News Muhammad Caricatures: Middle East Reaction & Nordic Press

[TheStatutoryApe]

but in a newspaper especially when they have a very bad impression of western countries, it could be quite differnt as you see.

I'm not on either side in this issue really. I'm equally willing to tell a stupid person that he should not be provoking people with his drawings as I am to tell a stupid person not to make bomb threats over drawings.

You know if muslims didn't pay attentin to this caricature, perhaps most of people wouldn't know about this caricature at all. AND I guess muslims just fine knew this fact but they've decided to react against it anyway in order to prevent the same/ or worse action in the future!

The problem is that I do not think they are preventing anything. The man's drawing was meant to provoke people. He got exactly what he wanted (though he may not have liked the death threats much). As long as people like him exist and people exist who like to have such strong reactions they will continue to feed each other with reasons to do what they do.
Aside from giving the man what he was looking for it could also be said that this outrage has only confirmed the biased view that people have of muslim society in general.
People (some any way) think that the muslim community does not respect the same values and sense of freedom that they do, which in this case would be freedom of speech. People (again some) think that the muslim community naturally overracts, such as boycotting an entire country over a drawing printed by one newspaper. People (same as before) think that the muslim community responds to any slight with threats of violence. So what has the Muslim community done here in their protest against this bias to assuage themselves of the biased view upon them?

I don't think any less of these people for their reaction since it's a natural one for many people and a hard thing to overcome. I just think they could have handled this better. Sorry if I seem biased but the misguided actions of several people is more serious to me than the misguided actions of an individual.

P.S. Sorry if my reply is a bit difficult to understand.

No reason to be sorry. Talking to you is always more than worth a bit of difficult reading.

 

[Anttech]

You utterly miss the point of this caricature - and, I think, why the reaction is so violent: Since radical Islamists use their religion as the justification for terrorism, it is they who are putting that bomb on Mohammed's head. That is why they get so upset about it - it shines a bright spotlight on their hypocrisy.

I think you are also missing a point, radical Islamists do not use their religion as the justification for terrorism. The Actions especially of the American government are what justifies it in there eyes. The Qu'an says in this context they are allowed to fight back, "eye for an eye." Maybe Symantics, but it gives more of a complete picture, rather than a biased view. Terrorism isn't excusable, but neither is the actions of the West in the ME. Once everyone stops pointing fingers and starts talking in a political context then maybe there will be peace.

Thats my interpretation

Anyway its gone beyond a cartoon, its now about something totally different...

 

[Lisa!]

I'm not on either side in this issue really. I'm equally willing to tell a stupid person that he should not be provoking people with his drawings as I am to tell a stupid person not to make bomb threats over drawings.


The problem is that I do not think they are preventing anything. The man's drawing was meant to provoke people. He got exactly what he wanted (though he may not have liked the death threats much). As long as people like him exist and people exist who like to have such strong reactions they will continue to feed each other with reasons to do what they do.
Aside from giving the man what he was looking for it could also be said that this outrage has only confirmed the biased view that people have of muslim society in general.
People (some any way) think that the muslim community does not respect the same values and sense of freedom that they do, which in this case would be freedom of speech. People (again some) think that the muslim community naturally overracts, such as boycotting an entire country over a drawing printed by one newspaper. People (same as before) think that the muslim community responds to any slight with threats of violence. So what has the Muslim community done here in their protest against this bias to assuage themselves of the biased view upon them?

I don't think any less of these people for their reaction since it's a natural one for many people and a hard thing to overcome. I just think they could have handled this better. Sorry if I seem biased but the misguided actions of several people is more serious to me than the misguided actions of an individual.


No reason to be sorry. Talking to you is always more than worth a bit of difficult reading.

You know as I said before I'm not talking about the accuracy of what mulims are doing in return. In fact I just wanted to say that the russ_watter's interpretation of muslims' actions couldn't be right and fair.
Now I guess I have to be out of here since I also find this discussions somehow boring and useless!

P.S. Thank yo very much for being patient with me!

 

[Hurkyl]

Here's a terribly cynical thought that struck me as I was about to leave for work:

What if this isn't about the cartoon at all? What if Muslims are just testing to see how much power and influence they can squeeze out of terrorism? And what if they're just testing to see how much we will let them get away with?


I attended a lecture a year or two ago on the Islamist movement, and why the Islamic community appears not to do much about it. It was suggested that defending one's homeland was a holy duty, and so the moderate Islams are very leery of condemning anything that might possibly have a tenuous connection with said duty.

It seems (to me) that it wasn't just the Islams that are leery, and there are many people outside the Islamic world who are willing to let the terrorists get away with murder, because their feelings are "understandable".

So after reflecting on all of this, it seems a distinct possibility (I did not say "likely") that the extremists are just testing how far the outside world will let them go, on the basis of having an "understandable" reaction.

 

[Azael]

well the editor of a french paper that published the cartoons has gotten fired and the Eu embassy in gaza has been raided.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4672642.stm

Seems like now when the original paper has apologised long ago this has just turned into a situation where a lot of people just want to run around pissed for no reason. Maby a nice way to ignore everything wrong in there own countries.

 

[russ_watters]

I think you are also missing a point, radical Islamists do not use their religion as the justification for terrorism. The Actions especially of the American government are what justifies it in there eyes. The Qu'an says in this context they are allowed to fight back, "eye for an eye." Maybe Symantics...

Yes, it is semantics - either way, they cite the Koran before killing unconnected civilians.

 

[Anttech]

Here's a terribly cynical thought that struck me as I was about to leave for work:

What if this isn't about the cartoon at all? What if Muslims are just testing to see how much power and influence they can squeeze out of terrorism? And what if they're just testing to see how much we will let them get away with?I attended a lecture a year or two ago on the Islamist movement, and why the Islamic community appears not to do much about it. It was suggested that defending one's homeland was a holy duty, and so the moderate Islams are very leery of condemning anything that might possibly have a tenuous connection with said duty.

It seems (to me) that it wasn't just the Islams that are leery, and there are many people outside the Islamic world who are willing to let the terrorists get away with murder, because their feelings are "understandable".

So after reflecting on all of this, it seems a distinct possibility (I did not say "likely") that the extremists are just testing how far the outside world will let them go, on the basis of having an "understandable" reaction.

Yeh its cynical... Actually its more a consipercy theory.

Its very simple:

The terrorists are terrorising because they feel they have cause too.. Not as an "experiement"

 

[Anttech]

Yes, it is semantics - either way, they cite the Koran before killing unconnected civilians.

... In an effort to make the american government listen to them...

Its wrong.. Its terrible...

 

[russ_watters]

Don't try to interpret people's actions the way you want!

What gives you that right and not me?!??

I'm not judging the accuracy of their action, but I'm just saying that it's 21 century and we should learn to respect each other's beliefs and the lowest respect you can show is NOT to direspect one's belief or make fun of it.

Setting aside the actions of those who oppose it, you are still missing the message that the caricature was intended to convey. It is not making fun of Islam.

And 1 more point: muslims get the feeling that western politicians are trying to ruin the reputation of Isalm in the world.(I agree that OBL is doing a greater job than western politicians !)

I think you just argued against your own point: it is OBL, not western politicians, who is ruining the reputation of Islam. And that is the point of the cartoon.

P.S. Perhpa the newspaper get annoyed by Hamas's success in election, so they decide to annoy all muslims in the world!(Note that even peaceful muslims who live in western countries are annoyed as well. although base on what you're saying it has nothing against them!)

No, this cartoon originated before the election. I'm actually not sure why the radical islamic community is choosing to get upset about it now.

 

[russ_watters]

That's right! But you don't have the right to offend people dileberately by what you're saying.

In the western world, yeah, you do. In fact, that's the reason the freedom exists!

Anyway I think we need to have more discussion on freedom of speech. It's not as simple as it seems at the first sight!

I'd be very interested to hear what you think freedom of speech should look like given the above.

 

[Anttech]

I think you just argued against your own point: it is OBL, not western politicians, who is ruining the reputation of Islam. And that is the point of the cartoon.

Its also the western politicans that are ruining the reputation of the west.. so what.. Untill you see both sides to this problem, there won't be any peace..

 

[russ_watters]

If you ask me muslims should be more offended by what some people like OBL do by the name of Islam.

Good...

...it's trying to link terrorist attacks with the message of Islam!

Like I said several times before: it isn't necessary to try to link terrorists acts to Islam - terrorists cite Islam all the time and provide the link themselves.

 

[russ_watters]

Its also the western politicans that are ruining the reputation of the west.. so what.. Untill you see both sides to this problem, there won't be any peace..

I do see that side of the problem! You're the one arguing on behalf of terrorists, not me, so don't come after me with that hypocricy crap. But regardless, that doesn't have anything to do with whether or not:

1. It is ok to make political cartoons.
2. It is ok to make death threats about political cartoons.

 

[Anttech]

Like I said several times before: it isn't necessary to try to link terrorists acts to Islam - terrorists cite Islam all the time and provide the link themselves.

They also cite the wests engagement in the ME, and corrupt polictics, so that also links the west to the terrorism

 

[Anttech]

I do see that side of the problem! But that doesn't have anything to do with whether or not

Glad to hear it!

1. It is ok to make political cartoons.
2. It is ok to make death threats about political cartoons.

As I said before, this has esscalated to far more than about a cartoon..

 

[russ_watters]

They also cite the wests engagement in the ME, and corrupt polictics, so that also links the west to the terrorism

Yes, and...? Do you think that somehow makes it ok to pervert a religion? Do you think that makes the cartoon incorrect in it's assertion that terrorists are perverting the religion?

As I said before, this has esscalated to far more than about a cartoon..

I must have missed that...I'll go back and look.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Setting aside the actions of those who oppose it, you are still missing the message that the caricature was intended to convey. It is not making fun of Islam.

While you're right that the point isn't to make fun of Islam I think it is pretty obvious that the point was to provoke muslims in general. Unfortunately while I think the artist may have wanted to get them angry at the extremists for the manner in which they tarnish their religion it back fired. Really the move was just quite stupid.

 

[Anttech]

Do you think that somehow makes it ok to pervert a religion?

No I dont...

Do you think that makes the cartoon incorrect in it's assertion that terrorists are perverting the religion?

No but I don't think it is a fair and balanced assesment of what is actually happening

 

[vanesch]

This is going in circles. Not agreeing with someone is not synonymous with insulting them.
"We" as in the Islamic world. And are you implying that freedom gives you the right to be a jackass?

Making fun of irrational beliefs is, IMO, something that is _almost at the basis_ of every humoristic activity. It is the confrontation of the holder of an irrational belief with his irrationality. Every religion is based upon irrational beliefs, and as such, is open to such exposure. The arch-enemy of every religion, tyrant, extremist, "true believer", guru,... has always been humor. The nazis couldn't stand humor.

From the moment that there is *something* in your life, viewpoint, or whatever, that you don't support being made fun of, it means that you're victim to an irrational belief and you should question yourself about it.

The correct attitude, if you are "victim" of some form of humor which you find offensive wrt. your beliefs, is to consider that the one making the humor is making a fool of himself, and exposing his ignorance of the "truth". Having made a fool of himself, that's good enough. If you believe that the Great Spaghetti Monster exists, and is as such, offended, then I guess you also consider he's powerful enough to give a lesson to that poor guy who just made a big fool of himself (maybe after he dies, and gets punished in Spaghetti Hell or whatever variant of it you think exists). And if you consider that The Great Spaghetti Monster is not powerful enough to do so, then you might wonder what use it is to believe in him.

It is always fun to see how religious people think they need to defend their almighty deity - as if that deity itself cannot do it for itself.

 

[Anttech]

Great Spaghetti Monster exists

I am relieved that I am not the only one who worships the Great Spaghetti monster.. May his sauce not be too garlic..

Homor can also be bad can't it :P

 

[Lisa!]

What gives you that right and not me?!??

The point is that I'm not interpret their actions. I just said what I knew about muslims! I told you they don't want anyone to draw their prophet's caricature.No matter what it's about! But anyway of course you have the right to see the world the way you want it to be! *shrug*

Setting aside the actions of those who oppose it, you are still missing the message that the caricature was intended to convey. It is not making fun of Islam.

Read the first part!

I think you just argued against your own point: it is OBL, not western politicians, who is ruining the reputation of Islam. And that is the point of the cartoon.

Western politicians are helping him as well!
1. by genaralizing.They're always trying to say all muslims are like OBL!
2. by trying to show a wrong pictureof wha's going on in ME countries!

No, this cartoon originated before the election. I'm actually not sure why the radical islamic community is choosing to get upset about it now.

Ok, thanks for the information!

 

[Lisa!]

In the western world, yeah, you do. In fact, that's the reason the freedom exists!

I don't have any problem with this kind of freedom ,although I think media are a bit different.
Since TSA said "Part of respect in this world is allowing for freedom of speech.", I just wanted to say when someone offend you dileberately he shouldn't expect the other side respect him!

"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones."

I'd be very interested to hear what you think freedom of speech should look like given the above.

You Do know what I think of freedom of speech!

Like I said several times before: it isn't necessary to try to link terrorists acts to Islam - terrorists cite Islam all the time and provide the link themselves.

All righty then! So you also don't mind if someone links the church opposition with science, Spanish inquistion, and lots of violence against humans durin the past centuries to christianity!

 

[Entropy]

If someone makes fun of my religion I'm not offended to the point of trying to take away their right to express their opinion. In fact, ignoring them usually works better than making a big deal out of it. Did more people see this caricature before or after they got upset about it?

Sometimes I really hate freedom of speech. Didn't the artist realize this would cause such an upstir? They're just making the Middle East hate us even more. It's like they're asking for more fundamentalist to come over here and bomb us. People need to learn that just because you have the right to do something, doesn't make it a good idea.

 

[Anttech]

You're the one arguing on behalf of terrorists, not me, so don't come after me with that hypocricy crap. But regardless, that doesn't have anything to do with whether or not:

I am not on your side or the "terrorists" side. I am trying to see the world from every angle, something you don't seem to be able to...


You sow what you Reap, right?

 

[Lisa!]

Wow if you're on behalf of terrorists I must be a terrorist bcause of the nature of my replies, Anttech!

 

[Anttech]

Wow if you're on behalf of terrorists I must be a terrorist bcause of the nature of my replies, Anttech!

Well

Your either with us or against us

 

[Curious3141]

One thing that *really* gets to me is the appalling double standard that many Muslims seem to practise.

In India, during the reign of the supposedly "right wing" Nationalistic Hindu party, the BJP, there was a Muslim satirist by the name of M.F. Husain who published a portrait of "The Naked Saraswati". Saraswati, BTW, is the Goddess of Learning, very revered, and always depicted modestly clothed in white. Painting her naked is the height of blasphemy to a devout Hindu. Husain compounded the insult by releasing other portraits of various Hindu deities engaged in lewd acts, etc.

Yes, there were protests within India. Some Hindus in other countries voiced their outrage over the portraits. They were non-violent and died down quickly. At no time was there any harm or destruction to physical property. At no time were threats to inflict the same issued by rabid Hindu militants. No "fatwas" were ever issued. Husain is still alive, still whole, still satirising merrily, in predominantly Hindu India.

Compare this with what has happened here : Muslims worldwide protesting and boycotting anyone who has the temerity to show these images. Threats of violence and arson made by Muslim fanatics.

Are we so quick to forget the whole Rushdie saga ? That poor man got mercilessly hounded by a bearded bastard till he died of his own venom. Bomb threats galore, threats of arson that actually got carried out in some cases. The fatwa can't even be revoked because only the person who issued it has the authority to rescind it apparently. Such sticklers for the niceties of protocol, these fanatics.

Here's what I think Muslims around the world need to realize, and realize quickly : the world does not owe you any favors. There is no damned reason to treat Muslims alone with kid gloves, when other religions and systems of belief are caricatured, parodied and satirised with impunity by the civilised world. There is only one circumstance under which I would agree with your outrage : that is if someone comes right up to you and insults your faith to your face. Then it's perfectly OK to get angry (but it STILL isn't OK to threaten or commit violence unless the other party initiates it).

Barring that, if you see something published somewhere mocking your religion in general terms, please, do the world a favor and stop shoving your outrage everywhere it is not welcome. Especially violent outrage : to be miffed is OK, to be militant never is. Suck it up, deal with it, for we live in a secular age. Either move with the times, or isolate yourself from the rest of the world where we cannot offend you and you cannot terrorise us. Don't try to have your cake and eat it.

 

[Lisa!]

Are we so quick to forget the whole Rushdie saga ?

Sounds like this carcaturist had forgotten it!

 

[Curious3141]

Sounds like this carcaturist had forgotten it!

Yes indeed. So I guess we should all live in fear of someday, somehow, possibly inadvertently, stepping on Muslim toes by something we do, say, write or draw and provoking the undying wrath of a crazy bearded Iranian anachronism ?

 

[BobG]

If someone makes fun of my religion I'm not offended to the point of trying to take away their right to express their opinion. In fact, ignoring them usually works better than making a big deal out of it. Did more people see this caricature before or after they got upset about it?

Sometimes I really hate freedom of speech. Didn't the artist realize this would cause such an upstir? They're just making the Middle East hate us even more. It's like they're asking for more fundamentalist to come over here and bomb us. People need to learn that just because you have the right to do something, doesn't make it a good idea.

Expecting the Danish government to do something about the cartoons is "over the top".

But, yes, having the right to do something doesn't make it a good idea - especially since the cartoons were published solely to prove at least one newspaper was not afraid to publish offensive cartoons about Muhammed (Cartoon controversy)

This wasn't an editorial cartoon published to make a point. It was cartoonists responding to a challenge to dare to use Muhammed in a political cartoon.

The firings that have happened in some newspapers over the cartoons is appropriate, since the cartoons go beyond the limits of good taste and could negatively affect the number of subscribers. Calling for the Danish government to punish the newspaper and/or cartoonists is unrealistic. As for boycotts, everyone is free to use whatever criteria they desire in the purchases they make.