| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
"At this point, it seems, terrorists don't even need to issue a specific threat in order to intimidate us." From Henryk M. Broder in Spiegel (thanks to HF):
One of Mozart's operas been taken off the playlist at Berlin's State Opera for fear of a terrorist attack. It's a shocking example of pre-emptive surrender: At this point, it seems, terrorists don't even need to issue a specific threat in order to intimidate us.It took the Catholic Church 359 years to revoke its condemnation of Galileo, but the current Pope needed only two days to distance himself from his quotation of a statement that remains topical despite being uttered 500 years ago. Piet Hein Donner, the former Dutch Minister of Justice, who has just resigned from her position, believes Islamic Shariah law could be legally introduced in Holland if two thirds of the Dutch population were to one day approve it. The London police has announced it will inform and consult with a board of Muslim community leaders the next time it plans an anti-terrorism operation that affects Muslims.
And now the Deutsche Oper in Berlin has taken Mozart's opera "Idomeneo" off its schedule after a "risk analysis" produced by Germany's Office of Criminal Investigation (LKA) concluded that "the possibility of performances being disrupted cannot be ruled out." The opera is more than 200 years old. This performance was to be directed by Hans Neuenfels, and it featured Idomeneo, the King of Crete, stepping onto the stage with a bloody sack containing the severed heads of Poseidon, Jesus, Buddha and Muhammad. In Neuenfels's production, Idomeneo produces the severed heads from the sack and holds them into the air triumphantly.
And voilà, yours truly -- a secular, atheist Jew -- feels insulted. I feel offended, a victim of discrimination and marginalization. Why is Moses's head not in the sack? Whence this refusal to acknowledge the existence of one of the world's major religions?
What am I to do? Run amok and set the opera on fire? Or is it enough for me to throw up in the foyer and express my discontent that way? Which brings us right to the issue at stake. We don't know who ordered, requested or initiated this "risk analysis." We don't know whether the LKA went into action on its own initiative or whether it was responding to a discrete warning. All that is certain is that there would have been no "risk analysis" if Idomeneo had chosen to slaughter only Poseidon, Buddha and Jesus -- leaving out Muhammad.
Read it all.
Posted by Robert at October 2, 2006 7:33 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Not to worry. They caved. Unfortunately, it had nothing to do with Mozart.
The mirage towards which you are driving your people's sons
Posted by: Sissy Willis![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 2, 2006 7:53 PM
Anything that offends Islam MUST always be banned because this is what PC dictates. After all, once someone "insults" Islam, the offense is recorded for all times in the "Islamic Book of
Atrocities" (with the Crusades at the top, of course). As the whole deal with the Pope's comments shows, this bunch never forgives or forgets so never EVER offend Islam. Or else!
at October 2, 2006 7:58 PM
On a certain level, i am happy that muslims believe we are appeasing.
It will catch them by surprise when we will take no-return measures.
there is a sort of "deception" from our part too.
Let them believe we are all spineless cowards... remember, if you give enough rope to a stupid he will hang himself.
Posted by: FedUp at October 2, 2006 8:10 PM
At this point, it seems, terrorists don't even need to issue a specific threat in order to intimidate us.
--- Henryk M. Broder in Der Speigel
Groping for more reasons to grope for Moslem zipper, Herr Henryk?
610 * 623 * 732 * 1066 * 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1928 * 1938 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001
6th Pillar of Islam
n
1. The pervasive threat of personal ruination, injury or murder used to dissuade infidels from opposing Islam in any way, the implied threat directed both against the one who would dare to criticze Islam and his or her loved ones.
2. The most effective enforcer of self-censoship in world history.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 2, 2006 8:33 PM
Wonder if any of these imbeciles at the LKA ever did a "risk analysis" before allowing millions of turks to invade Germany?
Posted by: Infidel33 at October 2, 2006 10:53 PM
Oh for Heaven's sake! The severed heads have nothing to do with Mozart and are a twentieth century peurile addition to this opera. They are not in the libretto as generally accepted; they interrupt the action and the music; they interrupt the story (such as it is); they are completely disconnected from any narrative that this opera might have. They are nothing more than a deliberate attempt to offend the sensibilities of Pagans, Christians, Buddhists and moslems, and to sell more tickets.
Whilst I have no objection to offending the sensibilities of the barbarian moslem horde let us keep this in perspective. Some inane bunch of teenage arty-farty types dreamed up a headline grabbing addition to an otherwise perfectly good Mozart opera and decided to go with it in order to grab some publicity. Well, really. I am so shocked, I'm so surprised, I'm so offended - NOT.
The true horror of this is that even the teenage wet-dream arty-farty types are being censored out of a fear of what a bunch of crazed barbarian moslems might just conceivably do. But, hang on a minute, what is a moslem doing at a Mozart opera? Why would a mohammedan go to an opera if not to have an excuse to be offended? Why this opera in particular? After all, this opera deals with the time before the daemon mohammed was sent by his master, the devil, onto the Earth and therefore it can have no value for any devil-worshipping moslem - so why would an uncivilised, barbarian moslem go to such a performance unless to allow him/her self deliberately to be offended and thereby have an excuse, in his/her eyes, to be violent?
Dominic.
Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at October 2, 2006 11:24 PM
A transparent defense of self-censorship, presented as covering a multitude of artistic licenses and sins, but clearly meant for those which offend Muslims only, is offered in The Boston Globe. The defense of those who would take into account, and give special deference to, Muslim sensibilities, and limit the exercise of the theoretical right of free speech, is slyly based by the writer, Martha Bayles, on an appeal to the reader's natural esthetic distaste for the production of Idomeneo in question.. But for god's sake, who's endorsing the addition of those severed heads? Who is arguing that Mozart would approve? That isn't the point, and Martha Bayles knows that perfectly well. But she chooses to ignore that, determined as she is to do something else: offer A Defense of Deference to Islam, and proleptic capitulation. What defense against Muslim attempts at censorship, or self-censorship for fear of Muslim reaction, would she offer if the production were of Voltaire's "Mahomet" -- and straight, without any Peter-Sellersish additions by an o'erweening director? Even Birnam Wood would never have come to Dunsinane undetected, had it been bedecked only in the kind of verbal camouflage she has on offer.
Posted by: Hugh at October 3, 2006 12:37 AM
I had a wonderful experience yesterday.
I was out walking my dog when i came across a pile of half burnt rubbbish in a field.
Imagine my delight when i noticed a small thick book in the ashes. It was mostly burnt but you could clearly see what book it was.
Normally this field is used by teens to ride bikes and eachother and i would never have thought that they could be so enlightened to actually find and burn this thing.
I asked one lad this morning about the book and he said they got it from the Library. Double Bonus. By burning it they actually prevented anyone else from reading it. I am thinking of giving them a list of Dhimmi authored books to get and burn.
Any suggestions ???
Posted by: Churchill1939 at October 3, 2006 6:45 AM
Oh for Heaven's sake! The severed heads have nothing to do with Mozart and are a twentieth century peurile addition to this opera.
Dominic...............that is very well said !
It is funny how hyped up people pretend to be over some stupid "artistic" and "provocative" adulteration of Mozart's work in his 250th Anniversary Year. Frankly I wish opera-critics had condemned it rather than this silly little scare story that someone had telephoned saying it was indecent and thus the great hoax was manufactured.
On 31 July 2007 two bombs were placed on trains in Germany - they were intended to be planted during the World Cup to kill football fans with incendiary devices in trains.......................that was FACT
Why do we need to get worked up about trivia where no facts are involved ?
Posted by: Voyager at October 3, 2006 6:45 AM
The year was of course 2006 before any of you get too frightened for next July
Posted by: Voyager at October 3, 2006 6:46 AM
http://www.meforum.org/article/337
Muslims ask French to cancel 1741 play by Voltaire
Monday, March 06, 2006
By Andrew Higgins, The Wall Street Journal
SAINT-GENIS-POUILLY, France -- Late last year, as an international crisis was brewing over Danish cartoons of Muhammad, Muslims raised a furor in this little alpine town over a much older provocateur: Voltaire, the French champion of the 18th-century Enlightenment.
Posted by: Voyager at October 3, 2006 8:31 AM
Alexon,
It was none other than the Koran.
I couldnt beleive it myself. But there it was. The lad I spoke to said he and his mates hate Muslims and Islam etc.. he was quite graphical in his choice of words.
I commended him and went on my way with a bit of a spring in my step and hope in my heart.
Posted by: Churchill1939 at October 3, 2006 11:17 AM
But she chooses to ignore that, determined as she is to do something else: offer A Defense of Deference to Islam, and proleptic capitulation.
Better a proleptic capitulation than an irreversible decapitation.
Posted by: remote_control at October 3, 2006 2:45 PM
Any suggestions ???
Yeah, I've found that in 10 point Times New Roman font with half-inch margins all the way around the book comes in right at 200 pages. With Duplex printing that's a 100 page tome. Spider bind the things and you could produce them at less than a 5 dollars a copy.
Set up a charity to fund book production, and reward kids with Farenheit 451 opportunities for, say, making a great play in the big game or getting top grades... you know, to motivate them.
The flames would fly.
* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *
There were flames flying when Mohammed had his boys stoke a camp fire on that dude's chest. When he still didn't say where the money was stashed, the great and holy Mohammed had him beheaded.
Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at October 3, 2006 6:03 PM
Any suggestions?
Anything written by Chomsky, Esposito or that uber-dhimmi Karen Armstrong.
Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at October 3, 2006 6:54 PM
Hi. I know this is of topic, but ...
This is someone who got lost in the depth of islam. Sad Isn't it?
Music Is prohibited
Assalam U Aalaikum. I need guidance on the following (1) Firstly, I used to listen to music with a huge tape and cd collection of various musicals but it has been almost 8 months since I left all this and am trying to follow the Sunnah. I have packed and stacked these cassettes and cds in boxes but don’t know what to do with them. If I want I can sell them to others but that would mean that I am persuading others to commit a sin. What should I do with all this? (2) Moreover I have musical instrument with me which I want to dispose of, I have many offers for this. Can you tell me what to do with all these things? Can I sell them? (3) I feel like breaking them and dumping them in the sea. (4) I have also stopped watching tv but people say that if tv was wrong then no ulema would come on tv, they refer to zakir naik, ahmed deedat, dr. israr ahmed etc., I still don’t buy their reasoning and deem tv to be an impermissible act (5) What is the basis of wishing happy birthdays, as people get offended when I don’t wish them? (6) They say that there is no proof that this is wrong according to Shariah to wish and celebrate birthdays. Can you give me proof? Jazak Allah & Allah Hafiz!
answer--
Maashaa Allah, may Allah make it easy for you to live a life according to the Sunnah.
1. Whatever unlawful things you have, it is better that you break it out or throw it away at such a place where no one can reuse them.
2. Refer 1
3. Refer 1
4. Some Ulama doing impermissible things does not render them permissible.
5. It is not permissible, since it resembles the non-Muslims. The Ulama have prohibited it. Furthermore, Rasulullah [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam] has also prohibited us to inculcate the practice of non-Muslims. (Ahsanul Fataawa)
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Ml. Imraan Vawda
FATWA DEPT.
at October 3, 2006 11:47 PM
Necessitasnonhabetlegem wrote:
Oh for Heaven's sake! The severed heads have nothing to do with Mozart and are a twentieth century peurile addition to this opera. They are not in the libretto as generally accepted; they interrupt the action and the music; they interrupt the story (such as it is); they are completely disconnected from any narrative that this opera might have. They are nothing more than a deliberate attempt to offend the sensibilities of Pagans, Christians, Buddhists and moslems, and to sell more tickets.
...................
About fifteen years ago I saw a production of Richard III with Sir Ian McKellan. The staging was set in a twentieth-century-style totalitarian state. If this had merely been described to me, I probably would not have liked the idea. I tend to be a traditionalist when it comes to Shakespeare.
However, it was *excellent*. The setting, far from being arch or gratuitous, made the message of the work more chilling and immediate (a setting in the fifteenth century tends to distance the viewer). Ian McKellan was absolutely astonishing in the role, brutal, pitiable, repulive and attractive. It was one of the best productions I have ever seen.
But what if it hadn't been? What if the performances were flat, and the setting silly and melodramatic? Well, then, I would not have recommended that my friends see the play--that's all.
On a certain level I do not care whether Hans Neuenfels' staging of "Idomeneo" is brilliant or moronic. This is a matter for critics and audiences. What I care about is the threat to art, and the pre-emptive impression of threat leading to craven self-censorship.
It is true that a lot of what passes for "Art" these days really is junk. A lot of it is meant to shock whatever is left of the old Bourgeoisie with pieces such as Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ" or Chris Ofili's "Dung Virgin". It is fine to protest this work, to critique it as bad art, to suggest that it not be created and shown at taxpayer expense, but it would not be OK if someone were threatening to do violent harm to these people. Of course, no one is, because those most offended are not radical Muslims.
I have had my own artwork censored by "conservative" Muslims as a student at Berkeley --there was no direct threat (at least that I heard about) but there was a lot of damage to the art, and the show was shut down. (the show was in no way offensive--it included one very tasteful nude figure).
For the most part, societies that have censored their artists are not pretty, and are ultimately worse than any amount of bad art. Take the example of the Nazis and their condemnation of Entartete Kunst (degenerate art), where it started with destruction of the art and quickly progressed to destruction of the artists themselves (any who did not see the writing on the wall early enough and escape, that is). The artistic merit of this work is of secondary consideration.
And Churchill 1939, i must respectfully disagree with you. I do not condone the burning of books. Especially this book, which I believe needs to be read more widely by non-Muslims, so that we know what we are up against. I recently held my nose and read the Koran cover to cover. Not a pleasant experience, but very enlightening--and not in a spiritual sense.
Posted by: gravenimage at October 4, 2006 11:42 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dhimmi Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)