Swedish papers publish Vilks' Muhammad cartoon in defiance of jihadist intimidation

Well - the solution is simple and obvious - all editors, employees, advertisers, subscribers and casual readers of those papers have to be killed. Immediately. Then there will be peace.

Seriously - it's encouraging to see some these people finally growing a spine.

GO SWEDEN!!!

Great news.
Someone is not cowing down to islamic threats.
The editors, Vilks, are all brave men.
Hats off to them.
I hope others too will take courage from this.
Amen.

Rinse, wash, and repeat. Luv it! Yeah Sweden! Hooray for Western Civilization! Freedom!

At least three Swedish newspapers on Wednesday published a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog after an alleged plot to murder the artist who created it was uncovered in Ireland...

Dagens Nyheter said in an editorial that "Vilks doesn't stand alone in this conflict. A threat against him is, in the long term, also a threat against all Swedes."
......................

Bravo, Sweden! I raise a metaphorical glass of brännvin to your courage!

Here are some more MoDoggies:

http://hodja.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/vilkssobieski.jpg

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/2007/09/02/vilks1modggie.jpg

http://www.mediawatchwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/modog.jpg

and here's the Lars Vilks' MoDoggies project logo:

http://chromatism.net/current/images/cvf/freespeecholandmedium.gif

"Islamic law generally opposes any depiction of the prophet, even favorable, for fear it could lead to idolatry."

And this is a central point. Why should any non-Muslim care about what Shariah law prohibits? Mohammed cartoons have zero chance of leading me to Mohammed idolatry.

Why even bother to honor this for the unneccesary and unwarranted concern of offence to Muslims? The very existence of non-Muslims is an offence to them and an affront to their god.

That said, this is a heartening move by Sweden. Things appear to be getting quite interesting there.

Get ready for lots of temper tantrums from Muslims. Ah, Muslims in hysterics is pure viewing pleasure and makes the sensible viewer realize his superiority over such childish adults.

Muslims cannot go around hatching homicidal plots over a cartoon. If some of them haven't figured that out yet, then they do need to learn that post haste. Such individuals should also take direction from mainstream Islamic jurists who have opposed such responses.

The newspapers publishing this seem reasonable, as it is part of news coverage of these events.

But while I assume Lars Vilks enjoys basic freedom of expression rights in Sweden, one has to ask what proper, responsible purpose was he seeking to fulfill with this cartoon.

He wonders "how far can they go" with their plot? Tell him to ask the heirs of Pim Fortune and Theo Van Gogh, among countless others, as well as the other cartoonist whose house was invaded by an axe-wielding motooner not so long ago in Denmark(?).

Truth etched on paper, whether written or drawn, is always a welcome sight! ...except to a mohammedan, of course. They are repelled by any and all forms of Truth.

But while I assume Lars Vilks enjoys basic freedom of expression rights in Sweden, one has to ask what proper, responsible purpose was he seeking to fulfill with this cartoon."
--fairfuzfan

Something called Freedom. Others call it Liberty. Freedom of Speech would be another term for.

It is very possible that having learned about the fiend muhammad, he felt that dethroning this iconic fraud was in the public welfare.

These are noble things, except to an apologist for islam and slavish Jew-hater like fairuzfan who swallows the cool-aid, laps it up,and thanks his thuggish Arab-masters.

Of course if we hadnt inflicted a wound on ourselves by allowing large scale immigration of Muslims, none of this would have happened.

Muslims would not be affronted by our customs, and demand sharia. And cartoonists would have no need to publish cartoons of Mohammed. Neither would we have a fifth column leading to terrorist cells within, and neither would we have 'Islamophobia'. We would ven respectr Isdlam and its traditions, simply because of ignorance and everyone would have been happier.

As it is, we are heading towards a civil war, which may end up as world war.

The New York Times Magazine of 14 February features on its front cover Washington crossing the Delaware, with Jesus Christ, that well known prophet of Islam, in the boat with him.

Accompanying the feature article, 'How Christian Were the Founders?' are various famous historical portraits each with Christ embedded with some creative photoshopping.

Was the NYT firebombed? Were its editors and illustrators killed? Even threatened? Did rioting Christians lock-down Manhatten?

Reflect on this difference, Muslims, and try to understand why the infidel world is growing increasingly weary of your tantrums.

I think Muslims are very crazy, what's wrong with this. I believe Allah is like a stone in Mecca, so this is the reason why Muslims are working on behalf of Allah. If Allah is great, why can't Allah take action. Let Allah do the job.

I notice that Muslims only complain about Mohammed portraits when such are boring and uninformative of the subject. Yey, when cartoon of Mohammed is vivid and enlightening and dramatic, the Muslims refuse to acknowledge it, in spite of world-wide promotion. They collectively turn their eyes from, for example, Derek Devereaux's "Portrait of Mohammed."

Well, here's another chance for the umma to look the other way:

http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com/2006/01/muslim-cartoon-people.html

"A threat to justice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." - Martin Luther King Jr

PS - The same applies to threats to human freedom. Bravo to the Swedes, who are otherwise the most craven dhimmis on a continent of craven dhimmis.

That's good. Defy the Muslim bastards. We should all thumb our noses at them,and stick out our tongues --
not literally of course, but that's the spirit we've got to have. Appeasing, and being nice won't save us. If they're offended, tell them to suck it up, get over it.

I am wondering about the meaning of the cartoon, if that is not too off topic:
1) Why a dog, and, does this breed of dog have any particular meaning?
2) Why is the dog tethered to a post?
3) Why does the post have a man wearing that particular hat and those glasses?

The point of my link to Derek's cartoon, (above) is that most "Mohammed cartoons" are so banal as to be worthless to either side for debate. They are, for the most part, innocuous cartoons that leave most people unimpressed and uninformed and probably bored.

Derek's portrait, on the other hand, is significant of Islam and Mohammed, which is one reason Muslims refuse to deal with it. It tells too much, and does so very dramatically. If you were to ask, "What does it mean to show a little girl bleeding?" then one could provide a significant answer. And so with the other details in Derek's cartoon. As is, we find ourselves trying to defend pap for the sake of the abstraction of free speech. Fair enough, so fr a it goes, but we could be defending something concretely worthy: Derek's cartoon and its obvious practical significance.

http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com/2006/01/muslim-cartoon-people.html

I am from the ADLIH and I am going to protest against this cartoon. How dare Lars Vilks puts the face of a vile, medeival hate-monger on the body of a decent dog(pbud).

Islam-Bang
(Association of Dog Lovers and Islam Haters)

it's stripped, pure form and light; crude yes, but bold screaming look at me I'm Muhammad's head on a dog! in a little freudian beard. hehe
This was never about idolatry. This was Muhammad's way of "taking away the gods of the vanquished"

Looking at this thread, a couple of thoughts:

1. I think the world is starting to wise-up about islam. New shoots of resistance and increased activity are sprouting everywhere; The EDL in the UK, Switzerland with the minaret-ban, the CPAC presentation in the US, Geert Wilders gaining politically in the Netherlands, despite his government. And now some brave and defiant Swedes stepping-up. And, BTW, I notice lots of new posters here; people are looking for a place where islam is given no quarter, just as it gives no quarter. There's a lot of work to be done, a long way to go. But there are some signs that the message is getting out there, that more and more folks are seeing & accepting the truth. What a shame that our politicians and governments will be the last to "get it."

2. One sure-fire way to show islam at its worst is to...MAKE FUN OF THEM! They have neither the emotional nor intellectual maturity to respond, except with indignation out-of all proportion and murder-hungry violence. Keep poking that ant-hill and get 'em out where everyone can see 'em. They are their own worst advertisement...

At least three Swedish newspapers on Wednesday published a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog...

This cartoonist dude, this Mr. Vilks, did he explain why he didn't use the body of a pig?

*** 33:21 ***

Ever since the Moslems came around with all the trouble it ain't been nothing but one slap after another to the face of the pork production industry.

:^(

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3860733,00.html

See the resemblance?

I'm still disgusted that no western newspapers published the original Danish cartoons. They should all have published them, on a daily basis, until the barbarians got the message that we are NOT going to give up the freedom of speech our ancestors fought and died for.

O/T - I just went to our local Miss Millie's fried chicken joint, only to see a halal sign on the wall. I told the manager that no way was I eating food that was inhumanely killed and dedicated to a satanic god, so I wouldn't be buying anything in there again.

What's even more ridiculous is that they even can't argue market forces, because in our small town of 75,000 souls, our one and only mosque has but 20 members and meets in someone's front room.

Last night in Australia, SBS, the local community/ethnic/usually totally dhimmi TV channel, showed this cartoon several times in the course of an interview with Vliks

I meant "things" of course, not "thinks".

A canine body with a human head made to look like a Muhammadan? Where is Vilks' sense of humor? And why can't he compromise a little with the Muhammadans' prohibition against drawing the head of Muhammad?

Political cartoonists of the USA, you have a much better sense of humor, and superior talent for drawing caricature, too. Please put the head of a drooling dog on the body of a human male dressed in traditional Muhammadan garb. The dog's tongue is hanging out a foot or so while it leers at a group of Muslimahs who have veils over their snouts. Add a suicide bomber's vest to the male, and there you go. Muhoundianism as it is.

Please make sure that the Muslimahs are overplucked and their eyes larded with eyeshadow and mascara. Have them standing outside an Islamic mask, I mean, a mosque.

Variants have the Muhoundian humping the leg of a multicultural appeaser, the leg of a table at a peace conference, and so on. And oh, look, there's Pavlov reading the Koran aloud at Friday prayers before a whole crowd of drooling Muhoundians.

But which breed(s) should the Muhoundians be?

Last night in Australia, SBS, the local community/ethnic/usually totally dhimmi TV channel, showed this cartoon several times in the course of an interview with Vliks

Every damned newspaper in Europe should publish the cartoons every day for a month, then the Mohammed bomb cartoon for a month then the Satanic verses for a month, then back to Mo doggy.

Our media are our real enemies.

Has the rioting in Pakistan over this started yet? We're waiting ... Maybe on Friday, after prayers, eh?

***Vilks booby-traps home to thwart would be assassins***

http://blogs.chron.com/iconia/2010/03/post_3.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+houstonchronicle%2Ficonia+%28Iconia%29

Let's all shop at Ikea and show these idiotic Muslims who is boss!!! We shall follow Lord Spencer into battle!!! Pamela Geller is the messiah!!!! Idiots...

fairuzfan asks:

"But while I assume Lars Vilks enjoys basic freedom of expression rights in Sweden, one has to ask what proper, responsible purpose was he seeking to fulfill with this cartoon."

while you are in the asking mode, you might call up the numerous Islamic publications in the middle east and ask what proper responsible purpose they are seeking to fullfill when they publish their racist and vile cartoons depicting Jews and other infidels? note: the Muslims cartoons are far more violent and horrific towards the other peoples religions than the cartoons of this post...

Let me just post a comment on the recent condemnation of Geert Wilders by Glenn Beck and Charles Krauthammer.
I think the dilemma they and other mainstream conservatives have is that if Islam, and not some misconstrued "Islamism", is the real problem, then the trillion dollars or so of taxpayer money sunk into Iraq and Afghanistan, as originslly initiated by a Republican administration, would suddenly seem like a questionable investment. To say nothing of the lives lost.
When you look at the fact that 40% of Iraqi refugees are from the 1% of Iraq's Christian minority, the democratic triumph seems less triumphant. Some democracy.

I emailed Mr Krauthammer a brief note that he needed to do some reading about Islam....I attached a listed of recommended books found on an October 2003 JihadWatch posting....(Islam then was no different than Islam today),

I went to the JW search engine, entered "recommended reading on Islam" and then went to page 3 of the listings for the article...

Maybe Mr Krauthammer will read my brief note....Ha!

Marisol rightly drew attention to this quote from the article:

'Dagens Nyheter said in an editorial that "Vilks doesn't stand alone in this conflict. A threat against him is, in the long term, also a threat against all Swedes."'

That's the attitude that all non-Muslim persons - and countries - are going to have to adopt, when one of them is threatened or worse, actually attacked, by the Mohammedans.

Let's try rephrasing that statement by Dagens Nyheter. This is what all free non-Muslim Dutchmen and all free non-Muslims should have said, the moment it was known that Mohammedans had issued threats against Geert Wilders' life : "Geert Wilders doesn't stand alone in this conflict. A threat against him is, in the long term, also a threat against all Dutchmen and against all free non-Muslim people".

And here's what should be heard from non-Muslim leaders the moment any Muslim entity threatens or actually attacks any non-Muslim country: "Israel [or, India, or, Denmark, or, Sweden, or, Switzerland, or, the USA, or, Italy, or, Thailand, or The Philippines....etc etc etc, insert names here, whoever it is who is currently being assailed] doesn't stand alone in this conflict. A threat against Israel [or India, or Switzerland, or...or...or..] is, in the long term, also a threat against all non-Muslim countries".

one has to ask what proper, responsible purpose was he seeking to fulfill with this cartoon.

All one has to do to see how preposterously asinine this rhetorical question is: juxtapose the two subjects of fairufzan's sentence:

1) proper, responsible purpose

2) cartoon.

We've had run-ins with fairufzan before on this thread. Here he shows that he's either a 19th-century Prussian proto-fascist, or a Muslim. I can't think of a third alternative.

Hesperado, re your question concerning fairufzan --what about just plain silly?

This irresponsible cartoon is an insult to dogs everywhere. Doesn't anybody think of the poochies?!

"A threat against him is, in the long term, also a threat against all Swedes,"

And the threat against Swedes is a threat against Americans. But don't expect the media in this country to realize this. Their gutless response is to be extra careful not to offend Muslim sensibilities.
God, if we only had real moral leadership in this country!

Well, Vilks should apologise to the noble dogs to associate them with Mo. Long live Sweden(minus the Mo guys).

If this is the attitude, then what's up with Malmo? One man on a mission? (the mayor)...

Graven Image, I think you have a good point that not many Muslims have seen a Mo-toon. However, that's not because they weren't visible to the world and well-know to the m.s.m. Derek's work languished in obscruity for months before he contacted me and asked me to drop a note here at Jihad Watch, which I did with some restrained zeal.

OK, I had no restraint. Derek's traffic went from literally zero per day for the first months of that blog's existence to 25,000 per day within days of his debut here. The reason for Derek's success as an illustrator went beyond is graphic abilities: Derek is one of the most remarkable intellectuals I have had the pleasure of knowing over what is by now a long lifetime. Due to his extraordinary abilities as a thinker and communicator he became widely known, interviewed by media even so far away as New Zealand television and points in between. He made a big stir in the world for a year or so, and then, sadly, disappeared from the public eye. But for that year he was and continues through his work to be a major influence on the world of anti-jihadis.

Derek's work wasn't strange to those who would have hated it: I spent a good month and more going around the Internet apologizing for the cartoon at Leftard and Muslim sites, begging them not to look, and writing that I am so sorry that it exists. I even apologized for a series of secret Qur'an burnings all across the world. I apologized for the Burning Man Festival, claiming the burning was of a Qur'an. Trust me on this one, I made a lot of people very angry, to the point that they attacked my blog and Gates of Vienna and numerous others in retaliation, shutting down the great Google itself for a few hours at the height of the frenzy.

Nor did I and others too numerous here to mention stop at that. We had talented cartoonists from the readership here contribute graphic and repulsive cartoons, some disgustingly pornographic and otherwise disgusting, of which I am equally proud to have had some hand in as a publicist. Jihad Watch readers and commentators rose to some grand heights in that time. We can all be proud of that. And the opposition saw it: I sent numerous emails to Arabic and Muslim sites and publications telling that they should never, and I mean never look at the links of the vile things posted. I haven't and so many death threats in my lifetime before or since, and I'm an obnoxious guy, at least according to my ex-wife who should know.

In spite of imbeciles like "Worry 01" railing that I'm a Muslim I can say that I did some of my best work in promoting the genius of Jihad Watch readers and writers during that period. I did much of that by writing directly to Muslim governments and organizations, writing that they should never look at the cartoons on view. So, they knew very well what was going on. The Muslims in question refused to acknowledge this effort or to use the graphics to rile up further rage among their supporters because there was deep truth in most of the images, which is missing from the ones shown and known now, trite and banal and outright mindless for the most part. And that because the truth shown in the images,a s one sees in Derek's piece linked above, is too difficult to explain away t the curious reader, even if such images offend. Why the disgusting image of Islam and Mohammed? one would ask. That requires the Muslim to explain, and they refused, preferring to deal with the stupid and inarguably stupid representations of Mohammed as we see most frequently.

I won't plug my archive, but for those interested in some of the world's greatest Mo-toons, there they are in all their repulsive glory. Muslims deliberately refused to take offence at them because many, if not most-- if not all of them-- portray the truth about Islam and Mohammed in graphics, and Muslims cannot deal with such truth without exposing themselves to the exposure of the truth.

Which by this time must be long-winded enough....

So the Islamic objection to the depiction of Mohammed is based on the idea that if Mohammed is portrayed in art it might lead to idolatry.

So, the Muslims are worried that Mohammed, depicted as a dog, might be idolized as a God.

That figures, considering everything else about Islam is backwards.

"Israel [or, India, or, Denmark, or, Sweden, or, Switzerland, or, the USA, or, Italy, or, Thailand, or The Philippines....etc etc etc, insert names here, whoever it is who is currently being assailed] doesn't stand alone in this conflict. A threat against Israel [or India, or Switzerland, or...or...or..] is, in the long term, also a threat against all non-Muslim countries".

-posted by Dumbledoresarmy

Exactly right.

Let's(as united infidels) adopt the same mindset as the Ummah.

We are the free world and reject totally anything benefiting the Islamic Ummah.

The Islamic Ummah is the enemy of all mankind.
To hell with Islam.
To hell with the Ummah.

Incredible that our media will not report how free ladies need to have their clitoris's cut off, according to Islamic law.

This is moving along quite nicely. If they can upset the Swedes that is going some.

That they seem to think they now control what we can and cannot say in Western society shows how far down the dhimmi route we've gone and how far the controlling aggressor they've become.

It had to snap and this response from Sweden is on a par with what is going on all over Europe.

Here in Britain we gave benefit of doubt but after our tolerance was mistaken for cowardice and the islamic agenda filled the defensive vacuum we're saying enough is enough.

Online newspaper comment has veered from mild acceptance to a building rage as incident after incident has revealed the Islamist plan.

Unless our government and once supine media now decides to back us I feel that violence is not too far away. The rumblings are beginning and Muslim arrogance only furthers the push back.

However the big game changer would of course be another successful terror atrocity or a repeat of the repulsive cartoon demos in London, where images of the threats of beheadings and slaughter were beamed across the world.

Even the slightest official defence would be met by public scorn and the grovelling by Labour, the police and councils which followed the London Bombings would not be countenanced.

We get it. Officialdom follows at a snails pace. The media has to take up the baton or be condemned to eternal irrelevance.

"The media has to take up the baton or be condemned to eternal irrelevance."

- posted by logdon

No, not irrevelance.
Eternal responsibility for this treason.

There was already a huge battle, where armies from different christian countries gathered to defeat the zombies because , like now, things had gone a bit too far:

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh21/plotino_photos/NavasdeTolosaBattle.jpg

Artists back then were much more elocuent:

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh21/plotino_photos/P1020804.jpg

Awake:

This view is held by Yusuf Qaradawi and the Grand Imam Mohamed Tantawi:
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout&cid=1201958010903

It's also the view held by a couple of dozen Muslim scholars who jointly issued a fatwa on the subject:
http://theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/declaration_of_fatwa_by_world_islamic_scholars_about_danish_cartoons/

And Bernard Lewis explained in a 2006 lecture hosted by the Pew Forum that the standard view of a non-Muslim committing an offense in a non-Muslim land is that it is of no concern to Islamic law.

"Muslim scholars"

Why bother being a "scholar" (lol) about something that's a hoax, a lie, and evil - islam.

"72 virgins" - Yeah, that's real! LOL! That Mo - a total con man.

Here's a little about fairuzfan's arab taskmaster:

Qaddafi, Wilders, and the Jihad Against Switzerland
by Andrew G. Bostom

Qaddafi’s declaration of jihad against Switzerland is an action with centuries of precedence within Islam.

Ever since the triumphs of Islam’s prophet became the ultimate inspiration for jihadism almost 14 centuries ago, Muslims have especially revered the bellicose, conquering Muhammad of Medina. (For a pious contemporary example, see Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s “The Prophet Muhammad as a Jihad Model.”) According to a canonical hadith (Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0272), Islam in essence belongs to Medina, as a serpent to its lair, the specific words being, “Verily the faith [i.e., Islam] would recede to Medina just as the serpent crawls back into its hole.”

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/

Muslim Scholars????? Oxymoron

Mersisol: I for one have had enough of DustinH's nonsense. I think he has crossed the line from annoying to troll.

In the topic "Tell those clerics" he posts:

"How cute, the august scholar Robert Spencer has to post a video from a young girl - where she condemns Christians - to get his followers collective dick hard."
Disgusting, libelous and completely stupid considering Mr. Spencer is (as is many of his readers) Christian.

Hilarious ...

Not only did fairuzfan get spanked by Hugh on the "Jihad Jane" thread, but he just got spanked AGAIN by Awake on this thread.

Hey Dustan...
Got hate much? Just wonderin'...are you muslim or just an apologist?
You call those that gather here, the "followers of Mr.Spencer." You are making that judgment according to how you feel about your own leaders. You may well be the follower of some imam or other hate filled piece of human detritus...I don't know...but none here "follow" Mr.Spencer. We support him, we share many of his views, we are anti-jihad.
Just because you get sexually aroused when defending the religion of Blood and Death does not mean that others share in your sexual excitement when debating or discussing same. You are alone in your sexual arousal...as far as we can tell anyway. No tellin' who's rubbin' your belly as you spew your venom on to the screen in front of you.
I bleeb I hear your mother calling you. You need to go upstairs and eat your lunch before it gets cold. You can play with your friends afterwards...
Oh yeah...piss off...

islam is a lie and
Truth is killing it.

Look for riots and Mohammedan rampage on Friday, after they get their message of hate and violence for non Muslims, from their local command center-the Mosque.

If Lars Vilks can keep up his Attitude,

as expressed in these remarks - "I'm not shaking with fear, exactly," he told Swedish news agency TT after Tuesday's arrests.

"I have prepared in different ways *and I have an axe here in case someone should manage to get in through the window*" -

seems to me we might have an early contender for the title of Anti-Dhimmi Internationale, 2010.

All three newspapers, Sydsvenska Dagbladet, Dagens Nyheter and Expressen, are controlled by the Bonnier family.

They publish such magazines as : Outdoor Life, Popular Science, Field & Stream, Ski, Yachting in the US.

The current Swedish ambassador to Israel is a member of the Bonnier family.

Here is a video of a digital reader Bonnier AB is developing. http://bonnier.com/en/content/digital-magazines-bonnier-mag-prototype

Brief appearance of Bonnier on Nightline discussing Apple’s iPAD.
http://abcnews.go.com/entertainment/video/howard-stern-fires-back-over-gabourey-sidibe-10070786&tab=9482931§ion=4765066

Elesvier is down, Bonner AB is up.

Typo alert!
That should read "ELSEVIER".