I'm sure some people may have read about it already, but the French satirical paper 'Charlie Hebdoo' was firebombed by Islamic extremists after publishing an issue with a cover featuring a cartoon Mohammed saying '100 lashes if you don't die of laughter!' in reference to the victory of an Islamist party in the Tunisian elections.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg703.imageshack.us%2Fimg703%2F7420%2Fcharlieu.png&hash=9218d4f7e8df5c620d05e0fc5bbe53bc3f5dde69) (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/703/charlieu.png/)
I know not all Muslims are so extreme in their beliefs that they would firebomb an office because of a cartoon, but even moderate Muslims would consider this little picture blasphemous, and it would be a serious crime in any Muslim country, even carrying the death penalty in some. At the end of the day it's just a cartoon!
Leaving the silly cartoon aside, the editorial inside the magazine was apparently trying to raise the question of whether or not an Islamist party can ever truly be democratic when it believes its mandate comes from a god and 1400 year old book and not the people, which is an interesting question. Personally, I think they can be so long as the majority of the population want them and supports their policies, on the theory that democracy just means 'the rule of the people'. Having said that I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society ruled by an Islamist party, I don't think any of us would last long!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/8864063/French-satirical-newspaper-Charlie-Hebdo-firebombed-after-prophet-Mohammed-announcement.html
http://tendancecoatesy.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/charlie-hebdo-sharia-hebdo-burnt-out/
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 03, 2011, 03:29:37 PM
Having said that I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society ruled by an Islamist party, I don't think any of us would last long!
Atheists, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists would all be in the same boat in a society ruled by Islam. Look at what happens to Copts in Egypt, and they've been there 2000 years. Look at what the Taliban did to the ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. It would be the same for all of us - convert to Islam or suffer.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 03, 2011, 11:12:54 PM
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 03, 2011, 03:29:37 PM
Having said that I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society ruled by an Islamist party, I don't think any of us would last long!
Atheists, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists would all be in the same boat in a society ruled by Islam. Look at what happens to Copts in Egypt, and they've been there 2000 years. Look at what the Taliban did to the ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. It would be the same for all of us - convert to Islam or suffer.
Don't forget the current South Thailand insurgency.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 03, 2011, 11:12:54 PM
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 03, 2011, 03:29:37 PM
Having said that I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society ruled by an Islamist party, I don't think any of us would last long!
Atheists, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists would all be in the same boat in a society ruled by Islam. Look at what happens to Copts in Egypt, and they've been there 2000 years. Look at what the Taliban did to the ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. It would be the same for all of us - convert to Islam or suffer.
It's true unfortunately, Isalm is an extremely intolerant religion, but we shouldn't pretend that religious intolerance is an Islamic problem. It was exactly the same in Christian Europe for 1400 odd years, become a Christian or be tortured and executed. I'm so very glad to live in a secular, tolerant society where you can be a Christian and I can be an atheist and we can peacefully coexist.
So am I. Sadly, we don't live in a society where one can publish a relatively harmless satire on Islam without risking extreme violence. Life of Brian, fine - but one cartoon about Islam and the world goes mad.
So were Charlie Hebdo sensible to risk that? Or should they have surrendered to extremism and suppressed the cartoon? I really don't have a clear answer to that.
Quote from: OldGit on November 04, 2011, 10:26:30 AM
So am I. Sadly, we don't live in a society where one can publish a relatively harmless satire on Islam without risking extreme violence. Life of Brian, fine - but one cartoon about Islam and the world goes mad.
So were Charlie Hebdo sensible to risk that? Or should they have surrendered to extremism and suppressed the cartoon? I really don't have a clear answer to that.
I'm sure they knew what they were doing would offend Muslims and possibly result in a violent attack, but I'm all for offending Muslims, Christians or anyone else who's so easily offended. You'd find it hard to offend me, and it would be impossible to offend me with a cartoon, or offend me to the point where I'd firebomb your property full stop.
I find absolutely nothing offensive in the silly cartoon they put on the cover and I don't feel we should be prevented from satirising Islam because we then may have to fear reprisals from religious nutters. Particularly as there's plenty to poke fun at in Islam!
Blasphemy (and heresy) are historically linked to the Abrahamic religions, and show how weak their religions and gods are. The Greeks and Romans never had any blasphemy laws, their view was that the gods are strong enough to look after themselves and wouldn't care if a mere mortal blasphemed them or not. Clearly Muslims don't have that much faith in their deity.
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 04, 2011, 10:21:03 AM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 03, 2011, 11:12:54 PM
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 03, 2011, 03:29:37 PM
Having said that I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in a society ruled by an Islamist party, I don't think any of us would last long!
Atheists, Christians, Jews, Hindus and Buddhists would all be in the same boat in a society ruled by Islam. Look at what happens to Copts in Egypt, and they've been there 2000 years. Look at what the Taliban did to the ancient Buddhist statues in Afghanistan. It would be the same for all of us - convert to Islam or suffer.
It's true unfortunately, Isalm is an extremely intolerant religion, but we shouldn't pretend that religious intolerance is an Islamic problem. It was exactly the same in Christian Europe for 1400 odd years, become a Christian or be tortured and executed. I'm so very glad to live in a secular, tolerant society where you can be a Christian and I can be an atheist and we can peacefully coexist.
A secular government is good for everyone. Islam needs a Renaissance/Reformation/Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution period. Then they would become more tolerant like the West in general.
This reminds me of a similar situation in Denmark. Unfortunately the cartoonist was murdered all for a drawing of a person.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 04, 2011, 05:26:46 PM
A secular government is good for everyone. Islam needs a Renaissance/Reformation/Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution period. Then they would become more tolerant like the West in general.
I couldn't agree more, the sooner it happens the better, and hopefully it will happen before some Dark Age Muslim country like Iran manages to develop nuclear weapons. The thought of that seriously scares me :(
I think tolerance is the most important thing in the world.
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 04, 2011, 05:55:23 PM
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 04, 2011, 05:26:46 PM
A secular government is good for everyone. Islam needs a Renaissance/Reformation/Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution period. Then they would become more tolerant like the West in general.
I couldn't agree more, the sooner it happens the better, and hopefully it will happen before some Dark Age Muslim country like Iran manages to develop nuclear weapons. The thought of that seriously scares me :(
Shiiit (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCySTWFcnlM&feature=related), Pakistan is more of a threat at the moment because they do have nuclear weapons and have not joined the NPT (a treaty to stop the spread of nuclear weapons), with the relationship between America and Pakistan not looking very good at moment and allegations and some evidence that the Pakistan Intelligence service are working and helping the Taliban. Thee BBC has a good documentary series on at the moment about the current relationship with Pakistan and their involvement in the war, Secret Pakistan - episode 2, backlash (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b016ynl1/Secret_Pakistan_Backlash/).
Quote from: Crow on November 04, 2011, 08:48:53 PM
Pakistan is more of a threat at the moment because they do have nuclear weapons and have not joined the NPT (a treaty to stop the spread of nuclear weapons), with the relationship between America and Pakistan not looking very good at moment and allegations and some evidence that the Pakistan Intelligence service are working and helping the Taliban.
Fortunately for the West, India is watching Pakistan very closely, and India has nukes, as well. Don't you think that it's more likely that India and Pakistan would nuke it out first before Pakistan would begin using its weapons against Western targets? India really hates Pakistan, and has a good relationship with Israel.
Israel right now is considering destroying targets in Iran to stop their nuclear development. Let's say Israel strikes Iran, and this agitates the Islamic fundamentalists all through the region. If Pakistan starts rattling it's nuclear sword, you can bet that India will respond. A nuclear exchange between those two countries would not surprise me in that situation. India sort of acts as a buffer to anything Pakistan does.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 05, 2011, 01:10:08 PM
Quote from: Crow on November 04, 2011, 08:48:53 PM
Pakistan is more of a threat at the moment because they do have nuclear weapons and have not joined the NPT (a treaty to stop the spread of nuclear weapons), with the relationship between America and Pakistan not looking very good at moment and allegations and some evidence that the Pakistan Intelligence service are working and helping the Taliban.
Fortunately for the West, India is watching Pakistan very closely, and India has nukes, as well. Don't you think that it's more likely that India and Pakistan would nuke it out first before Pakistan would begin using its weapons against Western targets? India really hates Pakistan, and has a good relationship with Israel.
Israel right now is considering destroying targets in Iran to stop their nuclear development. Let's say Israel strikes Iran, and this agitates the Islamic fundamentalists all through the region. If Pakistan starts rattling it's nuclear sword, you can bet that India will respond. A nuclear exchange between those two countries would not surprise me in that situation. India sort of acts as a buffer to anything Pakistan does.
Before India and Pakistan both had nuclear weapons they had 5 full scale wars. Since they both became nuclear powers they have had none. Nothing concentrates the mind of a politician better than facing a nuclear arsenel. In a nuclear exchange Pakistan has more to lose nuke-for-nuke. It is a smaller country with a smaller population with it's high value targets and population in higher densities. In a nuclear war Pakistan would lose.
Quote from: Tank on November 05, 2011, 01:32:35 PM
Before India and Pakistan both had nuclear weapons they had 5 full scale wars. Since they both became nuclear powers they have had none. Nothing concentrates the mind of a politician better than facing a nuclear arsenel. In a nuclear exchange Pakistan has more to lose nuke-for-nuke. It is a smaller country with a smaller population with it's high value targets and population in higher densities. In a nuclear war Pakistan would lose.
Yes, this is true. However, now the prospect of fundamentalists taking over Pakistan must be considered. Islamic fundamentalists don't fear destructive warfare as much as normal people - they figure they will go to heaven and Allah will sort it all out on earth. I agree that Pakistan would lose a nuclear exchange with India. I'm just not so certain that would keep a fundamentalist Pakistan from firing the first shot.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 05, 2011, 01:10:08 PM
Fortunately for the West, India is watching Pakistan very closely, and India has nukes, as well. Don't you think that it's more likely that India and Pakistan would nuke it out first before Pakistan would begin using its weapons against Western targets? India really hates Pakistan, and has a good relationship with Israel.
Israel right now is considering destroying targets in Iran to stop their nuclear development. Let's say Israel strikes Iran, and this agitates the Islamic fundamentalists all through the region. If Pakistan starts rattling it's nuclear sword, you can bet that India will respond. A nuclear exchange between those two countries would not surprise me in that situation. India sort of acts as a buffer to anything Pakistan does.
In the hypothetical event that some sort of war did break out due to their interactions with the Taliban I don't think Pakistan would be the aggressor, they would have everything to lose and nothing to gain. If this kind of scenario did take place I think India would give support but largely standby waiting for an outcome.
Quote from: Ecurb Noselrub on November 05, 2011, 02:06:22 PM
Quote from: Tank on November 05, 2011, 01:32:35 PM
Before India and Pakistan both had nuclear weapons they had 5 full scale wars. Since they both became nuclear powers they have had none. Nothing concentrates the mind of a politician better than facing a nuclear arsenel. In a nuclear exchange Pakistan has more to lose nuke-for-nuke. It is a smaller country with a smaller population with it's high value targets and population in higher densities. In a nuclear war Pakistan would lose.
Yes, this is true. However, now the prospect of fundamentalists taking over Pakistan must be considered. Islamic fundamentalists don't fear destructive warfare as much as normal people - they figure they will go to heaven and Allah will sort it all out on earth. I agree that Pakistan would lose a nuclear exchange with India. I'm just not so certain that would keep a fundamentalist Pakistan from firing the first shot.
Can't deny the logic of this. If fundimentalist Islamists do get into the driving seat in Pakistan there could be a temptation to sling a few nukes around to demonstrate a willingness to use them. However OBL was no fool and fundimentalist leaders could well see a nuclear umbrella as a protection under which they can do an awful lot of conventional terrorist damage. Would the USA et al been so keen to invade Afganistan is it had been a nuclear power? I doubt it. The possibility of nuclear retaliation was one significant factor taken into consideration bythe USA when they considered invading Pakistan in 2009.
Was the cartoon identified as Mohammed? It just looks like a generic cartoon Arab to me.
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on November 05, 2011, 06:39:18 PM
Was the cartoon identified as Mohammed? It just looks like a generic cartoon Arab to me.
I guess that's how you draw a cartoon Mohammed! I think it is supposed to be Mohammed because the little red bit above says that Mohammed's the guest editor for the week, and it has the same cartoon face as the main picture.
As an aside i was reading about Stuxnet last week, a rather clever computer virus that targeted the Iranian nuclear programme, that was most probably a covert creation of the US and / or Israel. Good to see these countries have been thinking of ways to halt Iranian nuclear ambitions that doesn't involve bombs!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-11388018
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/205827/was_stuxnet_built_to_attack_irans_nuclear_program.html
Quote from: Too Few Lions on November 08, 2011, 11:54:03 AM
Quote from: BooksCatsEtc on November 05, 2011, 06:39:18 PM
Was the cartoon identified as Mohammed? It just looks like a generic cartoon Arab to me.
I guess that's how you draw a cartoon Mohammed! I think it is supposed to be Mohammed because the little red bit above says that Mohammed's the guest editor for the week, and it has the same cartoon face as the main picture.
Oh, OK -- that explains a lot.
QuoteAs an aside i was reading about Stuxnet last week, a rather clever computer virus that targeted the Iranian nuclear programme, that was most probably a covert creation of the US and / or Israel. Good to see these countries have been thinking of ways to halt Iranian nuclear ambitions that doesn't involve bombs!
Shhhh. We're out of money for bombs, keep it to yourself.