Islamic caricatures are all the rage

by **Avalon** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 11:58 am

it is against Muslim tenets to have graven images of ANYone All the Abrahamic religions have that commandment, which is often taken to be the Second Commandment. What part of "Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth" do Christians and Jews not understand?

by **Avalon** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 12:25 pm

Wait -- I just noticed that for the first time. Is God saying they can't do little statues of protozoas in the aquifers? Or is He referring to Elder Race inhabitants of Lake Vostok, shut tight against the sun 2 miles deep under the Antarctic ice for the past 15 million years? If we do a Piss Cthulhu artwork are we gonna really get in trouble?

by **nomo** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 3:11 pm

<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/5/13149/60748">www.dailykos.com/storyonl...3149/60748</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>So what triggered this? Well it takes a blog to explain it. What CNN and the other traditional media failed to tell you is that the thousand gallons of fuel added to the fire of outrage came from none other than our old pals Saudi Arabia. While it was a minor side story in the western press, the most important of Muslim religious festivals recently took place in Saudi Arabia - called the Hajj. Every able-bodied Muslim is obligated to make a pilgrimage once in their lifetime to Mecca, which is in modern-day Saudi Arabia. This pilgrimage can be done at any time of the year but most pilgrims arrive during the Muslim month known as Dhu al-Hijjah, which follows a lunar calendar that does not exactly match the western Gregorian calendar. The most recent Hajj occurred during the first half of January 2006, precisely when the "outrage" over the Danish cartoons began in earnest. There were a number of stampedes, called "tragedies" in the press, during the Hajj which killed several hundred pilgrims. I say "tragedies" in quotation marks because there have been similar "tragedies" during the Hajj and each time, the Saudi government promises to improve security and facilitation of movement to avoid these. Over 251 pilgrims were killed during the 2004 Hajj alone in the same area as the one that killed 350 pilgrims in 2006. These were not unavoidable accidents, they were the results of poor planning by the Saudi government. And while the deaths of these pilgrims was a mere blip on the traditional western media's radar, it was a huge story in the Muslim world. Most of the pilgrims who were killed came from poorer countries such as Pakistan, where the Hajj is a very big story. Even the most objective news stories were suddenly casting Saudi Arabia in a very bad light and they decided to do something about it. Their plan was to go on a major offensive against the Danish cartoons. The 350 pilgrims were killed on January 12 and soon after, Saudi newspapers (which are all controlled by the state) began running up to 4 articles per day condemning the Danish cartoons. The Saudi government asked for a formal apology from Denmark. When that was not forthcoming, they began calling for world-wide protests. After two weeks of this, the Libyans decided to close their embassy in Denmark. Then there was an attack on the Danish embassy in Indonesia. And that was followed by attacks on the embassies in Syria and then Lebanon. <hr></blockquote>

by **Qutb** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 6:02 pm

Thanks for posting that, Nomo. I remember the Saudis were the first to formally protest against the cartoons. That's one part of the story. There are strong "forces" in Europe that are really itching for the "clash of civilizations" to commence as well (the anti-immigration and 3rd position right wing), and these right-leaning newspapers that published the caricatures have a rather obvious agenda here. I think they got exactly what they bargained for. It takes two to tango though, and the Saudis seem to have played a role in inciting this upheaval. The ongoing Saudi sponsorship of Islamist extremism is still an underreported story, IMO. Saudi money has built many of the new, radical mosques in Europe which actively proselytize their particular brand of uncompromising Wahhabi jihadism among younger European Muslims. And they are heavily "investing" in similarly minded madrasas etc in Pakistan, Western Africa, and elsewhere. Most who know the Muslim world would agree that it has become considerably more "Islamized" over the last 30 years or so, in fact since the Saudis started to get really, really wealthy after the 70s "oil crisis". In Peter Dale Scott's latest article, he seems to assign a key role to the Saudi royal family/the Saudi intelligence service in today's global parapolitical landscape (I remember Dan Hopsicker said in an interview that he could trace Saudi money behind certain figures in the American "conspiracy theory" sphere too... don't know how well he could substantiate that though). Joe Trento has written about how, after the Church committe, the CIA "outsourced" important parts of their operations to the Saudis, where it would of course be totaly beyond Congressional scrutiny and control. They've been buying chunky stakes in American newsmedia lately, that's interesting in itself.

by **heath7** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:35 pm

How convenient that the Saudis, with the strongest connections to western establishment of any arab nation, would help furnish the two punch from the one-two combo of insensitive egging-on by western press and hypersensitve overreaction by offended Muslims.

by **antiaristo** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 7:53 pm

<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoons/0,,337484,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/cartoo...84,00.html</a>

by **heath7** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:02 pm

I bursted out laughing. Thanks.

by **nomo** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:05 pm

Iran paper plans Holocaust cartoons <a href="http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/FCE073DD-7F1B-4714-95F0-DD1F354F1D9A.htm">english.aljazeera.net/NR/...4F1D9A.htm</a> Monday 06 February 2006, 20:00 Makka Time, 17:00 GMT Iran's largest selling newspaper has announced it is holding a contest on cartoons of the Holocaust in response to the publishing in European papers of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. "It will be an international cartoon contest about the Holocaust," Farid Mortazavi, the graphics editor for Hamshahri newspaper, which is published by Tehran's conservative-run municipality, said on Monday. He said the plan was to turn the tables on the assertion that newspapers can print offensive material in the name of freedom of expression. "The Western papers printed these sacrilegious cartoons on the pretext of freedom of expression, so let's see if they mean what they say and also print these Holocaust cartoons," he asserted. Iran's fiercely anti-Israeli regime is supportive of so-called Holocaust revisionist historians, who maintain the systematic slaughter by the Nazis of mainland Europe's Jews as well as other groups during World War II has been either invented or exaggerated. Systematic slaughter Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's hardline president, prompted international anger when he dismissed the systematic slaughter by the Nazis of mainland Europe's Jews as a "myth" used to justify the creation of Israel. Mortazavi said Tuesday's edition of the paper will invite cartoonists to enter the competition, with "private individuals" offering gold coins to the best 12 artists - the same number of cartoons that appeared in the conservative Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. Last week the Iranian Foreign Ministry also invited Tony Blair, the British prime minister, to Tehran to take part in a planned conference on the Holocaust, even though the idea has been branded by Blair as "shocking, ridiculous, stupid". Blair also said Ahmadinejad "should come and see the evidence of the Holocaust himself in the countries of Europe", to which Iran responded by saying it was willing to send a team of "independent investigators". AFP

by **nomo** » Tue Feb 07, 2006 8:43 pm

"Everyone is afraid to criticize Islam" Outspoken Dutch politician Hirsi Ali says the Danish cartoons should be displayed everywhere. <a href="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/02/07/hirsi_ali/">www.salon.com/news/featur...hirsi_ali/</a> <img src="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/02/07/hirsi_ali/story.jpg" style="border:0;"/> Ayaan Hirsi Ali during a January 2005 news conference in The Hague.  Feb. 7, 2006 | Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a member of the Dutch Parliament, is one of the most sharp- tongued critics of political Islam -- and a target of Islamic fanatics. Her provocative film "Submission" led to the assassination of director Theo van Gogh in November 2004. The murderer left a death threat against Hirsi Ali pinned to van Gogh's corpse with a knife. Thirty-six years old and a member of Holland's neo-liberal VVD Party, Hirsi Ali was born in Somalia, where she experienced the oppression of Muslim women firsthand. When her father attempted to force her into an arranged marriage, she fled to Holland in 1992. Later, she renounced the Muslim religion. Though she spent a brief period in hiding following van Gogh's murder, Hirsi Ali has returned to Parliament and is continuing her fight against Islamism. She recently published a book, "I Accuse," and is working on a sequel to "Submission." In an interview, she spoke about the upheaval over the publication of controversial Danish cartoons, arguing that if Europe doesn't stand up to extremists, a culture of self-censorship and fear of criticizing Islam -- one that she says already pervades Holland -- will spread across Europe.  Hirsi Ali, you have called the prophet Mohammed a tyrant and a pervert. Theo van Gogh, the director of your film "Submission," which is critical of Islam, was murdered by Islamists. You yourself are under police protection. How do you think the Danish cartoonists feel at this point? They probably feel numb. On the one hand, a voice in their heads is encouraging them not to sell out their freedom of speech. At the same time, they're experiencing the shocking sensation of what it's like to lose your own personal freedom. One mustn't forget that they're part of the postwar generation, and that all they've experienced is peace and prosperity. And now they suddenly have to fight for their own human rights once again. Why have the protests escalated to such an extent? There is no freedom of speech in those Arab countries where the demonstrations and public outrage are being staged. The reason many people flee to Europe from these places is precisely because they have criticized religion, the political establishment and society. Totalitarian Islamic regimes are in a deep crisis. Globalization means that they're exposed to considerable change, and they also fear the reformist forces developing among émigrés in the West. They'll use threatening gestures against the West, and the success they achieve with their threats, to intimidate these people. Was apologizing for the cartoons the wrong thing to do? Once again, the West pursued the principle of first turning one cheek, then the other. In fact, it's already a tradition. In 1980, privately owned British broadcaster ITV aired a documentary about the stoning of a Saudi Arabian princess who had allegedly committed adultery. The government in Riyadh intervened and the British government issued an apology. We saw the same kowtowing response in 1987 when [Dutch comedian] Rudi Carrell derided [the Iranian leader] Ayatollah Khomeini in a comedy skit. In 2000, a play about the youngest wife of the prophet Mohammed, titled "Aisha," was canceled before it ever opened in Rotterdam. Then there was the van Gogh murder and now the cartoons. We are constantly apologizing, and we don't notice how much abuse we're taking. Meanwhile, the other side doesn't give an inch. What should the appropriate European response look like? There should be solidarity. The cartoons should be displayed everywhere. After all, the Arabs can't boycott goods from every country. They're far too dependent on imports. And Scandinavian companies should be compensated for their losses. Freedom of speech should at least be worth that much to us. But shouldn't Muslims, like any religious community, also be able to protect themselves against slander and insult? That's exactly the reflex I was just talking about: offering the other cheek. Not a day passes, in Europe and elsewhere, when radical imams aren't preaching hatred in their mosques. They call Jews and Christians inferior, and we say they're just exercising their freedom of speech. When will the Europeans realize that the Islamists don't allow their critics the same right? After the West prostrates itself, they'll be more than happy to say that Allah has made the infidels spineless.  What will be the upshot of the storm of protests against the cartoons? We could see the same thing happening that has happened in the Netherlands, where writers, journalists and artists have felt intimidated ever since the van Gogh murder. Everyone is afraid to criticize Islam. Significantly, "Submission" still isn't being shown in theaters. Many have criticized your film as being too radical and too offensive. The criticism of van Gogh was legitimate. But when someone is killed for his worldview, what he may have done wrong is no longer the issue. That's when we have to stand up for our basic rights. Otherwise we are just reinforcing the killer and conceding that there was a good reason to kill this person. You, too, have been sharply criticized for your dogged criticism of Islam. Oddly enough, my critics never specify how far I can go. How can you address problems if you're not even allowed to clearly define them? Like the fact that Muslim women at home are kept locked up, are raped and are married off against their will -- and that in a country in which our far too passive intellectuals are so proud of their freedom! The debate in Holland over speaking Dutch on the streets, and the integration programs for potentially violent Moroccan youth -- do these things also represent the fruits of your provocations? The sharp criticism has finally triggered an open debate over our relationship with Muslim immigrants. We have become more conscious of things. For example, we are now classifying honor killings by the victims' countries of origin. And we're finally turning our attention to young girls who are sent against their will from Morocco to Holland as brides, and adopting legislation to make this practice more difficult. You're working on a sequel to "Submission." Will you stick to your uncompromising approach? Yes, of course. We want to continue the debate over the Koran's claim to absoluteness, the infallibility of the Prophet, and sexual morality. In the first part, we portrayed a woman who speaks to her god, complaining that even though she has abided by his rules and subjugated herself, she is still being abused by her uncle. The second part deals with the dilemma into which the Muslim faith plunges four different men. One hates Jews, the second one is gay, the third is a bon vivant who wants to be a good Muslim but repeatedly succumbs to life's temptations, and the fourth is a martyr. They all feel abandoned by their god and decide to stop worshipping him. Will this latest upheaval make your work more difficult? The conditions couldn't be more difficult. We're forced to produce the film under complete anonymity. Everyone involved in the film, from actors to technicians, will be unrecognizable. But we are determined to complete the project. The director didn't really like van Gogh, but he believes that, for the sake of free speech, shooting the sequel is critical. I'm optimistic that we'll be able to premiere the film this year. Is the Koran's claim to absoluteness, which you criticize in "Submission," the central obstacle to reforming Islam? The doctrine stating that the faith is inalterable because the Koran was dictated by God must be replaced. Muslims must realize that it was human beings who wrote the holy scriptures. After all, most Christians don't believe in hell, in the angels, or in the earth having been created in six days. They now see these things as symbolic stories, but they still remain true to their faith. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=nomo@rigorousintuition>nomo</A> at: 2/7/06 5:43 pm

by **Trifecta** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 5:50 am

"As suspected, and claimed on this blog over the weekend, the inflammatory anti-Muslim cartoons published in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten were a deliberate provocation designed to outrage and incite Muslims and thus engender support in Europe and America for the manufactured “clash of civilizations” engineered by the Straussian neocons. As Christopher Bollyn writes for the American Free Press, the neocon operative behind the cartoon scheme is Flemming Rose, cultural editor of Jyllands-Posten, who has “has clear ties to the Zionist Neo-Cons.” Rose “traveled to Philadelphia in October 2004 to visit Daniel Pipes, the Neo-Con ideologue who says the only path to Middle East peace will come through a total Israeli military victory. Rose then penned a positive article about Pipes, who compares ‘militant Islam’ with fascism and communism,” Bollyn reveals." <a href="http://kurtnimmo.com/?p=211">kurtnimmo.com/?p=211</a>

by **thurnandtaxis** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 3:05 pm

In answer to Charles Moore's question in the "Straussian Psychololgical Warfare" artical, <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Moore also finds it suspicious that there was no shortage of Danish flags to burn. “I raise the question because, as soon as the row about the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in Jyllands-Posten broke, angry Muslims popped up in Gaza City, and many other places, well supplied with Danish flags ready to burn…. Why were those Danish flags to hand? Who built up the stockpile so that they could be quickly dragged out right across the Muslim world and burnt where television cameras would come and look? The more you study this story of ’spontaneous’ Muslim rage, the odder it seems.”<hr></blockquote> We have this, from Reuters/Alternet: Gaza Shopkeeper Stocks Up On Danish Flags To Burn 06 Feb 2006 16:58:04 GMT Source: Reuters By Nidal al-Mughrabi GAZA, Feb 6 (Reuters) - When entrepreneur Ahmed Abu Dayya first heard that Danish caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad were being reprinted across Europe, he knew exactly what his customers in Gaza would want: flags to burn. Abu Dayya ordered 100 hard-to-find Danish and Norwegian flags for his Gaza City shop and has been doing a swift trade. "I do not take political stands. It is all business," he said in an interview. "But this time I was offended by the assault on the Prophet Mohammad." A wave of anger has swept the Muslim world over the publication of the cartoons, one of which shows the Prophet wearing a turban shaped like a bomb. First printed in Denmark, the cartoons have appeared in newspapers across Europe, as well as in the United States. While normally hard to come by in isolated Gaza, Danish and Norwegian flags are now popping up at daily protests, increasingly replacing Israel's Star of David. It's not clear how many merchants apart from Abu Dayya are offering the flags, but they appear to be readily available. Angry Muslims set the flags ablaze or tear them to pieces. At a protest on Monday outside European Union offices in Gaza, dozens of Palestinian students chanted: "Down with Denmark. Down with Norway. With our blood and with our souls, we will sacrifice for our Prophet." In Beirut and Damascus, mobs set Danish and Norwegian embassies on fire. "I knew there would be a demand for the flags because of the angry reaction of people over the offence to Prophet Mohammad," said Abu Dayya, whose PLO Flag Shop also sells souvenirs and presents. He sells his Danish and Norwegian flags for $11 a piece -- a price he acknowledged might be dampening sales. Many protesters prefer to save money and make the flags themselves from scraps of fabric, he said. Abu Dayya sources some of his flags from suppliers in Taiwan, but he buys Israeli flags from a merchant in Israel, even though he sells them to be burnt at anti-Israeli rallies. Flag-making has been a growth business for Abu Dayya for years, thanks to orders by Palestinian militant groups for national flags and banners bearing the symbols of armed factions. Last year, he said the Palestinian Authority ordered 60,000 flags ahead of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. Workers at one factory stitched some 3,000 pennants a day. While the flag merchant said the Danish cartoons upset him, he urged fellow Gazans not to punish Danish citizens collectively, citing their humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people. <a href="http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L06153755.htm">www.alertnet.org/thenews/...153755.htm</a> So, that's it then, no psyop here, just good 'ol crafty free market capitalism. Move along now...

by **marykmusic** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 3:59 pm

Today's Doonesbury page on Slate said, Freedom of expression only goes as far as not upsetting someone's belief system. The Vatican was quoted as the source... I had to paraphrase it, since it's not there now; this one is: "I never thought I would see the words 'deadly' and 'cartoon' juxtaposed in a sentence that didn't also have the words 'Monty Python' in it." -- Seth Greenland So, the Vatican now says that we have to be nice to everyone lest we piss 'em off. Well, their whole program upsets MY belief system. Perhaps if I could talk a few thousand people into rioting in the street, that would get their attention. --MaryK Or not.

by **antiaristo** » Wed Feb 08, 2006 7:33 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Danish paper pursues Holocaust cartoons John Plunkett Wednesday February 8, 2006 The Danish paper responsible for the original caricatures of the prophet Muhammad is set to run cartoons satirising the Holocaust. Flemming Rose, the culture editor of Danish daily Jyllands-Posten, said today he was trying to get in touch with the Iranian paper, Hamshari, which plans to run an international competition seeking cartoons about the Holocaust. "My newspaper is trying to establish a contact with the Iranian newspaper, and we would run the cartoons the same day as they publish them," Mr Rose told CNN. The Danish editor was also defiantly unapologetic about the original publication of 12 cartoons - one of which featured the prophet wearing a turban shaped as a bomb - in his paper five months ago. Mr Rose said he did not regret publishing the pictures. "I think it is like asking a rape victim if she regrets wearing a short skirt at a discotheque [on] Friday night," he said. "If you're wearing a short skirt that does not necessarily mean you invite everybody to have sex with you. If you make a cartoon, make fun of religion, make fun of religious figures, that does not imply that you humiliate or denigrate or marginalise a religion."<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1705297,00.html">media.guardian.co.uk/site...97,00.html</a>

by **antiaristo** » Thu Feb 09, 2006 5:11 pm

Apparently this is no longer a free-speech issue. Some things are fair game, like the Prophet and Jesus of Nazareth. And some things are not. <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Danish paper U-turns on Holocaust cartoons Gwladys Fouché Thursday February 9, 2006 Jyllands-Posten, the Danish daily that published the controversial Muhammad drawings, has made a dramatic U-turn on comments an executive made about using Holocaust caricatures. The paper said it would under no circumstances publish the Holocaust cartoons that an Iranian newspaper, Hamshari, is planning to commission. This U-turn comes after Jyllands-Posten's culture editor, Flemming Rose, yesterday told CNN that his paper was trying to get in touch with an Iranian paper with a view to running the Holocaust cartoons. Today, Jyllands-Posten said: "This information is based on an over-interpretation of a statement made by culture editor Flemming Rose. "Jyllands-Posten in no circumstances will publish Holocaust cartoons from an Iranian newspaper," the paper said, in a statement posted on its website. Mr Rose was quoted yesterday by CNN as saying: "My newspaper is trying to establish a contact with the Iranian newspaper, and we would run the cartoons the same day as they publish them." Meanwhile, Jyllands-Posten has reiterated its apologies to Muslims for causing offence by publishing the original 12 cartoons, in a letter to the Algerian press. The letter was distributed via the Danish embassy in Algiers. "We apologise for the great misunderstanding generated by the publication of the caricatures that showed the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and created aggressive feelings towards Denmark and calls for boycotts against Danish goods," the paper said. "These caricatures have clearly offended millions of Muslims around the world and it is for these reasons that we are apologising and offering our deepest regrets for what has happened, which was not our intention."<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1706374,00.html">media.guardian.co.uk/site...74,00.html</a>

by **antiaristo** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 8:41 am

THIS is what happens when you cross the Holocaust Priesthood. What happened to freedom of speech, Queen Margarethe? <blockquote>Quote:<hr>Cartoons editor sent on leave Jan Olsen Friday February 10, 2006 The Guardian The Danish editor at the centre of the prophet caricature furore has been sent on indefinite leave after a disagreement with management about whether their newspaper should also print cartoons of the Holocaust. Flemming Rose, the culture editor of Jyllands-Posten who commissioned the original 12 cartoons last year, has defended the decision of his and other European newspapers to publish as a valid exercise to test the growing tendency for self-censorship when handling Islamic subject matter. But earlier this week he said he would also be open to reprinting cartoons depicting the Holocaust commissioned by an Iranian newspaper. That prompted a public disagreement with editor-in-chief Carsten Juste, who has also come under pressure to resign over the row. "The editorial management and Flemming Rose have agreed that he needed a break from work until further notice," said Tage Clausen, a spokesman for the Jyllands-Posten paper. Jyllands-Posten has apologised for offending Muslims but has insisted it was right to print the cartoons because of the importance of freedom of speech. Muslims incensed by the images have insisted that Denmark properly apologises to defuse the row. Yesterday, the deputy prime minister, Bendt Bendtsen, said he understood Muslim anger but condemned the violent protests that have broken out in Muslim countries. The EU has tried to draw the sting of the protesters by calling for a voluntary code of conduct for the media that would avoid further inflaming religious sensibilities. The US has accused Iran and Syria of deliberately stoking up reactions.<hr></blockquote> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/cartoonprotests/story/0,,1706729,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/cartoo...29,00.html</a> Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antiaristo>antiaristo</A> at: 2/10/06 5:42 am

Islamic caricatures are all the rage

Nix pix

Oh, R'lyeh?

It seems our good friends the Saudis provoked the actions

Re: Our friends the Saudis

Re: Our friends the Saudis

On a lighter note...

Re: On a lighter note...

Iran announces Holocaust cartoon contest

"Everyone is afraid to criticize Islam"

and this just in

Well, this explains it...

The Vatican becomes politically correct

More fun and games

Some religions are different

Re: Some religions are different

Who is online