Cartoon riots in Nigeria: 16 dead

[Lock&Light]

Have you got a point or is that a bee I see in your bonnet?

Buzz, Buzz.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Face it yam, years of zionist brutality and recent moronic US blundering has stirred up a hornests nest that you have absolutely no idea how to deal with.

Bombing random civilians and torturing people is absolutely not going to help, no matter how good it may make you feel personally. It'll only stir up more hatred and create fresh enemies.

You might get some temporary domestic propaganda value from this rather silly expression of incoherent rage, but ultimately, we still have to deal with the broader consequences. Picking a fight with 1/5 of the Earth's population is a really stupid idea, no matter how many bombs and PR guys you have.

 

[nino_savatte]

Buzz, Buzz.

Oh, you're too clever for me.

This fucker's going to miss the irony -watch!

 

[nino_savatte]

So what's your understanding of Islam, Lock?

 

[rogue yam]

Picking a fight with 1/5 of the Earth's population is a really stupid idea, no matter how many bombs and PR guys you have.

It is the Islamists who equate publishing a cartoon with "picking a fight". They will continue to do so for as long as you enable them. You stop, they stop. Your stupidity and self-hatred prevent you from stopping, however, so the Islamists shall continue as well.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

If you think this whole business *started* with some cartoons, you are even stupider than your posts on Urban so far would suggest.

Which is very stupid indeed ...

 

[Dhimmi]

Well, I'm not quite sure what you mean there, but it does look to me rather as though both the 'all muslims are animals' crowd and the 'death to the western imperialsts' crowd are getting a lot of propaganda value out of this.

Very true, and the media are doing well out of it too. The weekly demo's come across as NuLabour stage management, but not in the immediately bad way that term might suggest. Obviously it's good for the UK to see peaceful demo's by muslims with no hint of arson or placards of threats, but it's also good to show an otherwise reserved minority that they can protest freely.
The problem with extremism is it tars all too easily. Whether that's the propagandist or the honest soul. This almost limits the spectrum to the two crowds you suggest but the most important part is the third crowd and most important (I think because I'm one of 'em) which is made up of immigrants or descendents of many of whom came here to escape the same religious intolerance, a lot of it extremist flavoured with Islam, and many of those Muslem. Are we reduced to asking which way we might swing?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

<snip> Are we reduced to asking which way we might swing?

I'd really hope not, but that's exactly what the power mad assholes on both sides are after.

 

[Dhimmi]

I'd really hope not, but that's exactly what the power mad assholes on both sides are after.

Agreed, I call this car crash culture. A day when even the vehicle accident reports are a victory or a defeat. School bus accident in Florida 6 hurt v Iranian truck crash 3 killed. Add fanfare or family fortune style ner-nerrr to taste.
So few make this planet so difficult for so many so keenly.

 

[Julie]

This marks the first riots in Nigeria over the cartoons.
At least 10 churches, some hotels, more than 20 shops and over 10 vehicles were burned by the protesters," one resident said by phone from Maiduguri.
http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/662300


http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/africa/02/18/cartoon.roundup/

I have never believed that violence solves a thing, no matter who (or for what cause) the violence is/has been engaged in. Rather, Ghandi's, Martin Luther King's advocacy for non-violent protest is the ideology I have always advocated.

However, as another poster pointed out (apologies for being too lazy to revisit the post), it does appear that those with a vested interest in continuing/augmenting antagonism towards the Middle East (right wing: politicians, journos, and members of the public) seem to be milking this situation for all it's worth. And my question is: How is that helping things?

My view? It's not helping one iota. And a cynical person might think that that is entirely the point.

 

[fela fan]

So few make this planet so difficult for so many so keenly.

So true dhimmi, but unfortunately that's only half the story. The sad fact is that they can only do this with our permission.

The power truly lies with us, the majority. The killer is that we don't know how to use it because we have allowed ourselves to be manipulated by those few you refer to. Largely through fear (not to mention the seduction, and modern day opiate, of the tv and its attendant obsession with fame), but either way, we are not blameless! I don't mean individuals per se, but the sum of our majority.

 

[jayeola]

i wonder what the aethiests will riot about... wish that there was a funny side to all of this but i dont think tha there is...

 

[nino_savatte]

Could someone ask mears what his interest in Nigeria is? I've never noticed him giving much attention to sub Saharan african countries unless it was attack the UN.

 

[Fong]

Face it yam, years of zionist brutality and recent moronic US blundering has stirred up a hornests nest that you have absolutely no idea how to deal with.

This entire argument annoys me.

They are not out there rioting about Zionist brutality, or US incursions and blundering.

They are out there rioting about cartoons. They are holding up banners condeming cartoons. Not condeming Israel, not condeming America, but cartoons.

How can you sit there and argue that somehow it has nothing to do with the cartoons and is about something completely different, Which they could easily be out there marching about, if they wanted to. They are not, they are not out there marching about any of that, so how come you get to decide that is what they were marching about?

Perhaps the country side alliance wasn't really marching about fox hunting but was instead marching about the falling price of gold in Zimbabwe?

Yes?

You can't just decide to change the reason they are marching just cause you don't like the reason they give for marching.

 

[ViolentPanda]

What seems to be happening though, is that corrupt and often precarious governments (e.g. the one in Egypt that seems to have started this) are using this silly stuff about cartoons as a kind of lightning rod for existing anger.

A thoroughly unsurprising move though, given the prevalence of the whole "external threat" narrative by any government seeking to either distract from their own doings and/or to garner extra powers.

Meanwhile far-right propagandists are (as we see here) exploiting it for all its worth.

Again, if someone hands you the tools...

 

[ViolentPanda]

This entire argument annoys me.

They are not out there rioting about Zionist brutality, or US incursions and blundering.

They are out there rioting about cartoons. They are holding up banners condeming cartoons. Not condeming Israel, not condeming America, but cartoons.

How can you sit there and argue that somehow it has nothing to do with the cartoons and is about something completely different, Which they could easily be out there marching about, if they wanted to. They are not, they are not out there marching about any of that, so how come you get to decide that is what they were marching about?

Perhaps the country side alliance wasn't really marching about fox hunting but was instead marching about the falling price of gold in Zimbabwe?

Yes?

You can't just decide to change the reason they are marching just cause you don't like the reason they give for marching.

I agree that t's incumbent on the person who posits such linkages to actually unpack them and lay them out for us, but are you seriously saying you don't believe there can be any connection between the points Bernie has made?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

This entire argument annoys me.<snip>

Well, it may annoy you, but I think there is something in it. It's not like there wasn't already an enormous base of anti-western feeling in both the middle east and Nigeria. This is pretty well-documented and isn't really in question I think.

Like it or not, the cartoon issue happened in that context. When we see attempts to remove it from that context, to claim that 'it's only about the cartoons and nothing else' then one has to wonder why it's so important to exclude a context of prior anti-west resentment and anger from discussion.

 

[nino_savatte]

I take you know what's happening in the Niger Delta, Fong.

 

[Lock&Light]

it does appear that those with a vested interest in continuing/augmenting antagonism towards the Middle East (right wing: politicians, journos, and members of the public) seem to be milking this situation for all it's worth. And my question is: How is that helping things?

While there is no doubt that many in the West are making use of this situation, it seems to me that it is as much the 'Mad Mullas' who are milking this situation for all it's worth.

 

[FruitandNut]

L&L - Yup, that is pretty much my own summation.

 

[nino_savatte]

While there is no doubt that many in the West are making use of this situation, it seems to me that it is as much the 'Mad Mullas' who are milking this situation for all it's worth.

Praytell, what underpins this thesis?

 

[Fong]

Well, it may annoy you, but I think there is something in it. It's not like there wasn't already an enormous base of anti-western feeling in both the middle east and Nigeria. This is pretty well-documented and isn't really in question I think.

Like it or not, the cartoon issue happened in that context. When we see attempts to remove it from that context, to claim that 'it's only about the cartoons and nothing else' then one has to wonder why it's so important to exclude a context of prior anti-west resentment and anger from discussion.

That is the point, you take it in context of what is happening. You don't decide that it has nothing to do with the issue in question and really its all about something different.

For informed debate, I think I understand the 'right wing' argument in this thread. That at the moment we are facing a pivotal moment where we either give up our basic freedoms in the face of religous aggression or we confront it.

What is your argument?

I don't really understand, you seem to be nit picking (and I don't mean that in a bad way) the particulars of why the right has come to this conclusion, but I am not sure of your position on the actual question posed.

IF, and that is of course a very big if, we are facing a pivotal moment of giving up rights or confronting religous doctrine.

What are we to do?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Here's a thought-provoking piece from US military theorist William Lind which I think has some sensible things to say about the wider context here.

Every four years, the Pentagon releases its Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), more accurately the Quadrennial Defense Rubberstamp. Usually, it offers the same, more of the same or less of the same. That is true of this QDR as well, with one interesting exception. Perhaps uniquely in the annals of strategic planning, this QDR promises strategic failure a priori. It puts that promise right up front, in its first sentence, which reads, “The United States is a nation engaged in what will be a long war.”

Long wars are usually strategic disasters for winners as well as losers, because they leave all parties exhausted. If they work to anyone’s advantage, it tends to be the weaker party’s, because its alternative is rapid defeat. The Rumsfeld Pentagon certainly does not see the United States as the weaker party in its “Global War on Terrorism.” So why has it adopted a long war strategy, or more accurately lack of strategy, unless one sees national exhaustion as a plus?

The answer is a common strategic blunder, but again one that is seldom seen up front; it normally arises as a war continues longer and proves more difficult than expected. The blunder is maximalist objectives. In a speech announcing the QDR, Secretary Rumsfeld said, speaking of our Fourth Generation opponents,

"Compelled by a militant ideology that celebrates murder and suicide, with no territory to defend, with little to lose, they will either succeed in changing our way of life or we will succeed in changing theirs."

It would be difficult for war objectives to be stated in more maximalist terms. Either they will succeed in turning us into Taliban-style Muslims or we will turn them into happy consumers in globalism’s Brave New World. Since most Americans would rather be dead than Talibs and most pious Moslems would rather perish than lose their souls to Brave New World, Mr. Rumsfeld has proclaimed a war of mutual annihilation. That will indeed be another Thirty Years’ War, with little chance of a renewed Westphalian order as the outcome.

source

This business of riots over cartoons seems to me to be just one more propaganda escalation in a struggle that has been going on for some time now. Clearly there are people pushing what Lind would describe as 'maximalist' objectives on both sides, who find it very serviceable, but these objectives are not in the interest of us ordinary citizens IMO.

 

[mears]

I have never believed that violence solves a thing, no matter who (or for what cause) the violence is/has been engaged in. Rather, Ghandi's, Martin Luther King's advocacy for non-violent protest is the ideology I have always advocated.

However, as another poster pointed out (apologies for being too lazy to revisit the post), it does appear that those with a vested interest in continuing/augmenting antagonism towards the Middle East (right wing: politicians, journos, and members of the public) seem to be milking this situation for all it's worth. And my question is: How is that helping things?

My view? It's not helping one iota. And a cynical person might think that that is entirely the point.

I'm sorry, you don't think these riots are news? You rather I don't start threads on them?

I don't understand. Is it uncomfortable? Are there other more pressing issues not being addressed on these forums?

 

[fela fan]

While there is no doubt that many in the West are making use of this situation, it seems to me that it is as much the 'Mad Mullas' who are milking this situation for all it's worth.

This just reminds me that the real fight in our world is between the leaders and the lead.

Forget nationality, religion, it's the fuckers that try to persuade us to believe this or that vs the rest of us who want a peaceful life. Just when the fuck are we gonna get this?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Going back to what I was saying before about a context of strong anti-western sentiments pre-dating this business about cartoons, take a look at this story:

BERLIN - A Turkish-made film that portrays American soldiers in Iraq as brutal and callous killers is setting attendance records in Turkey and has just opened throughout Europe.

From the opening seconds to the dramatic conclusion, the movie, "The Valley of the Wolves - Iraq," portrays Americans as wearing the black hats.

In one scene, an American doctor, played by actor Gary Busey, is furious because troops keep killing Iraqi prisoners before they reach the Abu Ghraib prison. The doctor's problem? If the Iraqis are dead, he can't harvest their organs to send to Israel.

The movie, the most expensive production in Turkish film history, has been a runaway success in Turkey since it opened Feb. 3. Would-be viewers must wait weeks for tickets. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, according to Turkish press reports, recommended the film to friends after a private screening. His wife noted, "It's a beautiful film."

source

It's worth bearing in mind that Turkey was about the most trustworthy ally the US had in the region up until the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq.

 

[JHE]

In one scene, an American doctor, played by actor Gary Busey, is furious because troops keep killing Iraqi prisoners before they reach the Abu Ghraib prison. The doctor's problem? If the Iraqis are dead, he can't harvest their organs to send to Israel.

And this, I imagine, will be believed by many who watch the film.

 

[fela fan]

It's worth bearing in mind that Turkey was about the most trustworthy ally the US had in the region up until the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq.

Heh, interesting. The opinion of america since bush took charge has drastically changed. For the negative. Those around the world are united in their belief that the US is a bad force for world peace since this criminal took office.

What gratifies me is that folk from all over the globe are finally seeing the country for what it is. For in my two decades of adulthood i've been arguing that the fuckers are nasty bastards. Seemingly it's only since bush took office that people can finally see them for who they really are.

 

[Fong]

Going back to what I was saying before about a context of strong anti-western sentiments pre-dating this business about cartoons, take a look at this story: source

It's worth bearing in mind that Turkey was about the most trustworthy ally the US had in the region up until the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq.

Other then the fact that this films existence proves your point, no one tiny bit. I don't really see where you are going.

Turkey is still the most trustworthy ally the EU/US has, nothing has changed at all. The fact that a movie does well means nothing, on that basis any movie made by hollywood that sells tickets is obviously indicative of an underlying hatred for whatever unfortunate race is this months hollywood favorite for bad guy.

I would like to point out at this stage, that Britain has had its fair share of bad guys in Hollywood lately. So clearly there is an underlying hatred of Britain in America that is only coming out in Ticket sales.

Of course there is an underlying disliking of western capitalism and globalisation, that is not what people are marching about, that is not what got them out of bed and out of their homes and jobs and marching down the road.

Religous fervor did that.

Try and brush that under the carpet as much as you like, but that is what got people out and marching. Not capitalism, not globalisation, not the war on terror nor the war on Iraq. No, religous fervor got them out.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

I think things can have more than one cause.

Let me illustrate what I mean with a metaphor. Suppose you have a chemical plant run by a company that cares more about profits than human life, where the safety procedures are not being properly observed, poor quality materials are being used and so on, corners are being cut, eventually resulting in the leak of flammable vapours. A spark occurs, causing a massive explosion.

What was the cause of the explosion? Was it only the spark?