Posted by: Kevin | February 14, 2008

Doing my Part…

…to Piss people off on the other side of the world.  Apparently some Muslims in Denmark were going to celebrate the 2 year anniversary of the riots over the prophet Mohammad cartoons by assassinating a cartoonist.  Fortunately, they were caught before they could pull it off.  In response blogs all over the internet are reposting the cartoons.  Like this one:


I’ll let PZ Myers say the rest since I completely agree with him.

The aggrieved Muslims are saying, “Mock our god and we will kill you.” They have the goal of suppressing images they consider blasphemous.

The cartoonists are saying, “Threaten to kill us and we will mock your god.” Obviously, they’d like to stay alive, but their goal in this context is to see their work disseminated widely.

Now ask yourself, who is achieving their goals? Who is winning?

It looks to me like a few relatively obscure cartoonists are crushing the fundamentalist Muslim world. Those cartoons aren’t even that good, and they’re being published everywhere, even appearing on blogs.

Now maybe I’m misinterpreting the fundie Muslim position here: maybe their goal is actually to make sure the world thinks their beliefs are dangerous and stupid, and also ineffectual; they’re flailing pointlessly to suppress a couple of scribblings that would have vanished into obscurity, and have managed to turn them into icons of Islamic insanity. They’re doing a good job if that’s so. They’ve convinced me, at any rate.

Note to my legion of Muslim readers.  When someone criticizes your religion as violent, threatening them with violence just proves them right.



  1. If someone punches, stabs or kills someone for using the word “nigger,” are you going to run around screaming “nigger!”?

    Why are you intentionally offending people? And you are not just offending people who use violence, you are offending millions of people for no reason other than to provoke. THAT was the goal of the original cartoons, to provoke. WHY are you doing it?

    Are you happy you and those of like mind have provoked Pakistan into blockin YouTube from millions of people around the world? I need YouTube to get my policital messages out, why are you intentionally adding fuel to the fire?

  2. Google: “Cartoons of Mohammed Were Published As a Stunt Intended to Provoke”

    The cartoons “ran in a newspaper that is repeatedly described as right-leaning, with ties to neocons. … Most telling may be the cartoon in which a figure stands in front of a blackboard with Arabic writing, translated in the caption: “Jyllands-Posten’s journalists are a bunch of reactionary provocateurs.” In another, a Western man in a turban — most likely the cartoonist — holds up a crude stick figure drawing, as an orange with the label “P.R. stunt” lands on his head. … the meaning of both these cartoons is clear — this was a deliberately provocative stunt, and the newspaper knew it.”

    Would this newspaper be this disrespectful to Christians as it had been to Muslims? What we do know is that this same newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, refused to print satirical cartoons depicting Jesus Christ giving the reason that they would “cause an outrage”:

    “On Saturday, Politiken printed a series of caricatures of Jesus on its editorial page. Next to them, the paper reprinted an e-mail exchange from April 2003 in which a leading Jyllands-Posten editor rejected publication of satirical cartoons depicting Jesus Christ. His reasoning? “I don’t think the readers of Jyllands-Posten would be pleased with the drawings. I think they would cause an outrage. That’s why I won’t use them.“” – Jyllands-Posten Rejected Jesus Satire

    “”Agents of certain persuasion” are behind the egregious affront to Islam in order to provoke Muslims, Professor Mikael Rothstein of the University of Copenhagen told the BBC. The key “agent” is Flemming Rose, the cultural editor of JP (Jyllands-Posten), who commissioned cartoonists to produce the blasphemous images and then published them in Denmark’s leading morning paper last September.”

    see link Cartoons of Mohammed Were Published As a Stunt Intended to Provoke

  3. That you Tom? I’m doing it because it’s my right to.

    Imams in Denmark and the Middle East cynically used these cartoons to rile up their followers. Otherwise these shitty cartoons would have faded into obscurity, just like other obsenities (“Piss Crist” ring a bell). That right wingers can be obnoxious pricks is not a story. That people would riot and kill over these cartoons is.

    “Western provokation” has very little to do with the blocking of YouTube and other sites in Pakistan and other countries. It’s all about information control. I suspect that if YouTube contained only Blasphemy and the worst excesses in Western society, the Pakistani Gov’t would be all too happy to allow access in order to show their population how “evil” western culture is.

    As for the moderate, peaceful Muslims, I suspect they’d be perfectly happy if both sides shut the fuck up about this issue. I’m sure they aren’t thrilled with the cartoons. However, it must be equally, if not more appalling to see their co-religionists doing everything to prove the cartoons right.

  4. Yes it’s me. Did you even pause to think about the question I asked you?

    You make the claim the blocking had “very little to do with the blocking of YouTube ” but did you read this?: “Pakistani officials have lifted a ban on the YouTube video-sharing Web site, saying that material deemed offensive to Islam has been removed.” So much for your convenient theory which reflectively deflects responsibility.

    I quoted on the blog you linked to some guy called Pollak who wrote, “You have the right to show a black man hanging from a tree or a buck-toothed Asian, too. But in any of those cases you don’t have the right to feign petty self-righteous faux-amazement that people got upset about it”

    You wrote, “Otherwise these shitty cartoons would have faded into obscurity”

    You know what would have helped make them even more obscure? Not commissioning cartoonists to create intentionally provocative cartoons to cause an outrage in the first place. The people who did this are not merely being “obnoxious pricks,” they are manipulating the public in order to further their racist goal of ethnically cleansing most of Palestine. You are being manipulated into parroting these “obnoxious pricks.”

    What possible good do you think there is in posting that cartoon? You have a right to show degrading cartoons of blacks and Asians, why not do it?

    As far as violence, the US poured millions, if not billions, into the billions of dollars spent to fuel violence in the name of Islam. The CIA literally backed shipping weapons and Korans with the encouragement to the Mujahideen do “jihad”. It is ridiculous to be pointing fingers as to who is instigating violence in light of the history.

    Like I said, you are being manipulated. I don’t get why you are so eager to push cartoons which you know offend people just for the sake of offending people. You have, like I said, you have a right to show racist cartoons against blacks, I don’t see them, why not post a whole bunch of those?

    As for the cartoons in question, did you read this part of my blog post?:

    “Was the reaction overwrought? Absolutely. Was it predictable? Absolutely. Was it an intentional scheme to provoke Arab anger, and thereby engender Western disgust with the Muslim world? The involvement of Pipes and Rose argues that that is exactly what happened.
    Cartoons and Provocation
    Flemming Rose is the cultural editor of the Danish newspaper. In all of the Lexis-Nexis database of stories from the American media on the Mohammed cartoons, there is absolutely no mention of the fact that Rose is a close confederate of arch-Islamophobe Daniel Pipes. Indeed, there is almost no context at all about Rose’s newspaper. Only a brief mention in the Washington Post gave a hint at a fact desperately needed to understand the situation. The Post described the affair as “a calculated insult … by a right-wing newspaper in a country where bigotry toward the minority Muslim population is a major, if frequently unacknowledged, problem.”

    How bad is Pipes? He wants the utter military obliteration of the Palestinians; indeed, from the Muslim world … Pipes’ frequent outbursts of racism – designed to toss gasoline on the neo-cons’ lust for a wholesale conflict of cultures – earned him a Bush nomination to the U.S. Institute of Peace, a congressionally funded think tank. Rose came to America to commune with Pipes in 2004, and it was after that meeting the cartoon gambit materialized.”

  5. Tom, my answer boils down to this:

    Freedom of speech means defending the speech of scoundrels.

    End of story

    Pakistani’s and other Muslims have every right to be upset over these cartoons, that’s their freedom. What they don’t have the freedom to do, in Western society, is make death threats, plot killings, destroy property or hurt people.

    There are literally countless constructive ways they could have responded to these cartoons. I hold them accountable for choosing a highly unconstructive response, a response which has the effect of reinforcing the message of the cartoons.

    When Asains or African Americans start issuing Fatwa’s over issues of free speech I’ll post those cartoons too. I don’t see that happening any time soon though.

    As for the YouTube question, I sometimes forget that the US isn’t the only place in the world where you’ll find “culture wars” and acknowledge that you may be right.

  6. why do you talk so much kevin JEEZ do you never go outside?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: