An exhibition in Iran will mock the Holocaust

[Behind the Aegis]

In early May, organizers in Tehran will stage the Second International Holocaust Cartoon Contest. Given the horrors of the Holocaust — in which the Nazi regime systematically killed more than 6 million Jews, as well as millions of Roma, homosexuals, political dissidents and other undesirables — and current fears about a rise in global anti-Semitism, an event with that name ought to raise myriad red flags.

An exhibition will feature some of the 839 pieces of "artwork" submitted as part of the contest by artists from more than 50 countries, reports Iran's semiofficial Fars News Agency.

Its stated goal is to provoke Western sensibilities — particularly as a response to satirical cartoons of the pr0phet Muhammad published in numerous European outlets in recent years. The "contest and exhibition intends to display the West's double standard behavior towards freedom of expression as it allows sacrilege of Islamic sanctities," Fars reports.

But this isn't just about Iranian anger with publications such as France's Charlie Hebdo, which has published cartoons depicting the founder of Islam.

more...

[merrily]

1. "Brilliant" move and "brilliant" timing.

Not to mention heart wrenching and nauseating.

[jobycom]

2. Sadly, the exhibition proves its point, but in a way the West will never admit.

The point of the contest is to show the West that we have limits to Free Speech, that all of our claims that Muslims should not get upset about cartoons are hypocritical, because we have our own taboos, and we get upset the moment cartoons cross the lines we draw. It's just more white/western supremacy, where we believe our interpretation is the only valid one, and can't believe other people are so stupid as to not get it.

The WP article--we'll have to see if this thread follows--demonstrates very clearly that the organizers hit the nail on the head. Westerners will say "But this is different, this is... (fill in whatever difference you see). We are clearly right and they are clearly wrong!" That reaction is the proof the organizers hope for. Problem is, the topic is too taboo for Westerners to see it objectively enough to understand the point.

On edit: Just to be clear, I'm in no way arguing the contest or its Holocaust-denying views have any validity. I'm only saying that they have successfully found a topic we consider so taboo that we curtail our sacred concept of Free Speech over.

[Behind the Aegis]

3. Sadly, you are incorrect.

This contest could easily be held in the US, and while people would be upset, possible boycott the sponsors, it would be legal and likely have some submitting their own art. There are some Western nations where it would not be welcomed. The difference is the Holocaust is a historical event, not a religion nor religious beliefs. Actually what this shows is an actual nation-state engages in a behavior they claim is an "evil" when done to their religion, but not to a historical event.

It proves a point its defenders will never admit. The reactions, while pointed and disgusted, will unlikely rise to a "response" of riots and murder.

[jobycom]

4. You've just demonstrated what I said, of course.

Our belief is right because of X and their belief is wrong because of X and any old idiot can see that.

As I said, they've proven their point, but in a way the West will never acknowledge. Supremacy is the one thing the West still does better than anyone else.

[Behind the Aegis]

5. No, you demonstrated it.

If they held a contest to deny slavery, the West would be just as repulsed, though some wouldn't make stupid comparisons. You missed the part where a Holocaust denial art contest would be legal in the US and many Western nations. It would still be tacky and be unlikely to have supporters.

ETA:

The filming of the Holocaust: "Suck in that stomach"

[jobycom]

7. Oh good grief. Are you really unable to see it?

Whatever the argument that makes your opinion "right" is irrelevant. The point is we have limits to our concept of Free Speech. Charlie Hebdo's cartoons were legal, so I'm not sure what point you are making by stating that a HD conference in the US would be legal, too. And the point is irrelevant, anyway. If you had a Holocaust denial convention here, it MIGHT be legal (it wouldn't be in many European nations, where people are imprisoned for denying the Holocaust), but it would never get off the ground for lack of sponsors and funding, it would be attacked by the media until people were frothing at the mouth, government officials from all levels would condemn it and look for legal ways to block it, any university scholar who took part in it would be fired and blacklisted (and since most universities are state run, that would be an example of the government using its full power to stifle speech) and I guarantee you there would be death threats and bomb threats surrounding it. MAYBE, maybe, no one would actually attack and kill anyone over it, but that's not a given. The only real difference between the way the West would react to such a convention here and the way some Muslims reacted to Hebdo and the various other cartoons is that HERE the government would be on the side of those who are outraged and offended, rather than going on air constantly saying "We support Free Speech and those offended by this Holocaust denial should just suck it and grow a thicker skin!"

So Iran is having it there, where our officials have no power, so we can see how it feels to be outraged by essentially the same thing as keeps happening in the West. Sacred taboos are broken, the dominant culture says "Hey, no skin off our noses, you guys need to grow up," and the unwelcome offended group fumes. Same thing, different nouns. Yes, the Holocaust is a historical event, but discussion of interpretations of the facts of that event are more closed off than in any other case I can think of. As someone who spent a lot of time in university history departments, I can tell you that no historian would challenge the current story of the Holocaust even if they disagreed with it and had facts to prove it (and there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story), because they'd be out of work very quickly. It is a sacred cow in the West, and politics plays a big role in teaching and writing history. (And yes, I agree that the current story on the Holocaust is the right one, but I don't know of any other subject in history where even a discussion of alternatives would be so forbidden).

The real problem is that our Western culture values different things than many Muslim cultures, and we in the West don't have enough respect of their culture to honor their values. We are right, they are wrong, there's just no reasoning with them, and there's nothing on our side that needs reasoning with. That's our attitude. That's supremacy. And that--not the silly cartoons--is what was behind the Hebdo massacre.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. You apparently can't see it.

The very reason they are holding the contest has not one, but two cartoons it can enter...



...plus the one in the other post.

What you are missing is the reason and rationale behind the "contest." It is supposed to be a demonstration of the hypocrisy of the West. Yet, the VERY SAME MAGAZINE has pictures qualified for it's contest. The West certainly is blind to many things, but so are those who defend shit like this or claim it has some equivalency. Too many try to place their culture over another...that is your claim, yet that could easily be claimed by those who murdered in the name of their religion being insulted. Sacred cows are on BOTH sides.

ETA: One can mock Islam and the Holocaust in France, a Western nation. Guess which one can't happen in Iran? Seems it isn't the West who is also blind to "sensitivities."

[JonLP24]

39. France

Act 90-615 of 13 July 1990 or the Gayssot Act (named for its sponsor in the National Assembly) introduced a right to respond for any person who considers that a newspaper or other print medium has damaged his honor on the grounds of his ethnicity, nationality, race or religion. The Gayssot Act sets a punishment of five years' imprisonment and a €45,000 fine for the public expression of ideas that challenge the existence of the crimes against humanity committed by Nazi Germany during World War II as defined in the appendix to the London Agreement of 8 August 1945

France's penal code forbids any private defamation of a person or group for belonging or not belonging, in fact or in fancy, to an ethnicity, a nation, a race, a religion, a sex, or a sexual orientation, or for having a handicap (Article R. 624-3). The penal code forbids any private insult toward a person or group for belonging or not belonging, in fact or in fancy, to an ethnicity, a nation, a race, a religion, a sex, or a sexual orientation, or for having a handicap (Article R. 624-4). The penal code forbids any private incitement to discrimination or to hatred or violence against a person or group for belonging or not belonging, in fact or in fancy, to an ethnicity, a nation, a race, a religion, a sex, or a sexual orientation, or for having a handicap (Article R. 625-7).[2]

(I'm not saying it happens often but there are certainly proceedings. Catholic offensives seem to gain the most traction.)

In 2006, the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo released a special issue which featured cartoons pertinent to Islam, including some from the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. A Muslim organization initiated criminal proceedings against Philippe Val, editor-in-chief of Charlie Hebdo, for insulting a group of people because of their religion. In March 2007, the court of first instance acquitted Val. The first court of appeal confirmed the lower court's judgment on the ground that the cartoons targeted only terrorists or fundamentalists——not the whole Muslim community.[1][5][7]

On 18 January 2007, a tribunal in Lyon sentenced Bruno Gollnisch to a three-month, suspended prison-term and a fine of €5,000 for the offense of contesting information about the Holocaust. The court also ordered him to pay €55,000 euros in damages to the plaintiffs and to pay for the judgment to be published in the newspapers that originally printed his remarks.[8][9]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_in_France

[cali]

11. you didn't spend enough time in history departments

David Irving- to name just one. And do tell us the purported facts you claim refute the mainstream historical accounts of the holocaust. Oh, and there are indeed other historical events where there is little dispute of the mainstream accounts.

[geek tragedy]

19. Almost 50,000 posts here before they let that one slip out.

"There are facts supporting a different interpretation"

We've seen that playbook before.

[cali]

20. funny how that poster has fled the thread.

[geek tragedy]

22. Search function produces good stuff

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4423147&mesg_id=4423746

jobycom (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-12-10 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #43
50. That's Holocaust Denial.
Denying the lessons of the Holocaust, denying that it could never happen again, denying that despite what we know we should never make the comparison when we first start to see it, are all ways to make it easier to happen the next time. That's the real Holocaust Denial. Some claim the Holocaust didn't happen, some claim it was exagerated, but some claim it was such a unique event brought on by unparalleled monsters that we can pretty much relegate it to history and not watch for the warning signs, knowing it will probably never happen again. That last is the worst kind.

[jobycom]

87. Could you explain your reaction to that post, and why you posted it?

[geek tragedy]

88. it is very sensible and very much at odds with the sentiments you expressed in this thread.

in this thread you are decrying people in western countries for persecuting Holocaust deniers for thought crimes, yada yada yada, but in that post you made no bones that Holocaust denial was objectively false and dangerous.

In particular, this bit of codespeak:

As someone who spent a lot of time in university history departments, I can tell you that no historian would challenge the current story of the Holocaust even if they disagreed with it and had facts to prove it (and there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story), because they'd be out of work very quickly. It is a sacred cow in the West, and politics plays a big role in teaching and writing history. (And yes, I agree that the current story on the Holocaust is the right one, but I don't know of any other subject in history where even a discussion of alternatives would be so forbidden).

Yes, any historian who denies that the Holocaust would be out of a job, just like any engineer who denies the law of gravity would be out of a job, just like a geologist who rejected plate tectonics would be out of a job.

So, which is it--is the Holocaust an historical FACT whose denial is dangerous and likely to lead to recurrences, or is it a "sacred cow" protected by politics rather than empiricism?

[jobycom]

90. Thanks. But that didn't make you reassess what you thought I said in this thread?

For instance, I did not in any way "decry people in western countries for persecuting Holocaust deniers for thought crimes."

[geek tragedy]

96. no. you peddled David Irving-lite garbage in this thread.

As someone who spent a lot of time in university history departments, I can tell you that no historian would challenge the current story of the Holocaust even if they disagreed with it and had facts to prove it (and there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story), because they'd be out of work very quickly. It is a sacred cow in the West, and politics plays a big role in teaching and writing history. (And yes, I agree that the current story on the Holocaust is the right one, but I don't know of any other subject in history where even a discussion of alternatives would be so forbidden).

This is exactly the language of the denial-lite crowd.

1) Referring to the FACT of the Holocaust as "the current story." It is not a "current story" it is a documented fact. It will always be an unassailable fact.

2) This bit of revisionist garbage: "no historian would challenge the current story of the Holocaust even if they disagreed with it and had facts to prove it (and there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story), because they'd be out of work very quickly. It is a sacred cow in the West and plays a big role in the teaching and writing history." could have been written by David Irving and is beneath contempt.

a) "No historian would challenge the current story even if they disagreed with it and had the facts to prove it"--the reason historians don't challenge the FACT of the Holocaust is because THERE ARE NO FACTS SUPPORTING SUCH A CHALLENGE.

b) "there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story"--classic denier language--when they want to deny, but are too cowardly to come out and say it

c) "because they'd be out of work very quickly"--because they'd be revealed as a really terrible, dishonest, unethical, and worthless historian given that THERE ARE NO FACTS SUPPORTING A CHALLENGE TO HISTORICAL FACT OF THE HOLOCAUST

d) "It is a sacred cow in the west." Again with the dishonest attempt (using the language of the David Irving crowd) to portray treating an INDISPUTABLE FACT as an INDISPUTABLE FACT as somehow a bad thing. The Holocaust is a 'sacred cow' of history much like gravity is a sacred cow of physics.

e) "and politics plays a big role in teaching and writing history"--again with the sleazy innuendo that acceptance of an indisputable fact is driven by political agendas rather than people insisting that the truth be told.

[jobycom]

108. I did no such thing. You've now given his argument more air time than I ever would have.

Read what I wrote again, in context, and if you don't understand it, read it a third time.

Nothing I said challenged the Holocaust story. Not one thing. Every point I made was to illustrate how sacred we hold that story as an example to demonstrate how Muslims feel when we ignore the things their culture holds sacred.

Let's take Christopher Columbus. The official story on him is a mess, right? There are still people who claim he discovered a new world. There are people who claim he was a decent guy for his time. There are people who claim he thought the world was flat. There are people who claim he was a genocidal monster (and he was). An historian could argue any of those perspectives, right or wrong, and not suffer any professional consequences, not be ridiculed internationally, not be imprisoned for it. One has the freedom to be wrong about Columbus that does not exist about the Holocaust. Both are terrible examples of genocide. Both have extremely important consequences in current society (if you don't understand that about Columbus, visit any Central or South American nation and bring him up). Only one has laws enforcing the historical accuracy of the story. The Holocaust exists on a different level, because of history, culture, politics, religion, and society, than the story of Columbus (or slavery, or the bombing of Hiroshima, etc).

I'm done with this. You obviously have some emotional need to misread and misrepresent me. Go ahead, post your misrepresentations some more. I won't respond. I won't even read it.

[geek tragedy]

109. You again confuse "proven beyond any conceivable doubt" and "sacred"

I am also unaware that there are those who deny that Columbus ever lived , that there were slaves in the United States, or that an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima.

There are those who deny the Holocaust.

Understand the difference?

[jobycom]

85. Or maybe he went to bed and then to work.

And when he got back a few minutes ago and saw the flamefest and the way his words were being misrepresented, he just figured he'd say hi and move on to more productive pursuits.

He is perhaps saddened, though, to see the way a certain poster who he used to be nice to acting as though she doesn't remember him and treating him so rudely. But that's another subject.

[Major Hogwash]

116. Please, stop.

You're talking about yourself in the 3rd person, just like George Costanza did in that one episode of Seinfeld.

You're cracking me up.
I understood perfectly what you were saying.
Just let it die out.
In case you didn't notice, this is just a tempest in a teapot.

[oberliner]

13. "That's supremacy. And that--not the silly cartoons--is what was behind the Hebdo massacre."

It's amazing that a person actually holds this opinion.

[cali]

14. If by amazing you mean despicable, I agree.

[oberliner]

17. Amazing was probably not the best word to use

I meant it in the sense that I am amazed/stunned/surprised. It boggles the mind. I can't get my head around it.

[geek tragedy]

16. Holocaust denial is not an opinion. It is willful lying in order to make

another Holocaust possible.

Holocaust denial is factually false hate speech. Not an opinion.

[geek tragedy]

18. Yes or no: do you think Holocaust denial has any factual basis? nt

[jobycom]

93. Did you not read any of what I wrote?

As I said over and over again, the prevailing story of the Holocaust is factually accurate. What part of that was unclear?

[geek tragedy]

95. "prevailing story?" You didn't answer the question. Is there any factual basis

for denying the Holocaust?

And, no, you have not been clear in this thread how you would answer that question.

[Capt. Obvious]

48. AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

On Wed Apr 8, 2015, 07:56 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Oh good grief. Are you really unable to see it?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6473337

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Wait, what???? "no historian would challenge the current story of the Holocaust even if they disagreed with it and had facts to prove it"

I realize the poster tried to cover their butts by later writing &quot And yes, I agree that the current story on the Holocaust is the right one, but I don't know of any other subject in history where even a discussion of alternatives would be so forbidden)" but this is way too close to holocaust denial for DU, or at least it should be.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Apr 8, 2015, 08:17 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: The poster stated an opinion you disagree with. Respond to it; don't alert it.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Post was okay otherwise, though I strongly disagree. Agree that that really looked like a coverup of true feelings. Notice the poster did not respond to requests for those "facts".
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I was unaware that someone here set a boundary regarding Holocaust denial that no one here at DU should cross. A rather lengthy argument (rant?) but nothing obviously disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate or outrageously anti-Holocaust history.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I actually read the entire thing before reading the alerter's claims of holocaust denial. Fail.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Pooka Fey]

57. Apology for terrorism - You are saying that the massacre was justified in your last sentence

I won't bother alerting on your post because the judges will never hide it.

[jobycom]

92. So are you saying that the Hebdo massacre would have been justified if my last sentence is true?

That's sick. Whether the attackers of the CH office were motivated by outrage over a cartoon or by feeling ignored by a supremacist culture that refused to respect them, massacring an office full of cartoonists is NEVER justified.

[Pooka Fey]

94. Dude I would have alerted on YOUR post if I thought it would have made a difference

Nobody but you on this thread is confused - nice attempt on the gaslighting. Goodbye now.

[LeftishBrit]

72. In the UK and USA it would be legal to deny the Holocaust. That doesn't mean that it is, or should

be, respectable.

I don't think that a music or chemistry lecturer would be fired from a university for denying the Holocaust, or any other crazy view (so long as they didn't harass Jewish or other minority students), though they would undoubtedly make themselves unpopular. A history lecturer who denied the Holocaust SHOULD be fired, because they're teaching their students lies within their own subject.

If someone was attacked or killed for denying the Holocaust, then the attacker would go to prison - such actions are not accepted. A few years ago, the Oxford Union (a private organization but with some links to the university, which the Oxford Union exaggerates to increase publicity) invited David Irving and Nick Griffin (then the BNP leader) to speak. More recently, they invited Marine LePen. On both occasions, there were massive protests by students and others, but murdering the speakers or bombing the Oxford Union, would NOT be acceptable (do I really need to say this?).

If the opponents of Charlie Hebdo had organized a big demo outside the offices, or had promoted a boycott of the journal, that would be well within their rights. It is MURDER that wasn't.

'and there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story'

No, there aren't 'facts'; plenty of lies, however.

[LanternWaste]

80. No doubt, you'll supply us with objective evidence which supports that allegation.

"ut discussion of interpretations of the facts of that event are more closed off than in any other case I can think of..."

No doubt, you'll supply us with objective evidence which supports that allegation so no one is led to believe you're simply making things up to better validate your own unsupported statements, yes?

[NCTraveler]

99. Then you are blind or can't think for yourself.

Really is that simple.

"but discussion of interpretations of the facts of that event are more closed off than in any other case I can think of."

[leftynyc]

117. Nonsense

Other posters have already shown your folly with reminding you about Piss Christ and other art exhibitions that many found deeply offensive and nobody took to the streets and started shooting people or cutting their heads off and further to that, those exhibitions are perfectly legal. THAT's the difference. That FACT seems to bother you - why is that? Or is it that you just want to post holocaust denial crap and have nobody call you on it? That's what you seem to be saying about historians being afraid of getting fired if they do what you suggest. Go ahead - post whatever the fuck you want - but then don't whine when the posts get alerted and hidden because DU doesn't want that shit on the board. I'm sure there are plenty of boards out there who will be very receptive to any "questions" you have about the holocaust.

[KittyWampus]

36. Edit- found this on NBC

TEHRAN —
Organized by Tehran-based House of Cartoons and the Sarcheshmeh Cultural Complex, the contest sets out questions for entrants to address in their artwork, including: "If the West says that freedom of speech has no borders then why don't they let historians and experts properly research the Holocaust?" and "Why should the Palestinian people pay for the Holocaust?"

All cartoons must be submitted by April Fools' Day because "April 1 is the day of big lies, and the Holocaust is a big lie that the Zionists invented to suppress the Palestinians," said Masoud Shojaei-Tabatabaii, head of House of Cartoons and one of the competition's organizers.

snip

[cali]

10. huge fail

As bat said, there is no law at all that would prevent such a contest in the U.S. btw, ever hear of Andre Serrano?

[Warren DeMontague]

115. Do you understand the 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution?

I think you don't. Sadly, there are a bunch of folks who either completely don't understand it, or actively loathe it, or both.

[NutmegYankee]

6. I think it will prove the opposite.

Westerners won't go out into the streets in mass and March down to the Iranian embassy and besiege it. Westerners won't drag Easterners from homes and murder them in the street. Westerners won't go into newspaper offices and murder the editors.

No - westerners will just answer distasteful speech with more speech.

[oberliner]

9. Actually it proves the opposite

Nothing will happen to any of the people who create these cartoons mocking the Holocaust.

If there was a similar exhibit of cartoons mocking the prophet held in the US, all of the cartoonists would risk their lives by participating.

There are cartoonists who are still in hiding as a result of drawing the prophet (and others who were killed for doing so).

[geek tragedy]

15. You just called yourself a white/western supremacist.

It's just more white/western supremacy, where we believe our interpretation is the only valid one, and can't believe other people are so stupid as to not get it.

Vs

On edit: Just to be clear, I'm in no way arguing the contest or its Holocaust-denying views have any validity.

So, you deny that Holocaust denial has any validity, while a few paragraphs earlier describe denying the validity if Holocaust denial to be "just more white/western supremacy."

The Iranians aren't the only ones trolling here.

[guillaumeb]

59. An interesting argument, even if refuted by the points you highlight

The poster is attacking the notion of western white supremacy. How do you read that as the opposite?

As to the Holocaust, the poster explicitly stated that the Holocaust happened essentially as it is generally described in history books.

I do not understand how you and others here can possibly read it as Holocaust denial.

[geek tragedy]

89. If something is objective fact, then there is no debate to be had in terms of respecting people

who deny that objective fact due to their own bigotry.

Which makes it completely different than the people who lose their marbles when someone disrespects their religion halfway across the globe.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

33. I predict ABSOLUTELY ZERO people will be killed or have death decrees made against them. nt

[Jenoch]

58. "...that all of our claims that Muslims should not get upset about cartoons..."

I do not recall anyone saying they should not get upset. I do recall people saying that executing the cartoonists or the newspaper editors is an over-reaction. (See Charlie Hebdo)

[guillaumeb]

66. I have read your posts here, and the reactions to them.

Amazing how people can completely reverse what you actually wrote in an attempt to frame you as a Holocaust denying apologist for the Iranians.

I liked your responses. Noam Chomsky makes a similar point when he discusses the limits of acceptable speech. I have experienced negative comments from some when I talk of the US as being an Empire that is always at war.

Thanks for the comments.

[jobycom]

83. Thanks. I know this place, I knew what to expect.

Most people who read don't bother posting if they agree. The handful of flames are from people who obviously didn't understand what they read, so why hold it against them? Some of them have shown that inability for years, so it's obviously not personal.

[geek tragedy]

91. Referring to rejecting the David Irving crowd as driven by "politics" and referring

to the acceptance of the most documented fact in history as a "sacred cow" was incredibly trollish and incorporated much of the denial-lite crowd.

Indeed, advocates for Irving, Zundel et al use the same kind of rhetoric.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=holocaust+%22sacred+cow%22&start=0

[jobycom]

100. If I had done so, then maybe you'd have a point.

I never mentioned David Irving, and until this moment didn't know his name. Which means you're the one who brought him into the discussion, not me. I didn't say that rejecting his "crowd" was driven by politics. My point had nothing to do with the Holocaust except that the Holocaust is a sacred issue in the West, and that's why Iran was using it to prove its point about the lack of equality of respect over issues important to the two cultures.

You can disagree with that, but at least talk about what I said instead of making up some bulllshit I didn't say to win a point that was never in dispute in the first place.

[geek tragedy]

104. The Holocaust is not a 'sacred' issue--it is an indisputable fact established by

mountains and mountains of empirical research and evidence.

It is precisely the opposite of a faith-based belief.

Perhaps you are not understanding this for a reason.

And it is not credible for someone who writes this:

As someone who spent a lot of time in university history departments, I can tell you that no historian would challenge the current story of the Holocaust even if they disagreed with it and had facts to prove it (and there are facts to argue different points than the mainstream story),

to be unaware of David Irving, the most famous Holocaust denier whose work was judged legally false, seems implausible at best

[840high]

84. I assure you no one will

be killed for participating in this. As opposed to Hebron.

[jobycom]

86. Did you read the part where I never said they would?

What do you think I said?

[Nye Bevan]

12. I'll go out on a limb and predict that these cartoons will not lead to bloody riots,

bombings, and the cartoonists being murdered.

[Bad Thoughts]

21. Certainly, because the target of the exhibited works is not "The West"

It is clearly Jews. No Western myths will be mocked. Christianity will not be mocked. Western politicians will not be mocked. The only people who will be mocked are the distinct minority and their relatives.

[geek tragedy]

23. How many people died because of Piss Christ? nt

[Bad Thoughts]

27. None. Piss Christ at least broadly reflects Western values. eom.

[cali]

28. care to explain that rather odd declaration? please expound

[Bad Thoughts]

50. Sure

The imagery used in Piss Christ belongs to a broad civilization, largely Western, that emerged through Christianity. The Holocaust reflects the experiences (in suffering) of a minority, not the entirety, not a majority, not even a plurality of Western Civilization. The subject matter of this exhibition would be no more central to Western Civilization than if it mocked Jeffrey Amherst's smallpox blankets. The people who will be offended by the exhibition (regardless of the virulence of their protests) will be small.

[cali]

53. You seem to erroneously believe that only Jews are offended by it. You are entirely mistaken.

[Bad Thoughts]

54. No, I am saying that the target is Jews, not the West

Everything else is a smokescreen. Thankfully, there are good people--non-Jews--who will be offended as well, but they will nnot be the target of the rhetoric.

[Nye Bevan]

24. Cartoonists who mock Christianity, and artists who dunk crucifixes in piss,

generally tend not to be murdered either.

[Bad Thoughts]

26. I would agree

However, if we were speculating on whether Piss Christ would produce outrage, we could at least recognize that it is a broad satire of Western values.

[cali]

29. and the Charlie Hebdo cartoons? Just what do you think they were?

[Bad Thoughts]

32. A satirical portrayal of Islam and (some) adherrants

The claim, though, of equivalency between that and Holocaust denial is erroneous. To call this about free expression is a smoke screen to allow them to divert attention from the essential antisemitism they hope to cultivate.. The claim that the Civil War was fought over states' rights is (barely) more legitimate.

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. I can imagine an angry mob looting a Whole Foods in Boca Raton

[Nuclear Unicorn]

35. I chortled.

[JonLP24]

42. What do you make of this?

I don't justify what these individuals did but they were obviously duped by Wahabbi cult leaders to perform attacks which was a process started years ago that it is only because of the cartoon which is very much a part of Wahabbi doctrine which absolutely should be condemn but when the entire sect is held responsible & marginalized it helps with their propaganda further in addition to the bombings & killings of Muslims. Ironically a lot of attacks in France targeted Mosques which shows how ignorant they are because Wahabbis aren't fans of Mosques either. They blow them up too.

-----

Raised in ophanages

In a 400-page court record from 2007, Kouachi was described as wanting to travel to Iraq "to go and combat the Americans."

Kouachi stated in a deposition, "I was ready to go and die in battle," and "I got this idea when I saw the injustices shown by television on what was going on over there. I am speaking about the torture that the Americans have inflicted on the Iraqis."

<snip>

Kouachi stated that "the wise leaders in Islam told him and his friends that if they die as martyrs in jihad they would go to heaven" and "that martyrs would be greeted by more than 60 virgins in a big palace in heaven," said documents in a section entitled "Motivations of Influence."

(wise leaders -- cult leaders)

http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/08/europe/paris-charlie-hebdo-shooting-suspects/

What I'm saying is the individuals related to the Charlie Hedbo shooting were influenced, tasked, training, & planning attacks way before this one. To be clear Wahabbi doctrine should 100% be condemned aside from the obvious reasons they are a far right ultraconservative orthodox sect as well as any far right movement.

On edit -- Realize they overload on the propaganda to influence followers. The reason the "wise leaders" choose this as a target is because they knew this is what the reaction would be which helps influence more followers who maybe marginalized or discriminated because of their religious beliefs.

Also why is Mohammed the target of this satire exactly? The doctrine responsible for these attacks is also the doctrine responsible for the desecration of his immediate familiy's graves.

[cali]

43. I think it's a crying shame. But maybe they were just duped into those attacks.

Sorry, but the "duped" into committing hateful acts excuse, stinks.

[JonLP24]

44. They are a quite clearly a destructive cult

They use propaganda very heavily & have been for quite some time. Oppression, discrimination, & other things that are unjust are helpful but the point I was making is Islam vs the West. Their actions & beliefs of the cult no doubt should be condemn. Similar to the far right groups we have at home doing unregulated border patrols & bombing a IRS building in Texas or killing cops in Nevada and planting the "don't tread on me flag" -- these same people participated in the armed standoff at the Bundy ranch.

Far right groups or movements should absolutely be condemn but so much if focused on Islam as if the human rights violations by people who call themselves Christian is somehow different.

I'm saying we act like we are so forward thinking when people who aren't Muslim are hateful & commit atrocities. Just like the people who did so after the Charlie Hedbo shooting on people or locations who happened to share an identity.

[cali]

45. your op is so murky it's hard to discern what you're trying to say.

The far right is condemned multiple times daily here on DU- far more frequently than Islam is condemned- and rightfully so as the far right poses a much greater threat to us. I think the "cult" excuse- be it for aspects of Islam or anyone else, is largely bullshit.

[JonLP24]

47. So a group like Al-Qaeda isn't a cult?

Wahabbism which is a doctrine with beliefs & practices that are so far off the norm of Islamic beliefs & practices it is ridiculous to slam the sect itself.

A group like ISIS or Al-Qaeda is far right. The Taliban is far right. The House of Saud is far right. They're far right. They're far right groups & movements of numerous faiths but Islam is singled out as a special problem.

I hold leaders of these cults very much in contempt & not making an excuse but explaining it what it is. Petrodollars were extremely helpful for the House of Saud in pushing Wahabbi ideology with organized & targeted and well funded propaganda campaigns.

[cali]

49. I wouldn't characterize them as such.

[JonLP24]

51. Fundamentalist preachers are convincing young adults that it is their religious duty

to turn themselves into a bomb but not themselves. They are very oppressive over people who don't 100% agree with them and a #1 rule is don't criticize them (for people unfortunate to live under their rule).

The select quoting, interpretation, & twisting is very similar much like how this right wing Christian sect/cult is
https://croydongate.wordpress.com/2015/01/28/the-essential-guide-to-potters-house-false-doctrines/

There are differences in scale but the doctrine from preachers claiming to have this direct pipeline to god or Allah is being used to oppress people which isn't even close to what Muhammed advocated

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina

[Pooka Fey]

52. +1

[LeftinOH]

30. Satirizing the prophet M*hammed is not the same thing as

satirizing the real-life, verifiable, systematic mass murder of millions of people. There is simply no comparison. One thing is merely insensitive (at BEST); the latter is simply vile. The Islamist extremists don't get it ...they just don't.

[KittyWampus]

31. Political Cartoons. The Article Has A Photo From Last Year.

edit- took out word "appropriate" because it's only one photo shown.

It may be possible the exhibit may be OVERALL less inflammatory than implied.

The Washington Post might be trying to stir things up to favor NeoCons.

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484

HERE IS THE WINNER FROM 2006

[dembotoz]

34. seeing how nutty yahoo has been talking....no olive branches from isreal that is for sure

[Nuclear Unicorn]

37. There it is!

[cali]

38. huh? what has that to do with the op?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

56. So because Bibi is a douche that permits folks to deny the Holocaust?

[SidDithers]

60. Can you believe that shit?...

Sid

[cali]

61. Why yes. Yes I can.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

64. Tit for tat or something like that...

[LeftishBrit]

70. This is a separate issue

Netanyahu is a RW bastard, but this is not just about Iranian/Israeli relations. Holocaust denial is crazy and ugly wherever one finds it. It's also a lie.

[Codeine]

105. So. Fucking. Predictable. nt

[Behind the Aegis]

112. Like the cleaning of a house....

...it never ends!

[goldent]

40. They are making their point

And as I understand it, the exhibit is not denying the holocaust, but is satirizing the politicalization of the holocaust.

[cali]

41. their "point" is hypocritical shit.

and sorry, but the last contest/exhibition did include holocaust denial.

so... fail.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/01/the-hypocrisy-of-irans-holocaust-cartoon-contest/385058/

[geek tragedy]

97. no, it's pretty much straight up Holocaust denial

"If the West says that freedom of speech has no borders then why don't they let historians and experts properly research the Holocaust?"

[NaturalHigh]

46. I am constantly saddened by human depravity.

Who would ever think that this is somehow amusing?

Sick bastards.

[djean111]

55. Political cartoons are not meant to be amusing. IMO and all that.

[NaturalHigh]

68. These aren't necessarily political cartoons.

They are entries submitted by children to be critiqued by adults. Regardless, any person with even a sliver of decency should be appalled by this.

[arcane1]

78. I don't think it's specifically children doing the artwork.

For what that's worth, anyway. If this was an exhibit of children's art, I missed that.

[Starry Messenger]

62. Fucking gross.

(And yes, before anyone jumps on me, I thought Hebdo was in shit taste too.)

[guillaumeb]

63. the limits of acceptable free speech?

As has been previously stated here, what constitutes acceptable fee speech varies by country. In France it is illegal to deny the Holocaust. Any who doubt this can Google the name Professor Robert Faurisson or comedian dieudonne and see the limits of free speech in France. Or go to Paris and burn the tricoleur at the Place de la Concorde while singing a parody of La Marseillaise.

The cartoon contest sounds like a disgusting bit of ethnic religious hatred.

But many of the cartoons in Charlie Hebdo were also disgusting examples of ethnic and religious hatred.

Let a cartoonist post a picture of Jesus having sex with Peter, or His mother Mary having sex with a donkey and see how the outrage would mount in the United States. It is perfectly acceptable to mock Islam or the Prophet in the West. And THAT shows the limits of US tolerance for free speech.

[cali]

65. You appear unable to distinguish outrage from riots and murder.

and you seem never to have heard of Andre Serrano.

[guillaumeb]

67. I have seen "Piss Christ"

and thought the concept was amazing. The light in the picture is very impressionistic. And yes, it triggered many protests and was called blasphemous and anti-religious.

As to riots and murder, have you ever read about the rioting, and murders, that have happened in Northern Ireland when the Orange Parade is held? I believe Ireland is a western country.

How about 2011 London and the riots over free speech? And no, it was not Muslims rioting. And I believe that England is a western country. Here is a link:
http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2011/08/10/london-riots-the-boundaries-of-freedom-of-expression/

Yes, I can distinguish between speech and violence. But I can also see the limits of tolerance for supposedly free speech in the west as well as in Middle eastern countries.

[cali]

69. Oh for pity's sake.

comparing freedom of speech limitations in western countries and certain Islamic countries is pretty ridiculous. As is comparing the reaction to Piss Christ (and I agree re its artistic value) and the reaction to cartoons mocking Mohammed. One reaction is consistently more extreme and results in loss of life.

[guillaumeb]

71. and as to England and Ireland?

What Cliven Bundy did was called free speech. If he had been confronted by the police when he and his followers brandished guns and pointed them at the police, it is quite likely that people would have died.

But my point is that there is no "free speech" that is lacking any boundaries. That goes for the west as well as the east. And in any case, when any rioting occurs, west or east, it is a tiny fraction of the population that riots. Rioting is an extreme expression of intolerance and people cannot be judged by the reactions of a tiny minority.

[Nye Bevan]

73. No-one Murdered Because of this Image (NSFW warning)

NSFW warning: the linked cartoon includes several penises and may be highly offensive to followers of the religions mentioned. It did not seem to cause much outrage, however, let alone riots and murders.

WASHINGTON—Following the publication of the image above, in which the most cherished figures from multiple religious faiths were depicted engaging in a lascivious sex act of considerable depravity, no one was murdered, beaten, or had their lives threatened, sources reported Thursday. The image of the Hebrew prophet Moses high-fiving Jesus Christ as both are having their erect penises vigorously masturbated by Ganesha, all while the Hindu deity anally penetrates Buddha with his fist, reportedly went online at 6:45 p.m. EDT, after which not a single bomb threat was made against the organization responsible, nor did the person who created the cartoon go home fearing for his life in any way. Though some members of the Jewish, Christian, Hindu, and Buddhist faiths were reportedly offended by the image, sources confirmed that upon seeing it, they simply shook their heads, rolled their eyes, and continued on with their day.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image,29553/

[guillaumeb]

74. I am outraged

Ganesha is the same color as Barney. Does that mean that Barney is also engaging in such behavior?

[Nye Bevan]

75. Yes, and he thinks its SUPER-DE-DUPER!

Barney is one thing I do NOT miss as my kids have gotten older.

[guillaumeb]

76. Barney is a liberal

Accepting all people, friendly with everyone. A very safe experience for young children.
But I do not miss Barney either.

[NCTraveler]

102. Never knew this was a part of liberalism, at all.

"friendly with everyone"

I don't know if it has a place in any ideology. I am not conflating human nature with ideology.

[Codeine]

107. Christianity gets brutally mocked all the time

I have dozens of unbelievably offensive anti-Christian album covers in my black metal collection. I have seen innumerable works of graphic art depicting Jesus doing all sorts of nasty things, including boning Mary and, memorably, fucking another Jesus (as in Jesus Fucking Christ.)

None if it has sparked any serious outrage.

[BainsBane]

77. If the idea is a comment on Charlie Hebdo

They've missed by light years. They should mock Western icons, aspects of the dominant culture. Genocide is not that.

It's also possible that some thoughtful art pieces will emerge that aren't anti-Semitic, however. Iran has some excellent artists, and not all are ex-pats.

[get the red out]

79. Cartoons

Oh the IRONY!

[zappaman]

81. The only appropriate response...

[Zorra]

82. Too bad we can't trade our US conservatives for Iranian liberals, women, and LGBT.

Then we could have fun with our new friends and new democracy while the fascist population of Iran ate each other.

[geek tragedy]

98. someone should enter a cartoon of Mohammed saying "denying the Holocaust is evil" nt

[Behind the Aegis]

111. But wouldn't that be "Western" arrogance?

[Major Hogwash]

101. Um, they have a museum park in Kentucky depicting Noah's Ark!!!

Talk about ludicrous!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[NCTraveler]

103. Noah's Ark.

One of the greatest massacres in history.

[Brett Fitz]

106. The USSR Threatened US With Nuclear Destruction For Decades!

Did that stop us from making agreements with them?

[Behind the Aegis]

113. What?!

[goldent]

110. Here are the winners from the last contest

for those interested in what is being discussed.

http://irancartoon.com/120/holocaust/index.htm

[U4ikLefty]

114. Thanks, this add a little nuance to the topic.