Nor should he be.
From The Australian
When asked whether he regretted his decision to publish the Mohammed cartoons, in light of the firestorm they unleashed in the Islamic world and threats against him, Flemming said it was like asking a rape victim whether she regretted wearing a short skirt.
"Flemming said it was like asking a rape victim whether she regretted wearing a short skirt."
What a great metaphor. For a long time I have thought that the Israeli/Palestinian conflict could be summed up as follows:
Israel was wearing a short skirt. Tough girl that she is, she managed to get her attacker into a headlock. That's when the rest of the world walked in...
Hi Caroline,
It's amazing what kind of gun you can hide in thigh high nylons. It gives new meaning to the Order of the Garter. : )
Unfortunately, most of the rest of the world demanded to know why the girl dared to defend herself.
The rapist has a RIGHT to rape you, they intoned.
Good for Flemming and good for Australia, I hope they keep it up.
Don't Burn Muhammad
From the desk of Paul Belien on Thu, 2006-02-16 20:43
In 711 Muslim armies crossed the Strait of Gibraltar. They took Spain by force and remained there until they were thrown out during the reconquista in 1492. Every year, in a tradition that goes back to the 16th century, Spanish villages still celebrate the liberation from the Moors (as the Muslims were locally called) during “Moros y Cristianos” festivals in which effigies of the prophet Muhammad – the so-called “la Mahoma” – are mocked, thrown out of windows, and burned.
Now the Spanish, having witnessed what happened to the Vikings recently, are wondering whether they can still continue their tradition of “offending Muslims.” The village of Bocairent near Valencia decided this year to discontinue the century old tradition of mocking and burning effigies of Muhammad. Bocairent does not want to risk becoming the target of suicide bombers.
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/823
Why good for Austrailia? Their paper was quoting the editor in Demark.
Depiction of Muhammad blasphemy? More lies and obfuscation by the Muslims.
Go to Google, click on "images" and type in the word Muhammad. Over 200,000 entries, not all are images of him of course, but there are plenty of them.
Why doesn't the MSM point this out in their articles about the cartoon caper? I guess they prefer to roll over and pretend they are politically correct.
Sickening......
Sorry about that.......there are only 83,000 entries under Muhammad.
Its hell to get old.....the memory is the 2nd thing to go.
"Last Friday, at the conclusion of a debate on Dutch television about the Muhammad cartoons, an animated cartoon was shown. It was made by Joep Bertrams, who won an award last year for being the best Dutch political cartoonist of 2005. the title ,Gevoelig means "sensitive""
see it at link below..caution, Muslims should not view..
http://www.novatv.nl/index.cfm?ln=nl&fuseaction=artikelen.details&achtergrond_id=8350&CFID=2735238&CFTOKEN=57221010
Hammerhead,
Now that's an awesome cartoon! It's amazing what people can come up with when they have the freedom to express themselves and think for themselves.
Vive La Liberte!
Isabella: "It's amazing what kind of gun you can hide in thigh high nylons."
Girl - you're way tougher than me, that's for sure. In my own defense, though, I do pull a mean head of hair! Hubbie and me are still weighing the whole gun thing. He's afraid I might go all impulsive and shoot him in a pique! We can't be the only couple having this debate. :-)
Hey girlfriend,
I'm running out to meet my gun totin' friends for some anti-Islamic alcoholic refreshment, (what's more offensive, rum or tequila?) and we'll probably get some babyback pork ribs. Yum! The only thing that would make that better is some fresh yeast rolls with a big slathering of Danish Lurpak butter!!
But seriously, with the gun thing. My friend carries a Luger. Her husband bought it for her and he's taking me down to do some shootin' when she goes next. These are the most peaceful, friendly, wonderful people I know.
Guns = equality when a thug comes your way.
Strength through vigilance and preparation. You got it goin' on, girl. Caroline, get your gun!
'Running out...talk at you later tonight! : )
Why doesn't the MSM point this out in their articles about the cartoon caper?
Because they, as the central engine of the Ruling Elite, are in the business of programming public opinion.
While it is true that bullshitting is one of the central pillars of Opinion Programming, so is the good old Intentional Mistaken Omission gambit.
its great to see an Editor with ethics and valor!
it sure does make most print media editors looks whimpish now!
Hammerhead thanks for the link, did you see the cartoon about the Muslim mind. Here is the link.
http://www.novatv.nl/index.cfm?ln=nl&fuseaction=artikelen.details&achtergrond_id=8350&CFID=2735238&CFTOKEN=57221010
Sorry I guess it's so good that you can mention it twice.
He, and others at that newspaper in Jutland, performed a great act. They tested whether or not certain subjects were simply verboten, or whether the freedom of speech that undergirds Danish and Western democracy, and without which free and skeptical inquiry is not possible, still existed, and could be practiced, or whether for some matters it had become merely a theoretical right, never to be exercised, for fear of giving offense.
Thank god Jyllands-Posten did what it did, and thank god that at least some honor was saved, in the Western world, by every newpaper, including those at American colleges (but not The New Duranty Times, not The Bandar Beacon), that showed their solidarity with the Danish paper, and the understanding of their student editors, even if many of their elders did not, of the principles of Milton's Areopagitica, of John Peter Zenger, of the First Amendment, of what Holmes, Brandeis, Learned Hand, Alexander Meiklejohn, and Alexander Bickel would have wanted them to do. They would have wanted them to publish. And they did.
Oh mister editor! You better repent! Why?
Well... if you don't... why... they'll bomb you.
And you don't want that, do you?
What if they issue a fatwa demanding your death?
What will you do then? I bet you'll wish you hadn't done such a thing then.
Why... they may burn something or break something.
And it will all be your fault mr. editor. Why? Because you MADE them do it. The Muhammadans are just calm, docile creatures until their "prophet" (profit) is assailed. After that, well.. no more docile creatures, only Muj.
You better apologize mr. editor
By Johann Hari..interesting perspective..
two excerpted paragraphs..;
"The fight-back by moderate Muslims has begun
This is no Clash of Civilisations. It is a clash within Islam"
"..across Britain, Muslim women are refusing to bow to fundamentalists who believe beheading is a legitimate form of literary criticism. While criticising the cartoons of Mohammed as “distasteful”, Fareena Alam, editor of the Q News, damned the protestors, demanding to know “what the parents of the child wearing the ‘I love Al-Quaeda’ cap would say had their son been on the number 30 bus that terrible day.”
"In France’s Muslim ghettoes, an amazing movement of Muslim women called "Ni putes ni soumises" (neither whores nor doormats) has risen up, initially to fight against the epidemic of domestic violence in their communities but increasingly to craft a liberal – even feminist – brand of Islam. In the past fortnight, we have seen the first stirrings from their British sisters."
http://www.johannhari.com/index.php
You all may be wondering "Why the heck does that crazy x_achillesheel_x guy keep referring to the "prophet" as a "profit". Why? He was a "prophet" for profit.
Consider.
He married a 42 year old woman for financial reasons. Hence, profit
He raided caravans to loot their goods and money. Why? Profit.
He overthrew the Quraysh? Why? Not for a religion, oh no. The religion was a side show. No, he overthrew the Quraysh for economic reasons. Power and influence reasons. More profit.
He launched a campaign to seize land everywhere in the arabian pennisula, sacking towns and seizing wealth all along the way. For what?
Profit.
All hail the might "Prophet" of Profit (MHBIH).
This detail that caught my eye the first time I read this article:
"He [Rose] acknowledged that his newspaper two years ago had declined to publish satirical cartoons depicting Jesus Christ, but said the current situation was not comparable, and noted that over the years Jyllands-Posten had printed cartoons deemed offensive by Christians, Jews and other religions."
Note: JP had been widely accused (by time-pressured authors of MSM articles, and by Muslim apologists who seem to have too much time) of using double-standards, turning down cartoons about Christians and Jews that were offensive. The above statement from Rose indicates that this chrage of double standards doesn't hold.
"chrage" oops, "charge"
You're right, x_achillesheel_x. With the Quraysh mass murder and robbery Mohammed had finally hit the jackpot. From there the Holy Prophet was able to move on and concentrate on the underage quim, Roman Polanski-style.
In other words, the newly rich Mohammed went all Hollywood. I can't wait to see George Clooney do a movie on Mohammed. It'll be great. I bet I break into a jag of sobs when I see the sensitivity with which Mohammed handled his torrid romance with the 6-year old Aisha.
PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH PBUH
Aisha, I love and respect you so much. You are totally awesome. Now, put those dolls down and play with this.
MHBIH?!?! (May He Be In Heat ;) Which he definitely were on several occasions....
"Note: JP had been widely accused (by time-pressured authors of MSM articles, and by Muslim apologists who seem to have too much time) of using double-standards, turning down cartoons about Christians and Jews that were offensive. The above statement from Rose indicates that this chrage of double standards doesn't hold."
It doesnt matter no matter whether they turn down all images that might insult christians, jews or any other non-muslim group. They are not obligated to insult everyone equally. But other papers free to print whatever they want within the limits of the law, just like Jyllandsposten is. There is no double standard involved in that since a newspaper is allowed to have certain political or cultural line that they follow. Most papers do this and thats fine. Everyone can choose for themselves which kind of political line they want to read and then buy the papers that fit that.
It would only be a double standard if they critisized others for printing images that insult christians, while at the same time doing it themselves with the Mohammed drawings.
ExpatriateDK,
I agree fully that the newspaper should be under no obligation to criticize all religions equally. Clearly, some religions deserve more criticism than others.
I cited the quote from Rose simply to indicate that the accusation that JP used double standards within its own editorial policy, as construed by journalists and Muslim apologists, was based on a premise that was factually incorrect. Whether JP had or had not criticized other papers' editorial policies was not an issue that was raised in regard to the example that I cited.
He, and others at that newspaper in Jutland, performed a great act. They tested whether or not certain subjects were simply verboten, or whether the freedom of speech that undergirds Danish and Western democracy, and without which free and skeptical inquiry is not possible, still existed, and could be practiced, or whether for some matters it had become merely a theoretical right, never to be exercised, for fear of giving offense.
Not only that, they also gave the world the chance to see Islam through the naked eye. Not through the lenses (individual or collective) of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the Iraq occupation, nor. the terror attacks of 9/11 or 7/7.
In doing this, Mr Rose wittingly or unwittingly gave the world a wake-up call. Unfortunately, too many still seem to be hitting the snooze button, which really is a smoke detector alarm.
I'm more upset that the contents of the Koran and Sunnah are verboten. Screw the cartoons.
Cartoons about Mohammad cartoon, so really funny and correct views of Islam.
http://www.cagle.com/news/Muhammad/main.asp
Why are we hearing this from the Australian. A newspaper based out of a country 1000s of miles from were the story is. No one in the UK thought that this was important? Gutless wonders the lot of em.