--- In [email protected], anon_astute_ff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], anon_astute_ff <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > In Norway, as I recall, its an intolerable crime to insult the king, > > even as a joke.. More so in Thailand as I recall, where you can get > > into serious trouble by doing so. Hard for Americans to "get" that -- > > they joke about the royal family in UK and elsewhere all the time -- > > seeing kings as antiquated throwbacks of tyranny. > > But then Norwegians and Brittons don't bomb their embassies as a result.
You either misread my comment about the Brits and royalty or I wrote it poorly. I didn't say that there are serious consequences and great offense will be taken if one insults the British royal family while in London. After all that has occured my sense is the Brits do quite a bit joking about their royals and no one is thrown in jail. But lets focus on the US and US culture. I assume you are a yank. In most of the 20th century, blacks were lynched, beaten,churches and homes were bombed, basic rights were denied, etc and all for acts, or imagined acts, most of the world would think trivial: blacks violated the sacred code of white suopremecy and highly detailed sacred codes of conduct of segregation and apartheid. Bombing a few embassies hardly compares to that multi-century oppression. The US overtly or covertly overthrew democratically governements in Chile (Allende), Vietnam (Diem), Iran(predecessor to the Shaw), Gautamala (I believe it was an elected govt there) and supported brutal and corrupt dictators for decades-- all because tenets of a US sacred code of their foreign policy was seen or imagined to be violated. "Violations" that much of the rest of the world saw as non-existent -- or small enough to be dealt with in other much less brutal ways. Bombing a few embassies hardly compares. Many other examples of US violence around the world because they perceived something "sacred" to them, though "trivial" to most of the world, being disrespected. I could go on with the Christian Right, the horrendous brutality of the Catholic (and other) church(es) over the centuries, who can forget the Crusades, -- much of which was instigated by something sacred in Christiandom being violated -- things much of the world saw as small potatoes. Bombing a few embassies is begining to look like a peaace march in comparison. And lets not forget -- the bombing a few embassies at this stage ofthe current issue is more of a governemnt stirring up dissent for political purposes -- not mosque generated dissent. > > But damn, mess with that flag -- or say something unholy about Jesus > > -- and your ass is fried. Lots of other examples -- Jewish Holy land, > > Hindu sacred cows and temple sites (adhoya sp?), cutting a sikhs hair, > > etc. > > > > To be insensitive to another culture and disrespect their sacred > > things -- "because it seems trivial to us" -- is the height -- or > > depth -- of stupidity, crudeness, rudeness, and barbarianism. > > > > To say "I think every news channel and newspaper in the world should > > publish the cartoon, including the ones in Muslim countries. If the > > fanatics have too many targets it will be the same as no targets" > > marks you as the above. > > > > But hey, maybe you have a point. Lets go burn some flags, drag some > > crucifixes through urine, deface some Stars of David with swastikas, > > and burn some crosses on every block across the US. If those US > > fanatics have too many targets it will be the same as no targets". > > > > I didn't say their beliefs were trivial. Ok. To be insensitive to another culture and disrespect their sacred things, for whatever reasons -- is the height -- or depth -- of stupidity, crudeness, rudeness, and barbarianism. > My point was to make the cartoon so ubiquitous they don't have a > target, much in the way the Danish people did when the Nazis required > Jews to wear the Star of David: the whole population, including the > Kind, wore the Star of David on their clothes. If everyone's doing it, > it might get a little harder to find the target you want to hate. Yet you have apparently found your target to hate. How do we diffuse such barbarians and cultural imbeciles so they don't do huge damage around the globe? > There's a difference between disrespect and sacrilege. You can > disrespect another's religion but only commit a sacrilege in your own. > Those rioting in protest against the cartoon are opposing it as a > great religious travesty, a sacrilege. Which is de facto imposing > their religious standards on non-Muslims. First, no one is giving out good conduct awards for people rioting in the streets. Actually, per above, few driven by pure religious sentiments apppear to be rioting. Its governments whipping up the fervor for their won ends. But, regardless your logic is silly. But lets follow it. If the US then finds "insult" from actions of other cultures and nations, they can "disrespect" those that do it, but if they act against such cultures (overtly, covertly, economically, politically) then they are de facto imposing their standards on non-Americans -- AND should be restrained from doing so. Ok. Maybe you do have a good point. No more cutural, economic or political US imperialism. > "...burn some flags, drag some > > crucifixes through urine, deface some Stars of David with swastikas, > > and burn some crosses on every block across the US. " > All those are examples of physical acts, some of which have been > associated with considerable violence. That's a far cry from > publishing a cartoon, which is an editorial comment. Again, your cultural biases and obtuse spinning are glaring. And scary. You "fairly characterize" violating a most sacred tenent of Islam (for many) -- across a wide audience -- as "publishing a cartoon". By your standards, would burning a cross at the Freedom March in DC in 1964 duiring King's "I have a dream" speech be just a friendly down home barbeque? Would 12 men pissing on a 12 foot crucifix at the Vatican during the Pope's Easter service simply be "nature calling"? > I agree it is in bad taste and disrespectful, Good. >but the violence and > riots upon its publication do nothing to undermine the assumptions > that prompted it. Is english your native tongue? ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
