Days of Anger

Burning the Danish FlagThe bruhaha over those cartoons continues unabated. (Where do they get all those Danish flags from? Someone is making a killing if you’ll pardon the unintentional pun.)

This despite the fact that upwards of a thousand of their brothers have perished in the Red Sea. Hints at the priorities of some people — outrage for the sake of outrage.

Personally, I think Muslims worldwide need to take a chill pill. From conversations I’ve had with normally liberal and tolerant people, there is a growing belief that we have two mutually exclusive credos, one a secular society that values free speech (though how did those BNP tossers get away with it?) the other ruled by clerics and a medieval religion, or should that be ‘mad’ and ‘evil.’

You see, now I’m at it. Stereotyping. There do appear to be Muslims who demonstrate tolerance. And maybe the media is driving my thinking, but if we can tolerate talking dolls of Jesus, Moses and Pope John Paul II, why seek grief over a scribbling?

(Have to say, I’m particularly unoffended by the Diana doll. And the cigar-smoking Churchill and Abe, masters of the soundbite, would look and sound good above my PC.)

I don’t think there is anything in the Koran that specifically forbids depictions of Mohammed or anyone else. It’s all based on an early conversation with his followers — we were all young once and said things we didn’t really mean.

But back to the Red Sea ferry story, I was reminded of once island-hopping in Greece. I was reading the terms and conditions that came with the ticket. It said that the company could not be held responsible for delivering you to your expected destination, nor even that you could expect to arrive at all, in fact everything and anything that happened to you on the voyage was entirely your responsibility.

A metaphor for God (or Allah), you and life really.

But if you really, really want to be doubly offended click here. It’s Jesus and Mo.

Nobody’s prefect. If you find any spelling mistakes or other errors in this post, please let me know by highlighting the text and pressing Ctrl+Enter.

5 comments… Add yours
  • Elle 4th February 2006

    I couldn't agree more.

    I saw an interview on BBC 24 this morning where a French journalist reminded a Muslim journalist that it was a Danish newspaper who published it. Not the Danish government calling to 'Kill all Muslims'. Which didn't stop the protesters to carry signs with "Kill the Danish".

    He was also asked why it is accepted that their newspapers showed Jews with swastikas painted on their bodies, being beheaded.

    His reply was: "These cartoonists were wrong and should be taken to court".

    So in one instance the countries are to blame, and in the others just the cartoonists….

    Or as Jiham Momani, the Editor of a Jordanian Newspaper, said: "What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim?".

    The Editor has been sacked in the meantime by the way.

  • Son of Groucho 5th February 2006

    Excellent articulate post with which I wholeheartedly agree.

    At times I think that the world would be a much happier place without religion of any kind, but many of the atrocities we see are done in the name of religion, and actually have little to do with the true teachings of the religion they "represent". Anyway, even without religion certain humans are so stupid and twisted that they would always find some reason to kill their neighbour!

  • the letter b 5th February 2006

    hi there dropped by way of krip. Islam or the Koran certainly doesn't forbid the depictions of Mohammad or god or any of their Prophets. what it actually did is to *discourage* their followers from depicting said prophets in any other form except *privately* in their own minds.

    those violent protesting Muslims from around the world as portrayed in the press were but a miniscule out of x million who were playing to the cameras, muslims in Malaysia and here in Singapore don't go around burning the danish flags nor the embassies. all the same why were they pissed? who did the cartoonist think he is to depict Mohammad as he did? why as a turbaned "Orientalist" just because it so conveniently happened that terrorists and European muslims happened to be from the Middle East? how about other racial types who are Muslim too?

    anyway, to point out that the arabs did themselves no favours by portraying Jews and Christians in a bad light is a bit off the mark. firstly, Muslims elsewhere around the globe never did same and secondly, them arabs *DIDN'T* offend Moses and Jesus respectively. or did they? so in other words, i can safely surmise that the behaviour exhibited by Continentals and certainly other westerners is akin to "an eye for an eye" eh? so who's being childish here?

    btw, i apologise for the rant, and no i'm not muslim. nor am i defending their actions.

  • J.J 5th February 2006

    GREAT cartoon!

  • Mark 5th February 2006

    Hello mate

    A very nice, moderate, intelligent, sensible blog about this topic.

    I thought about doing an epic ranty blog about this, but then decided against. I did, however, post all the cartoons on my blog in protest.



Your email will not be published on this site, but note that this and any other personal data you choose to share is stored here. Please see the Privacy Policy for more information.

Spelling error report

The following text will be sent to our editors: