Those Bloody Danish Cartoons

Kurt Westergaard is one of the 12 cartoonists involved in the huge controversy (/balder.org/muhammed/Jyllands-Posten-Tegner-Kurt-Westergaard-Ville-Goere-Det-Igen.php)

A couple of days ago I watched a documentary made on the very famous Danish cartoons which made revolts spur in the Muslim world and I was a bit shocked to see that in the 21st century people can still be so narrow minded.

It all started with a bunch of cartoons published by a Danish magazine, called Jyllands Posten, back in 2005 or so. The cartoons somehow featured stereotypes about Muslim people, but they were only fun cartoons, they did not mean to cause no harm. The drawings were only made as a satire. The 12 cartoons were drawn by 12 professional cartoonists and according to the newspaper that published them, it was only an attempt to contribute to the debate about the self-censorship and criticism of Islam.

What was only a bunch of cartoons in a local newspaper grew out to become a huge controversy, as the cartoons were also published in newspapers from 50 more countries. Everything got out of hand, it seems, given that protests began happening in the Muslim world. Buildings were set on fire, people were killed and so on. Officials of the Muslim world said that the cartoons were a blasphemy and that those who had drawn them would burn in Hell for 70 years (sure, no virgins for them!). One of them even put a price on a cartoonist’s head, saying that he would pay $1 million the person who kills him. So, make me understand please: it is not right to drawn some cartoons about whatever Allah, Mohammed, bombs or whatever, but it’s good and in God’s good graces to set buildings on fire and instigate to violence? In what kind of world does that happen?

Stereotyping is very common in this century, given that people are usually seen as a whole, rather than individuals. Of course, it hurts at times, but things should not be taken in such serious ways. People should be a bit more open-minded and take everything with a bit of humor, because life’s short and we have no time to get all violent over such a small thing. However, the Muslims did not think that the cartoons were funny at all. Thus, they were described as being Islamophobic and racist, but also blasphemous to the people who believe in Allah. Still, what people don’t seem to understand is that those particular cartoons illustrated important things related to terrorism. Yeah, it’s fine to get your plane and dive right in the World Trade Center, it’s fine to blow up trains and subways, but it is not good, nor religious to drawn some lousy cartoons! It makes me so angry to think about the fact that people start riots over such minor things, but when it comes to some serious issues (like, I don’t know, maybe the fact that our planet is slowly dying and we’re not doing anything about it) no one (or only a few) decide to take a stand and act.

But no, we should all fight over some cartoons! Yes, because that’s the right way to deal with things. So, what is all this trouble about? Is it correct from a political point of view to draw such cartoons? Has the press any kind of liberty left? Should we all just keep our mouths (or better said, imagination) shut and just let things the way they are?

From my point of view, mass media should be allowed to do whatever they find necessary in different matters, as long as some lines are not crossed. But what are those lines? No one really knows anymore what the press is allowed to do or not. It’s weird to think about the fact that journalists have the right to do almost anything, when they are actually very much criticized when it comes to their actions.

Sure, I can sympathize with the Muslim world too. I mean, it’s not easy to see someone mocking your religion or your state of affairs, it is not right either. But, come one! Those train bombs could not have walked there by themselves and say “Hey, look! A train. Let’s detonate!” There are evidence showing that most people responsible for such attacks were Muslims. So, how can you have the guts to start huge riots and protests against some cartoons that only showed what the whole world is actually thinking?!

Anyways, let’s take a look at the cartoons and try to decide if they were as blasphemous as they were said to be. The first one was drawn by Lars Fren and it depicts a young immigrant called Mohammed. The kid is in a public school, in front of a blackboard on which is written (translation from Persian) “Jyllands-Posten’s journalists are a bunch of reactionary provocateurs.” So, the first cartoon is not even about the Muslim world. What, no one is allowed to be called Mohammed anymore?! Or maybe the Muslims protested against the fact that someone mocked the newspaper? I don’t get it.

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The second cartoon was drawn by Bob Katzenelson and it features, probably, a man called Kare Bluitgen. He has a turban on his head and inside the turban there’s an orange on which is written “PR-Stunt.” That’s not controversial, but what seems to be blasphemous about the cartoon is that the man has a picture of Mohammed in his hand. Sorry, what now? That stickman with a turban is Mohammed? Sure, why not? The joke is actually on Kare who has promoted his career by stating that he could not find an artist for his book.

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The third cartoon, drawn by Annette Carlsen features a man trying to identify someone from a bunch of people who are wearing turbans. Number 2 is a Danish politician known for her criticism towards Muslims, number 3 is Jesus (?!) given the halo, number 7 must be again Kare Bluitgen. The man who’s trying to identify someone is saying that he cannot really recognize him. Why is the cartoon blasphemous? Well, they all have turbans, don’t they? Yes. Then one of them MUST be Moahmmed!

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The fourth cartoon was drawn by Annette Sorensen and it depicts a cartoonist drawing a cartoon. Ironic, huh? The cartoon being drawn in Sorensen’s cartoon features a man with a turban, wearing a beard. Something must be fishy about it, doesn’t it? Yes, the man MUST be Mohammed!

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The fifth cartoon, drawn by Erik Abild Somersen, is another cartoon about Mohammed, but there’s no Mohammed in it, is there? What’s a bit … let’s say disturbing is that there’s something written there and it reads “Prophet! Daft and dumb. Keeping women under thumb.” So yeah, it may hurt a bit. But come one, so cartoons are not accepted but not even a little criticism? Are people so uptight nowadays? Anyways, the cartoon does not feature Mohammed, but Muslims still claimed it did. But how do they really know it’s Mohammed, do they have pictures of him or anything?!

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The sixth cartoon drawn by Jens Julius, features Mohammed telling the suicide bombers there are no more virgins for them. Thus, the text reads “Stop, stop. We have run out of virgins!” That’s a good joke, as far as I am concerned. I guess everyone knows the myth about how martyrs who go and blow themselves up go straight to Heaven and they are rewarded with 72 virgins. Well, where do those virgins come from, really? Because it seems that the resource of fresh virgins went down the drain. Anyways, it is indeed very insulting! How could those Danish people draw such a thing? It’s only a joke, get over it! There was no need for protests and riots for a bunch of cartoons, really!

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The seventh cartoon drawn by Rasmus Sand Hoyer features a very angry Mohammed with two women behind him. He looks really angry, but he has his eye censored (shh! No one must know that that’s Mohammed, given that no one has even seen pictures of him! Ever!). Well, if that is not blasphemous, I don’t know what is anymore! People should understand that Mohammed had more than 4 wives (the number of wives Muslims are permitted to have) and they are wearing their “chador” and “burka” because Mohammed told them to. The cartoon is not so controversial as it seems, as it depicts the reality.

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The eighth cartoon drawn by Kurt Westergaard, features Mohammed’s head with a bomb instead of a turban. So what? Oh, sure, it shows the tie between Islam and terrorism, doesn’t it? As if there were still people on the planet who thought bombs came down from the sky… I don’t even understand what’s more controversial. This cartoon or the fact that there were many Muslims who killed huge amounts of people in London, New York, Madrid and so on. Apparently, speaking (actually drawing) your mind is no longer something we can do, but burning buildings to the ground is in Allah’s good graces at any time of day or night.

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The ninth cartoon drawn by Claus Seidel, features a very humble prophet. Well, isn’t this the way Mohammed was? A very humble man who turned out to be a prophet and now millions are worshipping him? Yes, so why is the whole blasphemy thing thrown around? Another thing, Muslims have stated that pictures of Mohammed are prohibited to be, you know, drawn or anything. But there’s one picture of him which was very much sold on the streets in the Muslim world. What was that? Wasn’t it also a blasphemy? Oh, I guess not, given that there were the Muslims who were selling and promoting the picture. My bad, it seems that no one has the right to draw a picture of the prophet, except the Muslims. Sorry.

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The tenth picture drawn by Poul Erik Poulsen, features a combination between Jesus and Mohammed. Meaning, the man put together Jesus’ halo with the crescent moon and the drawing was meant to show the similarities between the two religions. But no! That was not it! There are horns in the picture! Horns that reside on the back of one’s head, of course!!!

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The eleventh cartoon drawn by Peter Bungaard, features a man with a turban and a beard and the crescent moon. What’s so blasphemous about that? Oh yeah, it features Mohammed and that is thoroughly and very much prohibited, especially if the man who drew it is an infidel!

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

The twelfth and last cartoon drawn by Franz Fuchsel features Mohammed urging his warriors to take things easy. The text in the cartoons reads: “Easy friends, when all comes to all it is just a drawing made by an infidel Dane from Southern Jutland.” It is actually a very comic cartoon, which is not blasphemous at all, but well, it was drawn to “insult” the Muslim world, after all. Although the words Fuchsel put in the cartoon are very wise, they don’t seem to help the man a lot.

(bibelen.blogspot.com)

As you can see, the twelve cartoons are different and they features different things. Do you find them insulting, racist or blasphemous? From my point of view, they are only a bunch of cartoons, made just for the fun of it and they should not have gone into the world, outside the Danish borders. However, the reaction they caused was huge and there’s even a documentary made on this story, which you can see on YouTube. The documentary shows the reaction of the both sides and it gives people the chance to speak their minds regarding these cartoons.

Finally, what do you think? Should the press be repressed in any ways when it comes to such things or journalists should be permitted to make jokes (some very funny, actually), even though they may hurt people? Would you be offended if someone drew a cartoon about your nation (and I am sure that every country on the planet has at least a cartoon made after its faults) or would you take it as it is (a simple joke)?