FoxNews is reporting (Leaders Appeal for Calm in Muslim Cartoon Protests) that that Danish Embassy in Syria has been torched as a part of the intelligent discourse over the newspaper cartoons.
- “We will redeem our prophet, Muhammad, with our blood!”
- “Let the perpetrators of the insult see the gravity of their own mistakes which only they themselves can and should correct.”
- “Hang the culprits”
“The right to freedom of thought and expression … cannot entail the right to offend the religious sentiment of believers,” the Vatican said in its first statement on the controversy.
I wonder if the Vatican really believes what it says. Does it condone the actions? Does it believe the same violent reactions are warrented when the religious sentiments of Christians are offended???
Censorship to avoid Muslim discomfort is now spreading more widely (Fury over Prophet cartoons, calls for restraint):
In South Africa, a court granted a request by a Muslim group to bar publication of the cartoons.
Jordan’s state prosecutor arrested the editor of a tabloid weekly which had published the cartoons. He had already been sacked by publishers of his Shihan weekly for reprinting the turban-bomb cartoon as part of an article headlined “an Islamic Intifada (Uprising) against the Danish insult to Islam.”
Two New Zealand newspapers on Saturday reprinted the cartoons, which have now appeared in newspapers in Bulgaria, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Switzerland and Hungary, saying their decision was based on press freedom.
Polish financial daily Rzeczpospolita also published the cartoons, drawing the ire of Prime Minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz who said: “It is my conviction that the bounds of properly conceived freedom of expression have been overstepped.”
As Michelle Malkin says, who will they come for next?
Great observation today in the Best of the Web:
Remember the Christian Peacemaker Teams, the outfit that had four of its members kidnapped in Iraq a while back? Today’s Des Moines Register features an op-ed by one Pat Minor, a CPT member, in which she explains why she supports terrorism against Israel. But don’t worry, some of her best friends are Jewish:
“What do you think about Hamas’ victory?” I asked a co-worker, Sid Oxborough. He shrugged. “Personally, I think it’s great. But, it probably won’t help their cause.” . . .
While I abhor violence of any kind, it is hard to condemn a people who are resisting an oppression that has rendered them silent for more than 50 years. . . .
Sid, who considers himself a diaspora Jew, says, “Obviously, the Israelis are Jews, so they are my people. But, the Palestinians are oppressed, so they’re my people more.”
This is an example of what Arnold Kling calls “folk Marxism”:
Folk Marxism looks at political economy as a struggle pitting the oppressors against the oppressed. Of course, for Marx, the oppressors were the owners of capital and the oppressed were the workers. But folk Marxism is not limited by this economic classification scheme. All sorts of other issues are viewed through the lens of oppressors and oppressed. Folk Marxists see Israelis as oppressors and Palestinians as oppressed. They see white males as oppressors and minorities and females as oppressed. They see corporations as oppressors and individuals as oppressed. They see America as on oppressor and other countries as oppressed.
Folk Marxism leads a Jew to applaud the murderers of Jews, and a Christian to condone violence even while claiming to abhor it. And note what Oxborough said to Minor about the Hamas victory: “Personally, I think it’s great. But, it probably won’t help their cause.” Folk Marxism isn’t actually about helping the “oppressed”; it is nothing more than a perverted moral vanity.
Maybe that explains how people can think things like this:
Freedom…? The most important part is missing. Freedom for whom? Freedom for American corporations to loot Iraq’s resources! How many American soldiers have to die until this can be spelled out? Will it be less than 50,000 this time? How many more Iraqi civilians have to be sacrificed to the greed of the American corporations and their willing executioners in Washington, before this is over? More than 100,000 were already murdered, but there are millions to follow…
At least we have the oppressors nailed… corporations, America…
Contributing to the Blogburst seen on Michelle Malkin:
So today the whole Islamic world is uniting to attack the western world, or so we are told. (Protests have raged throughout the world against the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in European newspapers.)
So here are the cartoons, which brought so much trouble. And some description of the images (Hank Schouten, What the cartoons were about, 4 February 2006):
The drawings were commissioned by the Jyllands-Posten (Jutland’s Post) to accompany an article on self-censorship and freedom of speech after Danish writer Kare Bluitgen was unable failed to find artists willing to illustrate his children’s book about Mohammed for fear of violent attacks by extremist Muslims.
Islamic teachings forbid pictorial depictions of Mohammed.
The cartoons were published on September 30 with an explanatory article by the newspaper’s culture editor, Flemming Rose.
The following is a translated summary of the article and explanation of the cartoons published in the Internet encyclopedia Wikipedia.
“The modern, secular society is rejected by some Muslims. They demand a special position, insisting on special consideration of their own religious feelings.
“It is incompatible with contemporary democracy and freedom of speech, where you must be ready to put up with insults, mockery and ridicule.
“It is certainly not always equally attractive and nice to look at, and it does not mean that religious feelings should be made fun of at any price, but that is less important in this context. […] we are on our way to a slippery slope where no one can tell how the self-censorship will end.
“That is why the Jyllands-Posten has invited members of the Danish editorial cartoonists union to draw Mohammed as they see him.”
Forty artists were invited to give their interpretation on of how Mohammed may have looked. Twelve responded.
Clockwise from top, here is A brief explanation of each cartoon, as pictured at right, left, is given clockwise from the top.
# The face of Mohammed as a part of the Islamic star and crescent symbol, his right eye the star.
Advertisement
Advertisement
# The most controversial drawing shows Mohammed with a bomb in his turban, with a lit fuse and the Islamic creed written on the bomb.
# Mohammed standing with a halo in the shape of a crescent moon.
# An abstract drawing of crescent moons and Stars of David, and a poem on oppression of women. In English the poem could be read as: “Prophet! daft and dumb, keeping woman under thumb”.
# Mohammed as a wanderer, with a donkey.
# A nervous caricaturist, shakingly drawing Mohammed while looking over his shoulder.
# Two angry Muslims charge forward with sabres and bombs, while Mohammed addresses them with: “Relax guys, it’s just a drawing made by some infidel South Jutlander”. This is a reference is to a common Danish expression for a person from the middle of nowhere, which is how many Danes regard South Jutland.
# An Oriental-looking boy pointing to words on the blackboard reading in Danish “the editorial team of JyllandsPosten is a bunch of reactionary provocateurs.”
# The boy is labelled “Mohammed, Valby school, 7.A”, implying that this Mohammed is a Danish second-generation immigrant rather than the man Muslims believe was a prophet. On his shirt is written “Fremtiden” (the future).
# A drawing showing Mohammed with a knife and a black bar over his eyes and flanked by two women in burqas.
# Mohammed standing on a cloud, greeting dead suicide bombers with “Stop, stop, we ran out of virgins!” an allusion to the promised reward to martyrs.
# Danish writer Kare Bluitgen with a stick drawing of Mohammed and an orange on his turban over the caption “Publicity stunt”. An orange in the turban is a Danish proverb meaning a stroke of luck.
# The centre cartoon is of a police lineup of seven people, with the witness saying: “Hmm … I can’t really recognise him.” Not all people in the lineup are immediately identifiable. They are: 1, a generic hippie; 2, politician Pia Kjrsgaard; 3, possible Jesus; 4, possible Buddha; 5, possible Mohammed; 6, a generic Indian guru; and 7, journalist Kare Bluitgen, carrying a sign saying: “Kare’s public relations, call and get an offer.”
So what is the response?
- French President Jacques Chirac, whose country has the largest Muslim population in Europe, appealed for all sides to avoid “anything that could offend others’ convictions.” (Row over cartoons boils as Europe leaders urge calm)
- “We … respect freedom of the press and expression but it must be coupled with press responsibility. Inciting religious or ethnic hatreds in this manner is not acceptable,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper.
- “What is important is that the newspaper that initially published the cartoons has apologised, and I would urge my Muslim friends to accept the apology, to accept it in the name of Allah the merciful, and let’s move on,” - UN Sec Gen Kofi Annan
- About 800 people protested in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, chanting “Death to Denmark” and “Death to France.” They also chanted “Death to America,” although the cartoons have not been published in the U.S.( Pakistan parliament slams cartoons)
- “We strongly denounce and condemn this horrific action” - Iran’s Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani
Now I don’t have a problem with Muslim people being upset about a depiction of Mohammed. They have every reason not to like it. (but note to Mr. Chirac - I personally am offended when people chant “Death to America” in response to a cartoon in a Danish newspaper four months ago).
I find it very strange just how much supposed outrage there is in response to these images. Trying to pressure the Danish government into using it’s power to censor these images, now months later after original publication, seems more than simply misguided. All of the demonstrations and petty protest thuggishness seems very far over the top.
Can you imagine if a Christian said “”If they want a war of religions, we are ready!” or chanted “Long live Christianity, destroy our enemies.” Do you think the press coverage would be positive? Do you think the Christian leadership would be appeased with promises of press responsibility?
Instead we are treated to tax dollars paying for “artwork” like Piss Christ. And network television shows like Book of Daniel (Sex. Drugs. Stolen Money and Martinis. Family can really test your faith.). Somehow Chistians seem to have found a way to look past these distasteful attempts to detract from their religion.
No one has to be happy if their religious beliefs are mocked. They can and should work to try to correct that. But to me it seems like this stuff is a staged demonstration of outrage in the Muslim world against the West, looking for an excuse to be vented. And it just so happended to pick out some silly cartoons to use this time.
Yesterday Georgia’s House approved House Bill 950, supposedly aimed at making it OK to say ‘Merry Christmas’ again. According to reports (Gwinnett Daily Post, ‘Merry
Christmas’ bill clears House):
Public school students and public workers in Georgia would be able to say “Merry Christmas’’ to their friends and colleagues without fear of official retaliation under provisions of a bill the House approved Tuesday. The legislation, which passed 136-25 and now goes to the Senate, is among a series of measures taken up by state lawmakers across the country following episodes where schools or retailers were reported as having instructed their students or employees to substitute nonreligious holiday greetings for “Merry Christmas.’’
I’m really having a hard time getting worked up about this right now. I’m sure that Rep. Cox had the best intentions when drafting this legislation. Perhaps he was sick and tired of hearing ‘Happy Holidays’. It certainly seemed that many people were more vocal about the replacement of the word ‘Christmas’ this year than ever before.
But do we really need another government law? According to earlier accounts (AJC, Merry Christmas vs. Happy Holidays), the proposal "prohibits any government agency, including local school boards, from adopting a policy restricting the use of “verbal expressions relating to the celebration or observance of any public or legal holiday."
So if you are unhappy with the P.C. statement from your local Wal-Mart door holder, you’re out of luck. Maybe your employer doesn’t permit Christmas expressions. Too bad. But local school boards better not draft a rule against saying Merry Christmas! (Like local school boards actually have any intelligence left anymore now in the world of ‘zero tolerance’).
Sadly, as much as I love Christmas… this is the wrong place for government to be worrying. A waste of time and money to get Rep. Cox a little publicity. Much like congressional investigations into steriod use in baseball (S. 1114: Clean Sports Act of 2005), gasoline prices (H.R. 3544: Gasoline Price Stabilization Act of 2005), political grist (H. Res. 363: Requesting the President and directing the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Attorney General to transmit to the House of Representatives not later than 14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution documents in the possession of the President and those officials relating to the disclosure of the identity and employment of Ms. Valerie Plame), or making Election Day a Fedreal Holiday (S. 1130: Democracy Day Act of 2005).
If I go into a store, it doesn’t bother me to hear the words “Happy Holidays” or “Season’s Greetings”. There are multiple holidays. I’m sure the last thing a store wishes to do is to offend someone who’s Jewish or Muslim or Alien. I’m much more upset with Lowe’s for hanging a banner outside their store advertising the sale of seasonal “Holiday Trees” than anything this law would seek to protect. They are Christmas Trees. They are not used in the celebration of Hanukkah or Ramadan or even a made-up holiday like Kwanzaa. They are not even a religious symbol. If even a secular part of Christmas can’t be identified as such for fear of ‘offending’ someone, then that’s the real outrage.
Rep. Cox, please take your bill (and your good intentions) home with you, and set to work on something truely important for Georgia instead.
