Bruno ScottSep 26th, 2006 - 17:06:36

Don't ask me to defend this stuff. Yeah, it's art, and all that. Too many people get thrills from needlessly annoying others and then shield themselves with 'freedom of expression'.
Instead of asking if there might be a more apt way to present Idomeneo's crushing dilemma, the director Neuenfels seems to have asked if there were a more offensive way. He has found it. Let him be pleased with it, but don't insist that we share either his pleasure or take up arms or voices to defend his artistic vision. He's an adult, not a naive kid, and with maturity should come some sense of responsibility.
Censorship and limitations? Germans live with them already. We can't walk naked down the boulevards. We can't have sex in restaurant dining rooms. We can't say 'Heil Hitler' in the public arena. We can't spraypaint our philosophy on public walls. And these limitations are just fine with me.
Neuenfels has other venues to promote his so-called artistic vision. If his message has such merit, it will appeal to others: let them come forward to support it with their money, their property, their time, their energies. I wouldn't try to stop them. But if I were an investor in a private opera house, or an insurer for that opera house, I would certainly not be interested in this childish prank. Cut the stupid scene or cut the show.
Art can thrive with limitations. Early movies, Renaissance art, and song lyrics of yesterday reveal the truly creative, who can still get their message out even when they can't be blunt.

Report this comment

Another LogicSep 26th, 2006 - 17:59:37

We need to eliminate the Islamist's 'culture of fear' they have created in Western nations. We wimps in the West are limmiting our own freedoms and acting as apologists for vicious criticism of Christianity and Judaism that goes on in the muslim world every day.

This must come to a stop. It is the moral duty of Western governments to do so for their citizens. Let's start retaliating against Muslims and their institutions every time they criticize Christianity or Judaism. Let's see how they like it.

But let's retaliate in our own fashion, with all the awesome power of the West. Here's a formula for our own retaliation.

First, the EU and US should withdraw all aid funds from the country in which the offense occurs.

Second, we'll send their ambasadors home, along with all the citizens of that country residing in Western countries, including all the snot nosed kids of the muslim elites studying in the Western countries.

Third, we'll freeze the financial assets of all individuals and institutions from that country that are held in Western banks.

Fourth, we'll demolish with air raids the institutions from which the offending muslim religious attack occured. If it came from a mosque, we'll bomb that mosque. If it was broadcast on television, we'll take out all their transmisson facilities.

Fifth, we'll put a $1MM bounty on the head of the offending speaker.

Lastly, we'll institute a 'three strikes you're out' policy. After any 3 such attacks on other religions that take place from a predominantly muslim city, we'll simply firebomb the entire city and it's populace - Dresden style.

With such a retaliation policy of our own in place, we'll see how long moderate muslim populations are willing to tolerate the radical Islamists in their midsts.

It won't take long at all, and the Islamist culture of fear in free Western societies will come to a quick end.

Report this comment

Another LogicSep 26th, 2006 - 18:10:14

More seriously, we cannot treat one religion specially in our critiques of religion in general, whether voluntarily or by edict. That is madness.

Jesus Christ is a fairly regular character on the cartoon show 'South Park.' The same parodic treatment is both permitted and justified for other religious figures from any other religions.

Christians may not *like* South Park. Good for them; that is their right. So it goes for any other religious people, no matter what their nationality or numbers. They don't have to like it; so don't watch it.

But threats or violent acts against countries, individuals or people of other faiths is completely intolerable.

Our tolerance must come to an end - really.

Report this comment

John ChristopherSep 26th, 2006 - 18:25:21

While the Christian prophet Jesus sacrificed himself for his believers, the Muslim prophet Mohammed frequently ordered his followers to sacrifice themselves for his own glory. Islam is not a religion at all, but a political movement with the goal of world domination. Islam has a very violent history and the terror now being perpetrated on the West is simply another campaign for world conquest.

The Quran orders Muslims to either enslave or kill those who refuse to worship Allah. The Muslim holy book does not teach love, but hate. Faithful Muslims are directed to kill the 'infidels.'

The following are a few of the violent passages found within the Quran:

'Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you.' (Sura 9:122)

'make war on the leaders of unbelief...' (Sura 9:12)

'Allah has given those that fight with their goods and their persons a higher rank than those who stay at home. He has promised all a good reward; but for richer is the recompense of those who fight for Him.' (Sura 4:96)

'Believers, retaliation is decreed for you in bloodshed.' (Sura 2:178)

A merchant, Mohammed became a military leader and led several campaigns against 'non-believers.' He could also be easily classified as a common thief, as he frequently raided caravans headed for Mecca.

In 624, Mohammed led a few hundred Muslim warriors in a raid on a merchant caravan. It resulted in a battle between the Meccans and the Muslims at Badr. The Muslims prevailed and took 70 prisoners who were held for ransom.

In 627, the Meccans again were defeated by the Muslims in what is known as the Battle of the Trench. Afterwards, the Muslims accused a local Jewish tribe (Banu Qurayza) of conspiring with the Meccans and subsequently attacked the Jews. Under Mohamed's direction, the defeated Jews were given mock trials and executed by their Muslim captors.

In 630, Mohammed led a force of 10,000 to seize Mecca.

By the time of his death in 632, Mohammed was regarded as a ruthless military leader and a skillful politician. Less than a century after his death, his followers had conquered Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Armenia, Syria, and most of North Africa. During the 10th century, Muslim armies conquered part of India (in what is now Pakistan).

Webster's defines religion as: 1. belief in and worship of God or Gods 2. a specific system of belief or worship built around God, a code of ethics, a philosophy of life

As I said earlier, Islam is not a religion but a plan for world domination in which conquered peoples will either submit, become slaves, or be killed. Islam is no different to Nazism or Japanese Imperialism. American Muslims do not deserve Freedom of Religion protection under the U.S. Constitution and should be viewed as potential enemies of the state.

We must no longer allow Muslims to hide behind the banner of religion. We must shut down their mosques, deport all non-citizen Muslims within this country, and consider internment for American Muslims until the end of the war. If we do not recognize the Muslim threat lurking within this nation...We can look forward to seeing more smoke rising over American cities.

Report this comment

GJ Klaver, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.Sep 26th, 2006 - 19:58:40

To Bruno Scott: You said 'We can't walk naked down the boulevards. We can't have sex in restaurant dining rooms. We can't say 'Heil Hitler' in the public arena. We can't spraypaint our philosophy on public walls.'

Oh yes, we can.

We might get arrested, or have to pay a fine, but: WE WOULD'T GET DECAPITATED.

See a difference here, mr. Scott?
The difference of a modern culture and a barbaric one?
If not, ask Theo van Gogh's murderer.
Ask the Islamo-facists who killed a Nun over the Pope's remark.
Ask the modern-day Nazi's who rioted and killed over a couple of cartoons.



Indeed; This has to stop.
I'm sick and tired of Muslim 'sensitivities'

We need to do something and we need to do it fast.
Civil war isn't unthinkable.

Report this comment

SaragraphSep 26th, 2006 - 23:02:43

I hate to agree with these people but the truth hurts and we are wimps. We have become such a 'PC' nation that we are affraid to offend people who want to chop our heads off. I would like to see Cindy Sheehan try to 'talk' the terrorists out of their actions, how long will her head stay attached? The beautiful thing about art in every form is it makes you FEEL. If it is dull and unemotional it is plainly uneffectual, what would be that point of that? Now, I am not sure that sanctions on everyone and widepsread bombings are the answer. Can you imagine the backlash from all muslims? However, I do believe that we should not have to live in fear. I can't say I agree with everything our government has put us in the middle of but maybe when Bush said 'be vigilant, be alert', it could have been good advise. Why do you muslims want to kill so badly? Get a grip.

Report this comment

AceSep 27th, 2006 - 00:21:52

Berlin opera drops Mohamed's severed head

They should have not canceled it...and then kicked the 'morons head' off stage like a soccer ball....besides whats the big deal...wasn't his head actually cut off by another Muslim...so that would be about par for them.

Report this comment

Bruno ScottSep 27th, 2006 - 01:11:32

To GIK--
We all know everyone else's arguments. We have all heard them before. Perhaps none of our posts add very much to the sum of human knowledge.
Be principled? Or pragmatic? Is there a way to be both in this case? Maybe. I like a good fight as much as anyone, if I think something important is at stake. Sorry. This opera doesn't cut it.
I think many of us argue as though people out there are somehow open to persuasion by argument. They usually aren't.
You are right in saying I can do all of the things I said in my last post, as long as I will pay the fine or do the prison time. But whether I do so is not just a matter of cost-benefit calculation. It's also partly a matter of civility and self-restraint.
I don't think the opera cancellation is an issue of free speech. If the director can pay the insurance to cover the production, he can put it on wherever someone will let him. I think the decision would be uncivil, but he's assuming the risk, not me.
Just so, Andres Serrano has the right to put a crucifix in a jar of urine and photograph it. Just don't make my taxes or investment money pay for his work. I won't ask him to pay for mine. (And don't tell me it's art. It's not.)

Report this comment

Mr. ConcernedSep 27th, 2006 - 01:52:35

I look at all this with wonder, is it just me or have we gone totally soft. The muslims might not be a supe power, but they are sure getting what they want in the end with all their threats of bombing and Jihad and all those cries for war on the infidels who dare talk about their religion and their prophet. What kind of religion has God the almighty praise and pray for his prophet and what kind of religion forces its followers to kill themselves for 99 virgins and where they would be allowed to sleep with them and their virginity would be reinstated. Is that all what you think of when you go to heaven sex with girls and boys(mentioned in the Quran)and a feast where you can drink all the alchool you want.

I think to myself and say a religion where God allows the prophet to divorce his adopted son from his wife so the prophet can marry her. He got engaged to a 6 year old and consumated the marriage when she was 9 years old.

I wonder until when are we going to be held hostages to a religion built on the principles of killing your enemy and the people who do not have your sames beliefs.

In my opinion violence doesn't solve anything, what needs to be done is to expose Islam as it truly is, no more of this Islam is a religion of peace, the word peace is not mentioned in the Quran, it does not figure in their vocabulary. The moderate (if such a thing actually exists) muslims should be made aware of the true nature of their religion, their should be more education. They have to learn to be more tolerant of others. The firerand leaders should be stopped from preaching in the mosques and forbidden form spreading their hate speech. How come if a regular Jo Blow said something about a certain race or religion, he will end up in prison, but a muslim cleric can go on attacking the country that accepeted him with his distorted belief and no one would touch him for fear of offending the delicate muslim feeling.

I believe their fear and their anger comes from their ignorance, they used to be at cutting edge of cience and research when they were moderate, but every time they start delving into their religion they go backwards, they become dummer.

How ignorant can they be, when they demand the return of Andalos, they claim it belongs to the Arabs, didn't they attack it first, and when they got their butts kicked they started crying.

The spread of their religion happened not by conviction but by the edge of the sword, become a muslim, pay a ransom or die. Not many choices for the masses.

I think the world must wake up and see Islam for what it truly is, and let's not be afraid of saying the truth, every time we cower from saying the truth the Jihadists win and start making more insane demands.

Report this comment

Another LogicSep 27th, 2006 - 05:01:34

This is NOT a problem of theology. This is a problem of threats, actions and violence.

Like Nazis, muslim nations will understand nothing but violence. Will we bomb 'moral innocents' ? - this is completely irrelevant, as it was irrelavent when we fire bombed the cities of Germany and Japan. It took total carnage and raw force to beat the violent into submission.

The same task lies before us now. It's time to get to work.

BTW, I am liberal, I vote Democratic and I think our Iraqi invasion was a mistake.

But the threat of Islamist radicals is very, very real. It is the MORAL IMPERATIVE of Western power governments to protect their own citizens to a degree that they can live freely as if the Islamists did not even exist.

The way to accomplish this is to, in fact, eliminiate them - either directly through lethal force, or indirectly through the brutal intimidation of their moderate muslim peers.

There is no other way. Appeasement of theocrats is not an option and shall never be an option in the West again. We've fought that war in our own culture. That blood has already been spilled for the sake of our current freedoms.

Western powers have all the wealth and military might at their disposal. It's our move.

Report this comment