Just how ridiculous can these 'protests' get?

[ludwig]

Isn't there something badly wrong when a cheap crappy video made specifically for the purpose of causing trouble can provoke such knee-jerk outrage. Shouldn't it just be dismissed as the rubbish it is? How thin skinned can these morons be?

People like this don't help ..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/...-middle-east-19619646

Cynical hijacking of the issue for political purposes. It wouldn't surprise me if it was an organisation like his that made the thing in the first place.

[emmie]

The latest controversy over an Islamophobic film would not have occurred if Salman Rushdie had been killed"

read that carefully and know what you are up against. It's in the link
i posted i believe, and wondered what mindset would prompt someone to say such a thing.

[naomi24]

//The latest controversy over an Islamophobic film would not have occurred if Salman Rushdie had been killed//

Does that mean that if Salman Rushdie had been killed immediately, the rest of the world would have been too afraid to criticise Islam? I presume that's the thinking behind it.

From Ludwig to jno. //Do you think the rioting and murder is a reasonable reaction ? Is it wrong of me to criticise it? //

I'd be interested in jno's answer to that too.

[ludwig]

joko

// ..Most seemed to be of the opnion that he knew what would happen - because thats how they always react to things - so its all his fault... even saying that they were provoked and so what they did was understandable because it was 'their way'!
.......................
I am glad to see trusty old answerbank is not full of people with these addled views. //

^ not full of them, but I think there are one or two about.

[Kromovaracun]

Kerosene

" So to make assumptions on their beliefs and reactions is a false premise"

I won't pretend to be an expert in Islamic culture, because I'm not. But I don't think it's fair to say I'm making 'assumptions'. I'm trying to make educated guesses at the values behind these protests.

For all I know, there are probably millions of Muslims who are completely indifferent to the film and "insults" to Muhammed. If there are, I don't see how it harms my argument at all - if anything, it would demonstrate the utter emptiness of those who do expect the world to react when they say "my faith is insulted."

My argument wasn't intended to address every Muslim on earth. It was just intended to argue what the Western response ought to be to those among the Islamic faith who find themselves deeply insulted by Western depictions of Muhammed (or imagined Western depictions of Muhammed.) Given the number of international controversies that have arisen from this feeling, I think it's one that's worth thinking about how we respond.

[naomi24]

In every discussion of this nature, protests arise from the apologists who insist upon telling us over and over again what we already know - that all Muslims are not terrorists - but they consistently fail to address the problems created by those that are. It seems to me the critics of the critics are the people who are refusing to face facts and tarring all Muslims with the same brush – or more accurately whitewashing all Muslims with the same brush.

[ludwig]

I understand andy's point, but it's pretty much like saying 'as someone who isn't a bigot or a zealot, it's difficult for you to understand the actions of bigots and zealots'.

I can't really argue with that, but it doesn't mean I can't be critical of how they behave when I'm appalled by it.

I'm not sure what jno's point is, but if I had to guess I'd probably summarise it as 'Look, this is what they do when you provoke them, so don't provoke them'.

My problem with that is that there's no condemnation of the reaction, as if we should just accept that's how it will always be. All the blame is placed on the provocation.
It's actually a bit patronising - as if they're crocodiles or something that can never know any better, and we should just make sure we don't go near them or upset them by prodding them with stick.