NationStates Jolt Archive

So anyone actually have a pic of the danish cartoon that is sparking violence and in the news? cant seem to find a pic of the actual cartoon.

So anyone actually have a pic of the danish cartoon that is sparking violence and in the news? cant seem to find a pic of the actual cartoon.

You can find them on some torrent sites, apparently

Damn.... I never thought Islamic media control had advanced even that far...:D

The cartoon. (http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/5030/jp011005muhammedwesterga9hd.jpg)

This is what people are dying in protests for....

This is what people are dying in protests for....
Wow. That's nothing.

I thought it was porn or something along those lines.

Wow. That's nothing.

I thought it was porn or something along those lines.
http://www.michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm
That's just one of them, heres some others. Personally i think their quite humurous and just a bit of fun, certainly nothing to go jihad about.

LOL Suicide bombers standing at the gates of heaven. "Stop it! We've run out of Virgins"

Who knew the Danes had a sense of humour? ;)

http://www.michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm
That's just one of them, heres some others. Personally i think their quite humurous and just a bit of fun, certainly nothing to go jihad about.
The one where the guy is standing in paradise and saying, "Stop! We're out of virgins!" Is the only amusing one. The other ones are kind of lame.

It's absolutely pathetic what they're doing.

I can understand offence at a political cartoon. But for thousands to rise up, burn an embassy, and have two die...it's pathetic.

And now I hear the government of Iran is instituting a contest for a Holocaust cartoon tp publish in their papers, to see if the western world will tolerate it.

It's absolutely pathetic what they're doing.

I can understand offence at a political cartoon. But for thousands to rise up, burn an embassy, and have two die...it's pathetic.

And now I hear the government of Iran is instituting a contest for a Holocaust cartoon tp publish in their papers, to see if the western world will tolerate it.

you can understand someone being offended at a political cartoon but not a religous cartoon?

true, burning an embassy over a cartoon is a bit much...but insulting the holy prophet is on a whole different level for most if not all muslims

The cartoon is offending because it depicts Mohammed (should that be the cartoon your talking about) with a bomb in his turban.

Mohammed, as far I know about Islam, was the founding father of the Islamic faith. It's considered sacreligious to depict him in anyway.

you can understand someone being offended at a political cartoon but not a religous cartoon?

true, burning an embassy over a cartoon is a bit much...but insulting the holy prophet is on a whole different level for most if not all muslims

I apologise if I had confused you, but, to me, this cartoon does seem to have more political connotations than religious.

And as for insulting one's religion...you would do best to ignore them. You are not being physically harmed, and to lash out as the groups have today, you are only proving their point.

Apparently, the cartoons that really got people riled, never appeared in JP anyway, but were actually produced by muslims clerics and included with the JP cartoons in a package sent to the ME describing the 'offense to islam.'

I say fairs fair. The EU should apologize for JP, and then do the right thing by arresting the radical clerics and beheading them in a soccer stadium. It's what the people who are demonstrating really want anyway.

Does anybody else notice the gross double-standard here? The funamentalists claim they have the right to go batshit insane and riot their asses off, but we're not allowed to pull shit like this, even in response to the allegated Holocaust cartoons Iranian papers are now drawing.

Redsylvania']
Mohammed, as far I know about Islam, was the founding father of the Islamic faith. It's considered sacreligious to depict him in anyway.

Except for all those times he was depicted already. Those were fine. Dandy even.

(Why, I even saw islamic art featuring him when I was in North Africa. That was smashing)

I can only infer that this rule was introduced in 2006. (So much for the qu'ran being complete and unupgradeable.)

http://www.michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm
That's just one of them, heres some others. Personally i think their quite humurous and just a bit of fun, certainly nothing to go jihad about.

:headbang: Is there a Muslim sect that bred its adherents to have tissue paper skin and which now secretly controls the entire religion? Damn. These people really need to calm down, and the State Department and other Western countries need to go re-read the definition of "free speech" and "inalienable rights".

All 12 of the originally printed pictures can be found here:

http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2006/02/prophet_on_the.shtml

That's it, I'm making my own cartoon involving Muhammed and Aisha.:mp5:

I can only infer that this rule was introduced in 2006. (So much for the qu'ran being complete and unupgradeable.)
To change the Quran, you needed approval of the House and Senate, in addition to 3/4ths of the States in approval in the Olde Days (TM). Now it can be changed at the whim of the fundie imams.

Does anybody else notice the gross double-standard here? The funamentalists claim they have the right to go batshit insane and riot their asses off, but we're not allowed to pull shit like this, even in response to the allegated Holocaust cartoons Iranian papers are now drawing.

I didn't just pull the word "pathetic" out of my ass, you know. I had that in mind.

That's it, I'm making my own cartoon involving Muhammed and Aisha.:mp5:

I applaud the sentiment, but I am willing to bet if you post it here you'll get forumbanned; so I wouldn't do that.

... gosh, the irony kills me (figuratively).

In the National Post, they have pictures of some of the cartoons that some Islamic papers have printed against the Jews. Funny enough, Isreali's or Jews didn't start burning embassies, protesting. Instead, any of them that probably found out about it probably said something along the lines of this:
"Yeah, right, that's exactly what we're like, uh-huh, whatever."
And many of those chartoons are much more negative than most of those that I've seen.

It doesn't make it right, but the Islamic reaction isn't right either.

can someone explain the one with the suicide bombers at the gates of heaven?

I applaud the sentiment, but I am willing to bet if you post it here you'll get forumbanned; so I wouldn't do that.

Good point.

can someone explain the one with the suicide bombers at the gates of heaven?

The reward for suicide bombing is having sex with virgins in heaven*. So
the point of the cartoon is that there are more sucide bombers than virgins in the islamic world.


*Fundamentalist muslims believe that all women are sluts, so their best chance of meeting a virgin is in heaven (for some poorly defined reason, meeting a virgin is considered a big treat by the fundamentalist crowd). This is also why they make their female relatives wear garbage bags from head to toe, and frequently beat their daughters to death for being 'immodest.' I'd like to say this was twelfth century behaviour, but its actually far worse. I suspect a lot of them have problems with their sexual identity, and it comes out as mysogeny.

A decent roundup of cartoons from around the world about the whole cartoon fiasco can be found here: http://www.cagle.com/news/Muhammad/1.asp

Warning: While I find most of these tame some people might be offended by some cartoons, and some of them just aren't funny.

thanks for the clarification but i dont really see taht as funny

thanks for the clarification but i dont really see taht as funny

I wasn't. But then cartoons like that never are. I didn't think anyone in the world even looked at them anymore.

in October.
Here's the link:
http://egyptiansandmonkey.blogspot.com/2006/02/boycott-egypt.html

*smirk*

Redsylvania'] Mohammed, as far I know about Islam, was the founding father of the Islamic faith. It's considered sacreligious to depict him in anyway.

Sure it's sacreligious to depict him, but if the guy that drew it wasn't a Muslim, then what does it matter? If he wasn't a Muslim then those rules about depicting Mohammed do not apply to him.

Also, I fail to see why they have to burn things just because they were offened. I am a Christian, but if someone drew a picture depicting Jesus holding a bomb in his hand or some such thing, I would simply shrug and assume that person was having a bad day. But maybe that's just me.

Having said all this, I do think that the Danish guy who drew the drawing was taking it a bit far. There was no real point to it and it wasn't even very funny.

I like Brit WebToonists better:

http://poisonedminds.com/comics/pm20060208.png

Is it true that some paper is offering a cash reward for cartoons mocking the holocaust?