Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

_ The Wikipedia Annex _ Everybody Draw Mohammed Day

Posted by: Eva Destruction

Three-to-one-on that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Did_you_know#Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day results in (1) someone being blocked, (2) someone saying "do you know who I am?", (3) someone whining on Jimmy Wales's talkpage and/or (4) a mention in the Register. You heard it here first.

Posted by: Ottava

For laughs, I hope people merely take older (PD) images (hopefully very famous) and merely claim them as a depiction of Mohammad. The less likely the better. By technicality, the Muslims who get angry over it should still be angry as merely labeling someone as the prophet would be enough since we don't actually know what he looks like (and could look like Henry VIII in full royal gown).

By the way, Gatoclass would probably only whine and is not likely to go to Jimbo.

Posted by: Eva Destruction

QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 5th May 2010, 3:16pm) *

By technicality, the Muslims who get angry over it should still be angry as merely labeling someone as the prophet would be enough since we don't actually know what he looks like (and could look like Henry VIII in full royal gown).

Uh - we know exactly what he looked like, since http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_ibn_Abi_Talib helpfully left a description:
QUOTE
[Muhammad] is neither too short nor too tall. His hair is neither curly nor straight, but a mixture of the two. He is a man of black hair and large skull. His complexion has a tinge of redness. His shoulder bones are broad and his palms and feet are fleshy. He has long hair growing from neck to navel. He has long eye-lashes, close eye-brows, smooth and shining fore-head and a long space between his shoulders. When he walks he walks inclining as if coming down from a height. I never saw a man like him before him or after him


Posted by: Ottava

* [Muhammad] is neither too short nor too tall. - Rather vague.
* His hair is neither curly nor straight, but a mixture of the two. - Also vague and veriable
* He is a man of black hair and large skull. His complexion has a tinge of redness. -Any black and white image should accommodate this (and large skull? whatever that means)
* His shoulder bones are broad and his palms and feet are fleshy. - He has some weight to him, perfect for Henry VIII
* He has long hair growing from neck to navel. - Why would his nephew describe his bare chest? Creeepppyyy.
* He has long eye-lashes, close eye-brows, smooth and shining fore-head and a long space between his shoulders. - Whatever this means.
* When he walks he walks inclining as if coming down from a height. I never saw a man like him before him or after him - I doubt we'd depict him walking.


See, not too hard to apply to others.

Posted by: Moulton

Well, at least he doesn't look like a sheeple, a salmon, a centaur, or a killer pooch.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Moulton @ Wed 5th May 2010, 2:35pm) *

Well, at least he doesn't look like a sheeple, a salmon, a centaur, or a killer pooch.


Sheeples are adorable!

Posted by: HRIP7

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 3:09pm) *

Three-to-one-on that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Did_you_know#Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day results in (1) someone being blocked, (2) someone saying "do you know who I am?", (3) someone whining on Jimmy Wales's talkpage and/or (4) a mention in the Register. You heard it here first.

You're probably right. biggrin.gif There is also a fair chance the word "wiki-hounding" might be used at some point in the future, in reference to anyone that disagrees more than once with Cirt. evilgrin.gif

That aside, is it a good hook/article for the main page?

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 5th May 2010, 9:16am) *

For laughs, I hope people merely take older (PD) images (hopefully very famous) and merely claim them as a depiction of Mohammad. The less likely the better. By technicality, the Muslims who get angry over it should still be angry as merely labeling someone as the prophet would be enough since we don't actually know what he looks like (and could look like Henry VIII in full royal gown).

By the way, Gatoclass would probably only whine and is not likely to go to Jimbo.


For laughs you want to use Free Kulture to give offense, spread ill will and intolerance. Sounds about right both for you and Free Kulture.

Posted by: Eva Destruction

QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Wed 5th May 2010, 3:55pm) *

That aside, is it a good hook/article for the main page?

No; quite aside from the recentism problem—in six weeks time, nobody will care about this event—it's just plain boring. A "did you know" section ought to at least pay lip service to the idea of "wow, I didn't know that!", not "of course I didn't know that because nobody except those directly involved gives two fucks".

Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic

Sounds to me that in reality the big M is in a witness protection program.

Posted by: HRIP7

Ah, the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Bushranger&diff=prev&oldid=360308923 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cmadler&diff=prev&oldid=360290303. I guess that's how you make friends and allies in Wikiland.

Let's see if http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cmadler&action=historysubmit&diff=360301278&oldid=359630632 will develop into full-fledged persecution of Gatoclass. popcorn.gif

Posted by: gomi

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:24am) *
Uh - we know exactly what he looked like, since http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_ibn_Abi_Talib helpfully left a description:
QUOTE
[Muhammad] is neither too short nor too tall. His hair is neither curly nor straight, but a mixture of the two. He is a man of black hair and large skull. His complexion has a tinge of redness. His shoulder bones are broad and his palms and feet are fleshy. He has long hair growing from neck to navel. He has long eye-lashes, close eye-brows, smooth and shining fore-head and a long space between his shoulders. When he walks he walks inclining as if coming down from a height. I never saw a man like him before him or after him

That sounds just like this guy:
Image

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(gomi @ Wed 5th May 2010, 5:14pm) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:24am) *
Uh - we know exactly what he looked like, since http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_ibn_Abi_Talib helpfully left a description:
QUOTE
[Muhammad] is neither too short nor too tall. His hair is neither curly nor straight, but a mixture of the two. He is a man of black hair and large skull. His complexion has a tinge of redness. His shoulder bones are broad and his palms and feet are fleshy. He has long hair growing from neck to navel. He has long eye-lashes, close eye-brows, smooth and shining fore-head and a long space between his shoulders. When he walks he walks inclining as if coming down from a height. I never saw a man like him before him or after him

That sounds just like this guy:



OMG! Infidel!

Posted by: HRIP7

QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Wed 5th May 2010, 3:55pm) *

QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Wed 5th May 2010, 3:09pm) *

Three-to-one-on that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Did_you_know#Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day results in (1) someone being blocked, (2) someone saying "do you know who I am?", (3) someone whining on Jimmy Wales's talkpage and/or (4) a mention in the Register. You heard it here first.

You're probably right. biggrin.gif There is also a fair chance the word "wiki-hounding" might be used at some point in the future, in reference to anyone that disagrees more than once with Cirt. evilgrin.gif

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jayen466&action=historysubmit&diff=360409066&oldid=360078906

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 5th May 2010, 2:16pm) *

For laughs, I hope people merely take older (PD) images (hopefully very famous) and merely claim them as a depiction of Mohammad.


Muhammad, at age 12, naked:

Image

Oh shit. Now Larry Sanger's going to report me to the FBI!

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(anthony @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:07am) *

Oh shit. Now Larry Sanger's going to report me to the FBI!


Oh! Two for the price of one. Nice. : D Quick, upload it to Commons!

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:41am) *

Sheeples are adorable!

Not as adorable as http://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2010/03/peeps-recipes-how-to-make-peepshi-sushi-rice-krispies-treats-easter.html.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:19am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Wed 5th May 2010, 7:41am) *

Sheeples are adorable!

Not as adorable as http://www.seriouseats.com/recipes/2010/03/peeps-recipes-how-to-make-peepshi-sushi-rice-krispies-treats-easter.html.


OMG. That needs to have an article page.

Posted by: dtobias

All religion is superstitious nonsense.

If an individual wants to believe it, it's his/her own business; however, when people try to censor or restrict others on the grounds of their particular brand of superstition, they become oppressors.

Posted by: Moulton

I would go farther than Dan, to point out that religions are not the only variety of belief systems that people adopt on faith, without regard for the diligent epistemology that would confirm or refute the scientific accuracy of the beliefs in question.

It is often noted, for example, that Wikipedia is a cult which is not exactly a religion, but neither is it a well-grounded system of beliefs (or philosophical principles) and associated derivative practices.

The anachronistic and dysfunctional governance model of Wikipedia is a notable example of a failed system of beliefs and derivative practices.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:24am) *

I would go farther than Dan, to point out that religions are not the only variety of belief systems that people adopt on faith, without regard for the diligent epistemology that would confirm or refute the scientific accuracy of the beliefs in question.
{{fact}}

You obviously have not acquainted yourself with scholars such as Nicholas of Kues.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(HRIP7 @ Wed 5th May 2010, 4:26pm) *

Ah, the http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Bushranger&diff=prev&oldid=360308923 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cmadler&diff=prev&oldid=360290303. I guess that's how you make friends and allies in Wikiland.

Let's see if http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Cmadler&action=historysubmit&diff=360301278&oldid=359630632 will develop into full-fledged persecution of Gatoclass. popcorn.gif


I think that I am fairly familiar with Wikipedia and its problems, but the point of this discussion is lost on me. Could someone explain what it is that makes Cirt any worse than any other administrator (Gatoclass for example), or why Pieter Kuiper is any better than any other user who is involved on one side in Wikipedia's I/P disputes?

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:26am) *

All religion is superstitious nonsense.

I understand your perspective, Dan. But I, for one, subscribe to the values of learning, understanding, and applying the wisdom of religious teachings to our daily lives.

When it comes to Wikipediots, I really suck at it. But... in other areas, it is a help to me.

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:46am) *
You obviously have not acquainted yourself with scholars such as Nicholas of Kues.

Indeed I am not. But could you say more about his role in promoting diligent epistemology of arbitrary beliefs systems (including scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, secular political beliefs, and popular cultural beliefs)?

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

OK here it comes...

Obviously the point of this "protest" (imagine rich white people protesting the beliefs of a hard pressed and often maligned minority in the heart of the rich white peoples very own society) is to mock Muslim sensitivities about depicting Mohammad. The use of images that could not possibly be Mohammad is suppose to disarm Muslim concerns. Maybe it does. But what remains is the insensitivity that motivated the campaign. Muslims don't deserve yet another slap in the face.

Once again Wikipedia, the Wikipedians on WR and even some WRers who cannot fairly be called Wikipedians join in the mockery. Once again the most import value is our own self expression. Once again someone else has to bare the burden of our entitlement.

Speak Truth to Power.
Speak Trash to the Powerless.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:06pm) *

OK here it comes...

Obviously the point of this "protest" (imagine rich white people protesting the beliefs of a hard pressed and often maligned minority in the heart of the rich white peoples very own society) is to mock Muslim sensitivities about depicting Mohammad. The use of images that could not possibly be Mohammad is suppose to disarm Muslim concerns. Maybe it does. But what remains is the insensitivity that motivated the campaign. Muslims don't deserve yet another slap in the face.

Once again Wikipedia, the Wikipedians on WR and even some WRers who cannot fairly be called Wikipedians join in the mockery. Once again the most import value is our own self expression. Once again someone else has to bare the burden of our entitlement.

Speak Truth to Power.
Speak Trash to the Powerless.


I don't really think a group of over 1 billion people are a "minority" or that people who have the ability to wage war all over the Middle East and fly three planes into US buildings are powerless.

But thanks for trolling.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:11am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:06pm) *

OK here it comes...

Obviously the point of this "protest" (imagine rich white people protesting the beliefs of a hard pressed and often maligned minority in the heart of the rich white peoples very own society) is to mock Muslim sensitivities about depicting Mohammad. The use of images that could not possibly be Mohammad is suppose to disarm Muslim concerns. Maybe it does. But what remains is the insensitivity that motivated the campaign. Muslims don't deserve yet another slap in the face.

Once again Wikipedia, the Wikipedians on WR and even some WRers who cannot fairly be called Wikipedians join in the mockery. Once again the most import value is our own self expression. Once again someone else has to bare the burden of our entitlement.

Speak Truth to Power.
Speak Trash to the Powerless.


I don't really think a group of over 1 billion people are a "minority" or that people who have the ability to wage war all over the Middle East and fly three planes into US buildings are powerless.

But thanks for trolling.



Well if your so brave go into the slums of Cairo with your "protest."

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:06pm) *

Obviously the point of this "protest"...is to mock Muslim sensitivities about depicting Mohammad.


Well, yeah, obviously.

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(anthony @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:14am) *
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:06pm) *
Obviously the point of this "protest"...is to mock Muslim sensitivities about depicting Mohammad.
Well, yeah, obviously.

But is it trolling?

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:13pm) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:11am) *

I don't really think a group of over 1 billion people are a "minority" or that people who have the ability to wage war all over the Middle East and fly three planes into US buildings are powerless.

But thanks for trolling.



Well if your so brave go into the slums of Cairo with your "protest."


And now you just proved that they do have power across the world and would seek violence against me, verifying that your previous comments were trolling.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:19am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:13pm) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:11am) *

I don't really think a group of over 1 billion people are a "minority" or that people who have the ability to wage war all over the Middle East and fly three planes into US buildings are powerless.

But thanks for trolling.



Well if your so brave go into the slums of Cairo with your "protest."


And now you just proved that they do have power across the world and would seek violence against me, verifying that your previous comments were trolling.


What an asshole you are to invoke 9/11.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:11am) *

I don't really think a group of over 1 billion people are a "minority" or that people who have the ability to wage war all over the Middle East and fly three planes into US buildings are powerless.

I've always thought that projecting the actions of an Al Qaeda extremist group onto the lot of a billion believers would be similar to saying that a Ku Klux Klan rally represents the beliefs of all Christians.

Way to go, Ottava.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:46pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:46am) *
You obviously have not acquainted yourself with scholars such as Nicholas of Kues.

Indeed I am not. But could you say more about his role in promoting diligent epistemology of arbitrary beliefs systems (including scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, secular political beliefs, and popular cultural beliefs)?


Islam may be the world's largest religion, and is certainly one of the largest. Apparently1.3-1.5 billion according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world
Some of Islamic countries are very wealthy also. Why do you think that is "Speaking Trash to the Powerless"?

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:24am) *

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:46pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:46am) *
You obviously have not acquainted yourself with scholars such as Nicholas of Kues.

Indeed I am not. But could you say more about his role in promoting diligent epistemology of arbitrary beliefs systems (including scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, secular political beliefs, and popular cultural beliefs)?


Islam may be the world's largest religion, and is certainly one of the largest. Apparently1.3-1.5 billion according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world
Some of Islamic countries are very wealthy also. Why do you think that is "Speaking Trash to the Powerless"?


I live in America. More than 99% of the users of this site and en.WP are from the the English speaking world and Europe. Muslims are a small and hard pressed minority in our society. They are easy to pick on and vilify. Almost no one will speak up if you do. I'm speaking up for my neighbors and countrymen who are Muslims.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:22am) *

I've always thought that projecting the actions of an Al Qaeda extremist group onto the lot of a billion believers would be similar to saying that a Ku Klux Klan rally represents the beliefs of all Christians.


And by extension, that is like saying that Arbcom is representative of the Wikipedia community -- puerile, hypocritical, self-important, ill-equipped to handle editorial duties, unfit for managerial...

Oh, wait...that wasn't a good example. Hmmm.... unsure.gif

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:30pm) *

I live in America.


And if you weren't so ignorant you would realize that the world is more than America. Stop trolling already. People are tired of it.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:39am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:30pm) *

I live in America.


And if you weren't so ignorant you would realize that the world is more than America. Stop trolling already. People are tired of it.

Weak. I know you have a whole world of Muslims to hate.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:30am) *

I live in America.


Me too. I like to live in America, okay by me in America...



Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:30pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:24am) *

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:46pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:46am) *
You obviously have not acquainted yourself with scholars such as Nicholas of Kues.

Indeed I am not. But could you say more about his role in promoting diligent epistemology of arbitrary beliefs systems (including scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, secular political beliefs, and popular cultural beliefs)?


Islam may be the world's largest religion, and is certainly one of the largest. Apparently1.3-1.5 billion according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_world
Some of Islamic countries are very wealthy also. Why do you think that is "Speaking Trash to the Powerless"?


I live in America. More than 99% of the users of this site and en.WP are from the the English speaking world and Europe. Muslims are a small and hard pressed minority in our society. They are easy to pick on and vilify. Almost no one will speak up if you do. I'm speaking up for my neighbors and countrymen who are Muslims.


The Muslim population in the USA is rather well educated, many very well educated. The ones that have citizenship vote, and most are politically active. It is a small population, but probably already bigger than the USA Jewish population.

Muslims need to develop an ability to deal with stuff they may not like. Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech. I would like to see Muslims develop enough humor about themselves so they could make an ad like this one made by Israeli Jews about their own religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQQkopQSOlA

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:39am) *
Stop trolling already. People are tired of it.

We really do need to unpack the expansion of the scope of "trolling" to encompass anything and everything which one is taking exception to.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *

Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.


As is saying "You're being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:48am) *


Me too. I like to live in America, okay by me in America...




Paul Simon has a much better ear than Bernstein for appropriating the music of other cultures, but not alway for commercial success.


Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *

Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.


As is saying "Your being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."




There is a very good reason. They kill people over it in order to try and dominate and spread fear. This is to show that they cannot intimidate us.

Christ has been covered in shit in artwork and that was glorified. This is only the mere drawing of a cartoon. Get over yourself.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:51am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *

Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.


As is saying "Your being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."




There is a very good reason. They kill people over it in order to try and dominate and spread fear. This is to show that they cannot intimidate us.

Christ has been covered in shit in artwork and that was glorified. This is only the mere drawing of a cartoon. Get over yourself.

Wow.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *

Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.


As is saying "You're being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."


Since the Age of Reason most religions have learned to live with the criticism that comes their way. Why do you think Muslims can not take the same criticisms that other religions are subject to? "Dicks"? It would be, in fact, more rational to call "dicks" those who become threatening, or violent, when criticized.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

While we're talking religion, does anyone have any good Zoroastrianism jokes? smile.gif

Posted by: thekohser

The wild, broad-brush strokes on this thread make me more thankful that one of the largest initiatives at our church is to expand our inter-faith (Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist, primarily) outreach, education, and celebration efforts.

Are people really so dense as to think that caricatures of extreme and fundamentalist elements of religions do in fact represent the vast majority of practitioners of those religions?!

A new low, Wikipedia Review.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:29pm) *

The wild, broad-brush strokes on this thread make me more thankful that one of the largest initiatives at our church is to expand our inter-faith (Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist, primarily) outreach, education, and celebration efforts.

Are people really so dense as to think that caricatures of extreme and fundamentalist elements of religions do in fact represent the vast majority of practitioners of those religions?!

A new low, Wikipedia Review.


What is your point?

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:18pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *

Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.


As is saying "You're being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."


Since the Age of Reason most religions have learned to live with the criticism that comes their way. Why do you think Muslims can not take the same criticisms that other religions are subject to? "Dicks"? It would be, in fact, more rational to call "dicks" those who become threatening, or violent, when criticized.


You are certainly more reasonable than Ottava. But Muslims do have to deal with many, many Ottavas. I also think you over estimate the economic status of Muslims in America. There is great diversity, with a large and affluent exile Iranian community in LA and a even larger working class and recent immigrant community in East Dearborn. Guess who takes the brunt of the anti-Muslim hate?

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:37pm) *

You are certainly more reasonable than Ottava. But Muslims do have to deal with many, many Ottavas. I also think you over estimate the economic status of Muslims in America. There is great diversity, with a large and affluent exile Iranian community in LA and a even larger working class and recent immigrant community in East Dearborn. Guess who takes the brunt of the anti-Muslim hate?


Oh yes, I am unreasonable because I said that people should draw a simple cartoon to show that they are not afraid -after- they are threatened to be killed for making the drawing.

The death threats came first. Get a clue. You are a hate mongerer and a troll. You hide behind anonymity and take contradictory points simply so you can cause as much disruption and harm as possible. If it was possible to ignore you, most people would and you would vanish.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:43pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:37pm) *

You are certainly more reasonable than Ottava. But Muslims do have to deal with many, many Ottavas. I also think you over estimate the economic status of Muslims in America. There is great diversity, with a large and affluent exile Iranian community in LA and a even larger working class and recent immigrant community in East Dearborn. Guess who takes the brunt of the anti-Muslim hate?


Oh yes, I am unreasonable because I said that people should draw a simple cartoon to show that they are not afraid -after- they are threatened to be killed for making the drawing.

The death threats came first. Get a clue. You are a hate mongerer and a troll. You hide behind anonymity and take contradictory points simply so you can cause as much disruption and harm as possible. If it was possible to ignore you, most people would and you would vanish.


Unfortunately for you things are written down around here and once quoted you can't change the quote.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:37pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:18pm) *
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *
Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.
As is saying "You're being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."
Since the Age of Reason most religions have learned to live with the criticism that comes their way. Why do you think Muslims can not take the same criticisms that other religions are subject to? "Dicks"? It would be, in fact, more rational to call "dicks" those who become threatening, or violent, when criticized.

You are certainly more reasonable than Ottava. But Muslims do have to deal with many, many Ottavas. I also think you over estimate the economic status of Muslims in America. There is great diversity, with a large and affluent exile Iranian community in LA and a even larger working class and recent immigrant community in East Dearborn. Guess who takes the brunt of the anti-Muslim hate?


Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:47pm) *
Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.

Why is this so hard? I'm not saying "you can't criticize Islam." I'm saying you're not immune from criticism yourself for such a petty and mean spirited ploy disguised as a "protest." If to many adherents of Islam an important religious tenent is not to depict their prophet and people go out of there way to mock them for this it seems to me petty and mean.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:56pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:47pm) *
Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.
Why is this so hard? I'm not saying "you can't criticize Islam." I'm saying you're not immune from criticism yourself for such a petty and mean spirited ploy disguised as a "protest." If to many adherents of Islam an important religious tenent is not to depict their prophet and people go out of there way to mock them for this it seems to me petty and mean.

Did you make this big a deal about the Holocaust Cartoon Contest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Holocaust_Cartoon_Competition

I did not hear much complaining from Muslin sources. Its the usual: if I do it to you its good, but if you do it to me its bad.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:46pm) *
Unfortunately for you things are written down around here and once quoted you can't change the quote.
Exactly, and you made it sound like those being threatened with having their heads chopped off are the awful abusers of a poor minority that has no power!

You are so full of shit and everyone knows it. You are hateful. There is no possible way you honestly believe that the cartoons are awful, or that you honestly support the idiots who threatened to chop off the heads of the South Park people. You are just trolling.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:03pm) *
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:56pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:47pm) *
Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.
Why is this so hard? I'm not saying "you can't criticize Islam." I'm saying you're not immune from criticism yourself for such a petty and mean spirited ploy disguised as a "protest." If to many adherents of Islam an important religious tenent is not to depict their prophet and people go out of there way to mock them for this it seems to me petty and mean.

Did you make this big a deal about the Holocaust Cartoon Contest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Holocaust_Cartoon_Competition

I did not hear much complaining from Muslin sources. Its the usual: if I do it to you its good, but if you do it to me its bad.

Please don't cite Wikipedia articles to me for general background, it only debases the discussion. Of course if your point is about an article or userpage then no problem.

I have spoken out repeatedly about antisemitism on this site. I get the same "censorship" nonsense about that, too.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:30am) *
I live in America. More than 99% of the users of this site and en.WP are from the the English speaking world and Europe. Muslims are a small and hard pressed minority in our society. They are easy to pick on and vilify. Almost no one will speak up if you do. I'm speaking up for my neighbors and countrymen who are Muslims.


Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics. The small minority of Arab-Muslims in America tend to be looked at with some suspicion by Americans these days, but since nearly all the people who've been trying to blow up Americans this last quarter of a century (from La Belle discotheque to Faisal Shahzad) have been Arabic Muslims, it's not really surprizing. I'm not really sure American can be accused of "starting it" by supporting Israel. This does not excuse killing of Americans, and especially civilian Americans. Muslims aren't good citizens of France, either, and so you can't just make anti-zionism an excuse for any bunch of Muslim emigrants acting-badly.

Defending much of Islam is a losing battle. As a religion it's even more narrowminded and unforgiving than Southern Baptistism, and that's saying a lot. And its attitude toward women is some of the worst to be found in a modern religion. Frankly, a lot of it is shit (see the Wahabits and Taliban for how bad Muslim conservatives can be), and what's left is superstition. You have to look very hard to find the diamonds in its rough (okay, it has a good attitude toward treatment of guests and strangers, and it's color-blind, at least toward Muslims). But overall, there is no reason to have any great respect for it (the religion). If its followers don't wake up and perform some major surgery on it, rather like the Roman Catholics had to do when faced with modern astronomy and the reformation, the conservative and fundamentalist version of Islam is going to be source of a great deal more suffering for many of its conservative believers. The world's patience for these people has long run out. When the Arabs' oil runs out and money stops being diverted to the most nutty branches of "Islam" they're going to be even more of a world of hurt. And deserve it.

It's not a bigotry thing-- the liberal Muslims are fine with me. It's a "recognize the asshole" thing. The conservative Muslims (of which there are very many- they are NOT a tiny minority) are not fine with me.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:09pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:03pm) *
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:56pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:47pm) *
Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.
Why is this so hard? I'm not saying "you can't criticize Islam." I'm saying you're not immune from criticism yourself for such a petty and mean spirited ploy disguised as a "protest." If to many adherents of Islam an important religious tenent is not to depict their prophet and people go out of there way to mock them for this it seems to me petty and mean.
Did you make this big a deal about the Holocaust Cartoon Contest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Holocaust_Cartoon_Competition

I did not hear much complaining from Muslin sources. Its the usual: if I do it to you its good, but if you do it to me its bad.
Please don't cite Wikipedia articles to me for general background, it only debases the discussion. Of course if your point is about an article or userpage then no problem.

I have spoken out repeatedly about antisemitism on this site. I get the same "censorship" nonsense about that, too.

You did not answer my question, which makes it appear that you did not protest the Holocaust Cartoon Contest. (NB: I will site whatever sources I choose. Please do not tell me what to do.)

Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:51pm) *
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *
QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *
Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.
As is saying "Your being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."
There is a very good reason. They kill people over it in order to try and dominate and spread fear. This is to show that they cannot intimidate us.

Christ has been covered in shit in artwork and that was glorified. This is only the mere drawing of a cartoon. Get over yourself.

I'm sure Torquemada would be proud of you.

All organised religions are as bad as each other, some are just more imaginative than others.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:15pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:09pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:03pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:56pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:47pm) *


Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.

Why is this so hard? I'm not saying "you can't criticize Islam." I'm saying you're not immune from criticism yourself for such a petty and mean spirited ploy disguised as a "protest." If to many adherents of Islam an important religious tenent is not to depict their prophet and people go out of there way to mock them for this it seems to me petty and mean.


Did you make this big a deal about the Holocaust Cartoon Contest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Holocaust_Cartoon_Competition

I did not hear much complaining from Muslin sources. Its the usual: if I do it to you its good, but if you do it to me its bad.

Please don't cite Wikipedia articles to me for general background, it only debases the discussion. Of course if your point is about an article or userpage then no problem.

I have spoken out repeatedly about antisemitism on this site. I get the same "censorship" nonsense about that, too.


You did not answer my question, which makes it appear that you did not protest the Holocaust Cartoon Contest. (NB: I will site whatever sources I choose. Please do not tell me what to do.)


No I don't follow every meme on the internet or idiotic antic of Ahmadinejad with a Wikipedia Article. I have no qualms in saying that it was antisemitic and wrong. I am more concerned with addressing the ills of my own society.

Cite the Wikipedia article if you want. Makes you look stupid and I won't read it so its a waste of your time.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *
And its attitude toward women is some of the worst to be found in a modern religion.


Curious, but four predominantly Muslim countries -- Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Kyrgyzstan -- found themselves with women as heads of state.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *

Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics.


You got any stats on that nonsense, Milton?

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:04pm) *
You are just trolling.

I wonder if there is such a thing as unjust trolling.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *

Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics.


You got any stats on that nonsense, Milton?

You got any stats that say otherwise?

http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org/Factsheets5-ArabAmericans.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnic_composition_of_Muslim_Americans.png

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:03pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *

Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics.


You got any stats on that nonsense, Milton?

You got any stats that say otherwise?


Given the overall post it seems like questioning the bread in a shit sandwich.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:47am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *
And its attitude toward women is some of the worst to be found in a modern religion.


Curious, but four predominantly Muslim countries -- Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Kyrgyzstan -- found themselves with women as heads of state.

That is a bit odd. But it is the Arabs who tend to be the fundamentalists, and to export the fundie view of women.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:47pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *
And its attitude toward women is some of the worst to be found in a modern religion.


Curious, but four predominantly Muslim countries -- Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Kyrgyzstan -- found themselves with women as heads of state.


Pakistan didn't last too long with that, remember?

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:28pm) *

While we're talking religion, does anyone have any good Zoroastrianism jokes? smile.gif


Anyone? unhappy.gif

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:03pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *

Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics.


You got any stats on that nonsense, Milton?

You got any stats that say otherwise?

http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org/Factsheets5-ArabAmericans.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnic_composition_of_Muslim_Americans.png




"South Asian" is more likely to refer to Pakistan and India than Indonesian which would better be described as South East Asia, but what can you expect from Wikipedia... I'm not surprised many Muslims are Asians and of course Indonesia is a huge nation, with the highest Muslim population in the world.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE
[Muhammad] is neither too short nor too tall. His hair is neither curly nor straight, but a mixture of the two. He is a man of black hair and large skull. His complexion has a tinge of redness. His shoulder bones are broad and his palms and feet are fleshy. He has long hair growing from neck to navel. He has long eye-lashes, close eye-brows, smooth and shining fore-head and a long space between his shoulders. When he walks he walks inclining as if coming down from a height. I never saw a man like him before him or after him

In other words he looks like Sergio in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5up4PrAbbE. dry.gif

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:18pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:28pm) *

While we're talking religion, does anyone have any good Zoroastrianism jokes? smile.gif


Anyone? unhappy.gif


Zoroastor walked into a bar....

he was knocked unconscious.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:18pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:28pm) *

While we're talking religion, does anyone have any good Zoroastrianism jokes? smile.gif


Anyone? unhappy.gif

Baba Wawa: If you could be any kind of car, what would you be?
Zarathustra: Mazda Protégé.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:23pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:15pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:09pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:03pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:56pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 12:47pm) *


Is it, then, your view that for that reason Islam can not be criticized? US law forbids hate crimes against anyone, and (as little as I like its basic idea) Everybody Draw Mohammed Day does not seem to promote hate.

Why is this so hard? I'm not saying "you can't criticize Islam." I'm saying you're not immune from criticism yourself for such a petty and mean spirited ploy disguised as a "protest." If to many adherents of Islam an important religious tenent is not to depict their prophet and people go out of there way to mock them for this it seems to me petty and mean.


Did you make this big a deal about the Holocaust Cartoon Contest?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Holocaust_Cartoon_Competition

I did not hear much complaining from Muslin sources. Its the usual: if I do it to you its good, but if you do it to me its bad.

Please don't cite Wikipedia articles to me for general background, it only debases the discussion. Of course if your point is about an article or userpage then no problem.

I have spoken out repeatedly about antisemitism on this site. I get the same "censorship" nonsense about that, too.


You did not answer my question, which makes it appear that you did not protest the Holocaust Cartoon Contest. (NB: I will site whatever sources I choose. Please do not tell me what to do.)


No I don't follow every meme on the internet or idiotic antic of Ahmadinejad with a Wikipedia Article. I have no qualms in saying that it was antisemitic and wrong. I am more concerned with addressing the ills of my own society.

Cite the Wikipedia article if you want. Makes you look stupid and I won't read it so its a waste of your time.


1. In fact things are just the opposite of what you seem to think. 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day' is supported by virtually no one and is insignificant. The 'Holocaust Cartoon Contest' was supported by a national government that has also reprinted the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, and promoted that antisemitic lie at the Frankfurt Book Fair. (You will have to do without the links.)

2. Think I am stupid if you want - what you think is not in my power - but I would not have called you stupid even though I think you are wrong. Likewise with what you choose to read: that is up to you and of no interest to me.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:40pm) *

Zoroastor walked into a bar....

he was knocked unconscious.


I dunno about that one. Mr. Z. looked like a pretty solid guy:

Image


Posted by: dtobias

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:07pm) *

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.


The point is defending freedom of speech. That freedom is not now well defended because of a lack of guts in standing up to the threats of religiously motivated goons.

There have been cases where the American Civil Liberties Union defended in court the free speech rights of even the American Nazi Party. If US citizens will not defend the rights of all free speech there will soon be no free speech. Capice?

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:22pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:07pm) *

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.


The point is defending freedom of speech. That freedom is not now well defended because of a lack of guts in standing up to the threats of religiously motivated goons.

There have been cases where the American Civil Liberties Union defended in court the free speech rights of even the American Nazi Party. If US citizens will not defend the rights of all free speech there will soon be no free speech. Capice?

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything. Its like Rumsfield bombing Iraq because Afghanistan had no good targets. You are just bulling convenient targets who did you no harm.

The most serious speech that is being chilled around this event is that of American and other Western Muslims and those who might speak up against your bigotry.

How come when I speak out against antisemitism around here I don't get this kind of rancor? Bigots, all.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:34pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:22pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:07pm) *

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.


The point is defending freedom of speech. That freedom is not now well defended because of a lack of guts in standing up to the threats of religiously motivated goons.

There have been cases where the American Civil Liberties Union defended in court the free speech rights of even the American Nazi Party. If US citizens will not defend the rights of all free speech there will soon be no free speech. Capice?

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything. Its like Rumsfield bombing Iraq because Afghanistan had no good targets. You are just bulling convenient targets who did you no harm.

The most serious speech that is being chilled around this event is that of American and other Western Muslims and those who might speak up against your bigotry.

How come when I speak out against antisemitism around here I don't get this kind of rancor? Bigots, all.


Hmm..."Assholes" and "Bigots"? It seems that GlassBeadGame has either momentarily flipped his lid, or is out of rational arguments.


Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:59pm) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:40pm) *

Zoroastor walked into a bar....

he was knocked unconscious.


I dunno about that one. Mr. Z. looked like a pretty solid guy:



I hope you realized I was doing the classic bar = solid metal object and not a place to get a drink joke. ;/

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:45pm) *




Hmm..."Assholes" and "Bigots"? It seems that GlassBeadGame has either momentarily flipped his lid, or is out of rational arguments.


I'm sick of Internet Libertarian assholes and their self centered world view. Not that there aren't plenty of other sources of bigotry against Muslims in our society.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:34pm) *

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything.


Yeah, they will only chop off our heads if we do.

Stop trolling.

Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:49pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:45pm) *




Hmm..."Assholes" and "Bigots"? It seems that GlassBeadGame has either momentarily flipped his lid, or is out of rational arguments.


I'm sick of Internet Libertarian assholes and their self centered world view. Not that there aren't plenty of other sources of bigotry against Muslims in our society.


Now that got me pissing myself laughing, the notion that a middle-American has a world view on anything!

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:15pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:18pm) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 1:28pm) *

While we're talking religion, does anyone have any good Zoroastrianism jokes? smile.gif


Anyone? unhappy.gif

Baba Wawa: If you could be any kind of car, what would you be?
Zarathustra: Mazda Protégé.


Very good. I was thinking about a Star Trek shaggy dog story where Lt. Uhura has a Mazda, but it wasn't worth it.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:49pm) *

I hope you realized I was doing the classic bar = solid metal object and not a place to get a drink joke. ;/


Phooey! What kind of a Borscht Belt comic are you? hrmph.gif

We could get more laughs if McBride and Lar put on baseball caps and did "Who's on First?"


QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:21pm) *


Very good. I was thinking about a Star Trek shaggy dog story where Lt. Uhura has a Mazda, but it wasn't worth it.


Yeah, Big Mama Charlotte got her Z-drive going. But she's too erudite for me. I go for the slapstick babes. I wonder if Charlotte can do Martha Raye shtick like this:


Posted by: RMHED

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:34pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:22pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:07pm) *

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.


The point is defending freedom of speech. That freedom is not now well defended because of a lack of guts in standing up to the threats of religiously motivated goons.

There have been cases where the American Civil Liberties Union defended in court the free speech rights of even the American Nazi Party. If US citizens will not defend the rights of all free speech there will soon be no free speech. Capice?

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything. Its like Rumsfield bombing Iraq because Afghanistan had no good targets. You are just bulling convenient targets who did you no harm.

The most serious speech that is being chilled around this event is that of American and other Western Muslims and those who might speak up against your bigotry.

How come when I speak out against antisemitism around here I don't get this kind of rancor? Bigots, all.

Just because one can draw a depiction of Mohammed that doesn't necessarily mean one should do so. If your only reason for doing so is to try to cause offence, then shame on you. If your only reason for being offended is to bring about confrontation, then shame on you too.

Posted by: dtobias

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 6:45pm) *

Hmm..."Assholes" and "Bigots"? It seems that GlassBeadGame has either momentarily flipped his lid, or is out of rational arguments.


That would require him to actually have had a lid to flip, or a capacity to make rational arguments, in the first place.

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(RMHED @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56pm) *

Just because one can draw a depiction of Mohammed that doesn't necessarily mean one should do so. If your only reason for doing so is to try to cause offence, then shame on you.


Fair enough, but there are plenty of reasons to participate in "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" other than merely to cause offence. I think GBG was more on track when he suggested that a major purpose is to "mock Muslim sensitivities about depicting Mohammad".

The point isn't even to mock Muslims in general. Any (likely non-fundamentalist) Muslim who doesn't take this particular silly superstition seriously ought to be laughing along with the rest of us.'

Okay, now to get back on topic. O-|< (Muhammad ASCII art)

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(RMHED @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:34pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:22pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:07pm) *

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.


The point is defending freedom of speech. That freedom is not now well defended because of a lack of guts in standing up to the threats of religiously motivated goons.

There have been cases where the American Civil Liberties Union defended in court the free speech rights of even the American Nazi Party. If US citizens will not defend the rights of all free speech there will soon be no free speech. Capice?

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything. Its like Rumsfield bombing Iraq because Afghanistan had no good targets. You are just bulling convenient targets who did you no harm.

The most serious speech that is being chilled around this event is that of American and other Western Muslims and those who might speak up against your bigotry.

How come when I speak out against antisemitism around here I don't get this kind of rancor? Bigots, all.

Just because one can draw a depiction of Mohammed that doesn't necessarily mean one should do so. If your only reason for doing so is to try to cause offence, then shame on you. If your only reason for being offended is to bring about confrontation, then shame on you too.


You guys really don't seem to grasp the concept of free speech. It is not about what you think is nice, its about speech being free for everyone or else it is free for no one. For example, in the late 1970s, when the American Nazi Parti wanted to march through Skokie, Illinois, the local population (many of whom were Jewish Holocaust survivors) tried to have the march blocked. The American Civil Liberties Union defended the Nazi right to free speech in court even though they thought the march detestable.
http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/strwhe.html

The reason the ACLU got involved was because they knew that it is not possible to pick and choose on free speech issues. Either everyone has the right, or else we all wind up without it. Nice is not a deciding factor.



Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:58pm) *

QUOTE(RMHED @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:34pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:22pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:07pm) *

QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:58pm) *

The "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is in direct response to a Muslim group making death threats on the people involved with South Park for doing an episode that lampooned the intolerant attitude of Muslims over that sort of thing, ironically proving the point of the episode; and the cowardly corporate types who caved into this threat by censoring the followup episode (among other things, bleeping out a speech at the end which decried censorship and intolerance).

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.


Yes of course the ones with an open hand extended to the people who are different from themselves are the "intolerant" ones." Not the ones insisting that they need to be unimpeded by the concerns of others, even to the point of going out of their way to offend. A billion Muslims did not threaten South Park and neither did I. Bigot.


The point is defending freedom of speech. That freedom is not now well defended because of a lack of guts in standing up to the threats of religiously motivated goons.

There have been cases where the American Civil Liberties Union defended in court the free speech rights of even the American Nazi Party. If US citizens will not defend the rights of all free speech there will soon be no free speech. Capice?

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything. Its like Rumsfield bombing Iraq because Afghanistan had no good targets. You are just bulling convenient targets who did you no harm.

The most serious speech that is being chilled around this event is that of American and other Western Muslims and those who might speak up against your bigotry.

How come when I speak out against antisemitism around here I don't get this kind of rancor? Bigots, all.

Just because one can draw a depiction of Mohammed that doesn't necessarily mean one should do so. If your only reason for doing so is to try to cause offence, then shame on you. If your only reason for being offended is to bring about confrontation, then shame on you too.


You guys really don't seem to grasp the concept of free speech. It is not about what you think is nice, its about speech being free for everyone or else it is free for no one. For example, in the late 1970s, when the American Nazi Parti wanted to march through Skokie, Illinois, the local population (many of whom were Jewish Holocaust survivors) tried to have the march blocked. The American Civil Liberties Union defended the Nazi right to free speech in court even though they thought the march detestable.
http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/strwhe.html

The reason the ACLU got involved was because they knew that it is not possible to pick and choose on free speech issues. Either everyone has the right, or else we all wind up without it. Nice is not a deciding factor.


The ACLU was fighting for a the right of a despised group to speak out against the great weight of popular thought. That was noble on the part of the ACLU, even if the Nazis are assholes. You have the great weight of popular thought on your side and you are using it attack an innocent minority form the safety of a society that shelters you and despises them. That is cowardly.

One of the core values of free speech is to protect insular minorities from majoritarian tyranny. You are simply on the wrong side.

Free speech is more than a bunch of idiots saying "we can say anything we want, we can say anything we want" like some moronic nine year old cartoon characters. This is impossible for Internet Libertarians to grasp.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Moulton @ Thu 6th May 2010, 7:46am) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:46am) *
You obviously have not acquainted yourself with scholars such as Nicholas of Kues.

Indeed I am not. But could you say more about his role in promoting diligent epistemology of arbitrary beliefs systems (including scientific beliefs, religious beliefs, secular political beliefs, and popular cultural beliefs)?
The Wikipedia article is typically inadequate. An example of Cusa's epistemological rigor is his contribution to the debate on the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squaring_the_circle. Some scholars insisted that by increasing the number of sides of a polygon, you make it eventually indistisguishable from a circle. Cusa pointed out that in fact, the more sides (and vertices) you add, the less like a circle it becomes, because each vertex is a singularity, an interruption of continuity, as opposed to a circle which has no singularities. Beyond that, as a colleague of mine wrote some time ago,
QUOTE
This just underscores the fact that Cusanus was not the first to discover the incommensurability of a circular and a straight line. Cusanus’s discovery was to realize the implications of the incommensurability, i.e., that the circle is not incommensurable to the polygon in the same way that the diagonal of a square is incommensurable with its side. The circle is transcendental, and therefore ontologically superior, to the polygon, something which Llull did not realize.



QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:51am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 4:23pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:09am) *

Of course hate speech is forbiden, but otherwise mild humor and criticism is protected freedom of speech.


As is saying "Your being a dick to Muslims for no good reason."




There is a very good reason. They kill people over it in order to try and dominate and spread fear. This is to show that they cannot intimidate us.
Can you name one religion whose adherents have not done that at one time or another? You sound like Bernard Lewis.


QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:47am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *
And its attitude toward women is some of the worst to be found in a modern religion.


Curious, but four predominantly Muslim countries -- Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia and Kyrgyzstan -- found themselves with women as heads of state.
Milton is no dummy, but his Achilles heel seems to be his willingness to be an echo chamber for whatever the latest propaganda line may be.


QUOTE(dtobias @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:58pm) *

Of course, to our resident nincompoop GlassBeadGame, the cartoonists are the evil offenders and the censors/death-threateners are the victims.
IMHO,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clash_of_Civilizations are the evil offenders and everyone else becomes the victim.

Back to the question of Nicholas of Cusa -- despite being a Catholic Cardinal a long, long time ago, he was a progressive thinker in that he wrote De Pace Fidei, "http://www.schillerinstitute.org/transl/cusa_p_of_f.html," which is a dialog between representatives of different religious persuasions, including Islam, seeking common ground.

Posted by: Moulton

Cusa lived before Newton and Leibniz invented the Calculus, and before anyone (other than Archimedes) had worked out the mathematics of taking the limits of infinite sequences.

It took mathematicians a long time to work out a rigorous treatment of the limits of infinite sequences, and to this day, the topic remains a stumbling block for most students studying the Calculus.

Mathematics is one of the few disciplines where one can construct an air tight proof of a theorem. Most other fields of study employ methods that necessarily leave room for doubt regarding any given theory or model.

Perhaps there are better references to the work of Cusa than you have found on Wikipedia, but if those are what the public are relying on, it's unlikely anyone would be inspired to sharpen up their diligence with respect to examining the accuracy of their beliefs in any subject, let alone some arcane theorems in plane geometry.

Posted by: radek

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:49pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:34pm) *

Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything.


Yeah, they will only chop off our heads if we do.

Stop trolling.


The point is that the "they" here is misapplied - in a "those people" kind of way - and your usage of it says quite a bit about yourself. The "they" Muslims I know are not going to chop off anybody's head, for this or any other reason. At worst they may act uncomfortable if the topic is brought up in conversation. And I wouldn't blame them.

People also seem to be confusing right to free speech with generally being an asshole. You may have a constitutional or even God given right to be an asshole, but that doesn't make you any less of an asshole. In the Skokie trial ACLU was confronting government (local though it was) policy. Has the US government, or the Seattle city council or whatever passed a law forbidding depicting Mohamed? No? Then censorship has nothing to do with it.

Oh, and I'm on the internet and I confess to having some libertarian tendencies. But for this to be a libertarian issue, governments have to be involved in the equation somehow. As far as I can tell, with the whole Comedy Central flap, they're not.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(radek @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:26am) *

The point is that the "they" here is misapplied - in a "those people" kind of way - and your usage of it says quite a bit about yourself. The "they" Muslims I know are not going to chop off anybody's head, for this or any other reason. At worst they may act uncomfortable if the topic is brought up in conversation. And I wouldn't blame them.


Perhaps you didn't pay attention to the news where the creators of South Park were threatened with a beheading?

Posted by: radek

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:06pm) *

QUOTE(radek @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:26am) *

The point is that the "they" here is misapplied - in a "those people" kind of way - and your usage of it says quite a bit about yourself. The "they" Muslims I know are not going to chop off anybody's head, for this or any other reason. At worst they may act uncomfortable if the topic is brought up in conversation. And I wouldn't blame them.


Perhaps you didn't pay attention to the news where the creators of South Park were threatened with a beheading?


By the US government? Really? Or was it the entire population of Muslims of this planet?

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:06pm) *

Perhaps you didn't pay attention to the news where the creators of South Park were threatened with a beheading?
I missed that one. Was it for general tastelessness, or something more specific?

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:09am) *

I missed that one. Was it for general tastelessness, or something more specific?

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 8:06pm) *

Perhaps you didn't pay attention to the news where the creators of South Park were threatened with a beheading?



It was for depicting Mohammad, even though it was merely Mohammad in a teddy bear suit to not show him. Showing him without actually showing him was still enough to warrant threats of beheading.

Posted by: EricBarbour

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:49pm) *
QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:34pm) *
Asshole. Muslims are not stopping you, South Park or anyone else from saying anything.
Yeah, they will only chop off our heads if we do.
Stop trolling.

Image

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:06pm) *

QUOTE(radek @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:26am) *

The point is that the "they" here is misapplied - in a "those people" kind of way - and your usage of it says quite a bit about yourself. The "they" Muslims I know are not going to chop off anybody's head, for this or any other reason. At worst they may act uncomfortable if the topic is brought up in conversation. And I wouldn't blame them.


Perhaps you didn't pay attention to the news where the creators of South Park were threatened with a beheading?


Yes, by a website with a Manhattan phone number, called "RevolutionMuslim.com" with an Alexa rank of 89,749. The site denied intending the base and unjustifiably vile statement they made was a threat. They actually said something about the South Park writers might suffer the same fate as someone who was murdered. Not a very nice thing. Call the police and prosecute them. No complaint from me.

So how many people do you suppose are involved in "RevolutionMuslim.com?" Two, three, ten...maybe a hundred? I doubt anywhere near a hundred. But there are a billion Muslims. So if there are a hundred you want to punish 999,999,900 innocent people for the actions of these cretins?

Meanwhile Stan, Kyle and Butters are fine. But goddamn it they killed Kenny. Bastards.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:57am) *

Yes, by a website with a Manhattan phone number, called "RevolutionMuslim.com" with an Alexa rank of 89,749. The site denied intending the base and unjustifiably vile statement they made was a threat. They actually said something about the South Park writers might suffer the same fate as someone who was murdered. Not a very nice thing. Call the police and prosecute them. No complaint from me.

So how many people do you suppose are involved in "RevolutionMuslim.com?" Two, three, ten...maybe a hundred? I doubt anywhere near a hundred. But there are a billion Muslims. So if there are a hundred you want to punish 999,999,900 innocent people for the actions of these cretins?



Only takes one person. It only took one in the Netherlands.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:18pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:57am) *

Yes, by a website with a Manhattan phone number, called "RevolutionMuslim.com" with an Alexa rank of 89,749. The site denied intending the base and unjustifiably vile statement they made was a threat. They actually said something about the South Park writers might suffer the same fate as someone who was murdered. Not a very nice thing. Call the police and prosecute them. No complaint from me.

So how many people do you suppose are involved in "RevolutionMuslim.com?" Two, three, ten...maybe a hundred? I doubt anywhere near a hundred. But there are a billion Muslims. So if there are a hundred you want to punish 999,999,900 innocent people for the actions of these cretins?



Only takes one person. It only took one in the Netherlands.

That would leave, and please check my math, 999,999,999 innocent, but that means nothing to you in your bigotry.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:22am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:18pm) *

Only takes one person. It only took one in the Netherlands.

That would leave, and please check my math, 999,999,999 innocent, but that means nothing to you in your bigotry.


The only one being a bigot here is you, assuming that there are a billion Muslims ignorant enough to think that threatening to kill someone for drawing a picture.

See, that is the topic, regardless of how you try to twist it in your trolling.

Simple fact is, you hate everyone, so of course you'd want to promote a bigoted impression of Islam while simultaneously supporting the idea of someone threatening to kill another for a simple picture that is clearly not offensive.

Grow up.

Posted by: radek

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:18pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:57am) *

Yes, by a website with a Manhattan phone number, called "RevolutionMuslim.com" with an Alexa rank of 89,749. The site denied intending the base and unjustifiably vile statement they made was a threat. They actually said something about the South Park writers might suffer the same fate as someone who was murdered. Not a very nice thing. Call the police and prosecute them. No complaint from me.

So how many people do you suppose are involved in "RevolutionMuslim.com?" Two, three, ten...maybe a hundred? I doubt anywhere near a hundred. But there are a billion Muslims. So if there are a hundred you want to punish 999,999,900 innocent people for the actions of these cretins?



Only takes one person. It only took one in the Netherlands.


So some wack job says that bombing abortion clinics on Christmas is a gift to Jesus on his birthday. The Christians really are a murderous bloodthirsty lot. After all, all it takes is one.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:26pm) *


The only one being a bigot here is you, assuming that there are a billion Muslims ignorant enough to think that threatening to kill someone for drawing a picture.



Assuming what? If you hear a billion Muslims saying that they are only in your head you need medical attention, badly. That's my point. You don't need to punish them with your arrogant disrespect. They mean you no harm.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:32am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:26pm) *


The only one being a bigot here is you, assuming that there are a billion Muslims ignorant enough to think that threatening to kill someone for drawing a picture.



Assuming what? If you hear a billion Muslims saying that they are only in your head you need medical attention, badly. That's my point. You don't need to punish them with your arrogant disrespect. They mean you no harm.


You are the one that proclaimed what a billion Muslims apparently believed.

Here is the thing, you haven't proven that any Muslim cares except those who threaten to kill others.

It is that simple. You are defending those who spread hate and threaten to kill others. You have defended a lot of horrible things here mostly because all you want to do is spread hate. Just leave.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:38pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:32am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:26pm) *


The only one being a bigot here is you, assuming that there are a billion Muslims ignorant enough to think that threatening to kill someone for drawing a picture.



Assuming what? If you hear a billion Muslims saying that they are only in your head you need medical attention, badly. That's my point. You don't need to punish them with your arrogant disrespect. They mean you no harm.


You are the one that proclaimed what a billion Muslims apparently believed.

Here is the thing, you haven't proven that any Muslim cares except those who threaten to kill others.

It is that simple. You are defending those who spread hate and threaten to kill others. You have defended a lot of horrible things here mostly because all you want to do is spread hate. Just leave.


Last year 500,000 Muslims petitioned, peacefully and mostly with kind words, Wikipedia to not depict Mohammad with images in the WP article on their Prophet. That was a huge display which of course you belittled. So now you think they want your mockery of their belief?

Posted by: Moulton

Ode to Goys

O Fiende, niche diese Clöwne....

Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:22am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:18pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:57am) *

Yes, by a website with a Manhattan phone number, called "RevolutionMuslim.com" with an Alexa rank of 89,749. The site denied intending the base and unjustifiably vile statement they made was a threat. They actually said something about the South Park writers might suffer the same fate as someone who was murdered. Not a very nice thing. Call the police and prosecute them. No complaint from me.

So how many people do you suppose are involved in "RevolutionMuslim.com?" Two, three, ten...maybe a hundred? I doubt anywhere near a hundred. But there are a billion Muslims. So if there are a hundred you want to punish 999,999,900 innocent people for the actions of these cretins?



Only takes one person. It only took one in the Netherlands.

That would leave, and please check my math, 999,999,999 innocent, but that means nothing to you in your bigotry.


Oh the irony. wtf.gif

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 5:45am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:38pm) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:32am) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:26pm) *


The only one being a bigot here is you, assuming that there are a billion Muslims ignorant enough to think that threatening to kill someone for drawing a picture.



Assuming what? If you hear a billion Muslims saying that they are only in your head you need medical attention, badly. That's my point. You don't need to punish them with your arrogant disrespect. They mean you no harm.


You are the one that proclaimed what a billion Muslims apparently believed.

Here is the thing, you haven't proven that any Muslim cares except those who threaten to kill others.

It is that simple. You are defending those who spread hate and threaten to kill others. You have defended a lot of horrible things here mostly because all you want to do is spread hate. Just leave.


Last year 500,000 Muslims petitioned, peacefully and mostly with kind words, Wikipedia to not depict Mohammad with images in the WP article on their Prophet. That was a huge display which of course you belittled. So now you think they want your mockery of their belief?


And what right do any number of muslims have that allows them to decide what other people should or shouldn't be able to do?

It's fair enough to request that other muslims don't create images of Big M, it is not fair to request that non-muslims do.


Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:03pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *

Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics.


You got any stats on that nonsense, Milton?

You got any stats that say otherwise?

http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org/Factsheets5-ArabAmericans.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnic_composition_of_Muslim_Americans.png


This was an enjoyable exercise for me, Milton. Thank you for proving to me that Wikipedia and the "prejudiceinstitute.org" are biased and unreliable sources for your musings.

Just to give one example, your second link points to a Wikipedia article whose "Religious background" portion is drawn from the Arab American Institute. If you go to the linked source, you'll see that the AAI is citing a 2002 "Zogby International" survey of Arab Americans. Do you know who Dr. James J. Zogby is? He is the President and co-founder of the Arab American Institute. His study consisted of samples of people from only eight selected Arab nations (including the great Arab state of Israel -- that would help explain all the Jewish Arabs that Wikipedia has documented), even though there are 24 countries in the Arab League and the AAI itself notes that there are 22 Arab countries. Do you find it representative of religious distribution that a self-designed and self-managed survey excluded (out of the top 10 largest Arab countries) Arab Americans from the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th largest Arab countries?

Another Wikipedia source was this precious number entitled http://www.alhewar.org/gabriel_habib_What_About_Arab_Christians.htm In it, we can learn that:

Milton, you often impress me with your knowledge of things. Other times, you come off like a total ding-dong. This one was one of your ding-dong moments.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 10:49pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Thu 6th May 2010, 5:45pm) *




Hmm..."Assholes" and "Bigots"? It seems that GlassBeadGame has either momentarily flipped his lid, or is out of rational arguments.


I'm sick of Internet Libertarian assholes and their self centered world view. Not that there aren't plenty of other sources of bigotry against Muslims in our society.


Your regular use of insulting language, to characterize those you disagree with, seems to suggest that you are the internet asshole.

I do believe that the First Amendment is one of America's most valuable possessions. I am not sure if that makes me a libertarian (small l). I never thought about it. I certainly do not vote Libertarian, and do not much care for their politics.

I am not anti-Muslim, and one of the few articles I created on Wikipedia was concerned with a technical aspect of Islamic art. I had just started a second article on Islamic art that would have been much larger, but when I got indefed I had it deleted because there was not enough done for it to have any value.


Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Fri 7th May 2010, 1:25am) *


Back to the question of Nicholas of Cusa -- despite being a Catholic Cardinal a long, long time ago, he was a progressive thinker in that he wrote De Pace Fidei, "http://www.schillerinstitute.org/transl/cusa_p_of_f.html," which is a dialog between representatives of different religious persuasions, including Islam, seeking common ground.


I am not sure that many Jews would see Nicholas de Cusa in such a favorable light. For example there is this problem: http://www.brainyhistory.com/events/1451/september_21_1451_32634.html

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

Oddly, most Americans of a certain age were first introduced to Islamic culture with the cartoon where Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck were chased by a turban-wearing Arabian who swung a scimitar while yelling, "Hassan chop!" wacko.gif

Posted by: Moulton

Don't overlook Disney's Aladdin movies, too.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:45am) *

Last year 500,000 Muslims petitioned, peacefully and mostly with kind words, Wikipedia to not depict Mohammad with images in the WP article on their Prophet. That was a huge display which of course you belittled. So now you think they want your mockery of their belief?


1. 500,000 does not equal a billion, so, you are definitely trolling even more.

2. We haven't a clue what their religion is or any proof. With people like you around, if there were 500,000 people (highly doubtful) than it is more likely they were all fat little nerds like you who, after turning off WoW for the night, decided to spread hate and trouble

3. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia is the website that proves that it is easily faked and doesn't require anything "religious". You would have known that, but you refused to apply any standard as you would about Wikipedia. The wonderful thing is, we all know you are a hypocrite and a troll so it isn't surprising. I love the spam signatures, like "dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd ". Hell, reading how stupid so many of the statements are it is obvious that many people trolled it just to make Islam look bad.

In a similar way you are doing right now. You are such a hateful bigot.


More winning troll posts on that petition: "7:27 am PST, Dec 3, Flemming S�rensen, Denmark All muslims are TERRORISTS!!!!!!"

It is as if GBG wrote every single entry.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 7th May 2010, 1:04pm) *

Don't overlook Disney's Aladdin movies, too.


I have memories of seeing the 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad on TV sometime in the mid 1950s. I was probably around 12 when I saw it, and it fascinated me. There was an earlier, 1924, version with Douglas Fairbanks. I do not recall anything in it that would have given a negative view of Islam, rather the contrary I think.

In the long run it is the cultural contributions of the various religions that give people, of all backgrounds, something that can be shared. For example, I think The Prince's School of Traditional Arts makes a positive contribution to that. I rather wish there had been a school offering that type of studies in my own student days. http://www.psta.org.uk/

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:13am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:03pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 6th May 2010, 11:56am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Thu 6th May 2010, 2:14pm) *

Most Muslims in America are Indonesians. Most Arab-Americans are Catholics.


You got any stats on that nonsense, Milton?

You got any stats that say otherwise?

http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org/Factsheets5-ArabAmericans.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_American
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ethnic_composition_of_Muslim_Americans.png


This was an enjoyable exercise for me, Milton. Thank you for proving to me that Wikipedia and the "prejudiceinstitute.org" are biased and unreliable sources for your musings.

Just to give one example, your second link points to a Wikipedia article whose "Religious background" portion is drawn from the Arab American Institute. If you go to the linked source, you'll see that the AAI is citing a 2002 "Zogby International" survey of Arab Americans. Do you know who Dr. James J. Zogby is? He is the President and co-founder of the Arab American Institute. His study consisted of samples of people from only eight selected Arab nations (including the great Arab state of Israel -- that would help explain all the Jewish Arabs that Wikipedia has documented), even though there are 24 countries in the Arab League and the AAI itself notes that there are 22 Arab countries. Do you find it representative of religious distribution that a self-designed and self-managed survey excluded (out of the top 10 largest Arab countries) Arab Americans from the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, and 10th largest Arab countries?

Oh, yeah? What is your evidence for THAT? As you note, the AAI very well knows who Arab Americans are, and uses origin from the Arab league countries mostly to define it. BTW, the "size" (population) of Arab countries in the Arab league has little to do with Arabic descent representation in America. For example, most Arabs in the US are Lebanese, which is only the 17th most populous country in the Arab league. The second most popululous Arab league country, which you claim Zogby left out, is Iraq-- and yet Iraqi-Americans make up only 3% of Arab Americans: http://www.aaiusa.org/arab-americans/22/demographics. It wouldn't have mattered then if Zogby/AAI HAD left them out, but yet, what is your evidence that he actually did? He's well aware of their existence, as you see in the various links.

http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf
QUOTE

Milton, you often impress me with your knowledge of things. Other times, you come off like a total ding-dong. This one was one of your ding-dong moments.

Prove it. Let's see your cite for what you say above, for a start.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:45pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:13am) *

Milton, you often impress me with your knowledge of things. Other times, you come off like a total ding-dong. This one was one of your ding-dong moments.

Prove it. Let's see your cite for what you say above, for a start.


Milton, I believe this is one of the times that theory is overriding evidence, and that people want to continue their attacks against the system in any way possible because they are unwilling to possibly show what they disagree with in a neutral or sympathetic light.


Posted by: Moulton

"Gentlemen, we can disagree without being disagreeable ding-dongs." --Benjamin Franklin

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Moulton @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:55pm) *

"Gentlemen, we can disagree without being disagreeable ding-dongs." --Benjamin Franklin


Ha, ding dongs? : )

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 7th May 2010, 7:49am) *

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:45am) *

Last year 500,000 Muslims petitioned, peacefully and mostly with kind words, Wikipedia to not depict Mohammad with images in the WP article on their Prophet. That was a huge display which of course you belittled. So now you think they want your mockery of their belief?


1. 500,000 does not equal a billion, so, you are definitely trolling even more.

2. We haven't a clue what their religion is or any proof. With people like you around, if there were 500,000 people (highly doubtful) than it is more likely they were all fat little nerds like you who, after turning off WoW for the night, decided to spread hate and trouble

3. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia is the website that proves that it is easily faked and doesn't require anything "religious". You would have known that, but you refused to apply any standard as you would about Wikipedia. The wonderful thing is, we all know you are a hypocrite and a troll so it isn't surprising. I love the spam signatures, like "dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd ". Hell, reading how stupid so many of the statements are it is obvious that many people trolled it just to make Islam look bad.

In a similar way you are doing right now. You are such a hateful bigot.


More winning troll posts on that petition: "7:27 am PST, Dec 3, Flemming S�rensen, Denmark All muslims are TERRORISTS!!!!!!"

It is as if GBG wrote every single entry.


Of course in any petition of that size your going to have mischief. In that petition you have very, very little. The fact remains that it was a tremendous expression of opposition to Wikipedia disregard for their religion. Maybe the most significant display of such opposition on any issue to date. Of course the Internet Libertarians of Wikipedia are incapable of the self-restraint needed to care. Their own freedom to do whatever they want always trumps everything else. Then WMF hires consultants to figure out why Wikipedia is not held in high regard by the same people their community just shat upon.

In Ottavas twisted world of selfish and self centered me-ism gone wild a person who speaks up for people from other cultures who he melanges is a"hateful bigot" while http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=29454&view=findpost&p=234859and a host of other crimes because he doesn't like their religion. There are Internet Libertarians, and they are bad enough, selfish and entitled but at the end of the day mostly just misdirected and mistaken. And then there is Ottava... something worse, vile and full of hate.

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Kwork @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:22am) *

I have memories of seeing the 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad on TV sometime in the mid 1950s. I was probably around 12 when I saw it, and it fascinated me. There was an earlier, 1924, version with Douglas Fairbanks. I do not recall anything in it that would have given a negative view of Islam, rather the contrary I think.


There was also a Steve Reeves version in the early 1960s that turned up a lot on local TV stations in the pre-cable US. I suspect most Americans only knew of Bagdad from these films.

The 1940 version had a funny boo-boo -- Sabu eagerly enjoying sausages!

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:09pm) *

Of course in any petition of that size your going to have mischief. In that petition you have very, very little.


By very little, you mean probably over 90%.

It is wonderful how you stand by something that 1. is not 1 billion as you claimed and 2. is easily falsified and messed with.

Damn, your standards are low.

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:11pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:22am) *

I have memories of seeing the 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad on TV sometime in the mid 1950s. I was probably around 12 when I saw it, and it fascinated me. There was an earlier, 1924, version with Douglas Fairbanks. I do not recall anything in it that would have given a negative view of Islam, rather the contrary I think.


There was also a Steve Reeves version in the early 1960s that turned up a lot on local TV stations in the pre-cable US. I suspect most Americans only knew of Bagdad from these films.

The 1940 version had a funny boo-boo -- Sabu eagerly enjoying sausages!


Steve Reeves ?!! Who would care about a movie he was in? That's pathetic.

Posted by: GlassBeadGame

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:11am) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:22am) *

I have memories of seeing the 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad on TV sometime in the mid 1950s. I was probably around 12 when I saw it, and it fascinated me. There was an earlier, 1924, version with Douglas Fairbanks. I do not recall anything in it that would have given a negative view of Islam, rather the contrary I think.


There was also a Steve Reeves version in the early 1960s that turned up a lot on local TV stations in the pre-cable US. I suspect most Americans only knew of Bagdad from these films.

The 1940 version had a funny boo-boo -- Sabu eagerly enjoying sausages!



Posted by: dtobias

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 9:06pm) *

Free speech is more than a bunch of idiots saying "we can say anything we want, we can say anything we want" like some moronic nine year old cartoon characters. This is impossible for Internet Libertarians to grasp.


http://www.theonion.com/articles/supreme-court-upholds-freedom-of-speech-in-obsceni,17372/

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Kwork @ Fri 7th May 2010, 11:28am) *

Steve Reeves ?!! Who would care about a movie he was in? That's pathetic.


Hey, he was one of the biggest stars in Italian movies in the 1950s and 1960s.

Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 7th May 2010, 4:11pm) *

QUOTE(Kwork @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:22am) *

I have memories of seeing the 1940 version of The Thief of Bagdad on TV sometime in the mid 1950s. I was probably around 12 when I saw it, and it fascinated me. There was an earlier, 1924, version with Douglas Fairbanks. I do not recall anything in it that would have given a negative view of Islam, rather the contrary I think.


There was also a Steve Reeves version in the early 1960s that turned up a lot on local TV stations in the pre-cable US. I suspect most Americans only knew of Bagdad from these films.

The 1940 version had a funny boo-boo -- Sabu eagerly enjoying sausages!


Don't you have beef sausages round your way?

Posted by: A Horse With No Name

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:18pm) *

Don't you have beef sausages round your way?


That reminds me -- I have to pick up some sausages at the grocery store this evening. Maybe I'll see if I can get "The Thief of Bagdad" on DVD, too. smile.gif

Posted by: Kwork

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 7th May 2010, 3:11pm) *

The 1940 version had a funny boo-boo -- Sabu eagerly enjoying sausages!


Actually sausage can be kosher/halal, it depends on what is in it. Also, plenty of both Jews and Muslims ignore the dietary laws of their religions.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Fri 7th May 2010, 7:55pm) *

That reminds me -- I have to pick up some sausages at the grocery store this evening. Maybe I'll see if I can get "The Thief of Bagdad" on DVD, too. smile.gif

You've been up all night listening to Mohammed's radio, no doubt.

Posted by: Ottava

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:F.C3.A9licien_Rops_-_Sainte-Th.C3.A9r.C3.A8se.png Saint Theresa masturbating is "art" and should be kept.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:25am) *

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:F.C3.A9licien_Rops_-_Sainte-Th.C3.A9r.C3.A8se.png Saint Theresa masturbating is "art" and should be kept.

Well, I heard Calcutta's a boring place. dry.gif

Posted by: written by he who wrote it

QUOTE(radek @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:26am) *

You may have a constitutional or even God given right to be an asshole, but that doesn't make you any less of an asshole.

Words to live by.

Add "At least one side of every argument is wrong" (gracias, mi hermanito) and you have all the rules you need for political debate.

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(written by he who wrote it @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:42am) *

QUOTE(radek @ Fri 7th May 2010, 2:26am) *

You may have a constitutional or even God given right to be an asshole, but that doesn't make you any less of an asshole.

Words to live by.


And apropos of nothing. Satirically pointing out some of the logical flaws in a dangerous set of beliefs is not "being an asshole".

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:25am) *

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:F.C3.A9licien_Rops_-_Sainte-Th.C3.A9r.C3.A8se.png Saint Theresa masturbating is "art" and should be kept.


Why post that in this thread? Are you a supporter of the Everybody Draw Saint Theresa Masturbating Day?

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(anthony @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:03am) *

Why post that in this thread? Are you a supporter of the Everybody Draw Saint Theresa Masturbating Day?


Nah, just putting up a comparable example that lacks death threats.

Posted by: anthony

QUOTE(CharlotteWebb @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:38am) *

Well, I heard Calcutta's a boring place. dry.gif


Is female masturbation a Catholic sin? Or only male masturbation (which kills all those unborn human lifes)?

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:06am) *

QUOTE(anthony @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:03am) *

Why post that in this thread? Are you a supporter of the Everybody Draw Saint Theresa Masturbating Day?


Nah, just putting up a comparable example that lacks death threats.


I dunno about that. God did kill Onan.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:45am) *

Oh, yeah? What is your evidence for THAT?


http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=629

What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns Landmark Study of Arab Values and Political Concerns. The views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International

analyzes the views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International from eight countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel).



Now, it's your turn. Show me where it says that MOST Arab-Americans are Catholic. Show me where it says most Muslim Americans are Indonesian?

That's what I wanted proof of, and you provided three lousy links -- none of which even asserted, much less proved, either of your silly blathering claims.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:55am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:45am) *

Oh, yeah? What is your evidence for THAT?


http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=629

What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns Landmark Study of Arab Values and Political Concerns. The views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International

analyzes the views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International from eight countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel).



Now, it's your turn. Show me where it says that MOST Arab-Americans are Catholic. Show me where it says most Muslim Americans are Indonesian?

That's what I wanted proof of, and you provided three lousy links -- none of which even asserted, much less proved, either of your silly blathering claims.



3,800 people? in 8 countries? What is the margin of error, 20%? Gesh!

Oh, this isn't a real Zogby poll? (Or is it? I remember Zogby being a pollster, not a professor of Arab studies).

By the way, I couldn't find any pages with results.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:58pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:55am) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:45am) *

Oh, yeah? What is your evidence for THAT?


http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=629

What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns Landmark Study of Arab Values and Political Concerns. The views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International

analyzes the views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International from eight countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel).



Now, it's your turn. Show me where it says that MOST Arab-Americans are Catholic. Show me where it says most Muslim Americans are Indonesian?

That's what I wanted proof of, and you provided three lousy links -- none of which even asserted, much less proved, either of your silly blathering claims.



3,800 people? in 8 countries? What is the margin of error, 20%? Gesh!

Oh, this isn't a real Zogby poll? (Or is it? I remember Zogby being a pollster, not a professor of Arab studies).

By the way, I couldn't find any pages with results.

No, apparently this is 3800 people from 8 countries. So long as they represent a truly random sample of Arab-Americans, with no sampling bias, that number should give you correct percentages +/- 1.6%, at 95% confidence limits (which means that you can be 95% sure that the actual figure is between those values, or, so say it better, if you do 100 samples, you'll find that 95% of them give you the true value to within 1.6%, and only 5% of them will be farther off). If you want 99% limits, multiply by 1.3 and this many samples gets you the correct figures to +/- 2%.

The thing about sampling is the sampling margin of error is dependent on the absolute number of samples, not the size of the sample population (so long as it's a lot larger than your sample size). That's the reason why polls typically look at a few thousand people, since the 95% confidence limits are very close to the square root of the number of samples, no matter how big the population. To get +/- 2% at 99% you need 1.29 x 50^2 = 3250 people. I know that's counterintuitive.

Imagine a swimming pool full of red and green marbles-- exactly 33% red and 67% red. You want to know what's the true fraction of reds and greens, so you throw in a cup on a string, pull out a sample of marbles, and starting tabulating number of reds vs. greens. Turns out your accuracy on getting the correct fraction only depends on the number of marbles you take out, not whether the pool contains 1 million marbles or 10 million or 100 million.

Zogby has all kinds of data on where Arab-Americans live and where their mother country is, by US state, and so on. Surely enough info to avoid sampling biases of the most obvious kinds, on asking them for their opinions. Turns out 75% of Arab Americans come from just 6 countries: Lebanon, Syria, Egypt, Palastine, Morocco, and Iraq. You don't need to find Americans from all 22 Arab league contries living in the US to find out what Arab Americans think, or what religion they are.

http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:55pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Fri 7th May 2010, 10:45am) *

Oh, yeah? What is your evidence for THAT?


http://www.zogby.com/news/readnews.cfm?ID=629

What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns Landmark Study of Arab Values and Political Concerns. The views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International

analyzes the views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International from eight countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel).



Now, it's your turn. Show me where it says that MOST Arab-Americans are Catholic. Show me where it says most Muslim Americans are Indonesian?

That's what I wanted proof of, and you provided three lousy links -- none of which even asserted, much less proved, either of your silly blathering claims.


http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf

Okay, most Arab Americans are Christian (63%) and the largest fraction of them are Catholic. There are more Catholics than Muslims. Only a quarter are Muslim. Technically I was wrong, but it hardly charges the point, which is that most Arab Americans are not Muslim, and more are Catholic.

The largest fraction of Muslim Americans are "Southeast Asian" (of which most are Indonesian). But that's not the majority, just the largest single fraction. However, again only a minority (about a quarter) of Muslim-Americans are Arabs. Again, I had specifics wrong, but the major point that most Muslim-Americans aren't Arabs, doesn't change.

Happy now? I was way to close to the essential facts to be deserving of any ding dong moment award.

Posted by: CharlotteWebb

QUOTE(Ottava @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:58pm) *

Oh, this isn't a real Zogby poll? (Or is it? I remember Zogby being a pollster, not a professor of Arab studies).

Blame the nascent statistics lecture for it but for a second I thought you said "poetlister".

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 6:41am) *

The thing about sampling is the sampling margin of error is dependent on the absolute number of samples, not the size of the sample population (so long as it's a lot larger than your sample size). That's the reason why polls typically look at a few thousand people, since the 95% confidence limits are very close to the square root of the number of samples, no matter how big the population. To get +/- 2% at 99% you need 1.29 x 50^2 = 3250 people. I know that's counterintuitive.

Imagine a swimming pool full of red and green marbles-- exactly 33% red and 67% red. You want to know what's the true fraction of reds and greens, so you throw in a cup on a string, pull out a sample of marbles, and starting tabulating number of reds vs. greens. Turns out your accuracy on getting the correct fraction only depends on the number of marbles you take out, not whether the pool contains 1 million marbles or 10 million or 100 million.

BRAAAAAAINS!

Posted by: Moulton

QUOTE(anthony @ Fri 7th May 2010, 11:03pm) *
Apropos of nothing... Satirically pointing out some of the logical flaws in a dangerous set of beliefs is not "being an asshole".

If I understand Jimbo's use of the term, pointing out some logical flaws in an ill-crafted and erratic set of of beliefs by any means (be it satirical, Socratic, or otherwise) is called 'trolling'.

So if that's apropos of nothing, then 'trolling' is an instance of 'nothing'.

And if I'm wrong about that, then here I am spouting an ill-crafted and erratic belief about nothing of consequence.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 6:41am) *


No, apparently this is 3800 people from 8 countries. So long as they represent a truly random sample of Arab-Americans, with no sampling bias, that number should give you correct percentages +/- 1.6%, at 95% confidence limits (which means that you can be 95% sure that the actual figure is between those values, or, so say it better, if you do 100 samples, you'll find that 95% of them give you the true value to within 1.6%, and only 5% of them will be farther off). If you want 99% limits, multiply by 1.3 and this many samples gets you the correct figures to +/- 2%.

The thing about sampling is the sampling margin of error is dependent on the absolute number of samples, not the size of the sample population (so long as it's a lot larger than your sample size). That's the reason why polls typically look at a few thousand people, since the 95% confidence limits are very close to the square root of the number of samples, no matter how big the population. To get +/- 2% at 99% you need 1.29 x 50^2 = 3250 people. I know that's counterintuitive.



From my memory on statistics from statistics class that I had to take, I was told it was based on the absolute number, as the lower amount of people you have the chance you have for a non-representative segment chosen.

500 people from each country is far too small. Most pollsters would refuse to do below 1000 based on a population area in general and at a very minimum to make sure that the variables are not overwhelmed by those who do not reflect the rest of the population.

Plus, Milton, you are adding each polling area together, assuming that it was 3800 polled and not 500 per country. You cannot honestly do that, just as you cannot take 500 Americans and 500 Canadians, say it is 1000 people and get honest figures.


Edit to add, the Wikipedia page seems to agree with my memory from class: "if n is small relative to the population size, using the following formula". http://www.researchsolutions.co.nz/sample_sizes.htm also says the same thing. Base on the chart and a few country populations in relation to New Zealand, the actual margin of error of polling less than 500 people per area would waver between 4.5% and 6% (depending on the actual breakdown).

Not really good statistics in my book, and that is only hoping for 95% accuracy (so, the real reflective value would be over 10% off just by statistics alone).

Posted by: Moulton

Pollsters vary their sample size based on a variety of considerations. Bigger samples are more costly to obtain, but yield better accuracy. For some purposes, a sample size as small as 30 suffices, where precision to multiple significant digits is not needed. It all depends on what you are planning to do with the statistics.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:34pm) *

Pollsters vary their sample size based on a variety of considerations. Bigger samples are more costly to obtain, but yield better accuracy. For some purposes, a sample size as small as 30 suffices, where precision to multiple significant digits is not needed. It all depends on what you are planning to do with the statistics.


A sample size of 30 has a far greater chance of having significant problems than a sample size of 3000, and this pollster took samples closer to 30 per country than 3000 per country.

Posted by: Moulton

Actually, the sample size is often less of a problem than taking a biased sample, or asking poorly chosen or poorly worded questions in a poll.

Posted by: thekohser

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:51am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:55pm) *

Now, it's your turn. Show me where it says that MOST Arab-Americans are Catholic. Show me where it says most Muslim Americans are Indonesian?

That's what I wanted proof of, and you provided three lousy links -- none of which even asserted, much less proved, either of your silly blathering claims.


http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf

Okay, most Arab Americans are Christian (63%) and the largest fraction of them are Catholic. There are more Catholics than Muslims. Only a quarter are Muslim. Technically I was wrong, but it hardly charges the point, which is that most Arab Americans are not Muslim, and more are Catholic.

The largest fraction of Muslim Americans are "Southeast Asian" (of which most are Indonesian). But that's not the majority, just the largest single fraction. However, again only a minority (about a quarter) of Muslim-Americans are Arabs. Again, I had specifics wrong, but the major point that most Muslim-Americans aren't Arabs, doesn't change.

Happy now? I was way to close to the essential facts to be deserving of any ding dong moment award.

Your FD.org link is largely based on the same AAI / Zogby data that left out important countries in its analysis. I still don't understand how you think that "most Southeast Asian Muslim Americans are Indonesian". I really suspect that most Southeast Asian Muslim Americans are Pakistani, but that's just my hunch. I also suspect that most Muslim Americans are African-American, and with American-born legacy dating back several generations. I don't care enough about it to find "links" to prove my hunches, though.

I am happy that you realized your mistakes that were beyond "technical" in my opinion, and that you admit publicly to them. "Too" is spelled with two o's, though. And, the "ding dong" label only came out after you chose to do battle with my challenge, rather than contemplate how I might have been motivated to doubt your errors. I do it sometimes, too, Milton. We have to get better at considering that we might not always be right, even if 95% of the time, we are.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th May 2010, 3:26pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:51am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Fri 7th May 2010, 8:55pm) *

Now, it's your turn. Show me where it says that MOST Arab-Americans are Catholic. Show me where it says most Muslim Americans are Indonesian?

That's what I wanted proof of, and you provided three lousy links -- none of which even asserted, much less proved, either of your silly blathering claims.


http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf

Okay, most Arab Americans are Christian (63%) and the largest fraction of them are Catholic. There are more Catholics than Muslims. Only a quarter are Muslim. Technically I was wrong, but it hardly charges the point, which is that most Arab Americans are not Muslim, and more are Catholic.

The largest fraction of Muslim Americans are "Southeast Asian" (of which most are Indonesian). But that's not the majority, just the largest single fraction. However, again only a minority (about a quarter) of Muslim-Americans are Arabs. Again, I had specifics wrong, but the major point that most Muslim-Americans aren't Arabs, doesn't change.

Happy now? I was way to close to the essential facts to be deserving of any ding dong moment award.

Your FD.org link is largely based on the same AAI / Zogby data that left out important countries in its analysis. I still don't understand how you think that "most Southeast Asian Muslim Americans are Indonesian". I really suspect that most Southeast Asian Muslim Americans are Pakistani, but that's just my hunch. I also suspect that most Muslim Americans are African-American, and with American-born legacy dating back several generations. I don't care enough about it to find "links" to prove my hunches, though.

I am happy that you realized your mistakes that were beyond "technical" in my opinion, and that you admit publicly to them. "Too" is spelled with two o's, though. And, the "ding dong" label only came out after you chose to do battle with my challenge, rather than contemplate how I might have been motivated to doubt your errors. I do it sometimes, too, Milton. We have to get better at considering that we might not always be right, even if 95% of the time, we are.



For some reason, I think Indonesia has the largest Muslim population per country. I could be wrong, but it was something that shocked me when I heard it on the news.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 9:44am) *

For some reason, I think Indonesia has the largest Muslim population per country. I could be wrong, but it was something that shocked me when I heard it on the news.

Indonesia is one of the most populous nations on earth, period. Americans are somewhat oblivious to the rest of the world. That's why they are so susceptible to things like the Evil Muslim Conspiracy Theory.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 6:58am) *

QUOTE(Moulton @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:34pm) *

Pollsters vary their sample size based on a variety of considerations. Bigger samples are more costly to obtain, but yield better accuracy. For some purposes, a sample size as small as 30 suffices, where precision to multiple significant digits is not needed. It all depends on what you are planning to do with the statistics.


A sample size of 30 has a far greater chance of having significant problems than a sample size of 3000, and this pollster took samples closer to 30 per country than 3000 per country.

What?? This was a poll about the religion and opinions of "Arab Americans." You know-- people of Arab descent living in America? There are 22 Arab-league countries (they consitute North Africa, Sudan, and the Arabian peninsula). Almost all Arab-Americans come from fewer than half of these countries (actually, about 8 of them), with neglectable numbers from the rest. If you want to get a good sample, all you need to is make sure you sample proportionately from those. So far as I can tell, that is exactly what Zogby did for the AAI.

Okay, now you and Kohs clearly don't like this. But neither one of your have yet to give any rational reason why you don't. Would you like to try again?

If you think you have an answer different from mine, and you have some good evidence that you do, post your cite. So far, the only citations to anything about this, are coming from ME. You don't like my sources? Let's see you do better.

http://www.prejudiceinstitute.org/Factsheets5-ArabAmericans.html
Q: How many Arabs came from what countries?

A: 47% came from Lebanon.
15% came from Syria.
9% came from Egypt.
6% from Palestine.
3% from Iraq.
2% from Jordan.
18% from 16 other countries.



QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:37pm) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 9:44am) *

For some reason, I think Indonesia has the largest Muslim population per country. I could be wrong, but it was something that shocked me when I heard it on the news.

Indonesia is one of the most populous nations on earth, period. Americans are somewhat oblivious to the rest of the world. That's why they are so susceptible to things like the Evil Muslim Conspiracy Theory.

Indonesia has more Muslims than any country in the world. More than Pakistan.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th May 2010, 8:26am) *

Your FD.org link is largely based on the same AAI / Zogby data that left out important countries in its analysis.

Says you. For no good reason. You didn't give your cite, and you didn't give your reasoning, except to state that the largest Arabic countries were left out of the US Arab survey. But since most American Arabs don't come from the largest Arabic countries, so what?

QUOTE(thekohser @ Sat 8th May 2010, 8:26am) *

I still don't understand how you think that "most Southeast Asian Muslim Americans are Indonesian". I really suspect that most Southeast Asian Muslim Americans are Pakistani, but that's just my hunch. I also suspect that most Muslim Americans are African-American, and with American-born legacy dating back several generations. I don't care enough about it to find "links" to prove my hunches, though.


I think your hunch is actually right, but it still doesn't change the original point, which is that the interersection of "Arab" and "Muslim" in the US is far smaller than conventional wisdom allows, since most Arabs are not Muslims here, and most Muslims here aren't Arabs. Considering either group alone will not get you anything close to intersection which is where most of the domestic terrorists come from. I didn't make that point in contraversion to you-- I simply made it as the basis for going on to something else. You didn't like it, but that's too bad.

QUOTE

I am happy that you realized your mistakes that were beyond "technical" in my opinion, and that you admit publicly to them. "Too" is spelled with two o's, though. And, the "ding dong" label only came out after you chose to do battle with my challenge, rather than contemplate how I might have been motivated to doubt your errors. I do it sometimes, too, Milton. We have to get better at considering that we might not always be right, even if 95% of the time, we are.

You do understand that no matter how many typos you find in my work, it doesn't change the fact that only a quarter of US Muslims are Arabic, and only a quarter of Arab-Americans are Muslim? The details of who the rest of them are, are details. They aren't essential for the argument. Don't get mired down in them, and don't be too proud of nitpicks in them. They don't help you a bit, unless your primary reason for entering this argument was to find meaningless errors.

tongue.gif

Posted by: dtobias

From before the controversial episode came out: creators of South Park discuss it, including the concept of whether they should censor what they say about Mohammed compared to other religious figures simply because of more likelihood of violent threats:



Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 2:26pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sat 8th May 2010, 1:37pm) *

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 9:44am) *

For some reason, I think Indonesia has the largest Muslim population per country. I could be wrong, but it was something that shocked me when I heard it on the news.

Indonesia is one of the most populous nations on earth, period. Americans are somewhat oblivious to the rest of the world. That's why they are so susceptible to things like the Evil Muslim Conspiracy Theory.

Indonesia has more Muslims than any country in the world. More than Pakistan.

Actually, the last time I heard, India had the most Muslims, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population#List, you are right.

Posted by: Cunningly Linguistic

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sun 9th May 2010, 1:19am) *

Actually, the last time I heard, India had the most Muslims, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population#List, you are right.


Last time I heard, most Muslims could be found in car washes and kebab houses.

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(Cunningly Linguistic @ Sat 8th May 2010, 5:39pm) *

QUOTE(Herschelkrustofsky @ Sun 9th May 2010, 1:19am) *

Actually, the last time I heard, India had the most Muslims, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Muslim_population#List, you are right.


Last time I heard, most Muslims could be found in car washes and kebab houses.

My goodness, isn't that witty.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 9:26pm) *

What?? This was a poll about the religion and opinions of "Arab Americans."


"What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns Landmark Study of Arab Values and Political Concerns. The views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International "

I don't see "Arab American" in the title, and the word "international" suggests that it isn't American based.

"His book analyzes the views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International from eight countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel)."

Not living in the US but living in those 8 countries.

Not having 25 dollars to spend, I'm not going to bother and see if his website was misleading and didn't actually poll people in those countries.

Posted by: wikieyeay

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 10:26pm) *

Indonesia has more Muslims than any country in the world. More than Pakistan.


True, but the fact is they mostly stay there.

According to the source cited in the Wikipedia article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_American there are only 63,000 Indonesian Americans.

Out of those 63,000, a disproprotionate (relative to Indonesians in Indonesia) number are Christians.

Quite plainly the Indonesian American Muslim community, in the context of the fact, per Obama, ''that if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. ', is utterly negligible.

Posted by: wikieyeay

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 7:51am) *

The largest fraction of Muslim Americans are "Southeast Asian" (of which most are Indonesian). But that's not the majority, just the largest single fraction. However, again only a minority (about a quarter) of Muslim-Americans are Arabs. Again, I had specifics wrong, but the major point that most Muslim-Americans aren't Arabs, doesn't change.

Happy now? I was way to close to the essential facts to be deserving of any ding dong moment award.


Actually I think we need a geography/culture lesson here.

South East Asia consists of Indonesia, Singapore, Thailand, Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Malaysia and Vietnam and the Phillippines.

Thailand, Burma, Cambodia, Singapore, Laos and Vietnam generally are Buddhist, although there are minority Muslim populations.

Malaysia and Indonesia are generally Muslim, and the Phillippines is Catholic.

By far the largest South East Asian immigrant population to the US are Filipino, followed by Vietnamese. The others are all minor.

In religious terms, Malaysia is the most Islamic (while still moderate in global terms) whereas Indonesia is less so; Indonesian Muslims are significantly less likely than their Christian counterparts to attend a place of worship, and may not feel comfortable integrating into the mosques of immigrants from other cultures.

South Asia consists of Pakistan, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, the Maldives, Sri Lanka and Bhutan.

Islam is dominant in Pakistan and Bangladesh, with significant numbers in India, while Hinduism and Buddhism are predominant across South Asia, with the exception of Pakistan and Bangladesh.

According to Wikipedia:

"The majority, 60% of American Muslims are South Asians (from Indian subcontinent) and Arabs with the former constituting 35% of the population and the latter 25%"

South Asian and Southeast Asian is very different, racially and culturally.

Posted by: Milton Roe

QUOTE(Ottava @ Sat 8th May 2010, 8:56pm) *

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Sat 8th May 2010, 9:26pm) *

What?? This was a poll about the religion and opinions of "Arab Americans."


"What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns Landmark Study of Arab Values and Political Concerns. The views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International "

I don't see "Arab American" in the title, and the word "international" suggests that it isn't American based.

"His book analyzes the views of 3,800 Arab adults polled by Zogby International from eight countries (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Kuwait, Morocco, UAE, Saudi Arabia and Israel)."

Not living in the US but living in those 8 countries.

Not having 25 dollars to spend, I'm not going to bother and see if his website was misleading and didn't actually poll people in those countries.



Well, please look at page 9:

http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf

It says Arab-Americans, and they're nearly 2/3rds Christian. It references some 2002 "Zogby International" study, but since this one study is clearly one of Arab-Americans, we may well be talking about two different Zogby studies.

Posted by: Ottava

QUOTE(Milton Roe @ Tue 11th May 2010, 12:01am) *

Well, please look at page 9:

http://www.fd.org/pdf_lib/CulturalIssues_MidEast.pdf

It says Arab-Americans, and they're nearly 2/3rds Christian. It references some 2002 "Zogby International" study, but since this one study is clearly one of Arab-Americans, we may well be talking about two different Zogby studies.


Why is it buried on page 9? And not on the website?

o.O

By the way, go Catholicism! According to that, most of the Arabs are Catholic or Orthodox, meaning that they can share communion with me. Quite interesting.

Posted by: Zoloft

I am sadly disappointed that while I was away rafting - Horse and allies did not mingle the Boobquake event into this topic.

Posted by: Subtle Bee

Quick update: the Pakistani government has banned FaceBook over the "Draw Mohammed" dust-up, by http://globalvoicesonline.org/2010/05/19/facebook-is-blocked-in-pakistan-as-it-indulges-in-a-controversial-campaign/.

QUOTE

In compliance with the orders of Honourable Lahore High Court, Lahore, on the Writ Petition No.10392/10, dated the 19th May, 2010, the Ministry of Information Technology has issued a directive to Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) to block the ‘Face Book’ and all other internet links displaying sacrilegious caricatures of the Holy Prophet.

Ministry of IT has also directed the PTA to remain alert and watchful and block all such links displaying the profane caricatures immediately.

Ministry of IT has requested public at large to contact a dedicated Telephone No.0800-5505 and e-mail address: complaint@pta.gov.pk , to transmit necessary information, should anything to the effect of objectionable caricature get displayed/propagated at any website.

"Pakistan Makes Information Technology Breakthrough: phone-operated internet "ignore" list a world's first!" - you'd swear it was from the Onion.

So how come they can do that for Muhammed (PBUH), but we can't get one of those for Wikimedia Commons? hmmm.gif

Posted by: dtobias

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Fri 21st May 2010, 9:41pm) *

So how come they can do that for Muhammed (PBUH), but we can't get one of those for Wikimedia Commons? hmmm.gif


Because the countries most of us live in aren't as repressive as that one?

Posted by: Herschelkrustofsky

QUOTE(dtobias @ Fri 21st May 2010, 8:57pm) *

QUOTE(Subtle Bee @ Fri 21st May 2010, 9:41pm) *

So how come they can do that for Muhammed (PBUH), but we can't get one of those for Wikimedia Commons? hmmm.gif


Because the countries most of us live in aren't as repressive as that one?
Dan, sometimes I think you may be suffering from irony-poor blood.

Posted by: thekohser

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/france-muhammad-cartoon-attack_n_1071111.html? The Wikimedia Foundation headquarters?

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 4:19pm) *

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/france-muhammad-cartoon-attack_n_1071111.html? The Wikimedia Foundation headquarters?

No worries they will not touch The Wikimedia Foundation headquarters, at least not while http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive594#User:Rama and not while administrator Gatoclass http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_talk:Did_you_know&diff=prev&oldid=306920718
QUOTE
Thirdly, even if one took seriously the evidence presented by the Russians at Nuremberg that the Danzig Anatomic Institute conducted such experiments, AFAIK no evidence has ever been presented that the raw materials came specifically from the fat of Jews being slaughtered in Nazi extermination camps.

and not while wikipedia will host such http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alan_dershowitz_by_Latuff.jpg

Posted by: Tarc

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 4:19pm) *

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/france-muhammad-cartoon-attack_n_1071111.html? The Wikimedia Foundation headquarters?


The lengths these backwards knuckle-draggers will go to enforce their warped fundamentalism is nauseating. There's nbeen a slow-burning shitstorm at the Muhammed article regarding images over the last few weeks, too.

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 1:20pm) *
and not while wikipedia will host such http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alan_dershowitz_by_Latuff.jpg


Whether it is antisemitic or not (I find it to be more of a criticism of Dershowitz for being a hypocritical asshole rather than for being a Jew) is largely irrelevant. Just because the Wikipedia hosts an antisemitic poster doesn't mean that their are abetting or perpetuating the antisemitism.

They have the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jyllands-Posten-pg3-article-in-Sept-30-2005-edition-of-KulturWeekend-entitled-Muhammeds-ansigt.png poster too. Do you decry the Wikipedia for hosting "anti-Muslim garbage" ?

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(Tarc @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 6:07pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 4:19pm) *

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/02/france-muhammad-cartoon-attack_n_1071111.html? The Wikimedia Foundation headquarters?


The lengths these backwards knuckle-draggers will go to enforce their warped fundamentalism is nauseating. There's nbeen a slow-burning shitstorm at the Muhammed article regarding images over the last few weeks, too.

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 1:20pm) *
and not while wikipedia will host such http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alan_dershowitz_by_Latuff.jpg


Whether it is antisemitic or not (I find it to be more of a criticism of Dershowitz for being a hypocritical asshole rather than for being a Jew) is largely irrelevant. Just because the Wikipedia hosts an antisemitic poster doesn't mean that their are abetting or perpetuating the antisemitism.

They have the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jyllands-Posten-pg3-article-in-Sept-30-2005-edition-of-KulturWeekend-entitled-Muhammeds-ansigt.png poster too. Do you decry the Wikipedia for hosting "anti-Muslim garbage" ?


I do not believe that because the Wikipedia hosts an antisemitic poster it means that they are abetting or perpetuating the antisemitism. Not at all, but antisemitic pictures should be added to the right category:http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Antisemitic_pictures http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alan_dershowitz_by_Latuff.jpg, and it makes all the difference.

On the other hand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Jyllands-Posten-pg3-article-in-Sept-30-2005-edition-of-KulturWeekend-entitled-Muhammeds-ansigt.png is added to the category "Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy" with the key word here being "controversy", but honestly I do not believe wikipedia should host any images concerning Muhammed at all. If it is so important for Muslims not to have the images of their Prophet, if it is prohibited by their believes why to make people suffer?

Posted by: It's the blimp, Frank

QUOTE(Tarc @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 6:07pm) *


QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 1:20pm) *
and not while wikipedia will host such http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alan_dershowitz_by_Latuff.jpg


Whether it is antisemitic or not (I find it to be more of a criticism of Dershowitz for being a hypocritical asshole rather than for being a Jew) is largely irrelevant.
It's not antisemitic. Stupid, but not antisemitic. And by "stupid," I mean unfunny, not that Dershowitz shouldn't be attacked for being a hypocritical asshole.

Posted by: mbz1

QUOTE(GlassBeadGame @ Thu 6th May 2010, 3:30pm) *


I live in America. More than 99% of the users of this site and en.WP are from the the English speaking world and Europe. Muslims are a small and hard pressed minority in our society. They are easy to pick on and vilify. Almost no one will speak up if you do. I'm speaking up for my neighbors and countrymen who are Muslims.


I will speak up for Muslims, and for Arabs and for everybody who is discriminated against. I would have gladly gone to Iran or Syria to help people there to overcome murderous dictators, and
as I said above I do not believe there should be any images of the Prophet at all, if it hurts the feelings of Muslims, but I'd also say that Muslims should realize that the biggest enemies of Muslims are... well, Muslims themselves.

Muslims are murdering Muslims in schools, in mosques, at markets, in buses over and over and over again. People so used to this that they believe it is a norm, when a car bomb or a few are exploded in Iraq, or a suicide bomber strikes at a mosque in Pakistan. Why Muslim Egyptians are murdering Coptic Egyptians? They all are Arabs, a proud, ancient people with a great history, living in a beautiful country. Why they cannot live in peace with each others? If one day, they'll be able to do it, they will be able to live in peace with the rest of the world.

Posted by: SB_Johnny

QUOTE(mbz1 @ Wed 2nd November 2011, 5:22pm) *

Muslims should realize that the biggest enemies of Muslims are... well, Muslims themselves.

Pretty much the only enemy of human beings worth mentioning is human beings themselves.

(Of course there are plenty of virus and bacteria that make for perfectly good enemies, but for some reason our collective priorities tend to somehow rank bombs over antibiotics).