aem wrote:

> Dave Smith wrote:
> > .... and no one but a whacked Muslim would
> > even take offence.
>
> Muslims believe it is wrong (the equivalent of blasphemy for
> Christians) to produce and display images of Muhammed. These were not
> only images, they were insulting cartoons of the person they believe
> stands closest to their God. It is expected, normal behavior for
> Muslims to take offence.
>
> Didn't the televangelists take offence at the (already cancelled) tv
> show that portrayed Jesus looking like a long-haired hippie?
>
> I think believers in all three of the monotheisms that came out of the
> desert are wrong, but it has been obvious for centuries that when you
> insult believers they get angry.
>
> > We owe it to our Danish friends and to ourselves to run a
> > counter boycott.
>
> Oh nonsense. I don't owe the Danes shit. I might sympathize with the
> innocent getting caught up in generalized protest, but what else is
> new? I have more sympathy for the tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians
> that have been killed in the past few years.
>
> > Maybe the Moslems will stop these silly
> > protests if they backfire on them.
>
> More nonsense. People who believe their religion is under attack are
> going to change their thinking because you buy more Havarti? What
> planet are you living on? -aem


Well and eloquently put, Neville Chamberlain...

--
Best
Greg