Mohammad caricatures

[Salimar]

I am sure everybody has heard about the polemical generated around the publication of some caricatures of Mohammad in Norway, Denmark and France.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/...oon/index.html

We are used to make fun of religion or even intentionally provoke the Vatican in the Westen cultures. On the other hand, our societies are becoming very politically correct about different issues.

As many Islamic people consider religion as their primary motivation in life. Should we be politically correct about it?

What do you think about this?


Salimar

[Graeblyn]

I think it's ridiculous to hold entire nations responsible for what a few media companies within their borders choose to do. The mind simply boggles. The only POSSIBLE explanation I can come up with is that the muslim leaders within the countries getting all bent out of shape are ignorant of the fact that media outlets in most western countries are NOT state controlled.

[Kraxe]

For once I agree with the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw in the UK who said in a statement that he thought the reprints were irresponsible and disrespectful. Notice, not the Danish original just the reprints.

The original publication of 12 artists work in Denmark was part of a larger piece to do with testing the boundaries of free speech. That sparked this whole thing off back in September of last year. Months later a Nowegian conservative Christian newspaper reprinted the cartoons (without permission) and bundled Norway into it. Now France, Spain, Germany, Italy, Jordan and Indonesia have followed suit to a lesser degree. Was this reproduction really an exercise in free speech or nothing more than a cynical swipe at a religous group? In the case of the French Soir magazine who are in financial difficulties it might even be regarded as a cynical and tacky sales ploy.

The Sunni Muslims have a law that prohibits any depiction of the prophet Muhamed. In their eyes the publications that printed these were wrong to do so, and more so it seems so are the governments that refused to be drawn into an international argument over censorship and the right to freedom of speech. Drawn in they now are anyway.

But are the nations that are withdrawing their ambassadors and closing embassies really right to do so? I honestly don't know, so let's try ot put this into a little context.

Whenever the American flag is burned by nationals of another country there is often an quite the outcry. I know the US has asked that flag burners be arrested in various countries before. I'm sure if drawings of Ariel Sharon were made of him in a Nazi uniform Israel would be protesting vehemently. Stick a caricature of Jesus on a cross being fellated by Mary Magdalen and i'm sure lots of Christian groups would be up in arms. It's all about context.

These nations that are boycotting goods and removing their representatives from embassies, missions and so on have the right to do so, just as a Denmark publication had the right to publish those original cartoons, and the other international media outlets have the right (so long as they actually do have a legal right). Have they exercised their rights responsibly? Perhaps not.

On top of this, misinformation is making the whole situation worse. Listening to the reports coming from Gaza and Palestine where Norwegian aid workers were worried about reprisals, they were assured by Palestinian representatives that they were safe and that it was only the dogs of Denmark and Sweden that would suffer under the sword of justice. Sweden? So far they haven't printed or said anything.

And in all of this who are the people that are suffering? The muslim minorities in Europe, and the European aid workers and companies working and helping in the middle east and Indonesia. While the media 'exercises' it's right to free speech without thinking, and radical clerics call Government's refusal to act a declaration of war, it is normal people who are going to suffer.

[Wrent]

If you dumb this down. The arguments of Radicals is that "This other nation is not obeying OUR law".

This is completely ridiculous. Perhaps several centuries ago, a state could get away with defining the situation as 'an act of war' ... but not today.

Sorry, the world pretends it has grown up since then, no dice.

Were they stupid for exercising their rights like this? Absolutely. Its not like no one knew this would be a huge fucking deal to radical clerics and islamic theocratic governments.... Many radicals search for any and every reason they can to hate and make trouble for non-muslims.

[Kraxe]

Calling the governments refusal to condemn the cartoons and do anything about them 'a declaration of war' was from a cleric currently residing in Norway and fighting extradition to the US, and not as far as I know the words of any of the leaders of state involved in this.

You can dumb this down if you want. It doesn't help. You can dumb down almost every international incident and playground squabble if you like. It all comes down to acting responsibly. If people were reasonable and responsible about everything there would be no arguments, no wars. It'll never happen.

[Graeblyn]

Here we see that portrayals of Muhammed's image is quite common and has been going on since the early days of Islam:

http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

Granted, I am no fan of Christian fundamentalism, but in this case, Islamic fundamentalists might benefit from modeling their attempts to bend nonbelievers to their will after that of their Christian counterparts. Most recently, the Christian Fundamentalists, when confronted with what they felt was a sacreligious portrayal of Christ succeeded in getting the offending show (The Book of Daniel) cancelled, and without destroying any property, kidnapping any infidels, or killing anyone. For that matter, they did not resort to silly measures like demanding apologies from the US government for allowing media outlets to produce such a show

[ogron]

All this really has very little to do with pictures of Muhammed in my oppinion. When the drawings were put in the paper it gave some of the muslims in Denmark something real and fairly simple to object to. Over the years political debates about immigrants and fugitives - especially muslims - is getting more heated and the tone is getting more disrespectful, rude and in some cases bordering on racist. Protesting about something as real and fathomable as these drawings gives vent to frustrations that are otherwise difficult to bring up. This has blown WAY out of proportion especially after (as far as I know) danish imams and muslims started spreading rumors and lies in their home countries - such as the book burning that never happened.

I think the fact that both the Danish, Swedish and Norwegian embassy was burned in Syria, and that the names of the countries are constantly mixed up in both demontrations and the media shows that those protesting and causing riots are troubled and frustrated by something other than drawings. This - along with the general problem of placing blame - is what makes this a really difficult issue. It seems many of these protesters are actually in opposition to their own governments and probably using this issue - again - to vent frustations about something they cannot otherwise deal with. This means that not only will the real issues never get the attention they need, companies in my country will also suffer from it financially. Add to this our already growing reputation as a small, intollerant and even racist country. Sorry about the rant but I do hope it made sense.

[Aristotle]

Neal Boortz nailed this issue, imho:

http://boortz.com/nuze/200602/02032006.html

---

Muslim outrage huh. OK ... let's do a little historical review. Just some lowlights:

• Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia. A Christian school. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt. No Muslim outrage.
  
• A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India. Kills six. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia. Muslims shoot children in the back. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Let's go way back. Muslims kidnap and kill athletes at the Munich Summer Olympics. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses. Over 700 are injured. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslim newspapers publish anti-Semitic cartoons. No Muslim outrage
  
• Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge. No Muslim outrage.
  
• Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed. Muslims are outraged.

Dead children. Dead tourists. Dead teachers. Dead doctors and nurses. Death, destruction and mayhem around the world at the hands of Muslims .. no Muslim outrage ... but publish a cartoon depicting Mohammed with a bomb in his turban and all hell breaks loose.

Come on, is this really about cartoons? They're rampaging and burning flags. They're looking for Europeans to kidnap. They're threatening innkeepers and generally raising holy Muslim hell not because of any outrage over a cartoon. They're outraged because it is part of the Islamic jihadist culture to be outraged. You don't really need a reason. You just need an excuse. Wandering around, destroying property, murdering children, firing guns into the air and feigning outrage over the slightest perceived insult is to a jihadist what tailgating is to a Steeler's fan.

I know and understand that these bloodthirsty murderers do not represent the majority of the world's Muslims. When, though, do they become outraged? When do they take to the streets to express their outrage at the radicals who are making their religion the object of worldwide hatred and ridicule? Islamic writer Salman Rushdie wrote of these silent Muslims in a New York Times article three years ago. "As their ancient, deeply civilized culture of love, art and philosophical reflection is hijacked by paranoiacs, racists, liars, male supremacists, tyrants, fanatics and violence junkies, why are they not screaming?"

Indeed. Why not?

---

[Katidyd]

On the bright side, now three other contries will be targetted by islamic terrorists which means a few less scopes aimed at the US.

[Jidoe]

Well written!