nasty cartoons

[billy]

The English language Swedish news web site thelocal.se is not down. It works fine.

it was down. now it isn't
it had a big fuck off message saying it was down, now it doesn't.
i only lie in the sewer

[mrmod]

That's not good. I think they should take these as warnings and as an example impose heavy sentences to deter others.

And this goes against the idea of how safe Sweden is.

[billy]

is any person or country really safe from these sort of attacks

particularly sweden where it seems "they" the swedes, are particularly against the importation of islam.

[kath3]

What was Vilks hoping to accomplish by distributing obscene drawings meant to directly and intentionally offend a specific group of people? ... and I am by no means attempting to justify the physical abuse Vilks received. The man who head butted Vilks should be charged with assault.
I think both parties involved were wrong and should be ashamed of their behavior.
No one deserves to be assaulted nor does anyone deserve to have their faith attacked in such a vulgar and public manner. A person is playing with fire when they attack someone's faith which is bound up in strong convictions, emotion and heart. The world does not exist behind rose colored glass where everybody plays nice and will politely walk away if offended unfortunately. The world is full of aggressive, passive and conservative people. We don't and shouldn't tolerate physical abuse nor should we tolerate verbal abuse as there are respectful and decent ways to oppose a point of view without being so insensitive and vulgar.

[billy]

i can agree with you too a point kath.

for me anything, including religion and politics, specially religion and politics should be open to abuse via cartoon and comedy.

through history it's the cartoonist and his parody of life which has brought the wrong doings of the world to the fore. if any god can't withstand the vagaries of an ill thought out cartoon. said gods followers should reconsider if said god is worthy of following. jmo

[kath3]

i can agree with you too a point kath.

for me anything, including religion and politics, specially religion and politics should be open to abuse via cartoon and comedy.

through history it's the cartoonist and his parody of life which has brought the wrong doings of the world to the fore. if any god can't withstand the vagaries of an ill thought out cartoon. said gods followers should reconsider if said god is worthy of following. jmo

and I agree with you to a point. I personally don't aprove of abuse no matter what the form. People are very passionate creatures willing to defend even to the death especially their god. Religion is an extremely sensitive subject for a lot of people. I don't think I would jeapordize my safety for the sake of poking fun at someone's passion. Vilks is either brave and/or stupid to provoke such an extreme group.

[billy]

i agree that he's stupid. we've seen want an anti islamic parody can bring forth. that said. shouldnt we be allowed to use humour as a vessel of anything.

if not where do we draw the line, who says whats vulagr who says "thats okay to use"

i'm not on about free speech as much as common sense. i love a good pope, down syndrome, or gay joke. i have a niece who's down syndrome, a gay brother and i'm an ex catholic lmao. (seriously) if we can't laugh at ourselves, our religion, our politics etc, what's left. someone will always say they don't agree with some joke. where does the point come when all cartoons, jokes and parodies are banned?

[kath3]

i agree that he's stupid. we've seen want an anti islamic parody can bring forth. that said. shouldnt we be allowed to use humour as a vessel of anything.

if not where do we draw the line, who says whats vulagr who says "thats okay to use"

i'm not on about free speech as much as common sense. i love a good pope, down syndrome, or gay joke. i have a niece who's down syndrome, a gay brother and i'm an ex catholic lmao. (seriously) if we can't laugh at ourselves, our religion, our politics etc, what's left. someone will always say they don't agree with some joke. where does the point come when all cartoons, jokes and parodies are banned?

Believe me I hear what you are saying and I too am more about common sense than free speech ... with the same breath I also believe free speech must be an absolute. I also feel some people hide behind the right to Free Speech as a means to unnecessarily and even intentionally provoke people and in doing so must share in the responsibility of the out come. If I were to spout off my mouth knowing full well that my words are hurtful, vulgar and provoking then I would expect to get my ass kicked. Now if I shared my thoughts opposing a belief in a respectful manner and still got my ass kicked that would be an out right assault and I wouldn't be responsible for my ass kicking. I see Vilks actions also being extreme.
Just to let you know I am on dial-up so my replies are delayed.

[billy]

then your replies are even more welcome

i often see comedians mock this or that religion.
many of them i think go too far but i can't bring myself to loose sleep
over it. even if i really hate what they say or depict.

we both agree that retaliation in the form of retribution, physical and threatening is wrong. and i guess to point i agree that it's not good to mock anothers way of life.

i also have to say that i'm as guilty as the next guy for laughing at a good muslim or catholic joke.

[kath3]

then your replies are even more welcome

i often see comedians mock this or that religion.
many of them i think go too far but i can't bring myself to loose sleep
over it. even if i really hate what they say or depict.

we both agree that retaliation in the form of retribution, physical and threatening is wrong. and i guess to point i agree that it's not good to mock anothers way of life.

i also have to say that i'm as guilty as the next guy for laughing at a good muslim or catholic joke.

I haven't heard any muslim jokes but I have heard and laughed at catholic and other christian jokes knowing full well the person meant no intentional harm or disrespect ... Vilks went to far imo

[billy]

then your replies are even more welcome

i often see comedians mock this or that religion.
many of them i think go too far but i can't bring myself to loose sleep
over it. even if i really hate what they say or depict.

we both agree that retaliation in the form of retribution, physical and threatening is wrong. and i guess to point i agree that it's not good to mock anothers way of life.

i also have to say that i'm as guilty as the next guy for laughing at a good muslim or catholic joke.

I haven't heard any muslim jokes but I have heard and laughed at catholic and other christian jokes knowing full well the person meant no intentional harm or disrespect ... Vilks went to far imo

i can't argue that in everything, including free speech, people sometimes go too far.

i've had two little discussions with you here and both were enjoyable, thanks

[kath3]

Right back at ya!

[mrmod]

I haven't heard any muslim jokes but I have heard and laughed at catholic and other christian jokes knowing full well the person meant no intentional harm or disrespect ... Vilks went to far imo

I have. They're just like any other religious joke. A joke.

Muslims are only offended because they took offence when none was meant. Vilks had the right to say what he wanted, just like you and me. Nobody should take that right away from him, even if they don't appreciate what he's saying.

I've been subject to jokes many a time and I could've been offended if I wanted to. But it just turns out to be a bit of banter most of the time. I have never needed to turn violent yet.

[billy]

I haven't heard any muslim jokes but I have heard and laughed at catholic and other christian jokes knowing full well the person meant no intentional harm or disrespect ... Vilks went to far imo

I have. They're just like any other religious joke. A joke.

Muslims are only offended because they took offence when none was meant. Vilks had the right to say what he wanted, just like you and me. Nobody should take that right away from him, even if they don't appreciate what he's saying.

I've been subject to jokes many a time and I could've been offended if I wanted to. But it just turns out to be a bit of banter most of the time. I have never needed to turn violent yet.

i agree nad, but would you go into a cage of hungry lions with a pice of raw meat tied round your neck?

thats what this moron basically did lmao.

[srijantje]

i've been offended before but that doesn't mean you have to threaten to kill somebody.

[billy]

i've been offended before but that doesn't mean you have to threaten to kill somebody.

i know sj and sometimes hearing someone has been attacked for writing a book poem of cartoon can seem a bit funny.

thing is for certain things people will always be attacked. that some simply write non the less and then use tax payers money smakes a little of something foul.

if you write something and knowing expect some kind of retribution. then your a little bit silly to my mind.

[kath3]

I haven't heard any muslim jokes but I have heard and laughed at catholic and other christian jokes knowing full well the person meant no intentional harm or disrespect ... Vilks went to far imo

I have. They're just like any other religious joke. A joke.

Muslims are only offended because they took offence when none was meant. Vilks had the right to say what he wanted, just like you and me. Nobody should take that right away from him, even if they don't appreciate what he's saying.

I've been subject to jokes many a time and I could've been offended if I wanted to. But it just turns out to be a bit of banter most of the time. I have never needed to turn violent yet.

I agree, Vilks has every right to say what he wants without fear of harm. I also agree nobody should take that right away from him, even if they don't appreciate what he's saying.
In the perfect world this would not even be an issue, but we don't live in a perfect world.

Would you willingly go into an Islamic community wearing a t-shirt blaspheming Mohammad and expect to walk out alive?
You have every right to wear that t-shirt, but because of your knowledge of how some Muslims (extremists) react I'm guessing you would refrain from wearing your shirt and for several reasons ... (1) you are a respectful person and would not willingly insult ... (2) you would exercise common sense and accept the boundaries ... (3) you would fear being harmed. Vilks was not being respectful ...he was not using common sense ... indeed he was exercising his right to freedom of expression through his drawings and in turn provoked a highly sensitive and volatile group of people and unwillingly invited an assault. Muslim communities are world wide and even though we live in the western world respecting and defending freedom of speech we share this land with a people of very limited tolerance and an entirely different way of thinking.
This controversy is not going to go away over night and there will be many more Vilks who will willingly and unwillingly help bring the much needed attention and change to the Muslim community. And sadly before this reform is embraced by extremist Muslims there will be many deaths ... high prices are paid for freedom.
It's still my opioion that Vilks went too far ... though his going too far may very well help bring about change.

I too have been offended at times, but never would I react violently ... obviously you and I are not violent people, but you and I are not the world.

Here's an interesting read sharing how sensitive/passonate religious groups can be and not just Muslims
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_..._blasphemy

[mrmod]

Would you willingly go into an Islamic community wearing a t-shirt blaspheming Mohammad and expect to walk out alive?
You have every right to wear that t-shirt, but because of your knowledge of how some Muslims (extremists) react I'm guessing you would refrain from wearing your shirt and for several reasons ... (1) you are a respectful person and would not willing insult ... (2) you would exercise common sense and accept the boundaries ... (3) you would fear being harmed. Vilks was not being respectful ...he was not using common sense ... indeed he was exercising his right to freedom of expression through his drawings and in turn provoked a highly sensitive and volatile group of people and unwillingly invited an assault. Muslim communities are world wide and even though we live in the western world respecting and defending freedom of speech we share this land with a people of very limited tolerance and an entirely different way of thinking.

Sweden is not a muslim country. I would choose reason 3 foremost and above all the others. They will try to harm me or anyone who they don't like (or who doesn't agree with their point of view).

When they're playing in their home ground, they've got advantage (namely their Sharia and other religious laws). Sweden is a free democratic country and I'm sure you agree with me that extremists had no right to try and silence him.

I think we're hitting the same nail here, just from different angles though .

[billy]

which proves someones point though i'm not sure whose

he did it in a non muslim country and was attacked by muslims.
muslims don't mind so much if you ridicule their religion as long it doesn't involve Allah.

[kath3]

Ok, give this a try ... I've read in other threads comments stating that muslims are of a non civilized land, lacking in education, arts/sciences, communication etc. I don't know enough of this to comment myself. Civilized does not only mean advanced technology or the best hospitals or strong economy, or more tv's, computers etc.
Civilized to my understanding also means that we have some level of refinement, and morals as in respect for others, and to treat others as he/she would expect of others. Civilized doesn't mean to be only educated, because many educated people are not respectful in treating others with dignity and respect. Vilks is an educated man from a civilized nation who disreguarded the very essence of what it means to be civilized. He chose to provoke, ridicule, and insult an entire group of people to make his point about a belief system that he disappoves of. Not only was this done in an uncivilized manner it was childish.
I certainly don't know Vilks, I've read a bit about this controversy ... that his works have been banned in other countries for fear of retaliation and yet he continued to push his work/art ... for what ... the right to Free Speech ... give me a break. I see Vilks as an attention grabber, a spoiled kid determined to get his way at all costs. Well I hope the price he is paying now is worth it to himself and his family.
If Vilks truely is concerned for the right to Free Speech perhaps he should have used a more dignified way to express himself.