Daily Kos

Understanding Muslim Anger over the cartoon...

Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:39:00 PM PDT

Im sure most people have heard about or seen the cartoon that has shocked the Islamic world into outrage. I refuse to see it out of respect for the wishes of the islamic people. Normally I think anything is fair game, including cartoons of bad taste, but in a way I understand why muslims are outraged that the prophet mohammed's picture was even printed.
Islam is under attack by the liberal west. Believe it or not, George W Bush is very liberal compared to most Islamic leaders.One of the most appealing features of Islam is how it organizes one's life into simple tenets of their faith. In many ways, this is the goal of conservativism. Perhaps in american or western conservatism, there is more room for growth and potential for change. In Islam, changes happen very rarely, perhaps because there doesnt seem to be any necessity considering how fleeting life is in general. In a sense, liberals think beyond their own lives, and are more eager for revolution in this world.
 If you have ever been to a mosque, you'll find it is a very comforting place where you can sit and meditate and feel at peace with your simple life. All you have to do is follow some rituals, work hard, and glory will be yours in the next life. It is definately a contrast with my religion of hinduism, where the chaos of the universe all seems to find its way into our people,temples, statues, architecture, etc.  
As liberals or progressives, we are motivated to question or change our surroundings, and throw away ideas without MUCH hesitation. Most of us arent anarchists, we have certain rules of decency and boundries we wont cross. When we communicate through humor, progressives perhaps find that we can tolerate more of that bad taste than conservatives, who are much more easily offended. Thats why we are liberal, I wouldnt say we dont hold anything sacred, but we definately are less inclined to keep ourselves satiated with strict rules of which to adhere.
I dont agree with too much of anything that Amish people believe in, but if they want to drive around horse buggys and not use electricity, so be it. Although I have made an Amish joke in my lifetime, I recognize that its rude to make fun of someone when they are not laughing with you. Muslim's have had a very simple idea, that you never show the prophet Mohammed's face, and to blatantly disregard that, is rude also.
You might be saying, Islam get over yourself. We all make jokes about Jesus, Buddha, Vishnu, Jewish people, and printing the image of Mohammed is nothing.
Like I said islam is under attack from the west. The reason people in Iraq are not happy with the occupation, is because it is humiliating to them that anyone would find such an act of war necessary. In many ways I might argue that pluralistic democracy, equal rights, freedom of speech are necessary in any advanced culture, but those happen over time FROM WITHIN. There are definately some Islamic people who want to have no dialogue from the west, that would be dangerous for islam itself, because lets face it, some of our ideals are PROBABLY better. But no one is going to listen to you if you are patronizing, ridiculing, and glib to many of the things that Islam holds sacred. Islamic people who protest violently don't do themselves any favors, but their outrage is understandable. When they Burn effigies of Bush and Clinton, and scream death to America, these are the people who want to close the exchange of ideas between the west and the islamic world. Their fire is being fueled by indifference of the west toward their own cultural standards of decency. We as progressives can do the best thing possible, make sure we keep an open dialogue that fosters change in Islam, but at the same time RESPECT THEIR RIGHT TO BE CONSERVATIVE.
Poll

Have you ever been in a mosque?

56%32 votes
43%25 votes

| 57 votes | Vote | Results

Tags: mohammed cartoons, islamic relations (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 170 comments

  •  Respect my right to think some are batshit crazy (3.54 / 11)

    For BURNING AND HARMING PEOPLE over a cartoon that comments on the fact that the extremists BURN AND HARM PEOPLE. I will respect your right to apologize and make excuses for violence. OK?

    We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

    by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:42:15 PM PDT

    •  youre missing the point (none / 0)

      Its not even the message, the message of the cartoon is clouded by the fact that they used the forbidden image of mohammed. Of course they are going to be defensive and outraged, no matter what the intention of the comic was.
      •  YOU're missing the point (3.28 / 7)

        Civilized HUMAN BEINGS do not kill other civilized human beings over drawings.

        YOU are missing the point. These extremists need to be put in a time machine and transported back to the 5th century.

        Why the 5th...I just like the way it sounds so long ago.

        We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

        by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:48:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I said in the essay (none / 0)

          I dont excuse their violence, but I understand their outrage. Not every muslim in the crowd became violent, in fact their were relatively peaceful demonstrations in New Delhi.
          •  Their outrage is infantile (3.40 / 5)

            and inexcusable.

            Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

            by bumblebums on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:51:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  well (none / 0)

              You might describe a defense of the prophet mohammed as "infantile" but its really a rude slap in the face.
              •  That was a lame argument. (2.50 / 2)

                Jesus Fucking Mary would be a rude slap in the face, but as I said, one doesn't burn a person's house down and harm people over it. Get it together man...see what's happening.

                We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

                by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:57:29 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  i disagree (none / 0)

                  The image of mohammed to millions of people is just as offensive, and what is wrong with considering both JFM (I dont want to write it again) and an image of Mohammed as intolerable.
                  •  oh, and i'm sure (4.00 / 4)

                    those same offended masses throwing molotov cocktails are just as righteous when their newspapers print images of devil-jews killing babies. an iranian newspaper is sponsering a contest for the best 12 cartoons of the holocaust in retaliation for the danish cartoons. please explain how jews or the holocaust had anything to do with the danish cartoons? oh, i forgot, the jews are behind everything!

                    "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

                    by hoodoo meat bucket on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:14:24 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Is that every muslim? (none / 0)

                      I agree, there are definately inexcusable reactions to the situation, including violence, and eye for an eye tactics. But the real point is, should you publish images of mohammed, when even muslims find it sinful to do so? You want to outrage them, then tell them to stop being outraged?
                      •  if they buy the paper (none / 0)

                        then there must be a demand for such images. is it "every muslim" -- of course not, but neither is it some tiny, tucked away enclave of muslims. yes, there are very few terrorists (though more these days!) but plenty of supporters, sympathizers, empathizers, and ambivalents whom i'm sure make up a sizeable chunk of society and i'm also sure plenty of them buy newspapers with jew cartoons. how many of them cut them out and put them on their fridges next to the drawings by their kids, i don't know.

                        in answer to your query, no i don't particularly support outraging muslims. in fact, i support getting the fuck out of the region and having nothing to do with it ever again and i also  support inventing an engine that runs on water because that is by far the best way to say fuck you to the types that throw molotov cocktails because of a cartoon!

                        "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

                        by hoodoo meat bucket on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 04:41:56 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  Listen Desi...read carefully.... (none / 0)

                    Nothing is wrong with seeing both as intolerable....got it?

                    Violence because of it is INTOLERABLE.  Open your eyes and ears.

                    We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

                    by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:18:10 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  The scary thing... (none / 1)

                  is that if a US newspaper published a cartoon of Jesus fucking Mary, I bet a bunch of crazy Christian fundamentalists would resort to violence in the same way.  Maybe they wouldn't have the balls to do it in front of TV cameras, but I don't doubt it would happen.

                  The point should really be that if you CHOOSE to live in a country with free expression and open debate, then you need to learn when to ignore what offends you, or respond to it in kind.  A drawing should not beget violence, it should beget debate, or an opposing drawing, or something other than sticks and stones and fire.

            •  Yeah! (3.50 / 4)

              We need to invade their homes, kill their leaders, and convert them to secular humanism!!

              Seriously, you realize that's how all this stereotyping of THE ENTIRE ISLAMIC POPULATION with the tiny number of violent extremists is coming off, right?

              But hey, why try and understand or deal with on-the-ground realities when we can instead advance a strict ideological declaration of The Way Things Should Be and proceed from there.  We don't need to understand the appeal of Islam, and we can just dismiss their concerns or sources of anger as infantile, I'm sure they'll eventually come around THAT way.  That's exactly the kind of thinking that got us into Iraq, but I haven't seen many children pelting us with flower petals lately...

              Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

              by ChicagoDem on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:19:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  that tiny number of extremists (none / 1)

                just elected hamas by a majority!

                "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

                by hoodoo meat bucket on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:24:48 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Wow (4.00 / 2)

                  That's an Olympic level logical leap.  Y'know, Jonah Goldberg might be looking for some new staff writers, if you're interested in turning that kind of thing into a career.

                  Hamas is an expression of nationalist sentiment, and they gained power the same way extremists everywhere gained power: providing government services (security essentially, but also schools and infrastructure) when the more moderate political groups couldn't.  So first of all, "violent extremists" didn't elect Hamas, a majority of Palestinians did-- and mostly for reasons that had nothing to do with Israel.  Second of all, Palestine has jack shit to do with the efforts of a few Danes to openly insult their fellow citizens simply for being members of another faith.  And third of all, even if you DO erroneously believe that Hamas' election is somehow an indication that the majority of Palestinians are extremists, you're still only talking about one microscopic shred of the Muslim world.  A majority of a tiny minority is still a minority.

                  Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

                  by ChicagoDem on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:32:45 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I saw the editor of the Danish (none / 0)

                    paper who originally published the cartoons on c-span today.  They were published in the context of what is the price of freedom of speech and living in democratic counrties.  I don't think the paper was looking to just find the thing that might piss off the Muslims the most.  They were trying to make a point, like if someone printed parts of a klans-mens speech in the context of trying to say that all the free speech is not something we like to hear.

                    Whatever point the Muslim people may have had to say that it was an offensive cartoon(and it probably was)is overshadowed by their reaction.  

                    With the thousands and thousands of religions in the world there is no way in a free society we can all be completely respectful of everybodies religious customs.

                    Republicans need people to be stupid

                    by strengthof10kmen on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:58:15 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  yeah, i'm sure bushco agrees (none / 0)

                    with you plenty, bra.

                    "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

                    by hoodoo meat bucket on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 03:43:00 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  and what does that have to do (none / 1)

                  ..with the content of this post?

                  If you are consumed with the Hamas thingy take it to the next discussion on the ISR/Pal issue.

                  Hypocrisy in anything may deceive the cleverest and most penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it....

                  by Cal45 on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:32:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  And I say to you BE OUTRAGED, change viewpoints (none / 0)

            DON'T PERPETUATE THE STEREOTYPE. It's what you want right...understanding...well, it starts with the man in the mirror. I'm asking hom to change his ways. And no message could have been any clearer, if you want to make the world a better place take a look at yourself and make that...change.  Heh...Michael Jackson touches boys and now he lives in the middle east. That's just wrong.

            We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

            by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:55:56 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Question about Islam (none / 1)

        I'm not sure what your credentials are for understanding Islamic thought, but since you hold yourself out as someone who knows to some extent what they are thinking, I hope you can venture a theory about this:

        Why are Muslims enraged when non-Muslims violate their rule against idolatry? I understand the basic rule against idolatry since it is also found in Christianity. But what I gather from my Catholic unbringing is that it is sinful for me to make an idol, not for me to witness others making an idol. Why is it so offensive to Muslims to see non-Muslims engaging in what they consider sinful practices? A Christian might think a Muslim was sinful if he failed to accept Christ as his savior, but he wouldn't be personally offended or believe the Muslim was showing lack of respect for Christian beliefs. What's the difference between this situation and a non-believer making an image of Mohammed?

        •  Our forebears (none / 0)

          Islam as a religion is about 700 years younger than Christianity.  Seven hundred years ago, Christians were burning witches at the stake and switching from the Crusades to the Inquisition.  Feudal lords still had their ius primae noctae.  Should we expect a society that is in many ways still feudalistic wouldn't be in others?

          After all, our forebears were no great prize, either.  

          I'm glad I came out long ago - the closets are infested with Republicans these days.

          by grada3784 on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:50:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Forbidden by whom? (none / 0)

        Find me the legal authority that contravenes my First Amendment right to draw a cartoon of Mohammed. Not that I intend to draw one, but I reserve the right to do so.

        John McCain's Straight Talk Express runs on fossil fuels.

        by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 04:20:07 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  good (none / 0)

          Then I reserve the right to piss on your moms grave. Or make a Drawing of it. Look, certain things are offensive, and if you are indifferent to peoples beliefs, you are going to have consequences. Dont outrage them, and then tell them not to be outraged.
    •  So, That's NO, I DON'T WANT TO UNDERSTAND (4.00 / 2)

      I haven't even finished reading the diary, and from skimming it I think there's lots there with which I disagree.  But attitudes like yours are pretty much exactly the same as the people in the streets storming embassies and kidnapping westerners.  You don't like the xenophobia you see on TV?  Well bub, don't look in the mirror.

      The revolution will not be televised, but we'll analyze it to death at The Next Hurrah.

      by DHinMI on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:49:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  what makes me curious (none / 0)

      is the timing of all of this: that is, who exactly is instigating and inciting some of these supposedly impromptu attacks on European embassies (i.e. who is perhaps distributing the cartoon and pamphlets about it, in the hopes that normally anti-Bush Europeans will harden in their views towards the Muslim world generally)...

      see, for what it's worth:

      http://www.mosnews.com/...

      Russian Ultranationalist Leader Expects U.S. to Attack Iran in Late March

      "...He went on to add that the publication of Prophet Muhammad cartoons in the European press was a planned action by the U.S. whose aim is "to provoke a row between Europe and the Islamic world". "It will all end with European countries thanking the United States and paying, and giving soldiers," he said. Russia should "choose a position of non-interference and express minimal solidarity with the Islamic world", Zhirinovsky added..."  

      In other words, is the CIA or some such agency manipulating this situation to set the stage for sympathy on the part of liberals and Europeans towards more military action in the mideast...

      •  you figured it out! (none / 0)

        I knew the US was to blame somehow for Muslim extremists burning down European embassies.
        •  I assume you're being snarky (none / 0)

          but all I'm saying is that the instigation and incitement may have been encouraged by an outside agitating force:

          you understand the difference between instigation and actual action, correct?

          Of course there IS real etremist Muslim rage among a small minority of jihadis or fundamentalists or Koran literalists:

          no argument there.

          I am merely speculating (speculating, not insisting) that the U.S. would certainly seem to benefit (by possible European sympathy) if mideast military action occurs (directed at Iran and/or Syria and/or Hamas, etc)...

          and the CIA has in fact created riots and agitated similar spectacles (in Latin America for instance) before...

          The timing is what I find curious: the cartoons first surfaced last Fall...

          that's all

          •  here is what you are missing (none / 0)

            Actually Muslim/non-Muslim relations in Europe are way worse than they are in the US.  Just a couple examples: the riots in France a couple months ago and the murder of the Theo Van Gogh in the Netherlands.  

            Actually one (not the only one) of the reasons France and Germany opposed the Iraq War was because of their large unassimilated Muslim populations.

            In many ways, the Europeans are much less welcoming of "outsiders" than Americans.  Also, their societies have less economic movement among classes.

            •  no I undertsand that dynamic (none / 0)

              as well, and if anything it plays to my argument--which, to state it plainly, is this:

              a small group of influential hardline far-right neocons would like nothing more than to have an excuse to expand the Iraq war (in some way) into Iran and/or Syria, and perhaps even into Palestine, and certainly the recent flare-ups over the cartoon play into the general background of hardening sentiments (across Europe and among American liberals) that would be needed for these neocons to pull off more military maneuvers in the mideast.

              Obviously there would have to be more involved, but already one can see where anti-Muslim sentiments have begun to spread across Europe and could (could) be used by the US to trigger support by non-Muslim Europeans for some kind of military action: after all, Iran has been painted (rightly or wrongly) as extremist...

              •  on the other hand (none / 0)

                the point could certainly be made that this kind of eruption of anti westernism as well as hamas' victory only shines a light on the idiocy of bush's claim to be "spreading democracy" in the middle east.

                just sayin'

                "It was a bright cold day in April, and the clocks were striking thirteen."

                by hoodoo meat bucket on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 04:58:30 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Wrong, wrong, wrong and more wrong (none / 0)

              Holy cow.

              The classic canard 'well...America has much better class mobility than Europe.'

              Hate to tell you this, but a study at the University of Chicago has totally debunked this myth.  The primary reason is that American college is so tremendously expensive and the ability of the lower- and middle-class to afford college tuition has been hampered tremendously in the last 15 years.

              Also, if the Muslim population was equal to 10% of ours...that would equal close to 30 million Muslims or slightly less than our African-American population.

              You cannot possibly compare those our treatment of Muslims (which has less than 1% of the U.S. population) to that of Europe.

              Buy a clue.

  •  Your comments do not offer anything (4.00 / 4)

    practical.  By "respecting their rights" what do you specifically advocate if I, a journalist, submit a cartoon which might not go over well with them.  Are you saying I have to give up MY SACRED RIGHT of free speech?  There's a big difference between getting angry and burning down buildings and making threats against authors who must hide for the rest of their lives....and these threats come from people, who, let me guess, 90% or more are illiterate so don't know what the hell they are talking about anyway.  But of course, they CAN look at a cartoon and get something out of it.  Just as on TV, if you don't like it, don't look at it.

    We Changed The Course! Now we must hold their feet to the fire.

    by hcc in VA on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:46:34 PM PDT

    •  all you see is people getting violent (none / 1)

      Obviously I dont advocate violence, but there were peaceful demonstrations in India as well. I wouldnt make a comic of jesus fucking mary. Even writing that makes me cringe. Freedom of speech comes with some consequences. Sure those are not supposed to be violent, but lets not piss people off just to piss people off.
      •  I agree with what you wrote.... (none / 1)

        Although, a bomb for a turban in no way is the same as Jesus having sexual relations with Mary.

        If someone drew that, I'd feel more sorry for the person who did it. Obviously there's something not right about a person like that, but the minute I hurt the guy or burned his house or invaded his country for it is the day I NEED TO BE put down as well.

        I don't think a person should incite on purpose. But even if they do...THE LINE OF STUPIDITY AND VIOLENCE should end there.

        I AM A CIVILIZED HUMAN BEING. No more excuses for these savages.

        We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

        by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:53:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  really? (3.00 / 3)


          Tell us how you feel about "those people" who started a riot and fights over a football game? Shall we call all those middle class americans "savages"?

          Judging by the belligerence in your post I am willing to bet I could insult you enough if we were face to face to provoke you to violence.

          Hypocrisy in anything may deceive the cleverest and most penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it....

          by Cal45 on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:40:49 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  sure (none / 0)

            call 'em savages, if you get into violence over a football game I'm not much impressed with you.

            As for provoking violence face to face, yes pretty sure you could do that to anyone...

            doesnt make it right, and most people would be apologetic (not to mention possibly criminally sanctioned) for doing so.

          •  Let's find out (none / 0)

            Meet me in person. If I punch you in your stupid fucking face, I owe you a dollar, bitch.

            We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

            by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 03:48:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  What do you SPECIFICALLY recommend (none / 1)

        be done to the people who condemnned Mr. Rushdie to a life of hiding for writing a book.  People who didn't even read the book.  What shall we do?  I think you are saying that it's ok for one culture to impose their beliefs on other cultures?  Sorry, I don't buy it.  Let them perpetuate their own ignorance.  

        We Changed The Course! Now we must hold their feet to the fire.

        by hcc in VA on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:17:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  certain beliefs (none / 0)

          What is so bad about being angry that someone published an image of your prophet, when for thousands of years such an act is considered evil. We need to respect peoples right to be outraged, but at the same time, not excuse their violence.
    •  If your a journalis perhaps you shouldn't (none / 0)

      guess but do some research before making broad generalizations, otherwise know as stereotypes.

      To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men~~ Abraham Lincoln

      by Tanya on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:55:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  yea i agree (none / 0)

        That just shows how important it is for political cartoonists to have deep knowledge of international relations
      •  If YOU"RE a poster, (none / 0)

        you might want to check your spelling and grammar first.  I think you are confusing "journalist" or "political cartoonist" with "scholar."  The latter should indeed be ultra careful about their characterizations, but the former does indeed make use of stereotypes, at times, to make a point.  Perhaps you're right, perhaps it would have been more accurate to show Mohammad with bombs around his belt instead of on his head.

        We Changed The Course! Now we must hold their feet to the fire.

        by hcc in VA on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:15:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes you are correct many "journalists" (none / 0)

          and "political cartoonists" in the 30's used their sacred right to fan every anti-semetic flame in Germany. And from your comments I see you are following in that noble tradition.

          To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men~~ Abraham Lincoln

          by Tanya on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:29:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Digression (none / 0)

      90% or more are illiterate so don't know what the hell they are talking about anyway.  But of course, they CAN look at a cartoon and get something out of it.

      This reminded me of:

      "Stop them damned pictures. I don't care so much what the papers say about me. My constituents can't read. But, damn it, they can see pictures!" - Boss Tweed

    •  lol (4.00 / 2)

      Here's an idea.  As a journalist, don't go out of your way to insult members of group simply for having the temerity to belong to that group-- especially when it's a deep-seated religious group that's already facing attacks and insults from the majority.  How often do papers in Virginia decide to solicit as many anti-Catholic or Jewish submissions as they can?  Are they GIVING UP THEIR SACRED RIGHT OF FREE SPEECH or simply showing simple human respect to other members of their community?

      It's not like this was simply a fluke, or a situation where something was misinterpreted.  The whole point of publishing these cartoons was to provoke a reaction from the Muslim minority.  Well... they certainly got one.

      Read James Loewen's "Sundown Towns"!

      by ChicagoDem on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:25:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  who is asking you to give up your (none / 1)

      "sacred right" to free speech? Last I checked it's the content of the cartoon that has caused offence, not the means by which it has been presented...although admitedly the line has blurred.

      The point is that a perceved-to-be-racist cartoon about blacks or jews or hindus in a major U.S. newspaper might also arouse similar demonstrations here at home...

      The problem with "sacred" rights is that other societies have diffewrent views of what is sacred: clearly there are parts (parts) of the Muslim world that consider the dictate not to make a graven image of the Prophet a sacred dictate. Thus we have two competing literalisms: one regarding global free speech, the other regarding a religious view.

      I am not condoning violence here, merely pointing out the complexity of the issue...

  •  NPR (none / 0)

    I heard an NPR interview over lunch and had to diary about it when I got back.  I think it puts the entire furor into perfectly sharp perspective.  My diary.

    We're all just monkeys burning in hell. SmokeyMonkey.org

    by smokeymonkey on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 12:50:48 PM PDT

  •  Ignore it (none / 1)

    Be conservative, fine. Ignore those that make fun of you. It's the Streisand Effect.

    If someone makes a cartoon making fun of your religion, blow it off, and focus on educating others on the good things of Islam.

    I find a great many things offensive. Sometimes, its things others dont find offensive. Other times, I'm not offended by something that offends others. But as long as there's no actual harm done, you just say "I dont agree with that" and move on. Maybe argue why its offensive to change minds, but you dont go rioting, and peaceful demonstrations are acceptable but in this case, rather absurd.

    Make a comic about jesus and mary that's offensive, and I bet even the most die-hard christian conservatives won't riot and kill people. And that's the difference. They'll whinge, they'll complain, maybe boycott, maybe protest. But they won't murder. They'll go on and try to do good works to improve their image. So don't tell me that I'm only seeing the rioters. I am seeing them, and I think that proves the worst muslim is more violent and irrational than the worst christian.

    The muslim world needs to get a grip -- be offended, make their case, and get over it. Free speech. They need to understand that not everyone is a muslim, and so not everyone will follow their rules. There are plenty of good, decent, rational muslims out there -- I know a number.

    -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

    by cephyn on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:01:17 PM PDT

    •  are you kidding me (none / 0)

      You dont think Christians are capable of religious hatred and violence. Look at how many Sikhs were killed after 9/11, how many gays, how many muslim "heathens" during the crusades.
      You cant just move on, otherwise people will think what your doing is excusable, but you should not react violently, otherwise it undermines the ideas you are trying to protect.
      •  Another lame argument...dude, you're not right. (none / 0)

        I reccomend not trying to argue with this Desiunion. He obviously fails to grasp the simplest of ideas.

        We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

        by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:07:16 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  no he is right (none / 1)

          and proved me correct. He just likened the actions of current muslims to christians during the crusades. So, he validates the argument that the current muslim mindset is comparable to the christian mindset 1000 years ago. And so, we come back to what everyone is trying to tell him -- riots and mass violence are not an acceptable response in this day and age. And so, like i said, it is time for the muslim world to learn to respond civilly.

          -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

          by cephyn on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:20:40 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, but Christ himself was a pacifist (none / 0)


          He lived under occupation and if we believe the story died while urging his followers NOT to take revenge.

          Mohammed was a warrior and preached a much more worldly form of religion.

          Almost as soon as Mohammed died his followers went to killing each other over who his true successor was.

          After that they went about killing the Zorastrians and whomever else wouldn't convert.

          I would have to say the Christian religion is a religion that is pacifist scripturally, but has been responsible for violence due to the perversion by humanity.

          Judaisim has a violent history and teachings but it seems to have moved into the 20th century mostly.

          However while there's tons of good peaceful Islamic folks, and I know a lot of them, and like them, the % age of flat earthers in Islam is much higher than in Christianity and Islam.

      •  How about working (none / 0)

        to change the connotations and denotations that give such cartoons and caricatures legitimacy? These riots and firebombings seem to me to further the caricature that the cartoon presented.

        I may be incorrect, but hasn't a cleric issued a Fatwa for the death of these cartoonists? Would it be wrong of a cartoonist to satirize such behavior?

    •  I'm growing weary (none / 1)

      of this conflict (and I mean the WHOLE West vs. Middle East THING) being cast in terms of religion.      This is a wholesale clash of culture.  Religion is but an expression of culture.  I don't believe the violence perpetrated by terrorists is because of their devotion to Islam; I don't believe we are "at war with Islam."  It has become a lazily used catch-all term.  

      It's an old cliche that nothing has started more wars than religion but I am more prone to believe the simpler explanation that we go to war not because of what the other believes but because of what they DO--or because of what we WANT.

      -------------------------------------------------------
      Take your protein pills and put your helmet on

      by SFOrange on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:28:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Their outrage (none / 1)

    might be unacceptable, but if it is unacceptable then it would follow that insulting muslims to the point that they are doing the unacceptable would be unacceptable as well, no?

    What I find infantile is the "west's" insistance that it has every right to print what it wants. Well, the west just excercised that right now let the muslims excercise their right to respond to it.

    One would think that it would be easier to just avoid insulting millions of people than to convince them to not be insulted. I am surrounded by fucking idiots on the left and right, it seems.

    btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

    by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:02:52 PM PDT

    •  ummm...no (none / 0)

      The mere fact that they are offended is not "unacceptable". IF their offense is legitimate then fine it may be "unacceptable" or it may simply be "understandable".

      This cartoon blowup is the latter. I can understand why they might be upset, much as I am "upset" that women and children are treated as quasi property in many muslim nations, or that freedom of religion is not something they practice very well in many muslim nations.

      But you dont see me stoning or bombing their embassies. So I dont understand the levels this has risen to, nor do I think it condonable nor do I think it somehow the West's fault for not being "sensitive".

    •  Get some perspective. (none / 0)

      The response we're talking about--violence--is far worse than hurting people's feelings.

      It's not about convincing them not to be insulted.  It's convincing them to not engage in violence and try to impose their religious beliefs on others.

      "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

      by Geekesque on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:19:44 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good luck! (none / 0)

        The USA attacked a muslim country for NO REASON, killing thousands without remorse, then reelected the person who is responsible for this act of violence.

        There acts of violence arre more understandable than OUR act of violence, no? Until we put our own violence in check, I find it extremely disingenious to claim that muslims are more violent than us, a nation with more homicides per capita then most.

        Yes, they have an awful human rights record, but we are not perfect either (Hurricane Katrina, cutting funding for the poor, electing an asshole for president) and to pretend that we are is fucking pathetic and a distraction from the matter at hand -- millions of our fellow world citizens are PISSED!

        btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

        by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 02:03:24 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Meanwhile in the muslim world... (none / 0)

    This cartoon is from Al-Watan (Qatar), May 13, 2003. The U.S. and Israel are shown eating from two sides of an apple that represents "the Arab states". This cartoon is also noteworthy since it was published in Qatar, home to the influential Al Jazeera TV network. Qatar is considered by many in the U.S. State Department to be a U.S. ally and a relatively moderate state.

    From http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/... where there are many other examples.

    This is at least as offensive as the Danish cartoons if not more so. Until they start protesting the bigotry in their own papers, I don't have an ounce of compassion for them.

    Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

    by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:06:16 PM PDT

    •  OMG I AM SO OFFENDED. LET ME KILL YOU. (none / 0)

      See how stupid that is?

      We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

      by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:08:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yea definately (none / 0)

      There is alot of hypocrasy on the islamic people, but I have always believed in compassion for all people, and I see their point.
    •  Are you people serious????!!! (4.00 / 4)

      THIS demostrates hypocrisy? I am the last person to defend a religion, but you seem to think that their anger can be assuaged by calling them hypocrits. You know what will assuage their anger? NOT INSULTING THEM!  There are too many for this lame ass argument that they "should behave" WE SHOULD BEHAVE!

      Their outrage is not just from the cartoon, although it seems that it could justifiably be from just this. It also stems from us killing thousands in Iraq for no reason and with no apparant remorse, killing thousands in Palestine with the same regret, the ignorance of the french, and so on.  Now they are being told they are infantile. What do they have to do to demonstrate that this is unacceptable? They have killed, looted, set things on fire, called for boycotts and you friggin idiots seem to think that we should still be able to cause them this much pain because it is within our right! Unbelievable!  I am all for us excercising our rights, but let them muslims respond in kind. Okay?

      btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

      by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:17:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Denmark didn't start the war. (none / 1)

        They are barely involved in it.

        Yet it was the Danish embassy that was burnt and the rioters themselves said it was because of the cartoons.

        How is burning down an embassy responding in kind?

        Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

        by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:20:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They are responding the way they are responding... (none / 0)

          bitching and moaning about how unfair their response is to something is not going to change anything. But then again, maybe if you whining bitches wail loud enough, the "bad muslims" will go home and stop being such meanies...

          btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

          by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:24:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Please point out where anyone here (none / 0)

            'bitched and moaned' about it being 'not fair.'

            Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

            by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:26:28 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  My bad... (none / 0)

              Denmark didn't start the war. (none / 1)

              "They are barely involved in it.

              Yet it was the Danish embassy that was burnt and the rioters themselves said it was because of the cartoons.

              How is burning down an embassy responding in kind?"

              Sorry, maybe I inferred too much from "they are barely involved" as being a statement that the response is "unfair", as well as the numerous condescending comments about all muslims on this site as "bitching and moaning."

              If anything, those who are perplexed with their response have now shown me why they responded the way the did. Thank you for that. I was confused.

              btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

              by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:41:36 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  No, NOT OK (none / 1)

        I guess you don't give a shit about someone like Rushdie who must spend his entire life in hiding because these people got their feelings hurt by a book they don't know how to read.  Sorry....not going for that.

        We Changed The Course! Now we must hold their feet to the fire.

        by hcc in VA on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:20:35 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I don't care what you are going for... (none / 0)

          my point is your myopic perspective on how people should respond to being insulted will not prevent them from acting out.

          If you don't wish to live respectfully amongst other people, then live with the consequences. DUH!!!

          btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

          by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:22:58 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You seem to be under the mistaken impression (none / 0)

            that any of us are saying that we didn't expect them to act like this. To the contrary, I think we all know that they have a long history of violent overreaction. So I fail to understand the hostility you seem to be using.

            Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

            by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:28:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Whatever... (none / 0)

              Keep posting your rants. I am sure some muslim with influence will read what you have to say and change the response of the millions who are acting out.

              However, you have not convinced me, a non-muslim, non-religious person who favors freedom of speech, so I can only imagine the difficulty you will have in convincing those who need to be convinced.

              I am not trying to convince you that violence and riots should be accepted. However, you should accept the consequences of your indifference to the sensibilities of others. Good luck in your efforts. Hopefully, those Danes who need to apologize will, so that your viewpoints will be more reasonably interpreted. Until then, I think you have an uphill battle.

              btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

              by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:36:38 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  so you're saying (none / 0)

                that we need to be very careful about what we say?

                hmm.

                -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

                by cephyn on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:38:21 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Not at ALL! (none / 0)

                  Say what you wish!  Just be careful about how others might respond dear Watson!

                  btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                  by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:43:13 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  wow (none / 0)

                    ok, so its the Danish newspapers fault that some muslims cant control their own violence and emotions?

                    How's that work again?

                    Because that is the only logical argument I can pull out of you saying that one should be careful of the response that might come from exercising their right to free speech.

                    •  Am I really having this much trouble... (none / 0)

                      convincing you people that all the talk in the world will not prevent the muslims reaction?

                      It seems that you don't really care what makes them tick, what makes them lament, what makes them joyous. I am talking ALL muslims, not just the violent ones. If you did care about such things, you might try to appreciate what is going on instead of coming back to the right to free speech.

                      I am all for you, or anyone, excercising that right. But I can't understand why people don't appreciate that free speech comes with a price.

                      btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                      by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:02:08 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  prevent the muslim reaction? (none / 1)

                        Sorry, not my job, its their job to control their reaction, not my or the West's job to control it, as if we could anyways or should.

                        I am not talking ALL Muslims, I'm just talking the violent ones, the rest I have no current beef with.

                        The price of free speech is NOT violence, no matter how many times you say it. The result of free speech may be violence, and thats on the perpetrator not the speaker, but to state it as a "price" of free speech makes it seem 1)inevitable (it isnt), 2) justifiable (it isnt) and 3) understandable (it isnt).

                        •  You say... (none / 0)

                          "The price of free speech is NOT violence,no matter how many times you say it"

                          Are you sure?

                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence

                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence

                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence

                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence
                          The price of free speech is violence

                          One of the prices of free speech is being offended, then why not have another price being violence against the offense? Apparently, you want your cake and eat it too: I want to be able to be offensive to anyone at anytime, but they have to respond as I see fit.  

                          Yeah, whatever...

                          btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                          by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 02:30:35 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                      •  How about holding Muslims to the same (none / 1)

                        standard as we hold ourselves, instead of treating them as a bunch of violent, irrational crazies.

                        This "Muslims are crazy violent people so we should be careful around them" is more bigoted than those expressing outrage at the violence.

                        "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

                        by Geekesque on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:22:22 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  so (none / 1)

                    if we can assume that riots and murder and violence are an inappropriate response to something I say, then I should censor what I say because someone may have an inappropriate reaction?

                    What a bizarre mentality. Perhaps jodie foster should not act in movies, just in case someone has an inappropriate reaction and tries to murder the president.

                    -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

                    by cephyn on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:01:51 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I give up... (none / 0)

                      hopefully you can convince the millions of muslims to go home to bed before the nights out (speaking of bizaree mentalities!)

                      btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                      by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:03:17 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  i dont have to convince them (none / 1)

                        most muslims do go home and go to bed, and get up and get on with their lives. they may have been offended by the cartoons, but they don't go around rioting and murdering and participating in violence - especially violence against those not responsible.

                        The way I see it, they are not rioting against the cartoons. They're rioting against free speech. They burn the embassies of Denmark, but the Danish government had nothing to do with the publishing the cartoons. Just as the US Government has nothing to do with the publishing of this week's Beetle Bailey. Protest the Danish media, perhaps, but don't burn the embassy. To burn the embassy means you disapprove of the Danish government's policy to allow the freedom of the press.

                        -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

                        by cephyn on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:07:38 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  We have killed (none / 0)

                          THOUSANDS of Iraqis for no reason whatsoever, yet you expend your energy condemning muslims who have killed several people for being offended. I just don't get it and am happy that I don't.

                          btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                          by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 02:08:30 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  dont misunderstand (none / 0)

                            I am firmly against, and always have been against, the Iraq War. My position on it is of no relevance here though.

                            -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

                            by cephyn on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 03:56:52 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                            •  Fair enough... (none / 0)

                              however, the muslim's position on the iraq war is in play. I agree that the danish govt. is the LAST entity that should be involved in this. However, the views of certain people can only be ignored for so long before a gasket pops. This just happen to be the straw that broke the camel's back and the danish govt is the only tangible means of venting discontent.  As is now being reported, American flags are being burnt and we have even less to do with the cartoon than the Danish govt.

                              btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                              by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 07:22:19 PM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

                        •  and... (none / 0)

                          muslims attempted to speak with the Danish government right after the first printing of this cartoon in order to avoid this chaos, yet they renegged on the offer. So, instead they get their embassies burned to the ground. Oh well.

                          btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                          by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 02:22:23 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Once again (none / 0)

                            The danish government DID NOT PRINT THESE CARTOONS. That's like going to the US Government to complain about the New York Times. It's misplaced.

                            -5.50, -4.77 ...no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States. Article VI, US Constitution

                            by cephyn on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 03:57:48 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                            •  I thought you were following... (none / 0)

                              the story more closely. The danish muslims attempted to address the coming chaos with the Danish govt. in order to attempt to avoid what is happening now. The danish govt. refused to meet with them. Once again...oh well.

                              btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                              by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 07:16:33 PM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

              •  Once again... (none / 0)

                where did I say I didn't accept the consequences? I said I have no compassion for them but I wasn't at all surprised that they did what they did because this is the sort of thing they do.

                Why you feel this need to be condescending and put words in peoples' mouths, I don't know.

                Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

                by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:46:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Okay...agreed (none / 0)

                  we both accept the consequences. My condescension stems from your condescension. You feel that we can understand them by looking for solutions amongst ourselves. My point is that we are all human. If you do not think it is possible that the Dane crossed the line, then why should they respect what you (or anyone) are saying about their response?

                  And it irritates me when people kill others to prove a point yet people, such as yourself, ignore it because of your presumable moral superiority.

                  The US has killed thousands over the years, so I guess they think that "this is the sort of thing we do."

                  btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

                  by ejbr on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:55:06 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  More words in my mouth. (none / 0)

                    I do not feel that 'we' can understand anything. I also never said that the Danes didn't 'cross the line' mostly because I don't believe 'the line' exists. People fly off the handle and kill others after getting a dirty look. People are nuts. I don't claim to be morally superior to anyone either.

                    You have decided an awful lot about some person you think is Arken but it's not me. So I'm guessing either you're insane, not actually reading what I write or just an asshole. Any way you cut it, I'm tired of you so I'm just going to stop talking to you. Good day.

                    Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

                    by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:08:31 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  The Consequences... (none / 0)

                you are correct we should accept the consequences of our indifference to others feelings. But, if that is the case, is it acceptable for the Government to Gun down these rioters? They should have been mindful of the response of a Westernized Murderous Government, right?
          •  Ridiculous (none / 1)

            Live with the consequences? No thank you. Forgiving them their "acting out" is indulging their immaturity. They need to grow up and stop making moronic spectacles of themselves.

            Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

            by bumblebums on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:29:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  So you are saying that we are doomed (none / 0)

            for time immemorial to reading totally non-controversial books?  Sorry, that sounds just tooo boring.  And your solution for those who condemned Rushdie to death?  Was it Rushdie's fault?  

            We Changed The Course! Now we must hold their feet to the fire.

            by hcc in VA on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:03:18 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Apparently we are doomed... (none / 0)

              since people such as yourself are indifferent to the sensibilities of others, while these "others" are willing to kill and riot because people such as yourself are indifferent to their sensibilities.

              I have no solution for those who condemn Rushdie, just as I have no solution for the fundamentalist Christians who picket Matthew Shephard's funeral. Hardcore beliefs are hardcore beliefs.

              And if you think high brow analysis of the barbaric muslim protestor will get them to change, you are fooling yourself. So, yeah, we are doomed since you apparently are set in believing that they are stone age freaks with no reason to be upset.

              btw, Joe Lieberman is an ass and anyone who voted for him in 2006 is a jack ass.

              by ejbr on Wed Feb 08, 2006 at 02:17:53 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  disagree (none / 1)

      I don't see any reference to religion or anyone's God in that cartoon....it's "political".

      Hypocrisy in anything may deceive the cleverest and most penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it....

      by Cal45 on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:46:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then you're ignorant or blind. (none / 0)

        The jew in the cartoon is shown in a bigoted stereotypical style very reminsiscent that of Nazi propaganda:

        You might say that the figure represents an Israeli. That certainly isn't clear in the image since only a very small minority of Israelis look remotely like that. It is a very obvious stereotyping of a Jew. It is no different from a picture of a black person with huge lips and big buck teeth.

        Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

        by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:50:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  really? (none / 0)


          .in your cartoon both figures had on hats with the US and Israeli flag on them so I see no reference to religion or Jews....unless you think Israel and the Jews are the same thing.

          Personally I think of Israel as a country,...

          Hypocrisy in anything may deceive the cleverest and most penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it....

          by Cal45 on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:25:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The star of david (none / 0)

            is not the Israeli flag and you know it.

            It is a symbol for Judaism as a whole.

            Furthermore, virtually no one in the Israeli government looks Hassidic like that. It is very obviously anti-semitic and you are just being willfully blind.

            Flying Squid Studios - Cartoons to Rot Your Brain!

            by Arken on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:36:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  well (none / 0)

              ....it's on every Israeli flag I ever seen..or anyone else has ever seen....

              http://images.google.com/...

              ..and as for saying that is anti-semitic not to htink the cartoon is anti-semitic...I think we have pretty much debunked that slur on this site.

              Hell, maybe you are the of those "anti-gentiles" for not saying the stars and stripes on the Uncle Sam hat is anti-gentile instead of a political statement.

              Hypocrisy in anything may deceive the cleverest and most penetrating man, but the least wide-awake of children recognizes it....

              by Cal45 on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 02:46:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  compassion for whom exactly? (none / 0)

      Of course the rioters are morally wrong. No shit.

      The important questions are:

      --why now? (see my comments above about how this might benefit the US in Europe vis a vis an attack on Iran)

      --what are the more general sources of this rage?

      This is the action of a tiny minority: just as the mosques burned and Muslims beaten up in the midwest and elsewhere after 9/11 were teh actions of a tiny minority.

      This is not "the West vs. the Muslim world" or even "religious intolerance vs. free speech"...such reductions are meaningless.

  •  Muslim rage (4.00 / 3)

    Admittedly, I haven't been following this closely, but I'm not so sure I know the real narrative of the cartoon story.

    Did it ever occur to anyone that Muslim rage allows the Neo-cons a graceful exit from the Iraq and Hamas debacles, which have resulted from their failed and very cynical  "idealistic" "Wilsonian" "pro-democracy" nation building agenda?

    Now they can claim: see, there really is a clash of cultures, we were naive (but not to blame) to promote democracy.

    Muslim uprisings and jihad can be used to justify putting US foreign policy on a permanent war footing, one that that approaches the "crusades" that Bush now and then suggests.

    Timing is just right to divert attention from Bush's domestic troubles adn further jsutify widening middle east war at time when Iran air strikes appear to be next on the Bush agenda.  

    This cartoon episode recalls (I think it was published in Rolling Stone) a story about a Beltway consulting firm that did CIA black ops propaganda. The story laid out how the Iraq war propaganda campaign was built and implemented.

    Could the same folks be the puppeteers behind fomenting this?

  •  this seemed relavent (none / 0)

    sorry norway & denmark

    link courtesy of a dkos diary i saw yesterday.  s.

    the best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity --w.b.yeats the second coming

    by synth on Tue Feb 07, 2006 at 01:07:00 PM PDT

  •  Let's vote (none / 1)

    1. Rioting over a cartoon
    2. Blowing up 1,000 year old Buddhas in Afghanistan

    Are acts of people deserving thoughtful respect?
    •  Niether. What's your point? (none / 0)

      We're off to see the liberal the wizardly liberal D-kos we hear he is a lib-er-al wiz if ever a liberal blogged

      by phelander on Tue Feb 07, 20