no more burden for people to delete
> > > > the
> > > > > whole thread (as long as you leave the subject line intact).
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > (PS, I can see from the web logs that lots of you have viewed the
> > > > > pictures already so don't pretend you're not listening! :)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- \/ FROM Daniel Reeves AT 06.02.04 17:03 (Today) \/ ---
> > > > >
> > > > >> A Danish newspaper recently published cartoons depicting Mohammed
> > > > and
> > > > >> muslims as terrorists. Muslims are up in arms about it. In
> > > > fact,
> > > > >> they've burnt down the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Syria,
> > > > as a
> > > > >> start.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> It's all over the news but no US newspaper has the backbone to
> > > > print
> > > > >> the cartoons. I guess terrorism works. So this is an opportunity
> > > > to
> > > > >> fight for free speech by helping make sure the agenda of the
> > > > radical
> > > > >> religious right backfires. And so, improvetheworld brings you:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/itw/mohammed
> > > > >> (or google improvetheworld)
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Oh, and since muslims are calling for boycotts of Danish products
> > > > in
> > > > >> response to those cartoons, you should also buy more Danish
> > > > stuff.
> > > > >> Like Legos.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ,
> > > > >> Danny
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > John J. Kapusky
> >
> >
> >
>
------=_Part_19951_661937.1139107710974
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
i recently wrote to my friend who is a devout muslim and sweet as sweet
can be to ask about how he feels about the issue. i have a hard
time knowing how i feel because i can't really gauge how offensive it
is to have a picture of the prophet mohammed. as chris said, the
way i understand it it's blasphemy. blasphemy like using the
lord's name in vain? i'm sure it's more than that.
blasphemy like a cartoon of jesus masturbating? maybe. the
offense is somewhere in that spectrum and probably leaning towards the
latter. free speech is a tough thing. there is a
line. i'm not sure where it is, but there is. especially
for a newspaper. they have a responsibility to be truthful but
also not hateful. i can't decide if they were being
hateful. or just really really stupid.
but certainly, i agree with all that burning embassies is obviously the
wrong way to respond, and just further deepens the misunderstanding
between the muslim and western worlds. arrrrrrgh. it's
frustrating to read about in the news.
i'll forward any relevant info from my friend to you guys. On 2/4/06,
Vishal Soni < soniv Æ umich.edu > wrote:
This is off topic but of potential interest to this group: How people view
various countries
http:/ /www.globescan.com/news_archives/bbcpoll06-3.html
I know I know. They only polled about 40,000 or so people so the
results are to be taken with a few grains of salt. Nevertheless,
thought provoking.
-V On 2/4/06, Vishal Soni <
soniv Æ umich.edu > wrote:
I found those cartoons to be in extremely poor taste. I agree that from
a free speech perspective those newspapers can print anything they
want. But exercising this right to offend so gravely someone's
sensibilities for nothing more than cheap laughs is abusing the right
to free speech.
Burning down embassies is no way to respond either. It's ... infantile.
But I worry that this behavior will, once again, be generalized to all
Muslims. Just like the people that burnt these emabssies attributed the
cartoons to all Danes.
-V On 2/4/06, John Kapusky <
jjk514 Æ gmail.com > wrote:
I don't see the humor, so probably don't get it. Like Seinfeld
humor in England, it just doesn't work here. Its a shame that in
the world something can get someones ire up some much that they would
want to kill another person over it or burn down their embassy...
Its just a drawing!
On 2/4/06, Matt Rudary < mrudary Æ umich.edu > wrote:
I completely agree with you that newspapers shouldn't be intimidated into not
printing this . It's a real shame, though, that the cartoons
aren't terribly clever or funny. This may be the reason that they haven 't
been reprinted in US newspapers -- why print something insulting to people
without making a point? Further, I don't think US newspapers
have as much to worry about with respect to freedom of the press as European
papers do. It's thus more important to the European papers to assert that
right. Matt Daniel Reeves wrote: > And by the way , I'm completely serious
about this. I think this is a way
> that improvetheworld can literally improve the world. > > ; Also,
please don't be shy about chiming in on this. Once the first > message is
sent it's really no more burden for people to delete the
> whole thread (as long as you leave the subject line intact). > ; >
> (PS, I can see from the web logs that lots of you have viewed the >
pictures already so don't pretend you're not listening! : )
> > > --- \/ FROM Daniel Reeves AT 06.02.04 :03 (Today) \/ ---
> >> A Danish newspaper recently published cartoons depicting
Mohammed and >> muslims as terrorists . Muslims are up in arms about it.
In fact,
>> they've burnt down the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Syria , as a
>> start. >> >> It's all over the news but no US newspaper
has the backbone to print >> the cartoons. I guess terrorism works. So
this is an opportunity to
>> fight for free speech by helping make sure the agenda of the radical
>> religious right backfires. And so, improvetheworld brings you:
>> >>
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/dreeves/itw/mohammed >> ; (or
google improvetheworld) >> >> Oh, and since muslims are calling
for boycotts of Danish products in >> response to those cartoons, you
should also buy more Danish stuff.
>> Like Legos. >> >> <ducking>, >> ; Danny >
> -- Regards, John J. Kapusky
------=_Part_19951_661937.1139107710974--
|
