The Danish Mohammed cartoons
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 23 Next
BartSimpson @ Fri Feb 03, 2006 1:49 pm
$1:
Fundamentalist Muslims protested outside the Danish Embassy in Malaysia, chanting "Long live Islam. Destroy our enemies" and accusing Denmark's Jyllands Posten newspaper, which first published the cartoons, of seeking to incite hatred.
![[stupid]](./images/smilies/stupid.gif "With stupid")
BartSimpson @ Fri Feb 03, 2006 2:03 pm
Tman1 Tman1:
People draw up cartoons and then they spew forth this crap and call them uncivilized and heinous? Even I think this is a touch much. They should apologize just for saying this crap.
GreatBriton @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 4:48 am
DanishViking DanishViking:
GreatBriton GreatBriton:
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Wonderful stuff. Now let's see if the muslims are really going to prove that islam is The Religion of Peace (tm) by showing how tolerant they are of multiculturalism and diversity.
Or will the usual apologists rush to their defense and excuse them for being intolerant, bigoted, narrow-minded, violent, and ignorant?
Or will the usual apologists rush to their defense and excuse them for being intolerant, bigoted, narrow-minded, violent, and ignorant?
I think the Danes were wrong to publish these pictures of Mohammed.
According to the Muslim religion, it is forbidden to hand draw pictures of people or animals, so printing a hand-drawn photo of Mohammed in a newspaper is not a very good idea.
Free speech is one thing - but using it to provoke Muslim outrage worldwide is another.
I've noticed that these photos were printed in newspapers in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and Holland, but NOT Britain, the world's oldest democracy. Continental countries just haven't got the hang of free speech yet.
I really can’t take you serious at all – no matter what the UK does you are there to support it – if the British media had printed the cartoons you would be in here telling us all how free the media is in the UK. After hearing Jack Straw I on the other hand is of a different opinion:
I see it as his actually imposing a censorship by cheering the British medias mature and respectful handling of this matter by not bringing the cartoons.
– you people should have your self a little revolution and become democratic
Britain is the world's oldest surviving democracy.
I would say that the British press are being more mature and grown up than the Danish press by NOT printing the pictures. We cherish free speech in this country, but what we don't like is using free speech as a weapon to deliberately attack and annoy Muslims all over the world - even Muslisms who are completely innocent and have done nothing wrong. According to the Muslim religion, it is forbidden o hand-draw pictures of people and animals. And how would the Danes like it if a Muslim newspaper published a joke about Jesus saying what an "idiot" and an "arsehole" he was?
By not publishing these photos, us Brits are okay. We're not having our goods taking of the shelves in shops and markets in the Middle east - unlike the Danes, the French, the Italians, the Germans.
You've all gone and shot yourselves in the foot, whereas us British were more careful about what we said.
GreatBriton @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 4:51 am
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
GreatBriton GreatBriton:
I've noticed that these photos were printed in newspapers in Denmark, France, Germany, Italy and Holland, but NOT Britain, the world's oldest democracy. Continental countries just haven't got the hang of free speech yet.
No, they have it down correctly. It is you and your country, my friend, who needs to learn about free speech. For the United Kingdom free speech only truly exists from the height of a soapbox in Hyde Park.
You're a country whose citizens are locked up in a cell for a few days for having anti-George W Bush posters up on their bedroom walls.
GreatBriton @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 4:52 am
maritimematt maritimematt:
I'm afraid to say that tomorrow our nation's newspapers will be serving up the usual fayre - footballers, footballers' wives and women with large breasts; all very well and good, but they ought to show the cartoons as well (although not alongside the breasts - that will REALLY put the cat among the pidgeons)
What, and have Muslims burning our flags and shouting "Death to the UK"? I'd rather not. Let them burn Danish flags and call for the death of all Danes. Let them boycott Danish products. Britain should just keep out of it.
Wullu @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:21 am
GreatBriton GreatBriton:
maritimematt maritimematt:
I'm afraid to say that tomorrow our nation's newspapers will be serving up the usual fayre - footballers, footballers' wives and women with large breasts; all very well and good, but they ought to show the cartoons as well (although not alongside the breasts - that will REALLY put the cat among the pidgeons)
What, and have Muslims burning our flags and shouting "Death to the UK"? I'd rather not. Let them burn Danish flags and call for the death of all Danes. Let them boycott Danish products. Britain should just keep out of it.
That's it GB..go into ostrich mode. The arguement here is not that they found the strips offensive, the cartoonists could have depicted him sitting surrounded by children in a completely idilic setting preaching tolerance and peace and you would STILL have this reaction you see.
This a direct attack on our most basic and important right and by your statement above you have just capitulated. You have choosen to give up your right to freedom of expression. You can no longer defend every other right you might hold dear. The only difference I see between these protests you see now and the Nazi rallys in Nuremberg is that the Nazis were more orderly.
GreatBriton @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:25 am
Should the cartoons have been published?
No
What you are forgetting is that in sticking two fingers up at the extremists you detest ... you are also happening to offend and alienate the moderate Muslims that have not kicked up a big fuss or made death threats. You are also giving the extremists something to really get upset about, which is actually exactly what they want."
Posted by Ryan on Guardian Unlimited website
------------------------------------
No
These cartoons are offensive. They're not about freedom of speech. Nobody's disputing that there is freedom of speech in Europe. It's about exercising restraint and sensibility. Editors must have known that enormous offence would be caused to Muslims. One of the unfortunate outcomes will be that extremists are best placed to benefit from the situation. These caricatures are gross.
Inayat Bunglawala, Muslim Council of Britain
---------------------------------------
No
Muslims in the UK want to live in peace and harmony with everyone. These pics are highly offensive and should not be published. Don't stoop to the level of the Danes.
Posted by Fiasco on Guardian Unlimited website
-----------------------------------------
No
We should show some respect, because through respect you get common civilisation. Papers shouldn't do or not do something because of how Muslims might react. They should feel responsible and sensitive. You have the right to sneeze but you don't have the right to sneeze in my face. Be prepared for a backlash.
Ajmal Masroor, imam, spokesman for Islamic Society Britain
-------------------------------------------
No
As for the sacred cow of "freedom of expression", principles are only good so long as they have good applications, I could hardly think of a worse application than what has happened here. The only thing it has done is it has strengthened bigots and hardliners on both sides. Virtually all the papers that published the wretched images were rightwing in nature. Who benefits from xenophobic paranoia and distrust? The right wing of course.
Posted by 56000xp on Guardian Unlimited website
---------------------------------------------
No
Muslims are an easy target in Europe, even though there are more people who understand Islam and respect it and would be prepared to defend Muslims in their community. How are you going to stop jihad and suicide bombers and extremists if you allow Islam to be derided in this way? Bashing Islam has become an industry.
Baroness Uddin, House of Lords
----------------------------------------------
No
The media has every right to publish material that might be offensive or ridicule a religion. But sometimes that freedom has to be exercised with responsibility. The way other outlets are running this cartoon has been hugely irresponsible. It all seems like somewhat of a self-constructed argument and debate.
Shahid Malik, MP for Dewsbury
Wullu @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 5:37 am
Very nice GB....do you actually have your own opinion on this? On anything? I guess you don't feel the need to have your own view on this since you are ready to give up your right to free speech.
I won't quote the entire previous post but here goes........
$1:
Should the cartoons have been published?
Yes
Freedom of speech. When you start worrying about who you might offend with what you say, then you have already lost. You worry about someone burning your flag? Why? You are obviously willing to let go everything that flag stands and has stood for.
Wullu, posted on Canadaka.net
polemarch1 @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:35 am
$1:
Back in Denmark, the artists have gone into hiding and the Jyllands-Posten has been evacuated -- because they dared, in a free society, to say what they thought. But where is the uproar? What other media outlets have rushed to their defense? Where is the New York Times’ editorial page? Silent. What of CNN? They will report the riots over the cartoons, but refuse to show the rather tame cartoons themselves out of “respect for Islam.” A network that cannot self-censor itself to keep our soldiers safe in time of war will gladly self-censor itself to avoid offending those who would so forcefully censor Denmark. As will NBC. Other outlets are simply mute on the issue.
And this is not a new phenomenon.
The Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh dared to make a movie of a script by a Muslim woman in which she depicts the treatment of women in many Islamic societies. It was judged “offensive to Islam” by some -- so Van Gogh was shot, stabbed, hacked, and beat to death on the street.
Salman Rushdie’s book, The Satanic Verses, offended Islam, according to the Ayatollah Khomeini, so he issued a death sentence against the English author to be carried out on sight anywhere in the world. Mr. Rushdie has lived in hiding in his allegedly “free” society ever since.
Other less well-known artists are also under death threat for work published in Europe or America, but judged offensive half a world away.
And the complaints about offense go to the smaller end of the spectrum as well. A British bar owner was forced to remove a “no porking” sign from his parking lot because it was “offensive to Islam.” Pictures of Piglet have been removed from British government offices because Piglet is allegedly “offensive to Islam.”
Artwork was removed from a gallery in Sweden because it was “offensive to Islam.” An Italian author was brought up on hate crime charges because her opinions were “offensive to Islam.”
Barbie dolls are offensive to Islam, Coca Cola labels are offensive to Islam, Burger King Ice Cream lids are offensive to Islam, Levi’s jeans ads are offensive to Islam. These are all actual news items.
And this is not a new phenomenon.
The Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh dared to make a movie of a script by a Muslim woman in which she depicts the treatment of women in many Islamic societies. It was judged “offensive to Islam” by some -- so Van Gogh was shot, stabbed, hacked, and beat to death on the street.
Salman Rushdie’s book, The Satanic Verses, offended Islam, according to the Ayatollah Khomeini, so he issued a death sentence against the English author to be carried out on sight anywhere in the world. Mr. Rushdie has lived in hiding in his allegedly “free” society ever since.
Other less well-known artists are also under death threat for work published in Europe or America, but judged offensive half a world away.
And the complaints about offense go to the smaller end of the spectrum as well. A British bar owner was forced to remove a “no porking” sign from his parking lot because it was “offensive to Islam.” Pictures of Piglet have been removed from British government offices because Piglet is allegedly “offensive to Islam.”
Artwork was removed from a gallery in Sweden because it was “offensive to Islam.” An Italian author was brought up on hate crime charges because her opinions were “offensive to Islam.”
Barbie dolls are offensive to Islam, Coca Cola labels are offensive to Islam, Burger King Ice Cream lids are offensive to Islam, Levi’s jeans ads are offensive to Islam. These are all actual news items.
Muhammad Cartoons: Global Lynch Mob Attacks Free Speech
DanishViking @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:59 am
GreatBriton GreatBriton:
Britain is the world's oldest surviving democracy.
Well if that truly is the case – I’ll say it’s getting a bit rusty and in desperate need of service!
![[door]](./images/smilies/aaa.gif "Scared Door")
IcedCap @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:07 am
It disappoints me that many people while rightly defending the newspapers right to offend totally dismiss the Muslims right to be offended (and no that isn't the right to commit violent acts, issue death threats etc).
polemarch1 @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:17 am
The Muslims have a right to be offended but what there now doing goes beyond that, they are now attacking one of the fundemental pillars of democracy.
$1:
Hundreds of Muslims have staged angry protests in London following the publication of cartoons satirising the prophet Mohammed.
Scores waved placards bearing angry messages, one declaring: “Behead the one who insults the prophet”. Others said: “Free speech go to hell” and “Europe: Your 9/11 will come”.
Scores waved placards bearing angry messages, one declaring: “Behead the one who insults the prophet”. Others said: “Free speech go to hell” and “Europe: Your 9/11 will come”.
Muslims March on Embassy
$1:
'We will not accept less than severing the heads of those responsible,' one preacher told worshippers at the al-Omari Mosque in the Gaza Strip as tensions spread over the publication of the cartoons, first in Denmark and later in Norway, France, Germany and Spain.
.....
In Lebanon, thousands of Palestinian refugees marched through the streets of their camps, burning Danish and Norwegian flags and calling on Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader, to avenge the Prophet Mohammad.
'We will not be satisfied with protests. The solution is the slaughter of those who harmed Islam and the Prophet,' said Sheikh Abu Sharif, spokesman for the militant Osbet al-Ansar group, at a rally in Lebanon's largest camp, the southern Ein al-Hilweh.
.....
In Lebanon, thousands of Palestinian refugees marched through the streets of their camps, burning Danish and Norwegian flags and calling on Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader, to avenge the Prophet Mohammad.
'We will not be satisfied with protests. The solution is the slaughter of those who harmed Islam and the Prophet,' said Sheikh Abu Sharif, spokesman for the militant Osbet al-Ansar group, at a rally in Lebanon's largest camp, the southern Ein al-Hilweh.
Anger sweeps Middle East
DanishViking @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:23 am
IcedCap IcedCap:
It disappoints me that many people while rightly defending the newspapers right to offend totally dismiss the Muslims right to be offended (and no that isn't the right to commit violent acts, issue death threats etc).
Of course any Muslim community have the right to get offended – demonstrate, give way for their opinion, boycott (of their own will)… - and as former posted we in Denmark had a debate on the issue and Muslims were heard! The result still stands: that the majority of the Danish population supported the principles of freedom of expression – and yes it is very wide in Denmark (or was). This on the other hand did not mean that religious icons was to be depicted every day and every where just to provoke – but that it is alright to depict religious icon in satiric, provocative, rightches or humorous ways when ever relevant.
maritimematt @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 7:34 am
GreatBriton GreatBriton:
maritimematt maritimematt:
I'm afraid to say that tomorrow our nation's newspapers will be serving up the usual fayre - footballers, footballers' wives and women with large breasts; all very well and good, but they ought to show the cartoons as well (although not alongside the breasts - that will REALLY put the cat among the pidgeons)
What, and have Muslims burning our flags and shouting "Death to the UK"? I'd rather not. Let them burn Danish flags and call for the death of all Danes. Let them boycott Danish products. Britain should just keep out of it.
So Great Briton, are you saying that because something might be uncomfortable for our country, we shouldn't do it? Thank God Winston Churchill didn't have that attitude in 1940.
IcedCap @ Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:00 am
DanishViking DanishViking:
Of course any Muslim community have the right to get offended – demonstrate, give way for their opinion, boycott (of their own will)… - and as former poster we in Denmark had a debate on the issue and Muslims were heard! The result still stands: that the majority of the Danish population supported the principles of freedom of expression – and yes it is very wide in Denmark (or was). This on the other hand did not mean that religious icons was to be depicted every day and every where just to provoke – but that it is alright to depict religious icon in satiric, provocative, rightches or humorous ways when ever relevant.
DV there're are two issues here not one as you seem to believe
i) Should freedom of expression include the depiction of "religious icons in satiric, provocative or humorous ways when ever relevant".
Yes absolutely
ii) Do some of these cartoons cross the line from satirical or humorous to being bigoted and hateful
Yes, I don't know about Denmark but in Canada and Great Briton (where I've lived) these cartoons wouldn't have been published not because they depict Mohammed but because they promote anti-Muslim hatred. If the population of Denmark think its a good thing to print bigoted racist cartoons in your media then that's your business but don't lecture others about democracy because democracy should also include protection and respect for minorities.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 23 Next