Cartoon from Denmark

[afterbirth]

Cartoon wars
Feb 9th 2006
From The Economist print edition

Free speech should override religious sensitivities. And it is not just the property of the West

AFP“I DISAGREE with what you say and even if you are threatened with death I will not defend very strongly your right to say it.” That, with apologies to Voltaire, seems to have been the initial pathetic response of some western governments to the republication by many European newspapers of several cartoons of Muhammad first published in a Danish newspaper in September. When the republished cartoons stirred Muslim violence across the world, Britain and America took fright. It was “unacceptable” to incite religious hatred by publishing such pictures, said America's State Department. Jack Straw, Britain's foreign secretary, called their publication unnecessary, insensitive, disrespectful and wrong.

Really? There is no question that these cartoons are offensive to many Muslims (see article). They offend against a convention in Islam that the Prophet should not be depicted. And they offend because they can be read as equating Islam with terrorism: one cartoon has Muhammad with a bomb for his headgear. It is not a good idea for newspapers to insult people's religious or any other beliefs just for the sake of it. But that is and should be their own decision, not a decision for governments, clerics or other self-appointed arbiters of taste and responsibility. In a free country people should be free to publish whatever they want within the limits set by law.

No country permits completely free speech. Typically, it is limited by prohibitions against libel, defamation, obscenity, judicial or parliamentary privilege and what have you. In seven European countries it is illegal to say that Hitler did not murder millions of Jews. Britain still has a pretty dormant blasphemy law (the Christian God only) on its statute books. Drawing the line requires fine judgements by both lawmakers and juries. Britain, for example, has just jailed a notorious imam, Abu Hamza of London's Finsbury Park mosque, for using language a jury construed as solicitation to murder (see article). Last week, however, another British jury acquitted Nick Griffin, a notorious bigot who calls Islam “vicious and wicked”, on charges of stirring racial hatred.

Drawing the line
In this newspaper's view, the fewer constraints that are placed on free speech the better. Limits designed to protect people (from libel and murder, for example) are easier to justify than those that aim in some way to control thinking (such as laws on blasphemy, obscenity and Holocaust-denial). Denying the Holocaust should certainly not be outlawed: far better to let those who deny well-documented facts expose themselves to ridicule than pose as martyrs. But the Muhammad cartoons were lawful in all the European countries where they were published. And when western newspapers lawfully publish words or pictures that cause offence—be they ever so unnecessary, insensitive or disrespectful—western governments should think very carefully before denouncing them.

Freedom of expression, including the freedom to poke fun at religion, is not just a hard-won human right but the defining freedom of liberal societies. When such a freedom comes under threat of violence, the job of governments should be to defend it without reservation. To their credit, many politicians in continental Europe have done just that. France's interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, said rather magnificently that he preferred “an excess of caricature to an excess of censorship”—though President Jacques Chirac later spoiled the effect by condemning the cartoons as a “manifest provocation”.

Shouldn't the right to free speech be tempered by a sense of responsibility? Of course. Most people do not go about insulting their fellows just because they have a right to. The media ought to show special sensitivity when the things they say might stir up hatred or hurt the feelings of vulnerable minorities. But sensitivity cannot always ordain silence. Protecting free expression will often require hurting the feelings of individuals or groups, even if this damages social harmony. The Muhammad cartoons may be such a case.

In Britain and America, few newspapers feel that their freedoms are at risk. But on the European mainland, some of the papers that published the cartoons say they did so precisely because their right to publish was being called into question. In the Netherlands two years ago a film maker was murdered for daring to criticise Islam. Danish journalists have received death threats. In a climate in which political correctness has morphed into fear of physical attack, showing solidarity may well be the responsible thing for a free press to do. And the decision, of course, must lie with the press, not governments.

It's good to talk
It is no coincidence that the feeblest response to the outpouring of Muslim rage has come from Britain and America. Having sent their armies rampaging into the Muslim heartland, planting their flags in Afghanistan and Iraq and putting Saddam Hussein on trial, George Bush and Tony Blair have some making up to do with Muslims. Long before making a drama out of the Danish cartoons, a great many Muslims had come to equate the war on terrorism with a war against Islam. This is an equation Osama bin Laden and other enemies of the West would like very much to encourage and exploit. In circumstances in which emba**ies are being torched, isn't denouncing the cartoons the least the West can do to show its respect for Islam, and to stave off a much-feared clash of civilisations?

No. There are many things western countries could usefully say and do to ease relations with Islam, but shutting up their own newspapers is not one of them. People who feel that they are not free to give voice to their worries about terrorism, globalisation or the encroachment of new cultures or religions will not love their neighbours any better. If anything, the opposite is the case: people need to let off steam. And freedom of expression, remember, is not just a pillar of western democracy, as sacred in its own way as Muhammad is to pious Muslims. It is also a freedom that millions of Muslims have come to enjoy or to aspire to themselves. Ultimately, spreading and strengthening it may be one of the best hopes for avoiding the incomprehension that can lead civilisations into conflict.

[Original Syn]

new it was coming.
prophecy.
mohammed aint a prophet Luke 16:16
he's the antichrist read 1 John 2.
it was written.
you have to understand what a prophet is.
i'll explain
peace

Up till this point I had credited you with intelligence and ready wit presented in your skills at rhyme.. but this statement I find inflammatory, flawed and just plain disgusting Munetsi, I cannot believe you just called Muhammad the anti-christ and denied his prophethood...........
Your reading of Luke 16:16 is extremely narrow, On consultation with a family friend the honourable Father Michael O'Leary of the Cape Diocese, he's listed, Yes I have a discussions concerning scripture before, though I am muslim and was raised such, My mother was raised Roman Catholic and I have attended service in a number of denominations of the christian faith.
Anyway, in this pa**age of Luke (for simplicities sake I'm using my copy of the bible which is the King James version) i'm sure you refer to the first part stating the "Law and the prophets came until John..." and while you seem to read that  as meaning there were no prophets after John, it is as easy to have a different reading which Father O' Leary agreed with me when I discussed this with him today that the most likely reference is to the prophets of the idol-worshipping Pharisees who no longer held sway post-John... so I find your readiness to basically call the fastest growing religion on the planet, one built around the anti-christ, disgusting, have you ever read the Q'uran? If you did you'd find shocking similarities to the Old Testament.
BTW NOWHERE in verse 1 OR 2 of John is there any reference to the fact that Muhammad is the anti-christ... I don't see any reason in your statements and I am disappointed and disgusted with your prejudice and hateful remarks.
Don't go round begrudging others their faith, you only weaken your own.
As to the rest of the posters, most of you seem to speak from ignorance and anger, know what you're talking about before you mouth off.
Representations of The Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) are forbidden because he warned that to represent him is to open the door to praying to his visage and that is idolatry, he wished the man to be forgotten and only the word of God to remain. To depict the Prophet is akin to taking a madonna or a crucifix and shitting on it or defiling a church.
So now you're thinking, so what how were the non-muslims who printed the cartoons supposed to know that? Well when the cartoons were first printed in Denmark late last year, the Islamic Council of Denmark requested talks with the Danish governemtn to put there case and voice their grievances... they were denied any voice on the issue... so the delay was because they only went to a conference of Islamic clerics in Egypt, where they tabled it for discussion, the Danish government and Print Union repeatedly refused to speak to them and then when they took the print union to court, the print union printed it and distributed something they knew to be offensive in the extreme as protest.
Free speech is essential I agree, but with free speech comes responsibility, what is there to be gained by act in a manner you know to offend a deeply rooted religious tenet of an enormously large group of people?
Islam is ridiculed and critiscised everyday, and that is fine but this is too far... If you stand for nothing you fall for everything.....
Remember to me what they did is akin to diggin up your ancestors graves and robbing them, it is akin to defiling a church, it is akin to destroying a shul, to burning a bible or torah....
Certain shit you JUST DONT DO!!!!
Again the world only sees one side of a story and all us sand niggas is to blame...
I thought there might be people here with minds and hearts big enough to understand.......... my mistake.
Your faith, or lack thereof, in a higher power is a personal choice to which you are entitled, but do not express your issues of faith by trampling mine and get all surrised if I get angry.
CERTAIN SHIT YOU JUST DON'T DO !!!!!!!!!!!

[Original Syn]

To address individual questions... I been mum on this shit for a minute now but I'm tired of bein bugged about it and ill-informed opinions have made this unbearable... so:

Supposedly this is a mountain out of a molehill............. its only a small thing if you don't understand it. i've tried to learn as much as I can about the religions of those around me so as to not tread rough-shod over peoples customs and beliefs... it is these customs and beliefs which make us who we are.
We've allowed this to seem a small thing because it isn't standard "Western" practise, we all stupid slaves for lettin Western society tell us that if it isn't the thing we do on a daily in NYC or London or Paris, and wasn't given to us by our colonising friends then its a barbaric antiquated practise.
Thats why the history of our clans and tribes falls away daily, why indigenous african languages are dying, why nobody is proud to be african.
Pride in your custom and history is important, it is my definiton, and it is my right to fight for my identity, I'm supposed to say " oh thats not very nice.." timidly in a corner? Diplomacy was denied us if you'll read my above post.  
I 'm no radical but I'm pissed off, only 5 people have died in the protests and they have all been protesters, so hiphopsta you need to read a newspaper b4 you go opening that shitbox of a brain.
I dont see offending a religion as questioning its practise and I defy anybody to show me coherent debate that goes contrary.
Just cos you free and easy about belief don't go trying to make everybody follow your view, I'm entitled to belief and the respect of belief just as it is your right NOT to be burned at the stake as a heretic as was common practise among christians throughout history.
Nobody actually tries to find out or understand the anger on this issue, thats too difficult, its easier to just put it to a stereotype set forward by The US and swallowed by everybody else.
Being muslim is the same as being black.. the truth doesn't matter... you pray in Arabic or your skin is dark? then you guilty.

[briCK]

Being muslim is the same as being black.. the truth doesn't matter... you pray in Arabic or your skin is dark? then you guilty.

I am tempted to say something, but seeing how this has angered you, I feel it is unfair to pile on more anger coz i belive anger is unhealthy, so just this once i'll let it slide, but you know damn well that you CANT even begin to say and belive that Beign Muslim is like being black, you know damn well thats not true.


But I think after reading you post the anger is can be justifiable...

[afterbirth]

this is by far the most interesting & informative thread i've seen since joining AG...  

[Lord Deacon Of Frost]

This shit is spiraling out of control, The Iranian president say he's gonna come with pictures of the holocaust 8O

[briCK]

This shit is spiraling out of control, The Iranian president say he's gonna come with pictures of the holocaust 8O

link?

[Lord Deacon Of Frost]

Theres nothing yet, he just commissioned them and dares the Danish paper to publish them

[Original Syn]

Being muslim is the same as being black.. the truth doesn't matter... you pray in Arabic or your skin is dark? then you guilty.

I am tempted to say something, but seeing how this has angered you, I feel it is unfair to pile on more anger coz i belive anger is unhealthy, so just this once i'll let it slide, but you know damn well that you CANT even begin to say and belive that Beign Muslim is like being black, you know damn well thats not true.


But I think after reading you post the anger is can be justifiable...

Ok, now I can see I stepped into a place where you feel strongly and I have respect for peoples beliefs and value systems so I apologise... I'm not blazing mad anymore anyway...  But I would like to examine your sentiment concerning the similarities between being black and being muslim as incomparable and I would like to clarify that I said that to illustrate the way Western society has historically treated muslims and black people, including media depictions and the creation of "public opinion".
Now I aint lookin to offend you brick cos our a**ociation on these forums has bred respect for you on my part. But when i say bein black is the same as bein muslim i think about...:

- Around 52% of Africans are Muslim.
- both black peoples and muslim peoples, who are mostly black anyway, have had their indigineous cultures corroded, derided and discarded on an international scale.
- muslims, black folk and black muslims alike have all been demonised in  the international media.. for example, every black man is a suspect, muslim on a plane means we landing in a building, doesn't matter how much aid you pump into africa the dumb jungle bunnys are just gonna f*** it up...
- Muslims in palestine are suffering in a staet of guerilla warfare with a milirary occupier who has made them cheap labor and regulates their movements against their will, they can be and are held without trial, indefinitely. No Israeli has EVER been convicted for killing an innocent Palestinian non-combatant, even though the law against it exists. Muslims in Chechnya, Bosnia-Hercsigovena, all over the Balkans and former Soviet republics have been raped, tortured and ethnic cleansed to the tune of MORE than 8 MILLION and those lucky enough to survive suffered the loss of families and homes for an arbitrary reason (was religion but could've been race). Lets face it, too many countries in EUrope and the Americas to mention have all perpetrated these atrocities on black people.
- In england a paki is as black as aWest indian and many a paki corner shop went up and still goes up in flames just like Caribean immagrants homes in the 50's and nobody says anything these days either.
- There have been more than a million reported cases of racial violence based on religion against muslims worldwide in the last 5 years and there have been ZERO convictions. Just like in the US today the largest number of murder dockets either still open and unresolved or closed without indictment are perpetrated against black men, the commonly held legal a**umption is that its either another black man or who gives a f***.
- Try getting a visa to travel internationally and put in your visa application that you're muslim, then go for the interview lookin even vaguely muslim and know what its like to walk onto a whites only beach as a black man.

I'm just sayin brick that there are many similarities with bein black and muslim, and besides more than half this continents people have been muslim for more than 500 years, so muslims know what its like to be black from the ground up.
Hope you can understand me on this.

As for the Iranian presidents position.. hey I'm not a radical so I will agree this is highly inflammatory and will make more angry people, but many would say turn-about is fair... BUT heres a question how many of the people who post on this site were affected by the Holocaust? Probably not all that many,,, BUT how many think the idea of cartoons joking and meanly satirising the Holocaust is WAY hectic? Thats how I feel about depictions of Muhammad (peace be upon him)... But also ask yourself, how socialised are you that what happened to a few million jews a half a century ago still garners much more media attention and sympathy than WORSE things which have happened to more than 20 times the number of Africans, right up until the present.

[briCK]

Well if you explain it that way. THAT VERY LENGTHY way I understand where you coming from...Muslims are people of a particular faith which can incorporate people of various races, its a faith so its to some fundamental level(even if you are raised in a Muslim household) its your CHOICE to be part of the Islamic faith.

Black is being

to be discriminated / persecuted coz of one's religious belief( which you have a choice to follow ) and to be discriminated / persecuted coz of your being can not be seen to be same, that’s all I was getting at, but I see your point. Black Muslims probably have it worst actually Black Female Muslims must have it worst. If it was an attack on Arabs, will ALL Muslims be offended? No.

[briCK]

Now I aint lookin to offend you brick cos our a**ociation on these forums has bred respect for you on my part

The respect is mutual

[Lord Deacon Of Frost]

Now I aint lookin to offend you brick cos our a**ociation on these forums has bred respect for you on my part

The respect is mutual

Mahf***az need to get a room 8O  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[afterbirth]

know i'm really ignorant to ask this- but does one have to say "peace be upon him" each time they refer to the prophet Mohammad? i also saw it in the malcolm x movie when i was a laiitie

[Original Syn]

"Peace be upon him" in reference to Muhammad (pbuh) is an honorific bestowed on him by God. He never held any title or political position and eschewed the trappings of wealth and authority, though they were frequently offered. It is said that an angel descended at the time of Muhammad's (pbuh) death and proclaimed that he would hold the greatest honor bestowable on a human being, eternal peace and bliss at the side of God himself, the life he led put him above judgement, and that it was the only title worthy of him.
So, those who believe honor his existance by remembering the reward he received for leading an exemplary life, by saying or thinking "Peace be upon Him whenever his name is thought or spoken.

[nil fioktissovich grozny]

:evil:

I'm just sayin brick that there are many similarities with bein black and muslim, and besides more than half this continents people have been muslim for more than 500 years, so muslims know what its like to be black from the ground up.
Hope you can understand me on this.

My apologies. I read this thread with some equanimity until this point-quoted above. syntax, your arguments, together with afterbirth, have been the most sensible on this whole thing.

But I can never understand what you mean!

The only parallels [similarities] between Black and Muslim is that they never meet. It's a historical fact that those paths cross. I lost my calm where your statistics began! "...52% percent of Afrikan are Muslims... for more than 500 years... muslims know what its like to be Black..." Clearly somewhere you lost the overall sensibility?

You ommit the "why's" of your statistics: that it's because of colonisation that ".52% of Afrikans... are Muslims for more than 500 years..."! When Afrikans colonise Muslims, then they'll know what it's like being an Afrikan "...from the ground up...".

The only reason you feel that way is that the West is now, and has been, encroaching on you? You are now being thrown into the very same cage YOU threw me in, and our allegance ends when we are freed, because I still have to free myself from YOUR Muslim chains and revert to MY Afrikan essence! There can be no other similarity beyond that. A "colonised/Muslim" Black man is NOT, in essence, Afrikan/Black - he is no different from a "Christian Afrikan"! That's stuff for another thread though, and I've already written too much!

On this one: whether one is an atheist or hindu or christian, there can never be any sensiblity behind those drawings. Period. No good can come of it. Since you are NOT Muslim, what does your opinion of it count for? Considering that it does not affect you, why even have one? If not to arousing such violent actions!

Freedom of speech is fundamentally self-destructive and will in the end consume itself. It's characteristic of the West; they will not stop until this planet is theirs, and they will destroy it, along with themselves, afterwards.

 :evil: