| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
And yet more Muhammad cartoon fallout. From the Telegraph, with thanks to Sr. Soph:
Thousands of Muslims have taken to the streets in protest at the caricatures, the newspaper that published them has received death threats and two of its cartoonists have been forced into hiding. Jyllands-Posten, Denmark's leading daily, defied Islam's ban on images of the Prophet by printing cartoons by 12 different artists.In one he is depicted as a sabre-wielding terrorist accompanied by women in burqas, in another his turban appears to be a bomb and in a third he is portrayed as a schoolboy by a blackboard.
The ambassadors of 11 Muslim countries called on Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the prime minister, to take "necessary steps" against the "defamation of Islam".
But Mr Rasmussen, the head of a centre-Right minority coalition dependent for its survival on support from an anti-foreigner party, called the cartoons a "necessary provocation" and refused to act.
"I will never accept that respect for a religious stance leads to the curtailment of criticism, humour and satire in the press," he said.
The Danish debate over how to integrate Muslims has raged for years, with nursery school menus and women-only opening hours for swimming pools particular battlegrounds. But the cartoons satirising the Prophet have injected a dangerous new element into the controversy....
Carsten Juste, the editor of Jyllands-Posten, spurned demands that he apologise, saying he "would not dream" of saying sorry.
"To demand that we take religious feelings into consideration is irreconcilable with western democracy and freedom of expression," he said. "This doesn't mean that we want to insult any Muslims."
Juste commissioned the cartoons after learning of the difficulties a children's writer, Kare Bluitgen, had in finding an illustrator for his book on the Koran and the Prophet's life. Bluitgen said all the artists he approached feared the wrath of Muslims if they drew images of Mohammed.
Many cited the murder of the Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by an Islamist as a reason for refusal.
Juste said he wanted to counter growing "self censorship" and see how many cartoonists would be "bold enough" to draw the Prophet.
One artist, Franz Füchsel, said he intended no offence. "But I live in 2005, not 905 and I use my quill in the way that Danish law allows me."
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Dutch MP famous for her criticism of Islam and author of the screenplay for Mr Van Gogh's film Submission, supported the paper. "It's necessary to taunt Muslims on their relationship with Mohammed," she said.
"Otherwise we will never have the dialogue we need to establish with Muslims on the most central question: 'Do you really feel that every Muslim in 2005 should follow the way of life the Prophet had 1,400 years ago, as the Koran dictates?' "
Posted by Robert at November 4, 2005 7:28 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
The epitome of fanaticism displayed by those who have no sense of humor.
Muhammad should have a daily cartoon strip in all papers, but then again, newspapers are supposed to be family oriented.
Muhammad: XXX Rated false prophet.
Posted by: DCWatson![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at November 4, 2005 8:16 AM
DC:
Muslims do have a sense of humour and are capable of scathing self-criticism, but they usually have to live abroad and keep their identitites concealed:
funny thing about the cartoon that got them most worked up... ...I recall seeing precisely the same cartoon having been created by an Arab and published in an Arab newspaper shortly after 7/7.
Posted by: waterdragon52 at November 4, 2005 8:53 AM
Do you really feel that every Muslim in 2005 should follow the way of life the Prophet had 1,400 years ago, as the Koran dictates?
Ali's rhetorical question goes straight to the heart of the problem Robert, Hugh, and others have been alerting us to.
The answer of course, is that, YES, Muslims do believe that they should model themselves after their prophet (if they are men) or model themselves according to the prophet's prescribed template (if they are women) because the Qur'an is the literal word of Allah and Mohammad led a perfect life.
If it weren't for taqiyyah, Ali's question would be the ideal acid test for deportation.
Posted by: Charles Martel at November 4, 2005 9:44 AM
The Vicious Circle - The "problem" isn't a cartoon or "lack of respect toward Islam," the "problem" is that Muslims use violence to coerce respect which then leads to "fear of Muslims," which is a true phobia, the normal pattern since the first moment of the existence of Islam.
Muslims don't understand that non-Muslims see Islam in exactly the light depicted in the cartoons because of their behavior and that of the historical Mohammed. Although Muslims can't clean up Mohammed's reputation as a brigand and all the rest, but contemporary Muslims can do something about the how non-Muslims see them. Marching in the streets, burning down cities, blowing up children and the rest will only make them more infamous in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Posted by: epg at November 4, 2005 11:11 AM
Funny how Muslims in the West only use their democractic right to march in protest against things deemed against Islam when only non Muslims are the cause of the alledged offence.
Still no marches against the Londonistan bombers for their blatant "misunderstanding" of the central tenets of Islam?
Thought not.
Posted by: albion at November 4, 2005 11:17 AM
Kudos to Carsten Juste. May the pen prove mightier than the sword!
More editors just like him are needed as well as more cartoons of Mohammed, distributed widely throughout the free world. Let the protestors exhaust themselves marching madly off in all directions until they realize that Islamic adulation for Mohammed is not and need not be followed by any non-Moslem.
More importantly, non-Moslems must recognize and exercise this right, immediately and without delay, before they lose it altogether. Admire him or not, Theo van Gogh died the victim of gross act of intimidation and thuggery.
Posted by: Chatillon at November 4, 2005 11:51 AM
Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a treasure of all humanity.
Good job Denmark, you are putting us Americans to
shame!
Comics, and ridicule, are the atomic bomb of this conflict. More Mohammad comics now!
Posted by: American at November 4, 2005 12:38 PM
Do you really feel that every Muslim in 2005 should follow the way of life the Prophet had 1,400 years ago, as the Koran dictates?
Yes indeedy they should...minus guns, bombs, and all modern ammenities. No modern medicine, no modern transportation, no radio...no TV...NO INTERNET (porn)...no consistant supply of good food. If they want to kick Israel out, they must do so with camels, horses and swords.
The best thing that could happen is if they emulated Mohammad 632AD style. As it is, they are primitives pumped up by modern technology. If you take that away what's left? Only a bunch of ragged people living in the sand. Big ideas, but no way to impliment. Modern technology does not calm the savage beast, but those who are not so savage, can use it to control those who are.
So by all means follow the Prophet back in time to 600ad something, he's waiting there with open arms...what are you waiting for?
at November 4, 2005 12:40 PM
"Muslims don't understand that non-Muslims see Islam in exactly the light depicted in the cartoons because of their behavior and that of the historical Mohammed." -epg
Actually, most non-Muslims (at least in the West) still whitewash Islam.
Posted by: Dr. Pepper at November 4, 2005 2:08 PM
Carsten Juste, the editor of Jyllands-Posten, said "This doesn't mean that we want to insult any Muslims."
But Mr Rasmussen, the head of a centre-Right minority coalition dependent for its survival on support from an anti-foreigner party, called the cartoons a "necessary provocation"...
And Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Dutch MP famous for her criticism of Islam said "It's necessary to taunt Muslims on their relationship with Mohammed."
So, who are we to believe here?
Posted by: PRCS at November 4, 2005 2:19 PM
This is te Wests line in the sand, the problem is that most of the population don't realise it!!!
Posted by: Daffersd at November 4, 2005 4:26 PM
PRCS:
I think I experience some of the ambivalence that is expressed in your posting. "We don't intend to insult or provoke, and yet it is necessary."
We in the West have over the long years slowly learned how to agree to disagree. Insults and provocations, most of us were taught, are not the stuff of good manners. But now we are confronted with the very real possibility that bad manners (or "blasphemy" depending upon one's mindset) are punishable by death. That a cartoon of some guy should become the stuff of threats is scarcely believable in what we call the Free World.
Western law, at least up to this point in history and to the best of my knowledge, does not afford any status whatsoever to the man Mohammed, calling himself prophet, who lived and fought over the lucrative caravan trade in Arabia 1400 years ago. Members of the Mohammedan "family" and their associates may very well take exception to the lack of notice or respect afforder to this character. Then let them sue for libel and try to prove their case in a court of law. But in the meantime, if politics and religion are inseparable in Islam, then Mohammed will have to submit to the same scrutiny and criticism as any other politician... or Mafia chieftain for that matter. Come to think of it, the old guard Mafia boys didn't like their image spread around either.
So, no offense, but I think this this point needs to be made, to emphasize the fact that it still can be. And I think that that's good.
Posted by: Chatillon at November 4, 2005 4:57 PM
There is one so obvious point in all of this, and it is so obvious it should jab you and draw blood.
The reason that Muslims are so easily inflamed is because they are insecure.
And they are insecure for good reasons.
Truly secure persons, be their identity be based on religion,profession, gender or a combination of all three, do not become defensive, are not aroused so easily to offense, and are too self secure and sure to be threatened by the other or when confronted with disbelief or antipathy.
That which is true, is absolutely true, and if it is the truth it needs not defense, especially from mere mortals. It stands on it's own and is as intuitively self obvious as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west.
And therein lies the Achilles Heel of Islam, Muslims are insecure, and insecurity is infantilism, and reactionary.
Push a Muslim just a little bit, and they spring back five fold, with more force than exerted.
Like bending metal, flex it long enough and it will break, Muslims are breaking, and the worse thing that can be done is to back off and let them recover. Keep it up, until they can't stand the strain and have to fess up and admit that the Koran is not the Word of Allah, that Muhammad was not the perfect man, and that all is not unfolding according to the will of Allah, if it were, then the Muslims would not be under such stress.
How can the worlds perfect ideology revealed to the perfect man a representative of Allah's perfect tribe be the subject of so much humiliation, and very, very obvious backwardness and poverty?
Sooner or later they will have to, be forced to confront reality, when there are no excuses and scapegoats left.
at November 4, 2005 5:19 PM
But chaz martel 738,
"if the sunnah and koran are cleaned up . . ."
Can't be done. Nothing of value would be left, not that there's much of value in these books anyway. Any mention of ethics or morality is usually only for the believers, not for us.
Wait, I take that back. The koran and hadiths are incredible war manuals providing guidance for the mohammedans for 1,400 years.
Posted by: the poetess at November 4, 2005 5:20 PM
More cartoon insults to Islam ....
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/4406702.stm
"A chief constable has condemned the portrayal of Muslims in a police magazine cartoon, describing it as offensive and sacrilegious."
Of course, it is rather funny.
Posted by: 1630r at November 4, 2005 5:28 PM
There's a perfectly good reason why people ridicule Islam. ... C'mon, you know it. ... Because Islam is ridiculous.
This Prophet/Cartoon crap is just the icing.
Posted by: MontJoie at November 4, 2005 9:29 PM
How utterly pathetic that these Muslim leaders are not in the least ashamed to demand the curtailment of a newspaper in Denmark. If only they knew how stupid and bullying they appear to peoples accustomed to free expression. If only they knew how conceited they look to peoples who, however imperfect, are at least humble enough to recognize that no mortal human being or group has a monopoly on truth, so that all have the right to speak.
How ironic that many Muslims are wont to give in to the lie that democracy (with its free press) is arrogant because it means rule by human beings instead of by God. How ironic, since it is theocracy and the Muslim unity between religion and politics that is the shameless epitome of arrogance, because it means rule by human beings who pretend to know God's will sufficiently well to shove it down everyone's throat.
The Koran's thick strand of what must really be called warlike criminal arrogance becomes increasingly evident to the openminded. Depending on who advocates such arrogance, we are dealing either with evil of the most terrific stench or with a profound form of mental handicap, or some combination of the two, that with every passing moment becomes more and more disjunct from the ways of even minimally decent, minimally competent humanity.
Anyone who thinks he knows God's will that well -- well enough to dictate to his own country's press, and even worse, to the foreign press -- such a person in effect believes himself to be identical with God, even if in so believing he refuses to admit the belief to himself.
It is a lie to say that the other great religions contain the same warlike, violent will to force themselves upon others. In this Islam and the Koran excel the other religions by far. And it would be a lie to say that there is racist motivation in saying these things. Muslims come in all races. And I don't have the least problem with Hindus coming to my country and becoming citizens here, though racially the complexion of many Hindus is not very different from that of many Muslims.
May these bullying Muslims seeking to control the Danish press find that in doing so they are kicking against the hard and immovable tip of an iceberg that will not only break their toes, but crush them if they do not desist.
at November 5, 2005 4:46 AM
They desperately need to keep people away from looking too closely at their precious prophet. An artist will want to know their subject well before trying to depict it. Even a cartoonist. And that's the danger - people getting to know the subject. They don't want us digging too deeply, getting to know what he was like. They insist we swallow the lie of him being a merciful and wise prophet, kinda like a Jesus. If you find out what he really got up to, you'd be horrified that people could look up to someone so evil, or try to emulate them. So they try to threaten and scare people away from looking too closely.
I think that even many Muslims have no real idea of what their prophet was like. As far as non-Muslims, only those like us, who've looked deep into Islam know. Anybody I talk to, non-Muslim, really hasn't thought about it. They just think he was like some Arab Jesus, doing nice things for people. And that's the way Muslims would prefer we think. Or else.
Posted by: feralee at November 5, 2005 8:59 AM
Speaking of the Saudi Religious Policeman, scroll down a bit and you'll see one of those oh-so-hurtful cartoons.
Posted by: Ray C. at November 6, 2005 2:56 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)