If you want to live in a free society, respect other people's freedom. How is it people get this idea that they have some right not to be offended in public?

This story is about some Muslim vandals who painted over a swimwear billboard advertisement because they're miffed at having to see bare skin on a woman. Here's an idea, instead of damaging someone else's property, move your backwards ass to a country where they still treat their women like cattle and make them wear a tent.

Some Muslim mouth was saying its not sensitive to put these billbaords in neighborhoods. Tough shit. It's not a Muslim neighborhood, its a neighborhood in a free country, and you can choose to live there or pack a bag.

Before any of you bleeding hearts decide to take sides, ask yourself how pissed you'd be if this were Christians vandalizing the signs.

I think I'd be equally annoyed whether my property was vandalized by people for religious reasons (be it Islamic, Christian or other) or because local idiot teenagers wanted to scrawl their 'tags' and other graffiti all over it. Semms to me to be about lack of respect for others', through their property, not the reasons/rationalizations for the act of vandalism.

That's fair, but where the analogy breaks down is after the property damage, the Muslims demand that the ads should have never been placed in their presence in the first place. Motive for the vandalism shouldn't play a part in sentencing should they be caught.

I would be equally annoyed if it were a muslim, Jew, Christian, Pagan, Democrat or Republican coercing me to go their way - whether I like it or not.

Although I live in England, I value my democratic right to think and do as I feel is right for me - within reason. I don't believe that others have to toe my party line be it religious, moral, political or just sheer bloody-mindedness!


So if someone covers up a hoarding on my property that shows naked flesh (god forbid!!!) of someone in a bikini, then I will get mightily pissed off!

People forcing me (or others) to comply with (in this instance) to respect Allah's or Mohammad's wishes (even if I'm not a Muslim) whilst getting shot, blown up or maimed, is in my mind extremely hypocritical of the person doing it.


We have the same problem in England and I wonder where the law of our country (or America) is going to take their stand, where someone treats us all as chattels to thier belief structure.


I mean no disrespect to any religion or religious leader corpereal or incorporeal, god or otherwise, government or individual other than people doing things outside of our and America's laws.


Bright Blessings!

terabyte1

This story came from UK - at least a UK paper.

Agreed. The motive is not an excuse - no doubt we could easily dream up some ideological rationalization behind the idiot teenager taggers with their graffiti too, but it would be irrelevant to the wrongfulness of the vandalism. However, I can't help but feel a slight empathy for those wishing to express a political ideal. But I don't feel similar empathy for those wishing to express religious doctrines. These are I suppose conflicts between my personal emotions and fair civic reasoning. Perhaps a solution would be to provide some kind of public avenue for the expression of ideals.

It already exists. They can buy ad space on their own billboards to express their ideals rather than vandalizing someone else's.

Nice try, but I don't think that really qualifies. What I'm referring to is a medium available to everyone equally.

I'm all for the right to freedom of expression, but I don't think there is, or should be, a right to a forum to express it.

I know in my country, everyone is free to assemble. You can stand on the sidewalk and tell people what you think as they walk by, and they can tell you to fuck off. There's public access TV. You can go the library, log on a computer for free, and start a free blog. But just because you can't afford to put your own message up on a billboard, doesn't mean you should ruin someone elses, and it certainly doesn't mean someone owes you one.

Well I wouldn't call access to such a forum a right either. I'm just considering that it might be a progressive thing, in the same way that public TV is. Inviting and even encouraging public participation in society in more ways than just offering them to the right to vote or annoy people on the street seems like a good thing to me. In fact I am not so sure about the right to annoy people on the street either, as it is basically a confrontational medium by nature. Confrontation + emotion = conflict and violence (and/or to unexpressed hatred in the short term which can later get expressed as violence etc anyway).

All I meant was they already have the freedom to express themselves. I'd be happy if they didn't push their religion on me either, but I support their right to free speech.

Anyway, I think there are a number of ways already in place where they can express themselves, and there isn't really anything "progressive" that needs to happen. The problem is, and here I'll generalize a bit, is that Muslims don't seem to like using the system in place. I don't just mean the suicide bombers either, I mean Muslims in general.

Most of their bitching and moaning is either from the pulpit, or by way of angry demonstrations. The way to effect change in a free society is by getting involved. They should run candidates for city council or whatever, where they could have some say in zoning issues, laws about what kinds of billboards can go where, etc. Instead, they seem to prefer just being angry and expecting to be accomodated.

This may come as a shock, but I respect Muslims and many of their beliefs about things like modesty even tho I certainly don't agree with them. When I'm in Muslim countries I carefully follow all their customs and rules about wearing appropriate clothing, observing religious holidays (ie not chewing gum or eating in public during Ramadan) and the like. So, I wouldn't get in the way of them using the system peacefully and responsibly for asserting their agenda within the existing laws that protect everyone's rights and liberties. But vandalism is not the way to go about it, and pissing and moaning into a microphone isn't very effective.

People in my country managed to get an amendment to the Constitutino passed that prohibited alcohol. Fortunately, others were able to get it repealed.

Well I can somewhat agree with your statements about whining about the system in place rather than doing something about it - but from my perception, this comes from people in all walks of society, not just Muslims. I am fairly sure that there are Christian ministers ranting at their congregations about negatives in the world around them, just as much as there are Muslim ones (just as an example).

Undoubtedly. The unfortunate thing is, when Christians involve themselves in the political process, people often don't like it and disapprove, as if the political process should be steralized of anything smacking of religion or spiritual beliefs. Now, of course any policy should meet the requirements and fall within the legal limitaions already in place, but anyone belonging to any special interest group, be it religionists, gays, gun enthusiasts, prohibitionists, whatever - ought to use the process.

You just didn't sound like a fucking racist redneck. You may have painted a valid opinion, but that comment right there tells me you are narrow minded and waters down your whole argument. I think you can't stand tent wearing people. The vandalizing is similar to guerrilla advertising/protesting.

Which race was I sounding racist towards?

If being disgusted with those who treat women as less than human by violating their basic liberties and rights makes me narrow minded, then I plead guilty to narrow mindedness.

If someone chooses to wear a tent, I have no problems with that, and never said anything that would indicate otherwise.

Okay lets look at the Oxford Dictionary:

race - a group of people sharing the same culture, language, etc.; an ethnic group.

racism - the belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race.

Dude you're generalized media washed perception is diluted. Turn off the TV and go meet a real Muslim, communicate on a human level, exchange ideas ask why, and read some history.

Women in the west just acquired rights to vote & own property through feminist movements in early 1920s. This right was given women in Islam 1400 years way before this, regardless of what a chauvinistic culture dominated reign does. Where oppressive dictators rule and are supported by our governments in the west.

We have coalition forces in Afghanistan, Iraq, and are planning an attack on Iran. Who is pushing who's religion down peoples throats? Really now?

I like you - you define terms. You never named the race I'm being racist towards, but you can later if you want.

Let's see here, I've been critical about Muslim people who force women to wear certain types of clothes, who won't respect others' freedom to dress as they like or express themselves as they wish, and who opress women.

What is the name of that culture, language, etnic group etc. so I know which race you're saying I'm racist against.


Let's see, I've spent time in Oman, UAE, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan, just to name a few. I've spent accumulated years of my life among Muslims, and I've met the victims of those I criticize above. Have you ever met and talked with someone who lived under the Taliban? I have. For example, I spent a day with a father and his son and we talked about how happy they were just that they could work again because they were no long under the Taliban. Tell me about your experience with Muslims and the oppression so many of them face...Dude.

That's because people opposed and spoke out against the unfairness and oppression. Its because people saw something wrong and worked against it. What have you done to end oppression besides call names at people who speak out openly against the opressors?


I don't know, you tell me. Give me an example of religion being pushed in Iraq or Afghanistan, and what does it have to do with coalition forces?

Tell me about this attack we're planning on Iran. Will it be missiles? Bombers? Ground forces? Aerial or from the sea? When is it supposed to take place?

Then you should know better not to generalize. You obviously saw the different types of Muslims have different customs. That religion is different from tribe traditions. Customs like “they still treat their women like cattle and make them wear a tent” are different from one tribe to another in the same country, let alone the whole world. Where Muslims are scattered through out various countries. Btw these two comments of your contradict each other, and may make you appear racist:

1. &

2. I like the quote you have on your signature, but you should really have some more conviction towards it. Otherwise it might come off as pretentious.




It's not even a question of what I'm doing. I was merely stating the fact that womens right were acquired 1400 years ago by Muslims, before us in the US. That you're generalization of Muslims as backwards, women hating people are false. When you ask me what am I doing what you're really doing is applying an ad hominem argument.




To understand the situation of the people in Afghanistan you have to further back than the Taliban. The reign of Afghanistan has been used and abused over time. The people there are happy with any aid, any relief at this point. The situation is they don't care who rules over them as long as basic necessities are met. For the fear of not having that security people will do anything. Take the slaves during the Civil War in the US, you had one party who were called “Uncle Tom Negroes.” They were black and enslaved, but were against the abolition. Why? For the fear of loosing what their master provided them. They praised their masters and went even against their own people.

The abuse of women in Afghanistan, and the lack of resource existed way before the Taliban took over. It's more or so part of their chauvinistic traditions and years of war in that reign. It was only highlighted by us in the main stream media when propaganda was needed to justify a war. No, we went after Bin Laden, but we still don't have Bin Laden after invading two countries. Prior to 911, we invited the Taliban to Washington to talk. Even in the late 1990's American oil companies like Unocal were playing nice with the Taliban. At that time there were no FOX news headlines for womens rights or human rights violations in Afghanistan. So suddenly after 911 Taliban started beating women and creating massive human rights violations? Even after 911 Taliban said they would apprehend Bin Laden, and try him.




Oh, I donno, there's the constitutions we wrote for Afghanis & Iraqis for starters. Regime building isn't a new fad for use either. Afghanistan & Iraq are just the latest accessories.




Probably the usual divide and conquer method. Like Afghanistan's Taliban & Northern Alliance. Iraq's Sunni & Shia. But if you want to know exactly, I think you better look at Mr. McCain here.

You were in such a hurry to call me a racist, you forgot to think. I said, "go back to a country where..." You have just said yourself these abuses do occur in various countries.

Are you still standing by your original accusation of racism?
Even tho, you know as well as I do, that in some countries women are opressed?

Also, there was absolutely no contradiction whatsoever. Explain where you see a contradiction. And do explain how either of those comments would be racist.

If you can demonstrate some intellectual honesty, I'll deal with the rest of your post.