So how about these cartoons then, eh?

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Hahem, erm, Insensitive, cough, offensive, haharum, em, huh, Freedom of expression?

mumble mumble


In the news recently, Danish newspaper cartoons featuring Mohammed as the protagonist are offending millions of muslims and their reaction is offending millions of free speach advocates.

I won't put a link here, but the cartoons are easily found on the internet (like everything else)

Opinions?


Peace
ATF

[didymus]

I'm surprised that everyone is staying away from this thread. I am not surprised by the backlash occuring right now. You could see it coming. It is much more acceptable in western culture to use humor and satire against religious and political figures. There have been countless cartoons and the like about Jesus. People get upset but they don't retaliate. This was done to a people and culture that doesn't take such things lightly. I've got to wonder what the people who printed the cartoon were thinking when they did it. Surley they can't be surprised at the reaction. Maybe they wanted one?

[brucegdc]

Part of my staying away from this thread, frankly, is that I haven't seen the cartoons. The description I've seen is one that leaves me offended - and I am most assuredly not Muslim. But without actually seeing them, I am not comfortable commenting in depth.

Burning down embassies, however, does appear to be a massive overreaction - no matter how bad the cartoon. That sort of behavior certainly doesn't leave the impression of civilization. Mobs are usually a bad thing, all told.

Sounds like bad boy behavior all around on this one.

[thipps]

Originally Posted by didymus

I'm surprised that everyone is staying away from this thread. I am not surprised by the backlash occuring right now. You could see it coming. It is much more acceptable in western culture to use humor and satire against religious and political figures. There have been countless cartoons and the like about Jesus. People get upset but they don't retaliate. This was done to a people and culture that doesn't take such things lightly. I've got to wonder what the people who printed the cartoon were thinking when they did it. Surley they can't be surprised at the reaction. Maybe they wanted one?

The fact that I havent seen the cartoons and dont plan on it either isnt the reason I stayed away from this thread. The reason is what you stated yourself... you could see it coming. There is no surprise on the reactions.
So, what is there to really talk about? or comment on? The fact that it was done was wrong in itself but the fact of the poor timing cannot be ignored. We are living in a world where the situation is going towards a Muslims vs. the rest of the world scenario (sort of), so this is definitely not helping.
Bottom line: Insults/cartoons like this are wrong whoever does it, be it done regarding any religion/belief.

[I, Brian]

Not seen the cartoons either.

[I, Brian]

Okay, I have seen the original cartoons now.

What's interesting about this story is the claim of fake cartoons never having been published by the Danish press, apparently being shown around the Middle East - ones that show Muhammed with a pig's face, and another where he's being raped by a dog.

I'm not sure on the actual details of the overall story - but some US conservatives are certainly claiming that the whole issue was purposefully inflamed.

ADDED: Okay - here's the Wikipedia article, which contains some interesting balance. Especially note the Jordanian cartoon further down:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jylland...ammad_cartoons

ADDED2: I'm also going to risk wrath by posting a link to a Conservative blog, highly critical of use of cartoons within Islamic countries, as it's an interesting related issue:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/a...t_islam_s.html

[Quahom1]

At the risk of "parroting" my mother..."Two wrongs do not make a right..."

v/r

Q

[Quahom1]

5 Feb 2006 10:01 Associated Press

BEIRUT, Lebanon - Thousands of Muslims rampaged Sunday in Beirut, setting fire to the Danish Embassy, burning Danish flags and lobbing stones at a Maronite Catholic church as violent protests spread over caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad...

I do not think this is helping anyone's cause, much. Nor does it generate sympathy. In fact I submit that the opposite will occur.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10705393/

[Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine]

All I know about them is from my Danish e-pen pal and the discussion on BtN's (Behind the Name.com) off-topic board, so I don't feel comfortable responding directly either in this thread or on BtN.

Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine

All I know about them is from my Danish e-pen pal and the discussion on BtN's (Behind the Name.com) off-topic board, so I don't feel comfortable responding directly either in this thread or on BtN.

Phyllis Sidhe_Uaine

Eighteen people were injured and several hundred thousands of dollars in realestate was destroyed because of...cartoons, and the ones injured had absolutely nothing to do with the cartoons...

Where is the justice in that? Cartoons (granted, disgusting ones at that), give rights to harm innocent others?

Where is the peaceful nature of men? Or will it be blamed on the boys?

You know, Brian presented a good point with one of his links. The Arab media has had a grand ole' time poking fun at everyone else...but riots when they are poked fun at?

To be incensed is one thing. To physically harm innocent others over a fool's pen and ink and paper insult is ludicrous, not to mention against the Quran.

my thoughts

v/r

Q

[Faustus]

You know, if I were to go and torch an embassy every time I saw an offensive or anti-Semitic cartoon, newspaper article, television or radio program was produced in the Middle East, most of Washington D.C. would be in cinders.

I thought the cartoons were in poor taste, and I can certainly understand why people would find them offensive (I didn't think they were clever, funny or anything but rather childish), I also recall the Saudi newspaper that asserted in a "scholarly article" that Jews drink the blood of Gentile children on Purim. I remember the Iranian president saying that the Holocaust was "a myth." I remember the scads of cartoons I've seen coming from Middle Eastern papers that prominently feature racist drawings of big-nosed, sidelocked Shylocks plastered with swastikas. I remember the Egyptian airing of a made-for-TV version of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. All of those things are every bit as bigotted, offensive and calculated to provoke anger as the cartoons in that Danish paper were, yet I didn't see anyone burning embassies. I didn't see anyone rioting. I didn't see anyone advocating beheading or death of the cartoonists or writers. The Hasidic Jews of Brooklyn weren't announcing that any Arab entering their midst would be kidnapped and killed in retribution for their offense.

So now I'm left wondering why so many of us who are offended by things like the cartoons and other incidents mentioned above manage to control ourselves and express our anger in peaceful protest without levelling death threats at people, but that's apparently an impossibility for a significant percentage of those who have seen these cartoons of Mohammed. I know that it isn't the majority of the Muslim world engaging in this behavior- I simply refuse to believe that, because I'm quite sure that Muslims are just as capable of the rest of us of adhering to basic, fairly universal moors of good conduct. So why, then, are some people (I'm not referring to anyone in particular here, but I have encountered this on other web boards) attempting to excuse this ludicrous behavior?

Which harms the image of Islam more? Some deliberately offensive cartoons in a minor Danish newspaper, or the burning of several embassies (including those of Norway and Chile, countries who had nothing to do with the cartoons) and images of tiny kids holding signs that say, "He who insults the Prophet: kill him!"?

I'm certainly not saying that it wouldn't be completely reasonable, right and proper to engage in peaceful, nonviolent protest of the actions of these papers, to express offense and anger in letters to the editor or editorials in other publications, but is reacting with this kind of violence and hatred, thus proving right the accusations of those cartoonists, really in the best interests of Islam or anyone else? I would be inclined to say, "No."

Apparently there was one paper in the Middle East that published the actual photos. Its headline? "Muslims, Be Reasonable." I wish the article I read had mentioned the name of the paper, because I'd take out a subscription right now if I knew which one it was.

[I, Brian]

Just to keep coverage, John Simpson on the issue:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4685886.stm

[Faustus]

I do understand that many of these protests aren't representing all Muslims. As I said, I don't believe that the majority of the Muslim world wants the cartoonists to be beheaded or agrees with burning down embassies. But there are still large crowds in London calling for beheadings and terrorist attacks (apparently forgetting that as Londoners, they'd be caught in anything that happened, themselves), and part of me has to wonder why, when there must be people who don't feel this way, there aren't counter demonstrations of any kind. Or maybe there are, and they're just not getting coverage.

The thing is, there are still people trying to excuse or partially justify this behavior by saying, "Well, they shouldn't have published the cartoons," which I think is sort of irrelevent at this point. I don't really care how offended you get, you don't get to burn down a building or call for someone's beheading or beg for a terrorist attack and then think you're somehow justified. It bothers me that some people appear to be trying to minimize stuff that really can't (and shouldn't) be minimized by offering cheap excuses.

[I, Brian]

There's often an aggressive minority within demonstrations, regardless the cause.

What raises my eyes on this issue is the claims that the Danish cartoons are effectively racist - it's what the Jordanian cartoon on Wikipedia that I alluded to before makes a point of.

However, there's a history of anti-Semitic cartoons demonising Jews in the Arabic press, so I find it personally hard to understand how publishing the Danish cartoons can be claimed to be racist.

Hows does one press that demonises a people justify that?

It's not so much a case of supporting the Danish position - frankly, I feel a need to read different views and opinions on the matter, rather than make a judgement myself. But I do find the idea that one press publishing poor taste cartoons can be objected to, by other press who publish their own poor tastes cartoons, somewhat curious - especially in this context:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/4688466.stm

[Faithfulservant]

For the sake of conversation.. I do not believe its the world thinking its them vs the Muslims... I think its the Muslims believing its them vs the world.

All of this reminds me of 9/11.