Dirka dirka!
"Has Jyllands-Posten insulted and disrespected Islam? It certainly didn't intend to. But what does respect mean? When I visit a mosque, I show my respect by taking off my shoes. I follow the customs, just as I do in a church, synagogue or other holy place. But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy."
-Flemming Rose, editor of Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that commissioned the incendiary Muhammad cartoons which has led to worldwide protests and riots.
You can read his whole article here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/17/AR2006021702499_pf.html
So far, 45 people have died because of Muslim outrage over these perceived insults.
Personally, I get outraged whenever I'm told what I can or cannot say.
posted by jack @ 6:32 PM
7 Comments:
"The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ...on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers..."
http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,,1703500,00.html
Your stupid link isn't complete. Stupid.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1703501,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international
/0,,1703501,00.html
1.30pm
Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons
Gwladys Fouché
Monday February 6, 2006
Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that first published the cartoons of the prophet Muhammad that have caused a storm of protest throughout the Islamic world, refused to run drawings lampooning Jesus Christ, it has emerged today.
The Danish daily turned down the cartoons of Christ three years ago, on the grounds that they could be offensive to readers and were not funny.
In April 2003, Danish illustrator Christoffer Zieler submitted a series of unsolicited cartoons dealing with the resurrection of Christ to Jyllands-Posten.
Article continues
Zieler received an email back from the paper's Sunday editor, Jens Kaiser, which said: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."
The illustrator said: "I see the cartoons as an innocent joke, of the type that my Christian grandfather would enjoy."
"I showed them to a few pastors and they thought they were funny."
But the Jyllands-Posten editor in question, Mr Kaiser, said that the case was "ridiculous to bring forward now. It has nothing to do with the Muhammad cartoons.
"In the Muhammad drawings case, we asked the illustrators to do it. I did not ask for these cartoons. That's the difference," he said.
"The illustrator thought his cartoons were funny. I did not think so. It would offend some readers, not much but some."
The decision smacks of "double-standards", said Ahmed Akkari, spokesman for the Danish-based European Committee for Prophet Honouring, the umbrella group that represents 27 Muslim organisations that are campaigning for a full apology from Jyllands-Posten.
"How can Jyllands-Posten distinguish the two cases? Surely they must understand," Mr Akkari added.
Meanwhile, the editor of a Malaysian newspaper resigned over the weekend after printing one of the Muhammad cartoons that have unleashed a storm of protest across the Islamic world.
Malaysia's Sunday Tribune, based in the remote state of Sarawak, on Borneo island, ran one of the Danish cartoons on Saturday. It is unclear which one of the 12 drawings was reprinted.
Printed on page 12 of the paper, the cartoon illustrated an article about the lack of impact of the controversy in Malaysia, a country with a majority Muslim population.
The newspaper apologised and expressed "profound regret over the unauthorised publication", in a front page statement on Sunday.
"Our internal inquiry revealed that the editor on duty, who was responsible for the same publication, had done it all alone by himself without authority in compliance with the prescribed procedures as required for such news," the statement said.
The editor, who has not been named, regretted his mistake, apologised and tendered his resignation, according to the statement.
shove it. clacketyclack.
Perhaps, my wayward friend, you should pay more attention to detail. It was two different editors. Flemming Rose is the one I cited, the one who ran the Muhammad cartoons. The one who chose NOT to run the Christ ones was, as your story points out, was Jens Kaiser. Two different men. Same newspaper, yes, but two different men. And must I ramble about the discretionary powers of editors? Hmmmm?
En garde.
Post a Comment
<< Home