Let's eliminate the misconceptions about Jyllands-Posten

[Uiler]

Actually my feeling is that Muslims do support it. Most wouldn't do it themselves and they wouldn't say it outright but I'm sure they feel a little "go guys". Look at Saddam Hussein. The Islamic world supported himself despite all the mass murder and oppression because he opposed the US. I know Africans who support Hitler because he opposed their colonial masters.

If islam was more forcefull in decrying the the highjacking of its religion by terrorists then maybe many in the world would not equate all muslims and islam with barbaric actions like decapatation, bombing Joe Average for no reason and useing fuil ladden comercial air liners as guided missles. The muslim world has been weak in stopping terror wich leads me to beleive they either support it or are to stupid to realize that by not fighting it they doom them selves. I will go with the former by the actions on the brainwashed masses. Riots, flag burning, death threats and fatwahs are the actions I see islam responding with. Maybe if islam wasn't such a violence based religion and learned how do deal with the world in a more civil maner and got a thicker skin the world may just respect it a little more but if this is how islam reacts then why should they get respect.

 

[Tenochtitlan]

I don't have any problem with criticizing religion, I used to be muslim but I freed myself and now I am a happy aethiest. But I will still forever be prejudged by westerners because I look Middle Eastern.
However, making all these people angry by offending them with these cartoons will not help. It will just make it worse, because they are less likely to listen to any future criticisms.


I have no where to go, if I stay the US some redneck will shoot me because I'm Arab. And if I go back home I have to hide my aetheism.

 

[Marla_Singer]

In 2002, the French publication Charlie Hebdo ran this panel by cartoonist Cabu. The sign translates as "Election of Miss Sack-of-Potatoes, organized by Mohammed," who chooses his favorite while drinking and smoking.
(Hat tip: Etienne P.)

Actually, he doesn't chose any of the candidate, he chooses "la Belle de Fontenay". "Madame de Fontenay" (as she likes to be ridiculously called) is actually the one who manages the elections of Miss France over here. A really ridiculous girl pretending as if she was a "lady" and voting for trotskysts :

It's the kind of humor that can only be understood by people living in the French society... but if it's only about me, I find Charlie Hebdo extremely childish, and never funny. Most of the cartoons from Charlie Hebdo couldn't even be posted in this forum, because of their explicit nudity. Hence I can't even show you examples about how low and idiot is the "humor" in Charlie Hebdo.

 

[Capulet]

I'm a Muslim, as most of you probably know. In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) is the most revered figure, because he was the one who brought the Message to us. WE, Muslims, are not allowed to depict him in any drawing, because the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) said that if this happened, later generations would start worshipping him.

I have no problem with non-Muslims drawing the Prophet. They aren't bound by the same rules as us whatsoever. But what makes me mad, what offends me, was that this was such a blatant attempt to insult an entire religion. Have you seen any of the pictures? There is one that calls the Prophet dumb, one that shows a bomb on his head, and another showing him as a rabid looking man with a sword in his hand.

The newspaper was trying to make Muslims mad, no doubt about it. They were trying to insult an entire religion. They wanted to make Muslims mad. And guess what? They got what they wanted.

There is a line between free speech and hate speech, and thatline was crossed. There has already been a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment throughout Europe, and this only encouraged it more. This wasn't a poltical cartoon. It wasn't even funny. This was an insult, this was a blatant provocation, and this was hate speech.

 

[Tenochtitlan]

There is a line between free speech and hate speech, and thatline was crossed. There has already been a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment throughout Europe, and this only encouraged it more. This wasn't a poltical cartoon. It wasn't even funny. This was an insult, this was a blatant provocation, and this was hate speech.

Exactly.

10

 

[Marla_Singer]

I'm a Muslim, as most of you probably know. In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) is the most revered figure, because he was the one who brought the Message to us. WE, Muslims, are not allowed to depict him in any drawing, because the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) said that if this happened, later generations would start worshipping him.

I have no problem with non-Muslims drawing the Prophet. They aren't bound by the same rules as us whatsoever. But what makes me mad, what offends me, was that this was such a blatant attempt to insult an entire religion. Have you seen any of the pictures? There is one that calls the Prophet dumb, one that shows a bomb on his head, and another showing him as a rabid looking man with a sword in his hand.

The newspaper was trying to make Muslims mad, no doubt about it. They were trying to insult an entire religion. They wanted to make Muslims mad. And guess what? They got what they wanted.

There is a line between free speech and hate speech, and thatline was crossed. There has already been a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment throughout Europe, and this only encouraged it more. This wasn't a poltical cartoon. It wasn't even funny. This was an insult, this was hate speech.

I agree with this. Those cartoons have been made with as purpose to provoke.

The other thing I don't understand is the reactions of many people who behaved as is freedom of speech was threatened, and who provoked even more as a "support", to defend "free speech". Freedom of speech is not threatened in Europe and you have to severely exagerate that story to think so. Come on !

Now do I excuse people assaulting Embassies in Beyruth. No I don't, but it's not because there are stupid people in other countries that it means domestic provocators are less stupid. And I don't say so because I'm a lefty anti-racist who consider Europeans are always the guilty ones and everyone else is always right. I just say so because my opinion is that this Muhammad cartoons story is inherently stupid, and all the stupidity isn't in one side, there are stupidities in both sides.

 

[EdwardTking]

I'm a Muslim, as most of you probably know. In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) is the most revered figure, because he was the one who brought the Message to us. WE, Muslims, are not allowed to depict him in any drawing, because the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) said that if this happened, later generations would start worshipping him.

I have no problem with non-Muslims drawing the Prophet. They aren't bound by the same rules as us whatsoever. But what makes me mad, what offends me, was that this was such a blatant attempt to insult an entire religion. Have you seen any of the pictures? There is one that calls the Prophet dumb, one that shows a bomb on his head, and another showing him as a rabid looking man with a sword in his hand.

The newspaper was trying to make Muslims mad, no doubt about it. They were trying to insult an entire religion. They wanted to make Muslims mad. And guess what? They got what they wanted.

There is a line between free speech and hate speech, and thatline was crossed. There has already been a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment throughout Europe, and this only encouraged it more. This wasn't a poltical cartoon. It wasn't even funny. This was an insult, this was a blatant provocation, and this was hate speech.

The cartoons were very badly drawn too.

Their incompetent artistry insults me, not a Muslim, too.

 

[ironduck]

Considering that several people including myself went to fairly great lengths to explain the background for the illustrations as well as to actually show them (both Erik and I linked to them), I find it rather ridiculous how this is completely ignored and they are simply labeled as 'hate speech'.

Have you seen the anti-jewish cartoons that are consistently publicized in Arab newspapers? They are much more blatantly hate speech than these cartoons, most of which are not hateful at all.

And to be 'insulted' at the 'incompetent artistry' - oh dear. You must be easily insulted.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Not until this response, no. But now I have, I'm not going to bother explaining to you the difference between occasional pictures printed in publications probably not seen by a whole lot of Muslims, and a dozen all printed in one go in a major European newspaper. Think hard, and maybe you'll work out the difference. (And before you mention the entire book full of cartoons, if you seriously think that Muslims are happy about such a book, you are insane)

I'm sure Jyllands-Posten will be happy to hear that they're a "major European newspaper".

What I'm curious about is why this print run was the one to spark controversy and get reprinted. None of the other cartoons did, after all. The book had many more and was more insulting, so it's not the quantity; the other image I posted here was from 2002, so it's not the post-Sep 11 world either. And what took the crisis such a long time to come to a head?

In Islam, the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) is the most revered figure, because he was the one who brought the Message to us. WE, Muslims, are not allowed to depict him in any drawing, because the Prophet Muhammad (SWT) said that if this happened, later generations would start worshipping him.

Looks like it backfired. Muhammad gets caricatured → Embassies get burned? Anyone who thinks that an appropriate response has put Muhammad on too high a pedestal, where reverence slips into worship.

The newspaper was trying to make Muslims mad, no doubt about it. They were trying to insult an entire religion. They wanted to make Muslims mad. And guess what? They got what they wanted.

There is a line between free speech and hate speech, and that line was crossed. There has already been a wave of anti-Islamic sentiment throughout Europe, and this only encouraged it more. This wasn't a political cartoon. It wasn't even funny. This was an insult, this was a blatant provocation, and this was hate speech.

O RLY?

Have you seen the anti-jewish cartoons that are consistently publicized in Arab newspapers? They are much more blatantly hate speech than these cartoons, most of which are not hateful at all.

 

[Gibsie]

I'm sure Jyllands-Posten will be happy to hear that they're a "major European newspaper".

Well they're the largest selling daily in a European country, that's good enough for me. Maybe I have lower standards?

What I'm curious about is why this print run was the one to spark controversy and get reprinted. None of the other cartoons did, after all. The book had many more and was more insulting, so it's not the quantity; the other image I posted here was from 2002, so it's not the post-Sep 11 world either. And what took the crisis such a long time to come to a head?

Time to engage your brain, you can do it, you just have to try! Let's see, a quite offensive book that will get Muslims quite offended- how many regular retailers stocked the book, do you think? Or perhaps you expect the Muslims to protest outside the embassy of the internet? Are you seeing a difference yet? Do I need to keep asking rhetorical questions?

 

[Erik Mesoy]

Well they're the largest selling daily in a European country, that's good enough for me. Maybe I have lower standards?

Wait, what? A *DANISH* newspaper is the largest in Europe?

 

[Gibsie]

No, but Denmark is a European country, and it is the largest selling newspaper in a European country. I'll assume that this is just a slip-up on your part since English probably idn't your first language.

 

[ironduck]

To anyone who still doesn't know:

Hardly anyone in the muslim world knew about these cartoons until a group of fundamentalist Danish imams started touring the middle eastern dicatorships in order to drum up a reaction. On that tour they included images that were not part of the Danish debate, but considerably more offensive. They also made a number of exaggerated claims regarding the Danish debate, and they blatantly lied about representing most muslims in Denmark. They have a clear agenda of being seen as 'defenders of the faith' among Danish muslims, and this was one of the steps they have taken towards that goal.

The dictatorial governments in the middle east are looking for ways to channel the anger of their populations towards something else than themselves, and a case like this is perfect for this purpose.

 

[Erik Mesoy]

No, but Denmark is a European country, and it is the largest selling newspaper in a European country. I'll assume that this is just a slip-up on your part since English probably idn't [sic] your first language.

Ah. So your point was that Denmark is a large and important country.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

Considering that several people including myself went to fairly great lengths to explain the background for the illustrations as well as to actually show them (both Erik and I linked to them), I find it rather ridiculous how this is completely ignored and they are simply labeled as 'hate speech'.

Have you seen the anti-jewish cartoons that are consistently publicized in Arab newspapers? They are much more blatantly hate speech than these cartoons, most of which are not hateful at all.

I've seen the cartoons, and while many are pretty mild, several and one in particular are wildly offensive and obviously intended to spread hateful misconceptions about Islam. You even seem to agree with this when you say that most of them aren't hateful.

The contents of Arab newspapers have absolutely nothing to do with this. Nobody here is defending the violent reactions or the hypocrisy of fundamentalists.

 

[Gibsie]

You know, before I opened this thread earlier today, I thought the newspaper in question was largely innocent, that it didn't have bad intentions when it started this mess. However, largely thanks to the appalling defenses of their actions from other posters in this thread, I've been convinced that this newpaper is indeed to blame for igniting the idiocy we've seen. Well done everyone who'd rather talk about what Muslim countries publish and how these cartoons weren't really offensive.

Though don't think I'm excusing any of the actions of the idiot rioters.

Ah. So your point was that Denmark is a large and important country.

5 million people, a member of the EU- its actions reflect on the larger European populace. Especially when other newspapers across Europe follow suit and publish them too. Is this a Scandinavian thing, do you guys think your Danish cousins an insignificant lot or something stupid like that? Now would you be so kind as to make some kind of point?

 

[Erik Mesoy]

I thought you left?

Is this a Scandinavian thing, do you guys think your Danish cousins an insignificant lot or something stupid like that?

No, it's a Norwegian thing. We were part of the Kingdom of Denmark-Norway for 400 years. These days it's a place to go for your holidays and eat sausage, and their main export (as viewed from the classical Norwegian perspective) is LEGO.

5 million people, a member of the EU- its actions reflect on the larger European populace. Especially when other newspapers across Europe follow suit and publish them too.

Cause and effect getting mixed up? The cartoons got republished because they got attention. The cartoonists were receiving death threats all the way back in October.

Now would you be so kind as to make some kind of point?

*stabs Gibsie with a dagger*
Pointy enough for you?

I made my point a while back, so now it's my turn to leave because I can't be bothered explaining to you. Nyah.

 

[Birdjaguar]

For thirty years I've watched the world grow more and more polarized and violent at the regional and local level. Nations make fewer wars; people and groups make more than ever. Mostly the goals are personal power, money, and joy in destroying the lives others. There is plenty of blame to go around and so I won't point fingers at my personal favorites.

The western press has a long history of making fun of people and their values and in doing so in pretty unattractive ways. In most cases we ignore it the best we can and keep moving. In the worst cases we hire high priced lawyers and sue. Ever since the Iranian revolution of the late 70s, muslims have joined the hate speech game and in recent years they have escalated the game to new heights.

Compare the cartoons directed a George Bush for the past 6 years and the 12 cartoons creating the fuss today. The 12 published showing Mohammed don't even come close to being hate speech or what has been directed at Bush. When muslims get upset they don't ignore western stupidity and they don't sue. They kill people and burn buildings. Sometimes they kill specific people and other times it seems pretty random. Do all muslims behave this way? Certainly not. Do all american support US government policy? Certainly not. What is covered by the news media?

Those muslim leaders who actively promote muslim hatred of the west and the people who follow them are rapidly destroying the credibility of less radical muslims. Why should any non muslim westerner show political sensitivity for a religion that works very hard to make sure it's most vile practices make the front page of the world's newspaprers?

The mere fact that moderate and sensible muslims have absolutely no control over the hate mongers and killers only adds to the loss of respect that is befalling the arab world. The best way for muslims to earn back western respect is to take charge of who speaks for Mohammed. Right now it's the bad guys. Your situaltion is much the same as the American liberal left. George Bush as the president speaks for them and they hate it. They struggle to take back the bully pulpit of the presidency. Fortunetly, we have a mechanism that permits change. The longer you let suicide bombers, rioting mobs, and hate mongers like the president of Iran speak for you, the harder it will be for Islam to earn back a place of respect.

I have no plans to change my behavior towards muslims, but at the moment I am inclined to accept any action by western governments that increases the pain of those that promote hatred and violence through terror and destruction. To the degree that muslims have moved into western states for economic and political reasons/opportunities, one would think/hope they would be capable of adopting the better traits of the culture they live in. Hire a lawyer and sue somebody.

 

[Riesstiu IV]

This wasn't a poltical cartoon. It wasn't even funny. This was an insult, this was a blatant provocation, and this was hate speech.

Do you have the same concern for "hate speech" when mullahs and imams are spouting out hatred about Jews, Hindus and Westerners?

 

[Cimbri]

No, but Denmark is a European country, and it is the largest selling newspaper in a European country. I'll assume that this is just a slip-up on your part since English probably idn't your first language.

I think they have (or claim to have) 670.000 readers.