Actual Danish cartoons (that caused the violence)

[corporate_mike]

[patrice]

1. The first one?

No shit??? That's it???

Wow, talk about thin skinned.

On edit: I get it now. It isn't so insulting to their prophet. It says their single women aren't virgins and THAT'S a big deal to Muslims.

[corporate_mike]

14. NBC's hypocricy

NBC is planning a Will & Grace right before Easter that mocks the crucifixion. Yet they will not show the cartoons out of respect for Islam.

[patrice]

24. I can't imagine why/how they could do such a thing?????????????

Do you think they are just doing it to get ratings? I don't watch Will & Grace, but I would consider it for that episode, because I am curious what/why/how they would mock the crucifixion of the Lord of Love. I would want to know their thinking so I could rebut it.

[Breeze54]

49. It stars Brittany Spears too! lmao!

But how do you know if they are mocking anything??
:shrug:

[FreedomAngel82]

27. Oh but they can't show

"Book of Daniel" right? So where's AFA protesting that "Will & Grace" episode???

[corporate_mike]

2. Here are the first 3 cartoons

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

57. Eh, whatever.....

.....I'm as lost as to how these depictions are offensive just as much as when the Christian Fundis complain that depictions of Jesus are offensive. The fairy tale crowd confuses me.

[LaurenG]

3. They do appear harmless however strict

Muslims do take their religion very seriously and it is a violation of their religion to have images of the Prophet. I don't see anything wrong with them but they do, so I suppose since I'm not muslim I would want to respect their opinions - so I won't be drawing pictures of Mohammad. What a conundrum.

[corporate_mike]

5. is violance not against their religion ?

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,1658,5105418,00.jpg

[LaurenG]

9. You would think it should be

I think they believe in violence when someone breaks their laws or rules. I am not defending their behavior just trying to understand what the heck is behind their thinking. Please don't misinterpret my post.:shrug:

[catmother]

11. but the non radicals keep telling us that it's a religion of peace.

[LaurenG]

15. I know, it is sad. It reminds me

of our own radical Christian sects. I have no answers only questions and a desire to understand what drives them to this.

[catmother]

19. well at least the christians only bomb abortion clinics. not that

i'm condoning it. i find all acts of terror reprehensible.

[ikojo]

21. No, extremist Christians also bomb Federal buildings

or have we forgotten that Timothy McVeigh bombed the Murrah Fed Bldg in April 1995?

[catmother]

23. was he an extreme christian? i never did understand his

reasoning -- didn't it have something to do with Waco? and i still don't believe he acted alone.

[patrice]

26. There was mention of some kind of connections to Christian Identity

movement, i.e. Aryan Supremicists.

[catmother]

32. that was one weird guy. from what i understand when he staked

out the building he could see that there were children there. what a sicko.:hide:

[patrice]

35. VERY hard to understand. I can't picture his mind.

No matter how "right" you think you are and how strongly you feel about whatever, you know children are innocent.

[catmother]

40. exactly. i can't understand the mind of anyone who commits an

act of terror. i mean -- killing your own people -- whether it's an american or anyone it's wrong, wrong, wrong. no excuses. and it's certainly not the way to get people to understand your cause.

[patrice]

46. I have a nephew in the Army's Delta force.

He's been in Iraq from the start, except for some leave of course.

I feel very sad for him. He was a simple country kid with no prospects. Now he's . . . . . . . . ?

[catmother]

47. unfortunately people like your nephew are the ones who enlist

in the military. they feel it's a way to get an education, learn a trade. may god watch over him and bring him and the rest of our troops home soon.

[patrice]

48. I am praying that our Family will be able to provide what he will

NEED to be able to feel and function with his memories.

[catmother]

50. you'll find the strength. my dad an d4 of my mom's brothers

fought in World War II. one uncle did become an alcholic because of what he saw, but thankfully he is fine now and he's 87 years old.

[patrice]

51. Yes, even when it's the "right" thing, War takes its tole.

My Dad nearly killed himself a couple of times with alcohol after seeing the Nazi concentration camps. He was a Msgt. airplane engine mechanic, so he was among some of the first in after the campls were liberated, while they were being "cleaned-up". He was a shutter-bug, took lots of pictures, so there was this box of pictures that none of us kids were ever permitted to see. My older sister secretly looked at them and told me about them years later.

[catmother]

52. but some will argue that the holocaust never took place.

[fujiyama]

60. It would be a stretch to call McVeigh

a Christian terrorist. His bombing was not done in the name of religion. It was done because hhe was aangered (once again shows that 'offended' people can do some fucked up things) by the federal government over Waco and Ruby Ridge (where a white supremecist's wife, kid, and dog were killed by federaral agents). As anothher poster stated, he may have had links with Christian Identity, but even then McVeigh never claimed to do what hee did in the name of Jesus or God.

Also, I am not one to ever defend Christian fundamentalism and I view them as a threat to freedom at home, but violent actions are not nearly as well organized and widespread as their Islamic counterparts.

[Breeze54]

34. Religion bashing is nothing new....

Through The Looking Glass: The Danish Cartoons
Does one have the right to make fun of religion?
Where is the line between freedom of speech and censorship?
And what are appropriate responses?
http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1645_0_25_0_C

SNIP-->
By Sheila Musaji, February 4, 2006

There have been numerous cases <1> where various religious communities
have objected to films, art exhibits, books, songs, plays, lifestyles,
etc. as being blasphemous, offensive, obscene, or ....
<1>Sometimes the protestors have threatened violence.
<2>People have seen these issues as insensitive to their feelings,
disrespectful, as an attack on their culture or values, as sacrilege,
as blasphemy, or as intolerance or prejudice.
<3>Sometimes there have even been protests against other religious groups,
or the expression of their religion in the public square.<4>

The Background
The current Danish cartoon incident is different only
in the intensity and variety of the reactions to the cartoons.
---> more at Link.......

Partial list of incidents sparking protest:

<1> Partial list of incidents sparking protest:

"The Life of Brian" a Monty Python film was objected to by both
Jews and Christians, and was banned in many communities in Britain.

Pepsi was forced by a boycott and protests to discontinue an ad
featuring a video of Madonna singing "Like a Prayer".

Members of the Harvest Assembly of God Church in Penn Township
burned books, videos and CDs that they judged "offensive to their God."

Christian groups across the US protested a film about the life
of sex researcher Alfred C. Kinsey, and sought
"legislation and will punish sponsors of lewd entertainment."

Christians in Pakistan protested
what they considered "blasphemous" remarks made about Jesus
in a newspaper review of the book the "Da Vinci Code".
They demanded that the newspaper be closed, for which they threatened
protests outside the Lahore Press Club and other important places.

Christians filed lawsuits, promoted boycotts and launched campaigns
aimed at restoring references to Christ in seasonal celebrations.

Hindus demanded withdrawal of a British "Christmas" postage stamp
they found insulting to their religion.

45,000 complaints came in,
and there were demonstrations in London when the BBC aired
a program "Jerry Springer:
the Opera" considered "blasphemous" by many Christians.
Christian lawyers were contacted,
to consider whether it was possible to prosecute
the BBC under the Common Blasphemy Law, last used in 1977.

Parents at a Colorado school objected to a library book
and got permission to hold a book burning.

Christians protested the change from B.C. to B.C.E.,
as they saw it as an attack on Christianity.

Christian groups protested a music video by
Jessica Simpson that they considered indecent.

Catholic Nuns protested outside of the set
for the "Da Vinci Code" film.

Christian groups protested "civil unions" for gays. <--SNIP


Sheila Musaji is editor-in-chief of The American Muslim.

[Yupster]

53. I don't really get that logic OhioBlues

I understand courtesy and all, but since you're not a Muslim you think you should follow the Muslim prohibition against drawing pictures of Mohammed?

I would think that their religious beliefs, while interesting, wouldn't have any sway over non-Muslims.

I wouldn't think Muslims would want non-believers to have to follow their rules. That would certainly seem like an outrageous demand if they did.

Anyway, the idea of following other religions' rules so as not to offend them would certainly get complicated as you wouldn't be able to eat beef as to not offend the Hindus, eat pork so as not to offend the Muslims and drink alcohol so as not to offend all different ones.

Is that really a realistic way to live your life?

How do you pick which religions not to offend and which to ignore?

Only worry about the ones with angry mobs?

[LaurenG]

56. So you think I should draw pictures of their prophet

just to piss them off. I have no reason or desire to draw cartoons of religious figures. My point is I (capital I) would not do it. You may if you would like or the Danes or the French. That wasn't my point but as usual around here it is difficult to let a statement just stand alone. Once again, I will not and would not. I PERSONALLY would not want to OFFEND someone who felt that strongly about something. If I really thought I was serving some grander purpose I would do it. However, this whole thing is weird and I (I personally)see no point in it. :hi:

[fujiyama]

61. Yupster isn't saaying that you should

but you should have the right to do so, without being threatened for it.

[LaurenG]

62. That has been my point as well. nt

[Yupster]

63. Exactly fuji -- thank you

I would never have printed a cartoon about Jerry Falwell having sex with his mother.

To me that was rude and hurtful.

However, I'll support the right of pricks like Larry Flynt to print it and I think the courts were right to rule in Flynt's favor, even though I think he's about as low as you can get.

I'll support him while I insult him, and Larry would probably pat me on the back for each curse aimed at him.

I think his stated reason for printing the cartoon was that he didn't like Falwell or something like that.

Doesn't matter. That's freedom of the press.

If you think they went too far, then sue them. The courts will decide.

[LaurenG]

65. Now I'm really confused

That is exactly what I said. I would not draw them yet I would not try and stop someone else. Where did you think I didn't agree with that?

[Kerrytravelers]

4. Tell me where my reasoning is flawed.

If it is wrong for Muslims to depict religious figured in cartoonish illustrations, then Muslims should obey this as part of their religion. But, if someone else outside the faith depicts their religious figures in cartoonish illustrations, while they may not like it, how is it a violation of Islam if the illustrator isn't Muslim?

That is what I was thinking. However, I may be overlooking the obvious. I'm not throwing this down to be flamed, but simply asking someone to explain the situation from a point of view I'm missing.

Thanks!

[genie_weenie]

6. because if you blaspheme

a muslim has the right according to 1400 years of Islamic law and the word of the Koran (the most holy and final and perfect word of GOD) to strike of your head, take your wife and chattels...

[Kerrytravelers]

7. So then, their beliefs stretch beyond their own faith and dictate the

behavior of non-Muslims?

Just asking because I want to be very clear so when others talk about it, I can be knowledgable enough on the subject to explain the situation.

Any links would be great. Tell me how you know this so I can tell others.

Thanks!


Edited for embaressing spelling errors!

[genie_weenie]

13. Well, yes, of course

Islam is a proselytizing religion. Muslims must go out and preach the word of Allah to the unbelievers, (kafir), of course if you (the unbeliever) do not accept the word of Islam, Muslims are according to their legal standards able to kill you and take your lands.

Islam is broken down into two houses The House of War (Dar al-harb) and The House of Peace (Dar al-Islam), the job of *every* Muslim is to extend Islam to all lands.

But yes, like most religions, Islam spread throughout the world through violence and oppression. Just as the Papacy gave the Teutonic Knights special writs to extend Christendom into Pagan Bohemia and the Baltic area for example.

Islam early originals made it blasphemy to depict God, or man, or other images because this was seen as way Mankind would fall into veneration of idols. If you've ever heard of Icons, people began to venerate them and this was seen in many religions as a taking away of worship of God, a big no-no. This is why Muslim artists became some of the best calligraphers the world has ever seen, due to the Religious law against depicting the human form, although they never created a Donatello or Titian, due to this restriction.

As Islam spread through the sword it imposed special rules on conquered peoples. This was called Dhimmitude.

Dhimmitude was originally offered to "People's of the Book" Jews and Christians, sometimes to Persians (Zoroastrians) and never to Pagans or Atheist or Hindus.

A dhimmi had to recognize his lesser status than a muslim, his home could never be grander than a muslims, he had to pay special taxes, he could not build new temples or churches on "Muslim" lands, if his old temple fell down or was burned to the ground it could not be rebuilt, he could never try (on pain of death) to convert muslims or marry muslim women, and religious services could not be done loud enough for Muslims to hear, his word was not believed in courts of law against a Muslims word...

It was second class status.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/4677976.stm

&category=Kingdom

http://dhimmitude.org/

http://www.danielpipes.org/

http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/747

[A Simple Game]

17. So if I am standing on my porch, look to my left

and see a Muslim walking my way knocking on doors, then I look to my right and see a Jehovah's Witness walking my way knocking on doors, I should? Make popcorn?

[catmother]

20. i live on a private road. there are several signs along the road

saying "private road no trespassing" so when they ring my doorbell i tell them that they're trespassing, whether it's a religious person or a salesperson.

[donco6]

8. Actually, this is the heart of the matter.

And cartoons are just a tiny scratch on the surface.

How far do we go to avoid inciting the violence of religious fundamentalists? Today it's cartoons, tomorrow it's South Park and Family Guy, then on to TV shows, newspaper ads, magazines - where does it end?

I don't want fundamentalists of any stripe telling me what's appropriate to see or do.

[corporate_mike]

66. well, they do

don't they?

[Yollam]

16. Like American KKKristian fundie psychos, fundie muslims LOVE...

...to impose their religion on everyone else.

[patrice]

29. Maybe they're pissed because the cartoonist is saying their

unmarried women aren't virgins?

[corporate_mike]

10. Violent response is just out of control crazy

[Breeze54]

41. "Where they have burned books, they will end in burning human beings."

“On Sunday evening, members of the Harvest Assembly of God Church
in Penn Township sing songs as they burn books, videos and CDs
that they have judged offensive to their God.”

Published in the Butler Eagle, March 26, 2001.
Courtesy of the Butler Eagle.
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/bannedbooksweek/bookburning/21stcentury/21stcentury.htm

[Yupster]

55. Pretty ironic

that it's the Danish flag they're burning.

They're protesting disrespect of their religion by burning the cross.

Irony can be so ironic sometimes.

[proud2BlibKansan]

12. So which turbin looks like a bomb?

[otohara]

22. Different Toon

not shown above.

[corporate_mike]

18. I support Denmark

[kisstheman]

25. so do I. This whole thing is a setup by some shadow

[patrice]

30. setup?

This thread? - because those aren't the cartoons that caused the trouble?

Or - Those ARE the right cartoons and their "outrage" is a hoax?

What's a "shadow"?

[kisstheman]

31. These cartoons were printed in September, you don't see something strange?

[Breeze54]

36. They were published on a "dare..."

"The bottom line is that these 12 cartoons were commissioned "on a dare"
that no paper would be willing to published material that insulted Islam,
and they were published all at the same time,
leading one to believe that there was at least an element
of deliberate provocation involved."
http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1645_0_25_0_C

[kisstheman]

38. This does not change the point

How is it that the whole ME can go up in flames over cartoons.

This is stupid. You really don't see that someone is stirring this up.

These cartoons were printed in September, if I didn't make that clear.

[Breeze54]

42. "Robert Spencer has reprinted the cartoons..."

Snip-->
"The Editor of the newspaper did apologize,
but by this time the cartoons had been republished in papers
all over Europe leading the Islamic Human Rights Commission to state
that "the republication of caricatures of Prophet Muhammad
in Europe is indicative of the hatred that precedes genocide."
The Jewish ADL issued a statement pointing out their concern with both
the offensive nature of the cartoons, and concern about the extreme reaction,
and what it perceived as a double standard when anti-Jewish cartoons and statements
in the press in some Muslim countries go unremarked.
And, of course, Robert Spencer has reprinted the cartoons
with his usual Islamaphobic comments on Front Page." <--Snip

http://www.altmuslim.com/perm.php?id=1645_0_25_0_C
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I read the article.
I didn't take what you said at face value.
The cartoons were REPUBLISHED!!

[kisstheman]

44. That is a crock

"the republication of caricatures of Prophet Muhammad
in Europe is indicative of the hatred that precedes genocide."

[Tesha]

59. That would be because the religiously insane are, well, insane.

> How is it that the whole ME can go up in flames over cartoons.

That would be because the religiously insane are, well, insane.
And it doesn't matter which sect they belong to, they're still
insane.

Tesha

[patrice]

37. Sorry, I hadn't picked that detail up yet.

The story of the disruptions is so recent . . . . ? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm . . . .

[TankLV]

45. So do I - very strongly.

I condemn these asswipes masquerading behind their religion.

I'd like to see them tell ME who I can/can't ridicule!

[Catherine Vincent]

28. Thanks. I haven't seen the toons that everyone was talking about.

[Kire]

33. the ignore button is wonderful

[Renew Deal]

43. The muslim world has an ignore button?

:shrug: Ahhh, if life was only like DU.

[Dutch]

58. Yes it will be wonderful to ignore pro-fundy, anti-free speech posters

Even those whose level of discourse rarely rises above nasty little snippets of hypocritical innuendo.

[Zookeeper]

39. That's it?!?

IMHO, religious fundamentalists of every kind need to get over their crazy selves! I uphold the right of free speech, even if it goes against what I believe, but violence is inexcusable.

They are free to devote themselves to their (IMHO) superstitious fantasies, but they don't have the right to expect me to honor or participate in them.

[Katherine Brengle]

54. Um, they're funny. They aren't really that offensive, even if you were

being really, really, really picky...

The second one is just silly, and I enjoyed it quite a bit. Kind of like when Al Franken wanted to do the "cheerleaders in burkas" thing for the USO...

[corporate_mike]

64. Muslim Anti-Cartoon Clashes Turn Deadly (Yahoo)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060206/ap_on_re_mi_ea/prophet_drawings_76;_ylt=AmRNCtQnWXCAQ72W2Ycfg5XbEfQA;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl