News Muhammad Caricatures: Middle East Reaction & Nordic Press

[Lisa!]

I finally find the full story!

The drawings first appeared in a Danish paper in September but were reprinted this week in papers in Norway, France, Germany and even Jordan after Muslims decried the images as insulting.

I was wnondering if anyone could answer my questions:
1) what was the muslims' reacion the first time?(I mean in Sep.)

2) why these European newspapers decided to republish the caricatures this week?

P.S. I'm sorry if you've already discussed thenm in this thread. If yes, just let me now and I'll take the time to read all replies! You know Iwas too busy to read all replies before replying to this thread!

 

[BobG]

I finally find the full story!


I was wnondering if anyone could answer my questions:
1) what was the muslims' reacion the first time?(I mean in Sep.)

2) why these European newspapers decided to republish the caricatures this week?

P.S. I'm sorry if you've already discussed thenm in this thread. If yes, just let me now and I'll take the time to read all replies! You know Iwas too busy to read all replies before replying to this thread!

1) They were outraged ... at least the Muslims who knew about the story (it was just one newspaper, after all). The bigger the story got, the more outraged Muslims world-wide have become about the stories, so a significant wave of outrage has taken a little time to build.

2) Reporters are a strange breed. If one reporter is kidnapped, two or three reporters might find it worthwhile to interview the kidnappers. If those reporters are kidnapped as well, then you have a bigger story and a dozen or so reporters will want to interview the kidnappers. Reporters just have a way of making stories bigger and bigger ... for as long as the wave lasts, anyway. They're a little lemming-like, actually.

 

[Lisa!]

1) They were outraged ... at least the Muslims who knew about the story (it was just one newspaper, after all). The bigger the story got, the more outraged Muslims world-wide have become about the stories, so a significant wave of outrage has taken a little time to build.

2) Reporters are a strange breed. If one reporter is kidnapped, two or three reporters might find it worthwhile to interview the kidnappers. If those reporters are kidnapped as well, then you have a bigger story and a dozen or so reporters will want to interview the kidnappers. Reporters just have a way of making stories bigger and bigger ... for as long as the wave lasts, anyway. They're a little lemming-like, actually.

Thanks, Bob!

 

[Moonbear]

I finally find the full story!


I was wnondering if anyone could answer my questions:
1) what was the muslims' reacion the first time?(I mean in Sep.)

2) why these European newspapers decided to republish the caricatures this week?

P.S. I'm sorry if you've already discussed thenm in this thread. If yes, just let me now and I'll take the time to read all replies! You know Iwas too busy to read all replies before replying to this thread!

That was all in the original article posted, wasn't it? That's what it was about, that the other newspapers were supporting the Danish newspaper's freedom of press by reacting to the Muslim protests, boycotting and threats of violence with their own publications of the same caricatures. The reprinting of the caricatures was to show solidarity among members of the press for the rights of the papers to publish what they want, regardless of the bullying tactics others will use to attempt to censor the publications. It reminds me a bit of children on a playground...one kid says something that makes another mad, the one who is made mad punches the first kid, then all the first kid's friends see this and stand in a circle around the one who punched their friend and start taunting, "neener neener, we're going to say it too," and then the kid who did the punching runs off crying, not knowing why everyone picks on him. When the grown-ups of the world stop acting like children on a playground, we might make some progress toward peace.

 

[Art]

I have zero sympathy with the Danish muslims over this issue.

Muslim countries have what the west would consider draconion religious based laws against such things as alcohol, tobacco and sex which although deeply disliked by most westerners, visitors to their countries are expected to adhere to.

Denmark has it's own laws which include freedom of speech which it seems some muslims dislike deeply.

Well tough!

When in Rome do as the Romans do. A country's laws are not an 'a la carte' menu. If muslim immigrants don't like Denmark's freedom of speech then nobody is compelling them to stay there so they should vote with their feet and leave. If however they elect to remain then it can only be because on balance they prefer Denmark to their native country so perhaps they should bear this in mind before expressing their outrage or inciting violence or reprisals against their host country.

And whilst on the subject of people being upset by cartoons there's this

Editorial illustration angers U.S. military
Feb. 3, 2006. 01:00 AM
ROBERT BURNS
ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON—Military leaders angrily denounced as "beyond tasteless" a Washington Post editorial cartoon featuring a likeness of a severely wounded soldier and Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld as an attending doctor who says, "I'm listing your condition as `battle hardened.'"

The cartoon by Post artist Tom Toles appeared in Sunday's newspaper. It reflected the view of some that Bush administration officials do not recognize that U.S. forces are being worn out by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. In response to a Pentagon-commissioned report that said the Army was stretched so thin it had become a "thin green line," Rumsfeld said the war-fighting experience had made U.S. troops "battle hardened."

 

[Bilal]

As I know, there is no violence until now. People decided to boycott the Danish products, and this is their personal freedom. I do not deny that such environment will encourage the ‘’terrorists’’ to start their dirty job. Especially they want to increase their popularity after their shameful attacks in Jordan.

The Danish government rejected to meet several ambassadors in last Sep. from Islamic countries, therefore those ambassadors decided to transfer the problem to the rest of the Islamic world. They consider these cartoons as a new Fascist era, which is similar to the anti Semite propaganda in the 30s.

 

[Curious3141]

As I know, there is no violence until now. People decided to boycott the Danish products, and this is their personal freedom. I do not deny that such environment will encourage the ‘’terrorists’’ to start their dirty job. Especially they want to increase their popularity after their shameful attacks in Jordan.

The Danish government rejected to meet several ambassadors in last Sep. from Islamic countries, therefore those ambassadors decided to transfer the problem to the rest of the Islamic world. They consider these cartoons as a new Fascist era, which is similar to the anti Semite propaganda in the 30s.

You should read this : http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2006/01/a_mountain_out.php

That's one lady who has her head screwed on right. I wish all Muslims thought like her.

Quoting,

... Muslims have blown out of all proportion their outrage...

The initial printing of the cartoons in Denmark led to death threats being issued against the artists, demonstrations in Kashmir, and condemnation from 11 countries.

Death threats, diplomatic condemnation...I think it's gone a little beyond "personal choice" issues.

Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen was right not to intervene, insisting the government has no say over media - the argument used by Arab leaders when they are asked about anti-Semitism in their media, by the way.

Ho, ho, ho, hurts when the shoe is on the other foot, eh ?

Must we really boycott Danish products, as one e-mail I received exhorted? ...If we really want to pick a fight with the West, have we forgotten that 500 Muslim men continue to be detained without charge at ...Guantanamo Bay, Cuba...

However offensive any of the 12 cartoons were, they did not incite violence against Muslims. For an example of incitement, though, one must go back a few weeks before the cartoons were published. In August, the Danish authorities withdrew for three months the broadcasting license of a Copenhagen radio station after it called for the extermination of Muslims. Those were real threats and the government protected Muslims - the same government later condemned for not punishing the newspaper that published the cartoons.

The best quotes by far :

The fracas over the cartoons is a sad testament to the impotence of the Muslim world. That clerics and leaders of Muslim countries gain any sense of power over this issue is a reminder of how powerless they really are and also a reminder, as if we needed one, of the moral bankruptcy of our self-appointed moral guides.

Muslims must honestly examine why there is such a huge gap between the way we imagine Islam and our prophet, and the way both are seen by others. Our offended sensibilities must not be limited to the Danish newspaper or the cartoonist, but to those like Fadi Abdullatif whose actions should be regarded as just as offensive to Islam and to our reverence for the prophet. Otherwise, we are all responsible for those Danish cartoons.

 

[Mk]

I haven't read the thread fully but, has everybody seen the caricatures? I have 12 of them saved on my computer. They were VERY hard to find, I can put them up if we want to see them.

 

[Manchot]

I would like to see them.

 

[BobG]

I haven't read the thread fully but, has everybody seen the caricatures? I have 12 of them saved on my computer. They were VERY hard to find, I can put them up if we want to see them.

They're copyrighted, so it's probably best to link to a site that can provide them legally. Michelle Malkin's site has them: THE FORBIDDEN CARTOONS MATTER
[/url]
(By the way, I wouldn't take my linking to her page as an endorsement of Malkin's views.)

 

[Art]

As I know, there is no violence until now. People decided to boycott the Danish products, and this is their personal freedom. I do not deny that such environment will encourage the ‘’terrorists’’ to start their dirty job. Especially they want to increase their popularity after their shameful attacks in Jordan.

The Danish government rejected to meet several ambassadors in last Sep. from Islamic countries, therefore those ambassadors decided to transfer the problem to the rest of the Islamic world. They consider these cartoons as a new Fascist era, which is similar to the anti Semite propaganda in the 30s.

The Danish gov't did meet with the ambassadors. The ambassadors just weren't happy with the outcome.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Denmark's prime minister, welcomed the paper's statement but did not apologise.

Rasmussen said: "The Danish government cannot apologise on behalf of a Danish newspaper. It does not work like that ... and we have explained that to the Arab countries. Independent media are not edited by the government."

The muslim reaction to what were silly and rather peurile cartoons has been grossly over reactive. They were insulting but hardly worth a response mush less a call for jihad. European culture is hugely diverse and so given the right to free speech it is inevitable that at various times everybody is going to see or hear something they find offensive. The key is to keep a sense of perspective and respond proportionately. i.e. in this case complain to the editor and/or boycott the newspaper.

At a time when sympathy in europe is high for the muslims in general this is a bad time for the muslims to alienate the moderate majority by aligning themselves with the muslim extremists.

It seems perverse that the extremists calling for violent retaliation for this 'affront' to islam because the prophet has been caricatured as a supporter of terrorism are the same people who claim Islam and thus the prophet support their terrorist actions.

 

[Orefa]

Michelle Malkin's site has them: http://michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm

Thanks for the link, I was curious. After seeing them I have to say "that's it?!?"

I think if these silly cartoons are enough to make some people want to slaughter others, something is seriously wrong with their belief system.

 

[PerennialII]

I am disappointed from this problem. I am also surprised from such unexpected reaction from many people in Islamic world. It seems they want to put all their anger on Denmark.

I wish to see good relations between Denmark and ME soon ...

Bilal, been trying to figure out something where would value your opinion - say when something like this current caricature mess occurs, how deep and wide does the reaction run in Islamic countries? To elaborate, when I watch the news we get about the reaction in the Islamic world, it seems difficult to quantify the amount of hurt this incident has caused (since what we see in the news and what is reported, to great extent, are people from the "extreme-end" rallying the streets and burning flags ... and as such trying to make any sort of objective analysis about this is quite difficult). How & to what extent do the 'common man' see and feel this, is it possible to elaborate and/or quantify what the "many people" (like above in your post) actually means?

 

[Azael]

Thanks for the link, I was curious. After seeing them I have to say "that's it?!?"

I think if these silly cartoons are enough to make some people want to slaughter others, something is seriously wrong with their belief system.

I don't think the majority in the middle east has even seen the cartoons...

 

[Orefa]

I also have to wonder why there is any outrage at all over what a non-Muslim person may be doing. If it's against Islam to portray Muhammad then fine, Muslims may not do it. But Islamic law applies to them, not to others. We don't see Islamic jihads about pork packing plants, groceries and restaurants that handle pork against the Koran on a daily basis. It seems that the protest is not really about the depiction of Muhammad. It's probably more about a *negative* depiction, which should warrant comparable outrage as negative comments put in text instead. So really, there's nothing new here.

 

[Bilal]

Bilal, been trying to figure out something where would value your opinion - say when something like this current caricature mess occurs, how deep and wide does the reaction run in Islamic countries? To elaborate, when I watch the news we get about the reaction in the Islamic world, it seems difficult to quantify the amount of hurt this incident has caused (since what we see in the news and what is reported, to great extent, are people from the "extreme-end" rallying the streets and burning flags ... and as such trying to make any sort of objective analysis about this is quite difficult). How & to what extent do the 'common man' see and feel this, is it possible to elaborate and/or quantify what the "many people" (like above in your post) actually means?

- In Islamic world, around 30 % - 40% of people attend the mosques; surely all of those will respect what the imams say. They will boycott and demonstrate … while the rest will be under pressure to boycott as a patriotic duty... as I heard in some countries nobody dare to buy Danish products !

- We can not separate between these cartoons from the current political environment in the Islamic world after the war on Iraq and 11/9. If these cartoons were published before few years, I doubt that people will react in such way. For example, the former Israeli PM (Yetshaq Shamir) insulted explicitly the prophet of Islam in an interview with the Israeli TV … At least once per year; the Jews extremists put pegs (very dirty animals in Islam) in well known mosques after writing (Mohammed) on their skins. (These actions are much worse than cartoons in the eyes of muslims)

- There is a huge anger in ME after the war in Iraq. They really hate their governments (especially pro USA), and they looking to discharge their anger. They feel that they are under racist attacks from the American. The Arab media doing well in showing the American as new invasion of Mongolian wars (Jenkiz Khan), Crusaders or even NAZI. It is enough to watch an Arab TV for few hours to realize that the American are far from being decent human! It is rarely to hear good word about them (of course I do not agree with such brainwashing!)

- The problem is not just religious. Many people see these cartoons as racism against the Arabs as a race and Islam as a culture (not only religion).

These cartoons exist since last September, so why everything changed dramatically in last few weeks?

As I said before, the PM of Denmark ignored around 8 ambassadors and rejected to meet them in that time. Therefore those ambassadresses and their governments focus on this issue for weeks; they ordered all the imams to make it as a main topic on Friday prayers. They warned the people that if they do not react, the worse will happen … they compared these cartoons with the anti Jews cartoons in 30s. (This Danish newspaper was belong to NAZI in the 30s, they used to publish dirty cartoons about the Jews)

The PM of Denmark could easily say from the first day as most of European leaders said: We are not responsible about these cartoons; it is the responsibility of this newspaper …. Instead he disrespected the ambassadors and said: I will not comment on what the newspaper mentioned.

- The cartoons are stupid and very wrong because they can show a cartoon of a Muslim religious man instead of Prophet Mohammed. Unfortunately, showing the prophet as a terrorist (evil) means that the root of the ME culture is evil. In other word, it is type of cultural clash more than religions.

- The other problem, Denmark was never under attack from any Muslims group – may be people can understand if American or English newspaper did that- so what is their goal to insult another culture ?

I wish the government of ME can put pressure soon on the imams to calm, otherwise nobody can expect what will happen, and especially they extend the problem to include other European countries.

 

[Bilal]

I also have to wonder why there is any outrage at all over what a non-Muslim person may be doing. If it's against Islam to portray Muhammad then fine, Muslims may not do it. But Islamic law applies to them, not to others. We don't see Islamic jihads about pork packing plants, groceries and restaurants that handle pork against the Koran on a daily basis. It seems that the protest is not really about the depiction of Muhammad. It's probably more about a *negative* depiction, which should warrant comparable outrage as negative comments put in text instead. So really, there's nothing new here.

It is not just cartoons ... even in Islamic countries, there are no religious rules except Saudi Arabia and Iran. We have many atheists and communists who insult Islam in their books and media.

The question: If this newspaper published its cartoons in 30s about the Jews, how the West will react?

 

[Orefa]

It is not just cartoons

I agree. The first caricature in the set is just a man standing. I doubt that much would have been said if it had been limited to innocuous figures like this one. What triggered the uproar is the negativity carried in the other ones. I think the uproar is not over the fact that an image of Muhammad was drawn, it is over the critique made using the other drawings.

We have many atheists and communists who insult Islam in their books and media.

Do they all go about their daily life in peace in spite of this?

The question: If this newspaper published its cartoons in 30s about the Jews, how the West will react?

I don't know. The West is a big disparate place. I prefer to ask "How should people in general react today?" Political cartoons are an established medium to carry critique towards all sorts of other groups. It's not unexpected that Islam should be a target of this type of humour, just like politicians, Catholic priests, lawyers, cops, George Bush and everyone else you can think of. They all receive critiques, suck it up and move on.

 

[vanesch]

Thanks for the link, I was curious. After seeing them I have to say "that's it?!?"

I think if these silly cartoons are enough to make some people want to slaughter others, something is seriously wrong with their belief system.

I'd say Amen to that, but I don't know if it is appropriate

 

[revelator]

http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060204/muhammad_protests_060204

Wonderful , the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus have been torched. Link above.

 

[vanesch]

http://sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060204/muhammad_protests_060204

Wonderful , the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus have been torched. Link above.

We now have the "live" version of the cartoons, on TV

 

[Orefa]

I don't know if I am interpreting this part of the article correctly or if it was even translated accurately but they report this chant "We will redeem our prophet, Muhammad, with our blood!" Does it mean what I think it means: you guys called our prophet a name so we will kill someone? Tell me I'm wrong.

 

[revelator]

Way to prove to the world that the cartoons are grossly inaccurate portrayals of Islam Geez...

 

[ukmicky]

I have zero sympathy with the Danish muslims over this issue.

Muslim countries have what the west would consider draconion religious based laws against such things as alcohol, tobacco and sex which although deeply disliked by most westerners, visitors to their countries are expected to adhere to.

Denmark has it's own laws which include freedom of speech which it seems some muslims dislike deeply.

Well tough!

When in Rome do as the Romans do. A country's laws are not an 'a la carte' menu. If muslim immigrants don't like Denmark's freedom of speech then nobody is compelling them to stay there so they should vote with their feet and leave. If however they elect to remain then it can only be because on balance they prefer Denmark to their native country so perhaps they should bear this in mind before expressing their outrage or inciting violence or reprisals against their host country.

I couldn't have worded it any better

 

[selfAdjoint]

I think what we have here is an example of the classic game theory problem, the Prisoners' Dilemma, in which both parties would gain a lot by giving up something, but their perceived self-interest leads them to opt for a much smaller gain by not giving up anything. It has been shown in simulations that tit-for-tat is an evolutionary stable strategy (ESS). though not the best one, for PD games.

 

[Bilal]

I don't know if I am interpreting this part of the article correctly or if it was even translated accurately but they report this chant "We will redeem our prophet, Muhammad, with our blood!" Does it mean what I think it means: you guys called our prophet a name so we will kill someone? Tell me I'm wrong.

These expressions mean that they are giving full support to our prophet. They do not indicate to violence as you understood from the direct translation.

 

[Bilal]

While the demonstrators burn the Danish flags, they shout: Death to America!

However, I do believe it is the time for the Danish Muslims to call those people to calm. It is a civilized behavior to protest against the racist cartoons, but it is really too much!

The Scandinavian nations (especially Sweden and Norway) are the most peaceful and civilized nations in the world, they opposite the war on Iraq and they deserve all the respect.

May be we need to remind the demonstrators that Bush's government who are murdering 50000 civilians per year in Iraq and they destroyed hundreds of mosques …. They should demonstrate against the pro USA dictators in Arab world.

 

[Bilal]

Way to prove to the world that the cartoons are grossly inaccurate portrayals of Islam Geez...

Muslims are 23% of the world ... this means you talk about a world contians 55 nations with different cultures and history not about a tribe in the Amazon forests.

The governments of USA and UK support the Muslims against the Denmark in ‘’the cartoon war”, this automatically means that Muslims are wrong..

 

[Hurkyl]

May be we need to remind the demonstrators that Bush's government who are murdering 50000 civilians per year in Iraq and they destroyed hundreds of mosques …. They should demonstrate against the pro USA dictators in Arab world.

So rather than preach nonviolence, you'd rather just redirect it at someone you don't like?

 

[Orefa]

These expressions mean that they are giving full support to our prophet. They do not indicate to violence as you understood from the direct translation.

Thank you for clarifying that. I am not surprised that something got lost in the translation.

While the demonstrators burn the Danish flags, they shout: Death to America!

Oh well, thank your for clarifying this as well!