Cartoon War Continues Unabaited — I have to give these people the benefit of the doubt and assume they have other grievances. I mean, really. None of these jokers read Danish newspapers. Few have seen these innocuous cartoons. They have other issues and this is their excuse for rioting. But is this the best excuse they can come up with? Offensive cartooning? It’s nothing less than ridiculous.
Two demonstrators were killed and five were injured, while eight police also were hurt, he said. No U.S. troops were involved in the clashes, Ahmed said.
Lebanon, meanwhile, apologized to Denmark a day after thousands of rampaging Muslim demonstrators set fire to the building housing the Danish mission in Beirut to protest the series of cartoons satirizing Islam’s holiest figure.
The European Union issued stern reminders to 18 Muslim countries that they are obliged under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations to protect foreign embassies, and Austria — which now holds the EU Council presidency, reported calling in a top representative of the Organization of the Islamic Conference to express concerns for the safety of diplomatic missions.
“Do westerners every get tired of appearing as self-centered, arrogant, spoiled, insensitive, aggressive defilers of other people’s sacred beliefs?”
Sacred beliefs? In what? Silly superstitions about drawings or photographs stealing their souls? We are now expected to be sensitive to people who are outraged to violence by a cartoon.
Where was the muslim outrage to the September 11th attacks?
Where was the muslim outrage to the locking of doors of a burning school to keep young women from running out unveiled?
Where was the muslim outrage to shooting 200 children in the back by Chechen muslims?
gregallen if this is not yout “personal view” why did you publish it?Respect can only be earned not demanded.
This is just another case of extremists ruining the expression of religion for the majority. Just because a lot of the extremists have a closed mind, doesn’t mean you guys can’t have an open one.
Comments like:
“These folks hate everyone who isn’t them (probably themselves too). People who hate like this will use any excuse to demonstrate their hatred against anything and everything.”
..reak of the same simple-minded views as expressed by the people reacting to the publishing of these cartoons.
I’m a professional cartoonist and
I’ve posted an article about this on my blog.
http://www.jasonchatfield.com/blog
Cath.. what are you saying? “Wonder how people in the mid-west US would like it if there was a cartoon featuring an upside down cross and self-pleasuring Jesus? I could be wrong, but my guess is we wouldn’t be hearing them praising freespeech.”
These cartoons did not have anyone “self pleasuring themselves” and we’ve already seen how the crucifix in pee “art” didn’t involve bomb threats. Who are you kidding?
These cartoons were lame by comparison and these a-hole are out-of-control.
The people in the midwest wouldn’t like what you describe but a) it’s not funny anyway (like the Danish cartoon whihc DO MAKE A POINT!!! and b) would not result in RIOTS!!! HELLLO!!!
As someone living in the middle east, whose country bore the brunt of many terrorist attacks, I wasn’t surprised. All the people who live in the US should understand one thing – the regimes in the middle east are all dictatorships (except for a single democracy who gets slammed harder than the worst dictatorship there).
In a dictatorship, the power is held by few, over many. It’s in the best interests of these few to keep their population (subjects) as stupid as they can (note that the literacy precent in a country such as Egypt can’t be compared with the literacy in Europe for example), and as ignorant of the world as they can (by controlling media) – now if you don’t know anything around you, and I tell you that you have to be a Muslim (cause you don’t know any better), and that the “West” is your big bad enemy and that they hurt your most precious symbol – hell you’d go to war for it… not that I’m agreeing with these riots (I agree with the need to respect other people’s religions – ALL religions).
I’m afraid things would change for the better until more and more people who live an Arab countries become more educated, more informed about what’s going on around them – just take an example for the world’s favorite underdog – the Palestinians – under the Israeli “occupation” they had education, healthcare and other advantages which position them as the most educated (in general) of most Arabs… just think about that (even though they prefered to shoot themselves in the foot by not accepting any settlement offered in the past).
I’m afraid to say, that this would only have to end by war between one part of the world and the other part. And in such wars, usually the more determined side wins.
This is a clash of cultures and the only reason I can find for having us participate in it is our need for oil. Otherwise, the West could simply close its borders and leave them alone with their hatred and all their problems. I couldn’t care any less.
Freeing ourselves from oil dependency would give us the extra wonderful bonus of saving the planet from much of the pollution we create.
>Why is there such protest now?
If you wanted to protest Denmark, how long would it take you to get the flags for burning?
Miguel Correia,
What you said is quite ignorant. If you ignore what’s happening in the middle east by “closing the borders”, not sure what that means, then their hatred will grow out of control.
if anything the west and east need to mingle more in order to resolve their differences.
Don’t forget that his whole problem of differences between cultures is a result of Europeans using ships to sail around the world instead of using the Silk Road in order to trade with the east.
For more information on this visit your local public library.
Miguel Correia,
What you said is quite ignorant. If you ignore what’s happening in the middle east by “closing the borders”, not sure what that means, then their hatred will grow out of control.
If anything the west and east need to mingle more in order to resolve their differences.
Don’t forget that his whole problem of differences between cultures is a result of Europeans using ships to sail around the world instead of using the Silk Road in order to trade with the east.
For more information on this visit your local public library.
You got that right, most of em don’t read Danish newspapers. Most of em can’t read. BUT they could look at the funnies. If their tight-a***d mullahs would allow cartoons in their newspapers. They have other issues??? Really??? Please don’t make excuses for a bunch of street thugs. There is no excuse for this type of behavior. Just another example of “the tolerant muslim faith” :+
What we really need to do is grow up as a species and get beyond the little stories made up about a guy named jesus and grow beyond the belief that mohammad had a private pipeline to God. What everyone seems to be missing is that Christianity makes Islamic faith look like a piker when it comes to violence.
Only animals of any faith would burn embassies over this issue.
realist … what I am saying is that, to a Muslim, the cartoons are not just offensive, they are a sin (drawing the Prophet Muhammad) and that if someone were to do something like that to Christians (drawing Jesus is not a sin, but hanging an upside down cross comes pretty dang close), they would be really pissed. (for more about rioting christians read the Belfast times). I’m not condoning (obviously!) the killing, but I am saying that they have every right to be pissed. It’s easy to laugh things off when they’re not happening to you.
Michael Reed,
That’s because Christianity has been diluted over the years. It is not the same Christianity as it used to be. For example there are as many different versions of the Bible as the number of nose jobs Michael Jackson has had in the recent years.
I’m sure you if had a time machine and traveled back in time you wouldn’t say the same things now.
I hate to be the voice of dissent here, but as a recovering Baptist who lived in the Middle East for a year (working for a Oil Company) I should speak up.
Islam prohibits all images of the Prophet (positive or negative). This is analogus to the Christian second commandment.
Do you remember the outrage a few years ago over the NEA sponsored art exhibit that included a crucifix in a jar of urine? The cartoons are offensive to Islam in a very similar way. You could also make analogies to the “Last Temptation of Christ”. All of these were offensive images that were rightfully protected by freedom of speech.
The truth is that we allow outrageously offensive speech in our country (and in most of Europe). The cartoons ARE protected by freedom of speech. But to say that they are no big deal is a sign of our ignorance and/or apathy. I believe that is part of the outrage that these people feel.
It would probably calm a lot of people down if our leaders would just say “It’s offensive, but protected speech”.
What is truly idiotic is the attitude that insulting people without fear of reprisal is a right.
You people just don’t get it. This isn’t a Linux versus Windows debate. When you attack religion, you attack the very core of someone’s beliefs — his soul. You feel you have a right to insult their intelligence, strip them of respect, and laugh at their faith. Of course you have been doing this to Christians for years, so it’s no wonder you feel immune to reprisal. But Islam doesn’t believe in “turning the other cheek,” and now you are shocked by the reaction a few pictures can generate.
To you tolerance means that everyone should give up his or her faith, because it is religion, you believe, that creates intolerance. And your own hypocrisy escapes you.
I am not a religious person. I’m not sure if I even believe in God. But I make a point of never insulting someone’s religious beliefs. It’s called respect.
If a complete stranger were reading a newspaper on a street corner, you wouldn’t walk up behind him and punch him in the kidney. Yet you fail to see the harm in attacking his heart.
You call that a “right”.
Moe,
I would agree with you should you say that closing the borders is simply not possible. More than an actual solution, it was a sigh… wishful thinking if you like.
However, it is not ignorance in the sense that would make their hatred out of control, as the purpose would be precisely for us to have the ability of making their hatred irrelevant, no matter how big it was. We should just be able to go on about our business without them being an issue.
Are you really saying that we should live on fear of their hatred? That’s like the European position towards Germany before WWII… let’s lower our trousers not to enfuriate the agressor. It make the agressor even more agressive. Yes, I was doing some whishful thinking, but not out of ignorance. Maybe out of fear. Maybe you should go to the local library instead and read about how pacifism and how often that lead to nasty wars.
As for the difference of cultures. I am from the country that started the whole business of going around Africa for trade with the East, instead of crossing it, Portugal. So, you’re actually implying that we should have kept trading with the Muslims, instead of going directly to the supplier just to maintain cultural convergence??? What cultural convergence was there before? How far a stretch that is to say that our commercial decisions lead to this state of cultural division are there is today.
We are not responsible for other people’s behaviour and cultural divergence is not in itself a problem. What we should not tolerate is to have our freedom conditioned just because they’re different, nor should we try to make them “converge” towards our culture.
Before suggesting someone is ignorant, please be more careful and try to understand really what the person is saying. Besides that, try not to reveal ignorance yourself, as you should know that the cultural divergence existed way before Europe expanded into the sea. I would be very glad to lend you my history books.
I’m never surprised when folks haven’t any understanding of cause-and-effect relationships. Nor would I express surprise over most people finding some just cause to supress speech and opinion. But, Smith — look at your “telling” conclusion:
“If a complete stranger were reading a newspaper on a street corner, you wouldn’t walk up behind him and punch him in the kidney. Yet you fail to see the harm in attacking his heart.”
What provokes this whole discussion is thousands of people who feel perfectly justified in doing exactly that — coming upon someone reading a newspaper — hating what he’s reading — so, let’s set fire to his house and kill him. Because one or more religions or cultures haven’t yet made it beyond the days of the crusades is no justification for the rest of the world hanging about — waiting for them to catch up!
I’ve lived with folks whose “spiritual beliefs” said they must call their shaman to mix spittle with ashes and rub that mess into a fresh burn on a child’s body — to cure the burn. No thanks. I tried like hell to get that child’s parents to admit him to hospital. And I certainly didn’t support someone threatening to shoot me for trying. I’m not going to justify physical attacks and destruction out of “respect” for anything — whether it be religion or bigotry or custom.
By the way, that was in the United States.
……..and not 5 hours after I posted my (you just think the cartoons are silly because they don’t offend you statement I see this:
“A conservative advocacy group that urged a boycott of NBC’s recently cancelled drama about a pill-popping priest turned its wrath on Thursday to an upcoming Will & Grace episode that it says will mock Christ’s crucifixion.
The American Family Association immediately raised objections to the planned episode, saying it “mocks the crucifixion of Christ” and will “further denigrate Christianity” by airing the night before Good Friday. On its website, the Mississippi-based advocacy group called on its supporters to urge network affiliates to refuse to run the episode and to write to NBC.
oh the irony…
Islam does not forbid images of Mohammed. Images of Mohammed are forbidden by a Hadith. Hadiths are widely debated and differ from sect to sect of Islam.
Wanna see some images of Mohammed? Muslims have been making them for centuries!
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/
This isn’t about religion, that’s just the vehicle. It is about politics and economics, and the directions that many Islamic leaders want Muslim nations to take. They imagine a powerful theocracies that can bargain with the West on at least equal terms. It’s an old story. It’s easier to bring crowds together around the campfire if they fear the devils in the dark. There’s always a man behind the curtain pulling the levers.
Cath, At least with the lame TV show there were no bomb threats and burning of embassies..or do you NOT get that part of it? And how does someone in Denmark drawing a cartoon offend a Muslim in Indonesia? What’s the connection? When you say things are OK when “it’s not happening to YOU?” what do you mean? How is ANYTHING actually happening to them. What is happening? Really, tell me what it is that’s happening? If it’s a sin to depict Mohammed then the Danish cartooner sinned. So what’s that got to do with these other clowns? How does one person sinning (a non-believer mind you) generate this much anger? Do Muslims blow up when one of their own sins? Take all the rapes in these countries? Is that OK? Apparently it is! No protests and embassy burning over those thatI can tell. Taking the sides of these lunatics for some politically correct perspective no matter how nutty (yours) just doesn’t wash.
Moss, you prove my point. You think free speech gives you the right to say anything about anyone. You talk of cause and effect, without once considering the detrimental effects “free speech” can cause. I do not excuse the behavior of religious fanatics run amuck. But I do not excuse the behavior of those that attack religion as if its practitioners were morons or subclass humans.
The press defends its treatment of Islam as being no worse than its treatment of Christians or Jews; never for minute considering that it was wrong to attack ANY religion. What the European press did was to deliberately inflame a people, just to prove a point. “Idiot” doesn’t begin to describe these elitists.
Is Islam’s radicalism a concern for the West? Damn sure is. But we are fools if we think we can stop a people’s destructive behavior by telling them they are stupid for believing in Mohammed.
WHo is saying they are stupid — this is a cartoon. It’s humor. It makes a point, whatever it is (or it doesn;t make a point.)
Why does someone in Denmark have to kow-tow to the suddenly over sensitive fundamentalists in Syria or Saudi Arabia? Are we now supposed to be Muslim clerics ourselves just in case we don’t know all the rules (which they don;t seem to agree on anyway)? Do I now have to study the Koran?
THese are not modern pragmatic Muslims protesting this, it’s the radicals and the troublemakers. Can anyone get that part figured out. Does anyone think the average Turk, for example, gives a crap about this?
“never for minute considering that it was wrong to attack ANY religion.”
Smith: every religion should be ridiculed. As to attacked that’s different. If a religion can’t stand up to ridicule it’s not much of a religion.
When this first erupted I felt that it was inconsiderate of the Danish paper to publish the cartoons knowing they would offend Muslims. That was over a week ago. Since then I have been more offended that Muslims are feeling that they are so far above the law of man.
So many of these countries depend upon the west it would be a shame to see it all go to waste. Can you imagine Wal-Mart not buying it’s Men’s Shirts from Pakistan, or their electronic toys from Indonesia, or their Palm Dates from Algeria? The disruption to world trade would be tremendous.
> The press defends its treatment of Islam
> as being no worse than its treatment of
> Christians or Jews; never for minute considering
> that it was wrong to attack ANY religion. What
> the European press did was to deliberately
> inflame a people, just to prove a point.
> “Idiot” doesn’t begin to describe these elitists.
The press most definitely has the right to ridicule (as opposed to “attack”) religion all that it wants. There is a gold mine of hypocracy in all religions of the world. If you think this cutsy little cartoon was offensive, you haven’t read the European press lately. You should read what they say about their own politicians much less people that claim they are believers in a faith of peace and have been embroiled in war for the past 600 years. Milo’s point was right on: if your religion cannot stand up to ridicule, it’s not much of a religion.
I’m wondering who wrote the rule where it says it’s “wrong” for journalists, or anyone else for that matter, to attack a religion? Is there some book I should know about with this rule? Is it in the Bible? Koran? US Constitution? Columbia School of Journalism? Confucious Sez? I have not seen this rule on paper.
References please.
Yes, when did an ideology become immune from attack just because it is a religion?
LOL. I do not question your free-speech right to ridicule another’s core beliefs. I question your intelligence for doing so.
But please spare me your indignation and disbelief when the man whose face wears your spittle replies with a knee to the groin.
>But please spare me your indignation and disbelief when the man >whose face wears your spittle replies with a knee to the groin.
not a very fair comparison.
But, after thinking very, VERY hard, I can’t think of any possible drawing that would justify violence of any kind.
I suppose there are some images that would get you a knee in the groin if you walked up and showed it to someone. But its mere existance should not provoke any violence. Arguing in any way that there is some kind of justification is insane.
Bryan