Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drawing Conclusions--WHAT THE CARTOONS HAVE REVEALED.
New Republic Online ^ | 2-8-06 | Martin Peretz

Posted on 02/08/2006 10:59:36 AM PST by SJackson

aybe you remember, back in 1989, the controversy over Piss Christ, a piece of art by the now fashionable artist Andres Serrano. He himself had been living on a fellowship from the National Endowment for the Arts, and his brave break-out work (a crucifix immersed in urine) was hung in various public museums and was debated and mostly defended by the high culture elites until it became part of the canon. So much part of the canon that I suspect almost no one any longer blanches or even blinks when he sees the image anywhere. Then you may remember that other and later cruddy art work, by Chris Ofili, the Afro-Brit winner of the Turner Prize, Holy Virgin Mary, in which the medium is ever so daintily catalogued: "paper collage, glitter, polyester resin, map pins, elephant dung on linen." Coming after Piss Christ, it did not cause so much of a stir. Still, these experiments in testing public tolerance for the visual representation of the mixing of human and animal excretions with the divine constituted, at least in my view, the ugliest battle in the culture wars. It was started on the left, and it was the left that won it. And I'm not sure it shouldn't have. Yes, the First Amendment ... and all that. You may dislike what it protects ... but protect it, it must.

I was reminded of these episodes by the riots now spreading here, there, everywhere over the twelve cartoons about the Prophet Mohammed published in a privately owned Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, last September. Some of the illustrations are a bit goofy, some much more provocative. One depicts Mohammed's head with an ignited bomb protruding from his turban. In any case, for the rampaging mobs of Muslims this may be more a theological contention than a political one. Muslims are just plain forbidden from depicting the prophet. So, let them not depict him. But Christians and Jews, Hindus and Buddhists are not prohibited, and I assume that the Danish cartoonists were not Muslims but Lutherans (an overwhelming majority of whom assert that they do not believe in God) or from that cool breed of Scandinavian rationalists. Another cartoon shows the prophet greeting some martyrs at the entrance to heaven, and he shouts to them, "Stop, stop, we have run out of virgins." When you compare the most offensive of these caricatures to the vile and inciting images of Jews routinely shown on government-owned television all over the Muslim world (forget about the ugly role of caricature in the long history of Christian anti-Semitism) you wonder what all the fuss is about. OK, Bill Clinton doesn't wonder. He's referred to them as "these totally outrageous cartoons against Islam," although I myself doubt whether he's ever bothered to look at them. Is he for free expression or for that sloppy multiculturalism that forbids you from raising anyone's hackles? This is the liberal's dilemma. By the way, a European-Arab website--in retaliation, I suppose--has just put out a cartoon showing Anne Frank and Hitler in bed.

As far as I can tell, no American newspaper except The Philadelphia Inquirer has reprinted the cartoons. This has left those who still depend on the daily gazette in the lurch. They don't know exactly what the papers are writing about and why precisely Muslim mobs are so agitated. Of course, television hasn't shown them either. And TNR won't publish them. Should we? We certainly are not obliged to run them: Just imagine the geshrei if a pro-Zionist journal did run them. We wouldn't in any case: It would only bring more people into the circle of peril. If you're really interested you can find them on the web on your own. (The San Francisco Chronicle's online edition has a link to them and the right-wing FrontPageMagazine.com has a very informative and intelligent article on its site, fully illustrated.) I just don't recall whether any of the newspapers or news weeklies reproduced Piss Christ at the time of that controversy. (And I'd appreciate it if any readers can tell me.) The present American media black-out is consistent with the Bush administration's huffing and puffing: "We find them offensive, and we certainly understand why Muslims would find these images offensive." Maybe the media execs were thinking about whether our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would be in more peril if American press outlets reproduced the cartoons. It seems that the Islamicists believe that they cannot simply disagree vehemently with those who offend them. They seem incapable of simply opposing. Killing--or threatening to kill--seems to be a reflex with enough of them to make militant Islam a danger. As Saturday's Guardian pointed out, a demonstration "led by the extremist group al-Ghuraba ... marched to the Danish embassy in Knightsbridge carrying banners calling on Muslims to 'massacre' those who insult Islam and chanting: 'Britain, you will pay, 7/7 on its way'." Why exactly threaten England with another bombing? As far as I know, no British periodical has run the cartoons even as an act of solidarity. So why, in fact, are people who so openly menace the English populace allowed to walk free on the streets? This is not free speech. This is rank intimidation--and, given 7/7, there is, in the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., a clear and present danger.

But a few newspapers in other countries were neither docile nor frightened nor conscientious. There is, after all, some fraternity among journalists. The Times reported that the cartoons had been reprinted in Germany, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, and Hungary, in addition to France and Jordan, where the editors responsible for the decision were summarily fired by their papers' owners. That Jordanian is one hell of a brave person. In Damascus, where the Syrian police-state can prevent virtually anything from happening, mobs burnt the Danish and Norwegian embassies with impunity. In Beirut, thousands of seething Muslims stormed into a Christian quarter where the Danish consulate is situated and brought it down also. Lebanese security arrested 76 Syrians, 36 Palestinians, 25 suspected Syrians without papers, 36 Lebanese, and 12 of unidentified nationality. In proto-Palestine, of course, mobs sacked many European offices, even though most of them have functioned--to Israel's despair--as eager partisans in the Palestinian cause, even (with a wink and a nod) partisans of Palestinian terrorism. According to the AP, Mahmoud Zahar, a leader of Hamas, the landslide winner in the recent Palestinian legislative elections, told Il Giornale that anybody responsible for publishing the cartoons should be put to death, and complained that "We should have killed all those who offend the Prophet, and here we are demonstrating peaceably." Peaceably, indeed--if burning offices is considered peaceful. In the Arab town of Nazareth in Israel, hundreds turned out to vent their anger. Rage and bloodlust were on display elsewhere in the Muslim world. Here's the Islamicist equation: Blow up Jews, Israelis, unfavored Iraqis, Hindus in China, Christians in Indonesia, tourists in Egypt, ordinary and uninvolved people riding the trains in London and Madrid--good, very good. Draw some tasteless cartoons--bad, no, terrible, candidate for murder.

The Danish predicament is especially excruciating. Denmark has a deep commitment to freedom of the press, and the population is exceedingly disquieted by Muslim impingement on its distinctive way of life, socially tolerant, if also a bit xenophobic. Yes, the Danes assert, minorities have rights. But majorities do also, and among them is the right to survive with their culture and norms not being under siege. The whole of Western Europe is right now in the midst of discovering this truism, and other countries' political and cultural norms--those of France, Belgium, Holland, for example--are more imperiled than are Denmark's. Still, the Copenhagen government is center-right. The cartoons expressed something of the sentiment of its supporters. But, being an advanced economy in a globalized world, it has other interests, capitalist interests, and these interests have been pressing the government to try to propitiate the Muslim world and particularly the Arab sector of it over the cartoon incident.

Boycotts against Danish companies are underway wherever Mohammed is officially revered. There are interdicts against Danish products. In Egypt, what go for supermarkets have announced a ban on Danish commodities. There is an epidemic of ostracism, not only of the Danes but the other Scandinavians who had absolutely nothing to do with this episode. ARLA, one of the largest dairy producers in the world and the makers of Lurpak butter, has been particularly hard hit, and it has already laid off hundreds of workers at home. Lego is on the taboo list. So is Novo, the main producer of insulin. (Only Arab polities and Arab companies would put a hex on an insulin manufacturer. To hell with those who suffer from diabetes.) A.P. Moller, perhaps the world's hugest shipping company, like the other targets of the trade boycott, also has felt tremendous pressure. Of course, it, like its partners in trade pain, has attempted to rechannel that pressure on to the ruling party in Copenhagen to pacify the Muslims, to yield and pray for quarter.

But the European polis is not altogether controlled by the big corporations. The Europeans still have an attachment to their liberties, including their press liberties. And the incident of the cartoons that offended the Muslim minorities of the continent and the Muslim majorities elsewhere has not been, will not be, the only matter to provoke them. Europe and the countries of Europe will not take instructions on how to run a civil politics or how to preserve their culture from those whose habits have not yet caught up with the Magna Carta or the Declaration of the Rights of Man. This episode will inevitably harm Turkey in its bid to enter the European Union. More important, it will deepen the alienation of Muslim and Arab immigrants and their families from those amongst whom they live, still as a minority. They will have no one but themselves to blame. They did not keep the social contract that was both implicit and explicit in their arrival--not that they had larger birth-rates but that they increasingly do not seem to grasp the most elementary of democratic transactions: Give berth even to that which you dislike. The very essence of liberal society is the willingness--OK, the doleful willingness--of its members and constituent groups to be slighted.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: cartoon; islam; peretz

1 posted on 02/08/2006 10:59:39 AM PST by SJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: dennisw; Cachelot; Nix 2; veronica; Catspaw; knighthawk; Alouette; Optimist; weikel; Lent; GregB; ..
If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel.

..................

2 posted on 02/08/2006 11:01:31 AM PST by SJackson ("Bin Laden our beloved, Denmark must be blown up," protesters in Ramallah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

FYI, the source is listed as National Review Online, however the link is to The New Republic...


3 posted on 02/08/2006 11:01:44 AM PST by Zeppo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo

Thanks, I'll ask to have it corrected.


4 posted on 02/08/2006 11:04:57 AM PST by SJackson ("Bin Laden our beloved, Denmark must be blown up," protesters in Ramallah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Spoke to the store manager of a regional specialty grocery chain and suggested they set up a display of Danish products carried to help customers support the Danes.

He seemed receptive but could only pass the suggestion "up the line."

5 posted on 02/08/2006 11:05:59 AM PST by ncountylee (Dead terrorists smell like victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
I like that last paragraph. It bigs us up in Europe - heck, we need a bit of biggin' up.

kind regards
6 posted on 02/08/2006 11:06:05 AM PST by vimto (Life isn't a dry run)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The point over the Piss piece and the Dung canvas was about public money and public support. My tax dollars should not be spent in those ways especially when courts demand that any positive image or expression of Christ -- say in a nativity scene -- should be banished from public buildings and never touch public funds. There is some major hypocrisy in the application of the First Amendment. Give me back my positive religious expression rights and then I'll shut up about the piss and dung nonsense. But it flatly is not fair that you can bash Jesus but you can't praise him.

No one that I can recall ever said that the "art" should be illegal to produce. And no one rioted over the issue.

7 posted on 02/08/2006 11:07:13 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

You know, since the combined output of all the middle east (taking out oil) is less than that of Finland - these boycotts can only go so far - they don't make anything and must purchase most of their goods from someone.


8 posted on 02/08/2006 11:07:23 AM PST by 2banana (My common ground with terrorists - They want to die for Islam, and we want to kill them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
a European-Arab website--in retaliation, I suppose--has just put out a cartoon showing Anne Frank and Hitler in bed.

Well, obviously someone, somewhere, sees some kind of connection that is hidden from non-Islamofascists....

9 posted on 02/08/2006 11:08:31 AM PST by freebilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

bump


10 posted on 02/08/2006 11:10:27 AM PST by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

"But it flatly is not fair that you can bash Jesus but you can't praise him."

Perfect!


11 posted on 02/08/2006 11:13:01 AM PST by Blind Eye Jones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Time to look for and buy Danish products.


12 posted on 02/08/2006 11:14:44 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: js1138

What do the Danes make that we sell over here?


13 posted on 02/08/2006 11:15:33 AM PST by ark_girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Here's a hint: those whose habits have not yet caught up with the Magna Carta or the Declaration of the Rights of Man The "protesters" are still mired in the 8th Century.
14 posted on 02/08/2006 11:16:15 AM PST by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
You know, since the combined output of all the middle east (taking out oil) is less than that of Finland - these boycotts can only go so far - they don't make anything and must purchase most of their goods from someone.

As Johan Goldberg pointed out in his latest article ... the Muslim boycott of Danish goods will have no impact at all on the sale of Danish hams ....

15 posted on 02/08/2006 11:20:43 AM PST by tx_eggman (Islamofascism ... bringing you the best of the 7th century for the past 1300 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
16 posted on 02/08/2006 11:23:15 AM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #17 Removed by Moderator

To: ark_girl

baby back ribs.


18 posted on 02/08/2006 11:25:43 AM PST by js1138 (Great is the power of steady misrepresentation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

"So, let them not depict him. But Christians and Jews, Hindus and Buddhists are not prohibited, and I assume that the Danish cartoonists were not Muslims"

Have you heard the Muslim spokesman who said he demands that "new rules" be established in Europe that make everybody play by Muslim standards? Gimme a break! Sounds a little bit like the homosexual activist civil-rightsers right here in the US of A...


19 posted on 02/08/2006 11:26:51 AM PST by jagusafr (The proof that we are rightly related to God is that we do our best whether we feel inspired or not")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
We wouldn't in any case: It would only bring more people into the circle of peril. If you're really interested you can find them on the web on your own.

Yes, and thank God for the internet. Aside from the blatant cowardice implicit in that statement it is inaccurate as well - peril shared is peril diluted. But check this one out:

But the European polis is not altogether controlled by the big corporations. The Europeans still have an attachment to their liberties, including their press liberties.

Nor is the American polis. And it isn't corporate control that is the issue here, it is the self-confessed cowardice of the author that is the issue.

The American press gets a big, fat zero from this pen. I am absolutely appalled at its craven submission and at its desperate intellectual backflips such as this author's to blame Bush or the corporations for it.

20 posted on 02/08/2006 11:28:05 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bayourant

I love it!


21 posted on 02/08/2006 11:30:10 AM PST by Nevadan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

To a liberal that makes the oposite point. The government must support what ever liberals like or it is horrible and bloody suppression, NAZIlike in its effects. If Joe Blow says he doesn't want to give his money to people who insult him and his beliefs and preferences, that is also NAZI suppression of freedom. A liberal'primary freedom is freedom to finance what he likes with other people's money. A liberal also does not consider himself as free so long as he has not successfully suppressed people who don't agree with him.


22 posted on 02/08/2006 11:37:45 AM PST by arthurus (Better to fight them OVER THERE than over here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Zeppo
Good morning.
"FYI, the source is listed as National Review Online, however the link is to The New Republic..."

Is that confusing or what.

Michael Frazier
23 posted on 02/08/2006 11:42:42 AM PST by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nevadan

lol yeah i found that off atlas shrugs blog today. Hilarious. I used to love watching that guy on the pbs station. Of course I have problems drawing a stick figure so I was constantly amazed


24 posted on 02/08/2006 11:42:59 AM PST by bayourant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
Good point:

The point over the Piss piece and the Dung canvas was about public money and public support. My tax dollars should not be spent in those ways especially when courts demand that any positive image or expression of Christ -- say in a nativity scene -- should be banished from public buildings and never touch public funds. There is some major hypocrisy in the application of the First Amendment.

25 posted on 02/08/2006 11:47:43 AM PST by GOPJ (Scantily dressed women a blasphemy? Will cowardly newspapers drop lingerie ads?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ark_girl
Danish Havarti cheese. Be sure to check the label, I had to search for the imported stuff in my grocery store.

Danesborg brand Brie cheese.

Wal-mart has Danish Butter Cookies under their 'Great Value' brand, in tins.
26 posted on 02/08/2006 11:50:40 AM PST by fanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

As I mentioned on another thread, I equate the muslim reaction to the kid who gets caught smoking and pop has him puff on a nice strong cigar to "get his mind right". The posting of these cartoon images on every tree, wall, telephone pole, etc. would illustrate our freedom of expression and our wish for freedom everywhere. The muslims acting out, as also with the democrats, does nothing but hinder their causes. Let freedom ring!!


27 posted on 02/08/2006 11:51:10 AM PST by vietvet67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The very essence of liberal society is the willingness--OK, the doleful willingness--of its members and constituent groups to be slighted.

This statement seems to fly in the face of the current political correctness trend among liberals.

28 posted on 02/08/2006 11:58:10 AM PST by 6ppc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bayourant

I used to watch that guy too, but what amazed me the most was his hair!


29 posted on 02/08/2006 11:59:32 AM PST by Nevadan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: bayourant
Islam - an enemy culture. [new line here] This recent blow-up by angry Muslims, supposedly over cartoons depicting their prophet, is just the most recent outward expression of the Islamic faith -- a faith which by it's own terms, is at war with everyone else. From early on, that area controlled by Islam was considered the Domain of Peace and everything outside that, the Domain of War. Eventually, they came up with the Domain of Treaty, when they found that they could not beat the Western Crusader all the time. James Fallows wrote of a 'Clash of Civilizations.' As demonstrated by the outpouring of hatred by islamic mobs over cartoons and the ongoing terrorist threat, I would say that a full-blown war with Islam is not a matter of if, but when. [new line here] Some background (courtesy of Wikipedia): For the book by Judith Tarr, see House of War (book). Dar al-Harb (Arabic: دار الحرب "house of war") is a term used to refer to those areas outside Muslim rule. In some conservative traditions of Islam the world is divided into two components: dar al-Islam, the "house of submission" , and dar al-Harb, the "house of war" . The terms are usually understood to refer, respectively, to those lands currently administered by Muslim governments and those administered by non-Muslim governments. The exact definitions of these territories can vary widely according to the viewer's concept of who is and is not a Muslim, and which governments are or are not Muslim in practice. Dar al-Harb and its associated terms are not found in the two most basic works of Islam, the Qur'an and the Hadith. Muslim scholars maintain that the labeling of a country or place as dar al-Islam or dar al-harb revolved around the question of religious security. This means that if a Muslim practices Islam freely in his place of abode, then he will be considered as living in a dar al- Islam, even if he happens to live in a secular or non-Islamic country.During the Ottoman era the term dar al-Ahd, meaning the 'house of treaty', was created to describe the Ottoman Empire's relationship with its Christian tributary states. See dar al-Ahd. For more recent commentary on the meaning and relevance of the term dar al-Harb in the modern world, see the discussion under dar al-Islam.
30 posted on 02/08/2006 12:01:15 PM PST by Spottswood (Lord Vader, the fleet has moved out of light speed and we are preparing to......gack!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

*Muslims fly commercial airliners into buildings in New York City.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim officials block the exit where school girls are trying to escape a burning building because their faces were exposed.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims cut off the heads of three teenaged girls on their way to school in Indonesia.  A Christian school.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder teachers trying to teach Muslim children in Iraq.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder over 80 tourists with car bombs outside cafes and hotels in Egypt.  No Muslim outrage.
* A Muslim attacks a missionary children's school in India.  Kills six.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims slaughter hundreds of children and teachers in Beslan, Russia.  Muslims shoot children in the back.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims fire rocket-propelled grenades into schools full of children in Israel.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder more than 50 commuters in attacks on London subways and busses.  Over 700 are injured.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims massacre dozens of innocents at a Passover Seder.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims murder innocent vacationers in Bali.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims blow up commuter trains in Spain, murdering hundreds and wounding thousands. No Muslim outrage.
* Muslim newspapers regularly publish anti-Semitic cartoons.  No Muslim outrage
* Muslims are involved, on one side or the other, in almost every one of the 125+ shooting wars around the world.  No Muslim outrage.
* Muslims beat the charred bodies of Western civilians with their shoes, then hang them from a bridge.  No Muslim outrage.
* Newspapers in Denmark and Norway publish cartoons depicting Mohammed.  Muslims are outraged.

http://boortz.com/nuze/200602/02032006.html


31 posted on 02/08/2006 12:20:22 PM PST by Frances_Marion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Lego is on the taboo list.

I bought some Lego the other day. Felt good, even if it was not for me.

32 posted on 02/08/2006 12:23:22 PM PST by zeugma (Muslims are varelse...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tx_eggman
Notice that oil is the only product in the Muslim world that we really need there is not much else to sustain their economies
If they start an embargo we will suffer of course but very soon all they will have to eat is sand and camel piss to wash it down
Plus if it really come to that we have the military capacity to go help ourselves
33 posted on 02/08/2006 12:36:48 PM PST by 1903A3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Let me see if I have this quite right. In these Muslim theocracies you are not allowed to have a picture/image of your great prophet, Mohammed but everywhere around the country are posters of a great mullah, imam, ayatolla, bin ladin, hussein, king, sheik or other party power. Interesting marketing plan.


34 posted on 02/08/2006 12:48:12 PM PST by Oystir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
Maybe the media execs were thinking about whether our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would be in more peril if American press outlets reproduced the cartoons.

If that were true, they would not have hammered the Abu Ghraib story to death, or the phony Koran flushing, or printed every crticism of the war in Iraq on their front pages day in and day out. They were only concerned for their own pathetic safety.

Christains don't kill you over "piss christ", but muslims will slaughter your whole family over a damn cartoon.

As for boycotts of Danish products, Democracies everywhere should place a complete food trade embargo on any country that boycotts Danish goods. See how long they can keep it up when they start starving to death.

35 posted on 02/08/2006 12:51:18 PM PST by PsyOp (The commonwealth is theirs who hold the arms.... - Aristotle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ark_girl

Chocolate cherry liqueur

36 posted on 02/08/2006 1:32:00 PM PST by Alouette (Psalms of the Day: 55-59)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
...I assume that the Danish cartoonists were not Muslims but Lutherans (an overwhelming majority of whom assert that they do not believe in God)...

LOL!

Funny.

37 posted on 02/08/2006 1:36:21 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fanfan

Washed down with a cold Tuborg beer.


38 posted on 02/08/2006 2:32:43 PM PST by dynachrome ("Where am I? Where am I going? Why am I in a handbasket?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

bttt


39 posted on 02/08/2006 2:33:29 PM PST by dennisw ("What one man can do another can do" - The Edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dynachrome

Yes, or a Carlsberg.

:-)


40 posted on 02/08/2006 2:42:59 PM PST by fanfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

Maybe the media execs were thinking about whether our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan would be in more peril if American press outlets reproduced the cartoons.

&&
Sure, it's that sensibility that kept all of them from publishing the Abu Ghraib photos.


41 posted on 02/08/2006 4:41:18 PM PST by Bigg Red (Never trust Democrats with national security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jagusafr

Have you heard the Muslim spokesman who said he demands that "new rules" be established in Europe that make everybody play by Muslim standards?

&&
I did not hear that specific quote, but it is evident that many of them in Europe and America think that way. Their goal is the islamization of the West.


42 posted on 02/08/2006 4:45:24 PM PST by Bigg Red (Never trust Democrats with national security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
To me the fight isn't about cartoons... the fight is whether the Danish believe their unique culture is worth fighting for...

If the Muslims that live in Denmark refuse to become Danish but insist that they allow to be Muslim outside of Danish rule of law, then how much longer can Denmark survive.

The author says that is being xenophobic. No it's not.

There is a difference between not liking foreigners and refusing to surrender your culture.

The same goes for the French and the British and the Swedes...

Do they surrender to this growing alien culture and be content to be a minority in their own country.

It seems to be they have chosen to fight... and they have a fight on their hands. May they Europeans endure and win this clash of civilizations.

43 posted on 02/08/2006 7:28:46 PM PST by carton253 (Al-Qa'eda are not the Viet Cong. If you exit, they'll follow. And Americans will die...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past

44 posted on 02/08/2006 7:29:00 PM PST by Uncle Jaque (Club Freedom; Dues: Vigilance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SJackson

A lead-in to the story?

Your comments and where you stand on the issue?


45 posted on 02/08/2006 7:32:03 PM PST by TheBrotherhood (Randomness does not create intelligence; only intelligence creates intelligence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bayourant

Re your #16 -

I've seen photos of that picture (which has been widely used in satirical portrayals of "Mohammed") from Iraq some time ago, and as I recall it is not supposed to be the "prophet" at all, but some famous Immam who lived a few hundred years ago and is highly revered by some sect or another of Islam.

Sort of like a "Saint", I guess.

Perhaps someone who knows more about Moslem history than i do could comment?


46 posted on 02/08/2006 7:33:22 PM PST by Uncle Jaque (Club Freedom; Dues: Vigilance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SJackson
The mental illness known as Islam is the worst thing to ever happen to the people of the world. But especially to those who call themselves muslim.
47 posted on 02/08/2006 7:44:37 PM PST by Bullish (Proudly and consistently hating the Clinton's since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vietvet67

Re #27 -

In the more urban, metrosexual abcesses of socialized America, the PC liberals might be ready to capitulate to the "offended" Muzlim demands and bend their knee to the headsman's block...

But the America I know, where the trees grow and pickup trucks roll and people don't mind getting their hands dirty - you go telling someone what they have to or must not do, and they are apt to look you square in the eye, flip you the bird, and say "Make me, @$$XXX!".

Perhaps it's a similar spirit of defiance that some Danes are showing in response to the demands of the cutthroats to stop "offending" them.

They just start cranking out MORE Islammocrastic "cartoons", and make them even more vulgar, insulting, and tawdry.

Sort of like saying; "Make us, ragheads!"

The proverbial gauntlet is thrown right back into the offended Immam's faces... and they are not going to like that one bit, now are they?

The thing is, CAN militant Islam "make them" stifle their satire, punish them for their audacity, or make their government or management make them cease and desist?

They sure are trying!

How far will the Jihhadist thugs go to impose their will not only on the press, but on all of Europe... or the rest of the World, for that matter?

Once the precident is set that we must never "offend" Islam, then what will they find "offensive" next, pray tell?

European and American women without burquas?

The ringing of church bells anywhere a Muslim might hear them?

The very existance of a Synagog anywhere?

Will anything short of total submission to Sharia Law by all of Humankind become mortally "offensive" to them?

Stay tuned sports fans; only time will tell.

Just remember; when you are more afraid of the consequences of violating Sharia law than you are of the consequences of violating the legitimate statuatory law of your own Nation or community, then guess what?;

You've just lost, Dhimmie.

But I think that a few probably unarmed and vunerable Danish cartoonists are trying to "draw" (pun intended) a proverbial line in the sand... where a lot of their (as well as our own) "leaders" don't dare to.

And as much as I don't really go along with knocking anyone's religion, I've gotta respect their spunk.

Maybe it's high time for a few more lines in the sand, eh wot?


48 posted on 02/08/2006 8:27:00 PM PST by Uncle Jaque (Club Freedom; Dues: Vigilance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson