Kuwaitis call for boycott of Danish goods - Page 23 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-07-2006, 08:13 PM   #331
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:57 AM
No, the cartoons were initially run months ago, it was only after they were toured around the Middle East with 3 additional and more offensive cartoons that all this exploded and it was only as a response to the demands on Denmark that other papers published the cartoons.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-07-2006, 08:20 PM   #332
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
No, the cartoons were initially run months ago, it was only after they were toured around the Middle East with 3 additional and more offensive cartoons that all this exploded and it was only as a response to the demands on Denmark that other papers published the cartoons.
OK, but it looks like they might have created a monster. The protests are in their second day in Afghanistan, and Al Quaeda is supposedly in on the action as well. Maybe it coincided with a local event in Afghanistan. At any rate it's getting nasty there, all over the country.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 01:01 AM   #333
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Zoomerang96's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: canada
Posts: 13,459
Local Time: 04:57 PM
bbc is reporting the offensive cartoons will again be published in france in the morning.

morons.

they're like children stringing along their peers to get a reaction. a violent reaction.
__________________
Zoomerang96 is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 01:43 AM   #334
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 11:57 PM
In a genuine attempt to report the story, or as some grand (wasted, useless) statement on freedom of speech? It has all just become so immature.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 05:58 AM   #335
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Cartoon furore puts Mohammed's guest role on 'The Simpsons' in doubt

Sunday, 05 February 2006

The controversy over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in a Danish newspaper has led the producers of The Simpsons to reconsider his appearance in a forthcoming episode. The offending cartoons included a picture of the founder of Islam wearing a turban, and have been slammed by Muslims for being blasphemous and Israelis as overly subtle.

“In light of the situation in Denmark, we have decided to withdraw our depiction of the Prophet out of sensitivity towards the Islamic community’s feelings,” creator Matt Groening said. “And also our sensitivity to our office being firebombed.”

In the cancelled episode, entitled ‘Don’t Have A Pig, Man’, Mohammed was to have appeared to Homer in a dream, converting him to Islam with a promise of 770 donuts in the afterlife.

Groening said that the decision to produce the episode starring Mohammed was not taken lightly. “We suspected there would be an adverse reaction if we drew the Prophet,” he said. “But we had no choice. He's the only celebrity guest we haven’t used before.”

The show's creator has also guaranteed Muslim viewers that he won't be depicting the Prophet anywhere else in future. “Since the cancellation, we can't just use all the rejected Simpsons ideas on Futurama anymore,” he said.

The furore over the incident has led the Danish press to vow to tone down its coverage of controversial events. "This will teach us to write stories that aren't about Prince Frederik's baby," the editor of Jyllands-Posten said.

Meanwhile a fatwa has also been declared on cartoonist Michael Leunig, although on account of the insipidness of his work rather than any blasphemy.
link
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 12:07 PM   #336
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 03:57 PM


I had to put this in. This is from Todays SF Chronicle. http://sfgate.com/columnists/asmussen/ Don Asmussen is great. Never afraid to make fun of ridiculos situations like what happening over this stupid cartoon.
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 12:08 PM   #337
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76


OK, but it looks like they might have created a monster. The protests are in their second day in Afghanistan, and Al Quaeda is supposedly in on the action as well. Maybe it coincided with a local event in Afghanistan. At any rate it's getting nasty there, all over the country.
The cartoons created a monster?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 04:10 PM   #338
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
trevster2k's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 4,330
Local Time: 07:27 PM
If these newspapers want to prove a point about freedom of the press, and insist on republishing these images over and over, why not publish cartoons of all other religious figures along with the Muslim cartoons? This way they are showing it's not about mocking Islam but mocking all religions since IMO they are all filled with extremists.

The media around the world should leave it alone and stop poking the upset Muslim population with a stick by republishing these images. What pisses me off is that this was published 5 months ago, and this was practically ignored until certain people with an agenda decided to use this to light a fuse under the Muslim religion.

I feel the media is wrong to show its's support by republishing the images and the people who are offended are wrong to use violence to show their anger.
__________________
trevster2k is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 04:35 PM   #339
Babyface
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 27
Local Time: 05:57 PM
Quote:
By MICHAEL KIMMELMAN
Published: February 8, 2006


They're callous and feeble cartoons, cooked up as a provocation by a conservative newspaper exploiting the general Muslim prohibition on images of the Prophet Muhammad to score cheap points about freedom of expression.

But drawings are drawings, so a question arises. Have any modern works of art provoked as much chaos and violence as the Danish caricatures that first ran in September in the newspaper Jyllands-Posten?

The story goes back a bit further, to a Danish children's author looking to write a book about the life of Muhammad, in the spirit of religious tolerance, and finding no illustrator because all the artists he approached said they were afraid. In response, the newspaper commissioned these cartoons, a dozen of them, by various satirists. And like all pictures calculated to be noticed by offending somebody, the caricaturist's stock in trade and the oldest trick in the book of modern art, they would have disappeared into deserved oblivion had not their targets risen to the bait.

The newspaper was banking on the fact that unlike the West — where Max Ernst's painting of Mary spanking the infant Jesus didn't raise an eyebrow when recently shown at the Metropolitan Museum — the Muslim world has no tradition of, or tolerance for, religious irony in its art.

But there are precedents going all the way back to the Bible for virulent reactions to proscribed and despised images. Beginning with the ancient Egyptians, who lopped off the noses of statues of dead pharaohs, through the toppling of statues of Lenin and Saddam Hussein, violence has often been directed against offending objects, though rarely against the artists who made them.

Educated secular Westerners reared on modernism, with its inclination toward abstraction, its gamesmanship and its knee-jerk baiting of traditional authority, can miss the real force behind certain visual images, particularly religious ones. Trained to see pictures formally, as designs or concepts, we can often overlook the way images may not just symbolize but actually "partake of what they represent," as the art historian David Freedberg has put it.

That's certainly how many aggrieved Muslims perceived the cartoons. Circulating the pictures, they prompted Arab governments like those of Saudi Arabia and Syria, not otherwise champions of religious freedom, to support boycotts of Danish goods and to withdraw their ambassadors from Copenhagen. That in turn led European papers to republish the cartoons in solidarity with Jyllands-Posten and in defense of free speech.

Some of them have been reprinted in Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Hungary, New Zealand, Ukraine and Jordan. One appeared in The Philadelphia Inquirer. They've spread worldwide via the Web, exacerbating Muslim outrage while leading many nonbelieving non-Muslims to scratch their heads over how such banal and idiotic pictures could ever be given a thought in the first place. Muhammad is lampooned with a turban in the shape of a ticking bomb; he's at the gates of heaven, arms raised, saying to men who look like suicide bombers, "Stop, stop, we have run out of virgins."

Irate Muslim protesters set fire to the Danish and Norwegian missions in Damascus, where Syrian newspapers routinely print the most appalling, racist cartoons of big-nosed Jews. In Beirut, rioters burned the Danish mission and vandalized a Maronite Catholic church, beating a Dutch news photographer mistaken for a Dane.

On Monday, Afghan security forces killed several protesters who tried to storm the American air base at Bagram. Yesterday the leading Iranian daily announced a contest for the best cartoon about the Holocaust, and 200 members of Iran's 290-member Parliament condemned the Danish cartoons: "Apparently, they have not learned their lesson from the miserable author of 'The Satanic Verses,' " the members said in a statement, referring to the fatwah against Salman Rushdie. From Gaza to Auckland, imams have demanded execution or amputations for the cartoonists and their publishers.

Over art? These are made-up pictures. The photographs from Abu Ghraib were documents of real events, but they didn't provoke such widespread violence. What's going on?

In part, the new Molotov cocktail of technology and incendiary art has hastened the speed with which otherwise forgettable pictures are now globally transmitted. Cellphones help protesters rally mobs swiftly against them.

And there is also the deepening cynicism and political hypocrisy now endemic in the culture wars. Last week a State Department spokesman, Sean McCormack, simultaneously condemned the cartoons as "unacceptable" and spoke up for free speech, while the Joint Chiefs of Staff were firing off a letter to The Washington Post about a cartoon it ran in which Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, in the guise of a doctor, says to a heavily bandaged soldier who has lost his arms and legs, "I'm listing your condition as 'battle hardened.' " The letter called the cartoon, by Tom Toles, "reprehensible" and offensive to soldiers.

The Post's editorial page editor, Fred Hiatt, replied that the newspaper would not censor its cartoonists, inspiring John Aravosis, who runs Americablog (americablog.blogspot.com), the Web site where the letter was first reported, to tell Editor & Publisher magazine: "Now that the Joint Chiefs have addressed the insidious threat cartoons pose to our troops, perhaps they can move on to the less pressing issues like getting them their damn body armor."

As is so often the case in the culture wars, choosing sides can be exasperating. Modern artists and their promoters forever pander to a like-minded audience by goading obvious targets, hoping to incite reactions that pass for political point-scoring. The twist in the Danish case is only that a conservative paper provoked Muslims. One may be excused for wondering whether the silence of the art world has something to do with the discomfort of staking a position where neither party offers the sanctuary of political correctness.

An obvious precedent, now comically tame by comparison, is the "Sensation" show at the Brooklyn Museum in 1999, a promotional bonanza for the British collector and wheeler-dealer Charles Saatchi, who owned the art in the show. The exhibition incited protests by the Catholic League. Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani played the stern dad to a bunch of publicity-savvy artists whose work included a collage of the Virgin Mary with cutouts from pornographic magazines and shellacked clumps of elephant dung.

Previously unmoved to action by Catholic League protests against a play at City Center involving a gay lead character fashioned after Jesus, the mayor, contemplating a Senate race against Hillary Rodham Clinton, decided he was personally offended by the art, although he had never actually seen it, and threatened to cut off public financing for the museum.

"You don't have a right to government subsidy for desecrating somebody else's religion," he said, foreshadowing a bit the Danish debacle about freedom of religious expression, notwithstanding that the artist of the Virgin Mary, Chris Ofili, happened to be Roman Catholic.

The New York art world was shocked only because it had expected the show to pass without fuss, since the art was already old news to insiders. But then museums nationwide had to hold their collective nose to defend Brooklyn over the issue of free expression, and by the end the whole affair had turned into farce, obscuring even the quality of what were, in fact, a few not-so-bad works of art.

No protester torched the museum or called for beheading anybody. Farce now becomes calamity over the cartoons, a different matter. The current bloodshed, fueled by political extremists and religious fanatics, turns the culture war once again into real war. People forget that Salman Rushdie's Japanese and Italian translators were stabbed (the Japanese fatally) and his Norwegian publisher shot.

What may be overlooked this time is a deep, abiding fact about visual art, its totemic power: the power of representation. This power transcends logic or aesthetics. Like words, it can cause genuine pain.

Ancient Greeks used to chain statues to prevent them from fleeing. Buddhists in Ceylon once believed that a painting could be brought to life once its eyes were painted. In the Netherlands in the 1560's, pictures were smashed in nearly every town and village simply for being graven images. And in the Philippines, enraged citizens destroyed billboards of Ferdinand Marcos.

To many people, pictures will always, mysteriously, embody the things they depict. Among the issues to be hashed out in this affair, there's a lesson to be gleaned about art: Even a dumb cartoon may not be so dumb if it calls out to someone.
nytimes.com/2006/02/08/arts/design/08imag.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
__________________
2numb2feel is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 05:17 PM   #340
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 03:57 PM
Well thank goodness the US press didn't publish those cartoons, Were already in enough shit!
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 05:51 PM   #341
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 10:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


The cartoons created a monster?

Yes. There were riots and killings in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Kashmir, and maybe other places, all in response to the cartoon. That's pretty monstrous.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 05:58 PM   #342
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 02:57 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
Yes. There were riots and killings in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Kashmir, and maybe other places, all in response to the cartoon. That's pretty monstrous.
The vast majority of people who have seen the cartoons (including muslims) have not rioted.

There must be other factors involved.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 06:00 PM   #343
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Justin24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 6,716
Local Time: 03:57 PM
On one hand I feel bad for the losses, and other the other, it's there fault for going out and creating havoc over a drawing and know what the consquences are. They cant stop and think for a minute and realize Mohommod had been dead for a while, I dont think Mohommod would really be insulted by an image of him. God gave us free will and forgives even if it's a "Blasphomes" image.
__________________
Justin24 is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 08:03 PM   #344
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:57 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76

Yes. There were riots and killings in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Kashmir, and maybe other places, all in response to the cartoon. That's pretty monstrous.
And you put the responsibility of this upon the cartoonists

When a wife gets beaten by her husband is it her own fault?

The monster is in the Islamic world, the creator of this is the Imams who so effectively whipped up the hate with deceit.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 02-08-2006, 08:08 PM   #345
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 08:57 AM
More and more the hints point to a coordinated plot with this response, including that they were published in Egypt last October to no protests



link
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com