D
dan e 1980
Guest
and for levant to publish the cartoons doesn't hurt us elsewhere?
come on.
|
|
|
and for levant to publish the cartoons doesn't hurt us elsewhere?
come on.
D
dan e 1980
Guest
bizorky, if you haven't understood what i'm trying to say, i don't know if i can ever convince you of what i'm talking about.
read my posts carefully, hopefully you can understand the message i'm trying to convey.
does freedom of speech and expression really exist??
altreligion.about.com/b/a/231317.htm
bizorky, you're loaded.
you're basicly telling me that i can't use any examples or else i'm racist. it's very easy for you to win your argument if i can't compare. it's obvious that if i can't compare the inbalance, i have no arguement.
read my posts carefully, hopefully you can understand the message i'm trying to convey.
does freedom of speech and expression really exist??
altreligion.about.com/b/a/231317.htm
bizorky, you're loaded.
you're basicly telling me that i can't use any examples or else i'm racist. it's very easy for you to win your argument if i can't compare. it's obvious that if i can't compare the inbalance, i have no arguement.
D
dan e 1980
Guest
read between the lines. is he not suggesting that canadian politicians "shut up" in regards to their negative opinions on americans?
C
cacruden
Guest
And where did I say that....
It puts our troops in danger in Afganistan.
I have mentioned at least once -- and possibly many times on this thread that if I were publisher I would not publish them -- I think they were in bad taste -- BUT -- I fully support his right to publish them.
It puts our troops in danger in Afganistan.
I have mentioned at least once -- and possibly many times on this thread that if I were publisher I would not publish them -- I think they were in bad taste -- BUT -- I fully support his right to publish them.
D
dan e 1980
Guest
for the last time:
if your going to allow offensive material to be published, get rid of all the restrictions on other offensive material.
if you want freedom of speech, it must truly be free., not one sided.
if your going to allow offensive material to be published, get rid of all the restrictions on other offensive material.
if you want freedom of speech, it must truly be free., not one sided.
B
bizorky
Guest
Freedom of expression, as termed, is a social construction, as are any perceived limits. When an individual opens his or her mouth and says something, one can assume they are doing so within the context of what we refer to as freedom.
You suffer from extreme over-sensitivity, or at least that is what your remark suggests. I am telling you that, historically, such imagery was used to evoke something different than what the comics central to this thread were intended to do. It is you who have failed to make the distinctions between the two, and chose to provide a counterpoint that was not in the same category. I merely pointed that out to you. If you infer that I am calling you a racist, that is a difficulty with your own personal interpretation. What you employed was a transfer technique, pure and simple.
And no, I am not loaded.
D
dan e 1980
Guest
i'm sorry for standing up for equality.
what i see in the media is christian Vs. muslim Vs. jew Vs. etc.
quite frankly, i'm sick of it - the touting of freedom of speech when the people doing the touting are the same ones that would ristrict others' speech if given the chance.
lets see how long the freedom of speech & expression bandwagon lasts.
B
bizorky
Guest
Equality of what? Equal censorship? How exactly have you stood up for equality?
You appear to be terribly concerned about religious sensibilities, but what about those people who would otherwise choose to have none, who find themselves having absolutely no religious inclination whatsoever? Are they to remain forever silent in the face of religious-based criticism because fanatical believers might react poorly? Is a secular society open to religious-based criticism, but humanists are to be disallowed from making objections concerning the numerous prejudices bound up within religious beliefs?
Sick of free speech, so good for you.
Again, what do you mean when you say that people doing the "touting" are the same ones who would "restrict" the speech of others? This is vague in the extreme.
So according to you, the comic drawing is on equal grounds as the reaction to it: the rioting, the burning, the insults, the threats, the intimidation, the fearmongering, the numerous injuries and deaths?
Free speech and expression is a bandwagon. You make me laugh. The sentence alone suggests a terrible and unfortunate ignorance to what those things mean, to the value of them, and the cost born in pursuing and evolving those ideas.
You appear to be terribly concerned about religious sensibilities, but what about those people who would otherwise choose to have none, who find themselves having absolutely no religious inclination whatsoever? Are they to remain forever silent in the face of religious-based criticism because fanatical believers might react poorly? Is a secular society open to religious-based criticism, but humanists are to be disallowed from making objections concerning the numerous prejudices bound up within religious beliefs?
Sick of free speech, so good for you.
Again, what do you mean when you say that people doing the "touting" are the same ones who would "restrict" the speech of others? This is vague in the extreme.
So according to you, the comic drawing is on equal grounds as the reaction to it: the rioting, the burning, the insults, the threats, the intimidation, the fearmongering, the numerous injuries and deaths?
Free speech and expression is a bandwagon. You make me laugh. The sentence alone suggests a terrible and unfortunate ignorance to what those things mean, to the value of them, and the cost born in pursuing and evolving those ideas.
D
dan e 1980
Guest
bizorky, you turning and twisting everything i say.
re: freedom of speech
i'm not against freedom of speech, i just find it odd that people who would otherwise want to silence liberals, or any other group they disagree with, even the ones that would go as far as having the liberals shot or sipped out of the country - all of a sudden support freedom of speech and expression.
i know that you understand what i'm saying bizorky, but you refuse to show it because for some strange reason you seem to have a pickle for arabs and their religion.
when i say lets see how long this freedom of speech bandwagon lasts, i'm talking about the conservatives who are all of a sudden champions of free speech. lets see how long they can keep it up, i dunno, maybe untill somebody says something bad about bush or something, then liberals should "shut up" or "ship out" i guess.
re: freedom of speech
i'm not against freedom of speech, i just find it odd that people who would otherwise want to silence liberals, or any other group they disagree with, even the ones that would go as far as having the liberals shot or sipped out of the country - all of a sudden support freedom of speech and expression.
i know that you understand what i'm saying bizorky, but you refuse to show it because for some strange reason you seem to have a pickle for arabs and their religion.
when i say lets see how long this freedom of speech bandwagon lasts, i'm talking about the conservatives who are all of a sudden champions of free speech. lets see how long they can keep it up, i dunno, maybe untill somebody says something bad about bush or something, then liberals should "shut up" or "ship out" i guess.
A
AlvinofDiaspar
Guest
Well, the extremists are pulling a Salaman Rusdie again, from Yahoo News:
Cleric: $1 Million to Kill Cartoonist By RIAZ KHAN, Associated Press Writer
12 minutes ago
PESHAWAR, Pakistan - A Pakistani cleric announced Friday a $1 million bounty for killing a cartoonist who drew Prophet Muhammad, as thousands joined street protests and Denmark temporarily closed its embassy and advised its citizens to leave the country.
Police confined the former leader of an Islamic militant group to his home to prevent him from addressing supporters over the cartoons, amid fears he could incite violence, after riots this week killed five people.
Security forces were out in strength, particularly around government offices and Western businesses, as Muslims streamed onto the streets after Friday prayers. More than 200 people were detained, but most gatherings were peaceful.
In neighboring India, police used batons and tear gas to disperse thousands of angry worshippers who rioted in the southern city of Hyderabad. They burned Danish flags, pelted police with stones, and looted shops. Hundreds more protested in Bangladesh.
In the northwestern Pakistan city of Peshawar, prayer leader Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi announced the bounty for killing a cartoonist to about 1,000 people outside the Mohabat Khan mosque.
Qureshi said the mosque and his religious school would give $25,000 and a car, while a local jewelers' association would give another $1 million. No representative of the association was available to confirm it had made the offer.
"This is a unanimous decision by all imams (prayer leaders) of Islam that whoever insults the prophet deserves to be killed and whoever will take this insulting man to his end, will get this prize," Qureshi said.
Qureshi did not name any cartoonist in his announcement. He did not appear aware that 12 different people had drawn the pictures.
A Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, first printed the prophet pictures by 12 cartoonists in September. The newspaper has since apologized to Muslims for the cartoons, one of them showing Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban with an ignited fuse. Other Western newspapers, mostly in Europe, have reprinted the pictures, asserting their news value and the right to freedom of expression.
In Islamabad, former U.S. President Bill Clinton criticized the cartoons but said Muslims wasted an opportunity to build better ties with the West by holding violent protests.
"I can tell you, most people in the United States deeply respect Islam ... and most people in Europe do," he said on a visit to sign an HIV- AIDS project by his foundation.
Denmark announced it had temporarily closed its embassy in Pakistan. It also advised against all travel to Pakistan and urged Danes still in the country to leave.
"We have decided to do so because of the general security situation in the country," Foreign Ministry spokesman Lars Thuesen said.
Denmark has already temporarily closed its embassies in Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Indonesia after anti-Danish protests and threats against staff.
Pakistan, meanwhile, recalled its ambassador to Denmark for "consultations" about the cartoons, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said.
Unrest over the cartoons has spiraled in Pakistan, even as it has ebbed in the rest of Asia and in the Middle East. Big riots in Lahore and Peshawar this week caused millions of dollars in damage, as hundreds of vehicles were burned and protesters targeted numerous U.S. and other foreign-brand businesses, including KFC, McDonald's, Citibank, Holiday Inn and Norwegian cell phone company Telenor.
Intelligence officials have said scores of members of radical and militant Islamic groups, such as Jamaat al-Dawat, joined the unruly protests in Lahore on Tuesday and had incited violence in a bid to undermine President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's government.
On Friday, police confined Jamaat al-Dawat's leader, Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, to his home in Lahore to stop him from addressing supporters in the city of Faisalabad, about 75 miles away, his spokesman Yahya Mujahid said.
Saeed used to lead Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, a militant group closely associated with Jamaat al-Dawat and banned by Musharraf four years ago.
A senior police official in Lahore who confirmed Saeed's detention said the government had ordered police to restrict the movement of all religious leaders who might address rallies and to round up religious activists "who could be any threat to law and order."
The official spoke on condition of anonymity as he wasn't authorized to discuss the matter with media because of its sensitivity.
Police used tear gas and batons in isolated incidents at Friday's protests, but generally they were free of violence. About 7,000 protested in Rawalpindi, 5,000 in the southwestern city of Quetta and 5,000 in Karachi.
AoD
Cleric: $1 Million to Kill Cartoonist By RIAZ KHAN, Associated Press Writer
12 minutes ago
PESHAWAR, Pakistan - A Pakistani cleric announced Friday a $1 million bounty for killing a cartoonist who drew Prophet Muhammad, as thousands joined street protests and Denmark temporarily closed its embassy and advised its citizens to leave the country.
Police confined the former leader of an Islamic militant group to his home to prevent him from addressing supporters over the cartoons, amid fears he could incite violence, after riots this week killed five people.
Security forces were out in strength, particularly around government offices and Western businesses, as Muslims streamed onto the streets after Friday prayers. More than 200 people were detained, but most gatherings were peaceful.
In neighboring India, police used batons and tear gas to disperse thousands of angry worshippers who rioted in the southern city of Hyderabad. They burned Danish flags, pelted police with stones, and looted shops. Hundreds more protested in Bangladesh.
In the northwestern Pakistan city of Peshawar, prayer leader Mohammed Yousaf Qureshi announced the bounty for killing a cartoonist to about 1,000 people outside the Mohabat Khan mosque.
Qureshi said the mosque and his religious school would give $25,000 and a car, while a local jewelers' association would give another $1 million. No representative of the association was available to confirm it had made the offer.
"This is a unanimous decision by all imams (prayer leaders) of Islam that whoever insults the prophet deserves to be killed and whoever will take this insulting man to his end, will get this prize," Qureshi said.
Qureshi did not name any cartoonist in his announcement. He did not appear aware that 12 different people had drawn the pictures.
A Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, first printed the prophet pictures by 12 cartoonists in September. The newspaper has since apologized to Muslims for the cartoons, one of them showing Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban with an ignited fuse. Other Western newspapers, mostly in Europe, have reprinted the pictures, asserting their news value and the right to freedom of expression.
In Islamabad, former U.S. President Bill Clinton criticized the cartoons but said Muslims wasted an opportunity to build better ties with the West by holding violent protests.
"I can tell you, most people in the United States deeply respect Islam ... and most people in Europe do," he said on a visit to sign an HIV- AIDS project by his foundation.
Denmark announced it had temporarily closed its embassy in Pakistan. It also advised against all travel to Pakistan and urged Danes still in the country to leave.
"We have decided to do so because of the general security situation in the country," Foreign Ministry spokesman Lars Thuesen said.
Denmark has already temporarily closed its embassies in Lebanon, Syria, Iran and Indonesia after anti-Danish protests and threats against staff.
Pakistan, meanwhile, recalled its ambassador to Denmark for "consultations" about the cartoons, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said.
Unrest over the cartoons has spiraled in Pakistan, even as it has ebbed in the rest of Asia and in the Middle East. Big riots in Lahore and Peshawar this week caused millions of dollars in damage, as hundreds of vehicles were burned and protesters targeted numerous U.S. and other foreign-brand businesses, including KFC, McDonald's, Citibank, Holiday Inn and Norwegian cell phone company Telenor.
Intelligence officials have said scores of members of radical and militant Islamic groups, such as Jamaat al-Dawat, joined the unruly protests in Lahore on Tuesday and had incited violence in a bid to undermine President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's government.
On Friday, police confined Jamaat al-Dawat's leader, Hafiz Mohammed Saeed, to his home in Lahore to stop him from addressing supporters in the city of Faisalabad, about 75 miles away, his spokesman Yahya Mujahid said.
Saeed used to lead Lashkar-e-Tayyaba, a militant group closely associated with Jamaat al-Dawat and banned by Musharraf four years ago.
A senior police official in Lahore who confirmed Saeed's detention said the government had ordered police to restrict the movement of all religious leaders who might address rallies and to round up religious activists "who could be any threat to law and order."
The official spoke on condition of anonymity as he wasn't authorized to discuss the matter with media because of its sensitivity.
Police used tear gas and batons in isolated incidents at Friday's protests, but generally they were free of violence. About 7,000 protested in Rawalpindi, 5,000 in the southwestern city of Quetta and 5,000 in Karachi.
AoD
B
billy corgan19982
Guest
The media constantly jokes about Christianity Dan, but you don’t see Christians rioting out on the streets or putting bounties on people’s heads.
This is how South Park depicts the Christian God:
Not very flattering is it?
This is how South Park depicts the Christian God:
Not very flattering is it?
D
dan e 1980
Guest
billy, yes i don't see them rioting over things like that but abortion clinics still get blown up, etc.
there was a southpark episode which never aired because it was deemed too offensive to christians, i posted the link somewhere in this thread.
i am not defending the rioting at all.
we are being hyped up, they are being hyped up. the sides are trying to get everyone hyped up for a comming war. it's a slow process but it's getting there.
they're gonna make us think that we have to die in a war for freedom of speech but that speech already has limits anyway. we have censorship on radio, T.V, etc. just look at what they did to howard stern. offensive material will always be censored on the major media sources. what's one more cartoon? just for diplomacy? to show that we are sensitive to other needs?
the riots and everything, that's not our fault, it's the fault of their political leaders because they are using that to get their people ready and hyped up. they are trying to get their people soo pissed off at the west because they are paranoid of the west. they want the people to protect their power, a power which is illgeal by international standards sometimes. they are creating a human sheild. you'll find that religion is used as a tool many times in alot of different cultures rally the people against something.
doesn't the states have to do something about iran soon?
lets just stop publishing in the major media the one thing that is giving them fuel now. this isn't like giving concessions to the nazi's or anything. we're not telling them they can have poland or anything.
do we really have to publish this thing over and over again because we know it will piss them off? are we known for rubbing salt in peoples wounds? how many times is offensing material pulled from the media when somebody reacts? sometimes it's only the reaction of 2 people that can get something pulled.
B
bizorky
Guest
You presume that your arguments and statements are clear; they are not. The fact that you are making contradictory remarks and would seem willing to brush of freedom of expression is what is making me respond. If you want it more bluntly, I understand what you are saying and I think you are wrong.
Do you consider that an attempt to inflame war? Once again, it is the extreme over-reaction to expression that is the problem.
You suggest that I have a "pickle for arabs and their religion." This is exactly the poor thinking on your part that I am criticising. Your remarks are inaccurate and show that you really don't reflect on what you are saying. Are you suggesting that I am anti-Arab? How? This entire thread is about an excessive reaction by certain members of the Muslim community. I am not making that up. It was reported on all over the place. Maybe you'd have me refer to alien abductions or recent debates on how to treat acne. Instead, I chose to stick with the subject that the thread was about: drawings that upset extremists within a certain religious community. Do you see that?
Try to keep your crypto-accusations of racism to yourself. If you want to cower in the face of extremism, go right ahead.
You claim that you are against the rioting. Yet you've spent most of your time seeming to question the idea of freedom of expression as a road to racism, zenophobia and homophobia. Is that freedom of expression is to you? Do you see it simply in terms of the worst possibilities?
Aside from the rather unclear writing, I have to ask why you assume that people will shut up because a "conservative" spoke. They can speak, you can answer. That's the whole idea with this freedom of speech "bandwagon." Everyone can join in. The big difference is when people demand that expression and discussion be completely eliminated, or when certain subjects should never be spoken of. I have a hard time seeing any irrefutable rationale for such a stance.
B
BrianHawkins1
Guest
This is interesting...
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Pakistani riots about more than cartoons"
By David Montero, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
Feb. 17, 2006
news.yahoo.com/s/csm/2006...csm/oriots
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - As elsewhere in the Muslim world, Pakistan has seen an upswing in violence following the publication in Danish and other newspapers of caricatures of the prophet Muhammad.
Local TV has been awash with images of young men rampaging through the streets, hurling stones, and carrying sticks. Some youths simply seemed swept up in organic chaos, smiling and waving before cameras. Others destroyed hundreds of cars and trashed banks and restaurants like Pizza Hut and KFC in Lahore. A bank guard opened fire, killing two young men, and a third bystander was killed during clashes between students and police. In Peshawar, an 8-year-old boy was killed after being accidentally shot by a protester firing into a crowd. One man was killed by downed power lines.
Over the past week, Islam and religious fervor have been fingered as the source of the spreading violence. But to some analysts, the erratic nature of the demonstrations points to different root causes.
The flash conflagrations, they argue, highlight a profound discontent in Paki-stan over economic and social inequality that has deepened over the past five years, sparking alienation and resentment.
While the attacks on Western restaurants, cars, and banks have been read as an attack on the West, those targets are potent symbols simply of privilege and status that is beyond the reach of much of Pakistan's population.
"In Western society, only the common man eats at KFC. But in Pakistan, these are eateries of the most privileged," says Rasul Bakhsh Rai, a professor at the Lahore University of Management Sciences.
Muhammed Sarfarz Naimi, a religious party leader, began Valentine's Day shouting down the Danish cartoons as blasphemous. By the afternoon, however, his faith compelled him to shout different protests, as throngs of young people in Lahore destroyed private businesses and government buildings, part of a swell of some 15,000 protestors who rampaged through the cultural capital in some of the worst violence the city has seen in recent years.
For Dr. Naimi, condemning the desecration of the prophet Muhammad and the desecration of life and livelihood are both parts of his calling.
"We demand that the government of Denmark apologize. Until they apologize, the protests will continue," he said by telephone, but added about the violent protesters, "On that day we stopped them. We shouted, 'Don't destroy others' livelihood, don't destroy others' wealth, others' shops.' This is prohibited by Islam."
Naimi is one of several religious leaders playing a dual role these past few days, condemning in equal measure the offensive depictions of the prophet and the wanton violence perpetrated in several Pakistani cities.
"Violence is antireligion. To be harmful in this respect is against religion," says Syed Munawar Hasan, secretary general of Jamaat Islami Pakistan in Lahore.
While some of the agitation was in fact directed toward the cartoons, religious leaders and secular analysts agree that the ensuing violence has little to do with religious offenses committed far away, and more to do with grievances at home.
"There was no religious component to the violence," says Kamila Hyat, joint director of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, based in Lahore. "All the violence was influenced by small groups of boys who were not moved by the blasphemy issue."
Others express doubt that those participating in the destruction were even aware of the blasphemy issue. Instead, they say, many participants took the opportunity to express an otherwise stifled but roiling sense of frustration.
"The whole thing was initiated because of the cartoons," says Nauman Wazir, president of the Industrialists' Association of Peshawar. "Then it was hijacked by some elements - schoolboys, people sitting idle - who also wanted to be a part of it. They have forgotten what the cause is."
But youthful discontent alone cannot be blamed, religious leaders and other analysts are quick to point out. Both on and off the record, many say the involvement of state intelligence agencies in fomenting the violence cannot be discounted. The current administration, some argue, is trying to spread panic about religious extremists in a bid to hold on to power.
"Maybe [President Pervez] Musharraf is trying to create a situation where he says to [US President George] Bush, 'Look, I'm sitting on dynamite with these mullahs and I'm the only one who can contain them,' " says Zarafullah Khan, director of the Center for Civic Education in Islamabad.
There is no proof of such activity, but observers say a weak police response is suggestive of state approval. The police in Lahore have been widely criticized for their failure to quell the violence, with many saying police did little to intervene. Mian Ameer Mahmood, the district nazim of Lahore, roughly equivalent to a mayor, denied the accusations: "I am on the record that police were not present at the time when people were burning buildings."
Such a tepid response contrasts sharply with last month's controversial marathon in Lahore, observers say, where thousands of police were deployed to prevent disruptions. It also contrasts with reports of armed troops stationed on rooftops and roadsides of Karachi Thursday, where 50,000 demonstrators rallied peacefully against the cartoons.
Further protests are expected to mount in coming days, culminating in a nationwide protest on March 3 to coincide with the arrival of President Bush. Leaders of Jamaat Islami hope the demonstrations will be peaceful, although they cannot account for how some outside their party will act. "Ensure we cannot. We don't have the police and army with us," says Mr. Hasan. "Even then, our experience tells us that we've always been successful in organizing peacefully."
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Pakistani riots about more than cartoons"
By David Montero, Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor
Feb. 17, 2006
news.yahoo.com/s/csm/2006...csm/oriots
ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN - As elsewhere in the Muslim world, Pakistan has seen an upswing in violence following the publication in Danish and other newspapers of caricatures of the prophet Muhammad.
Local TV has been awash with images of young men rampaging through the streets, hurling stones, and carrying sticks. Some youths simply seemed swept up in organic chaos, smiling and waving before cameras. Others destroyed hundreds of cars and trashed banks and restaurants like Pizza Hut and KFC in Lahore. A bank guard opened fire, killing two young men, and a third bystander was killed during clashes between students and police. In Peshawar, an 8-year-old boy was killed after being accidentally shot by a protester firing into a crowd. One man was killed by downed power lines.
Over the past week, Islam and religious fervor have been fingered as the source of the spreading violence. But to some analysts, the erratic nature of the demonstrations points to different root causes.
The flash conflagrations, they argue, highlight a profound discontent in Paki-stan over economic and social inequality that has deepened over the past five years, sparking alienation and resentment.
While the attacks on Western restaurants, cars, and banks have been read as an attack on the West, those targets are potent symbols simply of privilege and status that is beyond the reach of much of Pakistan's population.
"In Western society, only the common man eats at KFC. But in Pakistan, these are eateries of the most privileged," says Rasul Bakhsh Rai, a professor at the Lahore University of Management Sciences.
Muhammed Sarfarz Naimi, a religious party leader, began Valentine's Day shouting down the Danish cartoons as blasphemous. By the afternoon, however, his faith compelled him to shout different protests, as throngs of young people in Lahore destroyed private businesses and government buildings, part of a swell of some 15,000 protestors who rampaged through the cultural capital in some of the worst violence the city has seen in recent years.
For Dr. Naimi, condemning the desecration of the prophet Muhammad and the desecration of life and livelihood are both parts of his calling.
"We demand that the government of Denmark apologize. Until they apologize, the protests will continue," he said by telephone, but added about the violent protesters, "On that day we stopped them. We shouted, 'Don't destroy others' livelihood, don't destroy others' wealth, others' shops.' This is prohibited by Islam."
Naimi is one of several religious leaders playing a dual role these past few days, condemning in equal measure the offensive depictions of the prophet and the wanton violence perpetrated in several Pakistani cities.
"Violence is antireligion. To be harmful in this respect is against religion," says Syed Munawar Hasan, secretary general of Jamaat Islami Pakistan in Lahore.
While some of the agitation was in fact directed toward the cartoons, religious leaders and secular analysts agree that the ensuing violence has little to do with religious offenses committed far away, and more to do with grievances at home.
"There was no religious component to the violence," says Kamila Hyat, joint director of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, based in Lahore. "All the violence was influenced by small groups of boys who were not moved by the blasphemy issue."
Others express doubt that those participating in the destruction were even aware of the blasphemy issue. Instead, they say, many participants took the opportunity to express an otherwise stifled but roiling sense of frustration.
"The whole thing was initiated because of the cartoons," says Nauman Wazir, president of the Industrialists' Association of Peshawar. "Then it was hijacked by some elements - schoolboys, people sitting idle - who also wanted to be a part of it. They have forgotten what the cause is."
But youthful discontent alone cannot be blamed, religious leaders and other analysts are quick to point out. Both on and off the record, many say the involvement of state intelligence agencies in fomenting the violence cannot be discounted. The current administration, some argue, is trying to spread panic about religious extremists in a bid to hold on to power.
"Maybe [President Pervez] Musharraf is trying to create a situation where he says to [US President George] Bush, 'Look, I'm sitting on dynamite with these mullahs and I'm the only one who can contain them,' " says Zarafullah Khan, director of the Center for Civic Education in Islamabad.
There is no proof of such activity, but observers say a weak police response is suggestive of state approval. The police in Lahore have been widely criticized for their failure to quell the violence, with many saying police did little to intervene. Mian Ameer Mahmood, the district nazim of Lahore, roughly equivalent to a mayor, denied the accusations: "I am on the record that police were not present at the time when people were burning buildings."
Such a tepid response contrasts sharply with last month's controversial marathon in Lahore, observers say, where thousands of police were deployed to prevent disruptions. It also contrasts with reports of armed troops stationed on rooftops and roadsides of Karachi Thursday, where 50,000 demonstrators rallied peacefully against the cartoons.
Further protests are expected to mount in coming days, culminating in a nationwide protest on March 3 to coincide with the arrival of President Bush. Leaders of Jamaat Islami hope the demonstrations will be peaceful, although they cannot account for how some outside their party will act. "Ensure we cannot. We don't have the police and army with us," says Mr. Hasan. "Even then, our experience tells us that we've always been successful in organizing peacefully."
D
dan e 1980
Guest
freedom of speech and expression?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.B...%28book%29
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banned_books
censorship is all around us. do billboards, newspapers, etc. display pornography? what's this beep i hear everytime someone swears? is that my freedom of speech?
:\
everyone is all "hey, we can show those cartoons - freedom of speech" but when something offends them - "no, you can't show that. it's wrong".
i honestly don't know why i'm complaining. i should be glad that people are starting to care about freedom of speech. lets just hope that the freedom of speech is still the topic of the day when something deeply offends them and they want it banned. i will be the first one to step in and say - "hey, what ever happened to free speech? if it was good enough for cartoons that offended other people, isn't it good enough for what ever offends you?"
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.B...%28book%29
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banned_books
censorship is all around us. do billboards, newspapers, etc. display pornography? what's this beep i hear everytime someone swears? is that my freedom of speech?
:\ everyone is all "hey, we can show those cartoons - freedom of speech" but when something offends them - "no, you can't show that. it's wrong".
i honestly don't know why i'm complaining. i should be glad that people are starting to care about freedom of speech. lets just hope that the freedom of speech is still the topic of the day when something deeply offends them and they want it banned. i will be the first one to step in and say - "hey, what ever happened to free speech? if it was good enough for cartoons that offended other people, isn't it good enough for what ever offends you?"