Political and topical news and commentary
Boycott of Danish products.
Published on February 1, 2006 By adnauseam In Current Events
In September 2005 the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published cartoon caricatures of the Prophet Muhammed in terrorist guise.The backlash by the World's Muslim population has taken some time to gather momentum but it is gaining momentum now and unlikely to abate for some while. Muslims are furious with this blatant blasphemy and are now boycotting Danish goods in Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries. Denmark is famous the World over for its high quality dairy and fish products, including Lurpak butter, which is sold in every Middle Eastern country. Judging by the fury unleashed by the newspaper's publication of these pictures, it is doubtful whether Danish products will return to supermarket shelves in the Middle East soon.

I cannot understand why a Danish newspaper would publish such insulting pictures in the first place. This is one of the most insensitive acts committed in a country that was at one time a supporter of South Africa's oppressed in the apartheid era (i.e. sympathetic and sensitive to the needs and feelings of the repressed). Furthermore, the Danes have a reputation of being conservative and uncontroversial. The furore has been heightened by the lack of a formal apology from the Danish government--although the newspaper has apologised.

This entire fiasco is a result of too much freedom regardless of the feelings of others. The Danish government should apologise forthwith and attempt to repair the damage to their economy and the dignity of others.

I heard today that a French newspaper had also published these caricatures, probably to remain in the forefront of the news-- but the very printing of these cartoons is libellous, offensive and degrading. Are the French also being insensitive? If not what was the reason for reproducing these pictures? Am I missing something here?

Let's be frank: A cartoon caricature of Jesus carrying a rocket launcher would outrage Christians. Why pick on the Muslim faith for your daily laugh?

Comments
on Feb 01, 2006

Are the French also being insensitive? If not what was the reason for reproducing these pictures? Am I missing something here?

Let's be frank: A cartoon caricature of Jesus carrying a rocket launcher would outrage Christians. Why pick on the Muslim faith for your daily laugh?

On the first I guess you missed the French and their Hitler comparison to Pope Benedict VI.  On the latter, I guess you are not an art patron or perhaps missed the 'art' called "Piss Christ".

on Feb 01, 2006
"This entire fiasco is a result of too much freedom regardless of the feelings of others. "


heh, too much freedom. Has a nice ring to it... if you are a fascist. The fact is we in the West enjoy our Christ Krispies, and we have our Last Temptation of Christ, and our DaVinci Code, and so far I am unaware of any beheadings or death warrants issued. Hell, we tag Jesus on about everything.

When you talk about "too much freedom" you are using your own values. In reality, though, the values used to decide what is "too much" will be those of whoever is in power. This week it will be Christians outlawing sacriledge, next week it will be PC Liberals telling us only gay people can say the word "queer" and removing all the books that use it from the libraries, like the insipid PC fad of the 90's..

People wanna boycott, fine. They are the ones doing without. The idea that government should do something about it begging for our freedoms to be crushed.

I wonder what you think about flag burning? Is allowing that "too much freedom"?
on Feb 01, 2006
on Feb 02, 2006
I'm sorry. I did not realise blasphemy was so rife. In South Africa, a country with a conservative press--blasphemous rhetoric, or pictures-- could not be published. However, I hope readers will comment on the affront to Muslims, as this is probably a far more volatile issue now. By that I mean that the World can ill afford to taunt or mock the Muslim faith in the present sensitive climate over Iraq. Not to mention Iran, Syria and the "reasonable guys" like Saudi Arabia who are extremely offended.
on Feb 02, 2006
Blaspheme is in the eye of the beholder. Christians sit down and watch the Monty Python movie "Life of Brain" and laugh they asses off. If it was the arab equivalent, nations would be closing their embassies.

These edicts about 'blaspheme' are religious, muslim edicts. When you make laws that impose those edicts, you are imposing and promoting a religios belief. Any state that does that is not free. I don't WANT my daughter to see Mohammed as anything but the normal person that I believe he was. If someone came along and told her that she couldn't be disrespectful to him, it would be lending him religious credence I don't believe he has, and frankly that is imposing a religious standard.

So, enough with it. If I lived in South Africa I would be asking why religious standards are imposed upon the press. The press of all institutions should be able to print without fear of religious imposition.
on Feb 05, 2006
Just a footnote: An interdict was obtained in the South African Supreme Court last week gagging the press from publishing any of the images.