Islam Cartoons (Queen, Religious, cover, quote, history)

Merkaba · 02-07-2006, 06:31 PM

The situation with the Islamic Denmark published cartoons is a mess. But here is an article from a journalist over here in NZ, Joe Bennett. I don't normally like his articles but he poses some points in here, admittedly these have probably been discussed before, but is the first I've seen of them. Just read thi and comment on the article or your thoughts on the situation.

Calls For Respect Prevent Obvious Questions Being Asked
"What a coup for cartooning. I have heard it suggested that a dozen cartoons, from Denmark of all places, may yet spark World War 3.
They won't, of course, because the leaders of Islam know they haven't got enough guns, but it's nice to know that the art of caricature still packs a kick.
The purpose of a cartoon is not to be funny. Being funny is the method. The purpose of a cartoon is to tell the truth. Truth is immediately recognisable and often funny.
The muslim world has not found the cartoons funny. The obstensible reason is that Islam forbids pictures of Muhammad. But that reason doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Five minutes on the internet and I had discovered several pictures of Muhammad.
I am also reliably informed that you can buy a picture of Muhammad in the central market at Tehran. So, there must be something else thats upsetting the Islamic world to the point that they're firebombing embassies, marching down Queen Street and boycotting Danish yoghurt.
I have seen only two of the cartoons. The first depicts Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. It is not particularly witty. The point it is obviously making is that some people commit acts of murder in the name of the prophet. Equally obviously, that point is true.
The reaction of a few Muslims has been funnier than the cartoon. "Slay those who insult Islam" said one placard carried by a protester, thereby exquisitely reinforcing the point of the cartoon he is protesting against.
He reminds me of the christian fundamentalist who murdered an abortionist on the grounds that the abortionist committed murder.
The second cartoon is wittier. It depicts Muhammad emerging from Muslim heaven to apologise to a stream of dead suicide bombers for having run out of virgins.
The reference is to the promise of 144 virgins to anyone who dies for the Islamic cause. (What attitude this implies to women, I shall ignore for the moment, though it does make me wonder what female suicide bombers get in the hereafter. A gross of Islamic Brad Pitts? A platinum Burka?)
What has been ignored amid the eruption of belligerance, apology, and yoghurt flinging is that the two cartoons invite two simple questions.
First, does Islam condone suicide bombers? Does it approve of blowing themselves up and killing the innocent? If so, then cartoons should be only the start of the mockery. Such a faith should be as universally condemned as Nazism. If not, if Islam does not approve of murder, then every Imam and Ayatollah should stand up and say so.
Second, is it a tenet of the Islamic faith that suicide bombers get a gross of virgins in heaven? If so, then once again the faith should be universally condemned. If not, then every Imam and Ayatollah should stand up and say so. And if they did, the hated cartoons would stop.
What has prevented these simple questions being asked is the usual argument about respect. It is our duty, the argument runs, to respect other people's beliefs. I, for one, have never had any idea why. Anything true can always withstand mockery.
Copernicus's belief that the Earth moved round the sun endured everything the Catholic Inquisitian could throw at it. And the Inquisition didn't just print cartoons. It pulled out fingernails. It incinerated it's enemies. But the truth endured.
Moreover, the rule about respecting other religions is selectively maintained. If a religion is small it is known as a cult, and a cult is fair game. Established religions are just cults that got big. Their beliefs are every bit as bizarre as the beliefs of little cults. Not questioning them is not an act of respect. It'sm erely not upsetting the status quo.
The Western belief that has sparked this controversy is the belief in freedom of speech. It's a belief I share, because history demonstrates that a free press is our best defence against tyranny. Every tyrant in history has muzzled the press.
Obstensibly, our leaders (in NZ) share my belief, but when the heat came on they renounced it.
"I approve of freedom of the press" said Helen Clark (PM) on television, "but".
"I approve of freedom of the press" said Don Brash on television, "but".
In other words, both of them worried more about votes or exports than about the truth.
In doing so they echoed Hamdi Hassan, an Egyptian MP. "Freedom of expression", said Hassan, "does not mean people are free to insult prophets".
I'm sorry Hassan, but that is precisely what it means. Freedom means freedom. And if a prophet is a true prophet he's not going to get upset.
The vast majority of the one-and-a-half billion Muslims in this world are good and peaceable people. They don't blow themselves up. They don't hate the West. They are superb hosts. They love their children. Tey are closer to Muhammad than their leaders are. The same is true of Christians and Christ.
Both religions began with one man. Both men were apparently tolerant. Both proposed a system of living, a code of social behavior.
After their deaths, however, their teachings became perverted. They became dressed in nonsensical theology.
That theology ossified into a system for gaining and retaining power. It became, in other words, merely political.
The grip of the Islamic authorities in Iran is indistinguishable from the grip of, say, the Catholic authorities in Spain and Ireland well into the 20th century, or the grip of the Soviet Union. Such a grip is noxious thing.
And if a dozen cartoons can shake it, it's a vulnerable thing."

Dezzy · 02-07-2006, 06:53 PM

Merkaba. A very well put opinion. I am of a similar ilk as you. Freedom of speech is good through cartoons like this. For me seeing the one of Mohamed turning away suicide bombers is very funny. It's comical. It also makes being a muslim appear less threatening to people like me who are not religous.

I would like to know if any followers of Islam actually thought I actually don't care about this issue. It's not that important in the general scheme of things.

(sorry for misquote Merkaba. That was someones article you posted, not your words)

Merkaba · 02-07-2006, 07:19 PM

Haha thats okay. I put it up there since I could see the logic in what he was saying as well.

Cheese · 02-08-2006, 12:47 AM

Seen a couple of them, but in all fairness I'd have to say I couldn't care less what another bunch of hypocritical religious nutters think.

Merkaba · 02-08-2006, 01:25 AM

Yeah well hypocritical is the right word. The protesting Islams are living up to the cartoons interpretations of violence and terrorism, having seen the signs they're marching about with.

Seriously; cartoon depicts terrorist religion, protesters march about with signs of death threats, death threats depict terrorism, terrorism depicts the cartoons.

Can they not work out how guilty they look right now?

DontRunMeOver · 02-08-2006, 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merkaba

Seriously; cartoon depicts terrorist religion, protesters march about with signs of death threats, death threats depict terrorism, terrorism depicts the cartoons.

I agree. In the newspaper yesterday they had a quote from one guy (paraphrased):

They asked him - "Why has there been such a violent, aggressive and sometimes deadly reactions from certain muslims towards these cartoons".
His answer was - "Because we're sick of muslims being associated with terrorism and violence".

The logic behind this still baffles me.

hookers with machineguns · 02-08-2006, 03:30 PM

I'm sorry, but this story pisses me off. I respect the fact that Muslims think it is blasphemous to depict the Prophet Mohammed in such a manner, but reacting with violence to basically what was a "mockery" of certain follower's violent-tendency.... that really makes me want to punch people (ha!)

adidasss · 02-08-2006, 03:49 PM

yeah, they responded to a caricature that intended to criticise islam for being an excuse for violence with violence.....way to prove them wrong.....

Tommyrocker · 02-08-2006, 03:54 PM

Have you heard the new Muslim Joke? Dignity.

hookers with machineguns · 02-08-2006, 09:37 PM

Like they say, Mo' hammed. Mo' problems.

02-07-2006, 06:31 PM	#1 (permalink)
Merkaba Whitewater! Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,885	Islam Cartoons The situation with the Islamic Denmark published cartoons is a mess. But here is an article from a journalist over here in NZ, Joe Bennett. I don't normally like his articles but he poses some points in here, admittedly these have probably been discussed before, but is the first I've seen of them. Just read thi and comment on the article or your thoughts on the situation. Calls For Respect Prevent Obvious Questions Being Asked "What a coup for cartooning. I have heard it suggested that a dozen cartoons, from Denmark of all places, may yet spark World War 3. They won't, of course, because the leaders of Islam know they haven't got enough guns, but it's nice to know that the art of caricature still packs a kick. The purpose of a cartoon is not to be funny. Being funny is the method. The purpose of a cartoon is to tell the truth. Truth is immediately recognisable and often funny. The muslim world has not found the cartoons funny. The obstensible reason is that Islam forbids pictures of Muhammad. But that reason doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Five minutes on the internet and I had discovered several pictures of Muhammad. I am also reliably informed that you can buy a picture of Muhammad in the central market at Tehran. So, there must be something else thats upsetting the Islamic world to the point that they're firebombing embassies, marching down Queen Street and boycotting Danish yoghurt. I have seen only two of the cartoons. The first depicts Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. It is not particularly witty. The point it is obviously making is that some people commit acts of murder in the name of the prophet. Equally obviously, that point is true. The reaction of a few Muslims has been funnier than the cartoon. "Slay those who insult Islam" said one placard carried by a protester, thereby exquisitely reinforcing the point of the cartoon he is protesting against. He reminds me of the christian fundamentalist who murdered an abortionist on the grounds that the abortionist committed murder. The second cartoon is wittier. It depicts Muhammad emerging from Muslim heaven to apologise to a stream of dead suicide bombers for having run out of virgins. The reference is to the promise of 144 virgins to anyone who dies for the Islamic cause. (What attitude this implies to women, I shall ignore for the moment, though it does make me wonder what female suicide bombers get in the hereafter. A gross of Islamic Brad Pitts? A platinum Burka?) What has been ignored amid the eruption of belligerance, apology, and yoghurt flinging is that the two cartoons invite two simple questions. First, does Islam condone suicide bombers? Does it approve of blowing themselves up and killing the innocent? If so, then cartoons should be only the start of the mockery. Such a faith should be as universally condemned as Nazism. If not, if Islam does not approve of murder, then every Imam and Ayatollah should stand up and say so. Second, is it a tenet of the Islamic faith that suicide bombers get a gross of virgins in heaven? If so, then once again the faith should be universally condemned. If not, then every Imam and Ayatollah should stand up and say so. And if they did, the hated cartoons would stop. What has prevented these simple questions being asked is the usual argument about respect. It is our duty, the argument runs, to respect other people's beliefs. I, for one, have never had any idea why. Anything true can always withstand mockery. Copernicus's belief that the Earth moved round the sun endured everything the Catholic Inquisitian could throw at it. And the Inquisition didn't just print cartoons. It pulled out fingernails. It incinerated it's enemies. But the truth endured. Moreover, the rule about respecting other religions is selectively maintained. If a religion is small it is known as a cult, and a cult is fair game. Established religions are just cults that got big. Their beliefs are every bit as bizarre as the beliefs of little cults. Not questioning them is not an act of respect. It'sm erely not upsetting the status quo. The Western belief that has sparked this controversy is the belief in freedom of speech. It's a belief I share, because history demonstrates that a free press is our best defence against tyranny. Every tyrant in history has muzzled the press. Obstensibly, our leaders (in NZ) share my belief, but when the heat came on they renounced it. "I approve of freedom of the press" said Helen Clark (PM) on television, "but". "I approve of freedom of the press" said Don Brash on television, "but". In other words, both of them worried more about votes or exports than about the truth. In doing so they echoed Hamdi Hassan, an Egyptian MP. "Freedom of expression", said Hassan, "does not mean people are free to insult prophets". I'm sorry Hassan, but that is precisely what it means. Freedom means freedom. And if a prophet is a true prophet he's not going to get upset. The vast majority of the one-and-a-half billion Muslims in this world are good and peaceable people. They don't blow themselves up. They don't hate the West. They are superb hosts. They love their children. Tey are closer to Muhammad than their leaders are. The same is true of Christians and Christ. Both religions began with one man. Both men were apparently tolerant. Both proposed a system of living, a code of social behavior. After their deaths, however, their teachings became perverted. They became dressed in nonsensical theology. That theology ossified into a system for gaining and retaining power. It became, in other words, merely political. The grip of the Islamic authorities in Iran is indistinguishable from the grip of, say, the Catholic authorities in Spain and Ireland well into the 20th century, or the grip of the Soviet Union. Such a grip is noxious thing. And if a dozen cartoons can shake it, it's a vulnerable thing." __________________ She thinks I'm a reclusive genius, she's going to be very disappointed when she finds out i'm a reclusive wanker

02-07-2006, 07:19 PM	#3 (permalink)
Merkaba Whitewater! Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,885	Haha thats okay. I put it up there since I could see the logic in what he was saying as well. __________________ She thinks I'm a reclusive genius, she's going to be very disappointed when she finds out i'm a reclusive wanker

02-08-2006, 01:25 AM	#5 (permalink)
Merkaba Whitewater! Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: New Zealand Posts: 2,885	Yeah well hypocritical is the right word. The protesting Islams are living up to the cartoons interpretations of violence and terrorism, having seen the signs they're marching about with. Seriously; cartoon depicts terrorist religion, protesters march about with signs of death threats, death threats depict terrorism, terrorism depicts the cartoons. Can they not work out how guilty they look right now? __________________ She thinks I'm a reclusive genius, she's going to be very disappointed when she finds out i'm a reclusive wanker

02-08-2006, 03:49 PM	#8 (permalink)
adidasss Slavic gay sauce Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Abu Dhabi Posts: 7,993	yeah, they responded to a caricature that intended to criticise islam for being an excuse for violence with violence.....way to prove them wrong..... __________________ “Think of what a paradise this world would be if men were kind and wise.” - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle. Last.fm

02-08-2006, 09:37 PM	#10 (permalink)
hookers with machineguns Music Addict Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,753	Like they say, Mo' hammed. Mo' problems. __________________ LASTFM

02-07-2006, 06:53 PM	#2 (permalink)
Dezzy Music Addict Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Manchester (southside) Posts: 149	Merkaba. A very well put opinion. I am of a similar ilk as you. Freedom of speech is good through cartoons like this. For me seeing the one of Mohamed turning away suicide bombers is very funny. It's comical. It also makes being a muslim appear less threatening to people like me who are not religous. I would like to know if any followers of Islam actually thought I actually don't care about this issue. It's not that important in the general scheme of things. (sorry for misquote Merkaba. That was someones article you posted, not your words)

02-08-2006, 12:47 AM	#4 (permalink)
Cheese Shadow on the wall Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: New Zealand Posts: 823	Seen a couple of them, but in all fairness I'd have to say I couldn't care less what another bunch of hypocritical religious nutters think.

02-08-2006, 03:30 PM	#7 (permalink)
hookers with machineguns Music Addict Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,753	I'm sorry, but this story pisses me off. I respect the fact that Muslims think it is blasphemous to depict the Prophet Mohammed in such a manner, but reacting with violence to basically what was a "mockery" of certain follower's violent-tendency.... that really makes me want to punch people (ha!)