unfortunately this is not true. We do pretend their behavior is ok and we respond to it in the way they demand. Your example of the cartoons is the perfect example. In most of the world, nearly every newspaper, magazine and TV station self censored the cartoons. They gave up their right to freedom of speech. They gave up their right to parody a figure. An act that is acceptable in their own culture and society. They gave this right up in order to appease an aggresive group.
Nobody pretended that the violent reactions of some protestors were okay. The cartoons were republished all over Europe, far more than they would have been if not for the protests. Those who chose not to publish them did so for various reasons - some found the cartoons offensive and needlessly provocative; some were afraid of losing customers by offending them, or afraid of inviting retaliation from nutters. None of this means accepting that those demanding death to the infidels were okay.
Nowhere were the cartoons banned. People who went around waving banners demanding death to the infidels were charged and convicted of inciting religious hatred in Britain. People who planned violent retaliation in Denmark were caught and charged. Their behaviour
was not accepted.
We cant save the lost lives. But we can work to prevent future losses. Beiviks message was clear.
To summarise your lengthy post, one guy, enraged at the faults he saw in society, murdered a bunch of people. Therefore, society is failing. Anders Breivik is a deranged sociopath - the fact that he can rationally explain what he's doing doesn't change that. One of the ideas suggested in his manifesto was the use of tactical nuclear weapons at various points in European cities, to bankrupt the 'multiculturalist, cultural Marxist, socialist' governments quicker and speed up the 'inevitable' coming of European civil war.
Did the existence of Marxist terrorist groups in the 60s and 70s mean that European captitalism had failed, and was inevitably doomed?
That is what multiculturalism is. This is how it is practiced. Everyone must cater for the beliefs of others as if they were true. In my part of the world, we have to accept Ramadan as a reason to put Islamic workers onto light duties as if their religion is true.
No, no, no, no, no. Read what I said again. You are
not accepting these peoples beliefs as true. You're accepting them as important to these people. It's not the same thing at all.
And is this true, anyway? There's nothing about Ramadan that requires Muslims to do less work. Are you saying that it's the law in Australia, or is it just the policy of the company you work for?
Edited by caffeine, : typo
™ Version 4.2
