I have been following this whole ‘cartoon outrage’ for what seems like forever now and I’m disgusted. I was disgusted by the hypocritical, holier-than-thou, indignant, repulsive fundamental and fanatical Muslims and their two-faced actions for quite some time, but this is absolutely absurd. It’s laughable that they’re in such an uproar over silly little cartoon pictures of some Arabian guy labeled ‘Mohammed’ in them. You can’t swing a dead cat around in Islamic countries without hitting several Mohammeds, so why isn’t there an uproar over the theft and overuse of their prophet’s name?

Even more amazing is just how tame these images are. Sure, there’s a guy with a bomb for a turban. So what? Why is that so awful? Isn’t martyrdom a good thing that all good jihadists aspire to? God forbid there ever comes along a REAL blasphemous picture that portrays good ol’ Mo in a totally evil light …as he probably should be portrayed in the eyes of anyone who’s ever been attacked by any of his legion of followers throughout the ages.

Hey -! What do you know …? I’m ‘illustr8rg8r’ and, like my moniker may imply, I’m an illustrator and I have just put the finishing touches on my most evil, repulsive, and most blasphemous piece of artwork that is certainly guaranteed to make the drawings of good ol’ Mo look bland by comparison! Don’t believe me? Well …if anyone wants it, I’m looking for recipients. No strings attached, no copyright, no nothing –feel free to use it, to spread it, and to get across to the masses of sleeping infidels that we are being invaded, attacked, and overrun by a death-worshipping cult of boiling hatred that wants to take away our freedoms and, those who don’t submit, dead. Put it on t-shirts, put it on billboards, make posters –I DON’T CARE! The only thing I have to offer in the struggle against Islamic Jihad is my ability to draw and that’s what I’m contributing. I’m going to submit it to several blogs that I’ve seen posted on this site and I hope that somebody out there will put it online, draw some attention to it, and use it to add to the insanity that is the Muslim mind. If anyone has any links to send it to, I’d appreciate some help and some sites and/or addresses which may accept it.

I have a God-given talent (honed somewhat through many years of schooling and several more in the real word professionally) I have an open mind, and I have the freedom of expression and I will use all of those things to the utmost to convey my thoughts. I’m not an especially religious person, but I know ‘evil’ and crimes against humanity when I see it. If there is a Muslim anywhere that doesn’t like the fact that I see these things and wish to convey them through art, he can go pound sand. If he or she is upset or angry, he or she can get over it –no one living or dead is above scrutiny or insult. If you’re on this planet, you’re a perfectly fine target of ridicule. If you have beliefs, that’s fine, but when your beliefs are confronted and made fun of, you need to grow a thick skin and just let those insults slide off your back. Take comfort that you have a belief system that others may not, believe what you believe, and to hell with everyone else if they don’t like it –you don’t throw tantrums like a child, kick and scream, demand apologies, and expect to be treated as an equal especially when your own kind have been guilty of just as blasphemous actions. This is the 21st century, modern times, not the 7th century.

The infidel jihad is on! The cartoon jihad is on! Holding mirrors up to the evils inflicted on mankind by his fellow man is happening right now In Denmark, Norway, and now France, Italy, Spain and I am calling on anyone who wishes this plague removed from societies the world over to join in and draw, pain, create, and make works of art that offends the delicate Muslim sensibilities. Let them show their anger to the world as the world simply laughs at them in return –we can defeat their smug self-righteousness by parodies and by expressing our freedoms (those things they know nothing about under their oppressive systems) and let those pictures be worth a thousand words and let thousands upon thousands of pictures be created and unleashed upon the Muslim word until their Allah-worshipping heads pop!

I can only offer one viewpoint that I totally respect and admire about the Muslims: their devotion. The only thing wrong is that I feel their devotion is for the wrong God. That’s what started my idea for the picture…

Posted by: illustr8rg8r at February 1, 2006 12:26 PM

illustr8rg8r,
You're like Paul Tibbetts! Go man go!
People who have a talent for illustration, or
satire, or joke construction, should let fly
on these noxious savages.

Remember Asma Bint Marwan, and Abu Afak!
Mohammad was worse than John Gotti, at least
Gotti wasn't a pedophile, just a ruthless murderer
and ganster.

Posted by: American at February 1, 2006 12:52 PM

illustr8rg8r,
email your pic to sdeakins@msn.com

Posted by: JanuaryMan at February 1, 2006 12:52 PM

To my mind, it seems that the pan-global Muslim reaction indicates a certain humiliation Muslims feel for their so-called "prophet" and his so-called "religion". On some level they are acknowledging the truth about these satirical images, acknowledging that their preposterous "prophet" and his disgusting filth strewn "religion" is indeed worthy of parody..

Their behavior is so overblown and reactionary that it reminds me of the naughty child caught in the middle of some petty crime -- embarrassment fills his immature heart -- to deflect the shame he feels for being caught in something he knows is wrong -- he chooses to lash out -- his humiliation turns to rage -- every effort is made to distract the witness from the truth about his original transgression, and he turns towards a delusional rage, and stokes it in his heart... In a child it is an understandable reaction, but in adults, and especially as a manifestation of world Islamic culture, and the so-called "world religion" of Islam, it is a pathetic and pathological display --

At the very least it shows a kinds of malignant inflexibility of the Muslim mind... Unaccustomed to hearing challenges, doctrinally forbidding criticism of their broken religion and the festering sores it has produced in the world -- and above all, treating their so-called "prophet" as a true IDOL -- one whose flaws must never be seen or scrutinized lest the whole stinking rotting mass of Islam comes falling down in a messy and foul heap of dung --

THIS is the medicine for what ails us: NO apologies to the Muslims! MORE publications of witty satirical images of their sick, blood stained idol!

Muslims reveal themselves to be true idolators... Worshipping this scrap of human filth as if he is an inviolate GOD...

Posted by: jsla at February 1, 2006 1:07 PM

Islam is such a sham, that it has to place at the top of it's aggression priority list, strong psychological efforts to stop any criticism of Islam. Even faiths such as Judaisim, Christianity, Hinduism, or Buddhism do not fight against the scientific principle of being falsifiable . Just think, what if Robert DID NOT allow comments on his website, but rather just implemented some sort of sharia blog law whereby all users MUST strictly adhere to what Robert says or else. The world needs to get a clue.

Posted by: Report at February 1, 2006 1:08 PM

It seems they're not being reprinted in Britain though. Are they likely to get reprinted in the US, Australia etc, because the only long term solution to undermining Islam and forcing its implosion is to tell the truth about that religion, stop being politically correct, and we hope that Bush has made a start by saying he'll massively reduce the US's dependence on Middle Eastern oil, and we know that not only the US, but the entire West has to reduce its dependency on Middle Eastern oil, not to mention stop paying the jizya, and give nothing whenever disaster befalls an Islamic nation. Let them know in no uncertain terms that they're on their own, and let them see the paralysing influence of Islam before their very own eyes.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at February 1, 2006 1:10 PM

PS -- is it possible that the putirified canker of Islam can be lanced and destroyed by simple cartoons??? Maybe so! Maybe so!

Posted by: jsla at February 1, 2006 1:10 PM

"Bush has made a start by saying he'll massively reduce the US's dependence on Middle Eastern oil..."

Did anyone see the unsmiling face of prince al-turki -- the new saudi ambassador the the USA during Bush's speech -- the spider wasn't smiling -- not a bit -- I thought there were several jabs aimed directly at him and his stench...

There also seemed to be a slight extension to the clapping on both sides when Bush called for the reduction in dependence on ME oil -- The poisonous spiders in Riyadh will be plotting and betraying now more furiously than ever... It may take more attacks -- more revelations about their so-called religion -- but I think the politicians know which way the wind is blowing... Despite their craven willingness to continue to accept Saudi largesse, and to parrot the Saudi disinformation campaign regarding Islam, I think our corrupt "public servants" are beginning to shift their allegiance away from oil profits and ME honey pots... They know that the average American would be thrilled if we began taking drastic measures against these clear Islamic enemies...

Do you think the politicians haven't been reading and watching the actual content of the "sermons" from the leading mosques in the Muslim world? This can't have escaped their attention -- and now the charade is harder and harder to maintain -- the veil is coming off -- and the face of Islam is a horror to behold...

Posted by: jsla at February 1, 2006 1:19 PM

This is now a test -- a test for The New Duranty Times. A test for The Bandar Beacon. A test for Bright Young Conservatives on the make, and Bright Young Liberals ditto. It is a test for The Telegraph of London, and The Times of London, but also for The Guardian, that paper that publishes the likes of Jonathan Steele and Robert Fisk. Either you report on the controversy, and show both the cartoons originally published, and the three forged cartoons made up by Muslims attempting (successfully) to whip up Muslim hysteria, or you do not. And then you become, if you have not already become, a permanent joke.

The New Duranty Times does not want to be a permanent joke. Does it?

Posted by: Hugh at February 1, 2006 1:22 PM

"Did anyone see the unsmiling face of prince al-turki..."
-- from a posting above

Yes, that was the best part of the whole evening.

Posted by: Hugh at February 1, 2006 1:23 PM

Mentioned on CNNs website now...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/01/france.cartoon.ap/index.html

Posted by: David at February 1, 2006 1:28 PM

Send the pic to www.ffi.org. Also, it can be posted on www.apostatesofislam.com.

[...]

Posted by: el greco at February 1, 2006 01:16 PM

el greco:

ffi.org =/= faithfreedom.org (Ali Sina's site)

Posted by: waterdragon52 at February 1, 2006 1:35 PM

Do not forget who was so quick to deplore, who volunteered to deplore, those Danish cartoons. His name is Clinton. His wife is running for President. It is reasonable for voters to assume, unless she quickly and vocally distances herself from his digusting words in Qatar, that she agrees with him. It will be too late to disagree with him later. She had better voice her disagreement -- if there is any -- now. Because soon enough others will enter the fray, and speak their mind, and then she will seem merely like an echo.

Posted by: Hugh at February 1, 2006 1:38 PM

Thank you for discussing this and posting about it.We all need to get the word out about this.

Posted by: WildThing at February 1, 2006 1:49 PM

One of the most interesting things that I have proud in my catholic religion is that we always have liked the paintings and photographies, in protestantism, the God image was forbidden telling the Deuteronomy texts about not worshipping idols. In orthodoxy a religion plenty of beautiful images, there was an iconoclast heresy, in judaism, it was famous that yavheh isn´t put in any temple and islam, it´s the same.
I have seen the Mohamed´s images, and I would like to say, that painting, like photography and the copy of an image is one of the most beautiful things in the world, I compare it with the music. The painting makes us humans.
And in addition, there are persian images about Mohamed very beautiful
In sum up, they lose a lot, with their anger against the painting.

Posted by: Franze at February 1, 2006 2:09 PM

I feel this is extreme. The reaction from Muslims is quite natural because it is their religion that has been made fun of. Consider a cartoon portraying Nazism in a favorable manner or even a cartoon that makes fun of Judaism. I would not doubt that Jews would create an outcry just as equal. Likewise, a cartoon making fun of Martin Luther King Jr. would illicit an equal reaction. If you slander me or my beliefs whatever they may be, I would do all in my power to stop you. We should not use free speech/press to hurt others and infringe on their rights. Free speech is not truly free speech you have no right to slander. Bigotry is likewise banned, although it is still practiced as sometimes seen on this site by its members. However, you can express your beliefs as long as you do not harass or slander anyone. Therefore, you may swing your fist as long as you do not hit anyone.

Posted by: Skeptic at February 1, 2006 2:12 PM

Robert,

This may by useful. I read this morning that the UK parliament has decided to water down the recent hate legislation that went before the house of commons. It is now lawful to criticise another religion.

All I can say about it is that IT'S ABOUT FREAKING TIME!!!!

Posted by: Shunkleash at February 1, 2006 2:14 PM

If there is anyone who missed this link I'll post it again so we can all have a chance to see Derek's perfect picture of the perfect man, Mohammed in all his glory. It's available at Faith Freedom as well, and now all over the place. Spread this image, if you will. I too have other graphics, available at the second link. Mine is slow to load, and it might stick a bit. Be be patient if you try it. The first link is hot. Don't be the only one on your block who hasn't seen it.

Derek's graphics:

http://thestudyofrevenge.blogspot.com/

Or: http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 1, 2006 2:14 PM

A victory for free speech and expression. Let's see how the Muslims handle this. It is another great opportunity for them to tear shit up and set everything ablaze.

Let's see if they can handle this Muslo-Crisis like human beings.

They have been provoked. There's a reason for this.

Posted by: DCWatson at February 1, 2006 2:16 PM

"The reaction from Muslims is quite natural because it is their religion that has been made fun of. Consider a cartoon portraying Nazism in a favorable manner or even a cartoon that makes fun of Judaism."
-- from a posting above

The "reaction" by Muslims deemed "quite natural" by the poster above so far has consisted of the following"

1) the forging and wide dissemination by Muslims themselves of three cartoons of Muhammad far more offensive than the very mild cartoos published in the Danish newspaper.

2) demands for "apologies" from the newspaper and from the government of Denmark.

3) economic boycotts all over the Arab Muslmi world of Danish goods.

4) the recall of the Saudi and Libyan ambassadors to Denmark.

5) the demand by various Muslim states to meet with the Prime Minister of Denmark to express their displeasure.

6) the demand by the O.I.C. that there be a reckoning, and an apology, from Denmark.

7) the issuance of death threats to those at the newspaper, requiring the evacuation of the newspaper building.

8) the insistence and that U.N. take up the matteer and outlaw all such mockery of what the Muslims call a "religion"

Is that a perfectly "natural" reaction? Is that how Christians and Jews have reacted to the daily Der-Stuermer like cartoons directed at them, and the editorials, and the staged atrocities (in Iraq or "Palestine") showjn on Al-Jazeera, or the Internet sites where you can see Muslims proudly beheading Infidels, so proud in fact that they use these as recruiting advertisements for the Jihad? Did Christians issue death threats when the "Pissing Christ" was constructed, and even put on display at a major exhibition? Do Jews issue death threats to the myriad promoters of antisemitism, not least in the Arab and Muslim world?

Is this a "natural" reaction? And why should the Western world, with its standards, change them in order to accommodate people whose ideas of human rights flatly contradict, at every oint, the ideas enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Why would we wish to go backwards, to become more primitive, simply to accommodate those who, almost as an oversight by the Western world, managed in some numbers to settle behind enemy lines, but if they continue to behave as the wild enemy, will in the end be removed in the same spirit of justified self--protection that was invokved by Benes and Masaryk in 1946, for the Benes Decrees (by which more than 3 million Sudeten Germans were evicted from Czechoslovakia, an undertaking that no prominent Czech, nor any Western statesman, found fault with at the time, and come to think of it, none has since).

As for those "cartoons portraying Nazism in a favorable manner" -- you can find those on the websites of crazed rightists in all sorts of places. And since the Nazis have a recent, well-established track record in mass murder, it is not inapprorpriate for Germany to ban their antisemitic propaganda. But cartoons about Muhammad are like cartoons about Jesus or Moses or Gautama Buddha. And entitled in the non-Muslim lands, at least, to the same freedoms. It is too bad that within the Lands of Islam, there is not the hint of an inkling that what ails Muslims is Islam itself, and that a little making fun, or even mockery, not only not punished but protected from the punishment meted out by murderous vigilantes, would be a good thing, a step up on the phylogenetic scale of civilization.

Posted by: Hugh at February 1, 2006 2:32 PM

"If you slander me or my beliefs whatever they may be, I would do all in my power to stop you. We should not use free speech/press to hurt others and infringe on their rights."
-- from the same poster.

You are in the wrong country, and possibly the wrong part of the world, buster. If that is your idea of what "free speech" is, you have not quite grasped the concept. In fact, it has eluded you entirely.

Posted by: Hugh at February 1, 2006 2:34 PM

Skeptic,

I think you’re kind of missing something here. The Muslim reaction is neither natural or even civilized, but rather irrational and pompous. Remember the ‘piss Christ’ years ago? There were many outraged, but I don’t recall there ever being death threats made to the artist nor boycotting being done by an entire religious group. We have every right, in a free society, to say anything we please and if someone doesn’t like it, then they are free to voice an opposite opinion. If it’s slander, then prove it. Speech doesn’t infringe on anyone’s rights –if I don’t like what you’re saying, I do have the right to ignore you and not listen, too, right?

“If you slander me or my beliefs whatever they may be, I would do all in my power to stop you.” is deliciously ignorant. You can be guaranteed that any viewpoint will have an opposite, alternative viewpoint, so you’d better be willing to roll up your sleeves and start swinging those fists because there are a good many who will believe something different than you and you’re going to be mighty busy, I’d imagine.

It shouldn’t result in bloodshed or violence, no matter what –and that’s the problem with the Muslim reaction. In a free society (perhaps you don’t live in one, I don’t know) we prefer to say something to the affect of “I may not agree with your view, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it” and that’s more the point when it comes to these drawings, not that we shouldn’t be upsetting the poor, downtrodden, sensitive Muslims.

Posted by: illustr8rg8r at February 1, 2006 2:44 PM

Hello all,

Here is some muslim reaction.

http://www.islamonline.net/English/In_Depth/mohamed/1424/misconception/article18.shtml

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503546276

French muslims to sue over cartoon insult--

Well at least they are gonna use the courts

http://islamonline.net/English/News/2006-02/01/article06.shtml

Posted by: Naseem at February 1, 2006 2:45 PM

Have you guys checked Cox and Forkum lately?

They've done their own cartoon on the subject.

http://www.coxandforkum.com/

JLP

Posted by: John Lee Pedimore at February 1, 2006 2:49 PM

Skeptic said "Therefore, you may swing your fist as long as you do not hit anyone."

Whose fist is swinging? The Danes printed some comics in a newspaper. That's comics, as in comedy. I'm not sure where you live, but here in the West we have seen everything satirized, from MLK to Christ to Pope John Paul to Bush to Clinton to, well you get the idea. Have you ever heard of SLN or Howard Stern? We don't kill each other over it, even if we disagree.

When the brouhaha erupted over the "mishandling" of Qur'ans at Guantanamo Bay, infidels died. When Van Gogh made a movie, infidels died. When Rushdie wrote a fictional book, infidels had to hide for the rest of their life in protective custody. Whose fist is swinging?

Posted by: special_guest at February 1, 2006 2:54 PM

the picture in the below link is more than 500yrs old,it is taken from

Siyer-i NebiEd. 5.0
A six-volume 16th-Century work written and illustrated for Sultan Murad III.
In Turkish, the title means 'Rules [of Muslim Conduct] of a Prophet'
This picture is far the best in showing the true nature of mohammed than any other picture I have seen so far
It is amazing that it was commissioned by a moslem ruler

http://www.fomi.nu/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=22914&highlight=#22914

A miniature (nakış) from Siyer-i Nebi
depicting Ali bin Abu Taleb beheading Nasr bin al-Hareth in the presence of the Prophet Muhammad and his companions.
In 1995, this miniature (measuring just 7 by 9 inches approximately) fetched £ 42,000 at Sotheby's in London. Curiously, in this depiction Muhammad's face has been 'whited out'. Whether that was the original artist's affectation or the work of a subsequent 'religious censor' is unknown.

Posted by: shiva at February 1, 2006 3:13 PM

Derka derka, mohammed jihad.

Posted by: Stendec at February 1, 2006 3:14 PM

"We don't kill each other over it, even if we disagree."

In fact, when I watch South Park, listen to Howard Stern, or whatever, I sometimes find my own various personal or political beliefs the object and target of outrageous and usually wicked sendups, some of which could be quite insulting if I took myself too seriously, or was so fragile and insecure as to feel threatened by them...

My "natural" reaction? I laugh -- see the humor (and the truth) and that's that!

Lor, dem muzzlumz sur can't take a joke... an dats fer sure!

Posted by: jsla at February 1, 2006 3:16 PM

Do you value freedom of speech and freedom of the press?

good question

Here is an issue that every one here cringes from

The best way to read this blog is to scroll down to day 1 and read up from there

http://freespeechontrial.blogspot.com/

Posted by: shiva at February 1, 2006 3:34 PM

"I would not doubt that Jews would create an outcry just as equal."

Here we go with the moral equivalency. Jews are not and would not overwhelmingly THREATEN the rest of the world based on cartoons.

"We should not use free speech/press to hurt others and infringe on their rights. Free speech is not truly free speech you have no right to slander."

If the above is true, Then Islam should be banned in all countries.

"If you slander me or my beliefs whatever they may be, I would do all in my power to stop you. "

Oh really. I suppose you would be willing to strap on an explosive device, or make threatening calls, or try and intimidate others via psychologically manipulative weblog postings.

Posted by: Report at February 1, 2006 3:43 PM

Anyone else starting to get the distinct impression the muslim ummah has biten off more then they can chew? What are you going to do now oh you Lions of Islam? Boycott Europe? I'm sure you can fill all your needs by dealing only with muslim countries.

Finally, Western Civ appears to be standing firm: muslim sharia laws do not trump man made western laws. Freedom of expression trumps religious sensitivity.

Any sightings of the cartoons in American MSM yet? Come on you MSM cowards. Cover the story. You know you want to. Just can't figure out how to spin it and remain PC, huh? Remember this: the true story isn't about secular religious intolerance. The story is the infantile muslim intolerance and response to the exercise of the freedom of epxression.

Posted by: omvi at February 1, 2006 3:44 PM

Thank you Shiva, however this 500 year old picture should be weighed against the dozens of pictures of people being beheaded on the order of, and for the entertainment of, Jesus Christ. Not to mention the hundreds of similar pictures of the bloodthirsty Buddha or the multi-armed Shiva. Yep, all religions are pretty much equivalent. They say "Vengeful Allah", we say "Benevolent God", "Potato" "Poe-tah-toe", let's call the whole thing off.

Of course, poverty was rampant at that time, and education was almost non-existent. And there is no doubt that they were acting against the humiliation that they knew would exist 1400 years later on the reformation of Israel and the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. So, it is understandable and justifiable why those few radicals were highjacking the Religion of Peace (tm) at that time.

Posted by: special_guest at February 1, 2006 3:56 PM

"... dozens of pictures of people being beheaded on the order of, and for the entertainment of, Jesus Christ" - posted by special_guest

Special_guest... you mean, like "short bus" special?

If you think Jesus ever called for murder in His name, or enjoys observing it, you need a serious fact check. You're talking about the person who told His followers to "turn the other cheek," and the one, who, hanging from a cross by nails in his hands and feet, said, "Father, forgive them, the know not what they do."

You're missing the central distinctions between violence committed in the name of Christianity and that which is done in the name of Islam: In Christianity, it's an aberration, and goes against everything in the Gospels and the example of the early Church in the Acts of the Apostles. On the other hand, Islam has seemingly innumerable calls to violence and warfare in their scripture and from their founder himself.

A Christian, by becoming increasingly observant, finds violence and oppression increasingly unacceptable. A Muslim, on the other hand, comes under extreme pressure to take the preexisting calls to violence and oppression literally-- but hey, they get the long end of the stick in the deal.

Thus, equivalency argument has no basis in reality.

But see? No fatwa from the Shinoliite. Just a fouts toi. :)

Posted by: Shinoliite at February 1, 2006 4:55 PM

Naseem:

Here's the last line of the fatwa to which you linked:

"Finally, I would like to state that the enemies of Islam will continue in their campaign of attacks and insults, especially against Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), and we Muslims warn them against their erroneous approach and the unjust trend they are embarking on!"

He WARNS us? Is that what you're doing? What exactly is the implied threat here? Care to answer, or are you just the insulting triumphalist bigoted empty skull you appear to be?

Posted by: The Dread Pirate Gryphon at February 1, 2006 5:02 PM

From Yahoo news:

The Supreme Council of Moroccan religious leaders denounced the drawings on Wednesday.\

"Muslim beliefs cannot tolerate such an attack, however small it may be," the statement said.

That is a typical statment made by adherents to a supremacist ideology. Just substitute Nazi for Muslim, and recall the caricatures of Hitler by the Three Stooges and Chaplin.

Yet Muslims can not only tolerate but proudly proclaim "may allah be pleased" upon the mass slaughter of infidels or the beheading of young schoolgirls.

Further in the same article:

French theologian Sohaib Bencheikh spoke out against the pictures in a column in France Soir accompanying them Wednesday.

"One must find the borders between freedom of expression and freedom to protect the sacred," he wrote. "Unfortunately, the West has lost its sense of the sacred."

No the West has not lost its sense of the sacred. In a reverse equivalency, one man's sacredness is another man's profanity. The West, at least those from the atheist to the most religious who believe in the inherent goodness of all mankind, find Islam to be the profane.

Posted by: Lisa at February 1, 2006 5:10 PM

Shinolite, I believe special-guest was being facetious.

Posted by: kafira at February 1, 2006 5:20 PM

Ali Sina at FFI has an excellent article on the Golden Rule, a universal principle that can be found among pagans, humanists, atheists, agnostics, rastafarians, and all religions except Islam. Perhaps it is time to add another universal concept that exits everywhere except in Islam:

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me.

Posted by: Lisa at February 1, 2006 5:32 PM

The Dread Pirate Gryphon says (in the Fatwa) "He WARNS us? Is that what you're doing? What exactly is the implied threat here? Care to answer, or are you just the insulting triumphalist bigoted empty skull you appear to be?"

Hay hold on...those are not my words ....I never threat...there are better ways of doing things ...."don't shoot the messenger here"

Posted by: Naseem at February 1, 2006 5:40 PM

Shinolite,

You mean that the Mohammed in that picture
http://www.fomi.nu/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=22914&highlight=#22914

is NOT the Mohammed mentioned here?

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503544732&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaE

Dr. M. M. Abu Laylah professor of Comparative Religions, and head of the English Department at Al-Azhar Univ., states the following:
"...Concerning what you said about Jesus not killing any one, we can tell you that Prophet Muhammad never killed any one too. But, Jesus’ mission was to guide people peacefully and in a land, which was occupied by a foreign power, and under siege, there was no liberty or freedom to allow Jesus to work openly or to oppose the authority in power. It was not the aim of Jesus to build a state. That is why we find that the people who followed him were small in number and influence. Though in the New Testament and in the four Gospels, in particular, Jesus did ask his followers to carry their swords and to follow him, he clearly said that he came not only to cast peace but also to set fire. He asked his disciples to be ready to sacrifice their lives for his cause.

Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) never raised or commanded any of his followers to raise a sword against his enemies in Makkah. Rather, he ordered them to remain patient and steadfast (despite all the persecutions and torture displayed by the Quraish against them). But when he moved to Madinah, Allah commanded him to establish the Muslim State, and this necessitated some sort of power and authority. Nonetheless, he was ordered not to resort to force in dealing with people disbelieving in him until after exhausting all peaceful means. For example, he concluded a peace treaty with the Jews acknowledging their religious and political rights and giving them the same rights as Muslims to live in Madinah and to run their own society in accordance with their own religion with no interference from Muslims. But all this did not prevent the Pagans of Makkah, aided by their Jewish allies in Madinah, to launch an attack against the Muslim State, so the war took place.

Here, we may bring to your notice that even though the war between the Muslims and non-Muslims in Arabia was very much limited and was under tough conditions, it was a sort of self-defense and with aim of preserving the creed and defending the newly-established State.

Muhammad was not only a prophet like Jesus or Moses (peace and blessings be upon them all) but he was a prophet and a statesman and his mission was a universal one. Along this line, Prophet Muhammad delivered his message outside Arabia through peaceful means. He performed peace treaties even with the polytheists in Makkah, received Christian delegations in his mosque and conducted a dialogue with them in the best decent manner ever existed. While still in Makkah, he sent a delegation to the Christian country, Abyssinia, and the history also recorded that its king, Negus, who was also at the helm of the Christian hierarchy, was held in high esteem by Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).

War in Islam is only legitimate if it is for self-defense or as a means to defend the religion, tradition, and the way of life as believed by Muslims. Even if the war takes place between Muslims and non-Muslims, there are certain religious and human conditions that should be taken into consideration. For example, the civilians should not be attacked, the crops should not be destroyed, and the water supply and other means of living should not be ruined.”

I feel Dr. M. M. Abu Laylah would have to have the reaction of Emily Latella on SNL after viewing that picture...."Oh, THAT Mohammed watching Nasr bin al-Hareth being beheaded? Oh nevermind."

Posted by: No_Mooselimbs at February 1, 2006 5:50 PM

"French muslims to sue over cartoon insult--"
Naseem, what happened? Did they run out of Renaults to burn?

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at February 1, 2006 5:50 PM

Bohemond_1069 says "Naseem, what happened?
Did they run out of Renaults to burn?"

LOL...good infidel humor.

Posted by: Naseem at February 1, 2006 6:00 PM

Looking for Satire in the Muslim World? I view this as a positive development with the collective 'west' beginning to 'call' the intolerance as it is. I am personally revolted to the extreme at a recent Italian cartoon showing an Israeli soldier killing and infant Jesus baby(symbolizing mistreatment of Palestinians). But the Italian cartoonist has a right to scribble this crap. Lampooning, often less visciously, is an age-old aspect of living in the west. If it makes it so damm horrid to have such cartoons printed defaming 'The Prophet' then perhaps it might be best to stay at home in wonderful, nuanced, developed Pakistan, Iran or Saudi Arabia. Just a thought. I view these French and German publications with guts . . . and I hope the NYT or Post or Washington Times looks closer at this . . . Fox probably won't so not to offent their Saudi investors.

Posted by: biorabbi at February 1, 2006 6:05 PM

"Unfortunately the West has lost its sense of the sacred" from the article regarding Moraccan religious leaders.

Remember that relativistic line so popular with jihad apologists, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter".

How about "one man's sense of the sacred is another man's farce." Like that one Mr Mohammedan?

Posted by: GFB at February 1, 2006 6:33 PM

Shinolite, I believe special-guest was being facetious.

My bad. I don't know why it didn't strike me that way at the time. I'm a bit behind on sleep, and I guess I'm more inclined, as a result, to take things literally. Again, mea culpa.

Gonna shut the computer down, swill some more caffeine (peace be upon Juan Valdez), and study 'til I can't keep my eyes open.

See y'all tomorrow. ;)

Posted by: Shinoliite at February 1, 2006 6:35 PM

shinoliite said "If you think Jesus ever called for murder in His name, or enjoys observing it, you need a serious fact check."

If you don't think that Jesus (and Abraham and Buddha and Shiva) called for beheading as often as MohamMad, then just google "Jesus Christ behead", if that doesn't bring up a long list, then just google "gullible".

Posted by: special_guest at February 1, 2006 6:40 PM

illustr8rg8r, please send your work to me if you like: dagdotwalkeratgmaildotcom. We here have up a fair number of works, and it's generating some excitement from our over-sensitive Muslim cousins. Oh well. I'll try to feel badly about it when I quit laughing.

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 1, 2006 6:47 PM

"Naseem: "Hay hold on...those are not my words ....I never threat...there are better ways of doing things ...."don't shoot the messenger here"

Hopefully you're not stupid enough to imagine that the triumphalism that Dread Pirate Gryphon accuses you of has escaped the notice of any of the regular readers at this site. You seem to be under the mistaken assumption that you can say the most insinuating and threatening things - such as calmly informing us "infidels" that we shall be rendered dhimmis or 2nd class citizens, in your hoped-for Islamic world, ("there are better ways of doing things") but that if you say them calmly, never raising your sugary sweet voice -that you are not basically violent at heart. What a superficial idea of violence you have. You are in fact extremely violent at heart. Anyone who dreams of the subjugation of others to their own narrow ideological ideas is essentially violent at heart. I’m not sure who it is you think you’re kidding with your “sweet” spiel- “What? Who me? Poor little me? Why, whatever are you talking about Sir? (bats eyelashes), when in point of fact, you come across like a serpent with a forked tongue. Too bad you're the only one who doesn't see it (of course self-reflection has never been a Muslim strong suit) but I can assure you that the rest of us sure as hell can. You're no "sista" of mine, that's for damn sure.

From your link:

“This depiction is unbefitting of a prophet who delivered the divine message.”

True. We haven’t yet seen a depiction truly “befitting” your “prophet”. Maybe the picture sonofwalker keeps linking to is a good start but even that picture cannot possibly convey the full horror and tremendous human cost that your “prophet” has wreaked upon the human race. No image could possibly convey it. Millions upon millions of graphic photographs maybe. But even that couldn’t possibly convey the full scale of the actual suffering involved.

Posted by: Caroline at February 1, 2006 7:05 PM

ALERT!!!
Par solidarité avec Jyllands-Posten, plusieurs journaux européens ont publié aussi ces dessins, parmi lesquels le quotidien populaire français France-Soir dont le président et directeur de la publication Jacques Lefranc a été limogé mercredi soir par le propriétaire du journal, l'homme d'affaires franco-égyptien.

M. Lakah indique avoir "décidé de révoquer M. Jacques Lefranc de sa fonction de président et directeur de la publication en signe fort de respect des croyances et des convictions intimes de chaque individu".
http://www.lefigaro.fr/perm/afp_depeches/une/060201231302.ui118t53.html
---

The president & director of France-Soir, Jacques Lefranc, has been sacked this wednesday evening by the franco-egyptian owner of the newspaper, Mr. Lakah !!!

Posted by: nadineken at February 1, 2006 7:49 PM

Interesting site for those who want to see some cartoons. http://islamcomicbook.com/13.htm

Posted by: DavidE at February 1, 2006 7:54 PM

"Hay hold on...those are not my words...I never threat...there are better ways of doing things...'don't shoot the messenger.'"

Sorry Naseem, but you're a damned liar, ma'am. I remember you threatening American about a month ago or so, that you were going to go to Washington, D.C., sit at an outside cafe, drink a halal coke and eat a halal hamburger and then go get a Muslim loan so you could buy his house for your kids.

We may be infidels to you, but we have long memories.

And Special Guest,

Please get some help. If you believe that Jesus Christ EVER encouraged ANYONE to behead another human being, you are the one who is gullible.

It's good to see the world finally waking up to the very real threat of Islam. And let's listen to them whine...maybe the world is beginning to see what a bunch of selfish, narcisistic dupes they really are. And let them threaten us. Remember what happened when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor? The sleeping giant awoke.

Go ahead and "warn" us, Naseem. America will use your country for a parking lot.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 1, 2006 8:02 PM

Nadineken: I don't read French. Can you provide more information? Are you saying the newspaper editor's boss was muslim?

Posted by: omvi at February 1, 2006 8:15 PM

You know something else? When "Piss Christ" was being shown in all it's glory in an American Museum, I as a Catholic was highly offended. And I know it offended my Lord, Jesus Christ. But instead of killing anyone, I said prayers of reparation for the ignorance of the people behind it. And that brings up a really good point...Do Muslims have consciences? See, I have one, so I couldn't kill somebody and then go eat dinner or have sex with little kids and call it a day. It would really, really bother me.

I just started reading Ibn Warraq's book, "Leaving Islam", last week and one of the apostates says that he was worked up by the Islamic teachers and went out and killed a Sikh and his little boy one night. And then he was so thirsty for blood that he went out the next night and killed another guy. He said it made him feel guilty and he regretted those killings and even now in his 70's he still feels guilty. I could feel the absolute anguish of his regret in the story. So why would anyone want to set themselves up for that kind of grief?

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 1, 2006 8:24 PM

In regard to the previous posts about my first post. I do believe that death threats and boycotts are indeed extreme responses. However, I do understand their resentment and comedy or not, these people adhere strictly to their beliefs. So strictly that they do not see humor in those cartoons. In fact personally I do not see them as humorous.

Posted by: Skeptic at February 1, 2006 8:26 PM

Someone above mentioned John Gotti...

I hadn't thought of it but it would be true that:

(1) A serial killer like John Gacy would give a serial killer like John Gotti a bad name.

(2) A serial killer like John Gotti could not give a serial killer like John Gacy a bad name.

But which of the following would be true?

(3) A serial killer like John Gacy could not give a Muslim serial killer - killing in the name of Islam - a bad name.

(4) A serial killer like a Muslim serial killer - killing in the name of Islam - could not give a serial killer like John Gacy a bad name.

(5) A serial killer like John Gacy could give a Muslim serial killer - killing in the name of Islam - a bad name.

(6) A serial killer like a Muslim serial killer - killing in the name of Islam - could give a serial killer like John Gacy a bad name.

Thoughts anyone?

Posted by: SCV at February 1, 2006 8:50 PM

Raymond Lakah, the boss that sacked the director of France Soir is Egyptian. I guess he is a nice good christian dhimmi (Raymond is NOT muslim!) such as the editor in chief of the (im)monde diplomatique Alain Gresh, a real a..hole!

More details on LGF: the guy owns 70% of the paper and had also severak problems with French justice etc...

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19044_French_Editor_Fired_for_Mohammed_Cartoons#comments

Posted by: nadineken at February 1, 2006 9:04 PM

Just one more article on the issue~

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/02/01/news/denmark.php

Posted by: Borg at February 1, 2006 9:04 PM

Yes! "When Syrian television showed drama documentaries in prime time depicting rabbis as cannibals, the imams were quiet"

Posted by: nadineken at February 1, 2006 9:09 PM

When did Imams complain about these cartoons in Arab press?
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/ArabCartoons.htm

NEVER!!!

Posted by: nadineken at February 1, 2006 9:10 PM

Read this:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/AllanPetersen60201.htm

Posted by: nadineken at February 1, 2006 9:17 PM

In fact personally I do not see them as humorous.

Posted by: Skeptic at February 1, 2006 08:26 PM

Fine, don't laugh.

Special Guest, if you want to know Jesus, read the Bible, not some anti-Christian website. Jesus NEVER encouraged anyone to commit physical violence and He certainly did not engage in violence Himself.

Posted by: Susanp at February 1, 2006 9:30 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4670370.stm

Posted by: Borg at February 1, 2006 9:33 PM

Read this one
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/741

Very good!!!!

Posted by: nadineken at February 1, 2006 9:35 PM

then just google "Jesus Christ behead", if that doesn't bring up a long list, then just google "gullible".

Posted by: special_guest at February 1, 2006 06:40 PM
I did just that, and guess what? Not much, most of the entries are about John the Baptist being beheaded, and at the bottom of the page it said
"Did you mean Jesus Christ beheaded?"

Posted by: Carolyn2 at February 1, 2006 9:42 PM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/02/wcart02.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/02/02/ixnewstop.html

By David Rennie in Brussels
(Filed: 02/02/2006)

Newspapers across Europe yesterday defended what one editor called the "right to blasphemy" by printing Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that have provoked fury in the Arab world.

A slow-burning row over the cartoons, originally published in Jyllands-Posten in September, exploded after they were denounced by a senior Saudi Arabian cleric last week.

Protests have included street demonstrations, flag burnings, death threats, bomb scares and a crippling consumer boycott of Danish goods by businesses in several Gulf states.

That anger spread across Europe after the cartoons were published yesterday in France, Germany, Spain and Italy. Syria became the latest nation to withdraw its ambassador from Copenhagen, after Saudi Arabia and Libya.

In France the front page of the France-Soir tabloid carried the headline "Yes, We Have the Right to Caricature God" and a cartoon of Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and Christian divinities floating on a cloud. Inside, the paper re-ran the Danish drawings.

"The appearance of the 12 drawings in the Danish press provoked emotions in the Muslim world because the representation of Allah and his prophet is forbidden," it said.

"But because no religious dogma can impose itself on a democratic and secular society, France Soir is publishing the incriminating caricatures."

France has western Europe's largest Muslim community, with an estimated five million people.

Mohammed Bechari, the president of the National Federation of the Muslims of France, said his group would start legal proceedings against France Soir because the pictures were "hurting the feelings of 1.2 billion Muslims".

The drawings were originally commissioned by Jyllands-Posten from Danish artists after an author could not find an illustrator to depict Mohammed in a biography of the Prophet.

The Danish cartoonists submitted a range of images, all banned by Islam, which strictly forbids depictions of the Prophet to avoid encouraging idolatry.

One depicts a grinning, knife-wielding Mohammed flanked by two veiled women. Another, which appeared on the front page of Die Welt in Germany, and in La Stampa in Italy, shows the Prophet wearing a bomb-shaped turban, topped by a hissing fuse.

The Spanish newspaper ABC used a photograph of the original Danish newspaper, with its 12 cartoons. Die Welt also ran an editorial regretting a decision by the Danish newspaper to apologise for the upset caused.

The Jyllands Posten has not apologised but its editor, Carsten Juste, said he would not have printed them "had we known that it would lead to boycotts and Danish lives being endangered".

Die Welt described the "right to blasphemy" as a key freedom of an open society. Roger Köppel, the editor of Die Welt, said his main motive for running the cartoon had been the "news value of the story".

But he stood by the decision. "In our culture, we have a tradition that even our most holy things can be subjected to satire or criticism. Muslims have to understand that in our culture, the representation of a holy man has another meaning."

The Left-wing Berliner Zeitung daily printed two of the caricatures as part of its coverage of the controversy, but said Denmark should accept the boycott of its goods as the price to pay for freedoms of speech.

"If we really want to protect our values, then we should respect this call for boycott and just accept the sacrifices they will incur."

Armed militants in the Palestinian territories this week warned Danish, Norwegian and Swedish citizens to leave the Gaza Strip and West Bank or risk being killed.

david.rennie@telegraph.co.uk

..
.
.
to avoid encouraging idolatry~ somehow I don't think those cartoons would encourage any idolatry...by anyone.

Posted by: Borg at February 1, 2006 9:48 PM

Raymond (Rami) Lakah, on the lam from louche dealings in Egypt, one of those "Middle Eastern businessmen" of indeterminate fortune, with source of that fortune unknown, of the kind we all know so well, has only for a year and a half been the owner of France-Soir, a dying newspaper. He no doubt has other Middle Eastern money behind him (officially a Copt, but as willing to deal with Islam as the "Christian" Lahoud was willing to support Syria); he has just fired the man who published the cartoons and an intelligent commentary to boot, the editor of France-Soir and he has just fired the intelligent editor Jacques Lefranc (a name almost impossibly Everymanish).

Google "Raymond Lakah" or "Rami Lakah" and see if I have been unfair to this character. The kind of fellow with whome Roland Dumas, and Jacques Chirac, are most comfrotable. See what you think.

And will the French press -- will Le Monde -- take over, and publish those cartoons, in a full spread, with both the real cartoons, and the forgeries? Le Monde, that promptly took the piercing Perconcel-Hugoz off the North African beat just as soon as his acute "Le radeau de Mahomet" appeared, and now has him reporting on travel in the Algarve; Le Monde, from which Eric Rouleau for years disseminated his Arab-League pro-PLO anti-Israel propaganda (and was rewarded with an ambassadorship to the Islamic Republic of Iran, and now is back still attempting to convince the French to yield to the demands of local Muslims and sacrifice the laic state, their laws, their customs, their manners, their understandings); Le Monde, the paper that used to formulaically refer to the Maronites and other Christians under attack by Muslims in Lebanon as those "right-wing Christians" -- Ionesco wondered exactly how "the paper everyone reads" came to the conclusion that Christian farmers and beekeepers were "right wing."

That's Le Monde. No big bad owner to worry about. It is owned by its staff, in good beuve-meryish fashion. Well, do they have what it takes to discuss the matter of the cartoons, and of course the matter of the cartoons cannot possibly be discussed sensibly unless those cartoons -- all of them, including the three forgeries -- are shown.

C'mon Le Monde. Fais un petit effort.

Try.

Or close shop.

Posted by: Hugh at February 1, 2006 10:05 PM

illustr8rg8r now has a photo of Allah and his pal Mo at http://nodhimmitude.bolgspot.com

I'll try to find a direct link to the work. This has no reason to end. There will never be a good apology from the Muslim world to soothe my hurt feeling over... uh, anything will do. So, on we go.

I suggest that to get the full beautiful effect of illustr8rg8r's graphic that you right click once and then again to enlarge it to it's maximum loveliness.

I do get a kick out of this. Please pass the graphic around. Do them all.

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 1, 2006 10:09 PM

http://seven.com.au/news/video Feb 1 2006 Bashing victim clings to Life

The story just below it is the same video footage but the victim is identified as a teenager, although it seems to be about the same person showing the same mosque.

Posted by: Borg at February 1, 2006 10:23 PM

I guess we can all surmise from this collection of artwork about Islam that Muslims are really only happy when disemboweling other members of humanity. (Which we all knew anyway from reading this and other jihad news websites).

And what a grim pictorial this is to my eyes. Not much to smile about--even in the humorous parts. I guess Albert Brooks' latest feature "LOOKING FOR COMEDY IN THE MUSLIM WORLD" could well have been subtitled "A FOOL'S ERRAND." These comics are about as funny as Islam gets--(not very).

As for Muslims' reactions to these comics--who in the hell gives a rat's ass? (Not I!). We don't answer to those bastards. And we never will. Let the Muslim world stew in its own vile juices!!

Posted by: pythagoras at February 1, 2006 10:35 PM

Look at the cartoons posted on page 5

http://www.thelocal.se/discuss/viewtopic.php?t=1585&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=100

Someone Please tell these posters to read this site!!!!

Posted by: Borg at February 1, 2006 11:52 PM

If you want, you can go to the link below and sign petition supporting Denmark. This is a good site.

http://alter-of-democracy.be/

Posted by: Susanp at February 2, 2006 12:21 AM

sonofwalker-

I'm sure you meant:

http://nodhimmitude.blogspot.com/

(A typo on your link had it as "bolgspot")

Glad to help spread the cartoon anti-jihad.

And check out:

http://nopedophileprophets.blogspot.com/

(I'll link yours through it later)

Posted by: profitsbeard at February 2, 2006 12:57 AM

A lot of people criticize US politicians for ameliorating Muslims by condeming some minor anti-islam statements or cartoons. I think you must understand the enemy. Arab world and culture is a falsity tied up in a lie. On Western TV, the smart jihadist criticizes terrorism and issues fatwahs against terrorists. When he goes to the mosque and, in Arabic, calls for destruction of all non-muslims and claims that it is a duty of every muslim to strap explosives to himself and take a non-muslim life.

Why can't we do the same? Should we not do the same in interaction with complete liers? An arab strapped up with bombs with a finger on the trigger will claim he is just testing out his new instant hummus maker. I mean it is completely acceptable to lie in their culture. What's more, it is expected. So lie to them back and privately plan agaist them. Say one thing and do the opposite. I am not saying that all politicians supporting the muslim nazis are doing that, but they could or should do that. For example, prohibit cartoons of Muhammed and when eliminate a bunch of mosques that support terorrist organizations. It will be more effective tool against terrorism and would make it harder to accuse the US of anti-muslim behavior. Arabs are cunning, be more cunning.

Posted by: mosmike at February 2, 2006 12:58 AM

Thanks, profitsbeard. I get excited and tense when I type.

Illustrator Gator now has up there a neat piece of work that one really must expand to get the full sense of. I'm going to leave it there on view at the top for the day in the hope that people will visit and copy and send it around the world with Derek's masterpiece. The more we see of Muslim behavior without the veils and the lies and the posturing fools in the West making light of their savageries and violence the sooner we can form a resistence and combat it.

We will meet again tomorrow at McDonald's diners from 7-9:00 pm around the world to sit and meet each other and discuss what we can do in practice. We can wear blue scarves to identify ourselves. It works. It will in time bring many people into the oen who are now afraid, not of Muslims, but of ridicule. Please make yourself available for your friends.

Posted by: sonofwalker at February 2, 2006 1:24 AM

sonofwalker-

No problem.

Got you site linked on my "No Pedophile Prophets" blog, along with the French "occidentalis" page (brush up your Francais).

Great job on NODHIMMITUDE! Excellent graphics and text / design.

(Mine is a no frills, 10 minute job, between the paying work that keeps the wolf off the proverbial stoop... but we still have to fight the bigger WOLF name of MO, too... )

Posted by: profitsbeard at February 2, 2006 1:36 AM

To all those who actually tried to google "Jesus Christ behead", I can only say that I just tonight read the Bible cover to cover, and gosh, you're right, I cannot find a single example where Jesus ordered the beheading of any person. What a surprise! I guess there is a difference between Islam and Christianity after all. I guess MohamMad's message of "behead your neighbor" and Jesus's message of "love your neighbor" are not the same. Boy, is my face red!

Posted by: special_guest at February 2, 2006 1:42 AM

A newspaper in Holland (Volkscrant) has also published the cartoons.
Is Saudi Arabia going to close down its embassies in Germany,France,Italy,Spain,Holland,too??!!
Let them try to boycott the entire western civilized world ....
More newspapers throughout Europe are expected to do the same in the next few days.
N.Y.Times anyone??!!

Posted by: adela at February 2, 2006 1:54 AM

The editor of LeSoir in France has been sacked for reprinting the cartoons:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4672642.stm

Bah, so much for freedom of speech. The right to political satire should include the right to caricature even God. If people get offended, then too bad, because otherwise what's the point in even claiming to support free speech?

The Ummahgrants want to benefit from the nations they have moved to, but they don't want to do anything in terms of supporting these societies that support them. It's a one-way relationship.

That's why the Ummahgrants have no credibility.

The main reason why the editor in France was sacked was due to the high price of oil, imho. Well, this is too high a price.

Posted by: sanman at February 2, 2006 3:34 AM

Sanman, i am not sure if I have heard correctly this morning on BBC4 Radio that the owner who sacked the editor is ....Egyptian. That would explain a lot. Should we let Muslims (assuming he is one) run our media? Shoudl we let our enemies control our right to free speech?

Posted by: Polish infideless at February 2, 2006 3:44 AM

hello,

i love this website , and i thank everybody for their interesting news about jihad .
Sanman , i can confirm Polish infidel's comment .
yahoo news wrote:
PARIS (AFP) - Le propriétaire du quotidien France Soir, l'homme d'affaires franco-égyptien Raymond Lakah, a limogé le président et directeur de la publication Jacques Lefranc, après la reproduction de caricatures de Mahomet, publiées à l'origine par le journal danois Jyllands-Posten et qui suscite les foudres du monde musulman.

Editor was sacked by the owner : a muslim franco-egyptian called Lakah .

I knew that French Media was poisoned by Marxists bastards who smoke cracks and sucked Muslims cocks
We knew that huge amounts of Muslim oil-dollars were invested in western economies and guessed that Medias were also in concerns.
This sacking is only a hint of how deep our western media may be under Muslim control.
it explains why the editors call Muslim rioters "despaired youth "
i wrote my point of view about last november riots on Diggers realm :
http://www.diggersrealm.com/mt/archives/001366.html

best regards

Posted by: simon at February 2, 2006 4:46 AM

Hello all,

A good day at the office then!

Isabelle-the-Crusader said "Sorry Naseem, but you're a damned liar, ma'am. I remember you threatening American about a month ago or so, that you were going to go to Washington, D.C., sit at an outside cafe, drink a halal coke and eat a halal hamburger and then go get a Muslim loan so you could buy his house for your kids".

Isabelle I'm sorry but I fail to see the threat here. Yes, I said all that, but getting a muslim loan (already muslim banks are starting to spring up in America) and BUYING your house isn't against the law. I wasn't just gonna come & take teh things....I would BUY them ...legally....and eating a halal hambuger & drinking halal coke isn't breaking the law either.

Having these items in America adds to the diversity of the culture there...something that Americans values greatly.

Perhaps Isabella...you are the threat here.

What YOU are really doing here is singling out one minority (muslim) and saying you don't want them there as a result of their religion and their success ....i.e. you are being rasict ....and probably breaking American law and christian moral laws.

Think hard Isabella ...who is the threat here?

Posted by: Naseem at February 2, 2006 4:57 AM

I have compiled a selection of interesting comments on the cartoons (from both sides - a very revealing Muslim ones!!!) from the BBC Have Your Say readers comments - enjoy:

"
When a British Prince dressed in a Nazi uniform, there was an outcry from the Jewish community and establishments.

So why is Islam seen as an easy target to pick on?

I wonder what would be the response if the Pope was depicted as a drunk doing a moonie in Trafalgar Square.

Ismail Amin, London

Come on BBC - either you are going to conduct a serious debate, including showing the cartoons in question so open-minded people can give an informed opinion, or you're not.
If in order to protect Muslim sensibilities regarding the portrayal of the Prophet Mohammed you feel you have to refrain from publishing the cartoons, there is no debate. You've already decided they shouldn't be published. So why bother asking what I think?

easterhay, Buenos Aires

Recommended by 430 people

Sign in to recommend comments.
Complain about this comment.

am proud to see European press show solidarity with Denmark. Yes, the drawings are offensive to Muslims, just as there is material in European papers that offends Christians on a daily basis. That is what freedom of speech means. To Muslims living in Europe who are offended and demand government action: move to Saudi Arabia, you will not have such problems there. To Muslims in Arab countries who are offended: nobody is forcing European papers on you. If you don't like them, don't read them.

Nathan Wajsman, Amsterdam

One Danish company offends...all Danish people and companies are threatened and punished. And yet the same people protesting condemn the west for withholding funds from the PA and the Palestinian people because of its new and deeper association with Hamas. Killing is OK, cartoons are not.

William, Richmond

Just because something may be in poor taste does not mean it should be illegal. Unpopular opinions and beliefs are the very things "freedom of speech" is meant to protect. What I find more offensive is the degree to which Western nations bend over backwards to accommodate immigrants. If you disagree with the cultural values of a country, my advice would be to not emigrate there.

Kevin S, Charlotte, United States

Yes they should! The freedoms of speech and religion enshrined in western law were, in many cases, paid for in blood.

Let's not forget that these are the same people that would burn your flag in your face, and not care if you were offended.

Juan, Queens, NY, USA

Recommended by 243 people

Added: Wednesday, 1 February, 2006, 16:20 GMT 16:20 UK

ITS HIGH TIME THAT THE EUROPEAN PRESS MUST RESPECT ITS MUSLIM READERS AND ITS BELIEF. PRESS FREEDOM DOES NOT OVERRODE RELIGIOUS BELIEF. THIS IS WHAT I WOULD CALL IRRESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM AND THE PRESS MUST QUICKLY APOLOGISE TO ITS READERS AND THE ENTIRE MUSLIMS UMMAH.

ABDALLAH KATUNZI, DAR ES SALAAM

In Muslim countries, cartoons, newspaper articales and television shows call Jews pigs and apes. They cites things like the forgery, Protocals of the Elders of Zion, they continually publish anti-Jewish...not talking anti-Israel here but anti-Jewish media. Muslims do not have a leg to stand on here.

Matthew, Vienna, VA

Recommended by 375 people

Of course they should have been published. If Iranian clerics can decree that "Death to America, Death to Britain" be chanted in mosques, when clerics can support and incite suicide bombers, when terrorists can pervert Islam to justify their twisted actions, we can print meaningless cartoons. My question is: should be be laughing at Islamofacism?

Peter Kohler, Washington DC, United States

Recommended by 98 people
Added: Wednesday, 1 February, 2006, 16:13 GMT 16:13 UK

As a Muslim living in America, I have also began to boycott Danish and French items. The Danish made a mistake..and tried to fix it..the French are just trying to add fuel to the fire! These depictions are one of the most blasphemous things in Islam. The world needs to sit down and learn Islam, or just stop being fearful of Islam. This fear is a result of these intentionally upsetting cartoons!

Yousef, New York

Of course they should have been published. What I want to know is, why haven't the BBC or the rest of the British press reproduced the cartoons, so that we can make up our own minds?

Why isn't the BBC raising the banner for free speech? What is the BBC afraid of?

Last week the BBC ran a debate on censorship in China. It looks like we've got censorship a lot closer to home.

[chatmandu_uk], London, United Kingdom

Recommended by 331 people

Added: Wednesday, 1 February, 2006, 15:52 GMT 15:52 UK

How in the world can Muslims expect the non-Muslim world to know (or even care) what Islam finds offensive? Why is it that Muslims the world over never have a shortage of things to gripe or complain about. What a bunch of first-class whiners!

Julius Bijou, White Plains, NY, United States

Recommended by 126 people

Added: Wednesday, 1 February, 2006, 15:51 GMT 15:51 UK

I will read and write whatever I want to, including cartoons that others find offensive. I am not a Muslim and these cartoons do not offend me. The laws of Islam only pertain to Muslims! Islamic law does not pertain to Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists or Atheists. Personally I don't even care enough to worry about what may or may not be offensive to some people. It could become a full-time job worrying about such things. Are there not more important things in the world to worry about?

Chester Drawers, Warwick, New York, United States

Recommended by 85 people

I saw them. I’m not Muslim and I don’t abide by Islamic law. I have no problem with these cartoons. It’s not up to every human to be well versed in the beliefs of all religions. That’s an impossible task. If these cartoons are against Islamic law then that only applies to Muslims. It is not against my laws therefore I cannot be held responsible for creating cartoons such as these or enjoying cartoons created by others. Islamic law has no relevance in my country. These cartoons are no big deal.

Last Straw, Putnam Valley, NY, United States

Recommended by 122 people

Added: Thursday, 2 February, 2006, 10:09 GMT 10:09 UK

I once met someone (a Christian) who visited Saudi Arabia, and was publicly flogged for the "crime" of eating bread during Ramadan.
Westerners are obviously expected to follow Islamic law in Islamic countries, so they should realise and accept that it goes both ways: Freedom of speech is fundamental to Western Law.
Deal with it.

[Mysturji], Basingstoke, United Kingdom

Recommended by 33 people
Added: Thursday, 2 February, 2006, 10:09 GMT 10:09 UK

The BBC was quite willing to broadcast Springer-The Opera, against mass protests from Christians, but has so far refused to republish these cartoons for fear of offending muslims. That's the true meaning of equality.

It's as if Blair never lost those votes in Parliament!

Dan Hassett, Folkestone, United Kingdom

Recommended by 26 people

"

Posted by: Polish infideless at February 2, 2006 6:07 AM

remember how the Muslim world popped its cork over Rushdi's book, Satanic Verses? Not much as a novel, but these folks are hugely sensitive. Now, the cartoons that they publish in their press in Arab countries are regularly offensive, especially to Jews. Yet, that never seems to bother them.
For a selection of Arab anti-Israel cartoons AFTER the Oslo accords, see Aryeh Stav [or Arie or Arieh], Peace: The Arab Caricature.

Posted by: Eliyahu at February 2, 2006 6:32 AM

Stav's book includes an esthetic and historical analysis and commentary on the cartoons.

Posted by: Eliyahu at February 2, 2006 6:33 AM

"When a British Prince dressed in a Nazi uniform, there was an outcry from the Jewish community and establishments."

GrannyW and the other UK bloggers will have to confirm, but I'm sure there was an outcry from the Prince's grandmother and many other non-Jewish Brits.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at February 2, 2006 8:27 AM

I feel this is extreme. The reaction from Muslims is quite natural because it is their religion that has been made fun of. Consider a cartoon portraying Nazism in a favorable manner or even a cartoon that makes fun of Judaism. I would not doubt that Jews would create an outcry just as equal. [...]

Posted by: Skeptic at February 1, 2006 02:12 PM

Skeptic:

The Arab/Muslim media are notorious not only for their hideous characterizations of Jewish and Israeli politicians and military leaders, but also for their representation of Jews as "apes and pigs", and hook-nosed Shylock figures draining the life-blood out of the world. Check out Palestinian Media Watch or MEMRI.org. The response by the world's Jews is not one of threatening acts of violence or boycotts but rather to try to educate the world to the fact that the animosity borne towards Jews is not about Israel, the "occupation", the human rights of "Palestinians", etc., but a profound religiously-inspired hatred. If it was only about "Palestine", they would not need to promote the Protocols of Zion or support Holocaust denial.

Posted by: waterdragon52 at February 2, 2006 8:32 AM

Wow, Naseem, did I touch a nerve or what! Me thinks you dost protest too much. Interesting attack, though. You accuse me of being a racist because I quoted what you said to American from an earlier post. Fill me in here. Where did I say that I "don't want them there as a result of their religion and success"?

Naseem, you love to come off as this kindler, gentler Muslim with the heart of gold, but, let's be honest here: isn't it a fact that your religion tells you that we non-muslims aren't equal to you, that Allah owns all the land on the face of the earth and it's your obligation through jihad to claim all land for allah and to convert all infidels to Islam? And if they don't want to convert you can tax and humiliate them and if not that, you can kill them? I read that in the Koran myself. Tell me that's not what you believe. See, we've been educating ourselves on what your ideology means and what the people who cling to your ideology believe. And we listen and we remember what they say.

Just this past week Hamas said they do not intend to stop using terror to achieve their goals and they intend to re-institute the jiyza tax on the non-muslims under their control. Are you still going to whine about how your minority of Muslims are so oppressed and put upon. Wake up and smell the coffee, Naseem.

Oh, and nice try with the "probably breaking American laws and Christian moral laws." What you don't understand about American law is that we do have freedom of speech here and while we might say something immoral or inconsiderate, it's not against the law, like it is where you live. And as far as Christian moral law goes, I don't hate you. As I've told you before, I don't even wish you any ill. But if you try to change the laws of my country to be more in line with your Sharia law, which is diametrically opposed to the ideals my country was founded on, then you and I will tangle. Christian moral law does not forbid self defense or defense of ones family or country.

And I'm sorry, but it's your people who've been doing the threatening. They use terror to threaten other people into doing what they want them to do. I've seen the pictures of burning bodies hanging from bridges in Iraq. I've seen the smiling face of some Muslim teenager holding a stack of severed hands. I've seen the anguish of a middle aged Muslim woman being methodically buried alive by three men who have no compassion whatsoever on their faces. I've seen your men laughing, dancing and shouting while they stomp on someone's severed head. I read about the 17 year old girl who was sentenced to be hanged for killing one of the three militants who tried to rape her. That sentence was handed down from a Sharia court, a court under the judicial system that you believe in. Do you want me to go on? There is endless, everyday, in your face evidence that the muslims are the racists and act, quite frankly, like animals in their relationship to other people.

I just hope, for your sake, that you will wake up one day and take a look at how oppressed you really are. In fact, that is my wish for you and I'm going to pray, really, that you do wake up. And you need to girlfriend, because people at this site know what you are about. As Caroline so eloquently put it from a post above, "I'm not sure who it is you think you are kidding."

And one last thing. If you want to convince everyone that you respect us and believe in our right to peacefully coexist then I would start by capitalizing proper names. Even though I think Islam is a false religion I still capitalize the first letter, as I do for the word Muslim, because that is proper grammatical english. So when you use the word Christian, please remember to capitalize it other wise people will think that either a) you need help with your spelling or b) that you are being disrespectful of other people's religions.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 2, 2006 2:11 PM

I run a kind of blog in my real-life name which has been covering the story for a while now. A few people have come in very much on my side, but I feel really sorry for a dear and sweet Muslim friend of mine who has been reduced to silence - her instincts are all positive, but she has not yet managed to see through her damn religion - and even sorrier for a Norwegian one, who has been equally silent when I argued that the current Norwegian government had acted more abjectly and slavishly than ever Vidkun Quisling did. I think there is a real insurrection going on, and that the Muslims will find that there is something here on which the vast majority of free people simply will not give in.

Posted by: Paolo at February 2, 2006 3:25 PM

Now Isabellathecrusader is a woman I'm proud to call my "sista"!

Naseem: "Think hard Isabella ...who is the threat here?"

That's a no brainer girl. However, the fact that you think the answer requires 'hard thinking' means that....well....let's just say it's a conclusion you might not appreciate.

Posted by: Caroline at February 2, 2006 7:09 PM

Thanks Caroline, I got yer back, girlfriend!!

Even though Naseem irritates me sometimes with the pretense thing she likes to do, I do feel sorry for her and I have to wonder why she posts here. Is she really so comfortable in her religion? If everything is hunky-dory, why does she seek us out? And that brings up a larger question...as people who have been brought up with positive beliefs about the value of life and other peoples well being, (Do unto others...) I often wonder what the solution is to the Islamic problem. We in the west cannot accept the Moslem's form of Sharia law nor their beliefs about women, marriage, apparel, etc., all in the name of their religion. But we also believe in live and let live and not stepping on other people's rights. I guess it comes down to the idea that I am free as far as my freedom doesn't step on your freedom. And that belief system is diametrically opposed to the Moslem belief that they know best, they own my land and they can do anything to me and you to get it and to make us tow the line.

But haven't they ever heard of a little thing called WWII? We are not that far removed from the mentality that at first didn't want to get into that war but then became so angry that they were willing to go overseas and kick some butt until America and the allies won. My dad is a WWII vet and I am my father's daughter. What I'm saying is that I am willing to let bygones be bygones until somebody threatens my peace or my family's well being, as it is being threatened right now. Right now my weapon is words but there may come a time that we will have to be ready for a physical assault, as those in France experienced at the end of last year. Several of my friends who are listening to me and getting educated about Islam are encouraging us to learn to shoot. I already know how but I'm thinking about the value of staying in practice. I don't think Naseem should count that as a threat. But if Islam decides to pull another 9/11 and her friends get out of hand, I'll be ready. Not a threat, just a promise.

Check out the article but especially check out the commentary below it from this link from Wretched Simpleton posted in another thread earlier today.

http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1642_o_25_o_C

The commentary is a real eye opener as to how the Moslem mind thinks.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 2, 2006 7:43 PM

isabellathecrusader: "I do feel sorry for her and I have to wonder why she posts here. Is she really so comfortable in her religion? If everything is hunky-dory, why does she seek us out?"

I don't feel sorry for her. There are too many people in the world who genuinely deserve pity for me to have any to spare for someone who expresses, however, calmly, the imperialistic, supremacist, grandiose views that Naseem does. In fact, I think I make even fewer excuses for her precisely because there are so many women who are genuinely trapped and victimized by Islam. There may well be Muslim women out there, feeling quite alone and hopeless, reading this website surreptitiously, hoping not to be discovered by their abusive spouses. They certainly aren’t women like Naseem, who boldly posts the sorts of views she does. As far as I’m concerned she is betraying not only the genuine female victims of Islam but us western women as well - in hoping for the triumph of Islam in the west. So frankly, I don’t care what her psychological issues may be. Western women have quite remarkably, and after much struggle, achieved their freedom. Naseem wouldn’t blink an eye if all those gains were reversed. That’s all I need to know about her.

Posted by: Caroline at February 2, 2006 9:49 PM

Nasseem sez:

"...singling out one minority (muslim) and saying you don't want them there as a result of their religion and their success ....i.e. you are being rasict ....and probably breaking American law and christian moral laws..."

Nice try, Nasseem. Two falsehoods don't make one right:

"Success" in what? Out-breeding us? laughable! You can shove the 'racist' label, you been around long enough to know that this is not a matter of 'race'. Neither should you concern yourself with our morals and laws: They are for us, and the Sharia is for you.

To the girls above, Isabella and Caroline:

Please keep in mind that 'Nasseem' is most of all an agent provocateur, she incites and in case you give her a particularly juicy rebuke it regularly ends up on a Mohammedan propaganda web-page like "watching Jihad Watch", That's right folks: some creeps (anonymously of course) are smearing us and are naturally trying their damnedest to get the site removed.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 2, 2006 10:23 PM

Caroline,

I see what you're saying. But what is the attraction to that religion that makes her such a staunch defender of it? What is she getting out of it? I've asked her that before but she never bothers to answer the questions.

Naseem is just as entrapped by Islam as those other women and that is the tragedy that bothers me. She doesn't even know she doesn't know. And that is also our dilemma, because if these women, and men for that matter, are so deluded by their love for "the prophet", how can they be extricated from a destructive and satanic religion that honestly seeks to destroy all mankind by a) destroying themselves through suicide, honor killings and just plain murder when they don't behave and b) death to the infidels that don't convert and fall under category "a". When we stand up and fight these people physically, which this conflict may lead to, what are we going to do about them? We can't peacefully co-exist with them; their religious beliefs will prevent that from happening. Will they convert? I don't know. Or will it be an all out war to the death? Maybe so. It just seems that there must be some other way besides total annihilation of one side or the other.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 2, 2006 10:24 PM

Sheik,

Yikes! The truth is I've often wondered if Naseem isn't really a man posing as a woman. Some of the things she says...

Do you have any links for those sites you're talking about? I'd like to check them out.

Thanks,
Isabella

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 2, 2006 10:27 PM

Yes Isabella, she's most likely a man.

Here are some links, just to show you that they are trying to f@#ck us:

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9htfTwQFuNDUSYAWqpXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE2b3M0dHUwBGNvbG8DZQRsA1dTMQRwb3MDMTMEc2VjA3NyBHZ0aWQDT09QNV81/SIG=11s8dn1l3/EXP=1139042192/**http%3a//hatinghate.wordpress.com/2006/01/

http://watchjihadwatch.blogspot.com/2006/01/spencer-bans-racists-lie-exposed.html

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 3, 2006 3:44 AM

Hating Hate,

Thanks Sheik! What a great name for a website. Too bad they don't saying anything about:
a) hating murder,
b) hating subjugation,
c) hating child rape in the name of marriage,
d) hating enslavement of women, or
e) hating stupidity.

I appreciate the links. This is going to be a fun weekend.

'Best, to you,
Isabella

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 3, 2006 1:10 PM

Isabella - sorry to take so long to reply - it's very difficult for me to post from work (which is why I always wind up on dead threads!).

You said: "Naseem is just as entrapped by Islam as those other women and that is the tragedy that bothers me"

I doubt it. Naseem comes across to me as a fairly fortunate Muslim woman (especially considering that she lives in Pakistan rather than the west). She appears to be well educated, she has access to a computer, she apparently works in an office, her marriage sounds relatively equitable from her own description, and if I recall correctly she was also able to send her son to be educated in Britain.

So no, I doubt that she is "entrapped" - I suspect that she is fairly outside the norm for a Muslim woman living outside of the west. But I also get the impression that like alot of Muslims, she is only capable of a limited moral reflection. "Hey, if it's good for me, it's good and if it's bad for me it's bad." I get the impression that things for Naseem are pretty good overall and so she sees no problem in expanding Islam around the globe, to include even you and me, free western women.

What she needs to do is look around at her Muslim sisters all over the world and outside her own social class and weigh the cost of Islam on them as a whole and if she finds problems there, closer to home, she could be devoting her spare time to improving their lives. But instead, she comes here, and devotes her time to crowing to us how Islam will take over the world and we might as well get used to it and then she gives a few anecdotes about her own obviously relatively priveleged life, to claim that Islam is no problem at all to women and to bolster her desire to see Islam spread to the west - to you and to me.

So no, Isabella - I have no pity for her nor really any curiosity regarding why she defends Islam as she does because it's pretty darned obvious to me that she is a priveleged woman.

Not all women are victims, even in the East. You're a woman so I hope you'll understand when I also say that some women are just b**ches. That's just the way it is and there's certainly no reason to expect that such a human tendency isn't equally represented in the Muslim world as it is in the west. There are also far far more women who are not and who genuinely dese