Anger, violence predicted

The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info

Last updated on August 9th, 2017 at 01:15 pm

Cartoon-crazed fundamentalists continue seething:

A leading Islamic cleric has called for an “international day of anger” …

Just for a change.

… over publication of caricatures of the prophet Muhammad and a Danish activist predicted that deadly violence could break out in Europe “at any minute”.

Maybe they’ll burn some cars, or bomb a train, or kill a film director.

As more European newspapers reprinted the cartoons, what started off as a row between Denmark’s press and its Muslim population has grown into a full-blown “clash of civilisations”.

No; that would require two civilisations.

Posted by Tim B. on 02/03/2006 at 07:09 PM
    1. Is it just me or does anyone else think the beardy weirdys have overplayed their hands on this one?
      A bit depressing to see sky news report about the british cartoonists doing drawings about the issue without any pics of Mo though. They were self censoring and congratulating themselves on not being intimidated.
      Not that Im aware of ANY Australian newspaper cartoonist that has even touched on the matter. (glass houses and all that)

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 02 03 at 08:22 PM • permalink


    1. Maybe the evil intolerant West should call for a day of “Get Stuffed Raghead Mullahs!”. Even the Kiwis have reprinted those cartoons – see,10117,18035976-2,00.html

      Posted by Wolfbane on 2006 02 03 at 08:23 PM • permalink


    1. Time for the west to realise that the “reasons” for attacking us are only for our benefit to maintain the ROP propaganda in OUR eyes.
      Just being an Infidel , living and breathing is enough reason.

      Posted by davo on 2006 02 03 at 08:34 PM • permalink


    1. What would happen if Islam weren’t a religion of peace.

      Posted by Ross on 2006 02 03 at 08:37 PM • permalink


    1. I blame Ted Rall.

      I hope some nutjob Jihadi Waddi blames him, too.  Get some benefit from the religion of piece(s).

      Posted by Carl H on 2006 02 03 at 08:42 PM • permalink


    1. Tim,

      A marvelous post.

      I’ve had enough of these ‘slammers.

      Posted by Rob Read on 2006 02 03 at 08:44 PM • permalink


    1. The USA State Dep’t has come out in full dhimmitude, with its tongue up its bum, as usual, denouncing the cartoons and cartoonist while failing to note the murdering violence exhibited by the Religion of Peace. This is what the State Department, and lefty loonies, call even-handedness. The Wasington Post has lost all respect for itself in a display of self-loathing. (See Powerline.) One good thing about all this, it clarifies just what the Religion of Peace has in store for us and it exposes the dhimmiwits in our societies. So far I see the latter as 99% leftoid moonbats.

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 03 at 08:45 PM • permalink


    1. The silence of the Anglospheric press on this issue is sickening.

      Tim:  Time for the Bulletin to print ‘em !
      C’mon Mr News Editor, time to step up and be counted in a real Continuing Crisis !
      At the very least please publish them on your blog. Your pull as a Real Journalist should qualify this as “Australian Journalist Publishes Cartoons”.

      LGF has some great photos of placards waved by ROP protesters (presumably in London).
      If images like that do not awaken Europe then nothing will. Not even the violence that these protesters assure us is inevitable.

      One crucial question:

      What position has the mainstream Euro-left taken on the issue? It would appear that their journalistic vanguard at least is taking an unusual stand.

      If Europe shows spine: I suspect that you are very right, a strong European position has wide ranging implications for the Middle East, including Iran, Iraq and the “Palestinians”. Dreaming out loud:
      We may finally see a United Army of the West (NATO plus Downunda) go forth and put the oil in control of someone sane. Us.

      Posted by sixdays on 2006 02 03 at 08:48 PM • permalink


    1. #7,

      I think that there is actually grounds for optimism regarding this particular development, and to note that it has in fact been somewhat misreported. (see link below)

      State has not been quite as craven as you say, they still support freedom of speech. When you think about it, State’s support for the Muslim position is a masterstroke, in as far as this would give the reflexively anti-US Europeans even more reason to take an uncompromising anti-ROP stand.

      Also a good idea to keep the Iraqis on side for now, while Europe goes through the process of coming to its senses. Given that fatwas have recently been issued against Danish troops, State has another reason to play it safe. For now.

      Finally, don’t forget Russia, which cannot decide whom it fears more, the US or Islam. Nothing like an apparent convergence of the two to put the Russians on the right side of the ROP. I am not talking about Putin, I am talking about simplistic, reflexive Russian public opinion.

      So I have some faith in method in State’s madness.
      Karl Rove is a mad genius!

      Posted by sixdays on 2006 02 03 at 08:57 PM • permalink


    1. Mo Hamed Mo Problems is my favourite.

      The mohammed brand anal johnnies are sure to leave a nasty tase in any ROPers mouth.

      Posted by Rob Read on 2006 02 03 at 09:06 PM • permalink


    1. They might be able to blow up people but they can’t blow up the internet.

      Apparently this is Muhammed endorsing Danish cheese.

      I expect the more they holler the more that this kind of stuff will appear. Up yours goat feckers.

      Posted by HC44 on 2006 02 03 at 09:12 PM • permalink


    1. Bet me by a bee’s dick Rob!

      Posted by HC44 on 2006 02 03 at 09:14 PM • permalink


    1. Here they are . . . judge for yourself.

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 02 03 at 09:15 PM • permalink


    1. My favourite so far . . .

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 02 03 at 09:21 PM • permalink


    1. This one’s pretty good too . . . .

      Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 02 03 at 09:25 PM • permalink


    1. If you have not yet seen Michelle. shots of the London demo.
      ahh how i miss the civilised life of that wise old city here in ‘redneck’ Queensland!

      Posted by davo on 2006 02 03 at 09:27 PM • permalink


    1. Try these …

      Posted by Rainbow on 2006 02 03 at 09:31 PM • permalink


    1. I’ve seen people compare this to kicking a hornet’s nest. Nice to see they at least admit the nature of the enemy, even if only as an expression of their own cowardice.

      Posted by bovious on 2006 02 03 at 09:39 PM • permalink


    1. No; that would require two civilisations.

      Well said, Tim.

      Check out the Jack Higgins cartoon in today’s Chicago Sun-Times (don’t know how to make it a permalink).

      Posted by Barbara Skolaut on 2006 02 03 at 09:42 PM • permalink


    1. Note to Euro’s

      The hard targets are the one’s wearing tablecloths on their heads.

      Posted by swassociates on 2006 02 03 at 09:48 PM • permalink


    1. a page one picture of angry Muslims burning a Danish flag beneath the headline: “Help, Voltaire, they’re all going mad!”

      The heading referred to the declaration attributed to the philosopher: “I don’t agree with what you say, but I’ll fight to the death for your right to say it.”

      Im sure that will give the ROPers pause.

      /acid flash-back

      Posted by Thomas on 2006 02 03 at 09:50 PM • permalink


    1. Two Americans are line up aginst a wall about to be sot by the crazed Mujahadeen.
      As they raise their rifles the first American raises up an offensive cartoon of MO in defiance.
      the second American shouts out ” Stop that Jo, you’ll only make things worse!”

      Who does the second American work for?
      1 The NYT
      2 the State department
      3 The ISM

      Posted by davo on 2006 02 03 at 09:55 PM • permalink


    1. “Maybe they’ll burn some cars, or bomb a train, or kill a film director”

      Don’t forget the flag burning which is very popular

      Posted by WeekByWeek on 2006 02 03 at 09:59 PM • permalink


    1. It seems there is a least one sane muslim in the world, and his stand cost him is job:  One Muslim stands up against Islamic bigotry

      Posted by darrinh on 2006 02 03 at 09:59 PM • permalink


    1. test I’ll be back

      Posted by gibno1 on 2006 02 03 at 10:04 PM • permalink


    1. The point I wanted to make is that the cartoons were published by private companies (individuals if you like). Why should the Danish national government be deemed to be responsible?

      Posted by WeekByWeek on 2006 02 03 at 10:08 PM • permalink


    1. I hope to U.S. press don’t buy into this and here’s why. I’ve noticed over the last few months watching the European news and reading European newspapers that they refer to the war on terror as either Bush’s war on terror or Washington’s war on terror.
      It seems now with all this Islamic anger and all these threats, it’s theirs too!

      Posted by Brian on 2006 02 03 at 10:17 PM • permalink


    1. Took me a while to get registered but here I am

      Good to see some Aussies who agree with me on
      this Allah stuff.

      The Main Stream Media in the U.S. is a bunch of
      lilly livered crud. Even here in Texas they are
      so damn careful not to show us anything that
      might be offensive.

      Yet, the Washington Post is so happy to show a
      cartoon by Tom Toles depicting a paraplegic
      G.I. with Rumsfeld as his DR. saying ” I guess I will have to list your condition as
      battle hardened”.

      Now that is really funny isn’t it?

      Then they make the comment today that they
      can’t show any of the Allah cartoons as they
      might be offensive. I could go on about this
      stuff for an hour but you have the internet
      I am sure you can find it as well as me.

      To paraphrase the Queen, our soldiers are not


      Posted by gibno1 on 2006 02 03 at 10:20 PM • permalink


    1. Muslims have a right to be offended by these cartoons.  Calling for boycotts and organising protests are a part of free speech.  If they stuck to that, I think they would gain a lot of support from members of the general public who don’t like to see other people’s religion mocked.

      However, that doesn’t seem to be what happens.  The violent thugs behave thuggishly and commit acts of violence, while the mainstream use the acts of terrorists as veiled threats (you know the sort of thing: ‘while we don’t condone acts of violence, what we are seeing now is an inevitable result of…’).

      Why can’t mainstream Muslims realize that by not unreservedly condemning extremists, by instead making excuses for them and using them almost as ‘muscle’ for their complaints, they harm the image or their religion almost as much as the actual terrorists?

      Posted by jic on 2006 02 03 at 10:31 PM • permalink


    1. Last year in France there was a depiction of Christ…get this…naked, with an erection, wearing a condom!
      As far as I know, no one was kidnapped, there were no threats to bomb and life went on.

      Posted by Brian on 2006 02 03 at 10:34 PM • permalink


    1. Why should the Danish national government be deemed to be responsible?

      Because democracy is Satanic, as men try to make themselves into gods to be worshipped by the people as idols: The only law is God’s law and God’s word is the whole of the law, which governs all aspects of private life. The Koran says so, apparently.

      Posted by Aaron – Freewill on 2006 02 03 at 10:34 PM • permalink


    1. WeekByWeek, the reason is that under Islamic law there is no difference between public and private, between government and religion.  It’s all the same, that is, it’s all religion.  There are no rights whatsoever aside from those explicitly granted by sharia.  There are no actions which are not religious.

      The Islamists either do not realize this, or they reject it out of hand.  My bet is on the latter.

      Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 02 03 at 10:38 PM • permalink


    1. when neo-nazi thugs call for the eradication of turkish guest workers, successfully encouraging arson & murder, they are quite rightly condemned

      when extremist muslims foment violent reaction to cartoons, the commentariat goes looking for root causes

      eh what?

      Posted by KK on 2006 02 03 at 11:02 PM • permalink


    1. Watch the Super Bowl Monday 6 Feb, Australian time

      At the risk of being one who predicted all 40 of the last 2 wars, I am uneasy.

      Notice that bin Laden made a truce offer in his audio tape?

      Notice that Al Jazeera reported that al Zawahiri made his own truce offer?
      It invited President Bush to convert to Islam.

      Notice that after the 9/11 attacks, a lot of radical Mullahs and Imams condemned bin Laden excuse he did not ‘offer the kaffir’ a chance convert before he murdered, IAW Sharia law?

      Now we have the AQ top two making that same offer in a three week span.

      Notice that bin Laden also offered a truce to the UK just before the London tube attack?

      Notice that the current 2 offers were made prior to Bush’s State of the Union Address, when he was certain to reject them in public?

      Notice that Zawahiri’s white turban, white robe and lack of his usual AK-47 can be thought of as symbolic of this sharia offer of ‘peace’?

      We have NEVER had four tapes released in this time frame (3 by Z, 1 by OBL).

      Notice that multiple Zawahiri tapes consistently presage attacks outside the current combat operations sphere within 30 days of the final tape release date?

      They will want to hit a hard target, on Bush’s watch, and soon after he has publicly rejected the ‘offer’ you have to give a kaffir.

      We know they have been sniffing about for years to assemble a radiological bomb, but HE (multiple suicide bombers), would be just as good an impact.

      The best opportunity I can see if the Superbowl on Monday, our time. It has astonishly dense media coverage, and would be a really major, splashed-all-over-the-front-page-for-months hit, even if just with HE.

      There is a big Muslim population in Detroit, and it is just across the border from Canada, so you have the classic issue of split jurisdictions to muddy the waters. Canada is also very hands-off with its Muslim population, and there are concentrations of them in Ontario, Canada’s moonbat central.

      I really, really hope I am dead wrong, and that you will all laugh at my paranoia on Tuesday, Australian time. But I cannot see a better opportunity for them, this year.


      Posted by MarkL on 2006 02 03 at 11:14 PM • permalink


    1. “No; that would require two civilisations.”


      Posted by JimC on 2006 02 03 at 11:21 PM • permalink


    1. Wonder if the UK’s famous ‘incitement to violence’ laws will be invoked to deal with the sentiments expressed by some of the protesters.  Not likely.

      Wonder if the West could rouse itself from self-loathing slumber long enough to have a ‘worldwide day of anger’ to protest the ritual portrayal of those of other faiths as pigs and monkeys, the routine calls for the murder of infidels, or the non-stop slaughter and mayhem the Muslim world has been exporting for decades.  Also not likely.

      Posted by cosmo on 2006 02 03 at 11:26 PM • permalink


    1. 11

      Up yours goat feckers.


      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 03 at 11:31 PM • permalink


    1. More violence by “Men of Middle Eastern Appearance” at Bondi last night.

      Six people were stabbed..

      Police report. – Nobody’s been arrested despite the beach crawling with police for the last few months.

      The ABC is seething because

      The ABC understands the attack in Bondi shortly after midnight was motivated by jealousy over a girlfriend. Despite this, police are still describing the offenders with reference to their race.

      Maybe that’s because whatever the motivation for the fight was, it’s only gangs of Lebanese Muslims who seem to walk around beachside suburbs with knives, or return with carloads of mates for revenge attacks.

      Just a thought…

      Back on topic, Michelle Malkin has protest photos which will frighten the hell out of you – they’re in London.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 02 03 at 11:36 PM • permalink


    1. Apparently the Muhammedists have never heard of that quaint little saying “if you lay down with dogs, expect to get fleas.”

      Their outrage would evoke some sympathy if I hadnt spent time since September 11, 2001 waiting for the “peaceful” Muslims to roundly condemn the jihadists for corrupting the “peaceful” language of the Koran.  Instead, I see limp-wristed attempts to deflect the debate into yet another sneer of “well, the west deserves it.”

      Here’s to seeing the Anglosphere’s continued application of flea powder.

      Posted by Sharon_Ferguson on 2006 02 03 at 11:43 PM • permalink


    1. Oh, and just so I get all the double standards rules straight in the newly-dhimmified West:

      No depictions of the ‘prophet.’ No movies, plays or statements critical of Islam or calling attention to its addiction to violence.  No questioning the import of its loopy ‘legal system’ into the heart of a tolerant and accommodating West it nevertheless despises.  No porcine statuary.  No presence of other religions in Muslim countries.  Endless accommodation of intolerance in the name of tolerance.  Endless ginned-up excuses for butchery.

      And all of this madness enabled by flaccid elites in the West who believe they’re entitled to lead the rest of us.

      Right.  Got it.

      Anti-Muslim backlash, my ass.

      Posted by cosmo on 2006 02 03 at 11:47 PM • permalink


    1. LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – A conservative advocacy group that urged a boycott of NBC’s recently canceled drama about a pill-popping priest turned its wrath on Thursday to an upcoming “Will & Grace” episode that it says will mock Christ’s crucifixion.

      Different flavor of the same freakin’ ice cream.

      Posted by Stew on 2006 02 03 at 11:51 PM • permalink


    1. #29 JIC, who are these mainstream Muslims that just can’t seem to condemn the extremists? OOPS, there they are waving those “Massacre The Infidel” shown signs on the LGF and Michelle Malkin websites. Very Expressive of Muslim mainstream thoughts, such as “Next 9/11 for you, Europe” I don’t need to be told that child-suicide bombings, airplane hijackings, beheadings, drinking the blood of murdered enemies (read up on Black September), kidnapping and other mainstream Muslim activities do not constitue good PR. What I would like the mainstream Muslims to tell me is why, if they are so offended by western rules of behavior, why they don’t simply return to their lands? I see this stampede of Muslims from Arab lands to western countries(I don’t see a corresponding stampede of westerners to Arab lands, just a few hard up female twits wooing Arabs with their potential for being hostages), and the stampede is growing wilder. How come? (BTW,over 1000 Egyptians died when a leaky ferry sank, one that is reported as being overloaded and not seaworthy, and these jackasses are rioting over a caroon.)

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 04 at 12:01 AM • permalink


    1. I was afraid I’d have to explain the ironic similarities in the Reuters story and the problem the Muslim/cartoon thing.  Guess we need another topic, eh?

      Posted by Stew on 2006 02 04 at 12:03 AM • permalink


    1. #41, Stew cannot see the difference between a peaceful boycott and the burning down of churches and threats of murder (and the committing of the same.) The Evangelicals have the right, as do the Muslims, to boycott whatever they want to for whatever reason. But you will not see the Evangelicals invading the NBC studios with AK hardware, shooting up everything in sight, kidnapping the producer and the staff,(the Muslims have kidnapped a number of foreigners already) threatening mayhem, and on and on. Stew, you only prove the old adage, whatever ugly, barbaric outrages the Muslims perform, there will always be a leftoid crawl outof the liberal’s fever swamps to make excuses for beasts.

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 04 at 12:11 AM • permalink


    1. Brian (3).

      Nobody was really bothered by the Christ image in France because we left that stuff behind us during the reformation, about 400 years ago.  Muslims count their years from the death of Mo, about 400AD in our timeframe.  In other words they are just confirming what Western civilization already knows – they are still stuck in a mediaeval time warp.

      Give them 400 years an they might grow up, maybe ?

      Posted by Rainbow on 2006 02 04 at 12:13 AM • permalink


    1. Not realy, Stew 11:51.  The advocacy groups are rarely effective (they’re ignored if the show is financially successful), they aren’t threatening (or conducting) violence and they aren’t calling for the obliteration of those they have issues with.

      One is an ice cream flavor most people don’t care for and can refuse to eat.  The other is mixed with dog shit and being shoved down our collective throats.  I don’t see the similarity.

      At all.

      Posted by cosmo on 2006 02 04 at 12:13 AM • permalink


    1. Stats, there are plenty of Muslims in the western world who are not seen “waving those “Massacre The Infidel” shown signs on the LGF and Michelle Malkin websites”, who do abide by the rules and standards of the countries they are citizens or residents of.  I’m not talking about “mainstream Muslims” like CAIR, I’m talking about actual mainstream Muslims.

      What bugs me is their refusal to condemn those who wave the signs you mentioned, or to fully condemn those who commit terrorist acts in the name of Islam.

      Posted by jic on 2006 02 04 at 12:16 AM • permalink


    1. #41,44. Reuters Huh? ‘Fraid you’d have explain the irony of the Reuters’ story, huh? We don’t get it, huh? What the hell are you mumbling about? Explain to us lower order beings, please, the irony you obtain from the major dhimmitude news service (aside from AP and Al JAZZ) in the world.

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 04 at 12:17 AM • permalink


    1. Stew:  If the Muslims we are talking about behaved like the Christians you are talking about, this thread wouldn’t exist.  And the Christians who do behave like the Muslims we are talking about are usually overwhelmingly condemned by most other Christians.

      Posted by jic on 2006 02 04 at 12:21 AM • permalink


    1. #47JIC, Asdide from an occassional brilliant exposition from a sane Muslim in the Wall Stree Journal or The Weekly Standard, these mainstream Muslims are invisible. How can I know they exist if they are not heard, seen, smelled, etc. The physicists had a theory that there was something called the ether which could not be seen, heard, had no odor, no color, no mass, no energy. Big Surprise. Einstein showed that it did not exist. Of course, it didn’t, by definition. Could this be true of “mainstream Muslims” as well?

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 04 at 12:24 AM • permalink


    1. Anybody else notice that those protest signs all have the same handwriting?

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 02 04 at 12:25 AM • permalink


    1. #34, MarkL.  You’re scaring me.

      At least this cartoon kerfuffle has finally exposed the lie:  it’s all about Iraq/oil/Bush.  I hope some eyes are opening now.

      As for the Muslims, I’ve come to the conclusion that they are idolators.  I thought Islam was all about worship of Allah, the One God.  Instead, they worship Mohammed and the Koran as if the man and the book were equal in reverence to God.  Idolators and hypocrits, I say.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 02 04 at 12:25 AM • permalink


    1. #51, Treacher.  I hate to say it, but some of those signs look photoshopped.  Either that, or the Acme-Palestine Sign Shoppe is churning them out big time.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 02 04 at 12:30 AM • permalink


    1. Asdide from an occassional brilliant exposition from a sane Muslim in the Wall Stree Journal or The Weekly Standard, these mainstream Muslims are invisible.

      That’s my point:  By not condemning extremists, in fact by using fear of extremists so help push their point of view, they essentially make themselves invisible.  I was criticising them for being self-serving.

      Posted by jic on 2006 02 04 at 12:32 AM • permalink


    1. I hope the Australian Immigration Department are watching the news very closely . These rabid Muslims need to be kept right out of OZ. We have far more of them than is healthy now.
      Send the lot back.

      Posted by waussie on 2006 02 04 at 12:36 AM • permalink


    1. Have met a lot of quite pleasant Musims over the years. Christmas islanders being among the best.

      The koran is a desert survival guide, as follows.

      a: Keep quiet and breed.
      b: Massacre, convert and enslave the host.
      c: Repeat

      Nothing flash or amazing about its spread If you lived where your every move was monitored by your family, society, police, strangers, anyone, youd probably buckle under as well.
      The Islamic religion is made to be all-encompassing. There should be nothing outside of it required or desired by its adherants. Anyone less devout than you should be monitered and/ostracised/or/ punished.
      The most common insult thrown at Muslin detention officers or people who wouldnt toe a troublemakers line was allways ” You are a bad muslim”..
      It means that the group is allways having their credentials questioned by the most fanatical.
      Mark L, you might be right but one rather hopes not. Would be lovely to have a government anywhere just come out and say, “If any Muslim group commits an act of terrorism bad enough we will nuke Mecca”. No ifs, buts, or maybes.
      The bluff will be called, and if its not a bluff then what advantage is it to western democracies to put off this apparent “clash of cultures?” Hope that the arab world will will reform itself?

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 02 04 at 12:41 AM • permalink


    1. More and more, I am seeing the religion of Islam as a five year old child, constantly crying “They’re picking on me!!”.

      Grow up, ROP.

      Posted by rinardman on 2006 02 04 at 12:45 AM • permalink


    1. Ok theyve hit the “stamping my feet” level of anger.
      How long before they get to the “holding my breath until I die, then you will be sorry” stage?

      I think thats next in the “Big bumper book of 5 year olds tactics”

      Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2006 02 04 at 12:57 AM • permalink


    1. #55 – Is that you Darp? or is you Mushtaq Heidelbugger?

      Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 04 at 12:59 AM • permalink


    1. #51 #53

      It doesn’t matter if the signs were mass produced, or came from a single source. What’s not in dispute, is that numerous people were holding them, and therefore agreed with them.

      For what it’s worth however, I give Malkin enough credit to verify the images’ authenticity for as a right wing blogger, she’d be skeptical of such things in case she’s set up.

      JIC, the scenario you raise is captured beautifully by this cartoon which also appears in this collection. There’s only so long the passive majority can do nothing, before the questions get asked:
      1) Why, if they are the majority, are they doing nothing or

      2) Are they really the majority?

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 02 04 at 01:01 AM • permalink


    1. jic.  Who took an axe to a gay bar and hacked up the queers?  I agree we’re better off, but I say the similarities and differences are in degrees.

      Posted by Stew on 2006 02 04 at 01:04 AM • permalink


    1. While Christianity and Judaism in history have produced their share of zealots and apostles of violence, it has always been possible to return to the original texts of these religions and argue that the violent ones were wrong, and that their acts were departures from God’s will; i.e., the Old and New Testaments offer abundant moral examples of, and direct calls for, charity and forgiveness. It would be interesting to see whether the Koran includes any calls for charity, at all. The Catholic liturgy includes a prayer for the conversion of sinners. Islam does not have a liturgy, per se, but one wonders: are Muslims ever exhorted by their imams simply to pray for the peaceful conversion of infidels, as opposed to slaughtering them, or converting them at the point of a sword? I have a very vague recollection of reading somewhere that mercy and forgiveness have little more than a “walk on” role in the Koran. However, this is an area in which I can pretend to no expertise, and I may well be wrong.

      Posted by paco on 2006 02 04 at 01:14 AM • permalink


    1. Has anyone read this piece by “military expert” William Lind? I just found this conversation platform, and you’re a lively bunch.  Thought it not completely off the subject, so let’s hear what you think?

      Wars, most wars at least, run not evenly but in fits and starts, settling down into sputtering Sitzkrieg for long intervals, then suddenly shooting out wildly in wholly unpredicted directions. The war in Iraq has fallen into a set pattern for long enough that we should be expecting something new. I can identify three factors – there may be more – which could lead to some dramatic changes, soon.

      1. Osama bin Laden’s latest message. Most observers, including the White House, seem to have missed its significance. In it, bin Laden offered us a truce (an offer we should have accepted, if only to attempt to seize the moral high ground). The Koran requires Moslems to offer such a truce before they attack. The fact that bin Laden himself made the offer, after a long silence, suggests al Qaeda attaches high importance to it.

      Why? My guess is because they plan a major new attack in the U.S. soon. I would be surprised if the plan were for something smaller than 9/11, because that could send the message that al Qaeda’s capabilities had diminished. Could this be “the big one,” the suitcase nuke that most counter-terrorism experts expect somewhere, sometime? That would certainly justify, perhaps require, a truce offer from Osama himself. Of course, al Qaeda’s plan may fail, and it may be for an action less powerful than setting off a nuke on American soil. But the fact that Osama made a truce offer should have set off alarm bells in Washington. So far, from what I can see, it hasn’t.

      2. In Iraq, Shiite country is turning nasty. The Brits are finding themselves up against Shiite militias around Basra. Muqtada al Sadr has made it clear he is spoiling for another go at the Americans, saying his militia would respond to any attack on Iran. In Baghdad, the Shiites who run things are finding American interference increasingly inconvenient. We are now talking to at least some Sunni insurgents, as we should be, but that means our utility to the Shiites as unpaid Hessians is diminishing. Put it all together and it suggests the improbable Yankee-Shiite honeymoon may soon end. When it does, our lines of supply and communication through southern Iraq to Kuwait will be up for grabs.

      3. We are moving towards war with Iran. Our diplomatic efforts on the question of Iranian nuclear research and reprocessing are obviously designed to fail, in order to clear the boards for military action. It will probably come in the form of Israeli air strikes on Iran, which, as the Iranians well know, cannot be carried out without American approval and support.

      In Israel, it was Sharon who repeatedly refused the Israeli generals’ requests for air strikes; he is now out of the picture. His replacement, Olmert, is weak. The victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections gave Olmert’s main opponent, Likud’s Netanyahu, a big boost. How could Olmert best show the Israeli electorate he is as tough as Netanyahu? Obviously, by hitting Iran before Israel’s elections in late March.

      In Washington, the same brilliant crowd who said invading Iraq would be a cakewalk is still in power. While a few prominent neo-cons have left the limelight, others remain highly influential behind the scenes. For them, the question is not whether to attack Iran (and Syria), but when. Their answer will be the same as Israel’s.

      Washington will assume Iran will respond with some air and missile strikes of its own. Those may occur, but Iran has far more effective ways of replying. It can shut down its own oil exports and, with mining and naval action, those of Kuwait and the Gulf States as well. It can ramp up the guerilla wars both in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

      It could also do something that would come as a total surprise to Washington and cross the Iran-Iraq border with four to six divisions, simply rolling up the American army of occupation in Iraq. Syria might well join in, knowing that it is only a question of time before it is attacked anyway. We have no field army in Iraq at this point; our troops are dispersed fighting insurgents. A couple dozen Scuds on the Green Zone would decapitate our leadership (possibly to our benefit). Yes, our air power would be a problem, but only until the Iranians got in close. Bad weather could provide enough cover for that. So could the Iranian and Syrian air forces, so long as they were willing to expend themselves. Our Air Force can be counted on to fight the air battle first.

      As I said, when a war has been stuck in a rut for a long time, thoughtful observers should expect some dramatic change or changes. Any one of these possibilities would deliver that; together, they could give us a whole different situation, one in which our current slow defeat would accelerate sharply.

      Beware the ides of March.

      Posted by Stew on 2006 02 04 at 01:15 AM • permalink


    1. #61 – Y’know, you’re right. I’m mighty fearful of those Seventh Day Adventists that live near me – they meet to worship on a Saturday when most normal people are trying to mow the lawn! can you imagine that?
      I also had a near miss with two Mormons who knocked at my door and asked to bless my house – I was afeared I tell you! I thought it was a home invasion Jesus style! Who are they trying to fool with those suits and ties? NOBODY!1
      And that was before one of them tried to take out my eye with a pamphlet he thrust at me!

      Posted by Lucky Nutsacks on 2006 02 04 at 01:17 AM • permalink


    1. Silent Running has a fine selection of further outrage provokers (Mohammed: I’m loving it) together with a smorgasbord (Scandinavian term) of cartoons from the Muslim-world press that provoked no outrage at all from Jews—why, not even one car was burned.

      Posted by arrowhead ripper on 2006 02 04 at 01:19 AM • permalink


    1. Dan Lewis:  Thanks for that, it is now my desktop background.

      Stew: who did take an axe to the gay bar and hack up the queers?  And how the hell does that prove your point?

      Posted by jic on 2006 02 04 at 01:22 AM • permalink


    1. Silent Running links to a Dutch site that’s having a lot of fun with FotoF*#k.

      Posted by arrowhead ripper on 2006 02 04 at 01:23 AM • permalink


    1. They only country in Europe to successfully prevent their Jewish citizens from being rounded up by the Nazis was Denmark.
      When the Nazi came to round up the Jews the Danes united to stop it from
      I think this time we owe it to the Danes to stand with them.  If every country printed the pictures, the Muslims would have to boycott everyone.
      If we loose this battle, there will be no stopping them next time when they will be outraged because women are walking around publicly showing their faces.

      Posted by Melanie on 2006 02 04 at 01:31 AM • permalink


    1. William Lind

      Dumber than dirt stew.

      Posted by guinsPen on 2006 02 04 at 01:32 AM • permalink


    1. #63: Never heard of him, but the knee-jerk, disparaging reference to neocons, and the flat (and untrue) assertion that Bush’s advisers (either past or present) thought that the war in Iraq would be a “cakewalk”, do not exactly boost my confidence in his “expertise”.

      Posted by paco on 2006 02 04 at 01:34 AM • permalink


    1. By the way stew, why not just link to the article?

      Posted by jic on 2006 02 04 at 01:37 AM • permalink


    1. #63.  Sounds like the usual doomsaying to me.  As in, please let it be true so I’ll be right for once.

      Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 02 04 at 01:46 AM • permalink


    1. Stew, the suspect in the Boston gay bar slayings appears to be a neo-nazi.  I guess that send your lame-ass attempt at equivalence between muslims and christians into the toilet.

      Latest Boston Globe stroy

      Posted by David Crawford on 2006 02 04 at 01:52 AM • permalink


    1. Lind is apparently a Buchananite – what, in the U.S., is known as a “paleoconservative”. Here is an example of Lind’s prescience, called “Little Stalingrad”.

      Posted by paco on 2006 02 04 at 01:55 AM • permalink


    1. Sorry, that link doesn’t seem to work, but you can google the story. The essence of it is that Fallujah was the new Stalingrad, and that American forces would most likely meet the same fate as the Germans. Not quite how it turned out, as I recall.

      Posted by paco on 2006 02 04 at 01:59 AM • permalink


    1. Maybe this one will work

      Posted by paco on 2006 02 04 at 02:05 AM • permalink


    1. Here’s a site with lots of images of Mohammed created by Muslims.  Some show his face. Some depict him with a veil over his face.

      Posted by Janice on 2006 02 04 at 02:20 AM • permalink


    1. Not too many Palestinians appear to be in the mainstream muslim group or they wouldn’a voted democratically holus bolus for Hamas.
      More importantly TWO FAIRFAX papers in NEW ZEALAND printed these cartoons.How game and uncharacteristic is that.Sounds like the media is beginning to catch on at last when it affects them.
      However that won’t save them -too microscopically little and an aeon too late.
      Yeah as above-those fundamentalist cycling god botherers could certainly put a spoke in
      somebody’s wheel…
      Lastly,when I heard the Bondi incident on ABC they just said mysteriously six men fought six other men on the beachfront and some were stabbed.
      In abc/sbs code if it’s not a racist crime then the perps aren’t white. It’s irrelevant if they are two different non -white races beating each other to a pulp.It ain’t racist.Like Austrayans keep getting blamed for being racist at the cricket (and slagging off Murali is not on at all it is absolutely wrong) but it’s not your average Aussie but white SAfricans who have to learn very quickly if they settle here that even neocons -specially neocons- would not do that and Strayans speak Strine not afrikkaans….

      Posted by crash on 2006 02 04 at 02:43 AM • permalink


    1. Got your goat SDD..?

      Posted by crash on 2006 02 04 at 02:44 AM • permalink


    1. here’s an interesting link to the Author of the marriage of figaro, showing nothing has changed in the last 300 years. Not quite, of course, because what has changed is that we keep erasing it out of our history books and are shocked and surprised therefore when it occurs.
      Pierre-Augustin Caron de Beaumarchais’ 1784 stage comedy Marriage of Figaro (adapted by Mozart for the great opera)

      Posted by davo on 2006 02 04 at 03:16 AM • permalink


    1. I am offended at Muslim’s offence of these cartoon’s. Instead of declaring WW3, as is their want,I propose enlisting cartoonist’s as front line troops in this war against a lack of perspective. Mohammed needs a good looking at.

      Current Aussie cartoonist’s can stay hiding under their commie beds.
      We need a whole new generation of cartoonist’s.

      Posted by gubbaboy on 2006 02 04 at 03:22 AM • permalink


    1. “No; that would require two civilisations.”

      Careful, Tim. You’re starting to sound like that nutcase Jericho.

      Posted by Mike Jericho on 2006 02 04 at 03:29 AM • permalink


    1. I just saw on a German news program one of the followers of the religion of “peace” waving a placard that said: BUTCHER THOSE THAT MOCK ISLAM!

      And peace be with you too brother!

      Posted by Brian on 2006 02 04 at 03:43 AM • permalink


    1. i wonder what adolf would have thought about all this and what his final solution would be??

      Posted by vinny on 2006 02 04 at 03:44 AM • permalink


    1. Re: #78,

      Yeah Crash, don’t you just love that code???
      It only qualifies as a race crime when the attacker is white!

      Whenever I hear the phrase racial attack on the ABC or SBS, I can work out the colour scheme without anymore information.

      Posted by Brian on 2006 02 04 at 03:51 AM • permalink


    1. British Moslems tell Europeans to:  TAKE A LESSON FROM 9/11!

      Posted by Brian on 2006 02 04 at 04:15 AM • permalink


    1. OK you British infeedel dogs, BE PREPARED FOR THE REAL HOLOCAUST!

      Why do I get the feeling that all of these signs – in the same handwriting – were prepared for the protestors by some British Leftist group?

      Posted by Spiny Norman on 2006 02 04 at 04:26 AM • permalink


    1. Regarding ‘those’ placards:

      Here’s a News photo at Yahoo in case anyone doubts its authenticity.

      Charles Johnson also has a cute parody.

      Posted by Dan Lewis on 2006 02 04 at 04:44 AM • permalink



    1. One point of issue Crash (agree with everything else)

      Heckling Murali is not wrong because he is obviously a chucker. Hence, he is cheating and has been allowed to get away with it because of a combination of racial sensitivity and the desire to see a cricket minnow like Sri Lanka do well.

      It would be wrong if Murali was being heckled on racial grounds but the heckling is all to do with warranted scepticism over the legality of his bowling action (despite the biomechanic tests which I am also sceptical about).

      Sorry for this OT interlude. Normal programming can now recommence.

      Posted by Francis H on 2006 02 04 at 05:05 AM • permalink


    1. I’ve not read all the comments yet, but I think that this is a remarkably apt picture of the msn and western dhimmification. (Is that a word?)

      Posted by Nilknarf Arbed on 2006 02 04 at 05:27 AM • permalink


    1. #90 Francis H:

      Murali is within 15 degrees or percent or something, so he’s now legal.  Hmmm… As per the “Australian” racist taunts at the South Africans cricketers, it appears the language has come from the large expatriate population in Perth who can speak Afrikaans.  They’re fucking South Africans.  Why are Australians now getting the rough end of the pineapple again?

      Why do so many MSM scribes want to keep putting the boot in?

      Posted by Stevo on 2006 02 04 at 09:15 AM • permalink


    1. #51 Anybody else notice that those protest signs all have the same handwriting?—Posted by Jim Treacher

      What?  You mean written by one hardworking person who was only following orders?  Who was given exactly one almost empty magic marker and a thousand cardboard placards?  At the last freaking minute!

      I really think you’re mistaken on that Jim.

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 02 04 at 10:34 AM • permalink


    1. And by the way, I’m not a cartoonist.  I do water colors.  So please be kind when you critique those cartoons.  They have artistic merit.  Of course some of you wouldn’t know art is he bit you on your arse.

      Posted by wronwright on 2006 02 04 at 10:36 AM • permalink


    1. 68

      If we loose this battle,

      Somebody’s been hanging out at Mushtaq’s house long enough to pick up some bad habits.

      Oh honestly!  I object to the objectification of goats as if we they were mere sexual playthings, with NO attention whatsoEVER paid to our their scintillating intellects and insoucient demeanors!  You sexist pig.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 04 at 12:19 PM • permalink


    1. Word of the day:  Fucktard.

      As in:  Stew, you are an ignorant fucktard.  Asking viewers to boycott a tv show is nothing like threatening a new holocaust, shooting up a studio, killing a movie director,  starting a riot, or burning cheese. “Daniel”was cancelled because no one felt like watching it, not because Christians wielded their mighty censorship power and yanked it.

      We get to see Jesus lusting after Mary Magdalene, and Scorcese not only isn’t stabbed in the street, he’s respected and admired.  We get to read that Jesus and MaryM had a kid, and not only is Dan Brown not fatwa’ed by the Pope, he makes a bazillion bucks.  We get a crucifix in urine and a Virgin Mary covered in dung and porn, and nobody dies!  Or is even threatened with death!  And no cheese is harmed!

      Meanwhile, the suggestion that Mohammed might select a wife from a bevy of beauties causes riots and death and the writer going into hiding; the implication of Islam as a cohort of spousal abuse causes the director to be stabbed to death in the street by a Muslim; cartoons depicting Mo in a non-Islamic country (no less!) cause riots, threats, violence, and the mutilation and carbonization of harmless, delicious cheese.

      Stew, grow a fucking brain before you parade your asstwittery here again, you suckhole loser.

      Posted by ushie on 2006 02 04 at 03:51 PM • permalink


    1. Stew: If you had bothered to have read the Globe story on the homosexual bashing, you would have realized at once that it was a Muslim who wielded the axe. After all, which religion has a policy of decapitating Homosexuals or cutting off their stones? Guess. The Methodists, the Mormons, the Catholics, the Jews, the Episcopalians-Yes, you guessed it! The Muslims!!! Yes, the Nazis too, but their not Judeo-Christains. Which of these groups practices genital circumcision? Right again. The Muslies!!! Which group regards a wife (wives) as chattel. Oh, you’re right again, you’re getting good. The Mulies!! Which group believes in child-suicide bombing sacrifice. Right on. The Muslies!!! Do you see a pattern here Stew? Of course you don’t. Which group will condone and excuse any outrage performed by the Mulies? Why, Stew, the one you belong to, the delusional anti-semetic liberal western hypocrites, liars, sneerers who can’t put two thoughts together.

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 04 at 05:42 PM • permalink


    1. And people wonder why Tim’s commenters have reputations as attack dogs….

      Posted by CB on 2006 02 04 at 06:16 PM • permalink


    1. CB, Perhaps it’s just a low patience level with the wilfully blind, and self-deluding?

      I like this place because it is robust, non-PC, and people say what they bloody well think. But then, I am old enough to remember the original name of policial correctness – hypocrisy….


      Posted by MarkL on 2006 02 04 at 06:39 PM • permalink


    1. Nah Mark, the original name of political correctness was partinost.  That’s a Russian term for what we might call “partyness” or absolute devotion to whatever line the Communist Party laid down.  PC originated as a term of approbation among Commie sympathizers and CP members in the 1930s.  The politically correct person hewed the party line exactly.  We are at war with Eastasia, and we have always been at war with Eastasia.

      Of course hypoicrisy is an excellent description of the actual application of PC in today’s world.

      Posted by Michael Lonie on 2006 02 04 at 10:00 PM • permalink


    1. #23

      Don’t forget the flag burning which is very popular

      Where do they get all those Danish flags from? Are they for sale in all towns in all Muslim countries?

      Or are those “spontaneous demonstrations” well-prepared? Like the “spontaneous” demonstrations in Paris.

      Posted by jorgen on 2006 02 05 at 03:49 AM • permalink


    1. It doesn’t matter if the signs were mass produced, or came from a single source.

      The more I look at this thing, the more stage-managed it seems. And that matters.

      Posted by Jim Treacher on 2006 02 05 at 06:34 AM • permalink


    1. #98 CB- Old Sayimg From the Effete French (roughly translated) “How savage this dog! It defends itself when attacked!”
      (By the way CB, why not stick to the subject and answer the questions posed in #97 instead of offering gratuitous remarks?)

      Posted by stats on 2006 02 05 at 09:51 AM • permalink


    1. Yeah!  To heck with those darn gratuitous remarks!  They’re terrible!  Nobody here makes those, so you should feel bad for making them.  Those gratuitous remarks, I mean.
      Gosh I ‘m glad I’m not like that.

      Posted by Stoop Davy Dave on 2006 02 05 at 10:11 AM • permalink


    1. #98:  Woof.

      Posted by ushie on 2006 02 05 at 01:55 PM • permalink


    1. “military expert” Lind?

      4 to 6 divisions of dead Iranians he must mean.  Did this “expert” ever hear of airplanes?

      Posted by Bob from Ohio on 2006 02 06 at 02:05 PM • permalink


Page 1 of 1 pages