This is good.  This is exactly what Moslems need to make the impression in Europe:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/02/gaza.cartoon/

It didn't seem to go blue:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/02/gaza.cartoon/ - http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/02/gaza.cartoon/

This is exactly what Moslems need to make the impression in Europe:

Infact  muslim impression at EU is already bad.(as you can see at that cartoons.

But It looks like this things  harmed west image at muslim worlds.

Maybe... but we don't need an image in Muslim World other than: let us do our way in our land.

is this real? what do you mean with our land? I always think, when Europeans mention our land, It is Europea, not middle east, not africa.

Who need an image in Muslim world are politicians and businessmen. Not the common European.

why do you think, it is different for muslims? I dont think any muslim at  arabia, cry because he  have bad image at Europea.

That's exactly! Antisemitism killed milions of jews. Rasisms killed many, many balck people, and opressed hundreds of milions. Secular modern freedom of expression, specially when is humorous about a religion that killed milion of people and today still kill, and discriminate, and incite to intolerance, and opress women and minorities, NEVER killed no one.

The whole cartoon issue is starting to take on a life of its own.  This touches on obviously unbridgeable cultural gaps that are not discussed because doing so is most unfashionable.  Very un-PC.

It is difficult for Westerners to understand such outrage at cartoons that are normal amusement in the press.  Pressure by governments or by the Vatican to suppress this is a non-starter.  That is a fact in the West.  It is not going to happen and many in the Middle East don't understand that.

There is of course much more to all this, but there may also be more to the thesis of Samuel Huntington than I had thought before.  I was never a proponent of the "Clash" theory, but what has happened here recently (and over the past year) seems to indicate that there is more to it.

Others' thoughts?

As long we don't know for sure why it is exactly and only in the west that appeared this spirit of objectivity, tolerance and scientific thought, we have to accept that we can't be sure that in 100, 200 or 500 yrs. the muslim societies will abandon this middle-aged vision of things. What concerns the actual situation, you said all one need to know . . .

The Muslim world has felt it was under seige for a long time:

- Political instability and civil war in the Middle East.

- War in Afghanastan(1979-1989)

- Genocide in the former Yugoslavia and a weapons blockade that clearly favored serbian forces as they had access to the old Yugoslavia's heavy weapons. 

- The Gulf War(1990-1991). It doesn't matter how justified we see it as being in the west, to many Muslims it must have seemed like a slaughter of fellow Muslims. The events that followed the war, both the pogrom carried out by Saddam both in the north and south of Iraq and the economic sanctions that caused so much suffering in that country also caused more outrage in the region.

- The Iraq War now. There is no question that the current war in Iraq has raised tensions worldwide.

It's possible that many Muslims look at the messages coming out of the West, including this cartoon, as an indication of our intentions for their culture.

There is an intermittent conflict between the West and Islam since the 8th century. This is just the most recent.

Oh, poor Muslims, and what about the Gulf War of 1980-1988? It was a slaughter of what? Oh yeah sure, as long as Muslims kill themselves or others there is no problem.

Originally posted by Mila Or we just listen to Boz and wonder how many Westerners people like him actually represent.

You seems to fail to the most elementary logic, sister: a stance, is valuable not for the sheer number of people that sustain it, but by the value per se, the force of arguments it has. What grade you said you are now?

It's funny how the Romanians think they are Western. Everytime they told me 'We Latins are passionate people, you know, Romanian, Italian, Spanish, we are all the same', I had to bite my lip to stop laughing in their faces.

They're not poor Muslims. Where would western culture be without Islam, probably still stuck back in the middle ages.

You have right to laugh, if you really know why (i know, and that's why i'm laughing by such "vulgates"; i'm not sure for you). But in what concerns Romania, of course it's MORE western than turkey, or arab world, if one looks to people's values, etc. But i spoke for me only, not for romanian; i did leave my country not exactly because i was very "romanian" in thinking.

It is disputable. And i'm sorry that you don't know that. Let's speak about: the returning greek philosophy, was just transmitted by the arabs to the westerners; they didn't created it  . . . . and btw, you seem to ignore the simple fact, that great arab philosophs were attacked by islam, so what "islam" you talk about!? (avicena, averroes and alfarabi, were all of some pantheistic convinctions) After that, you already have to know, that the bizantynes have all the greek texts in original; no need translation from arab to latin . . .greek was still a culture language.  And that's invalidating your argument, cause shows that NOT this arab phil. transmission was essential for the progress of the west: the arabs themselves possesed it, the greeks too, and they never created nor scientific method, nor human freedoms, nor . . .

I don't question the fact that knowledge either developed or preserved by the Islamic culture made possible the rebirth of Western culture. We should remember this when we look down our noses at "backwards" Muslims.

 well, that's exactly what you should question if suficiently informed . .  .

I not dispute that the west was he too "backward". I, for one, have no problems: know very well his history . . . . in fact important is not that west is "advanced" and others "backward", but to get a method that all live toghether without the errors of the past. It seems evident for me, that the west (maybe less U.S.) get this method, but muslim world not. They want us to trade pace for freedom; but we know (well, some of us) that this in long term, means slavery. It is exactly denying our peace. Of course, there is some losers that prefer to do the same errors the west made with hitler too, apeasement, but, hopefuly not all the people in west are of this type.

Do you think it's at all possible that you're living in the past when it come to Islam. The Ottoman Empire is no more and I don't really see any modern Islamic country lining up to enslave Europeans.

What I do see is a backlash from the Muslim world over the treatment they have been recieving that may make our worst dreams come true.

No wonder you see just that.

btw, you can read french?

http://lexpress.fr/info/monde/dossier/islamisme/dossier.asp? ida=436706

that in order to see that there is though some guys "lining up to enslave Europeans". if first and second generation still have probloms with vital values and freedoms, well . . .

I agree.  This is nothing new.  It seems an ongoing conflict that continues precisely because the two are irreconcilable in culture and outlook.  The only things the two "civilizations" have in common is mutual suspicion and resentment.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4675462.stm - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4675462.stm

In Jordan, an independent tabloid, al-Shihan, reprinted three of the cartoons on Thursday, saying people should know what they were protesting about.

In a separate article, the newspaper's editor, Jihad Momani, urged the world's Muslims to "be reasonable" in their response to the drawings.

The paper's publishers sacked him hours later over the "shock" he had caused, Jordan's official Petra news agency reported.

How can we expect the middle east to understand what is freedom of speach, if they do not have it themselves? We cannot blame them to be mad, simply because they do not know.

But these bomb threats and bounties on the heads of the news paper staff seems quite ridiculous.

Yes they do.  Precisely part of my point in the previous post.

  A comment to me?

attila, just try to know some arabs, and see to which point they are "occidentalists". And after that, appreciate the fact so many westerners are not orientalists.

Now mulims claiming Islam birthed western culture and the West would still be in the dark ages if not for Islam

Islamists do claim the superiority of Islamic culture.  The West is decadent materialistic and immoral.  Islamists reject all traditional liberal Western values.

The muslims were even worse treated by the bastard westerners in the past : 1899

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property either as a child, a wife, or a concubine must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

Quotation of the Decade Gregory Smith offers this Churchill comment on that great religion we are not fighting against, from The River War, first edition, Vol. II, pages 248 50 (London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1899).

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=137 - http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=1 37

I could just see it now, Bin Laden jamming out on his iPod

Will Durant wrote in his Oriental Heritage: "The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying from within."

Will Durant, great american historian, November 5, 1885 - November 7, 1981).

Voyager seems to agree that this conflict between Islam and the "West" has been ongoing for many centuries.  The current turmoil is only another incarnation.  Churchill's comments (in Victorian manor) speaks to observations of a century ago.  We could go on forever of course.

I appreciate that there are many who do not want the situation to be what it seems, and that criticism and even ostracism can come of holding opinions that are not considered "correct" in contemporary circumstances.

However, The differences that manifest themselves do appear to be more beyond accomodation and amity than reconcileable with them.  The two ancient and proseletyzing faiths and the differing civilizations they have founded, and that have so often clashed in the past, are only comfortable with each other when there is a tense coexistence.  They are not coexisting well these days.

Let's see if we can wrap this up tomorrow.  I think we all have had it with cartoons, and since I started this thread, I plan to lock it up sometime tomorrow.

There remain other issues to discuss.

These cartoons were published in a local Danish paper. Only a handful of people would have seen it, but now thanks to all the fuss Muslims have created everyone in world have seen them. On top of that it has helped the rest of world realize what kind fear people in the Muslim countries have to leave under and why many of these countries are listed as 99% hardcore believers in Islam. If someone in Denmark can get this kind of reaction imagine what it would take to question  Islam in a Islamic country

No question or doubts

An eternal Islamic dark-age, they just dont know it

Just read my signature:

"There was a time when religion ruled the world. It is known as the Dark Ages." - Ruth Hurmence Green

But mind you, this is applicable not just to Islam but to all religions.

Hey Im a christian and I also believe your siganture.

Never said muslims birthed western culture. Most classical knowledge in the west was destroyed during the dark ages because it didn't conform with the gospel. It was mainly through contact with eastern cultures that what knowledge that remained of classical times was regained.

Islam was years ahead of Europe in medicine, science, math, literature...

No contact with Islam no Age of Enlightenment, no Renaissance.

There was also much more than conflict going on between our cultures at that time.

I'm not Muslim by the way, I just believe in giving credit where credit is due.

Most of Renaissance influences came from Byzantium. There the only role that Islam played was that of scaring the refugees westward.

Most of the artistic influences were Byzantine but much of our basis in science, medicine, math, astronomy, literature, even geography were heavily influenced by Islam. Does it make any sense to believe that an empire that stretched from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific would not leave a lasting imprint on what was a very backwards Europe at the time.

It's chauvinism to believe otherwise.

You are correct to a degree that some important cultural/scientific contributions have been made by "Islamic" culture.  But their antecedents in the Levant and Mesopotamia and Persia, who laid the basis for those, were using medicinal elements, and making astronomical observations and writing philosophy long before there were Moslems.

The algebra only goes so far.

Now, I have seen your true face Maju.

True.

eastern culteres yes, islam more disputable: yes, through arab translations get the westerners the new knowledge, but they was just transmitters. Take aristotle philosophy, that of avicena and averroes, and conclude that they put nothing new to that old philosophy; they just commented it, with a sort of adulation for the "absolute master". Have to note too, that they are "islamic" in the same sens voltaire is "christian".

Yes, but west was not exactly the best choosen place to compare with. All the knowledge was from persian and bizantyne origin. Ethnically but more important, ideologically.

It seems that you don't care for the arguments of others: i explained why your thesis is false: the west, at 1200, the moment of first translations from arabian, was already expanding intelectually for 3 centuries!!! All what these transl. has given to them, was Aristotle. But without him, there was abelard with his new ideas, was Eriugena, both of them with liberating worldviews. The arabs had Aristotle, the bizantyne had Aristotle, but nothing errupted there intelectually!!! NOTHING. 

the killer of van gogh declared today that the prophet Mohamed preached the violence. Our friend Bush was heard tolding that islam mean "peace"; arab linguists told us that islam mean "submission", not "peace", and historian told us that Mohamed indeed preached and did practise violence in it's more cruel forms.

Who's right? Who's lying?

It's 2006 not 1006 AD . Just thought I'd point that out.

??   Maju's correct, Byzantium most influenced the Renaissance, as far as I knew.

I think we have beaten this to death.

As I said yeaterday, I am closing the topic.