Dear Editor,





Since a couple of weeks, a deep crisis has been developed regarding the publication dd september 2005 by the Danish paper The Jylands Posten of twelve cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed, among else depicting him as a terrorist.



A number of Arabic governments and the Iran government not only asked the Danish ambassador for an explanation, also a great number of Arabic supermarkets decided to remove Danish products, for example in Saudi-Arabia, Algeria, Bahrein, Jordan, Kuwait, Morrocco, Qatar, Yemen and Tunesia

Recently, dd 6-2, the Iran government has decided to cut off all commercial relations with the Denmark.

Also the governments of Saudi Arabia and Libia has closed their embassies in Denmark.



Apart from those government-reactions, a great number of moslims protested against those cartoons, by which in many cases European embassies, in particular Danish embassies, were being violated.

Also the protests were expanded to the American military.

Recently four people were killed by the often trigger happy Afghan police, when a group of people marched on a U.S. military base in Southern-Afghanistan, out of protests against the Danish cartoons



To give a thourough analysis of this crisis and the controversy between the freedom of ____expression, which is the point of view of most European media, and the lack of respect, which is the point of view of most moslims in and outside Europe, it is of importance to give a short review of the events.



The first publication of the Danish cartoons:



Dd 30-9-2005, the first publication by the Danish paper The Jylands Posten took place.

This caused a strong reaction, not only under moslims and moslim-organisations in Denmark, but also in Arabic diplomatic circles.

They asked for a conversation with the Danish prime-minister Rasmussen, who refused.

Seeing the recent crisis, mr Rasmussen has tried to calm down this by means of diplomacy, which failed.

However, he refused to make further excuses about the cartoons, calling the publications of the cartoons ''freedom of ____expression''



The second publication of the Danish cartoons:



However, despite of the crisis, which was caused by the first publication and which has also led to serious threatments to the address of the cartoonists, the Jylands Posten decided to republish the cartoons after the Christmas-period



It needs no surprise at all, that this second publication again lead to a serious crisis, by which not only the Danish government was being asked for an explanation, but also Danish products were being boycotted, diplomatic and commercial relations were broken and a huge people's protest in a great number of countries burst out.

The main protests took place in Saudi-Arabia, the occupied Gaza-area, the occupied West-Bank, Yemen, Somalia, Indonesia, the by India ruled disputed Kashmir area, Jordan, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia and Libanon.





Probably under the pressure of the worldwide protests, the Jylands Posten offered her excuses to the moslims dd 30-1, which was being accepted by the islamic community in Denmark



The publication of the cartoons in the European media:



Soon after the first reactions from the Arabic world on the second publication of the referred cartoons, a number of European media-papers, following the line of the Jylands Posten, were publishing also the Danish cartoons, claiming that they did this under the pretext of ''freedom of ______expression''

The cartoons were among else published in several Norwegian, Swedish, Dutch, French, Belgian, Italian and German papers



The editor of the French paper ''Le Soir'' not only was publishing them, but also added some own caricatural contributions to them.

Therefore he was fired soon after publising the cartoons

As reaction, out of socalled solidarity with his indeed unacceptable resignation and again, in the name of the 'freedom of _____expression'', a number of Belgian papers were also publishing the cartoons.



Of course it is evident, that the European newspapers have the right on publishing the cartoons as an information-source for the judgment of the public opinion.

However, out of their point of view and regarding some editorial comments, they are of the opinion, that freedom of ____expression can be ventilated totally, without any consideration for the religious rights of certain groups of people





Freedom of ____expression versus licence to insult:



Of course I consider freedom of ____expression as one of the most fundamental rights of humanity, but that doesn't imply, that there is no limitation to it.

Without any limitation namely, anywone would be free to utter racism and anti-semitism and other fundamental violations of human rights, as being condemned by as well European legislative law as International Law

In extremis it can lead to the opinion of a Dutch cartoonist J Collignon, who remarked in connection with the crisis round the cartoons, that it is no problem to publish Mein Kampf either



Also the socalled defenders of the freedom of ____expression forget, that their own legislative law has limited a total freedom of opinion, because the rights of different groups would be violated, as is being said above



In the first place, in European legislative Law, The ECHR [European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms], article 10 guarantees the freedom of ____expression, there is an addition, that states that it is limited ''by each responsibility of the law''



In the Netherlands, where a great number of papers have published the cartoons, also article 7 of the Constitution guarantees the freedom of ____expression, there is an addition, that states that it is limited ''by each responsibility of the law''



Article 1 of the Constitution states, that racism and discrimination is not permitted.



Insult of the religion of certain groups:



More specifically yet, article 137c of the Dutch criminal law, forbids insults of the religion of the several groups in society



The insulting character of the cartoons:



It is obvious, that the Danish cartoons, from which some are depicting the for moslims holy Prophet Mohammed as a terrorist, is violating the moslims in their most sacred feelings and is therefore a violation of their religious rights.

Moreover the provocation lies in the fact, that it also implies a connection between the Islam and terrorism, which makes fundamentally no sense (being, like Christianity and Judaism, based on the principle of Love) and also a connection between moslims in general and terrorism, a serious European prejudice.



However I think, this is not only a question of legislative law, but responds also to the deeper principle of fundamental respect for other human beings.



By publishing those cartoons, the European papers not only has shown a fundamental lack of respect for the moslims outside Europe, but also for their moslims-co-citizens on their own country.



This sort of freedom of opinion bigotry is leading in extremis only to the further escalation of the growing tension between European autochtones and especially islamic allochtones, with the great risk of further radicalisation.



Reactions in the Arabic world:



Of course I am of the opinion, that the diplomatic reactions of the Arabic and Iranian government, not only regarding the boycot of the Danish poducts, but especially also against the Danish government, are extrapoportionnal, since the government of a country has no power over the edition-policy of a newspaper.



Also I condemn the reactions of violence in parts of the islamic world, which is directed against the foreign embassies.



However it is evident, that such an outburst of violence has more causes than the publication of the cartoons





Backgrounds of the violent outbursts:



Yet apart from the reaction on the publications of the Danish cartoons, it is obvious, that for such outbursts, more explanations must be seek



I am of the strong opinion, that those violent reactions, which take place in so many countries, are directly interconnected with the feelings of powerlessness and humiliations, which are being mainly caused by the European military support of the British-American occupation of Afghanistan and especially Iraq.

This is also combined with the decennia-long European political attitude to the Middle-East crisis, which is de jure condemning the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian areas and the Israeli war-crimes and human rights violations, but de facto is maintaining the status quo, by not taking any political or economical measures to pressure on Israel to implement the UN-Security Resolution 242 dd 1967, to withdraw our of the occupied territories and also to dismantle the settlements, which are illegal according to International Law and break down the Wall, which has been condemned by the International Court of Justice dd 9-7-2004, because of cutting through occupied Palestinian area.



This, in combination with the since 11 september 2001 amounted anti-Islam hysteria in Europe, from which the publication of those cartoons are one of the utterings, is leading to those violent protests, which is only being worsened by the provocative attitude of a number of European papers, from which for example the Dutch Volkskrant [literary translared: People's Paper] is one of the most extreme, by publishing the cartoons two times in a short period.



Denigrated remarks of de Volkskrant:



Not only ''De Volkskrant'' was very bigot in her defense of the freedom of ___expression by placing the cartoons twice, in an editionary comment ''Geen slappe knieeen'' [''No weak knees'', by wich was meant no capitulation for ''religious fundamentalism'', which as so often in the European media is used in a wrong way] she also utttered very denigrating remarks considering the moslim protesters.

So every protest was being ''directed'' from ''the authorities'', by which they forgot, that it is highly unlikely, that so manu protests in so many countries would be ''put in scene''

Further they called the protests ''opgelopte lucht'' [litery ''cooked air'', which means ''of no real meaning and irrational''], which shows a complete lack of respect for the intelligence and think-capacity of the protesters.



Further the Volkskrant also neglected a remark by a French moslimleader, who was comparing the cartoons with the anti-semite cartoons from the 30 years of the former century

Their comment was, that the comparison was not just, because the systematic nazi-propaganda of that time is not to be connected with those cartoons





Anti-Islamhysteria:



Yet the Volkskrant is missing a very important point here.

Although there the anti-Islamhysteria is happily not to be compared with the nazi-propaganda from the years 30 of the former century, yet there are comparisons.

For example the Jews were being considered as untrustworthy [the same qualification is given to moslims nowaday in Europe], they would plan an ''international plot to dominate the world'' [compare with the generalisation of all moslims with the ''international terrorism''] and they were out to ''destroy the German cultural society'' [compare with the moslims, who would ''destruct'' ''the democratical European society'']



In my opinion I am also supported by no-one less than the very respected Dutch-Jewish rabbi Soetendorp, who stated that there are a number of comparisons between the anti-semite propaganda in the 30 years and the present European anti-Islamhysteria.



Political signature of the Jylands Posten:



Considering the Jylands Posten, it is perhaps interesting to commemorate, that this paper was in the 20, 30 and 40ths of the former century, a fervent political supporter of the racist-facistic regimes of as well Hitler as Mussolini

Although the past is not to be considered in this, it is being named by me, because nowadays this paper is a very right-wing paper also with ideological ties with the extreme right party in Denmark





Reaction of the AEL [Arab-European League]



The chairman of the Arab-European League, mr D Abou Jahjah, has recently decided, in reaction on the publication by the European media, also to publish a number of cartoons.

The deeper meaning is not only to explore the limits of real freedom of __expression, by placing certain cartoons, which are a taboo in the European ideological train of thought, but also confont the European defenders of the freedom of __expression, who don´t care about insulting the feelings of moslims, with cartoons, which are shocking to them.



Considering the fact, that the holocaust is such a taboo, he has placed already a cartoon, by which Hitler shares the bed with Anne Frank



Although I can understand the purpose of this and in reactions a possible double standard point of view can be read, I think it is unacceptable to make a cartoon, even for testing this principle, of a genocide like the holocaust.



In that respect also the comparison would have more meaning, when they had published a rabbi, being a terrorist.



I know almost certainly, that that would not be considered als ´´´freedom of __expression´´, but as anti-semitism.



My other objection however is, that it is better to protest against the publication of the cartoons, rather than to place possible shocking cartoons, but of course that is the responsibility of the AEL-Europe.





Conclusion



Overwiewing the insulting character of the publication of the cartoons and the fact, that the freedom if __expression has its limtits, when it comes to violatiing of the rights of groups of people, indiffently whether they are cultural, national or religious, it would be wise, when the European media would not have pubiseh them, at least not out of the point of view of ´´defending of the freedom of __expression´´



In the first place, there is a difference between freedom of __expression and licence for insult

In the second place, papers have not only their responsibility to bring news as objectively as]they can, but also a responsibility to society in respecting all citizens, also people, who have a different religion and descent

Depicting intentionally cartoons, knowing it will hurt people in their deepest authentic feelings, whether religious or on another part of their identity, lacks the most elementar feeling of respect, which is also a part of the principles of democracy



By this arrogant attitude, only national and world-tensions will escalate, with as a consequence an amount of bitterness on the side of the powerless and already humiliated people in this world



It is time for Western media and a number of anti-religious or anti-Islam intellectualistic publicists, columnists, to show some respect.



Without that attitude, violent outbursts and more tensions will be the answer



I´´ll end to show my respect and appreciation for those European papers, which didn´t publish the cartoon in a senseless obsession with the ´´freedom of __expression´´



In that respect many European newspapers could learn from the American papers, from which a very little part has published those cartoons



Astrid Essed

Amsterdam

The Netherlands



P-S



See for the political signature of the Jylands Posten

http://dearkitty.modblog.com/core.mod?show=blogview&blog_id=807007

This one must be for the ""palestinians" and Iraqi "freedom fighters".

Total and utter bullshit. Trying to pretend that the cartoons are some how "insulting" is an absurdity. The problem isn't with the cartoons or those who drew them or carried them in newspapers, the problem is with those who want to pretend they're all insulted.

No cartoon is insulting. No song is insulting. No comment, speech, artwork, novel, or anything else is insulting. The suggestion is bullshit, spewed from the weak minds of idiots -- or from people who think they have some political or religious benefit of playing pretend.

If someone's offended by anything, it's _their_ problem, fomented by _their_ inability to handle or deal internally with their mental or emotional problems.

My opinions only and only my opinions.

You know those Calvin decals that show him pissing on something?

And the ones that show him kneeling by the Cross in its shadow?

Just cut them and apply them to show him pissing on the Cross.

See how long that car window lasts here in this tolerant Christian society.

It's lame. It's not funny or anything.

The virgins one isn't that funny either.

When people thing an ethnic cartoon is funny, when it's not, it's probably because they think the ethnic group is funny. Or they're uncomfortable about something, so they need a reason to laugh.

Holy Bat Crap, Freddie! After all the head butting you and I have been through we actually AGREE for once!

You are dead on correct... the feeling of being 'offended' is entirely the responsibility of the offended. I'll drink with you on that point.

OK, now that that's over with, back to crossing swords... :-D

" See how long that car window lasts here in this tolerant Christian society."

You're kidding right?

Artwork and commentary and pop culture targeting Christianity is absolutely perfectly acceptable in our culture. It's everywhere.

And it's really no big deal. Hell there was more of a big deal when LA councilmen got all upset over a depiction of a mission on our state seal.

Christ and Christians get harangued ALL THE TIME.

And it's no big deal. There has yet to be a single riot, case of arson or murder from ANY group but the muslims.

Silly bastards.

I'd like to see you prove me wrong.

Talk is cheap.

Do it or STFU.

Maybe on your living room window perhaps.

no. Why would I want to do that?

I certainly don't fear a broken window, but I'd certainly look like an asshole with that on my window.

Besides, being a Christian by upbringing, I have no desire to make such a statement.

How about you try it. You'll be fine.

Hell, every kid in America has a "Jesus is my homeboy T-shirt". No one flips out about that. Sinead O'connor rips a picture of the pope and no riots. The group BAd Religion's logo is a crucifix with a red bar thru it and that logo is everywhere.

You're simply not ever going to see behavior like these crazy arabs are exhibiting over any cultural references to Christ.

Nothing behind your talk.

It's great to throw stones unless it's at yourself.

This is because you're a Lying Hypocrite.

You're fine at maligning others but we can't have your personal faith assulted.

Oh no, you have your standards.

What are you going on about there junior?

You know there's no reason to suspect that Christians here in the US or anywhere really would react even remotely like these fools in the muslim world.

I think you know that and it kills you.

Now, if i wasn't a vegetarian and Peta member, i'd have a plate of bacon in honor of that carzy bastard muhamad

Now I know why you are so dysfunctional.

Your pathology is easy to see for everyone except for yourself.

Pitiful sick thing.

There was that guy Eric Rudolph. Pat Robertson goes off a bit. There were the Branch Davidians -- not violent, but paranoid. There's GW Bush and some of the neocons. There were those child molester priests. There are the people who bomb clinics that offer abortions. There's still Christian violence, but, it's not the kind that goes on a rampage at little slights like a crucifix in urine.

There's a lot of Christian peace too. More peace than violence, I think, but there's plenty of violence.

I think Mohammed had a father. It was Jesus who didn't have a father (at least not the conventional, corporeal kind).

There are PLENTY of violent scumbags who also happen to be Christian and may even commit violence in the name of Christianity.

There are those who do it in the name of Dungeons and Dragons and Judas Preist as well.

So what.

What there isn't is any organized, well funded, systemic violence preached and designed at the massive group level by linked and fanatical leaders and followers.

Christianity, simply doesn't have an armed and well trained army like islam has. And PLEASE, don't make an ass of yourself and blurt out "the US Army is the Christian army". I know you're dying to but it's ridiculous.

Islam is the ONLY religion , on earth today that literally has an armed wing and a doctrine which demands and rewards violence against non-believers.

not that fresca needs help on this one, but I feel I have to say something.

How does fresca's not wanting to betray religious up bringing (place a symbol of someone pissing on a cross) make him a hypocite?

You are so sure it will cause a violent reaction, go and put it on your window. I do believe there will be a reaction because I am sure someone will react in a neagtive way. I am not sure if it would be a broken window but stand by for some reaction.

" There's a lot of Christian peace too. More peace than violence, I think, but there's plenty of violence."

Look, I'm not defending scumbags like Rudolph or Robertson, but I'm still maintaining that there is no organized and militarized wing of Christianity like we see in Islam. There is simply nothing even analogous to militant islam in any other present day religion. None.

The Militia Movement was like a Christian, patriotic/nationalistic movement. They were pretty popular until the OKC bombing.

Marching off to war...

With the Cross of Jesus going on before

Christ our royal master

Leads against the foe

Onward into battle see our banners flow...

You get the picture.

I still think you of all people should not be afraid to put a decal of Calvin pissing on the shadow of a Cross on your high priced roadeater.



Ha ha ha ha ha

Did you actually say this?

"There were the Branch Davidians -- not violent, but paranoid."

Paranoid? My good lord, friend, they were burnt to death by government

arms some of which were heavy weapons ( the Bradley FVs ) helicopters and snipers. What was their crime?

I expect better from you.

They had a stockpile of guns. My point is that they were a Christian group that was paranoid, and expecting violence. Fresca asserted that Christianity was not violent, but, I'm countering that it is violent.

I don't think they should have been attacked.

I don't think they are martyrs because the government went after them, either.

Several of them were licensed firearm dealers. That "stockpile" was their inventory. Dealing firearms is legal. The "crime" which sparked the murderous federal assault was one of them was thee weeks late paying a 0 fee on a completely legal firearms sale. By all accounts it was a simple book keeping oversight

Yeah, they were martyrs. They were peaceful, law abiding citizens, residents of a multi-racial, communal housing complex, who were well liked by all their neighbors and even the local sheriff. If all the feds wanted was the 0, they could have arrested Koresh peaceably when he was out jogging, unarmed, as he did every morning.

Instead, they burned a bunch of innocent children alive. It was a show of force. The previous Friday, the government had been forced to convict at a second trial, a couple of the cops who beat Rodney King. They had, in fact, had to back down in the face of the anti-police uprising that the beating had sparked in 52 separate cities. The feds don't like to be seen as weak, even when they are, especially when they are, so they staged a show, to demonstrate to the world the Uncle Sam could still get it up. The message was clear: "Any time we want, we can burn your children alive. So don't f*ck with us."

"Fresca asserted that Christianity was not violent, but, I'm countering that it is violent."

With all due respect, some of you are simply dolts.

Read my posts...again...and try to follow.

I am not trying to make some ridiculous claim that Christianity doesn't have its share of violent, awful adherents. What I am saying is that Christianity and Judaism and Hinduism and anything other than Islam really, does NOT have an organized massive armed force fighting WARS in the name of religion.

It simply doesn't.

Islam is unique in that regard.

Now I know I'll get responses listing more solitary or age old examples of Christians commiting acts of violence (we've already been through the nonsensical claim of the Third Reich being a Christian movement) and I'll be called a racist (yawn), but the fact remains that NO OTHER RELIGION ON EARTH has anything like the systemic, theocratic and highly organized armed wing of its followers like Christianity does.

Waco the Massacre

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/02/147124.php

why was this article hidden?

I posted it for the reader's edification. To keep the clutter off this thread.

??

Shall I repost?

Can't find where I read this, but as I recall, the number of guns per person in the Waco compound was actually less than the number of guns per person for the state of Texas. Can anybody confirm this?

BTW, if you're looking for a military arm of the Xtian religion, you just have to look back a few hundred years -- the Crucaders weren't exactly peaceful missionaries.

"Deus le volt"

sh(A)ne

...er, make that a few few hundred years (1200s). Hehe. Where's my mind?

;)

I've unhidden it.

Why is it grayed out?

"BTW, if you're looking for a military arm of the Xtian religion, you just have to look back a few hundred years -- the Crucaders weren't exactly peaceful missionaries."

Exactly! The key phrase being, "you just have to look back a few hundred years "

A few HUNDRED YEARS.

And as they were over by the beginning of the 14th century that "few" is actually 700 years.



Hmmm.

EDITORS, PLEASE BAN FRESCA FOR EXPLICIT & VILE HATE SPEECH AGAINST ARABS AND MUSLIMS

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2006/01/146014_comment.php#147217

Clicking that will gray it out.

thanks ,'someone'.