Danish Cartoon Crisis II

October 9th, 2006, in News, by Patung

Another Muhammad cartoon controversy in Denmark has stirred ill-will among some Indonesian Muslims.

On the 6th Danish state television aired some amateur video footage showing young members of the anti-immigrant Danish Peoples’ Party engaged in a competition to draw humiliating cartoons of Mohammad. The filming of the cartoon drawing was done secretly by an “undercover agent” who was attempting to do research on the Peoples’ Party and shows a number of young people drinking, singing and drawing cartoons ridiculing Muhammad.

In Indonesia there have some predictable reactions, similar to those aired during the last cartoon scandal reported that the president of the PKS, Tifatul Sembiring, was making threats to the government of Denmark.

I remind the Danish government not to engage in provocation. If the Danish government can not keep good harmony then it will be responsible for the consequences.
(Saya mengingatkan kepada pemerintah Denmark, jangan provokasi. Kalau pemerintah Denmark tidak bisa menjaga keharmonisan dia akan menanggung sendiri resikonya.)

He said a government must know how to control its own people.

Amidhan of the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI) said that the airing of the cartoon videos showed the intolerance of the people concerned in Denmark and that freedom of expression should not allow people to insult others. Especially during Ramadan Muslims demanded respect, he said.

Din Syamsuddin of Muhammadiyah recommended that Muslims seek a legal path of redress for this insult, for example by taking the matter to the International Court. He said the cartoons were an attempt to provoke Muslims and make them lose control.

In another report Din said that western atheism was to blame, atheists could not understand God. Those who supported the rights of people to freely express themselves on religious matters were egotistical, tyrannical, and terroristic, he said.

Nahdlatul Ulama (PBNU) chief KH Hasyim Muzadi said that there was a systematic plot to insult the holiness of Islam. He advised that Muslims not be taken in by Islamophobic attempts to incite their rage and therefore put them in a bad light.

Continued..

Former president Gus Dur typically advises calm. He said the Danes had the right to hold any kind of cartoon drawing festivities they wanted to even one insulting to Muslims. He is quoted as saying:

Just let them do it. It is their right. If we respond in excessive ways to every issue that appears, there will never be an end to them [the cartoon drawing competitions].

At the other end of the spectrum of reactions comes the General Secretary of the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (MUI), Ichwan Syam. He says that Indonesia should consider cutting off diplomatic ties with Denmark, at least on certain levels.

And then a Roman Catholic priest, Frans Magnis Suseno, who is originally from Germany, complained that western countries do not protect religion from ridicule and abuse. He said:

The West needs a Protection of Religion Law.
(Barat perlu Undang-Undang Perlindungan Agama.)

Continued..10th Oct.

The Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda called the Danish ambassador Niels Erik Andersen to his office and complained about the Islamophobia displayed by the airing of the video in Denmark. Ministry spokesman Desra Percaya said Indonesia understood the matter of freedom of expression but that such freedom could not extend to the insulting of religions.

12th October.

Vice chairman of Commission I of the parliament, Tosari Wijaya, has called for restrictions on travel by Danish citizens to Indonesia.

Muhammadiyah leader Din Syamsudin met with the Danish ambassador today and later said that Muslims had to respond cleverly to the problem, by for example, boycotting Danish goods or reporting the case to the International Court. He advised Muslims not to be overly provoked.

He said he understood that the system in Denmark was different to that in Indonesia but nevertheless he believes the Danish government has a responsibility to prevent insults to religions.

Tags: Religion

42 Comments on “Danish Cartoon Crisis II”

Tommy Joe Says:
October 9th, 2006 at 2:54 pm
Everyone has his own idol. And all of them want their idol become the best idol of all.
The caricaturists has their own religious idol. And They idol is not so much loved by their kinds as the other idol (Muhammad).

So when they can not promote their idol, they discredit other people’s idol….

That is very not grown up!
Oigal Says:
October 9th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
Well somebody is not very grown up that’s for sure.
Riccardo Says:
October 9th, 2006 at 7:17 pm
This has been a rough year for ol’ MO (parties be upon him).

I’ve got some links to the videos in question, on my site. But thanks P for putting up all those wonderful quotes…

My personal fave by the PKS guy: “… a government must know how to control its own people.”
Kim Says:
October 10th, 2006 at 6:01 pm
A few mistakes are apparent in this article - it was not a video made by The Danish Peoples Party - but a video taken undercover at the Danish Peoples Party Youth summer party. A private party - where someone who was “under cover” and who apparently was an active member of the “Entertainment committee” actually instigated the competition himself. This person has been revelling in fame since by agreeing to “air” the video via tv stations and loading up on his website. One can ask the question - who is to blame here? The young people innocently having a roudy party - with I might say too much to drink - being persuaded and led to go over the top? Or an undercover person who instigated a situation already preplanned - with the intent to spread this “video”, causing more trouble between peoples.

And by the way the Danish Peoples Party is not an “anti-immigrant” party at all - a commen mistake made by international press. The Danish Peoples Party criticize uncontrolled immigration - that is all - the party is in NO WAY anti immigrants. The political opposition often use this form for misconception as weapon to discredit the party - not a very intelligent form for criticism.
RAKA Says:
October 10th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
“that freedom of expression should not allow people to insult others”

those who preached freedom of expression should try these:

-go to your neigbour’s house and yell “your mother is a wh**e!” and then tell the angry neighbour “hey, freedom of expression!”.
-or go to the local church, walk up to the pastor, and yell out loud to the congregation “Jesus is dead!” and explained to the angry mob “I was just practicing freedom of expression”.
-or vandalize and draw obscene graphics in the walls of some house of worship (synagogues, mosques, churches, vihara, etc) and explain later “hey guys, freedom of expression!”.
-or go to the China town, little india, or some other ethnical neigbourhood and yell out loud some racistic statements, when the mob came out with knifes, cleaver, pitchforks, or guns just explain that you were was just practicing the art of freedom of expression.

do that, and good luck. may you have a long life!
Tony Says:
October 11th, 2006 at 3:17 pm
Difficult issue. In this contest and similar ones generally debated nowadays I perceive a subtle difference:

“Insult” is an active behaviour (it resides in the person who does it).
“Offense” is a passive one (it resides in the person who receives it).

When people insult they are aware of it and they do it to cause offense.
On the other hand, people might feel offended even if the “offender” is not aware of being offensive. E.g.: people A are asked not to eat or drink in public during Ramadan in order not to offend people B even if people A don’t feel it offensive.
The recent Pope’s speech comes to mind.

As to Raka’s comment, my stand on this issue is that the problem is not whether you can or you cannot do something. The problem is whether what you do is a criminal offense.
You cannot compare the offense of a person with the offense of an ideology, religion or else. I have not chosen to be what I am: black, tall, hairy, man, Indonesia etc. But it is completely my choice to be communist, fascist, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, mountainclimber, musician, etc.
To summarise, If I say “you are a “…ing negro” I commit an offense. While if I say: ” is b….hit” , I do not commit an offense (even if it is perceived as an offense by certain people).

Why religion shall be favoured over other ideologies?
Kim Says:
October 11th, 2006 at 6:22 pm
Interesting discussion - where the word “respect” comes into play….
A religion shouldnt have to demand “respect”.

Recently I took part in a discussion about religion and was asked whether I thought it was important to respect all religions. I thought about this for quite a while and my answer is NO - I really dont need to. There is a lot of talk about respect with regard to the cartoons of Muhammed and now the recent video - where respect is demanded for Islam and in this context we ought to put religion in its right place in this forum.

I feel that religion is a personal matter - something irrational - what I mean is it is something that we have out of personal choice (or it ought to be). Theoretically, you can not say what is the right or wrong religion - you can only make the point out of ones own personal conclusions and convictions. I am almost forced to put religion into a group of other irrational elements as art, music and for that matter love.

These elements can not be put into a concrete analysis of what is good or bad, right or wrong - you cannot make laws about these elements just as you can make laws about religions (only that there should be religious freedom) - but one can demand that religions keep within the law.

This means that it is optimal to have the opportunity to believe in what you want - freedom of choice.

In Denmark (where the cartoons originated) and most of the western world has religious freedom. But there is nothing in the law that demands “respect”. One can have respect for people and the way that they represent their religion for example: Mahatma Ghandi, Dalai Lama, Mother Theresa, Theodor Herzl, Martin Luther etc. withoug it being necessary having to say that their religion has to have respect. If a religion demands respect then so does Scientology, The Children of God, Moonies, Voodoo, Satanisme and a whole realm of other religions. I ask therefore - why should they.

Personally - I have no respect for religions that promote violence in any form and inequality for women - just as I have no respect for religions that brainwash young and decieve young people and even children - or using religion as a political weapon. This is my personal opinion and I have the right to have this.

Relgiion doesnt always make a lot of sense - but then sometimes it does… religion is between faith and the believer - and there are many ways of looking at religion. Just like art - you cannot say for sure what is good or bad art or music - this is a personal opinion. Just as one cannot say what is the right or wrong love - the people involved will have to decide that. As people of this world we must have the freedom to make, music and art - and we must also be allowed to have our love and religion as we will - we don’t need to have respect - just freedom.
Mohammed Khafi Says:
October 12th, 2006 at 6:43 pm
Respect has to be earned, it cannot just be demanded.
Bradlymail Says:
October 14th, 2006 at 9:04 am
keep cool! and it is not the big issue.
Boyke Says:
October 14th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Most West European countries have regulation against the spread of hate and racism but not on this? I mean, it’s against the law to show a swastika, promote nazism, and even insult a football player due to his race, but not hate towards religions? Strange…
Hassan Says:
October 14th, 2006 at 10:44 pm
Kim: you da man (or woman), aren’t you? wow! where did this came from?

“Recently I took part in a discussion about religion and was asked whether I thought it was important to respect all religions. I thought about this for quite a while and my answer is NO - I really dont need to”

yes absolutely, why must we respect other people’s religion? why must we respect other people’s race and ethnicity? why must we respect people’s gender? we shouldn’t respect any of them, in fact we shouldn’t respect other people! ingenious!!!

jokes aside, where have you been? let’s fill in the blanks, shall we? religion, culture, race, ethnicity, and gender are some properties that determined a person. if you disrespect other people’s religion, culture, race, ethnicity, and gender for example, than it means you disrespect that person. are you saying that we should not respect other people?!

man, you should’ve won the peace nobel prize instead of that Bangladesh guy.

——–

Tony,

-OK, how about if an artist decides to hang obscene graphics in places of worships, like synagogues, churches, mosques, etc. it’s not against the law, is it? freedom of expression?

-How about if prostitutes systematically decides to go church by church for example to find costumers? that’s not against the law. freedom?

-Try slaughtering a cow in a Hindu town. that’s not against the law, but the Hindus will try to seriously maime you for killing their sacred animal.

-Why don’t you run around naked in front of public, trust me even if it’s not against the law the police will arrest you, in whichever country you’re in.

It’s not always about whether it was against the law or not, but rather about decency. If the Hindus are upset if we slaughter a cow where they can see us doing it, then don’t do it!

BTW, why was it against the law to call a black man as ‘n***er’ but not against the law to insult what other religions held sacred? a single black person had more rights than an entire religion”¦
Riccardo Says:
October 15th, 2006 at 1:10 am
Ciao Hassan.
Those are all simple questions to answer. The reason that those things are considered by civilized societies to be “bad” are because the society has - through thousands of years of cumulative and collective wisdom - decided that prostitute costume designers, Hindus and people of African descent need be respected.

Islam is not in the same category.

Most people in this world (5 billion, in fact) DO NOT even consider it a legitimate religon, and only think it’s a kind of funny little fairy tale from the Middle East with all these really bizarre dos and don’ts — kneeling in the direction and “worshiping” some big black cube, no Q-tips or enemas during puasa, female mutilation………. — but with this very ugly murderous, violent streak.

I’m not saying I am one of those who thinks that way necessarily, I’m just letting you know that the majority of the world thinks that way and their societies have decided on what is good and bad for them. I realize that YOUR tiny circle of people — a kind of society — thinks Islam is great and must be respected, and probably everyone you have ever met in that tiny circle of your life thinks just like you; but the reality of this whole world is that your way of thinking is a tiny, insignificant minority.

The Danes are likely 1,000 years ahead of most Muslims in terms of development, so even their silly, ugly jokes should encourage introspection with a view toward mature growth, rather than your woefully naive rebuttals and mob violence.

My heartfelt prayers are with you and your brethren,
Riccardo

P.S. I must’ve missed you at the Bali Bombing commemmorations this week, were you ill?
Hassan Says:
October 15th, 2006 at 4:40 pm
Riccardo: you said “prostitute, costume designers, Hindus and people of African descent need be respected. Islam is not in the same category.”

well my ill informed friend, it is a common knowledge that you should respect other religions whether you agree with them or not, i do not agree with the practices of Christianity, Hinduism, or judaism for example, but that doesn’t mean i should not respect other religions.

as I said before “religion, culture, race, ethnicity, and gender are some properties that determined a person. if you disrespect other people’s religion, culture, race, ethnicity, and gender for example, than it means you disrespect that person. are you saying that we should not respect other people?!”

have you ever heard of ‘freedom of faith’?

if we stop respecting other people’s religion, it means we also stop respecting other people, because religion is one of the aspects that determined a person. can you imagine if all of the world’s religions and its’ believers stop respecting each other?? total and utter CHAOS!!

you also said “Most people in this world (5 billion, in fact) DO NOT even consider it a legitimate religon, and only think it’s a kind of funny little fairy tale from the Middle East with all these really bizarre dos and don’ts”

-is there any scientific proof that 5 billion people do not consider Islam as a legitimate religion? a survey maybe? if not, don’t give us anymore of your fairy tale and delusional assumptions. maybe it’s not 5 billion people who do not consider Islam as a religion, maybe it’s just Riccardo and his fantasies that thinks that way?
-that “fairy tale” is the word’s fastest growing religion, do you think a lot of people will fall for a fairy tale? do you think 1,5 billion people will fall for a fairy tale? that “fairy tale” is beating the ‘religion of love’s’ growth rate. may i wonder why a “fairy tale” can outgrow ‘love’??

BTW Riccardo, Muslims do not “worship” ka’bah. we face ka’bah only for a disciplinary reason, so every Muslim wherever he/she is will face the same direction. ka’bah is God’s spiritual place of representation on earth, much like how Catholics view the vatican (although somewhat different). get yourself educated, my friend.
Kim Says:
October 16th, 2006 at 1:19 am
Dear Hassan - my comments to your messages….

You have missed the point my friend - I agree that we should respect peoples race and ethnicity, gender, colour etc etc - because these are rational things - things we are born with that have a physical content - that we cannot change. I put religion in the category of irrational things - like art, music and love - this we can change our mind about - and grow with as we improve our minds. We can make laws about how and when we might be considered to be offending others - You write: “if an artist decides to hang obscene graphics in places of worships, like synagogues, churches, mosques, etc. it’s not against the law, is it? freedom of expression?” I say - Of course it is against the law - the people who have responsiblility for these places of worship would not allow this form of freedom - it would be trespassing - so it’s a silly example. But the art could be shown elsewhere in a hall for example - this is freedom - where the individual can decide whether they choose to see it or not. For your information - most black people I know call themselves “N***ers” - it was the white man who decided to change the law and call (in America) black people Afro-americans - desipite the fact that many of them never even originated from Africa. !! Most negros I know dont like being called black.

Anyway - it is a shame that you in a debate forum like this get so irate and sarcastic. This is a typical sign of intollerance for the opinions of others and a typical example of a lack of “respect” for those who think differently than you.

Surely, you will agree that religion cannot be described as “rational”. Just as music, art and love - can never be rational - these elements are of a “personal” nature. These things should always have a freedom of choice. Islam - is not rational - it a choice (and in some places not a choice - where Islam is blended with politics) - THEN it becomes rational - and then it becomes dangerous - because politics is rational! Then the freedom is taken away and decided by those who control the people. Mixing religion in politics is the absolut reason for many Islamic countries problems and difficult relationships with the west. The people are not free - but controlled by religion - whether they like it or not.

I do feel however that if everywhere in the world praised “freedom of religion” - where people stopped forcing and demanding others to take consideration for “their” religious preferences - but kept their preferences to themselves as a private matter - then the world would be a better place. The drawings of Muhammed was not wrong for an infidel to do - but would be terribly wrong for a Moslem to do - so why care! According to most Moslems we infidels are already dammed - so who cares! Just think for a moment how the Islamic communities have treated Jewish communities in this world. These poeple dont run around and blow up embassies or rage around screaming and shouting. It is quite embarrassing that the drawings of Mohammed that depicted a violence and insanity have not just come out from nowhere. The Islamic comunittees ought to be doing some soul searching as to why communties in the west have this image of Islam.

As far as Im concerned it will only be within the Islamic communties themselves that the approach as to how we can live in this world together can be achieved. I am 50 years old. The first 25 years of my life I lived and studied in London with peoples from all around the world - we had a great time - we listened to each other and learned from each other. It was not until Salman Rushdies book, and the pakistani community not accepting the British parliament that the troubles started. Why was it necessary to react so violently! If they had just shrugged their shoulders and said “who cares” - or ok lets have a good debate about it - just as the other relgions do (even when churches and synagogs are burned, buddah statues blown up etc etc - the lists are long)…. then there would not be so much trouble. But when free thinking people consider something is necessary to be debated - we should have the right to do it - whether Moslems like it or not. This is freedom! and has nothing to do with respect.

People can be respected - I agree (no matter what they believe in) - but not religions. I would like to know whether Hassan also respects - Satanism, Scientology, Moonies, Children of God, Voodoo etc etc. I would like to know whether Hassan respects the religions where children are abused, where stoning is acceptable, where discussion and analysis of ones own religion is forbidden? I would like to know whether Hassan respects Judaism and Israels right to exist. I would like to know whether Hassan respects all religions no matter what their behaviour entails?
Bradlymail Says:
October 16th, 2006 at 7:56 am
well Kim I agree with you. We must have rational thinking when we talk about religion, race, gender, etc. Respect yes but with fredom of practicing.
Kim Says:
October 16th, 2006 at 3:05 pm
Dear Bradlymail - No - you misunderstand - we must not rationalise religion with as you say “rational thinking”. Religion cannot be put in the same category as race, gender, skin colour etc. That is the core of the problem. Religion is irrational - like music, art and love - if you rationalise religion - as is done when Islamic nations use their religion to control politics - then freedom is removed from the equation and we then have “Islamism” - which as far as I am concerned as far from freedom as all the other “isms” - socialism, communism, nazism etc.
Hassan Says:
October 16th, 2006 at 6:44 pm
again, the cheerleader Bradlymail strikes again!
Kim Says:
October 16th, 2006 at 6:58 pm
Dear Hassan - I have no idea what your comment means….
Boyke Says:
October 16th, 2006 at 7:43 pm
Kim,

I agree that we should not rationalize faith. The efforts are futile. But like we respect others’ choice / taste in music, art and love, shouldn’t we respect their choice for faith as well? Respect ones’ choice vs. respect the object of choice itself. Just semantic I guess.

But when without permission you change the color of my hair in the name of art, only THEN I can disrespect your choice. Lawfully, rationally then I have the right to do something with your choice: report you to the police etc. Thus, intention is not the same with the act itself. Intention is the same with faith, only your hearts really know what they are.
Bradlymail Says:
October 17th, 2006 at 7:26 am
Kim thanks for correcting me.
Hassan Says:
October 17th, 2006 at 5:29 pm
Kim: how about the “slaughtering a cow in a Hindu town. that’s not against the law, isn’t it? but the Hindus will be mad at us” thing. should we respect them or not?
Mandala Says:
October 25th, 2006 at 10:40 pm
Last nite in BBC, they held a program called ‘Islam vs freedom of speech”, and so many very good Muslim defending our faith and opinion which point to Islam never threatening freedom of speech. In the end of program, they have their independent audiences to vote ‘Islam threatening freedom of speech, Yes or No’, and surprisingly, the vote ‘No’ won by 52% !!

The thing that needs to be straightened is, offending our prophet Muhammad is different with the same action to another religius leader. Muslim threat the leader as way of life, and at some degree it is equal to anybody threat their MOTHER (not father). So if you never know Muhammad, then imagine that they actually offend your mother, please find in your heart how it’s feel.

This kind censorship also happen in western, which they will refuse offending material published in media, like child pornography, put the ‘beep’ on TV, that means they also limit themself and try not to offend another people if they know it.

The most interesting quote is ‘They not only keep kicking us (Muslim) but also telling us how to REACT after being kicked’ how sad ….
Andrew Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 10:33 pm
The thing that needs to be straightened is, offending our prophet Muhammad is different with the same action to another religius leader.

In all fairness, please answer this question:
Why in the world are you expecting the general population to treat your religion differently? especially in a predominantly non-Muslim society, how can you expect an exclusive treatment? why the hell do they have to give you special treatment?
If everyone were like you, how many different law and regulation would there be?

To be honest, I am against offending ANY religion, BUT you simply cannot ask for a special treatment, period.
Mandala Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
hi andrew, nice to see you in here

yes we treat our Leader differently, that does mean we treat all religius leader with respect. Can you see any we abuse Jesus? never, in fact Jesus is treated very respected as our former leader, and we belive will have the same place with Muhammad, along with Moses, Noah, and Abraham.

the difference that I refer is, the way you treat Jesus (which you can satire Him, please might Allah forgive you), to our treatment to Muhammad, NOT treatment from us to Muhammad compared our treatment to Jesus (etc).

and you never answer my question, can I disgrace your Mother? even if your mother definitely not my mother.
Jack Hawkins Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 11:10 pm
All this shows that Islam is about submission and control, and consequently the Islamic hierarchy seeks to control everyone even non-Muslims!

Freedom of speech must include the right to say things which are offensive - otherwise freedom of speech is meaningless. And why logically should religion be excepted? No reason at all!

Muslims believe that Mohammed shouldn’t be insulted and that he was the perfect role model. Not everyone believes that. These Danes are not insulting God as such, merely doing what some people believe is wrong. Muslims SAY these are God’s laws - other people say different. Indeed Muslims use this freedom of speech to say things that are offensive to the Western world - so it’s a two-way street. Personally I find it far more offensive comparing rape victims to uncovered meat, but I wouldn’t riot and kill to show my offence.

Mandala, it’s interesting to hear that many Muslims disagreed with the views of Imran Khan. As for the quote “They not only keep kicking us (Muslim) but also telling us how to REACT after being kicked”, that misses the obvious point that no civilized society thinks that killing people over the expression of free speech is unacceptable. FULL STOP. If there had been such vigorous protests over the suicide bombings in the name of Islam, then there wouldn’t be so much hostility to the Muslim community in Britain. Once Muslims stop blaming everyone else for their problems and indulging in victim status, they may be able to tackle the terrorists (if they want to).

—————-

This argument about being allowed to insult someone’s mother is so obviously specious - what on earth makes people think this is remotely relevant to freedom of speech per se?

Hopefully everyone knows that freedom of speech does not apply to shouting “fire” in a crowded theatre, in the famous example? Making the analogy between, for example, violent pornography, and publishing cartoons of Mohammed, is rather odd as well.

“”””-

Hassan you say “if you disrespect other people’s religion, culture, race, ethnicity, and gender for example, than it means you disrespect that person”, as if that statement is patently and self-evidently true. I would disagree. If you disrespect someone’s gender, race, or ethnicity you disrespect that person, since these qualities are inherent and not a matter of choice. However it is perfectly acceptable to criticise (which may be interpreted as disrespect) their religion or culture, such dialogue is a means of progress. How else can societies become more civilised otherwise, without an examination of values and beliefs?
Kim Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 11:28 pm
Hello Jack
Yes, you have hit the nail on the head - The way to get the Muslim world to catch up with the rest of the world is that they have to develop from within. You are quite right that if only the Muslim world had in masses demonstrated against terrorists - everytime violence and terrorism has been done in Islams name then their wouldn’t be such hostility towards this religion. But no we don’t see it. In Denmark, and most of the other western countries the Muslims are quite silent about making a protest against terrorism in Islams name but shout and demonstrate quite loud and often violently about being a victim - a victim of being described as violent (which is what the Danish cartoons were all about)..
Its almost as though being the victim of western values and culture is the way forward for Muslims to argue their case. But western values and cultures are hundreds of years ahead of Muslim cultures and values which remove freedom of speech and freedom on the whole. This is why I believe that a revolution modernisation of Islam must come from within and from the people themselves.
I am very close to a Danish woman Reverend who makes it her mission to have great dialogue with all the leaders of other religious groups. She has done this with the exception of the Imams who will not meet with her. This is totally ridiculous and totally unacceptable. How in the world can their ever be dialogue with people who dont respect female reverends. The fact of the matter is that the local Imams dont regard women as equal and their have no desire to make contact with her - which says more about them than her.
Dear Muslims - open your eyes and be free…
Jack Hawkins Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 11:29 pm
If you look at the original cartoons (and not the fakes added by the Danish Muslims), actually many of them made a serious statement about Islam and so cannot be dismissed as being gratuitously offensive. Have any of the Muslims commenting here seen the cartoons? If not, how can you really comment sensibly?

Hi Kim, I have come across this attitude to women amongst Muslim men - for example with Somalian refugees in London who would refuse to speak to female paramedics and nurses. They would try and insist on female doctors however to see their wives but no dice unfortunately for them.
Andrew Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 11:33 pm
Mandala, just FYI, I’ve seen a lot of cartoons, t-shirts, table sheets, napkins, bibs, hats, handkerchiefs, you name it - with pictures and caricatures depicting Jesus, ranging from funny to grossly insulting. And I don’t care if they were created by anyone of any religion.

Islam may have a different rule internally, but what is allowed to be done to a religion must apply universally within the context of a country.
Jack Hawkins Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 11:41 pm
Hassan - when a civilised person goes to another country eg a Hindu town, they respect their customs. Of course with many Muslim countries there is not much choice - if I tried to get a crucifix or a Bible into Saudi Arabia I would be arrested. “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” - a proverb which is often misinterpreted I might add. Muslims in the UK show a lack of respect indeed frank contempt for UK culture and laws.

I have been inside a mosque and I took my shoes off. I have been inside the Vatican and Greek monasteries and again I respected the Holy See by dressing appropriately and being quiet. Respect should be a two-way street. You say Muslims respect Jesus - well that’s debatable actually. I have heard Muslims say thigns that according to Christian standards are heretical. Does that justify demonstrations and violence?
Kim Says:
October 27th, 2006 at 11:44 pm
Ha ha - Yes - the difference is when these stupid things are done other religious groups dont crowd the streets in hoads and violently protest. They just shrug their shoulders and say - who cares - its my faith not thiers…

This was the crux of the cartoons showing Islam as a religion with too much violent aspects (terrorism). Everytime there are huge protests around the world - what do we see - violent mobs! Doing exactly what is depicted in the cartoons that Islam is often closely connected to violence. If the Moslems disagree then they should make peaceful protests AGAINST the violence - but we never see this… we only see more violence… burning cars, burning embassies, mobs shouting screaming and often bleeding with self infliction - which to be quite honest is quite frightening!

This also is a response to Hassan who asked me “Kim: how about the “slaughtering a cow in a Hindu town. that’s not against the law, isn’t it? but the Hindus will be mad at us” thing. should we respect them or not? ”
Hassan - thats the point Hinduism is a very very peaceful religion and their would never shout and scream and be violent about anything you did to their cow… they would be sad - and probably protest - but their wouldn’t use violence. We should respect people for who their are and not for what their believe in - that is a personal matter and should be kept so.
Riccardo Says:
October 28th, 2006 at 12:50 am
I posted this on another thread, but it also seems quite appropriate here”

Below is an excerpt from a former Muslim, who describes a bit about what it’s like being a Muslim, and he has some important things to say to people who try to defend iSlam at all costs, AND NEVER criticizing even the most heinous of mass murderers who shout “Allah akbar!” as they slice the heads off of innocent schoolgirls.
“”””””””””””””-
“”¦Muhammad suffered from a malignant narcissistic personality disorder. His followers, to the degree that they emulate him, think like him and try to behave like him, have entered into his narcissistic bubble universe and have become narcissists by extension. This happens to all cultists. In all cults, the insanity of the guru reflects on the followers who surrender their intelligence to him and follow him unquestioningly and brainlessly.
The narcissists feel grandiose and self-important. They want to be acknowledged without commensurate merit. They want recognition and preferential treatment. They expect respect without feeling any obligation to reciprocate. They get their sense of self-worth by criticizing infidels, criticizing you, decrying THE WEST and disparaging its values, but the people in THE WEST are not allowed to speak negatively of them. It is okay for these cult followers to violate your rights, abuse you and even kill you, but you are not supposed to mistreat them in the slightest way. In fact, they demand privileges that are not available to others. What they want is your submission. That is what iSlam is all about - submission”¦.”
“”””””””””””””””””””-
Here’s the link to the whole article about mocking iSlam: jakchat
Andrew Says:
October 28th, 2006 at 4:01 am
That reminds me of a military leader from a country in Europe from WW2.
The difference being this latter man did not do things in the name of God.
He did murder a lot of people, though
Jack Hawkins Says:
October 28th, 2006 at 4:08 am
Ahmadinejad is going to make the little corporal look like an amateur I fear….
Andrew Says:
October 28th, 2006 at 5:17 am
Hi again Mandala,

The same treatment for Mohamed as for Jesus? that’s the point, people in the west do draw cartoons, tell jokes, and that kind of thing, about Jesus. That is considered acceptable within the context of the country - although the church certainly won’t like it. So if they can do that even to Jesus, why can’t they do that to Mohamed? (not that Jesus and Mohamed are compArable, at least not to Christians)

If you ask my personal opinion, people should not do that to either one, but the point is, it happens.

Imagine this: you live in Indonesia, and you love beef rendang. People have been eating beef since ancient time. Then suddenly a few hundred Hindu families move in, and demand that you stop eating beef, or else they will burn down cars, houses and businesses (although I’m sure the Hindus won’t do this kind of thing).

How would you feel about that? would you quit eating beef?

Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
Jack Hawkins Says:
October 28th, 2006 at 5:26 am
Hassan, you are very mistaken in thinking the Holy See is seen by Catholics as the place of “God’s spiritual place of representation on earth” (whatever that means) which would be apparent from an understanding of Christian beliefs.
Mandala Says:
October 29th, 2006 at 12:06 am
To Kim: you propose weak argument to distinguish between choice and choosen, and gave example that you can’t change gender, race, colour, etc. You can choose whether you want to be fat, or fit (it’s not that easy though, but you can), you can change you colour if you want, you can easily become blonde even if normally brunette, in extreeme you can change your colour to become white, even if you’re black. you know the rest.. The point is not because you can change it, then you can be insulted.

There’is a clear line between disobedient and insult. To slaughter cow in non Hindu town is disobidient according to Hindu rule, but if you’re not Hindu, then it’s OK. But it’s different when you doing it in front of public in Hindu town, that is a clear insult. To compare with, to depict Muhammad (properly) is disobidient, but if you’re not Muslim, then it’s entirely up to you. To falsely illustrate Muhammad as drunken rapist terrorist is just spread hatred and definitely insult. Your society is already at some degree detached to church, remember in middle age when they kill you if you speak differently. This doesn’t mean you can insult another religion if you don’t have any (or detached, by putting Jesus as a joke).

To Jack: imagine back there when we was in school yard, there’re two, or I can add three types of kid typically, the Bully, the one who can insult victim in any way, even somehow insulting race, religion, physical, parent, etc., and the victim, who the Bully knows that if he insult them, they will sad, cry, angry, or sometimes kill them self. And other group that usually allienated with Bully, or even control him. My point is, you know exactly when you do the insult, the exact reaction can be predicted, but then you still do that.. can you compare your self with those bullies?

In similar way Black people liberate them self, and gain the respect now, they also ask the west to deep in their heart not to insult them and treated differently, you will feel you need to exclusively treated them in the beginning, you feel need to be more careful to speak with them, treat them. You feel it that it will remove your freedom a bit, as they can easily complaint ‘ aahh you do this to me, is that because I’m Black??’

In the end, respect will automatically exist in any civilization, and if you can predict the result if you do something, and you still do that, that mean you really want the thing happen.
Mohammed Khafi Says:
October 29th, 2006 at 9:54 am
Mandala said:

But it’s different when you doing it in front of public in Hindu town, that is a clear insult.

The cartoons were produced in a predominantly Christian, secular country, namely Denmark, where Muslims have choosen to live for whatever reason. Why should this small group of people be able to dictate in a violent fashion the behaviour of the majority? It is only the idolisation of the Prophet Mohammed which the mainstream Muslims adhere to whch causes this sort of behaviour, according to Al Quran they are supposed to treat all of Allah’s Prophets equally, but do you see them getting upset when Jesus is lampooned or lambasted, never!

Mandala also said:

To falsely illustrate Muhammad as drunken rapist terrorist is just spread hatred and definitely insult.

Don’t forget Paedophile! But do you know where they get these stories Mandala. . . from Hadith! They are using your own false teachings against you, and also against Mohammed, but do you ever try to reject these ridiculous manmade teachings and just follow Al Quran, never!

And again Mandala said:

In similar way Black people liberate them self, and gain the respect now, they also ask the west to deep in their heart not to insult them and treated differently

Why bring colour into the discussion? are you unaware of the Arab Slave trade which flourished for 1400 years, as compared to the 400 years of the Western Slave Trade?

Nearly 100 years after President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation in America, and 130 years after all slaves within the British Empire were set free by parliamentary decree, Saudi Arabia and Yemen, in 1962, and Mauritania in 1980, begrudgingly removed legalised slavery from their statute books. And this only after international pressure was brought to bear. Today numerous international organisations document that slavery still continues in some Muslim countries.

Recently, a former slave from the Nuba Mountains of Sudan, Mende Nazer, had her autobiography: “Slave: My True Story” published. Mende was captured in 1992, she was first a slave to a rich Arab family in Khartoum, and then in 2002 to a Sudanese diplomat in London, from whom she escaped and sought political asylum.

Are you unaware of the problems in Sudan and other parts of Africa between the Etnic Arab and Black African populations?

Up to 80,000 black African villagers are believed to have died, many slain by Arab Janjaweed nomads competing with them for a fertile zone shrinking under desertification and by a minority Arab government accustomed to keeping power by killing opponents.

Not getting much respect from your Hadith following mainstream Muslim friends there are they?
Andrew Says:
October 29th, 2006 at 11:12 am
Mandala said:

There is a clear line between disobedient and insult. To slaughter cow in non Hindu town is disobidient according to Hindu rule, but if you’re not Hindu, then it’s OK.

You did not answer the question.

Who are you to say that “it’s OK”, in the above example?

Why do non-Muslims in predominantly non-Muslim countries have to follow the rule of Islam?
Jack Hawkins Says:
October 30th, 2006 at 2:13 am
Mandala - when you talk about bullies and victims presumably you are portraying Islam and Muslims as the victims. This is patently absurd in the case of the Danish cartoons, where the victims were those killed! Similarly for the Pope’s Regensburg address. Wallowing in victimhood is a Muslim preoccupation, which is rarely justified.

BTW Mandala, your point about black people is so badly worded I can’t make sense of it, sorry!
Hassan Says:
November 8th, 2006 at 12:13 am
kim: the indian Hindus are well documented for assaulting and killing Muslims who sacrificed cows for their holy day of eid al adha.

the message here: do not insult others and told them to react according to how you wanted them to react.
krishna109 Says:
March 6th, 2007 at 4:15 am
All the fuss over the Danish publication — alledegly an ‘insult to Islam’– is total nonsense. They were published several month earlier — without any problem. Why no fuss? Could it possibly be because, the newspaper that published them…was in a predominantly Muslim country?

And by the way they were publihed during Ramadan!

Those people that criticize the Danes for publishing them and those who incitement of hatred resulted in 140 plus deaths, merely over some cartoons really do look like hypocrites and total fools! Another case of taqiyya for the purpose of inciting hatred towards the kufr.

http://freedomforegyptians.blogspot.com/.
Suhada Says:
April 11th, 2007 at 2:08 pm
Assalamualaikum. I think, the part of being religiously mature is being content to take insults and criticisms in a proper manner. I am not giving my support for those Danish Cartoonists. I think they are very unresponsible for causing such a stir. But as a Muslim I tend to understand what underlies their action. We, Muslims, has failed to give the world the picture of peace within our religion. I think each of us is a messenger of Allah in some sense. We are not a prophet, but our existence and gestures somehow paint the worlds picture about Allah. How can we talk about Allah is compassionate while some of our brother comitting suicide bombing while shouting Allahuakbar? How can we talk about Allah is just when women in many Islamic countries is considered merely as objects. Honestly I envy our Christian coussins. You can browse easily any cartoons who insult Isa Al-Masih. But there were no such a hard reactions. I’ve read Dan Brown’s novel, The Da Vinci Code, and I found that very offensive to Christianity. Yet no Christian leaders declare a fatwa about killing Mr. Brown. Just compare this to what happened to Salman Rushdie. I’ve read The Satanic Verses. Yes it is offensive, but not in a rational way such as The Da Vinci Code. It is just fiction poets, nothing more. It never claimed itself to be based on facts. It’s a blasphemy, but it never challenge our apologetics.

Yes we are responsible with the world view about Islam!! We have failed to paint the grand picture of Islam as religion of peace. Let me quote Abdurrahman Wahid: “Tuhan tidak perlu dibela!! Gitu aja kok repot”. Wassalam.