Cartoon anger is a misrepresentation (5 Viewers)

Zé Tahir

JhoolayLaaaal!
Moderator
Dec 10, 2004
29,281
#1
Western embassies in Middle Eastern cities have been torched. Angry crowds have marched in the streets of London carrying placards calling for beheadings and massacres.

Yet despite how it looks on television news, the response to the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad has mostly been non-violent so far.

There were no demonstrations at all in a sizeable number of Muslim countries. In Iran, Egypt, Pakistan and Iraq, the demonstrations passed off quietly.

There has been serious trouble in Gaza, Damascus and Beirut, but in each case, local tensions clearly boiled up and found their expression in this particular issue.

In Syria, such violence is so rare that some people have wondered whether the attacks on the Danish and Norwegian embassies might not have been provoked by government agents, in order to discredit the beleaguered Islamists there.

In Lebanon, the continuing tension between supporters of the Syrians and supporters of the Americans played a part in the violence in Beirut.

When a breakaway group started to attack a Christian church at Ashrafiya, a group of Muslim clerics did everything they could to stop them.

Delayed reaction

How did a series of not particularly well-drawn or funny cartoons, published on 30 September in a Danish newspaper, produce such anger in Europe and the Middle East four months later?

If anyone fanned the flames, it was not Osama Bin Laden.

Instead, it was the mild, distinctly moderate figure of Ahmed Aboul Gheit, the Foreign Minister of Egypt.

As early as November, he was protesting about the cartoons, and calling them an insult.

"Egypt," he said, "has confronted this disgraceful act and will continue to confront such insults."

Perhaps it was a convenient way for the Egyptian government to demonstrate some Islamic credentials while not attacking any of the countries which really matter to Egypt.

He raised the issue at various international meetings. Slowly the news filtered out to the streets.

Past reminders


There are various similarities with the case of Salman Rushdie's book The Satanic Verses.

That also took months to come to general attention in 1989.

It was only when Ayatollah Khomeini was told about the way the book dealt with the Prophet Muhammad that he issued his condemnation of it and his threat to Rushdie's life.

The demonstrations became increasingly violent.

Much the same arguments were used then as now, about where freedom of speech ends and gratuitous insults begin.

Militant secularists clashed on air and in print with militant Islamists, each talking past each other.

At one point, Rushdie recanted and asked for forgiveness. At least one of the book's translators seems to have been murdered.

But The Satanic Verses continued to make good money, and the British government asked Rushdie to pay part of the high cost of his own protection.

Eventually the threat faded, and he went to live in America.

Double standards

In 1989, when the Satanic Verses demonstrations were at their height, I was making my way across Afghanistan to Kabul, which was still in the hands of the pro-Soviet Communists.

My guides came from a group of Islamic mujahideen.

In a cave in the mountains outside the city, I was invited to meet a number of local elders who wanted to know why Britain, or any other Western country, would allow a book which seemed to be so insulting to Islam to be published.

In the chilly gloom of the cave, with a glass of tea and a plate of sugared mulberries in front of me, the magnificent old men with their turbans and beards filed in and sat down on the carpets, their AK-47s beside them.

I began with the quote - attributed to Voltaire - about hating what other people say but fighting to the death for their right to say it.

I told them that the West wanted people to be free to express themselves as they wanted - this, I said, was why Europe and the US had supported the Afghan mujahideen against the Soviet invaders.

They nodded politely, but I could see they were not convinced.

Why, one of the elders asked again and again, did we allow the Prophet Muhammad to be insulted when we knew how much distress it would cause individual Muslims?

He had a point; after all, a number of European countries would not allow a deeply anti-Semitic book to be published, and have made it a criminal offence to deny the Holocaust.

Why should it not also be illegal to insult the Prophet?

Yet insulting and openly anti-Semitic cartoons and articles often appear in the press in Muslim countries, and we in the West rightly find that deeply offensive.

And when extremists march through the streets, applaud bloodthirsty crimes like the attacks of 11 September and 7 July, that is no less insulting than publishing unfunny and deliberately goading cartoons.

We must not imagine this has the support of the great mass of British Muslims.

Quite the contrary: the groups with their ill-spelt placards are just an unrepresentative, repudiated fringe.

In much the same way, we should not think the entire Muslim world is in flames about it.

But we must understand that many Muslims around the world feel increasingly beleaguered.

Increasing that sense will do nothing to help anyone.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4685886.stm
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

Hambon

Lion of the Desert
Apr 22, 2005
8,073
#3
Religion & Ethics are not things to mess with ....that goes for muslims and other religions.....This "Freedom Of Speech" that these danish think is a right that should be limited. This incedint is what will bring them down to there Knees......They are totaly forgeting that The Middle East doesnt need them whatsoever. We used to think danish people were quiet intellectuals who respected everyone but i guess we were wrong ( i am not speaking for the whole of denmark)

The Danish will really feel this the Incident in thier pockets as it will dent thier economy heavily......The Middle east holds precious oil that the world needs and also a huge market for goods and materials this will all affect the danish for thier Stupid act of Disrespecting our prophet. Even the Bush, Blair, France & Germany have condoned these cartoons...but no the danish are still standing firm....we will see who budges first.....because they are in need not us...

THis is the first amendment from the BILL of Rights...take note that Religion is stated first to show the utmost respect.....Freedom of the press comes later....Freedom of the press should be limited since it allways tend to cause bias and instigations more then information

Bill of Rights
Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,661
#6
That same Bill also states the Seperation of Church and State. Where government and the State are two seperate entities. Sure anti-Islamic writings are bad but if it had been an American newspaper that printed those cartoons our government would have done nothing as well. The same as if someone had written cartoons about Jesus. I cant speak for Denmark because Im unfamiliar with there law but I feel there opinions on the matter to be similar to the US.


PS. The establishment of religion coming before freedom of the press doesnt really mean anything of significance. Its just first in a list. If it said the establishment of religion before everything else then you would be correct.;)
 

Hambon

Lion of the Desert
Apr 22, 2005
8,073
#7
THe point is ....no other country in time has done what they have done with thier freedom of speech.....not america not the Uk not saudi arabia...nobody....it just makes you think more what is the limit of freedom of speech??? this will be a hard lesson for them....
 

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#9
That first post is a very well written and objective piece, one of the few I've read anywhere actually.

I've got several qualms/points with this whole thing.

1) How DARE anybody tell the western world we aren't allowed to publish such cartoons when anti-semitic imagery is apparently all over the press in the Muslim world

2) If anybody put in newspapers offensive pictures of Jesus, you wouldn't (I'd bet my bottom dollar) see ANY violent protests, let alone people encouraging the beheading of those responsible for the offence

3) Why the hell were none of these morons arrested that were marching through the streets inciting violence/murder against "those who offend islam" yet a couple of folk who did a counter protest, doing something or other with images of Muhammed, were arrested immediately. HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD!?

Why on earth we tolerate these people living in our society is beyond me and the government should me ashamed of themselves. They make me fucking sick and are an absolute joke. These twats should be shipped off to where they came from, and if they won't go voluntarily, should face a firing squad.
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,661
#10
hambon said:
THe point is ....no other country in time has done what they have done with thier freedom of speech.....not america not the Uk not saudi arabia...nobody....it just makes you think more what is the limit of freedom of speech??? this will be a hard lesson for them....
Actually. In Amerca racist hate groups put out worse things than those cartoons everyday. Pamphlets to given to youth about killing Blacks, Jews, Arabs, Gays, Feminists, Hispanics, and those that like them. The organizations are even allowed to hold public rallies in which they burn crosses and comdem people of all races and religions. And yet that same law allows them to do so. But they are not so different from several groups in the Middle East who are allowed to do the same thing. You are correct my friend there is a fine line when it comes to free speech. But how many times have Islamic extremist called for the destruction of America and other western powers with little of no prosecution given by their governments. Perhaps those countries do not want to turn their backs on their people no matter how messed up they are. Perhaps it is the same reason the Danish government does not act as many people wish.
 

AzherIqbal

Junior Member
Nov 15, 2005
288
#11
Tom said:
That first post is a very well written and objective piece, one of the few I've read anywhere actually.

I've got several qualms/points with this whole thing.

1) How DARE anybody tell the western world we aren't allowed to publish such cartoons when anti-semitic imagery is apparently all over the press in the Muslim world

2) If anybody put in newspapers offensive pictures of Jesus, you wouldn't (I'd bet my bottom dollar) see ANY violent protests, let alone people encouraging the beheading of those responsible for the offence

3) Why the hell were none of these morons arrested that were marching through the streets inciting violence/murder against "those who offend islam" yet a couple of folk who did a counter protest, doing something or other with images of Muhammed, were arrested immediately. HAS THE WORLD GONE MAD!?

Why on earth we tolerate these people living in our society is beyond me and the government should me ashamed of themselves. They make me fucking sick and are an absolute joke. These twats should be shipped off to where they came from, and if they won't go voluntarily, should face a firing squad.
@tom

With regards to point 1, two wrongs dont make a right.

Just because taking the piss/making fun out of Jesus has become the norm in Chirstendom, does'nt justify the cartoons.

I agree with you on point 3.
 

Tom

The DJ
Oct 30, 2001
11,726
#12
I know two wrongs don't make a right, however there is nothing imo wrong with a little piss taking out of religion. BUT we've been there before on these forums and it always ends up the same way. My point was really that its incredibly hypocritical for people, especially arab governments (who lets face it should know better) to complain about the images when they do nothing to stop the anti-semitic imagery in their own press!
 
Sep 28, 2002
13,975
#13
hambon said:
The Danish will really feel this the Incident in thier pockets as it will dent thier economy heavily......The Middle east holds precious oil that the world needs and also a huge market for goods and materials this will all affect the danish for thier Stupid act of Disrespecting our prophet. Even the Bush, Blair, France & Germany have condoned these cartoons...but no the danish are still standing firm....we will see who budges first.....because they are in need not us...
that kind of behaviour is even more disgusting. i believe i will speak by your logic here. did god gave all the oil to arabs because he wanted them to make from countries who dont have money?
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,661
#14
Tom said:
I know two wrongs don't make a right, however there is nothing imo wrong with a little piss taking out of religion. BUT we've been there before on these forums and it always ends up the same way. My point was really that its incredibly hypocritical for people, especially arab governments (who lets face it should know better) to complain about the images when they do nothing to stop the anti-semitic imagery in their own press!
Good point.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 4)