Issue of Holy Prophet MUHAMMAD (PBUH) cartoon

[xpcommon]

Anger grows over Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) cartoon

Protests have spread across the Muslim world over the publication in Europe of cartoons of the Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) . The drawings, first printed in Denmark,
sparked a fresh row when they were re-run in several newspapers including jangandjeo, leading to the sacking of a French editor.

Palestinian gunmen briefly surrounded EU offices in Gaza to demand an apology over the cartoons. Hundreds of students demonstrated in the Pakistani cities of Lahore and Multan, burning flags and effigies of the Danish prime minister.

EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson also criticised the European papers which re-ran the cartoons, saying they were "throwing petrol onto the flames of the original issue and the original offence that was taken".

The row intensified on Wednesday when France Soir, alongside the 12 original cartoons, printed a new drawing on its front page showing Buddhist, Jewish,
Muslim and Christian holy figures sitting on a cloud, with the caption "Don't worry Muhammad, we've all been caricatured here.

France Soir's editor, Jacques Lefranc, was dismissed by the paper's French-Egyptian owner in response to criticism from Muslim groups. The paper had apologised a day earlier for causing offence to Muslims, although it maintained it was legal under
Danish law to print the cartoons.

[milanocapitale]

I cannot understand why people can say EVERYTHING about christians and when someone says something little(or in this case too) about muslims there is a strong reaction...

[lazza]

I find it very depressing

Freedom of speech is the one of the most important assets of humanity. OK, not everyone will agree with the things people say, and some people may be offended, but as long as nobody is actually harmed, then anything is acceptable. So much so, the vociferous protests by Muslims are as acceptable as the original images. But if it turns to death threats, violence, and forced apologies then it has gone to far.

If we become afraid to voice our opinions or to publish our thoughts, then we are on a very sad trajectory downwards....

As a famous British comedian said (about the UK government's attempts to introduce an parliamentary act to ban "incitement of religious hatred"), "People are offended? So fucking what!"

[Klazu]

I find this a very ridiculous issue. They were CARTOONS! Come on, what's the big deal? I laugh at those who find something like that offensive...

[alex77r]

The related pictures can be found here :
http://permanent.nouvelobs.com/medias/20060202.OBS4859.html

This topic should be moved to "Europe-Board" Forum

[milanocapitale]

the picture are nice!It demonstrate that their religion is not ready to become a religion for people and their chief want a people of "narrow minded" followers...that's a pity, europe needs open minded muslims!

[Dakkus]

I don't think saying "We are sorry for hurting your feelings" would really be a very hard thing to do.. The Danes shouldn't say "We are sorry for doing this and will never do it again", since that would be against the freedom of press.

But what about instead of apologizing the pictures theirselves apologizing about the caused bad feelings, instead? Maybe it's now too late to do it stylishly. They will eventually have to either let the bad feelings keep existing, giving the islamic arabs even worse picture of us or they will have to apologize drawing the pictures in the first place. Both of these possiblities would be a huge shame.

I really can't understand at all the political reasons for not doing so. There has to be some reason the Danes are holding to that statement of theirs, that is heard as "you fuckers" in islamic ears.

I also consider the christians saying this is about freedom of speech quite a bunch of hypocrates. Would they accept a picture with Hitler giving flowers to a little aryan girl and being a nice guy and all that stuff? That would be very groase and unacceptable, but possibly a person from a culture that hasn't lived through WWII might not understand the strong feelings we have about it. And indeed should the newspaper (and if the situation escalated this far, also the country where the newspaper is written in) apologize for the victims of the WWII for that.
Then imagine the most important newspaper of some country printing several pictures of a guy looking like Jesus having sex with a pig, murdering people thinking differently and stuff like that. With a lot of crosses around him and the picture being drawn without even trying to make it look non-provocative.

I find it very hard to believe stuff like that could be accepted. The Europeans should understand that what Jyllands Post has drawn is in islamic eyes as groase as these examples of mine would be in our eyes. There are taboos everywhere. They are a bad thing, but still respecting them can be a good idea in diplomatic affairs.

The Danes should have apologized about the caused bad feelings a long time ago. There's no reason not to do that. The middle finger these pictures show to the Middle-East will give such a bad picture of the whole Europe in the eyes of the islamistic people, that I believe that will add to the other reasons or reason-like things for bombing us. And therefore I find it quite likely that somewhere in Europe at least 10 people, possibly a lot more, will die partially because of the Danish morons not apologizing for anything at all.

I am not buying Danish products.

[tabbs]

I also consider the christians saying this is about freedom of speech quite a bunch of hypocrates.

It is not just Christians who consider this to be a case of freedom of opinion. Besides, I agree that some of those cartoons are, well, tasteless and insulting. So? Quite a few satirical texts and cartoons that deal with Christianity in some way will probably be considered tasteless and insulting by Catholics or Protestants. However - and this is the main problem I have with the reactions from Islamic countries and Muslims elsewhere - the hatred and violence that followed is exactly what was expressed by the "Mohammed with the dynamite" cartoon which may be the most offensive one.

When a weekly newspaper in Jordan(!) published three of the cartoons, I was positively surprised - particularly by the accompanying editorial: "Muslims of the world, be reasonable," (...) "What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in front of the cameras or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony in Amman?"
(quoted from the Int'l Herald Tribune)

How true, I thought, and also courageous. Well, shortly afterwards the editor was fired, and distribution of that issue was stopped. And the PR campaign that some Islamic governments now plan, to "correct" the image of Islam, won't work as long as some violent mob in Islamic countries does everything to reinforce the skepticism over here.

Christian

[Leonudio]

I think freedom of speech is very necessary in a civilizated country, but i respect they culture and religion, so if they don't like pictures i'm ok. But... what about us?? If we want to have freedom of speech why don't we can have it in our own countries?? They are every day talking about killing jews, USA, Europe... and we say nothing. Someone draw a joke and they start a war!! I think there is anything wrong here.

[BogPoet]

Dakkus, but what should they apologize for? For using the freedom we have in Europe? I find it pretty tasteless and racist to have the image of Muhammad with a bomb on the turbant, and that image should probably not have been printed but the fact that Islam does not permit seeing his prophet represented in print does not make it binding to non-Muslims. Are you saying America should have apologized to the Christian world for The Last Temptation of Christ or that Portugal should have apologized for The Gospel According to Jesus Christ? They're both very offensive to Christians, but yet they saw print because our society allows it. Why should it be any different with Islam? I honestly don't care about what the Islamic world thinks about these. We are not the Islamic world, we are Europe. If they don't like it, hard luck. This *is* about freedom of speech, whether you like it or not and that, to me, is much more important than diplomatic flirting.

And therefore I find it quite likely that somewhere in Europe at least 10 people, possibly a lot more, will die partially because of the Danish morons not apologizing for anything at all.

You're a step away from putting the blame of murder on editorial decisions. That's how fear begins. The only thing Denmark has to apologize is for printing a racist cartoon (of course, caricatures of Jews with pig noses or other fancy adornments like that are commonplace in Muslim newspapers - and yet no one apologizes). But, if someone dies, the blame is on extremist reactions - not your Danish "morons", I'm afraid.

I am not buying Danish products.

I couldn't disagree with you more. So, you're cutting off buying products made by Danish workers who are trying to make a living because one of the newspapers in the country printed something with which you do not agree? I really can't understand that.

[milanocapitale]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4682262.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/

cartoons against bombs...that's the wrong!
No christian put bombs under dan's brown home after his book-novel about some inventions about Jesus' life.
All the muslims can kill Saman Rushdie and going to Nirvana.
A man killed Theo Van Gogh for his movie.

If someone justify this have to explain me a bit because I am a bit lost

Dakkus, u are a radical and u boycott food and products and I like this way to see the world and your idealism but I think that in front of this type of reactions I'd go to say "I am a Dutchman" today.

[Dakkus]

I think freedom of speech is very necessary in a civilizated country, but i respect they culture and religion, so if they don't like pictures i'm ok. But... what about us?? If we want to have freedom of speech why don't we can have it in our own countries?? They are every day talking about killing jews, USA, Europe... and we say nothing. Someone draw a joke and they start a war!! I think there is anything wrong here.

I'm not saying those pictures shouldn't have been published. I think it was stupid, but in my opinion no one should force a newspaper to be quiet. A newspaper is independent and state shouldn't censor it. However, it is very stupid that if the islamistic people ask for some statement from the government, why must the government remain completely silent even when the case has emerged this far.
Why couldn't they say "We understand your bad feeling and want to make clear that this is not in any way the official opinion of the kingdom of Denmark"?
(Althought I said so, because I couldn't find any better English word when writing the text,) I don't think they should exactly apologize. But they should indeed do about anything else than just plain shut up. I can't understand the reasons behind staying completely quiet.

Then.. I'd like to speak a bit more about this "they" you are referring to.
Let me repeat again what you have said:

They are every day talking about killing jews, USA, Europe...

I am fairly sure that no more than 20% of islamistic people say that. And I believe even this number is far higher than the reality. It appears that you consider the whole islamistic world completely monolithic and refer to any thing any islamistic person has done as a thing done by this "they", the monolith consisting of every single islamistic person on this planet, thus blaming the 99% for what the 1% has said or done.
That thought is just plain wrong. The words uttered by one islamistic person represents the opinion of the whole group of islamistic people with the same logic my words represent the opinion of, say, the whole western civilization. (what an oxymoron..)
You can't say "they" in a meaning that is easily understood as "all of the people belonging to the group to which also this individual belongs" if you are referring to the thoughts or acts of an individual.

You also say that "they" start a war for a joke uttered by us.
This "they" simply has not been doing that. There is no war going on. There is a lot of frustrated anger in demonstrations, but no actual war. I can very well understand (no, I don't agree with it, but I do understand the point behind it) the feeling that we consider the islamistic people lower than ourselves. This act done by J.P. together with the inability of the Danish government to do anything before it's too late to do things stylishly has, in the eyes of the "islamistic world" (a.k.a. "they"), been another proof of use thinking only bad about the islamistic people.

Even if some people have said they'd like to have a nice little war about this, it very likely does not reflect the thoughts of the vast majority of islamistic people. There is an individual for every possible opinion. That means you can blame any big enough random group of people for absolutely anything, because you'll always find among them an individual with thoughts you absolutely have to disagree with.

However, even though it is important understanding most people want peace, it is just as well important understanding that this conflict is not about politics, but religion. Because islam has been insulted as a whole, it is indeed almost the whole religion that is angry about the pictures. And when there are a billion people very discontent, I fail to understand why Denmark must stay silent.
I great portion of world's human population has been made angry. And someone should indeed do something about it, not just babble about how the newspapers were right at what they did. That has become a nyance, the risen conflict has been bubbling under for a while and has now only found a way to show its existence.

[Dakkus]

Dakkus, but what should they apologize for?

My apologies, "to apologize" was far from being the best possible to use in this case. English not being my mother tongue I couldn't find the right word for that while writing that comment of mine. What should have been said is showing understanding of the bad feelings caused and very clearly stating that the opinion is of the newspaper, not of Denmark. The araic nations don't have a strong culture of indepence of press and this difference should have been made very clear very fast. A state can't tell a newspaper not to press something, but it can say "this is not how we think". And I figure Denmark not saying that could be interpreted as "we think exactly the way you have interpreted the meaning of the pictures published in this newspaper". It would also be important stating that the islamistic cry for their rights has been heard. Stating that "yes, we can see you're having a demonstration and don't consider it nonsense" can have a surprisingly strong effect.

And therefore I find it quite likely that somewhere in Europe at least 10 people, possibly a lot more, will die partially because of the Danish morons not apologizing for anything at all.

You're a step away from putting the blame of murder on editorial decisions.

No. I'm not even a step away, but actually /on/ blaming murder on political decisions in a religious matter. I am not blaming Jyllands Posten for anything else than being stupid. I am blaming the Danish government for giving one more reason that together with other reasons or "reasons" may cause a murder or several murders by letting the impression that J.P.'s thought represent the true thoughts of the Danish government gain fuel for its fire.

I am not buying Danish products.

I couldn't disagree with you more. So, you're cutting off buying products made by Danish workers who are trying to make a living because one of the newspapers in the country printed something with which you do not agree? I really can't understand that.

The reason for this boycott is not entirely in this case. It lays also in the subjective impression of mine, that the Danish government is bad and would be better changed. And I still keep to prferring products made in the EU. I just move the money a few hundred kilometers to some direction. Learning German or Swedish is not very hard for a Dane. If a dane has no work to do because the work has gone to Sweden and Germany because of bad decisions by the Danish government, then why not just migrate to Sweden or Germany? Even Merkel is better than that Schwarzenegger-looking moron of Denmark. But I want to make clear that this thought is only my own and does not represent the opinion of any group of people I could call "us".

[melitikus]

I am not buying Danish products.

Ohh thats a very extremist comment!! are you sure your not muslim yourself? if not than what is the point to stop buying Danish products? … Europe should not be submissive to these countries, Europe has it own culture and they have to accept it – its already enough that we are too tolerant towards their culture in our European countries whereas if you live in their countries you have to adopt to their culture otherwise you have no chance to survive;

They should show some tolerance towards us, towards our freedom of expression at least in our own countries – its already hard enough that some cities are not even decorating for Christmas just not to offend the muslims

This is one of the main reasons why I’m against that a big country like Turkey joins the EU – I see only trouble with that – simply because the European cultures and ‘muslim cultures’ are totally incompatible ..

[avij]

Boy I'm glad the Finnish newspapers haven't published those pictures.

This issue has gotten out of hand. I guess this could have been settled peacefully, but unfortunately there are some extremists who try to provoke anger against Danes. Consider this quote:

"Meanwhile, the Danish tabloid Extra Bladet got hold of a 43-page report that Danish Muslim leaders and imams, on a tour of the Islamic world are handing out to their contacts to "explain" how offensive the cartoons are. The report contains 15 pictures instead of 12. The first of the three additional pictures, which are of dismal quality, shows Muhammad as a pedophile deamon, the second shows the prophet with a pigsnout and the third depicts a praying Muslim being raped by a dog. Apparently, the 12 original pictures were not deemed bad enough to convince other Muslims that Muslims in Denmark are the victims of a campaign of religious hatred." [source, emphasis original]

Although I haven't seen the 3 extra cartoons, judging by the description they are clearly more provocative than the original dozen. I don't think this is the correct way to resolve the issue.