What are people making of this crazy Mohammed cartoon row? Is it news in the States?

I'm really curious to see the actual cartoons that are causing so much fuss. Has anyone seen them on the net? As I understand it they've only been published in Danish, Dutch, German, Italian and French, but if anyone can find them in French I could translate 'em, or there are other people here who speak these languages, I'm sure?

Ah, so far I've managed only to find this:

This is going to sound insensitive, but the whole situation is fucking insane. Absolute bullshit.

Connor

I completely agree. I'm wondering if anyone will defend the Muslim* stance here or not.

*I mean, the Muslim people who are taking a stance against the cartoons, specifically. Not just any old tom, dick, or mohammed who happens to be Muslim.

Fuck em.

Just like we (and by we I mean gramsci) often say fuck the christians. Same bullshit, slightly different fairytale.

Believe whatever the hell you want, but if you try to control the media, arts or politics with your bizarre superstitions then you can get fucked.

Rotten Tanx wrote:Fuck em.

Just like we (and by we I mean gramsci) often say fuck the christians. Same bullshit, slightly different fairytale.

I completely agree.

It sickens me to watch this paper be bullied into submission.

I just read a BBC article that many other European papers are reprinting the cartoon as a sign of solidarity for a free press. Fucking A.

si-maro wrote:I completely agree. I'm wondering if anyone will defend the Muslim* stance here or not.

*I mean, the Muslim people who are taking a stance against the cartoons, specifically. Not just any old tom, dick, or mohammed who happens to be Muslim.

well--how would the US media/public react to a caricature of Jesus with a machine-gun, shooting up "infidel Iraqi's" as a joke on GWB's "God bless us all" stance?

how would the UK media/public react to an inverted Cross in the newspapers "editorial cartoons" section where the Union Jack was?

how would it look to see the Torah underneath Sharon's ass, in caricature, to allow him to see over his car's dashboard--which is leaking oil?

you may think it's bullshit, but these people are genuinely offended because of Islam's "No Graven Images" stance. The ten commandments has a similar tenet, which is followed figuratively as opposed to literally.

It could be argued that the christian movement allows Jesus to be portrayed "gravenly" because how else were they going to trick everyone into thinking Jesus was white? It may not be cut and dry like that, but I think you get my point.

Religious iconography (or the lack thereof) elicits a very strong response in people, and I can empathize with it. I don't think it's an unreasonable request, (especially considering how many unreasonable things Muslims in the world expect, given the way some of our most visible trangressors have behaved) and should be OK.

Gary Larson commented once that he had to make sure that all depictions of God were favorable when he tackled the subject in the Far Side. He mentioned in the comic strip where God was whaling on this guy in Jeopardy, and he (paraphrased)"had to make sure that the human competing against God had scored nothing, because if he had beaten God to the buzzer even once, people would have gotten mad."

It's no difference. regardless of the situation, the newspapers fucked up by printing it.

anyone seen the Firewater album cover for 'get off the cross' ? How about Cannibal Corpse or any other scene mag with mean ole' dirty picture of jesus. The fact is that caricatures of jesus are expected and I welcome them....what makes me cackle is the degree to which people will go to censor themselves against caricatures of muhammed or buddha and I'm glad this was published. This is a genuine issue of censorship and I love watching the apologists rage and divert the issue.

unpoppy wrote:anyone seen the Firewater album cover for 'get off the cross' ? How about Cannibal Corpse or any other scene mag with mean ole' dirty picture of jesus. The fact is that caricatures of jesus are expected and I welcome them....what makes me cackle is the degree to which people will go to censor themselves against caricatures of muhammed or buddha and I'm glad this was published. This is a genuine issue of censorship and I love watching the apologists rage and divert the issue.

your examples are album covers, not newspapers.

it doesn't even equate.

try again.

kerble wrote:

si-maro wrote:I completely agree. I'm wondering if anyone will defend the Muslim* stance here or not.

*I mean, the Muslim people who are taking a stance against the cartoons, specifically. Not just any old tom, dick, or mohammed who happens to be Muslim.

well--how would the US media/public react to a caricature of Jesus with a machine-gun, shooting up "infidel Iraqi's" as a joke on GWB's "God bless us all" stance?

I would 100% support that paper's right to publish that cartoon. And if Christians started burning up papers, brandishing weapons and making death threats, I would be just as repelled as I am on the Danish situation probably more so since it would be the dogmatism of my fellow U.S. citizens.

But I do sincerely appreciate your perspective, Faiz.

Connor

Kerble, you make a reasonable point except that if a newspaper made fun of Jesus here and people got offended I'd say fuck them too. Why pander to people who think their beliefs are above and beyond the law?