Muhammad cartoon

[DngrRuss]

Wow. I mean, just... wow.

Okay- the muslims are upset because of cartoons depicting Mohammed. The Joint Chiefs are upset over a cartoon depicting and injured soldier as "battle hardened".

GET THE HELL OVER IT FOLKS. It's just a cartoon.

Watching the news today just makes me cringe. Muslims in many countries are protesting and threatening violence over political cartoons depicting Mohammed. They say that Islamic law states that any depiction of the prophet is blasphemous. Fine. But your religous law does not rule us all. Of the many things that are just annoying the hell out me on this topic, 2 of them bubble up to the top:

1-If anyone purportedly representing your agenda (religous, cultural, racial, topical, etc.) takes public and political action (do what we want, or we'll blow you up- etc.), you have opened yourself up for public- and even international- scrutiny. That scrutiny may not be flattering, and even offensive. Tough. If you can't stand the heat...

2-Watching CNN this morning, they even pixeled out the face of the prophet from the cartoon so as not to offend viewers. Okay- as silly as I thought that was- I can understand CNN not wanting to anger an already angry group of people and put their offices and staff at risk. But, video of some of the protests show very graphic cartoons carried by protestors depicting decapitations of westerners (I assume Europeans) in suits for offending their sensativities. HUH? A cartoon offends you so much you call for beheadings? What the hell is wrong with you? I am all for worshipping and observing your spiritually however you want- but come on. This is just silly. If you don't like cartoons depicting Mohammed in a negative light, then START POLICING FROM WITHIN. Someone kills in the name of Mohammed- Condemn them! Fight back against them! Seperate yourself from them. Don't threaten to kill cartoonists and newspaper editors- eliminate the terrorists that make the opinion of those outside your faith negative.

Also on CNN this morning, they interviewed a religous writer about why Muslims are so offended by these cartoons. At the end of the interview, he states (I'm paraphrasing) that Jews and Christians have also been depicted negatively in cartoons. If it is wrong for one faith it is wrong for them all and it should not happen at all. HUH? Should not happen at all? Screw you and your PC ideology. If anyone of any faith, or culture, or whatever, goes into a public forum and makes statements or takes action- THEN SHUT UP AND TAKE YOUR LUMPS!

Then, another cartoon was shown depicting a seriously injured soldier and an army doctor listing his diagnosis as "battle hardened". The Joint Chiefs are upset saying it's deplorable. Is it insensitive? Is it destroying morale? I don't care if it is or not, what it is is a CARTOON. It is a political satire in response to statements made by Rumsfeld and it is supposed to hit hard. If you don't like it, that's fine. You have the right to not like it. You can complain and be unhappy about it. But, don't expect scrutiny to not happen. This is the same mentality that says that if you don't agree with the administration's views and statements- you're UnAmerican or a Traitor. GIMME A BREAK!

I can't stand this idea that anyone has the god given right to not be offended. This idea of political correctness is just ridiculous. I can understand not intentionally offending someone if that is your choice. I do not intentionally offend those I have discourse with, unless I am trying to stir the pot or make a glaring point and drive it home.

But if I do offend someone, one of two things happens-
If it was unintentional- I apologize.
If it was intentional- I stand by my statement and tell them why I am making such statements.

 

[DngrRuss]

So I just saw the other thread on this topic- sorry for starting a new thread when it was not needed.

I just rant and rant...

 

[Ping898]

A lot of the articles I am seeing in newspapers seem to be making the assumption that the cartoons were done on purpose to offend. Has anyone seen anything that says these artists drew the cartoons or the newspapers specifically published the cartoons to offend the Muslim community?

The reality of this world is after the violence that has been almost constantly happening, I think that much of the Muslim community is viewed as being represented by the radicals who are terrorists and suicide bombers. I could easily see the cartoon as being used by the Muslim community to wake up to the fact that IMO much of the non-muslim world views them as dangerous and that they need to make efforts to change that view if they don't want to see political cartoons like that.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Has the paper ever run off color or insulting cartoons that feature other religious figures, from other religions? If so then it can be chalked up to equal time. If not, then it could be just to harass Muslims, and if that is the case then Muslims do have a reason to be upset.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

I wonder what the "I understand their emotions" crowd has to say about the Tom Toles cartoon of the American soldier missing his arms and legs?

 

[Flatlander]

Mod Note:

2 Threads of similar topic merged.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Then, another cartoon was shown depicting a seriously injured soldier and an army doctor listing his diagnosis as "battle hardened". The Joint Chiefs are upset saying it's deplorable. Is it insensitive? Is it destroying morale? I don't care if it is or not, what it is is a CARTOON. It is a political satire in response to statements made by Rumsfeld and it is supposed to hit hard. If you don't like it, that's fine. You have the right to not like it. You can complain and be unhappy about it. But, don't expect scrutiny to not happen. This is the same mentality that says that if you don't agree with the administration's views and statements- you're UnAmerican or a Traitor. GIMME A BREAK!

Who said anything about being "UnAmerican" or a "Traitor"? I have the freedom to voice my opinion about a distasteful cartoon as much as anybody else and not get labeled a "censor". I heard the Joint Cheifs letter read. They voiced their displeasure about the cartoon but said nothing about removing it or closing down the paper or the artist. Seems like your side of the coin likes to trot out the "censorship" wagon every time somebody complains about someting in the paper you dont necessarially disagree with. Censorship is the government shutting down the paper and/or the artist. Saying that his cartoon was disgusting is as much their right as mine.

 

[Don Roley]

They say that Islamic law states that any depiction of the prophet is blasphemous. Fine. But your religous law does not rule us all.

You kind of see now the they do indeed think that their rules govern us all.

And whether the newspaper was trying to be rude or not is besides the point. It is like the display of a crucifix in urine. A lot of people protested over that because it was funded by American tax payer dollars. Was it meant to be rude, or was it meant to make a statement about modern Christianity and make us think about it? But no one reasonable said they had no right to do it at all.

The key point is that they expect us to censor ourselves to follow their rules. That is what should be causing you concern.

 

[Rich Parsons]

If someone was a Muslim, and their laws dictate not to have any images of Muhammad, then that is their business.

Yet to get upset with people of another culture, and to take up arms in protest is not the words of Muhammad either.

To show how things get out of wack, Wheh someone of the Islam Faith goes swimming there are rules for how much skin show for both men and women. In Ann Arbor at the local YMCA (* Ignore it is a Christian org as it has nothing to do with the comparison. Please. Thank you *), they would not let the local Muslims to swim in their clothes. As it was a safety risk. With a recent new Swim suit designed to be a loose body suit, as skin tight is not desirable either, made of normal swim suit material has been approved. Now their complaints of be discriminated against are over, as they can swim, and still follow their faith. If they had a swimming pool of their own they could swim on their property and do it with regular clothes and be fine. Yet when in a public pool, they must follow local rules and ordinances. So to expect people to change their local laws for them. with out due process is not reasonable.

It would be like, me claiming to be non-religious insisting that all religious meetings and prayers insult me, and claim that all forms of such religous actions must stop universe wide. This is an unreasonable expectation.

 

[Don Roley]

This was in the Friday International Herald Tribune in Japan. I hope this case is not the only one as it is a small glimmer of hope.

The editor of Al-Shihan in Jordan, Jihad Momani ran the cartoons in his paper so people could see them for themselves and said this,

Muslims of the world, be reasonable. What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?

This picture was a comment about the way Islam is viewed through its actions. Maybe we should be pressing the point that if they spent some time protesting the false hate speech in their own media and stood up and said that suicide bombings are wrong, then Islam would be viewed with less suspicion in the west.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Whether it be rude and offensive speech about Muhammad or rude and offensive speech about soldiers with missing limbs...the answer to free speech we find abusive or incendiary is.....MORE FREE SPEECH!!!!

Ain't liberty grand?

No other place i'd rather live, or era in history i'd rather exist in, than the free Western World. At least you don't, as a rule, get shot, burned out or hung for saying something that might be considered insulting to Allah (or anyone else for that matter).

 

[DngrRuss]

Whether it be rude and offensive speech about Muhammad or rude and offensive speech about soldiers with missing limbs...the answer to free speech we find abusive or incendiary is.....MORE FREE SPEECH!!!!

Ain't liberty grand?

No other place i'd rather live, or era in history i'd rather exist in, than the free Western World. At least you don't, as a rule, get shot, burned out or hung for saying something that might be considered insulting to Allah (or anyone else for that matter).

Dang Sgt- we agree again?

We gotta stop doing that or people are going to talk

 

[sgtmac_46]

Dang Sgt- we agree again?

We gotta stop doing that or people are going to talk

I know. We keep this up, and people are going to start thinking there's hope for the rest of the world.

In all seriousness, my natural inclinations are libertarian. It's exceedingly rare that I would suggest further restricting freedoms is the answer to anything. Usually, I do fall on the side of more severe punishment for violations of laws we already have, but that's an entirely different story.

I feel if we severely punish violations of a few, reasonable laws, then it's unnecessary to keep making MORE laws. For example, it's unnecessary to make laws against 'hate speech' (def. Any speech that offends some interest group) that incites people to burn buildings and kill people....if we aggressively enforce the laws we already have against burning buildings and killing people. If a group of people congregates to peacefully protest the speech of another, that is their right....to peaceably assemble.

If those same people, however, begin burning buildings and hurting and killing innocent people, we should shoot those who forcefully resist the attempt of the lawful authority to regain control, and arrest those who caused the acts of violence and destruction in the first place.

That's why threats of violence should not be enough in a free society to enforce silence on people's rights of free speech. Free speech is a right. Enforcing your views on other citizens through violence is NOT a right. Therefore, if Muslims wish to stiffle dissent in the Islamic world through violence and force, that's their perogative, I suppose. However, they WILL not use the same tactics if they expect to live in the Western World (or at least not the US, as it's clear some other Western nations are prepared to tolerate it). If they live here, they are to respect the same laws and views on liberty that we have adopted and embraced for well over 200 years...even IF someone insults Allah.

 

[Don Roley]

This was in the Friday International Herald Tribune in Japan. I hope this case is not the only one as it is a small glimmer of hope.

The editor of Al-Shihan in Jordan, Jihad Momani ran the cartoons in his paper so people could see them for themselves and said this,

"Muslims of the world, be reasonable. What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?"

Sadly, the editor was arrested.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...afp/europeislammediajordanarrest_060204143615

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Sadly, the editor was arrested.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2630&ncid=2630&e=31&u=/afp/20060204/wl_mideast_afp/europeislammediajordanarrest_060204143615

That is so sad - say something reasonable and your freedom, and perhas your life as well, is in jeopardy. That part of the world is in sore need of a Renaissance and a liberalization (in the traditional sense meaning loosening of controls). This will be a slow process, however, and they must do it THEMSELVES. Shock democracy or democracy imposed by gunpoint (invasion), will only, IMO, bring groups such as Hamas, The Islamic Brotherhood, and the folks like Sadr to eventual power.

Although I am not a Christian, I have ALWAYS been offended by "art" that attacked and desecreted Christian symbols or beliefs. It is puzzling (and disturbing) to me that Christianity is considered fair game and other faiths are untouchable. For the record I would have preferred the editors not to have ran this particular cartoon. However; it was their right to do so and blaming the GOVERNMENTS AND NATIONS involved shows that much of the Middle Eastern world has a fundamental misunderstanding of democracy.

 

[sgtmac_46]

That is so sad - say something reasonable and your freedom, and perhas your life as well, is in jeopardy. That part of the world is in sore need of a Renaissance and a liberalization (in the traditional sense meaning loosening of controls). This will be a slow process, however, and they must do it THEMSELVES. Shock democracy or democracy imposed by gunpoint (invasion), will only, IMO, bring groups such as Hamas, The Islamic Brotherhood, and the folks like Sadr to eventual power.

Although I am not a Christian, I have ALWAYS been offended by "art" that attacked and desecreted Christian symbols or beliefs. It is puzzling (and disturbing) to me that Christianity is considered fair game and other faiths are untouchable. For the record I would have preferred the editors not to have ran this particular cartoon. However; it was their right to do so and blaming the GOVERNMENTS AND NATIONS involved shows that much of the Middle Eastern world has a fundamental misunderstanding of democracy.

Keep in mind the very word 'Islam' means 'Obedience to God'. Therefore, Islam, as much as any other religion, is founded on the principle of absolute obedience, without question, to that religious ideal. NOT responding in the prescribed manner to a threat against Islam, real or perceived, is considered the same as committing it. Duty becomes a central tenent in Islam.

For example, when the Ayatollah Khomeini issued his famous Fatwa against Salman Rushdie, it was declared the 'Duty' of every pious muslim to carry it out.

 

[DuneViking]

Quote
DngrRuss

Wow. I mean, just... wow.
Okay- the muslims are upset because of cartoons depicting Mohammed. The Joint Chiefs are upset over a cartoon depicting and injured soldier as "battle hardened".
GET THE HELL OVER IT FOLKS. It's just a cartoon.
End Quote

Thousands of americans have died protecting the rights and freedoms of others as well as their countries over the years. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? The Danish ALL wore the Star of David when the Nazis called for jews to do so. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? While I am not a fan of the french of late, some French at least had an underground movement to help save lives during WWII. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? We should be considerate of the feelings of these others that call for deaths of entire countries for publishing a cartoon why??

One should instead ask "Why has the satire in cartoon emerged?" Some crazy people twisting a faith in religion to serve their own warped minds walk into crowds of innocent people and blow themselves up. I am ashamed for what I am about to say, just two words- PARKING LOT! That is about how much I sympathize with those that call for death. The moderate sensible people who follow that faith must endure satire just as the rest of the world does.
:soapbox: :viking1:

 

[Martial Tucker]

This was in the Friday International Herald Tribune in Japan. I hope this case is not the only one as it is a small glimmer of hope.

The editor of Al-Shihan in Jordan, Jihad Momani ran the cartoons in his paper so people could see them for themselves and said this,



This picture was a comment about the way Islam is viewed through its actions. Maybe we should be pressing the point that if they spent some time protesting the false hate speech in their own media and stood up and said that suicide bombings are wrong, then Islam would be viewed with less suspicion in the west.

Yes. The violent reaction from the Muslim world over a cartoon only serves to reinforce the message of the very cartoon that they are protesting. It's almost as if they were being "baited", and they not only took the bait, but swallowed the hook.....

 

[Jonathan Randall]

Thousands of americans have died protecting the rights and freedoms of others as well as their countries over the years. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? The Danish ALL wore the Star of David when the Nazis called for jews to do so. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? While I am not a fan of the french of late, some French at least had an underground movement to help save lives during WWII. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? We should be considerate of the feelings of these others that call for deaths of entire countries for publishing a cartoon why??

It should also be remembered that, despite our differences with the French, their forces were some of the first into Afghanistan after 9/11.

While I do not like cartoons that make fun of other people's faith, calling for their deaths is way out of line.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Quote
DngrRuss

Wow. I mean, just... wow.
Okay- the muslims are upset because of cartoons depicting Mohammed. The Joint Chiefs are upset over a cartoon depicting and injured soldier as "battle hardened".
GET THE HELL OVER IT FOLKS. It's just a cartoon.
End Quote

Thousands of americans have died protecting the rights and freedoms of others as well as their countries over the years. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? The Danish ALL wore the Star of David when the Nazis called for jews to do so. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? While I am not a fan of the french of late, some French at least had an underground movement to help save lives during WWII. What Arab nations have made such sacrifice? We should be considerate of the feelings of these others that call for deaths of entire countries for publishing a cartoon why??

For the record, many 'Arabs' cheered during the holocaust. The Grand Mufti of Palestine was a close friend of the Nazi high-command, and is considered one of the architects of the 'Final Solution'. In fact, it was his anger at the original plan to deport jews to Palestine that resulted in the time table being sped up.

The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan. ... He was one of Eichmann's best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures. I heard him say, accompanied by Eichmann, he had visited incognito the gas chamber of Auschwitz.

http://www.palestinefacts.org/pf_mandate_grand_mufti.php


He personally helped recruit Nazi SS Muslim divisions in Serbia. He also escaped war crimes trials after WWII because the west feared angering the Arab world. He was the uncle and person hero to Yasser Arafat, and is still considered a national hero.