NEWS: Cartoon protests turn deadly

Listening to Fox News this morning, it was said that images of the prophet are found in museums, etc., throughout the mideast. If that is true, then some of the reporting on this has been inaccurate.

Yes, that is true.

As far as I know, there is no Koranic injunction against images of Muhammad.

However, many portraits of Muhammad have been drawn by Muslim artists, often commissioned by Muslim rulers.

In museums within the Muslim world (including the Topkapi in Istanbul, and in Bokhara and Samarkand, Uzbekistan, and Haroun-Walat, Iran [a suburb of Isfahan] ) are famous depictions of

• Muhammad riding to Jerusalem (16th century),
  
  
• Archangel Gabriel guiding Muhammad into Medina (16th century)
  
  
• and the prophet contemplating a rose (19th century).
  
  
• The Janissaries - the elite of the Ottoman army - carried a medallion stamped with the prophet's head.
  
  
• A statue of Muhammad can be seen at the U.S. Supreme Court, where the prophet is honored as one of the great "lawgivers" of mankind.
  
  

[edit on 8-2-2006 by Riwka]

Great points Riwka. It's not as clear cut as the mainstream media is portraying, explaining why we see the majority of Islamic leaders (Organisation of the Islamic Conference and the French Muslim Council, including the British Muslim Council) calling for restraint and perspective in the Islamic response to these cartoons.

I was aware of images of Allah being explicitly prohibited but I thought the restrictions of portraying human/living beings (including Mohammad) were enforced by the stricter sects of Islam. Much like the Ultra-orthodox sections of all the major religions have stricter or divergent interpretations of the same basic religion.

I feel these ultra-orthodox segments of Islam are being preyed upon with this issue by people who want to inflame tension between the West and Islam. They are using these cartoons and the underlying belief amongst all muslims that they are being victimized by the West in the name of the War on Terror. I also feel that these people are being deliberately goaded into reacting in the predictably volatile manner.

[edit on 8/2/06 by subz]

Originally posted by subz

I was aware of images of Allah being explicitly prohibited

Yes, but if Muslims are prohibited from doing so- this prohibition does in NO case apply to non-Muslims!

Demanding that non-Muslims abide by such a religious edict, would also be then a call to Christian Churches around the world to remove their pictures of G'D, Jesus , his mother Miriam/Mary, angles etc...

(BTW: The Jewish Ten Commandments also include a ban on depicting G'd)

[edit on 8-2-2006 by Riwka]

Originally posted by jsobecky
Listening to Fox News this morning, it was said that images of the prophet are found in museums, etc., throughout the mideast. If that is true, then some of the reporting on this has been inaccurate.

You get your news from Faux??? There are indeed images of Muhammad but their faces are always veiled and the image itself is indicated by being dressed in white and surrounded by a halo of fire...a dipicition of the actual physical features of the prophet are never shown. I am not sure if the injunction forbiding his image is from the Quran or not but it is a very early one. The cartoons were published 4 months ago and someone is manuliplating this whole reaction. AND unless we forget religious fanatics are everywhere...lately funnymentalists here forced a show off TV (the book of daniel) because they did not like its dipiction of Christians or Jesus.

“There's none deceived but he that trusts”~Benjamin Franklin


Prophet Muhammed

Images of the Prophet Muhammad - a Zombie Error
The physical depiction of the Prophet Muhammad may be a taboo subject matter in some sects of contemporary Islam, but let's all be clear -- this is not a universal prohibition.

The Qur'an, Islam's holiest book, condemns idolatry, but has no direct condemnations of pictorial art. Direct prohibitions of pictorial art, or any depiction of sacred figures, are found in some hadith, or recorded oral traditions.

Most contemporary Muslims believe that ordinary portraits and photos, films and illustrations, are permissible. Only some Salafi and Islamist interpretations of Sunni Islam still condemn pictorial representations of any kind. Offensive satirical pictures are a somewhat different case — disrespect to Islam or to Muhammad is still widely considered blasphemous or sacrilegious.

Wiki

Scandinavian Update: Israeli Boycott, Muslim Cartoons
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.

Looks like imams of propaganda fabricated 3 images, and here they are:
ekstrabladet.dk...
ekstrabladet.dk...
ekstrabladet.dk...



Wonder if making crap up to incite murder, destruction and riots is blasphemous or sacrilegious?
Any bets that we won't ever see the fabricator(s) held accountable and/or the bills sent to the mosque.

[edit on 8-2-2006 by Regenmacher]

Djarums, I 'll clear up what I meant by that point. I was talking in the United Kingdom/European Union and it is true. If I was to print an article denouncing the holocaust, I could end up in prison or at least the Government/newspaper would say sorry.

If I published an image, with intention to cause hatred and to dehumanize Jewish people, I am sure under Race Protection Legislation they would attempt to convict me. However, I seriously doubt if this was to happen I would see anyone but the British National Party claiming Free Speech on my behalf and this is the major problem.

I mean, do we suddenly support images against Black People, Jews and every other group when the images dehumanize them? Really, should we?

There is a balance that we need to find, I myself believe we should have a complete free press. The problem is, we do not and the restrictions to me seem heavily bias against and for certain groups. We also have to remember, that the majority of the Muslim's Protested Peacefully, and just like many other protests a small fringe group caused trouble. We should not and can't punish the majority on the basis of the minority. We punished people in the passed like this and it was not fair then and isn't now.

Originally posted by Odium

I mean, do we suddenly support images against Black People, Jews and every other group when the images dehumanize them?

suddenly? Are you KIDDING?

If the Muslim outrage is really about demanding respect for others' beliefs (a valid argument), Arabs should be insisting that their own media stop the almost-daily depictions of Jews and Christians as bloodthirsty cannibals and murderers of children.

And, as said many times before: Their media is STATE owned - so this should be easy done, if they want.




[edit on 8-2-2006 by Riwka]

Riwka, you yourself have posted a link to a group who are doing just that. In fact, calling for the Iranian Government to make sure the Newspaper does not publish images denying the holocaust.

It needs to happen both ways though, from both our Government's and Press and that of other Nation's.

Originally posted by Odium
If I published an image, with intention to cause hatred and to dehumanize Jewish people, I am sure under Race Protection Legislation they would attempt to convict me.

Can publish evil Jew cartoons on Danish websites though:

Dutch Islamists post cartoons depicting Anne Frank, Hitler in bed
A Belgian-Dutch Islamic political organization posted anti-Jewish cartoons on its Web site in response to the cartoons of the prophet Mohammed that appeared in Danish papers last year and offended many Muslims.

I suppose if you dig around you can find a few thousand more.

Wonder when the people wise up and say who cares, just artists drawings trying to provoke a response. It's a 2d image folks!

Here's one of mine, you're going to love it:
www.shadowness.com...
(image not for easliy offended fundies)

[edit on 8-2-2006 by Regenmacher]

Odium,
Are you ignoring the fact that these imams were lying to the muslim people of the world? You yourself believed until a short while ago that there were pictures of Muhammed with a pig nose. Actually, you might still believe it for all I know.

Btw, I´ve noticed that the Norwegian media FINALLY picked up the story about the lying imams today. Several major newspapers in Norway report this story now.

The Islamic site carried a disclaimer saying the images were being shown as part of an exercise in free speech rather than to endorse their content - just as European newspapers have reprinted the Danish cartoons.

-snip-

Denying the Holocaust is illegal under most European hate speech laws, which outlaw intimidating or inciting hatred toward groups on the basis of their ethnic, cultural, religious or sexual identity. Complaints about alleged hate speech are common but prosecutions are rare and convictions very rare.

From your own source, Regenmacher.

Now, do you think we should have Universal Free Speech? Removing all of what is outlawed above...by the way, it can be argued those cartoons are iintended to incite hatred towards one group. It'd all boil down to the Judge on the day.

In fact, as your own source says: "In response to".

Hellmutt, I really do hope that people who have found out about this bother to tell the Imam's, Newspapers, etc, so that people can find out. I've posted it to every group that I speak to and have contact with the Press Office, in fact phoning Canada and a few other Nation's yesterday. If enough people bother, that guy will be facing a lot of what he is calling to happen to people.

Even more interesting.

The Danish editor behind the publication of caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed that ignited deadly riots in the Muslim world said Wednesday he's trying to coordinate with an Iranian paper soliciting cartoons on the Holocaust.

"My newspaper is trying to establish a contact with the Iranian newspaper, and we would run the cartoons the same day as they publish them," Flemming Rose said Wednesday in an interview on CNN's "American Morning."

The Iranian newspaper Hamshahri said Tuesday it would hold the competition to test whether the West extends the principle of freedom of expression to the Nazi genocide as it did to the caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad.

I would be very shocked, if all of the Newspapers that published them do post these as well. In fact, it might just shut up a lot of the Militant Muslim's. Do I think they will? Hell no.

As I said in my thread on pts this world is out of control and over what?.....cartoons?? It's madness.

Yes, but if Muslims are prohibited from doing so- this prohibition does in NO case apply to non-Muslims!

That's what MUSLIMS and ODIUM do not understand.

In the eyes of Islam, it's either my way or the hi-way. They demand that America and other civilized countries tolerate thier religious beliefs (rightfully so). But when they, including leaders of countries demand for an apology for someone expressing his freedom of speech in his own country...well that's taking it too far. Recent events over the cartoons (of all things) have really made this true.

Odium, you keep bring up what the cartoonist intentions might have been, to cause all of this, the protest and uproars. Why not put blame where it's due, blame the protesting muslims and the leaders that are advocating all of this non-sense. Blame the Imams that started the whole thing by lieing to thier people.

Ya know, you're really starting to sound like Syrian Sister, I havent seen her on the boards on awhile.

EDIT: changed "including" to "and"

[edit on 8/2/2006 by SportyMB]

Originally posted by Odium
Now, do you think we should have Universal Free Speech?

That depends if we want to evolve into an enlightened society that readily uses its intellect to push past the false propaganda and see things for what they are.

If we don't want to evolve into the information age, then we can keep on sabotaging education, slap more laws on expressing opinions, shutdown and censor the internet, until we wall ourselves off into our own little prisons.

So which way do you plan on going? Rollback or move ahead?

SportyMB, I am as much a Muslim as you are a Gay-Jew. Once more, I’ll have to go on about how I am not a Muslim, however I have been decent enough to read the Qu’Ran and speak to Muslim’s before I begin to comment on their religion and paint them as something they are not.

Why should we blame the Protesting Muslim’s? As long as what they are doing is fully legal, than surely that is also part of their Free Speech? Unless you just called for them to be denied that? I like this policy of twisting words and making accusations, especially trying to link me with a member who has made some rather extreme statements and glorified many things deemed as wrong and inappropriate - in fact, arguably linking me to the fact she has been warned for these views many times before. Nice try…very well done, but the fact I’ve only got one warn in nearly 4000 posts tends to deem otherwise. In fact, arguably you are attempting to demonise me - linking me to someone people hold a lot of scorn for. -thumbs up- Good work.

In fact, the process of insinuating I myself am a Muslim is another attempt and to lessen the importance of my opinion. Why does Religion even matter? However, just to make you happy I was raised in one of the Christian Denominations and am religious, but it is definitely not Islam.

Regenmacher, I myself agree that people need to begin to accept things and allow others to say what they desired. I’ve stated on numerous threads, how I respect the rights of people to say what they desire - even groups in the U.K. who have directly called for me and members of my family to be deported, even Nazi’s and so on and so fourth. In fact, the best way to beat such things - including Radical Islam- is to bring the supports out into the open and challenge them.

However, my problem is I don’t see that being allowed. It seems to be done on a basis, which to me is deliberately biased and deliberately intended to cause outrage in Muslim communities. If those Newspapers in Europe print the same pictures of the Holocaust that the Iranian Newspapers intend to than I would be very much impressed by their lack of hypocrisy. It looks like the Danish paper is willing, now I wonder if the French, etc, is as well. Otherwise, these restraints you seem so angered by are in place and are bias.

Odium, so you are a Muslim!!! Just kidding, I'm not a gay jew
I edited my last...took away "including".

I did'nt mean blame the protesting muslims for all of this non-sense. But in a way, yes they are to blame. They too should understand that other countries are more tolerant towards things like religious cartoons and free speech, especially if they are getting the messages from the Muslim leaders that are putting down violent protest and trying to shed some peace in all this mess.

If some PRIVATELY owned b-rated islamic newspaper decides to run a cartoon showing Jesus in the sack with Judas, that's good to go, they have every right too. And if Pat Robertson brings that fake (and incorrect) cartoon of Jesus in an orgy (that was never in the paper) and shows it to leader-X of whatever country and then a milllion people decide to protest, burn embassies and even kill a few of thier own in the process....then yeah, I would say that the people are also to blame for acting on "hear say" and not understanding that other cultures do things differently.

Yes, the protestors are also to blame, IMO. And are even more to blame if they continue to protest after finding out that they were probably misinformed about the content of the cartoons.


[edit on 8/2/2006 by SportyMB]

Originally posted by Odium
However, my problem is I don’t see that being allowed. It seems to be done on a basis, which to me is deliberately biased and deliberately intended to cause outrage in Muslim communities.

Yeah , those antagonists are generally behind methods that enslave people so they can stay in power. Didn't say it would be an easy run to bring about enlightenment, but even the most closed minds and eyes will eventually open.


Oppressors be damned, the information age is upon us!

Will the west tolerate cartoons about the holocaust?

We will do more than that...
we will help them secure the location of a public rally with tax paid for police to guard them while they declare there idiotic statements denying the holocaust...

and if anybody throws rocks at them, then we would arrest the stone throwers...

it is called freedom of speech, and we take it seriously here...

So come one, come all haters in the world... we will support your right to ignorance, and support your right to make a fool of yourself.

I kinda doubt that Iran would be defending the rights of Denmark to slander the prophet... but if they were to be fair, wouldn't they do so?

that was an easy one... give me another