Rasmussen To Apologize To 'Islamic World' For Mohammed Cartoons

poligazette.com:

To become NATO secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen will apologize for the Mohammed cartoons.

Read the whole story: poligazette.com

Comments

[Wozzeck]

"A starting point for analyzing the cartoon controversy, which has been a focus for attacking Muslims and Muslim countries as intolerant of Western ‘freedom of expression’ is the long-standing role of Denmark as a major operation point for [deleted] activity in Europe. Re-phrased: How could a tiny Scandinavian country of 5.4 citizens and residents (200,000 or less than 3% of whom are Muslim), renowned for fairy tales, ham and cheese, have become a target for the fury of millions of practicing Muslims from Afghanistan to Palestine, from Indonesia to Libya and into the streets of cities all over the world with significant Muslim populations? Why, after the bombing of Baghdad, the tortures of Abu Ghariab, the massacres in Fallujah and the utter destitution of the entire Iraqi and Afghan people…would Moslems turn their anger at symbols of Denmark from its tinned cookies to its Embassies and overseas business offices? "

Google "The Caricatures in Middle East Politics" for the rest of this speculative analysis.

[Solaris123]

Simple. Danish mollahs instigated the whole thing. A group of them traveled around the Middle East pitching these cartoons and lying about a few other cartoons which were not part of the set.
The rest was usual Islamic hyper-belligerence in action.

[Usama]

Really, the hatred and ignorance is atrocitous here on Huffington Post. If folks here are all liberal and leftwing, they are remarkably similar to the rightwing in both vitriolic hatred and ignorance. Its a sorry state of affairs for America. Electing Obama was a good start, but there are serious adult education programs needed to heal the rift in reasoning caused by the Bush era.

[antaeus]

One sure way to lose liberals, left wingers, and progressives is to prioritize religious sensibilities above free speech, political speech, and artistic speech--not even when it's unattractive, but especially when it's unattractive.

Fierce monitors of defamation would do well to differentiate between boorish, uninformed prejudice against Muslims, and criticism that has at least a semblance of legitimate politics. However "manufactured" the cartoon affair was, it still falls into the latter category.

[chaos4700]

Are you sure about that? The cartoon depicted the prophet of Islam -- ostensibly, a man preached about peace, justice, social integrity, compassion and fairness -- as having a bomb in a turban. For heaven sakes, the cartoonist didn't really even get his ethnic stereotypes in order. Slandering a whole religion as violent and destructive at its core -- imagine a cartoon of Jesus wearing Templar's armor and wielding a sword? -- does not equate to legitimate political discourse in my mind.

Oh, I'm all about free speech, but it's just as much a suppression of free speech to suppress the outcry this cartoon generates. Free speech means you are not to be prevented from getting your message out. It does /not/ shield you from reactions to what you've said.

[Wozzeck]

Sad how many here are taking the bait. The whole cartoon controversy was manufactured by
Islamophobes such as Flemming Rose, with the able assistance of sympathizers in the media .
The current dispute IS NOT about cartoons. Do some research, starting with Informed Comment.

[Cycadeoidea]

In 1989, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, then Supreme Leader of Iran, called for author Salman Rushdie to be killed for what he wrote in his fourth novel, "The Satanic Verses." The question I have for the Muslim members here is whether it is ever acceptable for a Muslim to respond to a verbal or written slight--or drawing--of Muhammad with physical violence?

[chaos4700]

The Ayatollah of Iran doesn't speak for the entirety of Islam. You might as well be pointing to Bishop Williamson and accusing all Catholics of being Holocaust deniers, it's just as offensive.

[AwShucks]

What I don't understand is why it is ok for Sunni Muslims to kill Sheite Muslims and vice versa, but a drawn picture of Mohammad , who was also a human being, causes so much ruckus ?

[hunt49]

Print them again. Print them everytime a threat is made. Stand up for the rights of free speech -- if it draws the bullies out of the corner, deal with them.

[RIXX]

No, disrespect to prophet Muhammad is acceptable. Period.

[KoolAidAmerica]

but bamiyan buddhas being blasted is acceptable
r

[Cycadeoidea]

Is it ever acceptable for a Muslim to respond to a verbal or written insult, criticism--or drawing--of Muhammad with physical violence?

[Prattvictory2]

I thought Ahmadinejad's response to the cartoons was appropriate. The cartoon defenders made it a free speech issue. Fair enough.

So Ahmadinejad held a conference on the Holocaust and invited Holocaust deniers. It was clearly a "free speech" exercise with dissenting views from people who would go to jail for "free speech." It was laughable and sad how many defenders of their "free speech" got their panties in a wad over his "free speech" exercise.

The Western Press failed to cover their own hypocrisy. How pathetic.

[antaeus]

In the US we don't imprison Holocaust deniers. Germany's approach might be different, which is why neo-Nazis in Europe often use American internet servers in order to disseminate their message.

[Gumby123]

I get that we don't need to go poking Muslims in the eye just for sport but we also don't need to be defensive about our civilization and values.

[antaeus]

We have enough on our plate dealing with our own philistines and art antagonists. Who forgets Rudy Giuliani's battle against a New York museum show that included a painting he deemed offensive. Or the Mapplethorpe exhibition. The list goes on, and we don't don't need to add to it with more critics, regardless of their culture or religion. Art and political speech are not ornaments of civilization; they are its purpose. They should never be stifled out of a concern for dainty feelings. Period.

[jamiso]

the bottom line, that muslims need to understand.

The majority of the world does not believe in this "prophet" or "allah".
A lot of people in the world, think that their "prophet" and "god" are very very silly and barbaric.
Many of these people think the same about the bible and its prophets also.....t­hey lampoon them all the time! From movie to cartoons to books to all kinds of stuff (South Park...had Jesus pooping on George Bush! The Simpsons make fun of christians all the time...Rus­hdie got death fatwas / Dan Brown gets Movies and awards!).
Muslim world...Ge­t used to it!

PS. There were many much more harsh critics of islam in its early days. Many of their works were destroyed, but If you want to see medieval muslims lampoon islam, look up Ibn Al-Rawandi or Al- Maarri

He wrote an entire book around 1057 called Fusul wal ghayat, which was basically a parody version of the Quran (with such great lines as : "Burning stakes blossom from the footsteps of Redeemers;
the Koran fashions daggers carried by true believers")

In the spirit of Abul Ala'a al-Ma'ari, I leave you with one of his poems:

O fools, awake! The rites ye sacred hold
Are but a cheat contrived by men of old
Who lusted after wealth and gained their lust
And died in baseness-and their law is dust.

[SethBLiNK]

I just read his statement and I'm glad I didn't rush to criticize him yesterday. While technically an apology because it expressed some regret he did not at all say that the newspaper was wrong for publishing the cartoons nor shoulder any blame for supporting them then or now. He did not indicate that he would ever try to censor such expression in the future. He merely offered sympathy to any of those who felt those cartoons insulted them or their religion and explicitly said that in his interpretation they did not.

President Obama helped engineer the conciliation between the Danish and the Turk leaders, so people like Michelle Malkin like to treat it like capitulation and weakness, but it is far from that.

[KoolAidAmerica]

Do they give the same courtesy to idols in Bamiyan

[Cycadeoidea]

Two millennia from now that's all the Taliban will be remembered for--as wanton vandals.

[Aziat]

I think thats what they're remembered as today

[Whinger]

Another weak leader, kiss ass dipolmacy that will fool no one in the Islamic nations!

[JerryLevy]

Any religion that says "I am not satisfied with being able to freely practice my religion, that is not good enough. You must practice my religion too" is a very dangerous and intolerant theology. It is one that cannot be pacified and cannot be compromised with. We have worked centuries not to be dominated by religious beliefs and it is the main reason the world has progressed as it has. I am a religious person but I cannot imagine being offended by others who have different religious beliefs.

[avvocato]

No apology is needed!

[amdan]

Press reports in Danish news papers www.BT.dk said that Anders "fjols" Rasmussen,' Did not apologies, but said that religion and its symbols should be respected.

http://www.bt.dk/article/20090406/politik/904060361/#aqp2106

I wonder if huff poo will post this one.

[popart]

as far as i know mohammed was an OK guy.....hi­s followers somehow have got their knickers in a twist...fo­r all they know mohammed might have enjoyed a jib jab or two at his expense...­..until we hear from him( directly ) i dont think there is any need to say.......­. sorry.