-
A Holocaust Denier Walks Into a Bar
May 10, 2013 | 219 comments
-
What’s in a Name?
May 6, 2013 | 25 comments
-
Benediction
March 20, 2013 | 12 comments
-
The Great Consolidator: Dec. 2009
February 15, 2013 | 0 comments
-
Punking the President
January 14, 2013 | 15 comments
The Nation's Pulse
The Humorless Veto
Ready or not, here comes Everybody Draw Mohammad Day.
Before I wade into the controversy over Everybody Draw Mohammad Day, I suppose I should declare an interest. In February 2006, I was just starting to write a national affairs column for the New York Press. The alternative weekly’s former owner and columnist Russ Smith had written about the Danish Mohammad cartoon brouhaha. The editors wanted to reprint said cartoons to show readers what Smith was talking about. The new owners of the paper wouldn’t allow that, so the entire editorial team, led by editor Harry Siegel, resigned. There went my national affairs column.
The controversy then was over the depiction of Mohammad by various artists that ran in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. The point was to be offensive about a taboo subject and thereby strike a blow for free expression. One cartoon had Mohammad with a bomb for a turban. Another used Islam’s crescent symbol to give him horns. Another had a Mohammad as a stick figure. The cleverest of the lot depicted a cartoonist drawing Mohammad while nervously looking over his shoulder for fear of what might happen.
What happened was mob violence, riots, death threats, burned embassies, and ongoing intimidation. Yale University Press recently published a book titled The Cartoons That Shook the World, about the controversy. The publisher made the utterly moronic decision not to reprint the cartoons, in deference to the sensibilities of violent Jihadists everywhere. We can only wonder if Yale will decide to censor images of women in bikinis in the future. Many mullahs do not look kindly on too much skin.
The impetus behind Everybody Draw Mohammad Day is a more recent depiction of Mohammad, this one on South Park. The cartoon is the brainchild of Matt Stone and Trey Parker. It regularly pokes fun at religious figures, from Jesus to Vishnu to Joseph Smith. Therefore, Mohammad was a natural target for Stone and Parker to go after. The problem is that Comedy Central, the cable network that airs South Park, has expressed a strong disinclination to let them.
Stone and Parker had got around this in the past by mocking it. In 2006, an episode had several South Park characters working to stop rival show Family Guy from airing an episode that showed Mohammad. Rival Fox Network considers censoring the episode but finally bows to the demands of free speech (and ethical manatees). But there was nothing satirical last week about Comedy Central’s decision to obscure images and bleep bits of South Park dialogue of and about Mohammad. And that wasn’t all. Kyle Broflovski’s usual wrap-up speech at the end of the episode, which counseled against intimidation and fear and didn’t even mention Mohammad, got bleeped too.
The network chose to do this in response to threats and posts on a website called Revolution Muslim, including images of slain filmmaker Theo Van Gogh and strong suggestions that Stone and Parker could be next. On the Washington Post’s Comic Riffs blog, Michael Cavna asked, “So we all see the crystal-clear irony in this by now, right? A Web site characterized as ‘pro-jihad’ preys on fear and intimidation in regards to South Park. So when South Park attempts a speech about fear and intimidation, Comedy Central — apparently chilled by the Web site…bleeps the speech. Voila — the Web site’s goal seems achieved: Parker and Stone have been at least partially ‘silenced.’”
However, that’s not how things tend to go in a liberal democracy with a strong a tradition of free speech. While the suits at Comedy Central and Yale University Press have been cowed, people across the country have decided to speak up and thereby magnify the offense a thousandfold. On Facebook and elsewhere, May 20 is being dubbed Everybody Draw Mohammad Day. One sponsor is the fictitious group Citizens Against Citizens Against Humor, but previous experience suggests that the blowback could be no laughing matter.
About the Author
Jeremy Lott is editor of RealClearPolicy.com, RealClearBooks.com and RealClearReligion.org and associate editor of RealClearScience.com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (101) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Jeremy Lott
More Articles From The Nation's Pulse
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/27/the-humorless-veto
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- The Continuing Crisis
- The Great Train Robbery
- Of Wizards and Weapons
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Ret. Marine| 4.27.10 @ 6:56AM
I believe everyone get the point here. I'm not impressed with a supposed religion who holds everyone elses religion in contempt or feels the need to kill (infidels) because of a different belief system, nor should anyone else for that matter. Every day we are told we are at war with the terrorist, terror is a tactic. We are in fact at war with a totalatarian ideology wrapped in religious tones inspired by a war lord, a theif, a child molester and is accepted as a religion. Yeah, right.
More to the point, this is about freedom of expression, speech, tolerance and our 1st. Amendment rights granted not by this grubmint, but God. We have witnessed this political correctness bull shale to run amoke by not insisting those who would run for cover on this issue stand up for the principles we hold to be true to our words in the our Constitution. And who is behind this mess besides the usual suspects, of course the US grubmint. Yeah sure they may talk a good talk but in my world actions speak louder than words do. And where is hussein obama (may allah piss on his grave) who would rather side with the muslim world on this issue? why of course siding with the muslim world. Did we expect something different? I didn't.
We are a free people's, about time we start acting like it. We do nothing to promote freedom if we are to pick and chose what rights we are willing to give up in the name of security. What a message we send to the individuals who have fought wars to ensure liberty to all who partake in this Representative Republic form of self-governance. To do otherwise, not fight these criminals who hide behind their woman and children as a tactic to gain favor with their mental illness mistaken for courage, is to dishonor all those who gave their all so that you might enjoy liberty. I will not be shamed or intimidated like we just witnessed by this network. They deserve not to call themselves Americans, rather cowards.
PolishKnight| 4.27.10 @ 10:44AM
I'll play devil's advocate here (literally) and observe that a thousand years ago, the Christian faith was little different AND 1500 years before that, the Jewish faith also was violently intolerant. They are all based upon the same 1st commandment that says that not worshipping the God of their particular Bible is the biggest sin of all, even ahead of murdering other human beings.
Christianity and Judaism appear moderate by comparison because two interpretations of the word moderate are watered down and edited. These faiths "work" precisely because their followers tossed out particular words written or prophesized by "God" to make them more palatable.
One of my favorite insults to hurl at smug, self-important elite leftists is to observe that their philosophy is extremely similar to Christianity and it's sister faiths which seek to force their beliefs upon others "for their own good" except that Marxism is itself founded upon a denial that it's a religion in the first place.
Irish Spectre| 4.27.10 @ 1:26PM
When you get a moment, PolishKnight, take a gander at the New Testament. You'll find exhortations such as in Luke 6, as follows:
"But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you."
While I'm admittedly even less of a Koran expert than I am a Biblical expert, doesn't the former encourage violence against one's enemy, the infidel??
Your point's quite specious, PolishKnight, for while violent Christians act in a manner contrary to their scripture, violent Muslims act in a manner that follows their's!!
Le Cracquere| 4.27.10 @ 2:32PM
Actually, Christianity & Judaism never tossed out particular passages so much as evaluated & studied them in relation to the whole of their scriptures and traditions, applying tools like exegesis and theology. These are precisely the tools that Islam forbids its followers to apply to the Koran--the faithful Muslim is required to swallow it whole, and death to the infidel who stops to theologize a sura and its context, rather than take it as a direct marching order. In short, a consistent Christianity and Judaism may at times generate what a consistent Islam can only generate.
vikram| 4.27.10 @ 7:40AM
I totally agree with u marine. and thanks to your brothers in arms we (the rest of the non muslim world) is actually taking the fight to these medieval basstards. the fringe muslim lunatics with the tacit approval of the mainstream muslim populations in most of the countries of the world are perpetuating such a extra judicial censosship on most of the world. to hell with them. we should all take them head on
Dave| 4.27.10 @ 9:18AM
I take just the tiniest issue, Vikram. "Medieval bastards" is a slight against our own medieval heritage. The sum of it all is far greater than Islam's history.
J| 4.27.10 @ 7:55AM
I recommend we declare EVERY DAY "Mohammed Joke Day"...Why does Mohammed have a fixation on 70virgins? BECAUSE HE IS A BIG D@!
plastic mold | 4.28.10 @ 11:00PM
. I keep hearing that "99% of Muslims don't believe in this stuff." Bull. Where is the Muslim outrage against this? I listened to an NPR segment on this yesterday, and several Muslims called in. Not one was willing unequivocally to condemn death threats to those who offend them. Instead, they claimed they were victims of "disrespect". Oh, okay. I guess you should kill people whom you think don't respect you. That's the Muslim way. It seems that most American Muslims really don't have a problem with murdering those who are different. They'll just stand by and explain while more extreme Muslims do the dirty work.
Tim*| 4.27.10 @ 8:07AM
Where's Pinch Sulzberger & The Keyboard Toughie Religion Critics from The New York Times ?
Run Girls these ain't The Catholics !
Uncle Curmudgeon| 4.27.10 @ 9:46AM
Hey, Tim
You could use an up-date of the old Spike Jones and His City Slickers WWII number: "*%@ In The Prophet's Face" for your theme song, Ol' Buddy.
Tim*| 4.27.10 @ 6:45PM
Am I Your Buddy ?
Why Would That Be ?
Doctor Right| 4.27.10 @ 10:59AM
He and his staff are very busy chasing down leads on pervert priests. It's apparently a 24/7 job.
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 3:33PM
what about pervert Congressmen?
Tim*| 4.27.10 @ 6:49PM
Aaaand like Dr.Reich here , Pinch Sulzberger doesn't chase down The Public School Teacher Perverts ,whose numbers and percentages dwarf anything that ever happened in Catholic Schools.
That's Not on their Anti-Catholic Agenda.
Brian Mc| 4.27.10 @ 8:28AM
Good one, Tim!
Catholics don't fight back...or, do they?
Only time will tell.
Louis Jenkins| 4.27.10 @ 8:42AM
Didn't see the episode. Don't care to. But good for the boys to make fun of Mohammed and his ilk. About time someone stood up on national news media.
Becky| 4.27.10 @ 9:16AM
It is a loss that Parker and Stone were willing to take that risk for the rest of us, including the suits. It is almost as though the idea of sharia law has informally replaced our centuries old Constitution and its interpretations. When the strongest defender of free speech is a cartoon, our government appears to be a joke.
What a lot of people don't get about Islam, is that it does not separate church and state. That is why Islam cannot coexist in a secular government like Christianity and Judaism can. Contrary to the idea that the founders did not respect or allow religion, they did not want an establishment of religion, which is the goal of Islam.
What does our pontificating president think about this, seeing how he's knows both Islam and took and oath to defend the Constitution? I'm sure it would be an 18 minute answer that evades the question.
Jeffrey| 4.27.10 @ 3:29PM
Becky,
Would love to see Obama show some guts and defend Matt & Trey or urge support of Everybody Draw Mohammad day as an American tradition to defend our free speech.
America can not peacefully co exist with a culture that practices 'Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong' which is the practiced by many Muslims.
Any Muslim wishing to also be an American needs to understand that 'Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong' means taking the law in ones own hands. Either you're willing to live by our laws or not. If you're not, you can't be an American. Simple as that.
murph| 4.27.10 @ 9:44AM
There are so many issues that need to be raised here: First, why isn't the FBI prosecuting this Muslim for his murderous threats? He has violated racketeering laws at the very least. We need to make an example of him so that all Muslims will see that they are going to have to learn to respect our nation's traditions of free speech.
Secondly, I guess the contemporary leftist media have shown their true colors. Jon Stewart is a wimp. Comedy Central has no balls. Remember "piss Christ" a few years ago, Serrano's crucifix in a jar of urine? When Catholics like me complained about it, we were all told "Hey shut up! This is about free speech! You can't censor us!" When a Muslim killer/terrorist complains about a joke, on the other hand, they immediately fold.
Thirdly, it shows once again why Muslims are not fit to be American citizens. I keep hearing that "99% of Muslims don't believe in this stuff." Bull. Where is the Muslim outrage against this? I listened to an NPR segment on this yesterday, and several Muslims called in. Not one was willing unequivocally to condemn death threats to those who offend them. Instead, they claimed they were victims of "disrespect". Oh, okay. I guess you should kill people whom you think don't respect you. That's the Muslim way. It seems that most American Muslims really don't have a problem with murdering those who are different. They'll just stand by and explain while more extreme Muslims do the dirty work.
Finally, the message from this administration is that Muslim violence and intolerance are okay. Tea Party protests are bad though. So are Christians who are serious about their faith. Does all this mean that if we Christians behaved more like Muslims, and took up violence against those whom we don't like, we would get respected just like our tolerant Muslim neighbors?
Mel Torme| 4.27.10 @ 5:44PM
I want to add a clarification to that, Murph: The people that raised hell (or attempted to) about the piss Christ "art work" were never even saying that the "artist" should be punished, much less beheaded. All their (quite valid) point was, is that they did not want this type of "art" funded by the US government.
That ain't a heck of a lot to ask. Personally, the US government has no charter to support any artwork, even the type of painting that one can make heads-or-tails of and even artwork that involves no human bodily fluids whatsoever.
I could understand the muslims getting upset if some degrading cartoons of mohammed were paid for by US tax dollars. Well, we'll see about that last; I turned in that grant application months ago, it seems, and all I've received is a "under review" status on the website (you know, National Nasty Cartoon Endowment, part of our stimulus package. Yeah, I got your stimulus right here, big Mo. Dr. Al Bendova, says, I'll give you your stimulus every evening, then take 2 aspirin, but don't wake me up in the morning)
Dang, that South Park crudity has rubbed off on me a little bit. Sorry.
Pingback| 4.27.10 @ 10:57AM
» Comedy Central is no laughing matter links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
DARTHLOKI| 4.27.10 @ 11:10AM
I always thought South Park was edgier and more funny than the Daily Show.
NavyBrat | 4.27.10 @ 11:29AM
I posted the link to this article on today's Jeffrey Lord piece. It's hillarious! Mike Adams of Townhall seems to have the right idea in confronting hard core practicioners of the "Religion of Peace" (snark, snark).
http://townhall.com/columnists....._diversity
Pocahontas Descendant | 4.27.10 @ 12:14PM
I am a Muslim and I don't see anything wrong in principle with depicting Muhammad in a respectful manner. In old Persian and Iraqi art from the middle ages he is often depicted without a face or with his face covered. So in a sense putting him in a bear suit was in an old tradition.
What we have now are radical reactionaries getting all of the press and giving other Muslims a bad name. Even when moderates stand up and reject terrorism publicly it never gets the same coverage. That is why you don't see it.
As for anyone who says muslims aren't fit to be US citizens. I am a descendant directly from an Ancient planter of Virginia, Pocahontas is both my great x 11 grand aunt and great x 12 grand mother. I am a descendant of the first "20 and odd negars" (As John Rolfe Pocahontas's husband wrote in a letter) to be brought to these shores.
In short I have more of a right to be here than anyone who would say my choice of religion makes me unfit. You Becky, Murph and whoever else, should get out of my country. Because while we are all United States citizens. I am more American that you will ever be.
ncatty| 4.27.10 @ 1:03PM
Just because a cat has kittens in an oven, it doesn't make them biscuits. Your ancestry is interesting from a genealogical point of view. However, a newly minted citizen is just as much an American as anyone with deep roots here, as long as that new citizen has forsworn allegiance to all other potentates and powers.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 1:50PM
Sorry there's a difference between being a United States Citizen and being an American.
Anyone who does what you said is a US citizen. Sworn allegiance to the United States. People like those who I directed my original comment to, who said muslims are automatically not fit citizens, are the ones who need to be reminded of that.
Anyone who has ancestry native to the Americas is an American no matter where they live or what country they are a citizen of. i.e. Native American are "American" if they live in Canada, Mexico, Bolivia or Bulgaria. It's genetic.
The earliest settler families have at least one drop of native (and African) blood in them so I include the First Families of Virginia, to which mine own also belongs in that category.
Trust me. When I first went to a tea party rally I was wearing Niquab ("the veil that only shows your eyes".) I faced some guys who looked like over the hill hells angels and told them the above. They shut the heck up.
I also condemned Nidal Hassan but that didn't make any mention in the news. I wonder why? Probably the same reason the media misrepresents the tea party.
Good Guy| 4.27.10 @ 2:51PM
Im sure we are all impressed by your presumed credentials. However, when you submitted to Islam, you placed yourself in direct opposition to everything this country stands for. Your status as an Islamic woman places you on the level of a beast of burden within their belief system. You and I know this: Every muslim looks down upon every non-muslim (infidel) - your belief demands it and you know that it is true. Even so, every male that converts to Islam (i.e. at the end of a sword) instantly becomes better (superior) to you as a woman in that belief system. Consider these things when a male drives you about in Saudi Arabia as you pay homage to the man in the bear suit. Consider it as your male escort shuffles you about while you are hid in a bag with little eye holes. However, if that male makes unwanted advances toward you, then you best have four male witnesses to defend yourself in Sharia court. Think on these things.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 3:29PM
I have thought about these things way more than you did. All you are doing is repeating talking points you read on Atlas Shrugs. I could at least respect Ms. Gellar for being original.
It must really P.O. so many of you recent Ellis island immigrants to have to face to face the fact that you are not native to this land. I am more American that you will ever be no matter how hard you try. Even this form of government was borrowed from the Natives. Think about that when your political party Caucasus
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 3:44PM
well...I was really gonna make an effort to be sympathetic to your pov. but your notion of "more American" is...well.....simplistic to say the least. the more native branches on the family tree...the more "American"? see the problem?
so, why not get to what matters: what are the fundamental American values, histories and allegiances that frame you as an American? The goal here is to provide real content...explore what the concept means to you. Given your current belief system - one which was likely not inherited from the root of your American family tree given the personages you have listed - it would prove interesting to understand the foundation your homily rests upon.
btw...since we know what you call natives were themselves nomadic....who did they displace?
Good Guys| 4.27.10 @ 3:55PM
Your pride is deafening. It seems that whether in genealogy or religion you like to look down upon others (determined by your own written words). Even so, I suppose you do it because in Islam a woman is nothing (nothing personal against you - but it is a fact). Know this - your religion also stands against that of the native Americans also. For whatever good Ms. Geller may do, she is very much for abortion and I am not a follower of hers as you presume. Muhammad is an ancestor of Ishmael. Ishmael was a wild man and thus are his descendents (uncontrolled temper). Even today, they can't get along with anyone (love - an action that they cannot grasp).
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 4:56PM
Why should I not be proud? On the backs of and the directions of my ancestors was the country that your ancestors moved into . Your ancestors moved into cities and struggled. Mine walked through the arctic/ landed in an unfamiliar wilderness.
Or is it that I dare not show deference to the great white man?
@Carnot.
I know American history and American values. I know that this country was founded on freedom of religion. Not just freedom to be Christian (which seems to the the opinion of so many here).
Here I have the freedom to be a mutriacial person who practices Islam and the culture of an semi-urban Indian in a 21st century world. Muslims are not collectively responsible for those who want to live in the 600's.
As for the status of women in Islam. Here in the west men shout take it off, over there the men shout put it on. Women will be free when no one tells us what to wear at all, which does happen here in the USA. Certain judges insist that women wear skirts in court. Certain localities consider not wearing a bra to be indecent exposure.
At least in Saudi Arabia Niqab has value as sunblock. :-)
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 9:12PM
yes...those are some of the freedoms we enjoy here. I'm glad you dispensed with the silly genealogy argument.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.28.10 @ 1:26AM
It's not silly when some white person is looking at me in Hijab, assuming I'm an immigrant and telling me to go back to my country.
I ask them what country is that? Virginia?
JS| 4.27.10 @ 1:52PM
Being an American is not about a place of birth, it is about a set of ideals. Islam practiced as Muhammed created it is totally incompatible with being an American. Being an American is rooted in freedom while islam is rooted in submission - submission by force if necessary or death. I don't believe your story about your geneology. I suspect anything that comes out of a person's mouth who practices a religion that believes the ends justify the means. Islam means submission - and I say no thanks. I'm happy being an infedel.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 3:03PM
Once again there is a difference between being a United States Citizen and being an american.
Canada has most of the same ideas you said. Is a Canadian an American then?
An American is someone who's genetic roots go back to the American continents. You recent immigrants via Ellis Island are as non-American as a immigrant muslim compared to me.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 4:03PM
Here's my family tree in entirety online.
This shows how the Botts family is descended from Pocahontas
This shows how my family is descended from Aaron Botts.
Which also makes me related to Percival Lowell, Nancy Regan and probably allot of other US Presidents including the current one (by way of his mothers family.)
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 4:07PM
For some reason my HTML did not go through. In their respective order mentioned above here are the links.
Relation of Pocahontas to the Botts family
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.co.....P526898358
The relation of my family to the Botts family.
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.co.....P510376321
Now what country should I go to? What country is mine if not this one? I think this one is mine and if you don't like who's here you recent immigrants via Ellis island ought to go.
TGC| 4.28.10 @ 11:13AM
Hang on a few minutes and I'll post a family tree showing I'm related to anyone you want! An online "family tree" means absolutely nothing.
haunyocker | 4.28.10 @ 2:12PM
PD. You prove the argument that Muslims do not criticize the violence against non-Muslims by your failing in your post to condemn violence against Americans. All you do is attack those complaining about the promoted tenant to kill or forcibly convert infidels to Islam.
As to your assertion that you have more rights than others for being in America, I would have to disagree with your justification of "earliest arrival" theory.
Some archeologist researchers say that Clovis spear points, found in the America before any one else arrived, were made by a group of people from the center of Europe . If that is true, the first American settlers, it could be argued, were white Europeans and the later Indians tribes found after Columbus were the encroachers.
But even that is specious, because the fact is that every human or group of humans to set foot in America is and are immigrants!!! It's just a matter of when. And if that's the case, parts of my family have been here more than 50 generations. Does that mean than that any so-called Native American who were born after me do not have the right to be here, as much as me? That is a pathetic argument and assumption.
If American Muslims do not defend the Constitution, as represented in the pledge allegiance to the Flag, what right do they have claiming American Citizen? If you refused to swear allegiance to become a naturalized citizen, do you have the right to American Citizenship?
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 12:41PM
http://www.cartoonstock.com/ne.....in328l.jpg
The point the cartoon makes which I sorta agree with is this. Drawing a cartoon of Muhammad that is meant to be disrespectful and mock him is like drawing a cartoon with the N-word in it. That word is anathema for most people in our society but for a minority of rappers. So it is with depicting Muhammad in Muslim society.
What disturbs me most is that from the outset there was not a period of time where one side tried to understand and learn from the other. It was all media focus on the kooks burning embassies and the crakcpots here who wanted to continue to insult them (as if it would lead to less violence?)
Kevin| 4.27.10 @ 1:29PM
A "minority" of rappers? Wow...talk about disconnected...
Pocahotnas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 1:33PM
It's likely that I listen to more rap than you. I'll bet the only time you listen to rap is when it's mentioned on Hannity for it's offensive language or some such.
Don't call me a liberal either I have protested with the the party.
Kevin| 4.27.10 @ 1:37PM
I mean, if you're listening to Eminem, then you're not going to hear the "n" word a lot. But list the top 100 rappers (by sales) in the country right now, and see how many don't use it at least once on EVERY one of their albums. I'll wait. Given how much rap you listen to at your Tea Party rallies, I'm sure you'll get through them all in no time.
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 3:48PM
your thoughts are well intentioned...but your thinking is confused.
there's a difference between civility/good taste....and freedom.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 4:13PM
It is often said that Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences. Drawing cartoons of muhammad has become almost like shouting fire in a crowded theatre.
Overhere based on some of the things written on these comments they can stoke anti muslim, anti "immigrant" (since it is assumed muslims are all immigrants) sentiment. Some people here in the US do act out violently towards muslims every day.
At the same time it can spark unrest in the muslim world and of course violence by nutty terrorist against the cartoonist. I will not excuse the terrorist violence, or the anit muslim violence.
Why is a cheap laugh worth stoking such strong negative feelings?
Suppose someone drew George Washington personally whipping a slave? I think it would PO allot of us.
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 9:15PM
PO'ing off someone and silencing them are two different things.
but why has drawing cartoons of Muhammad become almost like shouting fire in a crowded theatre? what if the theatre is...in fact...on fire?
Pocahonts Descendant| 4.28.10 @ 1:31AM
The Fire in the crowded theater saying came from a case years ago. At the time the doors into theater swung into the theater. You had to pull them open to get out.
Someone thought it would be funny to shout FIRE FIRE and a stamped occurred in which people were crushed to death. (Not unlike actual fires that occurred in living memory at nightclubs in Chicago and on the east coast.)
It's also comparable to saying bomb while on a plane or in an airport. You have the freedom to say these things but there are still consequences.
In this case drawing a cartoon of muhammad that is of a disrespectful nature is sure to at least get you hate mail. Or even prosecution for "hate speech" if it's bad enough. Possibly even make you a Jihadi target. Speech has consequences.
Kevin| 4.27.10 @ 1:34PM
See, now this article at least sounds well thought out. The comments are typical of the racism this site invites, but the article itself at least shows some understanding of satire, and how free speech can be used as a strong weapon in defense of freedom. Using the depiction in an offensive manner is of course inappropriate, especially if used in a racially degrading manner. However, other depictions are better served on a platter of hilarity with a side of well intentioned snark. May 20th should be VERY interesting (and hopefully actually funny). Remember the Buddy Jesus from Dogma? Now THAT is some funny sh1t...
Pocahontas Descendant | 4.27.10 @ 3:38PM
Now that's sensible. I mean the number of muslims that would be offended by a truly funny satirical muhammad cartoon is small.
I think this one is funny, non racist, and non offensive at all.
Then there are things which make are not so much drawings of Muhammad, but drawings of a monster. I don't think any ethnic, religious or social group would be happy if one of it's revered founders was drawn with devil horns.
Rappers who habitually use the N word all the freaking time. 50 cent, Jay-Z it's like every third word in their raps. I guess they think it rhymes with everything.
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 9:17PM
the first refuge of an empty mind: claim racism.
Jarmsie Spoondash| 4.27.10 @ 1:48PM
Beyond the threats by the mohammedists and choices of whether or not to be courageous in the face of them, the issue here is the unnatural influence upon our society of people whose sensibilities are easily bruised. The potential of this country will never be fully realized until we are able to conduct our business without worrying excessively if this or that group of children will be offended. And yes, we are dealing with children. "You said such-and-so and now I'm sad." "That picture isn't nice." "My mommy says I'm special so you have to say you're sorry for being mean to me." Yeesh. Caving to threats or coddling hurt feelings does nothing but drag us down.
ncatty| 4.27.10 @ 4:20PM
Pocahontas Descendant, a question. Is present day Spain a part of the caliphate?
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 4:41PM
No.
1.)Most importantly the Muslim caliphate hasn't existed, even as a formality, since the fall of the Ottoman Empire in World War I. The Ottoman sultans were the last to hold the title Kalifah. There is no current political or religious/ceremonial caliphate for Spain to be a part of.
2.) The Almohade caliphate (a break away caliphate) which existed during the middle ages fell apart and lost control of the Muslims of Spain. They rebelled against non "Spanish" rule (at the time anyone from Iberia was a Spaniard even as they were from different countries in Spain i.e. Aragon, Castile, Leon, Granada, Seveille. )
3.) The last remnant of the Caliphate in Spain was taken over by the united Castile and Aragon in 1492. Then the Spain we know was formed.
It must be recognized that Spain as it now exist is the product of a mixing of Visigothic European, and Berber north African, of Christian and Muslim ideas for art and architecture. Spanish took much vocabulary from Arabic and the Muslim world had Andulusia as a beacon of light even as the east was ravaged by the Mongols and the early Turks.
I know there are some nuts who say that it is. But there are also nutty Mexicans who want the southwest back, and nutty white people who act as if they were the original people and "discoverers" of America.
Mel Torme| 4.27.10 @ 6:12PM
Pocahantas Descendant, you are really missing a major point here:
You're not distinguishing at all between the N. American continent and the country America (aka, the United States). Your ancestry does indeed make you one of the most "North American" of all the people in this country. That, and a monetary system will get you a cup of coffee. That, an advanced, industrialized, modern society, and 35 cents will get you an ear of sweet corn (oh, I forgot, you call it "maize")
What I'm saying is that your ancestors on the N. American side that walked across the land that is now the Bering Straits didn't do anything worthwhile for the next 10,000 years (or whatever it was). They lived, and the were probably mostly decent folks, but they didn't do squat to improve society. 95% or more of all the physical improvements to the world have been done through the efforts of the white man alone.
I'll give the muslims some credit for the algebra; so, ya got that going for you, I guess, except you are not muslim by ancestry, only by conversion. So, what did your people do that you are so proud of?
("Well, Gosh Darnit, people liked us, cause we kept Mother Earth clean and lived off the land, blah, blah..." Actually, the Indians were not particularly environmentally sensitive people. I say this from my own experience. An Indian guy that I met lived in a trailer that has, been, to this day, the messiest place I have ever seen. After looking at his yard, with the broken washing machines and piled-up crap, I had a tear coming down my face that would put that TV Indian to shame!)
To finish my point: This country as organized by white men, used to have freedoms and opportunities never before or since seen in the entire world! Do you not understand that? You seem proud to have relatives from this continent going back centuries, but I was (not anymore) proud to be a part of the greatest country the world had ever seen; this had nothing to do with where my parents were born.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 6:43PM
"This country as organized by white men, used to have freedoms and opportunities never before or since seen in the entire world! "
Which shows the real motivation of your arguement. Do you deny the role that both natives and Black people (slave and free) played in organizing, and building the polity we live in, the United states?
Second you are a citizen of the United States. The United States is not all of America. Canadians and Mexicans and Brazillians could just as well call themselves Americans. It's a geographical name, not a political name.
It's funny how you seem so eager to claim priority in your American ness over not only one person who's got deep roots here than you, but over the millions of people who's ancestry is like mine who live on this continent. Both natives, and the white settlers that made this a place your ancestors would even want to be.
Mel Torme| 4.27.10 @ 8:01PM
"Do you deny the role that both natives and Black people (slave and free) played in organizing, and building the polity we live in, the United states? "
Yeah, I think we could have done it without either, though that does not take away from hard work done by all Americans over the years, and I can't fault either group for being here (for Blacks' ancestors, not their choice and under tragic circumstances, thanks to Yankee slave traders).
"The United States is not all of America." Give me a break, dude. Semantics won't get you but so far. For most people with common sense, "America" includes neither Mexico, Canada, S. America, nor Central America.
"It's funny how you seem so eager to claim priority in your American ness over not only one person who's got deep roots here than you, but over the millions of people who's ancestry is like mine who live on this continent. Both natives, and the white settlers that made this a place your ancestors would even want to be."
That doesn't make any sense, in light of what I explained to you in my first reply. I'm writing about a country with it's political system, not about a geographic area and who used to or didn't use to live there.
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 9:21PM
to be quite frank...I for one don't really care about your ancestors. I'm more interested in what you bring to the table other than a whinny insistence that your heritage somehow endows you with special entitlements when making certain assertions.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.28.10 @ 1:33AM
Think about what you just wrote the next time you tell a recent immigrant to go back to their country. There's always someone who can say the same thing to you.... Well unless your like me. lol
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.27.10 @ 6:55PM
Aw guys,
Pokea haunch is not agirl...but a guy, muslim girls keep their darned mouths shut....and their legs spread. heh....even in their paradise.
He tricked all of you, playing pretend he is a real girl.
PS: muslim guys, my wife is armed and trained. Just try to keep her mouth shut. heh. You will enjoy singing soprano in paradise.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 7:02PM
Umm Muslim countries have had female presidents.
Such as Pakistan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benazir_Bhutto
The US hasn't. So soo much for your thesis that muslim women never speak up.
As a matter of fact in Pakistan arguably the women are as radical if not more radical than allot of the men.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6503477.stm
Perhaps you should actually read about what you want to have an opinion of first.
carnot| 4.27.10 @ 9:23PM
true enough...which is likely why the US hasn't murdered its female Presidents as has Muslim culture!
Pocahontas Descendants| 4.27.10 @ 9:25PM
I don't know about that. Suppose Hillary had won. I think there'd be allot of people who would not like it at all.
We need to have a female president before we can preach about women in politics. Muslim countries (the ones that aren't kingdoms like Saudi) have lots of women in politics.
Bydand76| 4.27.10 @ 9:27PM
Ummmmm and she was assassinated?
Show me a muslim female who has led her country as a modern western proto-typical female and I will show you a corpse.
Sorry poke but your argument is to specious for me.
I think you make some interesting points but then you digress to using either your native American ancestry or your religion as a crutch.
Let me ask you this.
How can you square yourself with dhimmitude?
Islam means to Submit correct?
Where does your allegiance lie? Your Country? Or your religion?
How can you seriously take Islam as a religion when it directly contradicts itself?
The House of Peace versus the House of the Sword?
The Koran specifically says to love infidels and then turns around and says to kill all who oppose Islam.
i.e People of the Book. (Christians)
OR People of the Apes (Jews)
What gives? Can you say schizophrenia?
Thoughts?
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 10:01PM
You wanted to see a president of a muslim country, female , who was not assasinated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megawati_Sukarnoputri
She was president of Indonesia which is the most populous Muslim country. She's actually running for reelection.
Now as for the various chapters of the Quran. Some of those were revealed in different situations.
The last battle between the Muslims in medina and the idoalters in Mecca is known as the battle of the trench. It was a siege of Medina, and is named for a trench dug around Medina. This prevented the Meccans from storming in with their calvary.
Well as the siege wore on one "Jewish" tribe of Medina decided to defect to the other side. They had warred with the Muslims against the pagan Meccans. The part of the Quran that you refer to is from that period. This is also the situation in which "Apostasy" is mentioned. It's not merely deciding not to pray. In the context of the Quran's revelation Apostasy meant changing sides in the war between the Muslims in Medina and going to their enemies in Mecca. Since the days of the Ottoman empire that law has been off the books in the western Islamic world by their imperial Caliphal edict.
The thing is ignorant fools like the Taliban didn't get the memo.
Mel Torme| 4.27.10 @ 8:08PM
"The US hasn't." You had better thank your lucky stars on that one, cause it would have been Geraldine Ferraro (with a death involved) or Hillary Clinton. Neither of those would have made the American public ready to elect another woman for at least as long as the original voters remain non-senile or the oldest non-senile voters were still in the womb at the time of said tragedy.
And, let us not forget Buttros-Buttros-Golly, who though not a woman, was some type of elected official of some type of hellhole, and has a very catchy name.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 9:29PM
Oh I know. I would have hated having Hillary as President on so many levels. Not only is she an arch left winger who would socialize everything.
It would mean a whole generation would have grown up knowing only either Bush's or Clinton's as presidents. All it would take after that is for Prescot Bush to marry Chelsea Clinton and we'd have a full blown monarchy. Kind of like the Julio-Claudians' s who ruled Rome.
That is the way the US will loose it's freedom. It will be an inside job and it will be insidious. Each prez taking more and more power. Gov't getting bigger and bigger. Then one day you wake up and say hey WTH!
Mel Torme| 4.27.10 @ 11:17PM
You are right on that one. We had 20 years of those 2-sides of the same party in the White House Good thing the streak was interrupted by .... wait a minute... I really would rather have Bill Clinton over this Marxist. Even though he didn't care about his country one bit, he didn't really have any hard-core left-wing beliefs, as he didn't have any beliefs.
You could get that guy to sign up on ending the Fed, destroying the Dept. of Education, and cutting taxes in half all in one day, if you had a coupla blow jobs lined up for him for after the signing. He didn't even care if the girls were hot, it seems. Piece of cake, if it weren't for that meddling Hillary.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.27.10 @ 11:23PM
At least in Clintons case by this point he had gotten the message that most of America was not with him. Now this guy... basically he gets to write off anyone who opposes him as racist. Nothing but a resounding electoral disaster for his party will stop him. I hope that's what happens.
If not then I won't know what to think. He's left wing but hasn't even done some of the things the left wanted him too (Gitmo is still open, we are still at war, repeal of DADT is nothing but lipservice) Basically he's proven to be just another C(r)ook county politician.
hyrdr| 4.28.10 @ 1:23AM
Pocahontas Decendant
You sound really really mixed up. It's probably penisenvy. You follow the Koran more then the Constitution. That is why you are not as american an ellis island Immagrants who built this ocuntry to what it is today. ibet you are a welfare rat all you life.
Pocahontas Descendant| 4.28.10 @ 1:39AM
"That is why you are not as american an ellis island Immagrants who built this ocuntry to what it is today. ibet you are a welfare rat all you life."
So let's see you even discount people like the founding fathers, Lincoln, the Chinese who built the western railroads... Boy are you a piece of work.
I am far from a uneducated welfare person. If I told you my actual level of education and what I do you would not believe it. Suffice it to say unless you are in a wheelchair and need a computer to talk for you, I could probably teach you a thing or two about the universe. I don't mean new age stuff either.
Yosemeti Sam| 4.28.10 @ 2:12AM
" We look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms. The first is freedom of speech and expression - everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way - everywhere in the world. The third is freedom from want ... everywhere in the world. The fourth is freedom from fear ... anywhere in the world.
Message to Congress, 6 January 1941,
in Public Papers (1941) vol. 9, p. 6
Franklin D. Roosevelt 1882-1945
32nd President of the USA
Oxford 9th Concise Dictionary
Hmmmm - 1941.
Yikes - juxtaposed to explosive cartoons!
Pingback| 4.28.10 @ 5:02AM
Everybody Draw Mohammad Day - INGunOwners links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
murph| 4.28.10 @ 11:14AM
Hey Pocahontas - sorry to ruffle your feathers. But having aboriginal descent doesn't make you any more "native" than anybody else who was born here, like me. And Muslims are unfit to be US citizens because they advocate the murder of those who make jokes they don't like, and they don't believe in protecting the rights of those with whom they disagree. Simple as that, babe. (You sure make a lot of generalizations about white people. Got a problem there?)
M2TS File Converter | 4.29.10 @ 1:14AM
who make jokes they don't like, and they don't believe in protecting the rights of those with whom they disagree. Simple as that, babe. (You sure make a lot of generalizations about wh
Tyler S.| 4.29.10 @ 1:38AM
Wow, okay, I hat to use the word racist because of the automatic response it always evokes from conservatives (you know, saying the word racist makes me a coward who hides behind ... words ... or something ... I'm sure you all know the objection better than I). Still, sometimes the word is appropriate, and I gotta say, this is one of those times. There are some incredibly racist comments for this article. I'm not offended or anything, words seldom offend me, I'm just kinda floored by some of what I'm reading.
Oh, and I love South Park and cheered when they brought the Mohammed controversy back for the 200th episode. I'm all about equal opportunity offending in entertainment. These guys are free speech pioneers, plus, they're funny as hell.
Mi-Matt | 4.29.10 @ 1:24PM
I thought South Park was for the morons who didn't quite get the slapstick humor of the ol' Three Stooges shows -but laughed along with their rednecked friends to appear they "got it". I'm surprised you're one of those, Jeremy Lott. You clearly got some buddies in the comment section.
It is offensive to this Irish Catholic to read about supposed-cultural lampooners of South Park taking on Islam. A generation ago, my family ran into signs saying "No Irish Need Apply". That was after having served with the 3rd Marines throughout the Pacific Campaign all the way up to nearly being killed on Iwo. Shame on America in the 1950s; shame on Americans who tolerate this bigtoed, racist, ignorant crap now.
Racism, intolerance and bigotry is still racism and bigotry and intolerance; comedic or otherwise.
It has no place in America and it's up to the decent people left standing to call out these bullies and expose them for the bigots they truly are --spiteful, hate-centered, ignorant taunting of religion is wrong... whether from the Left secularists or Right rednecks who find sport in kicking a woman in a burqua two blocks down the street.
Impotent little rednecking bigots still hiding under white hoods.
Jeremy Lott | 5.19.10 @ 2:35PM
1. I do not agree with many of the comments above.
2. You are an idiot.
free psp music video downloads | 5.4.10 @ 11:51PM
i Really love watcing south park ,but this one is different
car bill of sale printable | 5.4.10 @ 11:53PM
Oh, and I love South Park and cheered when they brought the Mohammed controversy back for the 200th episode. I'm all about equal opportunity offending in entertainment. These guys are free speech pioneers, plus, they're funny as hell.