FD Editor Note: True Irony. The cartoonist wants the right to post highly inflammatory (he stated that was his purpose in an earlier statement) cartoons – yet those who are offended have no right to free speech. Not surprising – considered Muslims aren’t allowed the right to free speech. Of course, if this cartoonist decided to draw cartoons of Jewish people… things would look quite differently… I post this because of it’s ridiculousness.
Nico Colombant
A media rights activist who defends political cartoonists who come under attack for their work says Muslims should try to better understand the western idea of free speech, even if they find the message offensive to their religion.
Police in Ireland earlier this month arrested seven people, including an American woman, in connection to what they say was a plot to kill Lars Vilks.
He’s the Swedish cartoonist who an al-Qaida linked group wants killed for depicting the Prophet Muhammad with the body of a dog.
Irish authorities tie at least some of the suspects to another American woman who U.S. officials say tried to recruit people for the assassination plot.
That woman, Colleen LaRose, calls herself Jihad Jane, and is charged in the U.S. with conspiring to give material support to terrorists.
Former U.S. State Department official Robert Russell said he understands why Vilks’ cartoon in 2007 offends some Muslims. “In Islam, pigs are considered haram, taboo, dirty. Many people don’t understand in the West that also dogs are haram. Dogs are considered dirty and haram just like pigs,” he said.
Russell heads the Cartoonists Rights Network International, and counts among his clients, cartoonists who have been imprisoned, tortured, even killed.
Russell says Vilks may have gone too far in making his point about freedom of speech, but those allegedly involved in a plot against him are even more misguided.
Russell collects drawings. He shows one of the first controversial cartoons published in the U.S. related to fears over Islam. “Bob Gorrell published this. Now this is not supposed to be the Prophet Muhammad. This is just a cleric. This is just any Islamic cleric, of course, with a bomb in his headdress,” he said.
The picture looks similar to one of the cartoons of Muhammad published in Danish newspapers in 2005. That one showed the prophet with a bomb in his turban and lead to deadly riots.
Russell says people angered by such cartoons should resort to freedom of expression themselves, not fatwas, or death threats. “I think the best advice I could have for Muslims is please exercise your freedom of speech as the cartoonist was exercising. Please exercise your own freedom of speech, take your own cartoonist to do some drawing and write articles and send them to the newspaper,” he said.
Russell organizes cartoon events at college campuses across the United States. Here at American University in Washington, cartoonist Joel Pett shows how he draws U.S. President Barack Obama.
“Big ears, big old jug ears like that,” he said.
Pett says, cartoonists are essential to showing the lighter side of life, especially in difficult times. “The fact of the matter is you might as well laugh as cry and the tragedy that is the human condition invites sarcasm, invites irony, invites satire, invites laughter. What else are you going to do?”
Back at his home and headquarters in suburban Washington, Russell says Muslims should understand that western societies fought for specific rights during hundreds of years of war over religion. “We learned that a secularly based freedom of speech guarantees access to everybody, by everybody and that no religious sensibility and no religious feelings should trump the ability of the individual to express themselves freely,” he said.
So, Russell says, even if in the Vilks case, he does not defend the particular cartoon in question, cartoonists around the world should keep their right to draw and provoke, and ask questions about the world we live in.
Where does it say that those who are offended do not have the right to free speech?
Hi David, History says that. When Muslims rose up in protest – they were ridiculed and called extremists. They were chided and put down, insulted. People laughed at them. It goes right along with my point – of the fact that Islamophobia is now an accepted type of prejudice – no different from the racism against African-Americans in the 50s and 60s, and no different from the hatred of the Japanese – even interning them during WWII. I don’t understand why more Americans don’t see that.
I had a dialog with someone yesterday who said, “Well they didn’t have crazy people who flew airplanes into buildings.” I asked her if she was going to blame 1.57 billion Muslims for what 12 did. I also reminded them that Japanese Kamikaze pilots did fly their planes into things, aircraft carriers etc. They had no answer for that, because it’s illogical.
Prejudice, or racism, is prejudice. To pre-judge an entire people is ignorance at it’s finest. There is no basis for it. It’s easy for anyone to educate themselves on what Islam is, and what it teaches. The Qur’an has many english translations, and there are plenty of Muslims who will answer questions. Unfortunately some find it easier to go to anti-Islam websites and blindly follow what they have to say. It would be the equivalent of following what the Ku Klux Klan said about African-Americans during the civil rights days.
Firstly, Admin, ridicule, insults and laughter do not place restrictions on anyone’s free speech.
Secondly, and more importantly, you cannot equate “Islamophobia” with racism. People have no choice about which race they belong to, but their religious beliefs are under their control.
It is not necessary to go to anti-Islam websites to gain a negative view of Islam. All that is necessary is the Koran and the Hadith. For example, there are a couple of things we learn about the life of Mohammed from the Hadith al Bukhari:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/004.sbt.html#001.004.234
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html#007.062.064
Now, whatever else Mohammed may have done in his life, the fact that he did these two things overshadows it all. People see how this “perfect role model” for mankind behaved, and they disapprove. He is not a good role model for anyone. If you need a role model (and it is questionable that a mature adult should), I would suggest getting a better one.
David,
Thank you for the reply. I’m looking at the first hadith about Ablutions. I don’t understand what you find objectionable about it. Muslims aren’t the only ones who consider cleanliness when approaching God. The Essenes did this as well, and there are still Essene sects. Cleanliness is an important issue in Islam, and there are good reasons for this. Like so many of God’s laws in Islam – this has a practical purpose as well. Regular washing prevents the spread of disease, as well as contamination of food. When the Prophet was teaching this – Europe was in the dark ages, not washing, not taking proper care, and dying of disease. The same can be said of pork. Pork is forbidden in Islam, and a cursory look at the health problems caused by eating pork will show you that it, too, as a practical purpose. Everything that God teaches has a practical purpose.
Your second reference is the hadith about marriage. Again I’m unsure about what you consider objectionable here. If it is about polygamy – you might consider that polygamy was very common at the time, and was a way to help protect widows, orphans and women who didn’t have any means of support. You might consider it as a sort of charity. Chastity is important in Islam, so marriage is preferable to “fornicating” between unmarried men and women. I believe chastity is important in Christianity and Judaism as well. There are many reasons for polygamy. God says to “be fruitful and multiply in Christianity. It’s the same in Islam. If a woman is infertile, men may marry a second wife who can give him children, there is no harm in that. Note that the hadith states that if “you cannot be fair” with them, then do not marry them. All must be treated with equality. Personally I see nothing wrong with this. It’s preferable to a life with a husband who “cheats” as happens often in Christianity and Judaism.
These are all hadith. It might be more practical to use the Qur’an for the purpose of this discussion. The Qur’an has the most authority, and unless you know it, the hadith, when taken out of context, can be confusing. I’m not sure I understand your concerns with these references. If you are thinking that women are not respected in Islam, that would be untrue. Women are given more respect in Islam than in any other religion. In fact, Islam provided rights to women that were unheard of in any other society. So I’m guessing at what your points are. I hope you can clarify these for me, so that I might provide better responses.
I am aware that in the US polygamy is not allowed. One must remember, though, that not everyone shares the same values. It would be unfair to judge everyone by the values in this country. It would be unfair to judge everyone by our own values. We must realize that there are differences, and while we don’t have to agree with them we ought to respect them.
I apologize, I didn’t answer your second point. You stated that “you cannot equate “Islamophobia” with racism. People have no choice about which race they belong to, but their religious beliefs are under their control.”
The fact that people have a choice in religion doesn’t negate the fact that the root of racism and the root of Islamophobia are the same. It’s all prejudice, all judging a people based on ignorance or fear. These problems are easily resolved with knowledge of whatever group or religion that one is prejudiced about. Again – it’s unfair to judge another people by one’s own values. People do share different values.
Hi Admin. I apologize. The links I provided seem to work erratically. I tried them again and sometimes they work, and other times they point to the wudu and nikah passages you mention. I guess I’ll have to quote them directly!
Both are from al Bukhari.
Volume 1, Book 4, Number 234:
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:
These are the events to which I was referring. Have you, Admin, ever tortured anyone to death or had sex with a child? I do not for a moment imagine you have. That makes you, by definition, a better person than Mohammed. So why have a role model who is not as good as you? That seems irrational to me.
Also, if one can’t judge other people by one’s own values, whose values should one judge them by? Aren’t you judging the cartoonists by your own values?
In the US, you throw a nasty enough insult – and you get what you deserve – the RECOGNIZES that only got what you deserved.
It’s known as “The Fighting Words Doctrine”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words
Don’t expect anything different when you insult someone’s faith.
As for those who dig into questionable hadith collections to try to “prove” their hate, I really don’t believe any truth I bring here will change their minds.
For those who honestly seek the truth, here are some facts:
The few hadith reporting the age of Aisha as six at her marriage are not just week, they are direct attacks on the Prophet and are contradicted by other historical facts.
Almost all the historians report that Asma, the elder sister of Aisha, was ten years older than Aisha. If we read the reports in Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb or in Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah we are told that Asma died in the 73rd year after migration of Muhammad at the age of 100 years old. Now do the math, if Asma was 100 years old in the year 73 AH, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of migration. If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at that time then Aisha – ten years younger – would have been 17 or 18 years old
Thus, Aisha – if she got married in 1 AH (after Migration to Medina) or 2 AH – was between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage.
Clearly the hadith attributed to Aisha herself does not add up.
As for the report of how the murderers were punished, it is not backed up by any other similar report, and probably reflects some angry narrator’s wishful thinking.
Anyone who sincerely wants to know what the message of Islam really is needs to go to the one incorruptible source: the Quran.
@Gregory Waleed Kavalec – good luck convincing the Islamic scholars in Saudi, Iran, and every other Muslim country where the legal age of consent is based on the model of Mohammed’s life, that al Bukhari is a “questionable collection” and is wrong about Aisha’s age.
However, I agree with you that anyone who wants no learn about Islam should read the Koran. Anyone who does so with an open mind will see that it was obviously written by men. Not particularly clever or wise men.
Maybe you should have a word with these top Yemeni clerics who are in the news today. They have branded opponents of child marriage “apostates”:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/22/AR2010032201752.html
I’m sure if you bring them some of your “truth” they’ll welcome you with open arms, Greg.
As David above said. This comment piece is interesting as it sheds light on the rest of the site. No one should be illegally detained regardless of who they are but that has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING with what you are talking about here – everyone has the right to say what they like about religion – a religion is not OWNED BY BELIEVERS : we muslims DO NOT have a monopoly on what is said about the Prophet or God, like it or not. This has absolutely nothing to do with detaining people, Muslim or not, and simply makes the site look biased as ‘oh poor us Muslims’.
Its very silly and going to lose you supporters. All sorts of people ridicule other people – we Muslims ridicule plenty of people. Does that make it right? No. In the Indian subcontinent, Muslims make fun of HIndus and their beliefs. Is this right? No. What do most Hindus do about – ignore it. The ones that don’t – well, we’ve seen what happens there.
At the end of the day, Muslims will look far more convincing if we didn’t act like sulky children who KNOW they are wrong. If we really and truly believe in God and the Prophet, we should not be bothered what ‘non-believers’ have to say about it. If we really know what the truth is, we should be content.
Isn’t it hypocritical of Muslims to pressure countries to change their rules and customs to accommodate Muslims, while Muslims expect everyone to respect their beliefs? I was only a Muslim for about a year, but I’m pretty sure hypocrisy can lead a Muslim into hell fire rather easily.
@Gregory Waleed Kavalec
In the authentic Hadeeth it makes clear Muhammad married Aisha when she was six years old, and the marriage consummated when she was the age of nine. This is the same Hadeeth that tells Muslims the number of compulsory prayers they must pray each day, which is five. If you don’t believe in this hadeeth you’re not a Muslim. You can’t take parts of the Hadeeth you agree with, and not accept parts you don’t agree with, that is not halal.
Joseph? You were “only Muslim for about a year?” Would you like to expound on that? I’m finding it difficult to believe that one can just “be Muslim” and then suddenly not be Muslim again. Maybe it would be better to ask – why you would decide to be Muslim and then after a year decide not to be?
From your second statement to G.Waleed I’m thinking that maybe you could define what it is to “be Muslim” because I’m having trouble understanding.
David: I’m sorry I didn’t reply – frankly your response was typical of many islamophobic responses and the tactic is very familiar. Honestly I doubt that any discussion here is going to change your mind. All due respect – I’ve been on this ride before. I think anyone with a moderate amount of intelligence is going to see through the argument. I could point to places in the article that talk about the reason for these marriages – such as the fact that these girls are starving, but I’ve already mentioned that fact to you once before. You seem to be trying to view (and judge) the Muslim world “through western eyes.” I could add “look to the plank in your own” I suppose..