fleurette,

The answer for your post is " WHO CARES? "

oh fleurette, you are so confusing. You are mentally supporting "Killing" and "Beheading" protests whatever the cause be! Are you so ignorant of the position of woman in Islam or the brutal murders by mohammed?

See fleurette, you've are so ignorant of mohammed's history. please buy a koran and read how he killed others, took women as wives, even a 6 year/9 year old girl. To say that he is the perfect man for humans makes me to smile at the hypocrisy.

"The cartoon is saying that all Muslims are terrorists and that their one and only prophet is a terrorist." .. No, it's saying most of the muslim's violent nature is from mohammed. They think to kill is to follow their leader and it's not a wrong thing to kill as koran says so.

You wrote: "Would you say the same to cartoonists who depict Jesus as a peadophile? Do you say "Hey Madonna..nice of you to dress up as Jesus in your lingerie...maybe the Christians will start to reflect on the true meaning of their religion now".

flu, Some westerners, atheists did many blasphemous paintings like P*SS CHRIST, depicting Jesus as naked doing sex with children (to illustrate Catholic priests) Turkey's tourism ministry shows couples dancing on Jesus pictures, madonna hanging on a cross etc.. They are considered blasphemous by christians.. Are they saying : "Behead those who insult Christ. "

We had Holocaust cartoon competition in Iran and a Danish paper reprinting those cartoons.

What are the Jews doing? They're burning Danish embassies and doing protests calling for murder of the cartoonists.. Are they?

We got South Park TV Cartoons depicting Virgin mary menstruating..

Two days back, the person I hate (Papa Benedict) said:

" In the seventh conversation...the emperor touches on the theme of the holy war. Without descending to details, such as the difference in treatment accorded to those who have the "Book" and the "infidels", he addresses his interlocutor with a startling brusqueness on the central question about the relationship between religion and violence in general, saying: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God," he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5348456.stm

What's the reaction from the followers of ROP? They killed and injured themselves in the protests over pope's comments? It's funny and it's sick.

Are you there with them spiritually? Call a SPADE 'SPADE'

If your faith is so strong, others comments make no sense to you. I dont think if their/any god is so powerful, he wont need others to defend him. Dont you think so?

Clarification:

"What TV calls 'fundamentalist' is probably more like some eighth-century Islamic sects than sixth century Islam.

Islam started in the early seventh century (c.620), but some environmental roots go back to c. 570.

Oliver: I mainly agree with you. Are you saying Germany went from a feudal society to advanced rapidly? That's untrue. Many of the historical changes of the past 500 years occurred in or around what is modern Germany. The Reformation is a prime example. Russia and Japan are examples of rapid advances, but not Germany.

tao: Are you being facetious? From that quote, "So much in fact that it outweighs the "Freedom of speech" card."

I don't buy the line of newspapers having an effect in Nazi Germany because ultimately, people have to take responsibility for their own actions. The fact that the media may be ratbags is no excuse for people to absolve themselves of responsibility.

The way to complain about this is by not buying the newspaper and by naming and shaming the newspapers involved, not calling for legislation. Are you forgetting that much of where we are today is because people bucked the trend and said or printed things that were considered offensive or morally degenerate? We'd still be living in Victorian England or the 1950s otherwise. In this respect, I'm as opposed to censorship from the PC left as from the Christian conservative right.

Having said that, however, I keep getting back to one of my original points: why is it that Islam, which has been militaristic from day one, is never called on its bs? Everyone takes the piss out of Tom Cruise for being a Scientologist, why not the same for any Muslim? Why is it that the left (whom Islam sees as morally degenerate and the enemy) are so blind to this? The west still has a long way to go, but what, do you think there's a Tehran or Riyadh Gay Mardi Gras? Gimme a break.

As for the way the media portrays Iraq or any other conflict, I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I'm as opposed to the current round of military adventurism and empire building as you are, I'm sure, and I'm disgusted by the way the media has been such a cheersquad for this absurd War on Terror.

shorbe,

You make a good point about Germany's contribution to the Reformation. Likewise, on The Continent more generally, Academies started sprouting up and the (German) printing press allowed information to be effectiently distributed. Even in the late nineteen century German engineering was outstripping the US and Britain in many areas, notably automibles.

You mention "feudal" society which suggests you have read Veblen.

I think one would need to consider society-at-large not merely an elite, however. In this Redding notes that Western countries that had been occupied for more than a millinium by Rome show different patterns than countries so occupied. This pattern, carried forward to the success of the colonies.

Feudalism arose from the break down of the Western Roman Empire, where the British Isle and The Contintent took different paths. The former, being vis~a~vis the latter, liberal.

Interestingly, going back a century (or less) Russia and Japan, would import technologies, whereas Germany would inovate technologies. This supports your argument.

Provisionally, I am open to investigating/accepting your proposition. Just the same, historically, I wonder if the Germanic population en-mass, displayed the feudal or counter-feudal characteristics

Oliver: I'm not familiar with Veblen, sorry. I just know that for western Europe, feudalism ended (more or less) with the end of the Middle Ages (due to a whole range of factors, eg. urbanisation, monnetary currency, kings trying to weaken the power of nobility and the move to mercenary or standing armies, etc.), whereas in other places (Russia and Japan) it didn't end until the late 19th century.

Which countries were occupied by Rome for more than a millenium? The Roman Empire collapsed in 453 CE, which would mean any country occupied for more than a millenium would have had to have been conquered before 547 BCE, but Rome didn't even conquer the Italian peninsula until about three centuries after this.

I don't know that feudalism in its regional variations or different start or end dates had a lot to do with western European colonisation of the new world, which occurred (in earnest) about three centuries later, and indeed, more than a millenium after the fall of Rome. I think there were a whole different set of factors involved. Look, you could argue that the Anglo-Saxon tribes of Britain (which, according to Germanic customs, were more egalitarian than other Europeans) led to the Magna Carta, which led to Parliament, which led to a more liberal society, which provided a fertile intellectual ground for the Age of Reason, which led to the Founding Fathers of the U.S., but I think that would be a gross over-simplification. There were a whole lot of factors (many environmental) affecting the success of the different colonial nations, and these often waxed and waned. The period between the discovery of the New World and the French Revolution was incredibly complex, both in Europe and elsewhere.