Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

‘Very Close Call’

“People who engage in such acts are complete degenerates,” Zubair Butt Hussein, a spokesman for the Muslim Community of Denmark, said in a statement. “They don’t understand Islam or the principles of freedom and democracy.”

Westergaard said in an interview with the Ritzau news service aired on Denmark’s TV2 that he activated an alarm he carries on him after he heard the man break into his house. The cartoonist then entered a bathroom that has been converted into a safe room.

“The man tried with much energy to break down the door,” Westergaard said, adding that his 5-year-old granddaughter was in the house for a sleepover.

Police arrived 3 minutes after Westergaard set off the alarm and engaged the assailant as he was leaving, having failed to enter the safe room, TV2 said, citing police.

“I am very pleased I was able to get out of this alive,” Westergaard said. “This was a very close call.”

In 2008, three other men were arrested for plotting to kill Westergaard.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... MPUI&pos=9

The Degenerates continue their efforts to curb democracy and its related freedoms.
I'm getting tired of these degenerates. No wonder people call for neighbourhood vigilante groups to keep an eye out.

Can you imagine this cartoonist even had to built a safe-room in his house? My god...

RobbyG wrote:

The Degenerates continue their efforts to curb democracy and its related freedoms.
I'm getting tired of these degenerates. No wonder people call for neighbourhood vigilante groups to keep an eye out.

Can you imagine this cartoonist even had to built a safe-room in his house? My god...

democracy and freedom !! tell me how is making a joke of a religious figure is in your term a practices of democracy and freedom ? I mean I know you guys live with no believes and values but the cartoon was done for no point but to bring attention with no consideration of others feelings, don't you think ?

freedoms comes to an end when it effects others especially in religious issues in such a time. or do you think that my freedom allows me pee on your face with no consequences ?

lol turning your house into safe room lol hahah what a looser LOOOZER. seriously why go and make a cartoon about Islam knowing that you will piss off millions of people. and then you go and invest hundreds of dollars in making sure that your house is safe because of your actions. and for the rest of your life you will have to carry around an alarm and have to look over your shoulders to make sure you are safe. WHy WHY? I mean he couldnt make a cartoon of victoria beckham or Dodi or Charles that he decided to mock ISLAM.

WELL MATE he deserves what he gets and dont say we didnt warn him

You guys are absolutely mad in the head.

For the sake of entertainment (a cartoonist is a free art profession), whats wrong with some good satire? An artist can mock any person he wants. Thats part of the artistic freedom he learned to master when he followed his education!

What if a Christian nuthead came running after you guys for opposing his 'prophet of artistic freedom' ? Where would we (more importantly, you two) be?

The way you reply show how groggy your brains are.

Inshallah.

Well if it is true as the news says, I’d just like to mention that such murder attempts by individuals is forbidden by God in islam, capital punishment can only be administared by legal authorities..
What those Muslims don’t know is that Islam is the best product but sometimes they themselves are the worst sales men.

I’d also like to say that I don’t approve such satire, sarcasm or mocking as it deepens seperation between people in communities instead of uniting them. Denmark has both foreign and local convert Muslims living there all together…Such incidents can only lead to social injustice and unrest. Everyone, one way or another has something sentimential, precious and valuable for themselves. So one must be careful.

An artist can mock any person he wants. Thats part of the artistic freedom he learned to master when he followed his education!

What they couldn’t teach him is that(probably wasn’t part of the artistic curriculum)there are limits to freedom of expression, just like there are laws against liable and defamation.

Just wondering what difference is there between mocking through satire on a piece of paper by using a pen or mocking through some sort of sarcastic say by using tongue? …Don’t they both serve the same purpose?
I don’t really believe that I genuine God-fearing Christian would do such a thing…
Today I think in the western world, especially those people who have lost their touch with their creator, religions and prophets have this “civilised” excuse for “insulting” the believers, especially the muslims. I don’t understand how insulting can be civilised excuse of freedom of speech or freedom of art or freedom of satire etc. otherwise…I don’t really know…

But what I am even further interested to know is that what really has driven him for such satire? He must have known before that it would create huge controversy and millions to protest? So what was behind him? If he didn’t know the danger, certainly someone on the management/editorial board of the newspaper must have thought about it

Besides this I really wonder how much he knew about Islam and its prophet. I am saddened that such depiction of our beloved prophet has been allowed to happen. God in quran says to his prophet
(21:107) We have sent you forth as nothing but mercy to people of the whole world. In other words as a blessing for the people of the world. This is because he aroused the neglectful world froth its heedlessness and gave it the knowledge of the criterion between truth and falsehood, and warned it very clearly of both the ways of salvation and ruin. So why deform a man who provided freedom of speech, delivered right to the woman and slaves which did not happen in the west and rest of the word till late nineteenth century. You will not find in any Islamic publications insulting any of your Lords as that is forbidden by our Prophet and you will not find in any Islamic Publications insulting any of the Biblical prophets as they are also prophets of Islam.

So don’t worry, there will be no Christian nuthead came running after muslim guys as there will be no comparable situation…

Well said Berrin.

uaekid wrote:Well said Berrin.

Berrin forgot to mention that an Atheist nuthead doesn't need a booklet for his guidance.
I hope you didn't forget Stalin and Hitler. Those nutheads erased their opponents before they even blinked against them.

Point is: If one is tolerant, you don't have to resort to madman practices. You just reason by debate.

Although this topic has been done to death everywhere and the world reaction was almost totally wrong and a gross over reaction.

The topic of artistic freedom is all good in the western world, until that is something anti semetic comes up. Why ? what happened to artistic freedom now ?

I suppose a cartoon mocking the jewish holoucast or even saying it never happened and was a great joke and hitler was actually a saint and the a jew lover. I'm sure no body would be offened or utter a peep.

desertdudeshj wrote:Although this topic has been done to death everywhere and the world reaction was almost totally wrong and a gross over reaction.

The topic of artistic freedom is all good in the western world, until that is something anti semetic comes up. Why ? what happened to artistic freedom now ?

I suppose a cartoon mocking the jewish holoucast or even saying it never happened and was a great joke and hitler was actually a saint and the a jew lover. I'm sure no body would be offened or utter a peep.

I think a simple cartoon (about every subject you can imagine) shouldn't imply that policy is based on it. Its simply a cartoon. You like it or dislike it and move on with life. Whats more with a cartoon?

Its not that a cartoonist tries to demonize a specific subject constantly right? Its a session about a topic, most of the time about an actual media subject.

In the end, your audience will decide what they like or not. If you are a professional cartoonist, you have to be diversified in your topics. There's no demonizing in that is there?

I guess it all depends on personal ego's and long toes. Hypocrisy will always be there. However, resorting to personal terror attacks over a cartoon?

We don't live like Barbarians here. We discuss and debate endlessly in a democracy until it is appreciated in the proper context or consensus is reached. Thats it.

Well its nothing new, just getting extensive media coverage as anything muslim specially if there is a juicy story to be had is under a huge magnifying glass and spotlight.

People have attacked and killed other people for much less like as little money as 5 dollars or looking at someones girlfriend who he knows for a week the wrong way. They don't make headlines. Now if the guy was a muslim and his woman was in hijab and he attacked someone who was teasing in wife. You can bet your hoo ha it will be in the news and all the negative islamic rethoric will come out rolling again. Why ?

What you say would be true in a perfect world but it isn't, some people do get more offended more easily than others and do make a noise.

http://jta.org/news/article/2009/03/26/ ... ti-semitic.

In the your case. Lets say for the sake of argument he was using his "artistic freedom" but when first published there was a out cry and if there was any sense of humanity or not any consideration others feelings was involved they would not be republished several times over.

"Oops we screwed up and have managed to p!ss off a lot of people. Alright lets not do this again" did this happen ......NO

1st time round a group of 3500 protested peacfully, but no wanting to cash in on the controversy many other european papers republished them. The media themselves fueled the events.

Not that I'm saying what went down was right but could have been very easily avoided.

Regarding your link in the above post: Thats a specific Jewish case which I call hypocrisy and long toes.

Regarding the Danish cartoonist: I think that the media bloated this cartoon up so badly, that it become a statement other than 'just a cartoon'. I think the media should have more of a responsibility in controlling a wildfire they started.

Sometimes I wish those media firms had a bit more self restraint in their editor section. A moral code of conduct.

Media is basically unregulated and sometimes can be very biased in its reporting. Mostly the biased ones with political ties and owners like Rupert Murdoch etc. (Fox News ring a bell?)

This kind of one-sided reporting is so wrong. It should be forbidden. Op-ed columns are for personal opinions and insights. Not mass media outlets.

RobbyG wrote:Media is basically unregulated and sometimes can be very biased in its reporting. Mostly the biased ones with political ties and owners like Rupert Murdoch etc. (Fox News ring a bell?)

This kind of one-sided reporting is so wrong. It should be forbidden. Op-ed columns are for personal opinions and insights. Not mass media outlets.

Although I 1000% agree with you, but why ? They are also excersing their right to freedom of expression. Why should they be forbidden ?

If the cartoonist made it kept it to himself or showed it to a few friends of his then sure, but the moment he submits it for publication then he is entering it into the mass media, I'm sure he's not so naive to not know thw power of it ?

So such stuff does need to be regulated and you also just agreed to it, but then that infringes on their freedom of expression which the western so proudly defends, so now what ? Catch 22 situation.

desertdudeshj wrote:

RobbyG wrote:Media is basically unregulated and sometimes can be very biased in its reporting. Mostly the biased ones with political ties and owners like Rupert Murdoch etc. (Fox News ring a bell?)

This kind of one-sided reporting is so wrong. It should be forbidden. Op-ed columns are for personal opinions and insights. Not mass media outlets.

Although I 1000% agree with you, but why ? They are also excersing their right to freedom of expression. Why should they be forbidden ?

If the cartoonist made it kept it to himself or showed it to a few friends of his then sure, but the moment he submits it for publication then he is entering it into the mass media, I'm sure he's not so naive to not know thw power of it ?

So such stuff does need to be regulated and you also just agreed to it, but then that infringes on their freedom of expression which the western so proudly defends, so now what ? Catch 22 situation.

Indeed, catch 22. You can't forbid people to do things even if you disagree. (You just spotted my emotion speak for itself, so let reason take control again in the below explanation:)

Society will have to decide whether rules are necessary if it poses a threat to them. People demand it from their leadership. One mind/person cannot decide for a million minds/people. Its the people who have to have voting power and judge actions on their combined moral and ethic values. Power to the people.

So lets conclude first that the cartoonist is not to blame, but the individuals that retaliate are clearly intolerant to other viewpoints and/or fueled with zombie-style media stories from single-sided camps and convictions that spur hatred.

Limiting individual freedom is a no go in my opinion. Although rules and regulations are constantly interfering with these values in the West (most of the time through government intervention) and are proposed as the solution, more rules and regulation will eventually lead to a society losing all these obtained rights (obtained over centuries of development and progression) and result in autocratic central planning (can be fascism, socialism, communism)

I don't have a clearcut answer for this either. I think tolerance is the only way out or perhaps a peaceful debate. People have to understand eachother to accept this and carry an open mind.

The whole debate whether or not the cartoonist should or should not have brought out this cartoon is not the real issue. The issue is tolerance.

Don't you think its a bit odd that people depend their lifes on a proclaimed divined person? Isn't there more in life than that person being mocked in a cartoon? Whats the purpose of a cartoon in the creators view? Think about that.

A resort to terror is just degenerative of the entire democratic system of debate and consensus. It shows that individual being incapable of reasoning from intellect. Anger management could come in handy in that case.

We need to keep this in perspective.

Many, if not most, Muslim leaders denounced the violence that ensued in the protests over the cartoons.

The protests against the cartoons was manufactured and stoked - it initially did not cause a big stir, eg when the cartoons were published in Egypt - not a stir - but was made worse when it was stirred up by some Imams who created a 'dossier' who included the cartoons that were not published in Denmark. I think the original cartoons were published around Sept 05, and the main violence kicked off the following year (or at least a few months later).

Most Muslims I know think it was stupid that people were rioting in Pakistan (for example) over a publication in Denmark!

Cheers,
Shafique

Bah ! your starting to be robotic now. You actually said what you truly feel and think, but now that kind of thinking is " haram" is the west. So now you must go back the official party dogma and be a good sport and all.

BZZZZZ......FAIL !

shafique wrote:Most Muslims I know think it was stupid that people were rioting in Pakistan (for example) over a publication in Denmark!

Cheers,
Shafique

HA ! people in pakistan just need an excuse to riot, burn and destroy public property and get killed in the process.

desertdudeshj wrote:Bah ! your starting to be robotic now. You actually said what you truly feel and think, but now that kind of thinking is " haram" is the west. So now you must go back the official party dogma and be a good sport and all.

BZZZZZ......FAIL !

No thats not true. I was very thoughtful in my reply as this is essentially the basics of Western democracy. The problem is that it gets corrupted by politics and religion. Without all the 'expert' interference, the system would work very well.

What I say and think doesn't mean I'm right. People tend to act first before they think. Everybody makes that mistake in life.

I happen to be honest about it when I do, instead of defending my emotions which are just that...emotions and more often, a lack of proper insight.