<< TWICE AS FISKY ~ MAIN ~ SHROUD OF LATHAM >>
CARTOON LATEST
Fundy Melbourne Sheik Mohammed Omran predicts a camel-related spinal trauma:
“They are trying to provoke Muslims,” Sheik Omran said through his spokesman, Mustafa Kocak.
“You would expect a country like Australia, which is multicultural, would be sensitive to such issues.”
Mr Kocak said it was hard to predict the reaction the images would have in Australia.
“It may be the straw that breaks the camel’s back, it may not,” he said.
I’d like him to list all the other straws, and to tell us what might take place once that camel is broken. One of the surprises of this cartoon debacle has been the level of support for publishing those Danish ‘toons; I expected a 50/50 split, but email is running at about 80% in favour. And several on (or near) the left sound like they’ve reached a camel-breaking point of their own. Speaking of the left, here’s then-editor of The Age Michael Gawenda in 1997, being interviewed by Radio National’s Robert Bolton:
Bolton: To take an example, when the National Gallery of Victoria recently closed the exhibition including the picture of Piss Christ, did the paper take a view, a position, on whether or not that was a good or bad thing?
Gawenda: Yes the paper did. And the paper took a very strong position that the gallery had made a mistake, closing that exhibition down.
Bolton: Was that your decision?
Gawenda: Well in the end it was my decision, but there was a process of consultation and discussion that went on the paper about what position we would take, we also had discussions and listened to arguments put by both the artist involved, the gallery director, gallery staff, people outside of the National Gallery but had an interest in the arts, so it was a considered position, but in the end yes I decided that the paper had to take that particular position on that issue.
Bolton: Did you personally have a strong feeling about the Church, the State as represented by the gallery and art?
Gawenda: Well I did have a fairly strong position, I mean we ran two editorials on this issue, the first was that the exhibition should go ahead, this was before it was closed, there is a free speech issue here an artistic freedom issue here, and while we understand the Church’s sensitivities on this issue, there is a larger good served by allowing this exhibition to go on.
Gawenda went on to say he aimed for a “consistent and considered decision that is in line with the tone of your paper.” Which is no longer so consistent under current editor Andrew Jaspan:
The Age will not run the cartoons for the reasons explained in today’s editorial. I am of the view that alongside strong press freedoms and rights come equally important responsibilities. As a leading player in the Victorian community, we place a high value on building understanding and tolerance between the various communities. The cartoons do not contribute to that end.
And a urine-drenched crucifix did. Incidentally, the magazine I work for is also accused of hypocrisy:
Cartoons satirising Islam’s Prophet Mohammed that have sparked violence overseas will not be published in The Bulletin magazine, assistant editor Tim Blair says.
The series of 12 cartoons has already been published on Mr Blair’s own website.
Mr Blair, a political commentator and former chief of staff of NSW’s The Daily Telegraph, said on the website that cartoons mocking other religions had been published before without incident.
But he says the latest cartoon would not appear in The Bulletin.
“It was an editorial decision that was taken that we didn’t need to, that they were already out there on the internet and it would be gratuitous,” he said.
I should have been clearer during that television interview; my fault. The Bulletin appears on sale Wednesday, at which point it would have seemed a little redundant to present cartoons already published here and elsewhere days earlier. Nice gotcha attempt by our News Ltd. friends, though.
Frankly, I feel that the need to publish the cartoons is passing now, if not already past. The issue has never been about the cartoons themselves anyway, but about whether the West will knuckle under to the Muslim demand to curtail free speech when it concerns Islam. And that will be debated thoroughly in the coming months, especially if the Muslim world continues to seethe and burn.
I keep on seeing it remarked that the cartoons in question “aren’t all that funny.” But really, the longer this crap goes on, the funnier they get. Because the underlying truth that they point to gets more and more obvious with each new Muslim riot and each new Muslim arson.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 02:31 PM • permalinkDoesn’t this imply, then, that countries like Saudia Arabia and Japan and China will be insensitive to such issues? Is that okay with Omran? Maybe the answer is just to get rid of multiculturism and force people to integrate into the local culture or leave. I’ve got a few candidates.
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 02 06 at 02:37 PM • permalinkThe Left once again proves their hypocrisy has no bounds.
Posted by swassociates on 2006 02 06 at 03:18 PM • permalinkKristallnacht in the Third Reich was the “measured response” of sensitive Germans to an assassination in their Paris consulate. And seven decades later, Denmarkkk has it kkkoming
Posted by chinesearithmetic on 2006 02 06 at 03:28 PM • permalinkAm I missing something here .. the cartoons were first published in September 2005. Why is all the fuss occurring now - do their brains go into recess (along with their manners) during Ramadon?
Posted by LuvDaKartoons on 2006 02 06 at 03:58 PM • permalink“It was an editorial decision that was taken that we didn’t need to, that they were already out there on the internet and it would be gratuitous,” he said.
Spineless editors are a wonder to behold. No doubt he will demand a pay raise and bonus for his courageous stand.
Posted by perfectsense on 2006 02 06 at 04:10 PM • permalinkThe Bulletin appears on sale Wednesday, at which point it would have seemed a little redundant to present cartoons already published here and elsewhere days earlier
Disappointing.
Like it or not, the line has been drawn. Under the threat of violence, there is either defiance or submission, there is nothing in-between. As much as it may seem convenient or high-minded, failing to defend the right of free-speech because it would be “a little redundant” misses the point entirely, and becomes submission even if only by default.
Since when has defending freedom been “redundant” because others already entered the fray?
Shame on every paper/mag everywhere which does not make it absolutely clear where they stand on this issue. If they are fearful to print even one cartoon, even once, then by all means say so.
But to attempt some middle-ground bloviating editorial claiming to have the right to show the cartoons but explaining why it will not do so… that is more craven than to admit the fear.
I don’t work for a paper/mag, so I cannot say what I would do. But I dearly hope I would have the courage to at least choose one side or the other, not attempt to dodge the issue entirely.
Defending freedom is never “gratuitous”.
Posted by zeppenwolf on 2006 02 06 at 04:36 PM • permalinkNice gotcha attempt by our News Ltd. friends, though.
And have your News Ltd friends published these cartoons? I haven’t seen them if they have.
I totally agree with 11 above. Sorry Tim, but your failure to publish these cartoons in the Bulletin seems like a gutless cop-out to me.
If its OK to make fun of Christianity, then it should be OK to do it to ANY religion.Posted by DropDeadUgly on 2006 02 06 at 05:01 PM • permalink#13 I think that suggesting a decision by the Bulletin not to publish the cartoons reflects badly on Tim is a bit rough DDU considering the evidence at hand.
However it is clear that the mainstream media seem to respond to embassy burnings.
Could we get enough people together to burn an embassy until such time as Benny Hill is put back on television?
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 02 06 at 05:17 PM • permalinkPutting them on someone at the paper’s personal website is quite a bit different than actually publishing it in the paper. While I wouldn’t go far as saying it’s hypocritical, it is pretty weak running an editorial saying the cartoons are okay and then not actually running them.
Posted by trancejeremy on 2006 02 06 at 05:20 PM • permalinkI believe every free minded publication, daily, weekly, monthly, etc, should publish the cartoons. This issue is still current. We still hear threats of violence and retribution from the offended Muslims.
It is all about another right. The public’s right to know what all the threats are about. The Bulletin has a responsibility to publish those cartoons for its readers who may not have access to the internet or other publications that have published them. I hope I see them instead of lame justifications NOT to publish on Wednesday.
It is a strange day indeed when Australian publications are justifying their reasons for not publishing something. Usually it is the other way around. We frequently hear them justifying their decisions to publish un-newsworthy or voyeuristic items under the banner of the public’s right to know. What is so different here?“published elsewhere”
where have they been published in Australia Tim? I know they have been published in NZ and the PM over here was forced to make a comment on them (a rather disgraceful comment by the way) but where have they been published in Australia? What views have been expressed by Australia’s leadning politicians on this. I bet they are all trying to avoid saying anything like Helen Clark was until she was forced to respond.
weak Tim…very weak
#17 - A brisbane paper (Courier Mail?) published them either yesterday or the day before. I couldnt be arsed goggling it -
btw, what’s with you lefties demanding that they be published? i thought it promoted ‘hate speech’?Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 06 at 06:04 PM • permalinkHey, Tim, let’s show the bastards some real courage and publish here, and in the print news, a sample of the vicious, degraded anti-semitic, anti-christ, anti-infidel west cartoons daily published by the Arab-Muslim press, with complete credit given to the source. I am not being sarcastic. If this tripe doesn’t open the eyes of the west, and give the lied to Ahmed and other apologists for the Mulim lunatics, nothing will. (LGF has already published one.)
As a leading player in the Victorian community, we place a high value on building understanding and tolerance between the various communities.
I think what he really meant to say was:“As a leading player in the Victorian community, we place a high value on our buildings, and don’t want them torched by a seething mob of ROPers!”.
#16 Janet is quite right. I confess to not even *understanding* some of these mild creations. Some are just funny, and valid comments on Moslem-inspired violence.
The Oz press are hypocritical and cowardly.
By denying their readers the ability to judge the level of offence, they deny them the right to assess the absurd level of hysteria in the Moslem world, as well as the correct limits of free speech. Are mullahs behind these riots and arson? Probably.Remember when we were given [in The Age?] a disgusting cartoon equating the Israelis with the Nazi creators of Dachau? David Marr loudly defended this on Media Watch, reproducing the cartoon there.
I considered this offensive and unworthy of publication, but that was much greater in level of offence from the present cartoons.
I hear that some Moslems are now to have a competition to mock the Holocaust. So pointing out the widespread violence BY Moslems is equated with the Holocaust’s level of violence TO Jews? Hmmm.Flags burn better with the “flame of allah” brand of matches - http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/2108/2155/1600/101_ed9173816f1eab0d.jpg
:D
To take it further (see http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/islam.asp) Coca-Cola’s script logo was designed to reveal anti-Islamic messages in its mirror image. Although a backwards, fuzzy image of the Coca-Cola script logo does vaguely resemble some phrases in Arabic script, there’s nothing to the claim that this phenomenon is the result of intentional design. As mentioned elsewhere in our collection of Cokelore, the elegantly-written “Coca-Cola” trademark was invented by Frank Mason Robinson in 1886 when he wrote the first label in flowing Spencerian script. Robinson was a partner with pharmacist John Pemberton (who made the first syrup), and it was also Robinson who gave the beverage its name.
Posted by WeekByWeek on 2006 02 06 at 06:42 PM • permalinkSounds like the Bulletin has used Tim’s site as a convenient “out”—stick the cartoons online and then say that’s why they don’t need to be published in print.
When Omran says Aus should be “sensitive to such issues” he means “craven before Muslimist threats,” “abject toward Muslim bullying,” etc etcPosted by arrowhead ripper on 2006 02 06 at 06:43 PM • permalinkWell Tim it seems you have readers at the SMH. The paper defends the mainstream media’s “cautious line” and concludes “Why would you put people at risk?” I assume that passes for traditional yellow journalism, but apparently the caution only extends to protecting SMH staff. They happily name you as a publisher in the glorious company of the Courier-Mail.
Many in the mainstream media seem to have suddenly taken a view that censorship is okay if there is a responsibility to the broader community.
This view has been notably absent on many other occasions, such as when text messages about gatherings at Cronulla were broadcast far and wide, leading to the Festival of the Bogans and the subsequent Dickhead Challenge which was enthusiastically embraced and eventually won by males of middle eastern appearance.
The only difference to me seems to be one of personal courage. Editors of mainstream media have not suddenly discovered their Responsiblity to the Public - the fact is that they are just chicken-shits.
Tim has clearly demonstrated that he is not one of them.
Posted by Margos Maid on 2006 02 06 at 06:47 PM • permalinkPretty much everyone has seen the cartoons now and the main issue has become the reaction, (which of course it always was). I think it’s enough that the cartoons have all been described and there’s nothing to be gained from printing them again… They are crappy cartoons after all. Some are just doodles that make Leunbat look good. The only one I liked was the “We’ve run out of virgins” one. Ha ha - sucked in, suicide bombers.
Anyway, The Bulletin hasn’t come out yet and it would be scoop-wise unadvisable for an ass. ed. to let publishing competitors know exactly what is in an upcoming issue. Eh?
Those brave defenders of freedom at Channel 7’s Sunrise program on the teev have got 65% support on their poll about publishing these pictures.
That implies that 35% of respondents are gutless. At least it’s 2 to 1. Show the pictures, and let the public see what the fuss is about. The disproportionate violence being carried out in Islam’s name in the ME and Europe should be explained to Australia by showing the readers/viewers the cartoons in question. Surely that’s news in and of itself.
NEWS at 11: Muslims burning embassies proven to be barking mad….more after the break.
The gutlessness of the Australian press in not publishing these juvenile drawings is no real surprise.
The responses from the various editors confirms what rational non-Muslims have suspected for some time…that the Christian and Muslim religions cannot co-exist. One must secede.
Sadly, the dazzling stupidity and abject fear purveyed by multi-culti disciples like Jaspan will backfire when this religion of hate and intolerance breaches the barricades and starts destroying the infidels in the name of Allah.
The question is…has it already started?
Posted by Jay Santos on 2006 02 06 at 06:53 PM • permalinkTim,
I share the disappointment of others, and possibly your own, with a sneaking suspicion that if you had your way the cartoons would have been published in the Bulletin.
I can only hope that what we do get is an honest view of why they did not get published, an overview of anti-Semitic cartoons from the Middle East, and perhaps some non-Jyllands-Posten cartoons of Mohammad doing the rounds of the blogosphere.
You are still to be commended for publishing them on your blog, anyone who does so under their real name is a hero risking life, limb, their families, their jobs as well as legal trouble.
It is vital that the Muslim world does not have the last word in this crisis, otherwise the West will become subject to ongoing self-censorship imposed by violence.
Lets hope at least one Aussie newspaper or magazine finds the balls to print them.Quote de jour from Maher Mughrabi in The Age:
This controversy is about power. Muslim communities in the West feel under suspicion and under siege through the mere fact of their faith. Muslims in the Muslim world feel war has been declared on them by an adversary who controls the world. In such circumstances, the one power people feel they have left is to insist on their dignity
Yep. That’s right. With the VVHC (Vast Viking-Hebrew Conspiracy) bearing down upon them, Muslims had no choice but to kill each other, burn large quantities of jarlsberg and generally act like a troop of baboons who had just broken into a HM Customs warehouse and consumed the entire stockpile of crystal meth.
And more on (moron?) public art:
http://tinyurl.com/b6jr8Posted by andycanuck on 2006 02 06 at 07:27 PM • permalinkAs a resident of New York during the Piss Christ and the elephant dung Virgin Mary days, I felt that the courts really screwed up then. Since they felt that the museum and the artist were free to express themselves, what is different now from then. Publish the damned cartoons and screw the Islamofascists. If they get too frisky, remind them that their homeland too can resemble glass with very little effort if they keep pushing.
The cartoons were simply offering a critique of Islam. The fact is that Islam rules by fear. Mohammad was no prophet and the Koran is morally floored is demonstrable wrong historically. (Did you know the Koran claims Jesus Christ never died, despite all the evidence to his crucifixion under Pontius Pilate)
The only way Islam can continue to hold sway is by censorship and silencing dissent. E.g. if you leave the faith you die. It is a massive cult like the Jehovah’s witnesses but worse.
The Truth doesn’t fear being examined, criticised and critiqued and in fact welcomes it.
It is of great importance that some notion of tolerance does not stop us highlighting the errors of the Koran and great evil that is Islam.
If we can’t defeat this false ideology in debate we will never defeat it militarily.
Sadly the mainstream media aren’t willing to join the fight for minds.
#32 anyone who does so under their real name is a hero risking life, limb, their families, their jobs as well as legal trouble
Freddie asked “Is This The World We Created”.
Sadly, it is.
Unfortunately the changes wrought in the West by those in power have been done under the guise of freedom and democratic principals…and tolerance. Musn’t forget tolerance.
Ironically, none of these exist under Sharia.
I’d like to know what would Ronnie have done?
“The bombing begins in five minutes…”
Posted by Jay Santos on 2006 02 06 at 07:38 PM • permalinkVia The Brussels Journal, we learn that European Islamists are attempting a counter-attack with some witty and satirical cartoons of their own.
This one for example, depicts Hitler in bed with Anne Frank. Let’s hope it’s widely disseminated throughout Europe and beyond to alert un-alert folks as to what it is they are dealing with.
#33 Janet, yes, normally I’d agree with you - a picture = 1000 words and all that - but there’s not much in the way of nuance in these cartoons. A couple are well-drawn, but there’s no subtlety that one person will see more than another. Or maybe I’m wrong…
Publishing the cartoons (again) is just red rag to a rag head. If the goal is to get yet another over-reaction from some Australian-based crazies, then go for it. I mean, you could also try batting a pitbull with balloon on a stick - no surprises what happens next…
This belated ho-hum cartoon was first published in 2005.
Why is the world wide - Religious community starting to react now to the cartoon?
What’s the underlying issue or agenda ( Complete Muslim law in Denmark and Europe) and a complete change in Western Democracy through a new style of bullying.
Why re-address this issue world wide in 2006?
Didn’t they blow up Buddah statue recently?
The religion is reacting as if it is a country or a NZI party in Denmark and has very interesting perspective in the article website below..
http://www.sullivancounty.com/id3/denmark.htmDenmark, we’ll use your medicine, New Zealand we’ll buy your sheep and your kiwi fruits.
p.s. I think piss christ was necessary but then again Jesus forgives as well.
I mean, you could also try batting a pitbull with balloon on a stick - no surprises what happens next…
Yes, the balloon makes a big bang and the pitbull runs away with its tail between its legs.
—Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 02 06 at 08:04 PM • permalinkThis isn’t about the pretty ordinary cartoons.Extreme violence on the morning news,on and on they go,they are absolutely insane and totally incapable of rational dialogue,so where will this all lead us?Their objective is our complete destruction right?I’ve always considered myself pretty laid back and tolerant but atrocity after atrocity is wearing this treasured side of myself thin.Last week I was on a city bound train approaching the tunnel(Melbourne) and this young Middle Eastern man with a large back pack wouldn’t stop fiddling with his mobile phone and I found myself getting more and more stressed with news images of London and Madrid flashing through my mind though I heard my thoughts,“surely not,not me,not here” and I admit to praying and experiencing a fear I’ve never known,irrational perhaps but palpable.I have never been so relieved to alight a train in my life.I felt I should have been able to ask this man to stop fidgetting with his phone but you can’t do that can you?It’s not polite.
Oh,I digressed but it’s an example of an ordinary,normally rational woman’s imagination being effected by current events.As for the cartoons I found a couple mildly amusing,it wasn’t until I found this site via an article in The Age online that I actually saw them for the first time,thanks Tim,you saved me trawling the net.What is the fuss about?(stating the bleeding obvious),I cannot fathom how these people’s minds work and I have tried.Different strokes for different planets I guess.
From ibn Ishaq to Hamidullah Islamic scholars and Imams agree that Muhammad was Prophet, Messenger, General and Politician.
Almost every reference to Muhammad, especially in the Western press, is written with the title ‘Prophet.’ Never Muhammad the General, or Muhammad the Politician.
Is it totally beyond our media to conduct a simple search on this subject to place discussion into a category more in line with the intended criticism? When did criticism of the proponents of military strategy and tactics or political figures, past and present, become blasphemy?
If Islamic scholars can discuss politics and military matters over a fourteen century span, without having charges of blasphemy levelled at them, or ‘provoking’ fellow Muslims into rioting and mayhem, then there is an acceptance that these types of discussions do not deprive Islam-the-religion of its sacred characteristics.
What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Publish and be damned!I don’t think that the problem is Islam, Muslims, freedom of speech, respect or anything like that - rather it is borne of religion in general.
We must remember that Islam was “invented” some 600 years after Xianity.
The Xians or Catholics in particular, 600 years ago were in the process of The Spanish Inquisition, kind of a medieval equivelant of todays Jihad.
It takes quite a bit of time for a religion to progress from supressing women, killing minorities, buying up real estate and brainwashing people, quashing free thought to mature and be content with supressing women, raping children, hating homosexuals, buying up real estate, brainwashing people and quashing free thought.
Come 2606, Islam and Muslims will be just as progressive and modern as Christianity is today.
Posted by Dr Crispin Q Wheatley on 2006 02 06 at 08:28 PM • permalinkCan we still publish cartoons of Muslim women having their veils pulled off, though?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 02 06 at 08:41 PM • permalinkA Polish website, points out today that a film producer/director was attempting to raise financing for a big screen biography of Mohammed. The producer and his daughter were killed last year in the Amman hotel bombing. the Wahabbis seem rather serious about this tenet of faith.
Mohammed on CelluloidPosted by Pat Patterson on 2006 02 06 at 08:45 PM • permalinkOK, that didn’t work, the address is http://www.beatroot.blogspot.com.
Posted by Pat Patterson on 2006 02 06 at 08:47 PM • permalink#52 You seem to making the point that Christianity and Islam are both wrong and as bad as each other.
I think it is a big mistake to lump all religions into one bag. They teach different things. They need to be critiqued at their source i.e compare Mohammad with Jesus the Koran with the Bible. Which one is true or neither.
We need to learn to discuss these matters rationally and seek the truth together.
Whatever it is you believe also needs to be open to critique. Remmeber athiests have perpetrated some pretty big attrocities in recent times.
I agree with Andrew, Dr C, not all religions are the same and indeed it could be argued that atheism is a religion in itself.
—Nora
Posted by The Thin Man Returns on 2006 02 06 at 09:03 PM • permalink#52
do some reading on Beslan and come back to us
Posted by knuckleheadwatch on 2006 02 06 at 09:12 PM • permalinkRemember when Andrew West wrote in favor of Mark Steyn’s “It’s the Demography, Stupid” article, and an indignant Phillip Gomes, of Lavartus Prodeo, wrote the following in comments:
“But I’m puzzled by what left you’re referring to, most of the lefties I know would open up a can of whupass on any mad mullah if he tried to take away all that we hold near and dear.
That’s why we get so pissed off at the political christian right. Same thing just directed at a more dangerous target right here at home.”
Is freedom of speech something they hold near and dear? And when was the last time it was actually threatened by the “Christian political right”? Still waiting for said can of whupass to be opened, Phil.
Posted by dsmith_michigan on 2006 02 06 at 09:13 PM • permalink#52 Dr. Wheatly: “Come 2606, Islam and Muslims will be just as progressive and modern as Christianity is today.” That means that the Muslims will stll be 600 years behind Christianity. (The good Dr. Wheatly is undoubtably a PhD in the paranormal since he has the ability to see into 2606.) Well, Dr., I can’t wait that long for, as has been said elsewhere, the Muslies to stop behaving “like a troop of baboons who had just broken into a HM Customs warehouse and consumed the entire stockpile of crystal meth.”
If only someone could stay alive long enough to make a movie about Muhammad, based on historical data and the Koran. Then all the Taqqiya and rhetoric about Islam being a ‘religion of peace’, or ‘just another religion’ or ‘misinterpreted’ will end. Everyone will at long last see that Muhammad was nothing like any other central character to any other religion. The movie will show him exactly like he was; a ruthless blood thirsty criminal. It would have to be rated R for a start.
WeekByWeek 25
Although a backwards, fuzzy image of the Coca-Cola script logo does vaguely resemble some phrases in Arabic script, there’s nothing to the claim that this phenomenon is the result of intentional design. ..., the elegantly-written “Coca-Cola” trademark was invented by Frank Mason Robinson in 1886 when he wrote the first label in flowing Spencerian script. Robinson was a partner with pharmacist John Pemberton (who made the first syrup), and it was also Robinson who gave the beverage its name.
[conspirinoid rave mode/]
AHA! That just PROVES that the conspiracy to defame Islam goes back farther than was previously hallucinat… er, previously perceived! Yes! Imagine finding and recruiting an Arabic-fluent calligrapher in North America in the 19th century JUST to piss off the long-anticipated “Arab Street” of 2006! Only the jooooooooos could have contrived so diabolical a plot!
[\conspiranoid rave mode]Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 09:41 PM • permalinkI’ve got to add my name to those who say the cartoons should be published. its not about news or sensibilities or any such shit. its about standing up to bullying on something we claim is a fundamental right - freedom of thought and expression. publish and there may be trouble, but surely (unless you’re leftoid pond scum) defending who and what we are is a fight worth fighting. the MSM’s test is now, and for the most part its failed again. don’t publish and be damned, I say.
Rob Read 41
Sudatenlaw.
oo I like that. As in “By late 2006, Sudatenlaw had been imposed, from westernmost Mexifornia to easternmost Eurabia. Dignity and respect now prevailed, that is, all speech and other activities were now either mandatory or prohibited. And Allah was pleased.”
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 09:50 PM • permalinkThey are trying to provoke Muslims,” Sheik Omran said through his spokesman, Mustafa Kocak.
I would like to know what the Muslim Clerics are doing to try and reduce the uprising of the people they represent. This comment is just a very thinly-veiled threat, and is not asking for the muslim community to take these cartoons, and other comments made by the public/media in their stride. Surely, if the Muslim community wants the general population to understand their values, then it’s best for them to discuss this in a responsible, adult manner, rather that taking their frustration out on innocent buildings..
Publish them. It’s the only option available. Otherwise, Australia will set themselves up for a continuing kow-tow to any minority. And on that point, since when did the Government become so concerned in protecting the rights of minority groups in the first place? They are a minority for a reason.And in the interests of being re-elected, perhaps it’s time they actually started listening to the majority - those who call ourselves “Australian”, as opposed to those who call themselves according to their religion or their parents birth-place.
Katie
#52 - I’ve noticed that Christians are allowed to renounce their faith and become atheist - what happens to muslims who become unbelievers?
Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 06 at 09:52 PM • permalinkAnabel 51
If Islamic scholars can discuss politics and military matters over a fourteen century span, without having charges of blasphemy levelled at them, or ‘provoking’ fellow Muslims into rioting and mayhem, then ...
If what? Are you claiming that 14 centuries went by and none of these mullahs and imams were calling each other blasphemers and making wars with each other because of it ... wait ... ARE you claiming that? Because I bet it ain’t so.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 09:56 PM • permalinkDr Crispin Q Wheatley 52
Come 2606, Islam and Muslims will be just as progressive and modern as Christianity is today.
Yeah they will ... the ones that are left. There may be some vigorous evolutionary selection processes going on, on the road to that outcome.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 09:58 PM • permalinkNora 57
I agree with Andrew, Dr C, not all religions are the same and indeed it could be argued that atheism is a religion in itself.
Indeed it could be argued that “bald” is a hair color. And it could, with equal validity, be argued that Dr C was making the point that AndrewM claims he was making.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 10:03 PM • permalinkPeter Blunden, Herald Sun editor, doesn’t deserve the title of hypocrite. He explained clearly on radio yesterday he wouldn’t publish the toons because it wasn’t worth the trouble.
It’s a fair call.
Then he went looking for the latest celebrity crap from Hollywood, an update on Eddie McGuire’s career moves and the condition of Kouta’s knee.
Yet it’s the biggest selling paper—by miles—in Australia.
Perspective—a little dab’ll do ya.Piss Christ vs Cartoon Jihad in FrontPage Magazine today:
Though some criticisms of Piss Christ, and the man who created it, were intemperate, Serrano’s art was never forced underground, nor was his life seriously threatened, nor was he forced into hiding a la Salman Rushdie or placed in protective custody. Violence-prone packs of Christians did not roam the streets of Paris, or London, or Frankfurt, or Madrid, or New York calling for the head of Piss Christ’s creator.
Posted by walterplinge on 2006 02 06 at 10:15 PM • permalink#44 - rebase - try a little experiment. Ask a militant islamist fundamentalist dickheadist to describe the cartoons to you and see if you survive long enough to ask a christian or atheist or cartoonist to describe them to you. If you live you will probably find that the descriptions of the cartoons vary markedly. People need to see the pictures and judge for themselves. Publish them in all modern free thinking publications. Every one is talking about the issue but most people have not seen what started all the problems.
Sorry if this has been posted already, but just saw this on news.com.au…...
IRAN’S largest selling newspaper announced today it was holding a contest on cartoons of the Holocaust in response to the publishing in European papers of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed.
“It will be an international cartoon contest about the Holocaust,” said Farid Mortazavi, the graphics editor for Hamshahri newspaper - which is published by Teheran’s conservative municipality.
How can newspapers claim to be covering the story adequately if they do not publish the cartoons? How can any reader judge the rationality or otherwise of the worldwide islamic reaction without having seen what they are reacting to?
On ABC radio this morning it was announced that the secretary-general of the Arab League was advocating laws to prohibit anti-Islamic expression, on the model of those in some states that ban anti-semitism. I very nearly lost my cornflakes. And the really scarely thing is that cuddle-mongering liberals (the ones who haven’t woken up yet) may confusedly react to the current cartoon riots by proposing exactly that.
#75 Janet, don’t know many militant islamist fundamentalists, though I do know a few dickheadists, among which I am no doubt numbered. We know what the mil-is-funs are doing - they are burning things again and denouncing away in beardy, pointy-fingered flag-stomps. I don’t want their description of anything because it will be a rant. Nor do I want to hear from avowed christians because their description of even the most exciting event puts me to sleep. And then at your weakest when your brain is really low on alpha waves they invite you to bible group. So yeah, I agree with you there - christians and muslims are different.
But no need to risk a beating or a boring, there have been plenty of moderate commentators describing the content for me. Anyone whose interest is piqued can hit the net and find the cartoons in a click, like I did.
Why publish them again? Well, despite how it now appears the original publication was some months ago. I guess the reaction wasn’t newsy enough so it’s time to stir things up again. Ah, there we go - embassies burn, let the debating begin. Geez I am starting to sound like a conspiracy-theorist…
#65
Stoop,
Shhh! There are people who would take your rant seriously. Some anti-Wahhabi Muslims think the sect that runs Saudi Arabia was set up by a British agent in the mid-18th Century as a means of ensuring British rule over the Arabs a century and a half later. More sensible Muslims realize this is silly and false, but, well, you can see how many sensible Muslims there seem to be as opposed to the other kind.I just hope they never find out about Wronwright and the Time Machine.
#52 You make the assumption, perhaps implicit, that all religions must develop the same way. I think that is demonstrably false, as a glance at Judaism should show.
Those who compare the “Christian political Right” to those Muslims threatening terrorism and death to those who displease them in their prejudices, y’all let me know when Pat Robertson rams an airliner into a skyscraper, or when a follower of Franklin Graham stabs a filmmaker to death on the open street, then I’ll listen to your ranting.
The key point is that Muslims are demanding, under threat of violence and death, that the West abandon freedom of speech if exercising it conflicts with their prejudices. The imams stoking this tempest are trying it on, aiming to get veto power over publishing about Islam in the West. What will be their next demand, enforced under threat of terrorism and death? Appeasement of the unappeasable become easier with repetition.
I could be persuaded that we ought to behave courteously to Muslims, provided they reciprocate, and as part of that courtesy avoid offending them unnecessarily. I thought Serrano was like a vicous little boy defacing a wall with obscene graffitti, and his deliberate blasphemy ought to have been consigned to his living room for show, not a museum. But if Muslims demand that we curtail freedom under threats of death it is instantly necessary to defy them and rub in the fact that we will not surrender to their dictates.
Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 02 06 at 10:56 PM • permalink#80 - rebase. Yes a reasonable person’s (what is reasonable to you may not be reasonable to another) description will suit most. My 78 year old mother in law is following this story with very keen interest. She has visions of some disgusting and perverted images of a benign holy man circulating in the press. She didn’t get that from a Muslim or a Christian but from the Australian press. Her reaction when I told her I had seen the pictures was “can you get me a copy, I want to see them for myself”. She does not have access to the internet, as many others do not.
The story is newsworthy now for whatever reason. Let people see the pictures and judge for themselves. We do not need the protection of cowardly politicians or editors.Like i posted on another comment stream yesterday, if the newspapers/tv channels won’t publish these cartoons, then they must in my opinion get a selection of the usual trashy cartoons that appear in the arab press to give the story/issue some context… “Here is what these people routinely print against the jews/west, their hypocrisy on this issue is breath taking, etc…” If they don’t, they are truly cowards and failing in their duty!!!!
It would facilitate collecting some of these cartoons/tripe if many newspapers in the arab world had online editions, but i’m not sure if most of these places have progressed out of the horse and buggy era????
I’ve also heard a few muslims/imams say that if we want them to respect our culture/countries etc, we should learn to respect theirs etc… I believe for the majority of muslims they will never respect our cultures, freedoms, propserity and how we got it and our wish to continue living in a free and enlightened way… they sort of tell us if we will just appease them a bit more they will behave themselves and we will have peace, just appease a bit more, give up a few more rights etc and we can be one big happy community… i don’t think hardly any of these people are interested in assimilating and becoming a real part of our community, with their insistence on their own schools and mosques etc, criticising and attacking our women for what they wear and how they conduct themselves, praising the psychos who want to attack our societies, etc…
they will never respect or adopt most parts of our australian, US, UK lifestyles, no matter how much we fawn over their religion and multi culti rights, or bend over to show how much we respect and appreciate them being here…. just like hitler and munich, if we tried to understand their perspective, and give them just a bit more of what they want/demand, we hoped they’d be satisfied and we’d have peace… these people are as fixed in their backward ideas and traditions, and determined to maintain it that way as u will ever find….
Michael Lonie 81
#52 You make the assumption, perhaps implicit, that all religions must develop the same way.
No I don’t, although maybe Dr C does. Probably not him either. The assumption I’m making is that something very much like evolution will be at work on the world’s Muslim populations, over the next 4-500 years or so. The most belligerent amongst them (along with their followers and many nearby innocents) will be “selected out” by the process of them picking fights with more technologically advanced neighbors, who will kill them. Those who remain will develop more tolerant societies. Maybe.
Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 06 at 11:21 PM • permalinkWhy publish them again? Well, despite how it now appears the original publication was some months ago. I guess the reaction wasn’t newsy enough so it’s time to stir things up again. Ah, there we go - embassies burn, let the debating begin. Geez I am starting to sound like a conspiracy-theorist…
Are you aware that a radical imam based in Denmark has been touring the Middle East, passing around the cartoons and a handful that were never published in the paper and drumming up the boycott and anger?
The stirring-up wasn’t done by westerners, rebase.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 02 06 at 11:27 PM • permalinkdsmith_michigan — Are you kidding? Why, I turned on the public access channel just this morning over breakfast and there was that fine Democratic theocrat, the Reverend Phelps, sawing the head off a hostage while picking all the candidates for our next election. Of course the religious right is a bigger menace than Islamic fanaticism…
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 02 06 at 11:31 PM • permalinkThis is about our freedoms not being curtailed in our country by the dictators of a repressed and violent religion. Let them evict all the foreign embassies from their soil, let them repress their own people, let them wear the veils and brainwash their boys. Let them burn our flags and effigies of our leaders. In their own countries. Not in mine!
The cost of trade is too high if it means we must chisel away at our precious democratic rights and human freedoms to secure their contracts. Where do their demands stop.
We have a system, somewhat flawed, in this country. If you have a grievance with something that has been published, go to the courts. Remember ET’s diddle? It worked.
I often dream of all the women in these repressed Muslim states simultaneously declaring ENOUGH and removing their veils and remonstrating their violent men. Bravery on a large scale is needed in those countries. I am fortunate, as are we all in this country. We don’t need to throw off a violent repressor. Please don’t let him in the backdoor!A document linked by Michele Malkin, which is supposed to be a statement by the Danish Imams’ Roadshow, gives this explanation for the extra cartoons, which may, on the other hand, be straight-out fakes (quoting from page 3 of the document) -
Muslims in this period received, and especially those who participated in protest of the printing of the drawings, different letter which in subject differed between threads and degeneration of Islam itself through attack on the Koran, as the claimed that it was invented, and they repeated the attacks on the prophet (PUBH) by sending animated pictures which was much more offending, and which can only come from a deep hatred to Islam itself as a religion
“You would expect a country like Australia, which is multicultural, would be sensitive to such issues.”
Multicultural??? Im already stopping off at the trendy Lakemba outlet to buy myself an abaya.
“They are trying to provoke Muslims,”
I know by allowing the right to free speech which you seemed to have taken quite well, cause unfortunately we have to read your rubbish words.
All I can say is the media would not publish the cartoons?? but yet with all this controversy and talk its not going to take long before people start searching and seeing for themselves what has stirred up such a war. So maybe the media hasnt let us down?? they did mention Tim Blair’s site after all.
#96 No, I don’t advocate surrender but I do advocate advoiding asking fundamentalists their opinions on a (wide range of) topics they’re not adequately equipped to answer. In fact, fundamentalists should be avoided generally.
Meanwhile, I would be interested to hear more about bad imam. Sounds like the embassy fury was not about the original 12 pictures?
http://blogs.smh.com.au/thecontrarian/archives/2006/02/those_cartoons_1.html Andrew West sums it up beautifully.
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
“You would expect a country like Australia, which is multicultural, would be sensitive to such issues.”
But they’re not and more’s the pity. Must be their Eurotrash roots. Much better to be tolerant in the way of Islam ~ where a Mullah/Iman/Sheik’s followers are not a congregation, but a conflagration.