Why aren't we talking about "Draw Muhammad Day?" May 20th

Speaking of Comedy Central. . . .

At least in this country, where the First Amendment addresses the Freedom of Speech.

"They cannot kill us all."

Honestly, from whence do radical Muslims obtain their spectacular incompetence?

"The Three Stooges" springs to mind... or perhaps Comedy Central (as Roger mentioned above).

BTW, May 20th is this Thursday.

As muslims believe in Jesus as a prophet and Mosa as a prophet, So others have to respect prophit Mohamed "Peace be upon him" and to stop drawing such pictures that hurt muslims.

Allah says in Quran"And endure you patiently -O Muhammed-your patience is not but from Allah. And grieve not over them (Polytheists and pagans) and be not distressed because of what they plot. Turly Allah is with those who fear HIM and those who are good doers"

"Peace be upon him... And be not distressed..." so says the Koran.

Are the Muslims who gave the death threats, and the actual killings in the past, "not distressed?" Are they "peaceful?"

Are they abiding by the Koran? Do they practice peace, as their religious texts have clearly told them to do?

You DO know that Jesus has been depicted in very negative terms by these same cartoonists, right? And yet these cartoonists have NOT received any death threats due to these depictions of Jesus (or other religious figures).

And if "Patience is from Allah," does this not indicate, rationally, that Muslims who threaten to kill cartoonists lack the very patience their prophet has requested, even demanded?

Double stupidity - they were two of them.....

Two men 21 and 20 years old - no information about background

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and assume that one of the two has suddenly become very unpopular with the other.

I hadn't seen this one before, with translations:


And a new video from Thunderf00t:

I think Thunderf00t has a very good point about the intended purpose of the flag-burnings.

If you are not prepared to respect their most cherished beliefs why should they respect your freedom of speech which is only an illusion anyway.

I've read considerable thoughts on this and remain convoluted.

I'm all for free speech. I don't get the whole "being offended" thing because I view taking offense as aproblem for the one offended, not the supposd offender. What I mean by that is that if someone calls me a bitch, I don't take offense because I am not one. They don't get to define me. They obviously have a problem with me, not I with them. If someone were to draw a picture of my Mom naked, whether respectfully nude or nonrespectfully naked, I would not take offense because it is not my Mom. If I take offense, it is because some core truth exists in ME, the roots of which I probably need to explore in order to understand why I am taking offense.

I view 'nigger' and 'spic' in the same way. If someone calls another a 'nigger,' then in order to be offended the reciever has to identify with the term. It's the taking offense that I correlate with owning it. They may be hurt, or any other number of feelings, if it is coming from someone they care about and that they thought cared about them in return, but offended?

If I draw Muhammad and offend Muslims that are not terrorists or threatening to kill people, then they are the ones, by being offended, that are taking it personally, as if they are the terrorists the whole thing is targeting. My understanding is that they are not the target and therefore should not be offended. However, I cannot control their decision to take offense or not.

Having said that, I also see where regular, non-terrorist Muslims are asking that this not be done out of respect for them and their beliefs. They don't get the distinction, from the numerous things I've read, and therefore, the Draw Muhammed Day effort is not going to come across to them as what it is intended to be... a thumb of the nose to terrorist threats.

So, as I said at the start, I remain convoluted. I don't personally find drawing Muhammed any more offensive than the "Jesus in a Jar of Piss" that was called Art a few years back. It wasn't REALLY Jesus in the urine, and it won't REALLY be Muhammed that is drawn. (I don't think he was a stick figure, but may be wrong)

To me, the distinction and decision to draw or not draw comes down to what does the least harm to others. Does drawing or not drawing Muhammed harm my freedom of speech more or less than it harms non-terrorist Muslims who, from my reading have been very reasonable and respectful of their request that this not be done?

I'll probably choose to just write to Viacom asking them to stop caving to terrorist threats that censor my viewership options and their freedom of speech. That will likely do more than drawing Muhammed, in my opinion.

I was on the fence (sort of) until I watched that first video you posted (a couple of posts up...with the Swedish guy). I encourage everyone to watch the entire thing, beginning to end. It really put things in perspective for me. Appeasement is never the way to go.

Thanks for posting it.

I agree with all that, Squinney - well put.

I watched the whole video from Sweden. How the Muslims behaved - just awful.
Just watch the Swedes, all sitting there"calm as sour whole milk".( lugn som en filbunke).

The video and threats to Vilk are what keep me convoluted. The muslims knew what they were attending, and then fake outrage to force silence.

There is no contest to see which will "do more" as the cable companies decision and the "Draw Muhammad day" decision have different objectives.

It is certainly a good idea to write the cable company and let them know your private dollars would prefer that the artist's work not be censored by reason of death threat; but this does nothing to alleviate the dangers faced by the artists themselves. Without broadening the potential target; the artists will be in even more danger if the de facto censured material is aired.

I can certainly understand your desire to be respectful of the vast majority of Muslims who are not terrorists, just as I'm sure you'd also desire to be respectful of black Americans by denying the KKK the right to voice their putrid hatred. But alas, that protection cannot extend so far as to deny the KKK it's right exist, to gather, to demonstrate, or to speak. These are fundamental, inalienable constitutional rights, granted by the creator according to our founding fathers, and the right to these freedoms transends any thoughts of niceties.

To believe otherwise is to believe that unpopular speech is unworthy of protection; but whose value set will we base that on? Christian values? Muslim values? Atheist values? Or should we go on believing as we have for centuries that each of these entities right to swing their fists ends at the next guy's nose? Each has the right to say whatever they wish about whatever they wish; but none have the right to silence the speech of others. And make no mistake; de facto censorship is precisely what we're talking about here, and it's already taken place.

The decisions that remain are really this simple: Am I or am I not okay with Sharia Law being super-imposed over the Bill of Rights by way of death threat? And am I willing to risk standing up for my constitutional rights in the face of these threats? I'm no expert; but from what I've read and seen of Sharia Law, I want it to get no foothold in my country whatsoever. Neither do you.

P.s. I know what Patrick Henry would say.

I know. I know. A well behaved woman doesn't get beaten. It kinda gets in my craw that I'm even having this internal debate since my natural tendency is to step in front of the fist and tell em to bring it on.

I've never been a political person... I imagine my A2K friends are perfectly aware of that fact. (Can you say: I like kittens?)

I think my mind was changed when the Seattle cartoonist who suggested "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" dissociated herself from the event, saying she was too afraid to continue.

I was also a bit disturbed by The Simpson's chalkboard-writing: "South Park-We'd stand beside you if we weren't so scared."

There are many other issues to consider here, obviously, but these 2 spring to mind for me.

As I've already drawn mine, posted it to my blog, and my blog has fed into my Facebook account, I thought I'd offer this.

My blog post: http://theregoesourhero.blogspot.com/2010/05/how-free.html

One of my Muslim roommates from college replied to my post on facebook. Here is what he had to say to me.



Emphasis mine (Chi is what I went by in college if that is confusing). I think this closes this issue for me. I think it's foolish to think that moderate Muslims are too stupid or selfish to see other issues here beyond their own faith. My friend here has been a Muslim his entire life and came to the US from Malaysia to attend college. Although moderate, a term which in the USA might bring about ideas of a the causally practicing Christian, I can certainly say that his religion was a part of his daily life and he never missed a single prayer.

It's my belief that Muslims in the USA and the world at large do value free speech, and that even if uncomfortable, they understand this kind of exercise in mass artistic protest. As predicted, my friend used this opportunity to share information and his views, not to declare jihad on me.

I think that anyone who participates should simply draw Muhammad without using some sort of insult. RG had it right on that, and I believe my drawing stays within the boundaries of good taste.

A
R
T

Link to Wikipedia article about the event, with many sources quoted & linked:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day