A nice little counterpoint to the media;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 685886.stm

aldo wrote: I think you'll find any people can be roused to violence quickly, given the right type of prodding.

And for the Middle East it just happens to be religion? That's a little difficult to buy. More to the point, when was the last time somebody's embassy in the US was torched? Or in France, or Denmark, or the UK? (And unless the act was staged, which is a real possiblity I grant, one should also consider the difficulties of accomplishing it and the size of the punishment if caught are considerably greater there.)

Once Islam behaved as though the eldest child; now they seem the youngest (not unreasonable, they actually are), rash and quick to use force. And if not all, enough. It has been a long, long time indeed since Christians whose fundementalism was comparable to that of the Taliban, Iran's government, or Hamas have been in control of a country. (The most recent that come to mind were in fact of the Church of England, but being Catholic hasn't been a capital offence there in hundreds of years.)

They have been through their version of the days of the Inquistion and the Crusades, this is not their turn for such behavior. And yet suddenly the second coming.

The answer lies somewhere in the fundementals. Perhaps it goes back to the beginning, and the Prophet himself. He was spiritual and temporal leader in a way that Jesus or Buddha never were. Government and Islam have never really been seperate concepts. The somewhat hapazard system for deciding who counts as spiritual leader hasn't helped the problem.

When's the last time France or Germany were invaded by a totally alien country, or had very little actual power? When was the last time any major european or 'western' country was a theocracy, dictatorship or monarchy?

The less power a country or region has, the more extreme a small group of people will be in trying to protest. I mean, look at the post-9/11 effect; the US could probably have invaded Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, on the back of the desire for revenge. It's also worth noting that Islam as a religion is a lot more life-consuming that Christianity, so it has a greater role as pretext for any action.

Also bear in mind the turmoil many of the Islamic states have been through in the last century alone; some were owned/ran by the British Empire (Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Nigeria, Egypt - also owned by the Ottoman Empire, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Maldives - prior Portugal and Holland, Brunie, Malasia), others by other nations (such as Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia & Mali by France, Libya by Egypt, Inodnesia by Holland, or Azerbaijan by Russia/USSR), some by proxy dictators (Iran) . It's worth noting the most democratic Islamic nation - Turkey - also probably has the longest history of independent rule. So in many cases, there's not been enough time for full democratization; that took several hundred years in the UK alone. Also, a lot of the ruling structures were put in place or manipulated by the great powers of the 1800s-early 1900s. And then add in the strategic manipulations before and during the Cold War to get oil access.

If you look at religious terrorist organizations, they're always motivated by domestic concerns; even the likes of Al-Queda are aiming to spark a religious upheaval and theocracy through 'inspirational' acts of terror murder; their aim being, of course, to also assist this by polarising the East/West divide. Because Islamic states are almost uniformly undemocratic, that's why you see more than in Western states; terrorism or fundamentalist violence is not the only outlet in democratic society, and the freedoms (speech, vote, belief) bred from hundreds of years of history act as a pressure valve. If you look at the primary instance of Christian terrorism, it's the LRA in Uganda, a former colonial state.

So, yes, it just happens to be religion that is the driving force, but it's the history and politics of those countries that drives this type reaction. Same reason as we don't have this sort of violence in western countries. And let's not make the mistake of assuming the majority action or response is to burn flags and storm embassies, either, because - patently - it's not. We're just seeing a small percentage, taking advantage of a situation that leaves their country, region and by extension religion able to be portrayed as oppressed. If Islam was really of that ilk, we'd be seeing embassies burning in every city.

I see that fella who dressed as a suicide bomber got busted back to the slammer for parole violation.

I also read dibble busted a guy who was passing copies of the cartoons out when the loopy mentalists were marching (with police protection, natch).

Hence why I will never, ever become a policeman

As for the story at hand.... I dunno, the IQ of a crowd seems to decrease exponentially with it's size. Maybe there really is a reason why most geniuses are loners?

Roanoke wrote:I see that fella who dressed as a suicide bomber got busted back to the slammer for parole violation.

I also read dibble busted a guy who was passing copies of the cartoons out when the loopy mentalists were marching (with police protection, natch).

To be fair, I don't blame the police for that; there would definately have been a riot had the guy been handing out the cartoon to the mob. The bloke wasn't formally charged or anything, though; just moved out the way.

I think the police tactic is, when a mob isn't actively violent (looting, etc already), is to stand back, act as a cordon, and video the protest with a view to any later prosecution. I can understand why they didn't intervene with riot police, etc, given the possibility of a real riot and innocent people getting hurt; unfortunately it's not as simple as we'd all like it to be when it comes to arresting these people for incitement, etc.

Back to the original question, so are we torchin an embassy or not?

On a side note, here's a quote in reference to the attempted storming of a U.S. base in southern Afghanistan:

The U.S. base was targeted because the United States "is the leader of Europe and the leading infidel in the world," said Sher Mohammed, a 40-year-old farmer who suffered a gunshot wound while taking part in the demonstration in the city of Qalat.

Just thought all of you would appreciate that wonderfully enlightened opinion.

Goes to show how well they are educated over there.