 Sudan is accusing the upcoming Danish movie by Susanne Bier of being in the same class as the Muhammmed cartoons. Sudan's government are upset at the Danish movie Civilization ("Hævnen", literally 'the revenge'), which director Susanne Bier is shooting in Kenya and Denmark. The movie is an extension of the anti-Islam Dutch movie "Fitna" and the Danish Muhammed cartoons, says the Sudanese foreign ministry.
Susanne Bier's movie is based on the war in Sudan's Darfur region, and follows the trail from refugee camps in Sudan to life in a town in South Funen.
Sudan's foreign ministry says in a press release that the people responsible for "Civilization" intend to "represent nonexistent conditions in Darfur" and that the movie represents a "new step of the hostile forces who work to prolong the war in Darfur."
The spokesperson for Sudan's foreign ministry, Muawiya Osman Khalid, says that the 'production of this racist movie should be seen as a new extension of the notorious 'Fitna' movie and the cartoons which insult the prophet Muhammed," the official Sudanese news agency Suna reported Tuesday.
Khalid says that the Danish film crew shot in the Kukobi refugee camp in Kenya, where, according to Khalid, the crew duped the refugees to get them to play war victims from Darfur for a price of 2000-5000 Kenyan Shillings.
The spokesperson for the Sudanese foreign ministry says that they residents of the Kukobi camp launched a campaign against the movie.
Actors Trine Dyrholm, Ulrich Thomsen and Swedish Mikael Persbrandt appear in the film. The Danish Movie Institute gave the movie 7 million kroner, and it is expected in movie theaters this August.
Source: Fyens Stiftstidende (Danish)
With thanks to Islam in Europe
 A group of liberal Muslims in Norway is calling on the Islamic Council of Norway to demonstrate in order to support Muhammed cartoonist Kurt Westergaard.(Pictured)"It wasn't a mistake that the caricatures of Muhammed were printed, and in any case it doesn't justify violence. Muslims have just a great interest in protecting freedom of expression as all others. Therefore Muslims should also support Kurt Westergaard," writer Shakil Rehman of the liberal Muslim network LIM (Equality, integration, multiculturalism) told Klassekampen. Rehman is looking for a response from the Islamic Council of Norway after the attack on Westergaard. He calls on the Islamic Council to arrange a demonstration to support freedom of speech. If the Islamic Council doesn't rise to the challenge, his network themselves will take the initiative. "I'm afraid they won't rise to the challenge, because they don't want to lose face in the Muslim world. But if they support freedom of speech, they should also be able to show that they mean it in practice," says Rehman. "Muhammed didn't want to be depicted because he didn't want to be worshipped like an idol. When Muslims think the prophet is insulted by being depicted, then they make him into precisely such an idol. Therefore there shouldn't be any problem to make a caricature of him. I will go so far to say that Muslim leaders are unqualified." Q: Maybe they respond most to the strong connotations of violence? A: He was also an army chief. That is one of his worse sides. We should be able to criticize that. Muslims shouldn't be so holy that we can't criticize him," says Rehman. Norweigan-Somali SV politician Hamsa Mohamed was against publishing the Muhammed caricatures in 2005, but now he's changed his mind. "For me it's completely fine now. I don't respond as vigorously as before. Afterward I saw that people responded unnecessarily vigorously from the Muslim side. Caricatures are drawn all over the world," says Mohammed, who sympathizes with Rehman's liberal view of Islam. "Many say that the Prophet himself had a lot of tolerance, but that it was his followers who did the opposite of what the Prophet stood for. I agree with the interpretations. Many Somalis I speak to are discussing this now, and think that the reaction to the caricatures was an over-reaction," says Mohamed. He would like to participate in a demonstration for freedom of speech, but he's skeptic about a demonstration with only supports urt Westergaard. He also thinks that it's important to correct the image created after the tragic incident in Aarhus. "What happened in Aarhus, made the possibly positive impression that we've succeeded in creating for Muslims change around in minutes. Even of people become more tolerant, and admit that we've overreacted, one person can destroy for all of us," says Mohamed. He's just come back from Christmas vacation in Hargeisa in Somalia. He met there many who were concerened about the rise of the Al-Shabab terror organization. He thinks it's important to prevent youth from being recruited by such extreme groups. "We can do that by preventing stigmatization. The media is also responsible here. When Somali youth experience stigmatization, there many can think of looking towards communities who think extreme things about the majority society, among them there are those who are violent," says Mohamed. In 2006 the Anti-racist Center and 43 other organization took the initiative for a big demonstration for freedom of speech and against threats and violence. This came in response to the riots following the publication of the Muhammed cartoons. The Islamic Council was invited, but decided not to participate. The head of the Anti-racist Center, Kari Helene Partapuoli, thinks such a demonstration is a good idea, but is skeptical about the liberal Muslims fronting it. Partapuoli says it's important to be careful. If liberal Muslims front the demonstration, what does that say about the other Muslims? It would be better if the initiative came from "Norwegian Muslims" or "Muslims in Norway". She thinks that one shouldn't demand of Norwegian Muslims to distance themselves from what one Muslim did in Denmark. Partapuoli says that it's reasonable to demand that society understand the difference between extremists and common Norwegian Muslims. A demonstration done in the right way might get the majority to understand this. General Secretary Shoaib Sultan of the Islamic Council of Norway says they will make a decision about the request for a demonstration for fredom of speech and against violence in the ordinary way, but that there are no plans to support anything.Sultan says that if the main slogan would be like in 2006 "Respect freedom of speech. No to violence and threats" then they support it. Sources: Klassekampen, VG (Norwegian)
By Maxim Lott A German book publisher has canceled a novel about Islamic "honor killings," fearing that the book would offend the Muslim community and put him in danger. Critics of the decision call it a cowardly move, but others say the publisher is simply being responsible. The publisher of the book, which was to have been titled "To Whom Honor is Due," has indicated that he withdrew the book after an expert on Islam warned that some of the passages could spark violent retaliation from Muslims. "After the Muhammad cartoons, one knows that one can't publish sentences or drawings that defame Islam without expecting a security risk," Felix Droste, of Droste Verlag publishing, told the German newspaper Der Spiegel last week. He referred to a series of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad that were published in Denmark in 2005 and sparked deadly violence across the Muslim world. Depictions of the Prophet Muhammad are forbidden in Islam. This new controversy comes on the heels of Yale University Press' refusal to print the cartoons that were published in Denmark in a new book that details the controversy surrounding them. It also recalls other recent incidents: In 2008, Random House pulled The Jewel of Medina, a book about one of Muhammad's wives, and in 2006 a German theater cancelled a play in which Muhammad gets beheaded. Gabriele Brinkmann, the author of "To Whom Honor is Due," has been speaking out about the cancellation of her book. “It’s a scandal for a publisher to tuck its tail between its legs. This is anticipatory obedience," Brinkmann said, according to the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung. But Droste Verlag spokeswoman Nora Tichy pointed to statements by Droste that were published Wednesday, in which he said he was primarily motivated by a desire to respect all religions — "whether Christianity, Islam or Judaism."
He said he still plans to release a book that involves an honor killing next year, but that it will not contain controversial passages such as one in the cancelled book in which a chracter says "You can shove your Koran up your…” That passage, said Ibrahim Hooper, director of communications for the Council of American Islamic Relations, would offend Muslims. But while he would prefer to see the book go unpublished, he said Droste has every right to release it. "Obviously it's offensive. The question is do they have the right to publish it, and the answer is yes," Hooper said. "Now, they also have the right not to publish. That's really something that should be up to the publisher. And we would hope that [the decision] would be based on good faith and respect for others and not due to potential violence." But Nonie Darwish, the author of "Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law," said the publisher had every right to be afraid. Read more here ... Source: FoxNews Droste Verlag
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
By L. Gordon Crovitz In today's world of instant global communication, disagreements happen more quickly and resentments get established in real time. Just as the British and Americans have been called two nations divided by a common language, today we all share the Internet, yet we are divided by the instant communicating that digital technology makes possible. Recall the incident in 2005, when a Danish newspaper printed a dozen cartoons featuring the Prophet Mohammed, including one with a bomb in his turban. Posting the cartoons on the Web resulted in protests in much of the Muslim world, including riots and deaths. The bomb-in-the-turban cartoonist, Kurt Westergaard, has received death threats and lives under 24-hour police protection in Copenhagen. Last week he visited the U.S., with the message that when it comes to insult and humor, there is little common ground around the world. Read more ...Source: WSJ H/T: Europe News
Monday, September 21, 2009
The Cartoons That Shook Yale [Nina Shea] On October 1, Yale University is scheduled to host Kurt Westergaard, the Danish cartoonist who drew the iconic caricature of Muhammad wearing a turban-bomb. The invitation to Westergaard is no doubt a response to the backlash that Yale and Yale University Press (YUP) have suffered for dropping the Danish cartoons from YUP’s new scholarly book The Cartoons That Shook the World.Yale cited a fear stoking Muslim violence as its reason for censoring the depictions of Muhammad. But the seriousness of that threat now is being thrown into question, given the on-campus speaking engagement of the most prominent of the cartoon “blasphemers.” It would appear that, in its decision to remove the cartoons from the book, Yale traded off freedom very lightly. None of the experts consulted by Yale were in favor of publishing the Muhammad cartoons, and none articulated a persuasive defense of freedom of speech in public statements explaining their rationale. When asked in an interview to describe the circumstances in which “concern about possible violence” should “be outweighed by the obligation to protect free speech,” even John Negroponte, former director of national intelligence and currently a senior fellow at Yale’s renowned Grand Strategy program, could give no real response beyond saying that it is a “judgment call.” Here is an insight into why the West is losing the contest of ideas with Islamic extremism.— Nina Shea is director of the Hudson Institute’s Center for Religious Freedom. Source: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MjAxZmM3YzhjNDM2ZTVmNTExMjJmYzU3MmZlYTM3Y2Q=
H/T: PosteDeVeille.ca
Those Bloody Danish Cartoons......! Thanks to Vlad for finding this documentary of a Dane who interviews principle players in the dreaded Mo-cartoon brouhaha. Make no mistake, this documentary is not an attempt to blame the Danes or exonerate Muslims, but an interesting window into the thoughts of those who became news due to their role in the crisis.I particularly enjoyed watching OIC's Ekemleddin Ihsanoglu's strong arm tactics in refusing to answer a question of whether he is in part to blame, as head of the OIC, for the fanning of flames of the conflict. Ihsanoglu responded in the very same way to a Tundra Tabloids' statement and subsequent question when he was in Helsinki last year. KGS NOTE: Observe how the documentary pulls no punches when it describes the events leading up to the riots that erupted around the world. Video/Documentary: http://en.sevenload.com/videos/KebMeB2-Bloody-Cartoons-avi Source: TundraTabloid.blogspot.com
Sunday, August 30, 2009- by Baron Bodissey A Letter to Kurt from the ProphetFarshad Kholghi has posted an unusual find at Europe News: a letter from beyond the grave written by the Hon. Mr. Pbuh himself and addressed to Kurt Westergaard. Here’s what Mr. Kholghi discovered:
Note:
I was on my way to Skanderborg to attend the opening of an exhibition of pictures by Kurt Westergaard when I was stopped by an elderly gentleman. He handed me a letter explaining that it was a letter from a prophet to the caricaturist. The letter read as follows: Dear Kurt I hope you are well and enjoying life. I do not know if you know, but I have been dead for many years. In spite of that, I am well, considering the circumstances. Unfortunately I am not — as many believe — surrounded by 72 virgins. This thing about the virgins was just something I made up in order to motivate my fellow fighters.It is always hard to motivate others to die for oneself. For this reason, I had to come up with a little white hallal-lie, promising that everything I claimed to be haram or unclean here on Earth would be given them by God in great abundance, such as wine and women. Obviously, they had to die first. It was quite fortunate that Hitler didn’t come up with the same trick, for otherwise he would most certainly have won the war. Oh, mentioning Hitler: He lives in the basement of my house and follows the career of Ahmadinejad with great interest. So here I am — unfortunately — along with all the radical mullahs, ragged and bloodied terrorists, Lenin, Stalin and all the other useful idiots, who for some unfathomable reasons love the mullahs. I fear for my life. For they are much like Danish converts — void of humour and even more fanatical than myself in my wild prophet-days, where I rode a camel to chop the head off all those poets who would ridicule my poorly told stories.Anyway, I am writing because I wanted to tell you a few things. First and foremost: Thank you for that wonderful caricature! That was hilarious as well as clever…Read the rest at Europe News.
Farshad Kholghi (born 1971) is an actor, author, writer, debater and a lecturer in high demand. He has participated in several Danish movies and television series and has authored two books. He is a consistent critic of religious fanaticism and speaks his mind freely against the challenges to freedom of expression
 Why did Yale University Press remove images of Mohammed from a book about the Danish cartoons?By Christopher Hitchens The capitulation of Yale University Press to threats that hadn't even been made yet is the latest and perhaps the worst episode in the steady surrender to religious extremism—particularly Muslim religious extremism—that is spreading across our culture. A book called The Cartoons That Shook the World, by Danish-born Jytte Klausen, who is a professor of politics at Brandeis University, tells the story of the lurid and preplanned campaign of "protest" and boycott that was orchestrated in late 2005 after the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten ran a competition for cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. (The competition was itself a response to the sudden refusal of a Danish publisher to release a book for children about the life of Mohammed, lest it, too, give offense.) By the time the hysteria had been called off by those who incited it, perhaps as many as 200 people around the world had been pointlessly killed. Yale University Press announced last week that it would go ahead with the publication of the book, but it would remove from it the 12 caricatures that originated the controversy. Not content with this, it is also removing other historic illustrations of the likeness of the Prophet, including one by Gustave Doré of the passage in Dante's Inferno that shows Mohammed being disemboweled in hell. (These same Dantean stanzas have also been depicted by William Blake, Sandro Botticelli, Salvador Dalí, and Auguste Rodin, so there's a lot of artistic censorship in our future if this sort of thing is allowed to set a precedent.) Read more ... Source: SlateYale
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
How to strike fear into the heart of Yale University Press The absurdity of cringing dhimmitude and Fear of Offending Muslims reaches its apotheosis. "Yale Press Bans Images of Muhammad in New Book," by Patricia Cohen for the New York Times, August 12 It’s not all that surprising that Yale University Press would be wary of reprinting notoriously controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in a forthcoming book. After all, when the 12 caricatures were first published by a Danish newspaper a few years ago and reprinted by other European publications, Muslims all over the world angrily protested, calling the images — which included one in which Muhammad wore a turban in the shape of a bomb — blasphemous. In the Middle East and Africa some rioted, burning and vandalizing embassies; others demanded a boycott of Danish goods; a few nations recalled their ambassadors from Denmark. In the end at least 200 people were killed. So Yale University and Yale University Press consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam and counterterrorism, and the recommendation was unanimous: The book, “The Cartoons That Shook the World,” should not include the 12 Danish drawings that originally appeared in September 2005. What’s more, they suggested that the Yale press also refrain from publishing any other illustrations of the prophet that were to be included, specifically, a drawing for a children’s book; an Ottoman print; and a sketch by the 19th-century artist Gustave Doré of Muhammad being tormented in Hell, an episode from Dante’s “Inferno” that has been depicted by Botticelli, Blake, Rodin and Dalí. The book’s author, Jytte Klausen, a Danish-born professor of politics at Brandeis University, in Waltham, Mass., reluctantly accepted Yale University Press’s decision not to publish the cartoons. But she was disturbed by the withdrawal of the other representations of Muhammad. All of those images are widely available, Ms. Klausen said by telephone, adding that “Muslim friends, leaders and activists thought that the incident was misunderstood, so the cartoons needed to be reprinted so we could have a discussion about it.” The book is due out in November. John Donatich, the director of Yale University Press, said by telephone that the decision was difficult, but the recommendation to withdraw the images, including the historical ones of Muhammad, was “overwhelming and unanimous.” The cartoons are freely available on the Internet and can be accurately described in words, Mr. Donatich said, so reprinting them could be interpreted easily as gratuitous. He noted that he had been involved in publishing other controversial books — like “The King Never Smiles” by Paul M. Handley, a recent unauthorized biography of Thailand’s current monarch — and “I’ve never blinked.” But, he said, “when it came between that and blood on my hands, there was no question.” The blood wouldn't be on your hands, Mr. Donatich. The blood would be on the hands of the murderous fanatical Muslims who might kill because of these cartoons. That would be on their heads, not yours. This is one of our biggest problems: we are letting irrational, bloodthirsty people dictate terms for us, and allowing them to displace their responsibility for their irrational, murderous actions onto us. Reza Aslan, a religion scholar and the author of “No god but God: The Origins, Evolution, and Future of Islam,” is a fan of the book but decided to withdraw his supportive blurb that was to appear in the book after Yale University Press dropped the pictures. The book is “a definitive account of the entire controversy,” he said, “but to not include the actual cartoons is to me, frankly, idiotic.”... First time I've ever agreed with Reza Aslan, and probably the last. Source: JihadWatch
 Thomas Landen | Journalist The new enemy of the West seems to be ideological Islam. If NATO wants to be a useful instrument in defending the West against this enemy it needs to accept a new member state - Israel - and stop groveling to Turkey. Last week, Bernard Kouchner, the powerful Minister of Foreign Affairs of France, announced that he is no longer in favor of admitting Turkey to the European Union. Mr. Kouchner changed his mind, he said, at the recent NATO summit in Strasbourg on April 4th. There, Ankara threatened to veto the appointment of Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Danish Prime Minister, as NATO’s new Secretary-General. The Turks objected to Mr. Rasmussen they said because in 2005 he defended the freedom of expression of Danish cartoonists who had depicted the Muslim prophet Muhammad. Turkey is governed by the AKP, a popular Islamic party in Central and Eastern Anatolia. The AKP’s voters feel more strongly in favor of the Islamic law which prohibits depicting the Muslim prophet than about basic Western values such as freedom of expression.
These voters already feel “hurt” by the mere depiction of their prophet, which in Islam is blasphemy. The Turkish threats in Strasbourg jolted Mr. Kouchner into realizing what the future has in store for the European Union if Turkey becomes a member. “I was very shocked by the pressure that was brought on us,” Mr. Kouchner said. “Turkey’s evolution in, let’s say, a more religious direction, towards a less robust secularism, worries me.” Turkey only dropped its veto against the Danish politician after US President Barack Obama brokered a compromise. Mr. Rasmussen is obliged to have a Turkish deputy and to issue some sort of apology to the Islamic world. Lo and behold, within a week Mr. Rasmussen rushed to Istanbul where he declared: ... More »
February 22, 2006
The Russian newspaper Gorodskiye Vesti has been closed down after it published a pacifist cartoon featuring Mohammed, Buddha, Jesus, and Moses yesterday. Source: Matthew Hunt
 From correspondents in Dubai
September 05, 2008 06:18pm
AL-Qaeda has released a video featuring a senior commander who was rumoured to have been killed in Pakistan in July, threatening more attacks against Denmark after a suicide bombing on its embassy in Islamabad, according to the SITE group which monitors Islamist websites.
"We have warned previously - and we warn once more - the Crusader states which insult, mock and defame our Prophet and Koran in their media and occupy our lands, steal our treasure and kill our brothers that we will exact revenge at the appropriate time and place," Mustafa Abu al-Yazid said in the video, SITE reported today.
The June embassy bombing killed six Pakistanis and came amid anger in the Muslim world over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed first printed in Danish newspapers in 2005.
There were reports that Yazid was killed in a July air strike on a hideout in a tribal region of Pakistan bordering Afghanistan, but the identity of the slain militant was never confirmed.
Yazid, an Egyptian Al-Qaeda commander based in Afghanistan, was identified by the 9/11 Commission as the group's chief financial manager.
The US-based SITE Intelligence Group said the video, released by al-Qaeda's media arm Al-Sahab, shows the Saudi suicide bomber who carried out the attack and an "animation'' of the bombing itself.
Yazid said the embassy attack "is but the beginning...if you don't end your errant ways and aggression," SITE said in a translation of the video message, adding that the date it was recorded was not known.
"As for my final message to the worshippers of the cross in Denmark, I tell them... this isn't the first nor the last retaliation,'' he said.
"Allah willing, we will wipe you from the face of the earth." Source: News.com.au via Agence France-Presse
 In his letter regarding the controversy over cartoons offensive to Muslims ("Why We Don't See Islamic Cartoons," July 18) reader Shahid Kinnare asks each offending cartoonist to consider if "he could survive" if the subject of his work were changed to the Holocaust. The answer is yes. Although a cartoonist who produces a cartoon that uses the Holocaust in an offensive way would no doubt be harshly criticized, the cartoonist wouldn't be murdered and there wouldn't be riots by enraged Jews outside embassies. In fact, a number of newspapers recently reproduced, without incident, some despicable cartoons published in Iran concerning the Holocaust.
Alan S. Ritterband
Philadelphia
We do enjoy humor based upon religious figures, i.e., how many jokes begin "There was a rabbi, a priest and a minister"? And we see no harm in humorous criticism of the disconnect between Muhammad -- Islam's founder and prophet of peace -- and the terrorists who kill and maim in Muhammad's name. Is it the cartoonists or the terrorists who are committing the blasphemy?
Jonathan Kahnoski
Sunriver, Ore.
Letter writer Tom Lawrence's theory -- that the decision of Muslims to live in a Western society is theirs and, as a result, they need to accept the societal traditions of those countries needs close scrutiny in the context of the constitution of a democratic country. At stake isn't whether the decision of Muslims to live in a Western society is theirs but whether a Western society, such as the U.S., protects the religious rights of any group so that the citizens of that group have a right not to be offended by other groups.
B.K. Shah
Pearl River, N.Y.
In America, I am allowed to insult whomever and whatever I like. Islam is no more immune from criticism or mockery than Christianity, Judaism or Scientology. In 1987, an "artist" (a term I use loosely) displayed a photograph "Piss Christ," depicting a crucifix in a glass of urine. There were many complaints and much negative press, but at no point did the artist need to fear for his life. Jews and Christians might not be happy to see their religious figures mocked, but they understand that in a free society such actions must be permitted.
If Theo van Gogh had produced an anti-Christian or anti-Jewish movie, he would be alive today. If "Satanic Verses" had been about Judaism, Salman Rushdie wouldn't have spent years in hiding under a threat of death. So do not lecture me about "sensitivity" toward Islam until its followers are willing to demonstrate tolerance toward dissent.
Daniel Palmer
Evanston, Ill. Source: WSJ H/T: Jihad Watch
Prague, May 31 (CTK) - Cartoons of Prophet Muhammad have appeared in Prague as a witness saw them in the Cerny Most neighbourhood and near the Florenc coach station, the server Novinky wrote Saturday. At one of them, Muhammad is depicted with a bomb in his turban and a detonator like in the Danish paper Jyllands Posten in 2005, while the other poster calls him a pedophile. The posters points to the Internet pages that are being constructed and that present a group of authors who feel concern over what they call growing Islamist extremism. Read more ...Source: CTK
 Eleven Danes have been summoned to appear before the Jordanian pubic prosecutor to answer charges of blasphemy and threatening the national peace. They include the cartoonist who drew one of the Mohammed cartoons and editors from 10 of the 17 newspapers that reprinted them. The group behind the announcement is called The Prophet Unites Us, a union of Jordanian media organisations, organisations and private individuals. 'The public prosecutor decided to summon the Danes for a series of criminal offences. Now the Danes have to meet in Jordan,' said Zakaria al-Sheikh, the group's general secretary, to Politiken newspaper. He explained that the public prosecutor will ask the Danish embassy for help in contacting Danish officials to arrange the meeting of the editors. Osama al-Bettar, the group's lawyer, said that if the Danes do not appear, the next step will be to inform Interpol and seek their arrest. The public prosecutor confirmed to Politiken that the editors have been summoned. However, the Danish foreign ministry has said that a forced deportation is not a possibility. It would require that the printing of the Mohammed cartoons is punishable in Denmark, which is not the case. The case will be heard by Jordanian public prosecutor Hassan Abdullat on 21 April. He will hear witness testimony and decide if the case will continue further with the possibility of a three-year jail term or be dismissed. Read more ...Source: The Copenhagen Post
A French film championing freedom of expression against attempts by Muslim activists to censor caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed highlighted a key front in the culture wars at the Cannes festival. "It's Hard Being Loved By Jerks" by Daniel Leconte takes as its subject a bitter legal battle by the editor of a French weekly who was acquitted last year on charges of offending Muslims for reprinting the offending cartoons. Read more ...Source: Islam in Europe
 Gregorious Nekschot is quite the equal opportunity offender, having penned cartoons offensive to Catholics and Jews (e.g., Muhammad molesting Anne Frank) alongside his emphasis on lampooning Islam and Muhammad. What did he get arrested for? Lampooning Islam and Muhammad. Thomas Landen at the Brussels Journal has the story: The Dutch authorities have arrested the cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot (a pseudonym. Nekschot means deathblow, litt: "shot in the back of the neck"). The judicial authorities in Amsterdam said yesterday that the cartoonist was arrested as a suspect for the criminal offense of "publishing cartoons which are discriminating for Muslims and people with dark skin." Prior to the Islam-related complaint, the "dark skin" aspect doesn't seem to have mattered as much. And by the way, how does a cartoon discriminate? The cartoonist was arrested on Tuesday, while the police searched his house for "discriminating evidence." His computer, backups, usb sticks, mobile phone and a number of drawings were confiscated. Nekschot was released two days later but it is possible that he will be charged following a complaint in 2005 by the Dutch imam Abdul Jabbar van de Ven, an indigenous Dutchman who converted to Islam. Read more ... Source: Spits (Dutch)H/T: Dhimmi Watch
 Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali at the Lakemba Mosque. He
will protest against the 2005 Mohammed cartoons. Natalie O'Brien CONTROVERSIAL Muslim cleric Taj Din al-Hilali yesterday rallied his supporters against the publication of cartoons insulting to Mohammed, just a day after Osama bin Laden denounced the European Union over the same issue in a new videotape.At his sermon at Australia's biggest mosque, in the southwest Sydney suburb of Lakemba, Sheik Hilali said the cartoons, published in a Danish newspaper in 2005 - and republished last month - showed the "hatred and envy" felt by the West against Islam. He said today's sermon at the mosque would be followed by a march to a nearby park to protest against the cartoons. "The West announces holding a competition for caricatures that insult the Messenger of God, may he be blessed," Sheik Hilali said. Read more ...Source: The AustralianH/T: Gramfan Taj Din al-Hilali
Latest recipient of the Distinguished Islamofascist Award
COPENHAGEN, Denmark (AP) -- Denmark said Thursday it will oppose any debt relief deal for Sudan in response to the Sudanese president's comments urging the Muslim world to boycott Danish goods over the publication of a Prophet Muhammad cartoon. Interior Minister Ulla Toernaes said she summoned Sudan's ambassador to Denmark to demand an explanation of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir's comments a day earlier. Al-Bashir said Wednesday that he would bar Danes from Sudan and told tens of thousands of people at a government-backed rally in Khartoum that the Muslim world should boycott Denmark because of a cartoon reprinted recently in Danish newspapers. Danish newspapers reprinted a cartoon showing Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban on February 13 to show their commitment to freedom of speech after police uncovered a plot to kill the artist who drew it. Read more ... Source: APH/T: Dhimmi Watch
![]() Geert Wilder, leader of the Freedom Party in Holland, is planning on releasing a film called “Fitna” which is expected to be met with great outrage from the Muslim world. Given our experience with recent outrages, it is even likely that innocent people may die. So, the question is, is it responsible to release a film which many people believe will set off a violent reaction from Muslims? Let’s look back in history for a moment. It could be argued that abolitionists’ criticism of slavery in the US was a major factor leading to the Civil War. Does this mean the abolishionists should not have spoken out against slavery? Without having the opportunity to see the film as yet, my opinion is that so long as the film states facts and/or opinions that are grounded in facts or logic, and the film does not call for violence against innocent people, then it is responsible to release it, regardless of the consequences. In fact, if the Muslim world responds violently to honest criticism, this is evidence that Islam deserves criticism and should be criticized even more. We should then be seriously analyzing the question, “What causes these people to act in such an infantile manner?” What would really be irresponsible would be for us to allow fear of violence to condition us to submit to fascist Islamic doctrines rather than speak out against them. If we don’t give the Muslim world enough provocations to outrage them, they will fabricate their own. The power brokers in the Muslim world evidently want to provoke outrage amongst their people, because otherwise why would they fabricate outrages that did not otherwise exist? Here are three concrete examples in which this actually has or does occur: the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, the Al Dura film, and the Mohammed cartoon controversy. Protocols of the Elders of Zion: This is a thoroughly-exposed forgery of an alleged plot by Jews to take over the world. Originating in Russia in the late 19th century, most of it is plagiarized from an obscure French satire. However, it has been translated into Arabic and is widely disseminated throughout the Middle East today, used to fan the flames of Jew hatred. Al Dura film: This film supposedly shows a Palestinian boy killed by Israelis, but there is good reason to believe that not only this film, but a great deal of Middle Eastern journalism, is fake. This phony event has been the rallying cry for the "al-Aqsa intifada”. However, it appears this bloody intifada was not a spontaneous uprising, but an orchestrated affair. Mohammed cartoon controversy: Nearly everyone knows about this controversy, in which more than a hundred were killed in murderous Muslim riots following the printing of cartoons of Mohammed in a small Dutch paper. However, many are unaware that the Middle Eastern press who reprinted these cartoons about six months after the fact included an additional three cartoons, which were much more inflammatory than the ones actually published in Denmark. It appears that the Muslim mobs were deliberately enraged by people who didn’t think the real cartoons would be enough to do the job. We should be asking ourselves, “What motivates the Muslim elite to intentionally and deceptively provoke their people?” Hint: It could have something to do with an Islamist agenda. Is there any benefit to the West in provoking the Muslim world? If the source of the provocation is honest criticism of Islam or Islamic doctrines, then yes, there is a benefit. In fact, this is the difference between the provocations that are fabricated by the Muslim power brokers and the ones that are generated by honest criticism by Westerners: the fabricated provocations have zero potential of benefiting the West. Honest criticism has the potential to defeat Islamo-Fascism, with much less violence than defeating it militarily. Here’s how: - It has the potential of influencing more Muslims to seek ways to reform their faith, or reform more effectively, or leave Islam altogether. This reduces the support within the Muslim world for the doctrines of Jihad and Sharia.
- It has the potential of reducing conversions of non-Muslims to Islam. This is a huge benefit, as Western converts are targeted by terrorist recruiters.
- It has the potential of increasing support for policies necessary to defeat Islamo-Fascism, such as: a Constitutional amendment explicitly stating that Sharia is not a valid source of law in the country; halting or drastically reducing immigration from Muslim countries; deporting Muslims who advocate Jihad or Sharia; allowing mosques and Islamic centers to be monitored; reversing the infiltration of Islamists into sensitive positions; and having a no-nonsense policy to prevent the spread of Islamism in prisons.
The more the “battlefield” can be shifted to the realm of ideas rather than the realm of military, the less violence there will be in the long run. It would be nice to have zero violence, but we do not have that choice available to us. A murderous rampage in the Muslim world may claim 100 lives; a change in policy to curb Jihad in the West may save 100,000 lives or more in the long run. No one really knows what the numbers would be one way or the other; we don’t get to do things twice to see how they play out. However, it appears certain that the casualties are less if we meet the Islamists and the apologists point for point where they are weakest: their ideology. Is it important to avoid gratuitous insults? A “gratuitous insult” is a statement that is more inflammatory than necessary to convey the truth or make a point. It is intentional rudeness. I believe that, yes, it is important to avoid gratuitous insults. That is why I avoid them on this site. However, I do not shy away from telling the truth as I see it. For example, I have alluded to the fact that the Hadith and Sira include several accounts of Mohammed marrying a child (consummating the marriage at the age of 9 or 10). However, I have not labeled Mohammed a “pedophile”. This may seem like a fine line, but it’s the line I draw. I feel that the term “pedophile” is gratuitously insulting, while a dispassionate statement of facts is necessary for people to understand an uncomfortable truth that is relevant to a discussion of Islam. This is a fact that is embarrassing to Muslims, but that does not make it irrelevant, especially since child brides are all too common in the Muslim world today, including Muslims living within the West. My reasons for avoiding gratuitous insults is not that I believe they are wrong, it’s that I believe they are ineffective. They turn people off who otherwise might be interested in what I have to say. In addition, they cause emotional hurt with no benefit. And besides that, I simply prefer a less inflammatory style. However, others disagree with me about rudeness. Like it or not, it is common in ordinary political discourse for people to insult those with whom they disagree, or to use “strong language”. Islam has a political side, so the same rules of political discourse that apply to other political schools of thought should also apply to Islam. Just because Muslims or others dislike a person’s style of communicating does not mean that person should be hushed up, and it does not mean their point of view is invalid. Sometimes people make some good points impolitely. Robert Spencer points out that if the West were to ban insults to Islamic symbols, this would take something that is sacred to Muslims and require that non-Muslims also treat it as sacred; so it would then have a universal sacredness and give Islam superiority over other religions. This is a known agenda of the Islamists, and it would move their agenda of Islamizing the West a step forward. So, while I do think it’s important to avoid gratuitous insults, there are many things that are more important than that, such as learning the truth about Islam and Islamic doctrines. Copyright 2008, Citizens Against Sharia, All Rights Reserved Source: Citizens Against Sharia
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Sudan is accusing the upcoming Danish movie by Susanne Bier of being in the same class as the Muhammmed cartoons. 
Posts
