Michel Boucher wrote:

> Dave Smith > wrote in
> :
>
> > However, that is a personal boycott. I am not burning down
> > embassies or pushing for an organized boycott.
>
> To paraphrase Louis B. Mayer, a personal boycott, like a verbal
> agreement, isn't worth the paper it's printed on.


But get a few of those "personal" boycotts together and they can work
wonders. I've done it with businesses right here in my own
neighborhood...

--
Best
Greg

Michel Boucher wrote:
> Dave Smith > wrote in
> :
>
> > " wrote:
> >>
> >> I hope that you are dilgently boycotting USA businesses until
> >> they pay up on the softwood lumber case too. Just so you're
> >> consistant
> >
> > Buy Canadian wherever possible :-)
> >
> > I am also very reluctant to buy French because they went halfway
> > around the world to test nuclear arms that they would not dare to
> > do closer to home where it might affect them. Then there was their
> > actions in New Zealand where French agents killed two people while
> > blowing up the Rainbow Warrior. The agents were convicted and
> > France responded by using its veto power in the EU to pbar NZ meat
> > from the continent. Dirty business.
>
> That was a long time ago and a completely different government. France
> was on our side in the Iraq debacle, and you should reward them for
> being on the side of goodness and niceness. Tough decisions need to be
> made in the area of boycotts. Too many boycotts are launched as an
> unintelligent emotional reaction to something one takes as a personal
> slight, like the guy who wanted everyone to boycott Chinese buffet
> restaurants in the US until China released the spy plane they had
> captured when it landed in Hainan. Fat lot of good that was going to
> do :-)
>

Well it might have helped improve food quality. I don't know about US
"Chinese buffets" but I have never seen a good one in Canada. I don't
think most Chinese food is designed to be left in warming pans .
Getting people to eat in 'real' Chinese restaurants would have been a
good thing.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada


> --
>
> "When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
> the poor have no food, they call me a communist."
>
> Dom Helder Camara

Dave Smith wrote:
> " wrote:
>
> >
> > > I am just doing my bit to make the Moslem boycott of Denmark counter
> > > productive. I got some Faxe beer the other day and today I bought some Danish
> > > blue cheese and some Danish Havarti. It's got nothing to do with Bush. I am not
> > > American and I am not Christian. I owe a personal debt of gratitude to a lot of
> > > Danes, and as long as Moslems are boycotting Denmark over some silly cartoons I
> > > am going to be boycotting Moslem run businesses.
> >
> > I hope that you are dilgently boycotting USA businesses until they pay
> > up on the softwood lumber case too. Just so you're consistant
> > John Kane, Kingston ON Canada
>
> I would be lying if I didn't admit that was a factor in a lot of my shopping. I was
> in the grocery store yesterday and say pears from the US and pears from SA, so I got
> the SA pears. Apples were from US or Canada, and I always give preference to home
> grown.
>
> Thanks to the French nuclear tests in the Pacific and French market retaliation
> against NZ for imprisoning two French agents for bombing of the Rainbow Warrior and
> related deaths of two NZers I am reluctant to buy any French goods.
>
> However, that is a personal boycott. I am not burning down embassies or pushing for an
> organized boycott.
>
> In this case there is a culture that espouses ideals counter to our own that is using
> a violation of their personal religious beliefs to incite people to riot and trying to
> economically cripple an entire country because of the actions of a handful of
> people. I know which side my bread is buttered on.

What culture? Islam is a world-wide religion with various sects in the
same way that Christianity is. Sunni, Shia , Ismaili, Druse- I must
be missing a few here

Are you saying that a third-generation Canadian from Toronto, an
illiterate fundamentalist from Afganistan and the Aga Khan all share
some kind of monolithic culture? Or that Irshad Manji (This may be
more of an Ontario reference (1)) and Osama bin Ladin have very much in
common?

This is a bit like saying Mother Theresa and Pat Robertson have a lot
in common. Well, they may both be brain-dead but at least Mother
Theresa has an excuse.
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada


1. Irshad Manji http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/

Dave Smith wrote:
> " wrote:
>
> > >
> > > Why would such a boycott be a sign of bigotry? The boycott is not based
> > > on Muslims' religious practice, but their violent reaction to cartoons
> > > and their Danish boycott. If Muslims are free to boycott products from
> > > Denmark, it seems only fair that others be free to boycott Muslim
> > > products.
> >
> > Well the first question might be "Are Canadians boycotting Danish
> > products?" If not then all Dave Smith is doing is boycotting a fellow
> > citizen because he dislikes the behaviour of that fellow-citizen's
> > "possible co-religionists" in another country.
>
> He has the opportunity to demonstrate his allegiance. If he has Danish
> products prominently displayed or some other sign of support of Denmark, or a
> prominent repudiation of the Islamic boycott of Danish foods I will consider
> patronizing the business. Otherwise, I will feel free to associate him with
> the other side of the boycott.

Why? I have not been looking all that closely but I have not seen any
prominent displays of Danish goods here. How many stores in your
community do? He probably is more concerned about normal business than
about a boycot in some country, say in the Middle East thathe only
knows about from the 6:00 news.

>
> Bear in mind that it was Muslims who called for the boycott of Danish goods.

So what? Do you always do what the Pope or Billy Graham commands? Or
the Queen as head of the Church of England. There are about 1 billion
muslims the world. Some of the nuttier ones are acting crazy.

Of course by your approach I should not deal with any business owned by
a Christian since I dispise some of the US fundamentalists. Damn I'm
going to feel silly asking every store clerk if the boss goes to church
on Sunday and then having to leave the store if they do.

And I really dislike some of the Israeli policies so I guess that means
I cannot go to Dunn's the next time I'm in Montreal. Maybe if I can
find a non-kosher source of bagels I could compromise?


> There are a lot of small stores here run by Muslims. Economic boycotts are a
> two way street. They can backfire on the people who call them.

And you are sure that your local gas station owner was one of the
immans who called for this boycott? He has a burning Danish flag in
the window, perhaps?

How likely is it that a local business man in Canada was a prime mover
in a boycott started by some Danish religious leaders propagandizing in
the Middle East?

What exactly is his opinion of the boycott? Have you asked him?
John Kane, Kingston ON Canada

" wrote:

> > slight, like the guy who wanted everyone to boycott Chinese buffet
> > restaurants in the US until China released the spy plane they had
> > captured when it landed in Hainan. Fat lot of good that was going to
> > do :-)
> >
>
> Well it might have helped improve food quality. I don't know about US
> "Chinese buffets" but I have never seen a good one in Canada. I don't
> think most Chinese food is designed to be left in warming pans .
> Getting people to eat in 'real' Chinese restaurants would have been a
> good thing.

I am not sure that Chinese foods are less suitable for buffets than a lot of
other dishes, though most Chinese buffets are truly substandard. Fear not.
Mandarin is gradually expanding in your direction. They really do have a good
buffet, and if the veggies are hot and crisp enough for you, they also have
roast beef and Yorkshire pudding.

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in
ups.com:

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> Dave Smith > wrote in
>> :
>>
>> > However, that is a personal boycott. I am not burning down
>> > embassies or pushing for an organized boycott.
>>
>> To paraphrase Louis B. Mayer, a personal boycott, like a verbal
>> agreement, isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
>
> But get a few of those "personal" boycotts together and they can work
> wonders. I've done it with businesses right here in my own
> neighborhood...

The effect on a local merchant if a dozen clients decide to boycott is
VERY different from the effect on an entire nation if the same dozen
decide to boycott.

--

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

Dom Helder Camara

" >
wrote in oups.com:

>> Too many boycotts are launched as
>> an unintelligent emotional reaction to something one takes as a
>> personal slight, like the guy who wanted everyone to boycott
>> Chinese buffet restaurants in the US until China released the spy
>> plane they had captured when it landed in Hainan. Fat lot of
>> good that was going to do :-)
>
> Well it might have helped improve food quality. I don't know about
> US "Chinese buffets" but I have never seen a good one in Canada. I
> don't think most Chinese food is designed to be left in warming
> pans . Getting people to eat in 'real' Chinese restaurants would
> have been a good thing.

My point was that the guy was recommending a boycott of US businesses
to "punish" the Chinese government for holding a US spy plane which had
landed on their territory, a government who, it must be said, derives
no benefits from said Chinese buffets in Iowa, I think it was. It was
a case of a man clearly thinking with his butt.

Now boycotting Chinese buffets to improve the food might or might not
work, but in a so-called free-market economy (yeah, right) you are free
to NOT buy from them anyway, and inversely they are free to not sell to
you. If you were a good client of one restaurant and wished to protest
a change of policy with respect to food preparation, a personal boycott
might have an impact on the owner if he valued your custom, but
otherwise, you're asking to be ignored.

Switch to Indian buffets. They're much better and way fewer chemicals.

--

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

Dom Helder Camara

Michel Boucher wrote:
>
> Now boycotting Chinese buffets to improve the food might or might not
> work, but in a so-called free-market economy (yeah, right) you are free
> to NOT buy from them anyway, and inversely they are free to not sell to
> you.

Maybe in fercocktah bigoted Canuckland... but in the US businesses are
prohibiterd from discriminating.

Sheldon wrote:

>
> > Now boycotting Chinese buffets to improve the food might or might not
> > work, but in a so-called free-market economy (yeah, right) you are free
> > to NOT buy from them anyway, and inversely they are free to not sell to
> > you.
>
> Maybe in fercocktah bigoted Canuckland... but in the US businesses are
> prohibiterd from discriminating.

Look at the stink that was raised 5 months after a Danish newspaper published
a few seemingly harmless cartoons and their government refused to act because
it infringed on free speech. Could you imagine what would happen if a western
country dared to force a Moslem owned business not to discriminate.

Dave Smith > wrote in
:

> Look at the stink that was raised 5 months after a Danish
> newspaper published a few seemingly harmless cartoons and their
> government refused to act because it infringed on free speech.
> Could you imagine what would happen if a western country dared to
> force a Moslem owned business not to discriminate.

Are you seriously suggesting that the Jyllands-Posten, a conservative
anti-immigration newspaper with an avowed anti-islamic stance before
the event, did not know that the caricatures would result in a major
upset among muslims?

See Decision by the Council of the Press in a matter of race
discrimination brought against the Jyllands-Posten, Copenhagen March
20th, 2002:

"Regardless the current debate about crimes committed by refugees and
immigrants we find that in the concrete case it is irrelevant to
mention the nationality of the two [Somali] sisters. In publishing
this information the newspaper has violated good press ethics,
according to section C. 4 in the guiding rules for good press ethics,
and therefore the council finds a basis for stating criticism of the
newspaper. Section C 4. states: "Any mention of family relations,
occupation, race, nationality, faith or relationship to an
organisation ought to be avoided, unless this has a direct relevance
to the case."

http://www.retsinfo.dk/_GETDOC_/ACCN...25-afgrTARGET=

Originally pro-fascist, the Jyllands-Posten has recent published a
number of racist and specifically anti-islamic comic books:

"Disguised as a Dane - a commentary to the current migration of
peoples." (1994) The frontcover shows a man dressed in Arabic attire,
shocked by his mirror image which shows him in Western dress.

"Other published books include Ayaan Hirsi Ali "I Accuse". The well
known Somali dissident who was officially recieved by the Prime
Minister during the build up to Mohammed cartoon crisis. And Irshad
Manji's book "The Problem with Islam" (2005)."

It seems on the face of it to be a question of freedom of speech, but
really it's a thin disguise for racism and hate literature.

Same holds for the Western Hairparter and their reprint following the
comments on Klein's wife. I don't like the man but that was hitting
below the belt.

--

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

Dom Helder Camara

Michel Boucher wrote:

> Dave Smith > wrote in
> :
>
> > Look at the stink that was raised 5 months after a Danish
> > newspaper published a few seemingly harmless cartoons and their
> > government refused to act because it infringed on free speech.
> > Could you imagine what would happen if a western country dared to
> > force a Moslem owned business not to discriminate.
>
> Are you seriously suggesting that the Jyllands-Posten, a conservative
> anti-immigration newspaper with an avowed anti-islamic stance before
> the event, did not know that the caricatures would result in a major
> upset among muslims?


Maybe the Muslims simply need to grow up....maybe take a coupla courses
in anger management or something.



> See Decision by the Council of the Press in a matter of race
> discrimination brought against the Jyllands-Posten, Copenhagen March
> 20th, 2002:
>
> "Regardless the current debate about crimes committed by refugees and
> immigrants we find that in the concrete case it is irrelevant to
> mention the nationality of the two [Somali] sisters. In publishing
> this information the newspaper has violated good press ethics,
> according to section C. 4 in the guiding rules for good press ethics,
> and therefore the council finds a basis for stating criticism of the
> newspaper. Section C 4. states: "Any mention of family relations,
> occupation, race, nationality, faith or relationship to an
> organisation ought to be avoided, unless this has a direct relevance
> to the case."
>
> http://www.retsinfo.dk/_GETDOC_/ACCN...25-afgrTARGET=
>
> Originally pro-fascist, the Jyllands-Posten has recent published a
> number of racist and specifically anti-islamic comic books:
>
> "Disguised as a Dane - a commentary to the current migration of
> peoples." (1994) The frontcover shows a man dressed in Arabic attire,
> shocked by his mirror image which shows him in Western dress.
>
> "Other published books include Ayaan Hirsi Ali "I Accuse". The well
> known Somali dissident who was officially recieved by the Prime
> Minister during the build up to Mohammed cartoon crisis. And Irshad
> Manji's book "The Problem with Islam" (2005)."
>
> It seems on the face of it to be a question of freedom of speech, but
> really it's a thin disguise for racism and hate literature.


Or maybe it's simply a matter of priniciple, e.g. taking a stance
against the seeming "sharia - zation" climate that increasingly
surrounds the discussion of Muslim issues in the secular West...

Make no mistake, these Muslim thugs intend to rule by fear. And one of
their first goals is the shutting down of any open discussion about
their religion and it's effects on the secular world. It's happening in
Europe and even on the flat distant plains of central Ilinois, e.g. the
firing of some of the editorial staff of the University of Illinois
paper _The Daily Illini_ after they decided to publish some of the
cartoons (google for the contretemps)...

--
Best
Greg

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Maybe the Muslims simply need to grow up....maybe take a coupla courses
> in anger management or something.

There's an interesting magazine called "The Week", sort of a digest of news
from around the world. Interesting stuff. Many columnists and politicians
are saying something I agree with: Think about the race riots in THIS
country (USA) during the 20th century, and it's a bit easier to understand
what's going on with Muslims now. Not the most violent extremists, but the
ones who are part of million-person demonstrations throughout the Middle
East. The vast majority of black Americans who demonstrated were not
bomb-throwing extremists, either. But, they definitely had reasons to edge
in that direction.

Michel Boucher wrote:

> Are you seriously suggesting that the Jyllands-Posten, a conservative
> anti-immigration newspaper with an avowed anti-islamic stance before
> the event, did not know that the caricatures would result in a major
> upset among muslims?
>
> See Decision by the Council of the Press in a matter of race
> discrimination brought against the Jyllands-Posten, Copenhagen March
> 20th, 2002:
>
> "Regardless the current debate about crimes committed by refugees and
> immigrants we find that in the concrete case it is irrelevant to
> mention the nationality of the two [Somali] sisters. In publishing
> this information the newspaper has violated good press ethics,
> according to section C. 4 in the guiding rules for good press ethics,
> and therefore the council finds a basis for stating criticism of the
> newspaper. Section C 4. states: "Any mention of family relations,
> occupation, race, nationality, faith or relationship to an
> organisation ought to be avoided, unless this has a direct relevance
> to the case."
>
> http://www.retsinfo.dk/_GETDOC_/ACCN...25-afgrTARGET=
>
> Originally pro-fascist, the Jyllands-Posten has recent published a
> number of racist and specifically anti-islamic comic books:
>
> "Disguised as a Dane - a commentary to the current migration of
> peoples." (1994) The frontcover shows a man dressed in Arabic attire,
> shocked by his mirror image which shows him in Western dress.
>
> "Other published books include Ayaan Hirsi Ali "I Accuse". The well
> known Somali dissident who was officially recieved by the Prime
> Minister during the build up to Mohammed cartoon crisis. And Irshad
> Manji's book "The Problem with Islam" (2005)."

How was I supposed to know about their alleged conservative and
anti-immigrant stand? I don't read Danish. But it is interesting that
they cite a review of "The Trouble with Islam". I read that book a few
months ago and found it quite interesting. It is written by Moslem who
criticizes some aspects of contemporary Islam as a religion based on the
Quran but a culture based on arabic dessert culture, and that many of the
modern practices and teachings are at odds with the teachings of the
Quran.

> It seems on the face of it to be a question of freedom of speech, but
> really it's a thin disguise for racism and hate literature.

I see. Their solicitation of cartoons to explore the nature of self
censorship is a thin disguise for racism and hate, but the racist and
violent reaction is...... ?????? Son of a gun, they elicited the racism
and hatred of that culture.

In article >,
Dave Smith > wrote:

> I see. Their solicitation of cartoons to explore the nature of self
> censorship is a thin disguise for racism and hate, but the racist and
> violent reaction is...... ?????? Son of a gun, they elicited the racism
> and hatred of that culture.

The most obvious connection, and the one most people aren't writing
about is that this bruhaha began, what, five months after the fact, so
the question should be why. The UN is putting Denmark in a place to
have oversight over things like nuclear weapons and who stands to gain
if they are discredited?

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

Ranee Mueller wrote:

> In article >,
> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
> > I see. Their solicitation of cartoons to explore the nature of self
> > censorship is a thin disguise for racism and hate, but the racist and
> > violent reaction is...... ?????? Son of a gun, they elicited the racism
> > and hatred of that culture.
>
> The most obvious connection, and the one most people aren't writing
> about is that this bruhaha began, what, five months after the fact, so
> the question should be why. The UN is putting Denmark in a place to
> have oversight over things like nuclear weapons and who stands to gain
> if they are discredited?


Hmmmmmm...now *that* is interesting...

--
Best
Greg

Gregory Morrow wrote:

>
> > The most obvious connection, and the one most people aren't writing
> > about is that this bruhaha began, what, five months after the fact, so
> > the question should be why. The UN is putting Denmark in a place to
> > have oversight over things like nuclear weapons and who stands to gain
> > if they are discredited?
>
> Hmmmmmm...now *that* is interesting...

Especially in light of the new Iranian call to call off the protests.

Ranee Mueller wrote:

>In article >,
> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>
>
>>I see. Their solicitation of cartoons to explore the nature of self
>>censorship is a thin disguise for racism and hate, but the racist and
>>violent reaction is...... ?????? Son of a gun, they elicited the racism
>>and hatred of that culture.
>>
>>
>
> The most obvious connection, and the one most people aren't writing
>about is that this bruhaha began, what, five months after the fact, so
>the question should be why. The UN is putting Denmark in a place to
>have oversight over things like nuclear weapons and who stands to gain
>if they are discredited?
>
> Regards,
> Ranee
>
>Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.
>
>"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13
>
>http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
>http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/
>
>
Quite so. Where has there been the most violent reaction? Iran, a
country where you can be imprisoned for merely expressing an opinion
that is not government approved. You can find loutish young men willing
to riot anywhere, but normally the authorities don't encourage them,
they jail them (after the police have given them a kicking). The Iranian
government has something to gain from all the fuss, don't they?

Indonesia is the largest Moslem nation on earth, but there have been no
reports of any trouble at all. Indonesia has been through unsettling
times since Soeharto was deposed, and there has been a growth of Saudi
funded religious extremist groups who have committed some terrible
atrocities. The Indonesian government has no interest in fomenting
unrest, neither do the Malaysians, a thoroughly authoritarian lot. Many
of their citizens may be offended by the idea of the cartoons, but
that's as far as it goes.

Nobody has mentioned the worst part of the Iranian reaction to the
cartoons. One of their newspapers has announced a retaliatory
competition for cartoons about - wait for it - the Holocaust. So, upset
by the officially Lutheran Danes, the Iranians decide to go in for a
spot of anti-semitism. You know what they say: if something is wrong,
it's the fault of either the cyclists or the Jews.

Christine
Who is neither a cyclist nor Jewish

Dave Smith > wrote in
:

> How was I supposed to know about their alleged conservative and
> anti-immigrant stand? I don't read Danish.

Neither do I but it wasn't terribly hard to dig into this to uncover
the real JP.

> But it is interesting
> that they cite a review of "The Trouble with Islam". I read that
> book a few months ago and found it quite interesting. It is
> written by Moslem who criticizes some aspects of contemporary
> Islam as a religion based on the Quran but a culture based on
> arabic dessert culture, and that many of the modern practices and
> teachings are at odds with the teachings of the Quran.

And Christianity is a Middle Eastern religion as well over a thinly
veiled North European barbarian core. What of it? When it comes
right down to it, all religions are thin veils over less savoury
cores.

> Their solicitation of cartoons to explore the nature of
> self censorship

That was Rasmussen's explanation, taken up later by the JP.

> is a thin disguise for racism and hate, but the
> racist and violent reaction is...... ?????? Son of a gun, they
> elicited the racism and hatred of that culture.

You're mixing two things here. The reaction of Muslims outside
Denmark was not the intent of the cartoons (a bonus to the extreme
right-wing parties, maybe) but rather the publication aimed at
causing the Danish Muslims to riot (believing representations of the
Prophet to be forbidden) in order to then point the finger and call
for their expulsion. Unluckily for the JP, the Danish Muslims took
the civilized route and foiled that dastardly plot. It's fairly
disingenuous of the Danes to have anti-islamic sentiments when they
actually invited them to come work in Denmark back in the 1970's.
They are of the group called guest-workers, not unwanted immigrants
at all.

However, nowadays, among Muslims, Denmark has a reputation for being
possibly the most racist of all the Northern European nations.

http://nhindymedia.org/newswire/display/3209/index.php

http://www.sabawoon.com/news/minihea...article&artid=
28170

My wife was living there up until the mid 1980's and already racism
(anti-Turkish) was poking its ugly little head. One of her friends,
a black woman from New York, would get into trouble with strangers
accosting her rudely in the street if they believed her to be a
"turk", but it was ok if she was black. So they have been acting on
their racist inclinations for at least twenty years unchecked because
of the belief that they are a civilized nation. Muslims outside of
Denmark have been rioting for a few weeks because they are angry.
You need some perspective here.

The situation of "foreigners" has only gotten worse in recent years
and escalated after 9/11.

"[...] the Danish government declared war on the some 300,000
immigrants in the country, 70 percent of whom are Muslims.

"Right-wing and center-right parties have run viciously anti-Muslim
campaigns. Among its acts of scapegoating, Denmark shut down its
national borders, slashed immigrant welfare payments by 30 percent
[NOTE: To people they had invited to come live in Denmark to work] or
more and barred marriage of Danes to "foreigners" before the age of
24."

You should read more and rant less :-)

--

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

Dom Helder Camara

Old Mother Ashby wrote:

>
> Quite so. Where has there been the most violent reaction? Iran, a
> country where you can be imprisoned for merely expressing an opinion
> that is not government approved. You can find loutish young men willing
> to riot anywhere, but normally the authorities don't encourage them,
> they jail them (after the police have given them a kicking). The Iranian
> government has something to gain from all the fuss, don't they?

I am not sure that Iran is the worst. It's bad, but so is Saudi Arabia. The
thing is that this particular culture thrives on censorship and physical
intimidation. IMO these riots are designed to intimidate the west not to dare
to portray Islam as practised for what it is and I am glad that places like
Denmark will take a stand against it by refusing to censor their press. Today
it's images of the Prophet. Tomorrow it could be daring to speak out against
female genital mutilation.

>
>
> Indonesia is the largest Moslem nation on earth, but there have been no
> reports of any trouble at all. Indonesia has been through unsettling
> times since Soeharto was deposed, and there has been a growth of Saudi
> funded religious extremist groups who have committed some terrible
> atrocities.

Like 9/11? That is where most of the 9/11 terrorists came from. That is where
most of the Taliban came from.

> The Indonesian government has no interest in fomenting
> unrest, neither do the Malaysians, a thoroughly authoritarian lot. Many
> of their citizens may be offended by the idea of the cartoons, but
> that's as far as it goes.

Hopefully, they would be content to rest assured that Allah will deal with the
infidels on his own in the afterlife. I would grant them the right to be that
smug. To react by committing acts of violence and arson is totally
unacceptable.


> Nobody has mentioned the worst part of the Iranian reaction to the
> cartoons. One of their newspapers has announced a retaliatory
> competition for cartoons about - wait for it - the Holocaust. So, upset
> by the officially Lutheran Danes, the Iranians decide to go in for a
> spot of anti-semitism. You know what they say: if something is wrong,
> it's the fault of either the cyclists or the Jews.

What do you expect from a who react to a depiction of them as violent by
committing acts of violence?

Michel Boucher wrote:

> Neither do I but it wasn't terribly hard to dig into this to uncover
> the real JP.

Oh? I guess we did different searches. Nothing I came across even hinted
at it, and interviews with the editors that I hears and saw gave no
indication of that.

>
>
> > But it is interesting
> > that they cite a review of "The Trouble with Islam". I read that
> > book a few months ago and found it quite interesting. It is
> > written by Moslem who criticizes some aspects of contemporary
> > Islam as a religion based on the Quran but a culture based on
> > arabic dessert culture, and that many of the modern practices and
> > teachings are at odds with the teachings of the Quran.
>
> And Christianity is a Middle Eastern religion as well over a thinly
> veiled North European barbarian core. What of it? When it comes
> right down to it, all religions are thin veils over less savoury
> cores.

I am probably among the last that you could expect to defend
Christianity. Maybe it is because I grew up with that moral code that I
don't find it as offensive, but I can't think of any recent incidents
where seemingly inoffensive cartoons have led to violent riots.

Dave Smith wrote:

>Old Mother Ashby wrote:
>
>
>
>>Quite so. Where has there been the most violent reaction? Iran, a
>>country where you can be imprisoned for merely expressing an opinion
>>that is not government approved. You can find loutish young men willing
>>to riot anywhere, but normally the authorities don't encourage them,
>>they jail them (after the police have given them a kicking). The Iranian
>>government has something to gain from all the fuss, don't they?
>>
>>
>
>I am not sure that Iran is the worst. It's bad, but so is Saudi Arabia. The
>thing is that this particular culture thrives on censorship and physical
>intimidation. IMO these riots are designed to intimidate the west not to dare
>to portray Islam as practised for what it is and I am glad that places like
>Denmark will take a stand against it by refusing to censor their press. Today
>it's images of the Prophet. Tomorrow it could be daring to speak out against
>female genital mutilation.
>
>
>
You do realise that female genital mutilation is a cultural, not a
religious practice? It is common in parts of Africa where people may be
Christian or Moslem or some tribal religion predating both.

>>Indonesia is the largest Moslem nation on earth, but there have been no
>>reports of any trouble at all. Indonesia has been through unsettling
>>times since Soeharto was deposed, and there has been a growth of Saudi
>>funded religious extremist groups who have committed some terrible
>>atrocities.
>>
>>
>
>Like 9/11? That is where most of the 9/11 terrorists came from. That is where
>most of the Taliban came from.
>
>

Actually I was thinking of the nastiness in the Moluccas, and of course
the Bali bombings. You must have heard of them? The people who
perpetrate these outrages are Indonesians (though I think the recently
deceased expert on bombs whose name escapes me might have been Malay),
but they are supported and funded by Saudis. It's a bit like all those
American fundamentalist missionaries infesting South East Asia; they
offer schools and new mosques (built to Arab designs, not in the
traditional Indonesian style) and assistance to the poor, but of course
the alien ideology comes as part of the package.

>
>
>>The Indonesian government has no interest in fomenting
>>unrest, neither do the Malaysians, a thoroughly authoritarian lot. Many
>>of their citizens may be offended by the idea of the cartoons, but
>>that's as far as it goes.
>>
>>
>
>Hopefully, they would be content to rest assured that Allah will deal with the
>infidels on his own in the afterlife. I would grant them the right to be that
>smug. To react by committing acts of violence and arson is totally
>unacceptable.
>
>
I'm not sure that smug is quite the word I would use. They're probably
ropeable, but as you point out, violence is as unacceptable in Indonesia
as here and in fact it's unthinkable for the average person. Idle young
men are another matter. We had a spot of violence in Cronulla recently,
you know - the jury is still out on whether it was a genuine race riot,
but you had a mob of drunken yobbos (some of them draped in the national
flag, if you please), stirred up by the Sydney shock jocks, who had a
whale of a time beating up anybody who they thought might be Lebanese or
the like. All to do with longstanding resentment about who owns the
beach, one of those Sydney things. And of course the next week there
were the payback bashings. It's all settled down apparently, but the
powers that be have had to think about some of the mixed messages
they've been sending.

>
>
>
>>Nobody has mentioned the worst part of the Iranian reaction to the
>>cartoons. One of their newspapers has announced a retaliatory
>>competition for cartoons about - wait for it - the Holocaust. So, upset
>>by the officially Lutheran Danes, the Iranians decide to go in for a
>>spot of anti-semitism. You know what they say: if something is wrong,
>>it's the fault of either the cyclists or the Jews.
>>
>>
>
>What do you expect from a who react to a depiction of them as violent by
>committing acts of violence?
>
>
I expect them to direct the violence, not to mention the insulting
cartoons, at the people who have offended them, not to go vilifying
people who are not involved, but that's not what it's really about,
which is the point I'm making.

Christine
Who would rather talk about food

>
>
>
>

Old Mother Ashby wrote:

> I'm not sure that smug is quite the word I would use. They're probably
> ropeable, but as you point out, violence is as unacceptable in Indonesia
> as here and in fact it's unthinkable for the average person. Idle young
> men are another matter. We had a spot of violence in Cronulla recently,
> you know - the jury is still out on whether it was a genuine race riot,
> but you had a mob of drunken yobbos (some of them draped in the national
> flag, if you please), stirred up by the Sydney shock jocks, who had a
> whale of a time beating up anybody who they thought might be Lebanese or
> the like. All to do with longstanding resentment about who owns the
> beach, one of those Sydney things. And of course the next week there
> were the payback bashings. It's all settled down apparently, but the
> powers that be have had to think about some of the mixed messages
> they've been sending.


No "mixed messages" at all about the Cronulla contretemps Ma Ashby,
beach - goers were sick and tired of Lebanese male trash taking over
the beach, picking fights, insulting white women, etc....

--
Best
Greg "you can only push it so much..."

Michel Boucher wrote:

> Dave Smith > wrote in
> :
>
> > How was I supposed to know about their alleged conservative and
> > anti-immigrant stand? I don't read Danish.
>
> Neither do I but it wasn't terribly hard to dig into this to uncover
> the real JP.
>
> > But it is interesting
> > that they cite a review of "The Trouble with Islam". I read that
> > book a few months ago and found it quite interesting. It is
> > written by Moslem who criticizes some aspects of contemporary
> > Islam as a religion based on the Quran but a culture based on
> > arabic dessert culture, and that many of the modern practices and
> > teachings are at odds with the teachings of the Quran.
>
> And Christianity is a Middle Eastern religion as well over a thinly
> veiled North European barbarian core. What of it? When it comes
> right down to it, all religions are thin veils over less savoury
> cores.
>
> > Their solicitation of cartoons to explore the nature of
> > self censorship
>
> That was Rasmussen's explanation, taken up later by the JP.
>
> > is a thin disguise for racism and hate, but the
> > racist and violent reaction is...... ?????? Son of a gun, they
> > elicited the racism and hatred of that culture.
>
> You're mixing two things here. The reaction of Muslims outside
> Denmark was not the intent of the cartoons (a bonus to the extreme
> right-wing parties, maybe) but rather the publication aimed at
> causing the Danish Muslims to riot (believing representations of the
> Prophet to be forbidden) in order to then point the finger and call
> for their expulsion. Unluckily for the JP, the Danish Muslims took
> the civilized route and foiled that dastardly plot. It's fairly
> disingenuous of the Danes to have anti-islamic sentiments when they
> actually invited them to come work in Denmark back in the 1970's.
> They are of the group called guest-workers, not unwanted immigrants
> at all.
>
> However, nowadays, among Muslims, Denmark has a reputation for being
> possibly the most racist of all the Northern European nations.
>
> http://nhindymedia.org/newswire/display/3209/index.php
>
> http://www.sabawoon.com/news/minihea...article&artid=
> 28170
>
> My wife was living there up until the mid 1980's and already racism
> (anti-Turkish) was poking its ugly little head. One of her friends,
> a black woman from New York, would get into trouble with strangers
> accosting her rudely in the street if they believed her to be a
> "turk", but it was ok if she was black. So they have been acting on
> their racist inclinations for at least twenty years unchecked because
> of the belief that they are a civilized nation. Muslims outside of
> Denmark have been rioting for a few weeks because they are angry.
> You need some perspective here.
>
> The situation of "foreigners" has only gotten worse in recent years
> and escalated after 9/11.
>
> "[...] the Danish government declared war on the some 300,000
> immigrants in the country, 70 percent of whom are Muslims.
>
> "Right-wing and center-right parties have run viciously anti-Muslim
> campaigns. Among its acts of scapegoating, Denmark shut down its
> national borders, slashed immigrant welfare payments by 30 percent
> [NOTE: To people they had invited to come live in Denmark to work] or
> more and barred marriage of Danes to "foreigners" before the age of
> 24."
>
> You should read more and rant less :-)


Boy, Michel that is *really* rich (not to mention disengenous in the
*extreme*) coming from you...

Do carry on...

--
Best
Greg :-|

In article
>,
Old Mother Ashby > wrote:

> Indonesia is the largest Moslem nation on earth, but there have been no
> reports of any trouble at all. Indonesia has been through unsettling
> times since Soeharto was deposed, and there has been a growth of Saudi
> funded religious extremist groups who have committed some terrible
> atrocities. The Indonesian government has no interest in fomenting
> unrest, neither do the Malaysians, a thoroughly authoritarian lot. Many
> of their citizens may be offended by the idea of the cartoons, but
> that's as far as it goes.

This may be true, about the Indonesians and the Malaysians, but I
don't take it as a sign of their relative peaceful coexistence in a
pluralist world. There are all those church burnings, for instance, in
Indonesia.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

In article
>,
Old Mother Ashby > wrote:

> You do realise that female genital mutilation is a cultural, not a
> religious practice? It is common in parts of Africa where people may be
> Christian or Moslem or some tribal religion predating both.

What is troubling for most people who learn of it, isn't that they
are mistakenly taught that it is a Muslim practice, but that the Muslim
community does very little to combat it.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

Ranee Mueller wrote:

> > You do realise that female genital mutilation is a cultural, not a
> > religious practice? It is common in parts of Africa where people may be
> > Christian or Moslem or some tribal religion predating both.
>
> What is troubling for most people who learn of it, isn't that they
> are mistakenly taught that it is a Muslim practice, but that the Muslim
> community does very little to combat it.

While it may precede Islam, it is most commonly practised by Muslims. As you
point out, Islam has done nothing to curtail it.

Who benefits from the distraction caused by the cartoon intifada? Which
countries housed the first embassies to be torched? The answer to those
quesitons nowithstanding, Jyllands-Posten unquestionably had a right to
publish the cartoons. Unquesitonably, Muslims have a right to be
outraged. Should J-P had published? Should Muslims have torched
embassies and placed bounties on cartoonists' heads? Not all rights
need to be exercised.

-bwg

Old Mother Ashby wrote:
> Quite so. Where has there been the most violent reaction? Iran, a

How many people have died in Iran as a result of the cartoons? How many
embassies have been torched in Iran? How many Iranian mullahs have
issued fatwas decreeing death to cartoonists? How many Danish flags
have been burned? What is your measure of "violence?"

-bwg

" wrote:

> Who benefits from the distraction caused by the cartoon intifada? Which
> countries housed the first embassies to be torched? The answer to those
> quesitons nowithstanding, Jyllands-Posten unquestionably had a right to
> publish the cartoons. Unquesitonably, Muslims have a right to be
> outraged. Should J-P had published? Should Muslims have torched
> embassies and placed bounties on cartoonists' heads? Not all rights
> need to be exercised.

People can be outraged without going on violent rampages.
I think that most of us are probably more outraged at the reaction than we
are to the blasphemy that led to it, but you don't see us rioting, looting
and setting fire to buildings.

>

> Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> Dave Smith > wrote in
>> :
>>
>>> Look at the stink that was raised 5 months after a Danish newspaper
>>> published a few seemingly harmless cartoons and their government
>>> refused to act because it infringed on free speech. Could you imagine
>>> what would happen if a western country dared to force a Moslem owned
>>> business not to discriminate.
>>
>> Are you seriously suggesting that the Jyllands-Posten, a conservative
>> anti-immigration newspaper with an avowed anti-islamic stance before the
>> event, did not know that the caricatures would result in a major upset
>> among muslims?
>
>
> Maybe the Muslims simply need to grow up....maybe take a coupla courses in
> anger management or something.
>
>
>
>> See Decision by the Council of the Press in a matter of race
>> discrimination brought against the Jyllands-Posten, Copenhagen March
>> 20th, 2002:
>>
>> "Regardless the current debate about crimes committed by refugees and
>> immigrants we find that in the concrete case it is irrelevant to mention
>> the nationality of the two [Somali] sisters. In publishing this
>> information the newspaper has violated good press ethics, according to
>> section C. 4 in the guiding rules for good press ethics, and therefore
>> the council finds a basis for stating criticism of the newspaper.
>> Section C 4. states: "Any mention of family relations, occupation, race,
>> nationality, faith or relationship to an organisation ought to be
>> avoided, unless this has a direct relevance to the case."
>>
>> http://www.retsinfo.dk/_GETDOC_/ACCN...25-afgrTARGET=
>>
>> Originally pro-fascist, the Jyllands-Posten has recent published a
>> number of racist and specifically anti-islamic comic books:
>>
>> "Disguised as a Dane - a commentary to the current migration of
>> peoples." (1994) The frontcover shows a man dressed in Arabic attire,
>> shocked by his mirror image which shows him in Western dress.
>>
>> "Other published books include Ayaan Hirsi Ali "I Accuse". The well
>> known Somali dissident who was officially recieved by the Prime Minister
>> during the build up to Mohammed cartoon crisis. And Irshad Manji's book
>> "The Problem with Islam" (2005)."
>>
>> It seems on the face of it to be a question of freedom of speech, but
>> really it's a thin disguise for racism and hate literature.
>
>
> Or maybe it's simply a matter of priniciple, e.g. taking a stance against
> the seeming "sharia - zation" climate that increasingly surrounds the
> discussion of Muslim issues in the secular West...
>
> Make no mistake, these Muslim thugs intend to rule by fear. And one of
> their first goals is the shutting down of any open discussion about their
> religion and it's effects on the secular world. It's happening in Europe
> and even on the flat distant plains of central Ilinois, e.g. the firing of
> some of the editorial staff of the University of Illinois paper _The Daily
> Illini_ after they decided to publish some of the cartoons (google for the
> contretemps)...

Is this the same paper that wants to republish holocaust cartoons?

yes, i think it is....

Lena

Ranee Mueller wrote:

>In article
>,
> Old Mother Ashby > wrote:
>
>
>
>>Indonesia is the largest Moslem nation on earth, but there have been no
>>reports of any trouble at all. Indonesia has been through unsettling
>>times since Soeharto was deposed, and there has been a growth of Saudi
>>funded religious extremist groups who have committed some terrible
>>atrocities. The Indonesian government has no interest in fomenting
>>unrest, neither do the Malaysians, a thoroughly authoritarian lot. Many
>>of their citizens may be offended by the idea of the cartoons, but
>>that's as far as it goes.
>>
>>
>
> This may be true, about the Indonesians and the Malaysians, but I
>don't take it as a sign of their relative peaceful coexistence in a
>pluralist world. There are all those church burnings, for instance, in
>Indonesia.
>
> Regards,
> Ranee
>
>Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.
>
>"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13
>
>http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
>http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/
>
>
Like I said, there have been some terrible atrocities in Indonesia,
perpetrated by extremist Islamists. And in some places, like the
Moluccas, it appears that not a great deal has been done about it. The
Bali and Jakarta bombings got proper attention at least partly becuase
foreigners were involved, not to mention significant economic interests.
My point is that there is no violence at present about the Danish
cartoons - as far as I know - because it is not in the Indonesian
governement's interest to allow it, much less encourage it. There is
violence in Iran because the Iranian government wants it.

As you know, Indonesia and Malaysia are themselves "pluralist" nations,
another reason why sectarian violence is something they can do without.
I'm not sure how many Christians there are in Indonesia, but I think
it's more than the entire population of Australia.

And of course I'm not pretending that the Indonesians are a mob of
non-violent pacifists. Who can forget East Timor, and Blind Freddy knows
what's going on in Papua. But it's not driven by religion so much as
good old lust for power and money and control of resources.

Christine

Dave Smith wrote:
> Nancy1 wrote:
>
> >
> > > TEHRAN, Iran - Iranians love Danish pastries, but when they look for
> > > the flaky dessert at the bakery they now have to ask for "Roses of the
> > > Prophet Muhammad..."
> > >
> > > <http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060216/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iran_danish_pastries>
> > >
> > > -bwg
> > > Jihadi in the Cartoon Intifada
> >
> > So, it's not o.k. to portray Muhammad with a bomb on his turban, but it
> > IS o.k. to have him endorse flaky pastry. Hmmmmm.
>
> I thought it was pretty goofy when Merkins started called fries Freedom Fries.
>
> I bought some Danish beer the other day.

I assume you mean Carlsberg. It's OK, but not worth the price.

> I intend to buy some Danish Cookies

Danish Butter cookies are nice because the only fat used is butter.

> and some Danish Blue Cheese when I go shopping today.
>
> The other day I was on my way to an appointment and had to stop for some gas. I
> went to the new self serve station around the corner from my doctor's office.
> When I went in to pay I discovered that it is run by Moslems. I won't be
> taking any more business there.

How do you know they were Muslims? Bet you couldn't tell the
difference between an Arab Muslim and a Chaldean Christian.

--Bryan

Food Snob wrote:

> >
> > > So, it's not o.k. to portray Muhammad with a bomb on his turban, but it
> > > IS o.k. to have him endorse flaky pastry. Hmmmmm.
> >
> > I thought it was pretty goofy when Merkins started called fries Freedom Fries.
> >
> > I bought some Danish beer the other day.
>
> I assume you mean Carlsberg. It's OK, but not worth the price.

Nope. Not Carlsberg. The only Carlsberg I can get here is the stuff made here under
licence. It is not as good as the stuff from Denmark, but I can get Tuborg, Faxe and
Girafe. For some reason it is no more expensive than our domestic beer which now runs
about $1.50 per bottle. The Danish beer sells for about $2 per 500ml can, 25% more
cost for 30% more beer.

>
> > The other day I was on my way to an appointment and had to stop for some gas. I
> > went to the new self serve station around the corner from my doctor's office.
> > When I went in to pay I discovered that it is run by Moslems. I won't be
> > taking any more business there.
>
> How do you know they were Muslims? Bet you couldn't tell the
> difference between an Arab Muslim and a Chaldean Christian.

I probably wouldn't. I guess the ball is in his court to let us know he is on our
side.

Dave Smith a écrit :

> > How do you know they were Muslims? Bet you couldn't tell the
> > difference between an Arab Muslim and a Chaldean Christian.
>
> I probably wouldn't. I guess the ball is in his court to let us know he is on our
> side.

Why are you boycotting a business in North America for what is going on
halfway around the world? Do you think he can have any effect on that
or that punishing him will make the booboo go away? And which sides
are there, anyway? Seems to me you want him to side with the knee-jerk
reactionary camp and why should he be forced to take sides? He's a
businessman. Taking sides is not good for business.

And why, in the final analysis, should he have to do anything simply
because you have your underwear in a bunch?

wrote:

> >
> > People can be outraged without going on violent rampages.
> > I think that most of us are probably more outraged at the reaction than we
> > are to the blasphemy that led to it, but you don't see us rioting, looting
> > and setting fire to buildings.
>
> But are you outraged that J-P published cartoons intended to incite
> Muslims?

No. I saw the cartons and didn't see anything offensive about them. But then, I
am not a religious person. I have seen depictions of the prophet before, so I
find it hard to believe that there is an absolute ban on them, unlike depictions
of Allah. I have seen much more offensive cartoons about Christianity. The only
one that I thought would be remotely offensive was the one with the bomb in the
turban. How appropriate that they would respond with violent protests, arson and
looting. I guess their religion doesn't deal with the concept of irony.

alsandor wrote:

> > > How do you know they were Muslims? Bet you couldn't tell the
> > > difference between an Arab Muslim and a Chaldean Christian.
> >
> > I probably wouldn't. I guess the ball is in his court to let us know he is on our
> > side.
>
> Why are you boycotting a business in North America for what is going on
> halfway around the world? Do you think he can have any effect on that
> or that punishing him will make the booboo go away? And which sides
> are there, anyway? Seems to me you want him to side with the knee-jerk
> reactionary camp and why should he be forced to take sides? He's a
> businessman. Taking sides is not good for business.

I would suggest that they are the ones who made it look like there were sides. It was
originally directed at Denmark, not at the newspaper who ran the cartoons, but the
whole country. The protest spread from Denmark across Europe, Asia and Africa. There
have been peaceful demonstrations in North America. While it was primarily against
Denmark, the attacks broadened to other western countries.


> And why, in the final analysis, should he have to do anything simply
> because you have your underwear in a bunch?

Because he should be able to get back to his people and let them know that when they
do things like that it affects him.

In article .com>,
wrote:

> But are you outraged that J-P published cartoons intended to incite
> Muslims?

I thouhgt it was in incredibly poor taste, but not any more poor
taste than those kinds of things made about Jesus Christ in the western
press, and certainly much more tame than what is done in "cartoons" in
the middle east about Jews and Israel. One of the costs of freedom of
the press is blasphemy. I don't approve of blaspheming, and I reserve
the right not to purchase from or patronize a company that offends me,
even to start a letter campaign or help publicize their policies, but
the government shouldn't limit the press, no matter how idiotic or
vitriolic it is.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

In article
>,
Old Mother Ashby > wrote:

> Like I said, there have been some terrible atrocities in Indonesia,
> perpetrated by extremist Islamists. And in some places, like the
> Moluccas, it appears that not a great deal has been done about it. The
> Bali and Jakarta bombings got proper attention at least partly becuase
> foreigners were involved, not to mention significant economic interests.
> My point is that there is no violence at present about the Danish
> cartoons - as far as I know - because it is not in the Indonesian
> governement's interest to allow it, much less encourage it. There is
> violence in Iran because the Iranian government wants it.
>
> As you know, Indonesia and Malaysia are themselves "pluralist" nations,
> another reason why sectarian violence is something they can do without.
> I'm not sure how many Christians there are in Indonesia, but I think
> it's more than the entire population of Australia.
>
> And of course I'm not pretending that the Indonesians are a mob of
> non-violent pacifists. Who can forget East Timor, and Blind Freddy knows
> what's going on in Papua. But it's not driven by religion so much as
> good old lust for power and money and control of resources.

I'm not sure that the imprisoning of Christians and converts to
Christianity for blasphemy in a "pluralist" nation, the shake down
tactics to break up bible studies in a home setting or the burning of
churches and then looking away can be seen in any other context than
being driven by religion.

Regards,
Ranee

Remove do not & spam to e-mail me.

"She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13

http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/
http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/

Gregory Morrow a écrit :

> > You should read more and rant less :-)
>
> Boy, Michel that is *really* rich (not to mention disengenous in the
> *extreme*) coming from you...

Hardly disingenuous. I may rant occasionally (not in this case) as do
you (I remember a few diatribes about children in restau"rants"), but
on the other hand I also read :-)

> Do carry on...

Oeuf corse :-)

Dave Smith a écrit :

> alsandor wrote:
>
> > > > How do you know they were Muslims? Bet you couldn't tell the
> > > > difference between an Arab Muslim and a Chaldean Christian.
> > >
> > > I probably wouldn't. I guess the ball is in his court to let us know he is on our
> > > side.
> >
> > Why are you boycotting a business in North America for what is going on
> > halfway around the world? Do you think he can have any effect on that
> > or that punishing him will make the booboo go away? And which sides
> > are there, anyway? Seems to me you want him to side with the knee-jerk
> > reactionary camp and why should he be forced to take sides? He's a
> > businessman. Taking sides is not good for business.
>
> I would suggest that they are the ones who made it look like there were sides.

Who? Gas station owners in Manitoba? Who are these "they"?

> > And why, in the final analysis, should he have to do anything simply
> > because you have your underwear in a bunch?
>
> Because he should be able to get back to his people and let them know that when
> they do things like that it affects him.

Oy...you need to get out and unwind...