On 30 September 2005, 12 cartoons appeared in the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, under the headline, ‘The face of Muhammad’.
The headline was not entirely accurate. One of the cartoons made fun of the Jyllands-Posten editors for commissioning the series, while another showed Islamist suicide bombers being turned away from heaven. ‘Stop. Stop. We have run out of virgins’, ran the caption.
At least Kurt Westergaard’s now infamous effort chimed with the title. He had drawn Muhammad wearing a turban containing a bomb, accompanied by the Muslim declaration of faith: ‘There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of God.’ The cartoons were undoubtedly provocative, as indeed they were intended to be. They stood firmly in a long-standing, anti-clerical tradition of satire.
They were commissioned in response to reports that Danish children’s author Kare Bluitgen had been unable to find an illustrator for a book about Muhammad. It wasn’t hard to guess why. A rising tide of sometimes vicious Islamic intolerance had fomented an increasingly fearful, self-censoring climate throughout Europe. In the previous 12 months alone, Theo van Gogh had been murdered in Amsterdam by an Islamic extremist . . .
They were commissioned in response to reports that Danish children’s author Kare Bluitgen had been unable to find an illustrator for a book about Muhammad. It wasn’t hard to guess why. A rising tide of sometimes vicious Islamic intolerance had fomented an increasingly fearful, self-censoring climate throughout Europe. In the previous 12 months alone, Theo van Gogh had been murdered in Amsterdam by an Islamic extremist . . .
Continue @ Spiked.
Surely the greatest lie in the modern zeitgeist is that "Islam is a religion of peace"?
ReplyDeleteIt has demonstrated time and time again that it entertains no critique, happily endorses violence against those who it deems to be opposed to it, delights in treating women like property and uses the redundant retort of "Islamophobia" if these issues are raised.
I'm still searching for the outrage among UK muslims regards the murder of two Jews at there place of worship.
Steve - all of the big Abrahamic religions are rooted in war and violence. I think the same can be said of them all in terms of their claims to be religions of peace. Their original texts damn them in that regard.
DeleteSome within Islam are theocratic fascists but we also find that within Christianity and Judaism. It is also present within Hinduism as the surge in Hindu nationalism indicates.
The Manchester attack should no more be put down to Islam than the genocide in Gaza should be put down to Judaism. It would be concerning if Muslims were not to speak out against the murder of the Jews in Manchester. It reminded me so much of the Dylan Roof murders.
I have no more time for Islam than I do for other religions and while there are fundamentalists within it, I question the whole religion being viewed through that prism.
No argument there Anthony, most religions are one's of conquest (regards the Crusades et al) but Islam is a lot different in many regards to those who went before. It is far more militant, brutalist and openly calls for Holy war.
DeleteNot sure how you got the parallels with Roof; he was self radicalised online . The perpetrator of the Manchester attack was an attendee at a Mosque highlighted by the National Secular Society as being antisemitic and divisive. Hell, his given name by his parent was "Jihad"!
Steve - the texts of the Christian Bible justify genocide; the clerics of Judaism are calling for genocide - I don't get too fussed over Islam. I no more disposed towards the Christian nationalists than I am towards the Islamic fundamentalists.
DeleteThe parallels with Roof are in that both attacked unarmed people while they worshiped. If his was a terrible atrocity then so is what happened to the Jews in Manchester and no mitigation should be offered for it.
"Is Islam a Religion of Peace?" is a debate that has been had many times. I recall Mehdi Hasan debating the question, but I don't recall the points he made being satisfactorily countered. The fallacy is equating all followers of Islam with those that are, as you say, far more militant and brutalist, this is where I believe the argument breaks down. Perhaps in most cases, it's not the religion itself that is inherently violent, no more so than many other beliefs, rather it is how one interprets and chooses to act on this belief. It would actually seem to me, in the present day, most Muslims choose peace.
DeleteThen were is the widespread condemnation of Jihad by the majority of these adherents?
DeleteThe condemnation is there Steve. To be honest, I'm not sure how one can actively search for condemnation of the latest Manchester attack and not find it. Not an accusation, but I also believe cognitive biases can play a large part. I could place some blame on media outlets, but I can see plenty of online articles of Muslims condemning the attack, including in a piece ran by Jewish News.
DeleteI take it back, there has been some condemnation of the Manchester attack by a few different Muslim bodies and that's to be welcomed. Not sure why it didn't come up first in my search though. But that is encouraging. Great to see there are moderates there, now if they could go to the Pakistani Muslim community groups and ask for condemnation that'd be great!
Delete