Tensions rise in Mideast over Cartoons

[Curiosity]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/3632952.html

Feb. 3, 2006, 1:38AM
Gunmen swarm EU offices over papers' cartoons
The drawings of Muhammad are being reprinted in more publications


By CRAIG S. SMITH and IAN FISHER
New York Times

PARIS - An international dispute over European newspaper cartoons deemed blasphemous by some Muslims gained momentum on Thursday when gunmen threatened the European Union offices in the Gaza Strip and more European papers pointedly published the drawings as an affirmation of freedom of speech.

In Gaza City, masked gunmen swarmed the European Union offices on Thursday to protest the cartoons, and there were threats to foreigners from European countries where the cartoons have been reprinted. The gunmen stayed about 45 minutes.

A newly elected legislator from Hamas, the radical Islamic group that swept the Palestinian elections last week, said large rallies were planned in Gaza in the next few days to protest the cartoons, which depict the Prophet Muhammad in an unflattering light. Merely publishing the image of Muhammad is regarded as blasphemous by many Muslims.

"We are angry — very, very, very angry," said the legislator, Jamila al-Shanty. "No one can say a bad word about our prophet."

The protests spread to Indonesia today, with Islamic hardliners barging into a building housing the Danish Embassy and burning the European country's flag. The Indonesian government had earlier condemned the drawings, as did Afghanistan.

In Iraq, Islamic leaders urged worshippers to stage demonstrations following weekly prayer services today. Iran summoned the Austrian ambassador, whose country holds the EU presidency.

The conflict is the latest manifestation of growing tensions between Europe and the Muslim world as the Continent struggles to absorb a fast-expanding Muslim population whose customs and values are often at odds with Europe's secular societies. Islam is Europe's fastest-growing religion and is now the second-largest religion in most European countries. Racial and religious discrimination against Muslims in Europe's weakest economies adds to the strains.

The trouble began in September in Denmark, when the daily Jyllands-Posten published 12 cartoons lampooning intolerance among Muslims and Islamic links to terrorism. A Norwegian magazine published the cartoons again last month, and the issue erupted this week after diplomatic efforts failed to resolve demands by several angry Arab countries that the publications be punished.

The cartoons include one depicting Muhammad with a bomb in place of a turban on his head and another showing him on a cloud in heaven telling an approaching line of smoking suicide bombers, "Stop, stop, we ran out of virgins!"

They have since been reprinted in France, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Spain and Hungary. BBC broadcast them on Thursday.

Late Thursday morning, about a dozen gunmen appeared at the European Union offices in Gaza, firing automatic weapons and spray-painting a warning on the outside gate: "Closed until an apology is sent to Muslims." The men handed out a pamphlet warning Denmark, Norway and France that they had 48 hours to apologize.

The office, staffed only by Palestinians at the time, reportedly received a telephone warning that the gunmen were coming, and was quickly closed.

Another armed group, the Abu el-Reesh Brigades, which is connected to Fatah, said Norway, Denmark, France and Germany must apologize within 10 hours or their citizens in Gaza would be "in danger."

In Nablus, on the West Bank, two masked gunmen kidnapped a German from a hotel, thinking he was French or Danish, Agence France-Presse reported. They turned him over to the police after they realized their mistake.

The Associated Press contributed to this report

 

[I think not]

It never ceases to amaze me how some rush to draw parallels between fundamentalist Christians and Islamic extremists when Islamists make the news. I never hear any reference to Islam when the fundamentalist Christians f*ck up. :roll:

 

[sanch]

“again if you want to demonize a whole group of ppl remember that our own crimes still exist even if we sweep then under the carpet.”

I am not demonizing a whole group of people. I am questioning why they are not voicing outrage at the crimes perpetrated in the name of Islam? Why this silence? Because of these tactics they have been able to hold the press hostage on many issues that cry out for humanitarian attention. This is especially the case in the neutered Canadian press. Are you even remotely aware of what is occurring in Africa and that we cannot talk about in the name of tolerance? Why? Well we would hardly want to insult someone because of our lack of tolerance. And we have to accept it as you say because of continuous guilt over our history.

But is it my history as you suggest? No. My ancestors are Mennonites and have been for 500 years. But you lump me in with the atrocities that have been swept under the carpet in the name of Christianity. Happens all the time. Yet when you make these charges whether in writing or by satire I am not in the streets threatening to kidnap innocent people.

I am also very outraged by the way Palestinians have been treated historically and the way this history has been sanitized. But I was not aware of an equal time rule when it came to the Middle East.

 

[Freethinker]

Re: Kudos to Islamic-Canadian Society

where/when did he say that, if so it changes my opinion on him entirely, no more "wild world", "peace train" and "the wind" for me ever.

the 9/11 dancing in the streets has already been proven as Fox news airing ancient footage to cement anti-arab feelings.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/667bkgnr.asp

Yusuf Islam is already well known for his public endorsement of the death sentence issued by Ayatollah Khomeini against Salman Rushdie in February 1989. "Salman Rushdie, indeed any writer who abuses the prophet or indeed any prophet under Islamic law, the sentence for that is actually death," he said at the time. In addition, he has been barred from entering Israel because of alleged financial aid given to terrorist groups.

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

Even popular musician Yusuf Islam (formerly known as Cat Stevens) infamously gave indirect support for the fatwa, and in 1989, confirmed during a British television documentary that he was not opposed to the death sentence. Islam stated that rather than attend a demonstration where Rushdie would be burned in effigy, "I would have hoped that it'd be the real thing", and that if Rushdie showed up at his door, he "might ring somebody who might do more damage to him than he would like... I'd try to phone the Ayatollah Khomeini and tell him exactly where this man is.". Islam stood by his statements during a subsequent interview with The New York Times. [1] Islam's official statement on the matter, still posted on his website, is as follows:

Under the Islamic Law, Muslims are bound to keep within the limits of the law of the country in which they live, providing that it does not restrict the freedom to worship and serve God and fulfil their basic religious duties (fard'ayn). One must not forget the ruling in Islam is also very clear about adultery, stealing and murder, but that doesn't mean that British Muslims will go about lynching and stoning adulterers, thieves and murderers. If we can't get satisfaction within the present limits of the law, like a ban on this blasphemous book, 'Satanic Verses' which insults God and His prophets – including those prophets honoured by Christians, Jews as well as Muslims – this does not mean that we should step outside of the law to find redress. [2]

On the 911 celebrations, I never saw a refutation:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1538861.stm
http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4030
(second has many more links...)

 

[nitzomoe]

“again if you want to demonize a whole group of ppl remember that our own crimes still exist even if we sweep then under the carpet.”

I am not demonizing a whole group of people. I am questioning why they are not voicing outrage at the crimes perpetrated in the name of Islam? Why this silence? Because of these tactics they have been able to hold the press hostage on many issues that cry out for humanitarian attention. This is especially the case in the neutered Canadian press. Are you even remotely aware of what is occurring in Africa and that we cannot talk about in the name of tolerance? Why? Well we would hardly want to insult someone because of our lack of tolerance. And we have to accept it as you say because of continuous guilt over our history.

But is it my history as you suggest? No. My ancestors are Mennonites and have been for 500 years. But you lump me in with the atrocities that have been swept under the carpet in the name of Christianity. Happens all the time. Yet when you make these charges whether in writing or by satire I am not in the streets threatening to kidnap innocent people.

I am also very outraged by the way Palestinians have been treated historically and the way this history has been sanitized. But I was not aware of an equal time rule when it came to the Middle East.

yet by saying that al muslims, ppl who had nothing to do with teh crime should respond unequivocally with press conferences apologising for crimes they had nothing to do with, you are making them guilty by association.

The biggest problem with your statement is its not true, tehre hasnt been silence, those muslim/islamic/arab ogranzisations have done what you said, its just that mainstream media does not publish any of it, they only like to show ppl that can strike fear into ppls hearts. These organizations shouldnt belittle themselves by doing what you want them to do, they are not guilty of any crime.

It never ceases to amaze me how some rush to draw parallels between fundamentalist Christians and Islamic extremists when Islamists make the news. I never hear any reference to Islam when the fundamentalist Christians f*ck up. :roll:

thas because when pat Robertson starts promoting his own fatwas "Kill Chavez" thats somehow okay and theres very little outcry about ti. All he has to say is " if some ppl took what i said out of context then i aplogiuze but i still stand by what i said" and then everything is forgiven. This is true for every crazy nutjob evangialist including jerry falwell who famously blamed 9/11 on homosexuals, blacks, and abortionists and even Haggis who goes on rampages condemning a whole range of ppl.

If the media actually stuck to the concept of unbiased news coverage (which it never has) then your argument would be valid.
the hypocrisy of what is being said here is unbelieveable, I for one will no longer engage in this thread. Such ignorance of the facts is what has caused holocausts in the past.

freethinker i went through your sites and it got me thinking whats Cat Stevens resposne to this which i found here:http://catstevens.com/articles/00236/

after reading the transcript of the question period I tend to believe Cat stevens more so than your link. He does not endorse the fatwa he merely eludes to his more strict version fo islamic law which forbids blasphemy.

http://www.labournet.net/world/0109/cnn1.html

i would not trust old BBC urls, they stop updating them, for instace on bbc they still have a news article claiming that 8 of the highjackers of 9/11 are still alive and well.

As of this post, i for one will not engage in this hatred filled discussion as I am being consistently surprised by the extent of ignorance that some ppl post on this thread. Only christian countries having democracies, All muslims should share in the punishment of a few, only muslims are guilty of massacres and war crimes, Islam is a religion of hate(this could be applied to every religion be it judaism, hinduism, islam and even buddhism) etc.

thinking black & white is exactly what got us into this mess in the first place.

 

[Curiosity]

What is a moderate Muslim?

http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=011106D
[printed in full because registration is required}

What Is a Moderate Muslim?



By Stephen Schwartz : BIO | 12 Jan 2006

As we enter 2006, Islamic radicalism remains no less a challenge to the world than it did four years ago. One of its chief aspects involves how non-Muslims, who typically have little knowledge of Islam, may accurately identify Muslim moderates.

Muslim moderation is defined by attitudes and conduct, not by abstractions or historical precedents, which, as with all religions, may be interpreted to support any ideological position. Observing and analyzing Sunni Muslims by such positive, practical criteria is extremely easy. There are more than a billion Sunnis in the world, and they are not all jihadists or fundamentalists, so telling them apart should not be difficult with a little effort. Identifying moderate Shia Muslims is harder, but one thing may be said immediately: those who follow Ayatollah Ali Sistani in Iraq prove their moderation daily, by their silent but effective support to the U.S.-led liberation coalition.


Moderate Sunni Muslims may be recognized in person by asking a simple question: “what do you think of Wahhabism, the state Islamic sect of Saudi Arabia?” Every Muslim in the world knows about Wahhabism, and knows that it is embodied in al-Qaida. If a Sunni Muslim is asked about Wahhabism and states that it is a controversial, extreme doctrine that causes many problems because of Saudi money, the respondent is probably moderate. Denouncing the Saudis alone is not enough; radicals criticize the Saudi monarchy for insufficiently enforcing Wahhabi beliefs. The root cause of Sunni terror is Wahhabism, not the monarchy.


It seems unnecessary to add that those who try to disclaim a link between Wahhabism and al-Qaida, or who blame al-Qaida on American machinations, cannot be considered moderates. If a Sunni denies that Wahhabism exists by saying “there is only Islam,” or tries to cover Wahhabism with an ameliorative term like “Salafism” -- a fraudulent effort to equate Wahhabism with the pioneers of the Islamic faith -- the individual is an extremist. Such a radical will not, under any circumstances, declare his or her opposition to Wahhabism per se. They may even claim that the whole concept was invented by Westerners such as myself.


A parallel example may be cited from the history of Communism. Stalinist Communists would repudiate the charge that they were Communists, calling themselves progressives, liberals, or socialists. They would deny that Communism intended anything malign toward the U.S., portraying America as an aggressor (something Islamists and Stalinists have in common) but nonetheless claiming loyalty to it. They would often argue over whether Stalinism even existed. And they would never denounce Stalin, even though the entire planet knew about the atrocities of the Soviet regime. Neither will Islamist radicals denounce Wahhabism.


Moderate Muslims may also be identified by what they do not do, to contrast them with radicals. And at the top of that list comes the practice of takfir, or declaring Muslims unbelievers over differences of opinion. Takfir also includes describing the ordinary, traditional Muslim majority in the world as having fallen into unbelief.


Takfir is used to justify the radical Sunni massacres of Shia Muslims in Iraq. It underpins the ideology of the Saudi-Wahhabi sect, the extremist Sunni Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt, and the bloodthirsty Sunni jihadist movements in Pakistan. It also serves to bind together Muslim extremists through the illusion that they belong to a purified elite. Islam is not, and never was, a radical or fundamentalist religion in its mainstream practice, regardless of the fantasies of Islamist fanatics and Islamophobes alike.


Moderate Muslims do not engage in takfir. Shias shun takfir, including radical Shias, and Shias fighting against Sunnis who persecute them do not practice takfir against their foes. Enemies of terrorist Wahhabis do not accuse them of unbelief, but of criminality. Traditional Muslims avoid accusations of unbelief, as they were counseled to do by the Prophet Muhammad. The Prophet never anticipated that Muslims would fall into unbelief.


Moderate Muslims, including Shias as well as Sunnis, also do not refer to followers of other religions, especially Jews and Christians, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and Buddhists, as unbelievers. The Koran never refers to Jews and Christians as unbelievers, but as People of the Book, worthy of respect and protection. Moderate Muslims adhere strictly to this outlook.


Moderate Muslims do not employ the rhetoric of jihad, including attempts to split hairs over the meaning of the term. Moderate Muslims seek a place in the contemporary world for Islam to be respected as a faith, not conflicts in which they may gamble on victory with the lives of others. Jihad vocabulary does nothing to advance the cause of Islam; it creates obstacles to it.


This does not mean moderate Muslims do not defend themselves when attacked. They do. But moderate Muslims in Iraq are under attacks from Sunni radicals, just as moderate Muslims were murdered by Serbs in the former Yugoslavia and moderate Muslims in Chechnya are killed by both Russian troops and Wahhabi adventurers. Iraqi Sunni radicals have more in common with Milosevic’s fascist bands than with moderate Muslims. Wahhabis in the Caucasus have interests closer to those of Putin than those of ordinary Chechens, in that both seek a pretext for war. And the Iraqi Sunni radicals and other Wahhabis, Putin the neo-Stalinist, and the Serbs all benefit from the same “antiwar” cheering section in the U.S.


Moderate Muslims also do not reject allegiance to non-Muslim governments. According to current interpretations of Shafi’i sharia, a major school of Islamic jurisprudence through history, there are no countries where Muslims are not required to obey local governments, for the security of their communities. Moderate Muslims do not proclaim public loyalty to such governments while privately counseling that Western governments are inferior to Muslim religious decrees. They do not invent civil rights violations as a political means of fighting Western authorities. Moderate Muslims recognize that Muslims have more rights and opportunities for advancement in most Western countries than in most Muslim lands.


Finally, moderate Muslims are not Arabocentric or trapped in the rhetoric of Pakistan and elsewhere in the Indian subcontinent. They recognize that the styles, idioms, and spiritual practices of Islam differ considerably from Mali to Malaysia and from Bosnia to Botswana. Moderate Muslims accept that such diversity should also exist among Muslims in the West; that there can and will be an Islam that is fully American in its culture, as Bosnians and Indonesians reflect the customs and cultures of their lands.


How do moderate Muslims deal with radicals?


Moderate Muslims admit there is a problem in the body of the religion -- not in the principles and traditions of the faith, but among the believers themselves. They recognize that radical ideology and terrorism threaten the future of Islam and must be stopped.


Moderate Muslims do not limit their struggle against extremism to perfunctory statements stating that terror is incompatible with the religion. Rather, moderate Muslims publicly identify, denounce, and combat radicals.


Is the Islamic establishment in the U.S. -- the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and the Muslim Students Association of the U.S. and Canada (MSA) -- moderate? No, it is not. Not one of these three groups has ever identified or criticized a Muslim radical in the U.S., except to slander authentic moderates by trying to portray them as extremists. To cite a few notable examples: the aforementioned organizations, which I have called “the Wahhabi lobby,”


accused the moderate author Khalid Duran of being a non-Muslim because they disagreed with an opinion he held (takfir);

labeled the Sufi spiritual shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani a dangerous sectarian because he warned at the end of the 1990s that Islamist extremists in Russia were attempting to purchase nuclear materials;

accused me of “jihadism” because I defended the Kosovar Albanians. In reality, I insisted on recognition that the Albanians are multireligious and that the Kosovo war was ethnic, not religious.

Meanwhile, however, the Wahhabi lobby has stood by every accused radical to appear before an American court, paying for their lawyers and inventing excuses for their transgressions.


Moderate Muslims do not come up with bogus fatwas and other gimmicks to try to befog the Western public. Nor do they suddenly remake themselves as Sufis to purge the record of their previous radical statements. Moderate Muslims know that the foundational texts, commentaries, and legal, philosophical and theosophical works of the religion suffice as a bulwark against extremism; that is why today’s extremism is a new and radical, not a traditional or conservative, phenomenon. They also know that for a person to be called a Sufi, authentic spiritual study, based on meaningful traditions and precedents, must be the basis of his or her religious activity, not a search for instant credibility.


Finally, some moderate Muslims may seek to “reform” Islam, but moderates are not required to be “reformers.” Many who today proclaim their desire to “reform” Islam are not moderate at all in their manners and mental equipment; some are simply publicity seekers who think that by talking about “Islamic reformation” they will gain access to the non-Muslim public. Others are obsessed egomaniacs who consider arguing over an 800-year old text to be more important than defeating terrorist conspiracies. But Ibn abd al-Wahhab, founder of the eponymous sect 250 years ago, is proclaimed a reformer, and Saudi Wahhabis assert they have reformed Islam. Opportunism and sectarianism are ever the twin obstacles to the success of moderates who seek real improvement in society and especially, today, its interreligious relations.


Moderate Muslims concentrate on devotion to their religion, not on politics or public relations, and always recall that the Prophet called for his umma to be a community of moderation.


Stephen Schwartz is the author of The Two Faces of Islam.

 

[Jay]

What is a moderate Muslim?

One that converted to Christianity? :twisted:

 

[Curiosity]

Jay

You mean moderate Christianity????

 

[Durgan]

Has Islam been hijacked? A small mob has taken over the Moslem religion, if so it is time for the main stream to come out of the woodwork and take control.

A few thugs threaten people over a few silly cartoons. The same nuts might look at the destruction of a monument as opposed to a sill cartoon.

The Taliban Destroy Ancient Buddhist Monuments in Afghanistan.
http://purtuels.notlong.com
The Taliban defended their actions, saying that the Islamic religion
is rooted in the Old Testament, which clearly states in the
Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not possess any idols."

The Roman Catholic Church might sit up and take notice.

 

[sanch]

Nitzomoe one of the issues I raised was that you lumped me in with practices that I had nothing to do with which you feel is fine but you feel this same lumping practice is grossly unfair when applied to other groups. I get lumped in with American foreign policy all the time by Canadians. Many Muslims typically lump all Jews together As they do Americans and now the French.

Now after being grouped unfairly by you with a very unsavory history and having received no apology for it I should remind you that I was referring specifically to Canadian papers and the comments in the Globe & Mail article. So I was not going global. I could have gone further and said that the cartoons do have current political significance as this negative imagery has been given agency by militants as well as the sort of comments found in the article.

 

[Curiosity]

Sanch

I thought the response to your opinion was unfair also and I agree with your defense.

People are being charged with broad generalizations, when I think most of us are criticizing certain groups within a larger group....

There are always extremists in any large numbers of people who do acts which draw condemnation of the whole.

It is wrong and unfair.

 

[thulin]

I just saw that "a conservative lobygroup" contacted NBC and lodged a complaint about Britney Spears future appearance in the series; "Will & Grace".

It seems Spears will be playing the role of a christian chef, hosting the TV-show "Cruci-fixin's". The group claimed she made the crucifiction of christ look ridiculous.

I know an old saying that goes: "you shouldn´t throw stones while in a glasshouse"... :roll:

Original article (Swedish only)

 

[Freethinker]

I just saw that "a conservative lobygroup" contacted NBC and lodged a complaint about Britney Spears future appearance in the series; "Will & Grace".

It seems Spears will be playing the role of a christian chef, hosting the TV-show "Cruci-fixin's". The group claimed she made the crucifiction of christ look ridiculous.

Because of free speech there is something somewhere that offends someone everyday. And there is legitimate protest that follows. But not endless death threats. Those that claim these cartoons mock Islam should consider what their threats do.

The cartoons don't negatively affect anyones opinion of Islam, but the Islamic reaction sure does.

One last thing those of us familiar with western media freedom, controversy and protest realize. If there is something you want don't want publized, the last thing you want to do is protest it. You protest if you want everyone to see it, and to see it in every media outlet imaginable. Protest makes it news. New means wider coverage on a feedback loop.

Overall this is massive farce.

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[sanch]

Thanx Wednesday what has happened since the publication of Edward Said’s Orientalism is that all comments about Muslims are often treated as generalizations that are influenced by this monolithic and enduring perception of the Muslim world that began in the middle ages. So even making specific comments about one sub-sector can easily be interpreted as applying to the entire group. You wouldn’t feel this way about this group if you didn’t feel this way about all Muslims.

I was in Frankfurt airport a couple of years ago waiting for a flight to Cairo. There were 6 Middle Easterners who I presume were Egyptians and they all wanted to sit together. For some reason they were told they couldn’t. The leader or spokesperson became very angry and accused the airline clerk of being racist and hating Muslims. So the slightest slight or inconvenience can easily be elevated into an attack on the entire group. It is an easy boondoggle to slip into if you make a misstep or a wrong reference.

 

[Doryman]

Now after being grouped unfairly by you with a very unsavory history and having received no apology for it .

You won't either. You are only allowed to attack a group with broad generalizations if the people making up that group are White Christian Westerners ( even better if they're Male too). They are not allowed to be insulted, or to cry "Racism" when things don't go their way, or mockery comes too close to the truth. So stop complaining you smelly Capitalist Racist Pig! :roll:

Honestly, Islam is the problem religion of our age. ( Christianity was from the 900's up to about 1900's when it gave up). We are continuously seeing Islamic terrorists, dictatorships and crime in our global vilage. We see mainstream musicians that can call for the death of an author. We see whole regions that erupt in rage over some cheeky cartoons.

I'm not saying that the Muslim religion is the sole reason ( or even a reason) for these problems, but it IS a recurring common factor. We need to frankly and openly look at Islamic culture to find the reasons for this and constant cries of "But you're being Racist!", "But my Muslim friends in Oshawa aren't like that!", and "But we can't disagree, it's their Religion!" Are. Not. Helping.

Shuck the kid-gloves, people. You cannot tackle a problem like this and be strictly PC at the same time.

 

[#juan]

The bigger this kafuffle gets, the more ridiculous it is. I don't know all the cartoonists or how they think, but I'm pretty sure they are not motivated by hatred of Islam. They are cartoonists and they are paid to satirize or ridicule people and or groups who take themselves too seriously. It helps to sell papers. I don't see that Muslims are immune, nor should they be. Threatening people with death over a cartoon in a foreign country is the height of arrogance/ignorance.

 

[Jo Canadian]

 

[Curiosity]

This cartoon by Tom Toles printed in The Washington Post....

...on January 29, 2006 has many American people up in arms about the same Freedom of the Press issue we are discussing here.

I won't go into all the articles written in response to the feelings
of the top Military People, families of Military - especially those languishing in Walter Reed and the other Veterans Hospitals around the country....

It works both ways....cartoons have a strong message....and do we shoot the messenger or censor their thoughts or do we keep it out in the open....also free to deride the intent....to make our own opinions and judgments known.

To censor one is to censor all.

On a personal basis, it made me physically ill....but the men and women who fight for freedoms, also fight to allow this insult.

 

[Jersay]

The bigger this kafuffle gets, the more ridiculous it is. I don't know all the cartoonists or how they think, but I'm pretty sure they are not motivated by hatred of Islam. They are cartoonists and they are paid to satirize or ridicule people and or groups who take themselves too seriously. It helps to sell papers. I don't see that Muslims are immune, nor should they be. Threatening people with death over a cartoon in a foreign country is the height of arrogance/ignorance.

Now this has gotten past cartoons. The people who made the cartoons admitted that the paper who asked them to do it was looking for a provacation.

So that means, they wanted to statrt something with Muslim people, so tough shit about Freedom of Expression or Speech because it is a direct attack on another religion to cause chaos and anger between Christians and Muslims.

So if Muslim people want to boycot all things European and burn their flags, i would support it because it is bigotry at its finest.