Why aren't we talking about "Draw Muhammad Day?" May 20th

@ossobuco,

Quote:

... But I'm more interested in the women in between.

Which is exactly why I hope this thread will lead to other people asking "Moderate Muslims" about their beliefs, and why those beliefs require death threats to cartoonists.

1 Reply

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

are you sure you are not pumping this stuff ?

Pumping? Sorry, I don't follow. Would you restate?

A
R
T

1 Reply

Now you've gone and done it. Facebook censored in Pakistan.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64I29P20100519

Pakistan blocks Facebook over caricatures

(Reuters) - The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) directed Internet service providers to block Facebook indefinitely on Wednesday because of an online competition to draw the Prophet Mohammad.

The order followed a decision by the Lahore High Court temporarily banning Facebook in Pakistan after the country's media reported that the competition would be held on May 20.

"The court has ordered the government to immediately block Facebook until May 31 because of this blasphemous competition," Azhar Siddique, a representative of the Islamic Lawyers Forum who filed a petition in the Lahore High Court, told Reuters.

"The court has also ordered the foreign ministry to investigate why such a competition is being held."

2 Replies

@roger,

I thought facebook removed the site ?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Yes. Initially, they blocked the url. More recently, they blocked the entire facebook site. It can still be accessed by way of Blackberry. I don't know how that works.

0 Replies

@failures art,

failures art wrote:

I see some laps are happening here. How is saying someone "will end up like Theo Van Gogh" not a threat? He's a guy who made a piece of visual art critical of Islam, and then was assassinated.

You might want to read the NYTimes article I linked, FA.

These people didn't state that someone will end up like Theo Van Gogh. They said that they "will probably (emphasis mine) end up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show." They were speculating. The article further quotes them as saying, "this is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them."

They were acknowledging the fanaticism that the cartoon could incite.

I found a more complete quote of the posting at CNN News Blogs

"We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat(emphasis mine), but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.”

This is not to say that the statement posted on revolutionmuslim shouldn't be taken seriously, but there was no actual death threat let alone a fatwa like was issued against Salman Rushdie for having written The Satanic Verses back in the day.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

HA

Think of Blue as my name, Infra is a modifier.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

I did read the article. My point still stands. You're running in circles here.

Quote:

These people didn't state that someone will end up like Theo Van Gogh. They said that they "will probably (emphasis mine) end up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show." They were speculating. The article further quotes them as saying, "this is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them."

Oh well, that changes everything. This group is in the USA. If you were a group in the USA and wanted to make a threat, valid or not, but still with the intention of leveraging violence to manipulate a behavior, how would you word it so you could avoid getting arrested?

Continuing with my gay son metaphor: Your gay son will probably end up like Matthew Sheppard. This isn't a threat.

See. If you say it's not a threat. it isn't one. You can't honestly think for a second that it is not a threat. It's just one done in such a way as to prevent getting arrested.

Quote:

This is not to say that the statement posted on revolutionmuslim shouldn't be taken seriously

It's not a threat but it should be taken seriously. How does one take the statement seriously? By complying with the desired behavior?

E.g. - If you don't move your car, somebody is probably going to flatten your tires. This isn't a threat. I'm just saying move your car or something bad will happen.

A
R
T

3 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

Continuing with my gay son metaphor: Your gay son will probably end up like Matthew Sheppard. This isn't a threat.

See. If you say it's not a threat. it isn't one. You can't honestly think for a second that it is not a threat. It's just one done in such a way as to prevent getting arrested.

It's not a threat/it's a veiled threat/it's not an outright threat/it's a veiled threat used to mitigate the chances of being arrested/it's a .../it's a ... .

Saying "Your gay son will probably end up like Matthew Sheppard" could simply be a person conveying the likelihood, in their mind, given the circumstances, of someone's son being subjected to the same thing as Matthew Sheppard.

A given structure can say a lot of things.

0 Replies

@roger,

Quote:

Pakistan blocks Facebook over caricatures

Now, are/should the owners of Facebook be subject to arrest/punishment in any country where this behavior is prohibited? Are the people who participated subject to the same, even if the sentence is death?

0 Replies

@failures art,

Quote:

E.g. - If you don't move your car, somebody is probably going to flatten your tires. This isn't a threat. I'm just saying move your car or something bad will happen.

The first structure, underlined, does not equal the second, in bold. How would this be viewed, overall? Would it be viewed as a threat or as an expression of probability? Even with the "will happen", it would depend on who the speaker was.

A gangster, I'd think it a threat, a very real threat. My buddy, I'd have to weigh any number of things; his knowledge of the situation, his tone of voice, ... .

0 Replies

This "No Threat" angle has to be dumbest incarnation yet. An artist's home was set on fire just days before the protest. If NO ONE had even hinted at a threat, the unspoken threat would be there just the same. And so too would the resulting self-censorship as a direct result. As it turns out; the would-be oppressors threats resulted in a thousand-fold increase in published Muhammad drawings. These would-be oppressors would have to be pretty stupid to continue trying that same tact, considering these results.

And anyone who thinks Deb was just looking for an outlet to display her racism, do some armchair soldiering, or feigning self-righteousness; is a moron. Her presence alone debunks half the idiotic motivation assumptions posted on this thread. Sweeping generalizations remain the product of an inferior argument, because they simply don't work.

0 Replies

The people making the "statement" are people that do wish for bad things to happen. Given that context, it's hard to swallow that they are "warning" others out of their goodness.

Veiled or unveiled, the point is to manipulate people's behavior. Even if they have no knowledge of any attack, or plan to attack, it's still a threat.

If I walk up behind you and tell you to give me your wallet or I'll shoot, it's a threat. It's a threat, even if I don't have a gun. The point is that I'm leveraging potential violence to manipulate you into complying with my demand.

If this NYC Muslim extremist group had plans or knew of plans to harm people is irrelevant. There never needed to be some public fatwa for this to be a valid threat.

A
R
T

2 Replies

@failures art,

To play along with your analogy, if a man were to come on to homicidal, homophobic heterosexual men, then it stands to reason that they'd probably end up like Matthew Sheppard.

You say it's a threat, so it is one.

This is as ridiculous an assertion as the one you've made.

Quote:

I'm just saying move your car or something bad will happen.

I haven't read anywhere where they've supposedly said anything to the effect, "stop the cartoon or something bad will happen."

You're merely reading more into what's been quoted from their site.

Revolutionmuslim made the statement after the South Park episode aired, so they couldn't have threatened to stop the airing. They asserted that they'd probably wind up like Van Gogh for having aired it.

I, however, think that they'll probably wind up more like Salman Rushdie than Theo Van Gogh for having aired their cartoon.

You're all wet if you think I've made a threat.

0 Replies

@failures art,

Imagine me, a white guy (sorta tan, but whatever) walking into a poor neighborhood, and a couple of poor black/latino kids hanging on the corner yell out, 'better watch out, white boy - dangerous around dark here!'

Is that a threat by them, or an assessment of the situation?

I would also say that having a national freak-out over what some disaffected college kid posts on some website is the fastest way to make **** more important then it really is.

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

@BorisKitten,

I don't think the beliefs require death threats to cartoonists, whatever stunts some fanatics pull.

0 Replies

@failures art,

That was shorthand for my tiredly thinking you were getting strident.

0 Replies

The TV news has interviews with moderate muslims protesting.

Youtube is now also blocked in Pakistan .

0 Replies

@failures art,

failures art wrote:

The people making the "statement" are people that do wish for bad things to happen. Given that context, it's hard to swallow that they are "warning" others out of their goodness.

Veiled or unveiled, the point is to manipulate people's behavior. Even if they have no knowledge of any attack, or plan to attack, it's still a threat.

If I walk up behind you and tell you to give me your wallet or I'll shoot, it's a threat. It's a threat, even if I don't have a gun. The point is that I'm leveraging potential violence to manipulate you into complying with my demand.

If this NYC Muslim extremist group had plans or knew of plans to harm people is irrelevant. There never needed to be some public fatwa for this to be a valid threat.

A
R
T

No one is saying that revolutionmuslim were warning others out of their goodness, for goodness sakes. They'd probably dance in the street if Parker and Stone were to wind up like Van Gogh. And the way I read their post, they wish something like that upon the two. Expressing bad wishes upon someone is not nice; it's very, very bad.

However, I don't think the post warrants offending a whole bunch of people through the ill conceived efforts of an idiotic campaign whose net result was to draw out a bunch of bigots and haters.

Again, I think that that post should be taken very seriously, and that the South Park guys should take all precautions to ensure their own safety, especially if they plan on inciting murderous zealots by way of their cartoons.

Equating their post with someone walking up behind you and threatening to shoot you if you don't give them your wallet is a stretch.

I wish anyone drawing Muhammad in the name of this imbecilic campaign would get a life.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

I so agree, at the same time I get the drawing. I just don't like it.

0 Replies

Why aren't we talking about "Draw Muhammad Day?" May 20th

Quick Links

My Account

able2know