Thursday, September 18, 2014


Features

Swedish Muhammad Cartoonist Says 'World' Created Controversy

Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks says he has effectively lived under "house arrest" since his controversial Muhammad cartoons were published five years ago.
Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks says he has effectively lived under "house arrest" since his controversial Muhammad cartoons were published five years ago.
BRUSSELS -- Swedish artist Lars Vilks caused a storm of controversy when his cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad's head on a dog's body was published in 2007. Large-scale protests ensued around the Muslim world, and Vilks has since lived under what he describes as "house arrest" for his own safety.

Speaking to RFE/RL's Rikard Jozwiak, Vilks gives his views on freedom of speech in today's society and what consequences it has had in his life.

RFE/RL: You have claimed that freedom of speech, in a sense, was the loser in the debate that followed the publication of your cartoons, and that the Islamists are winning. What do you mean by this?

Lars Vilks: It has resulted in the fact that it has become very restrictive to use and produce images concerning Islam's religious symbols.

You can simply conclude by saying that the Prophet has become impossible to reproduce or copy and every time a case of this nature has emerged and been brought to wider attention, problems occur and we can see that there has been general self-censorship on this topic. This is what has been revealed.

RFE/RL: Salman Rushdie recently said that, whereas in 1989 there was massive support for him in the West, today no one wants to stick their neck out. Do you feel that artists have become scared to back you up?

Vilks: You need a very strong person to stand up for something because there is enormous pressure. And it will continue to be like this for some time. Who would want to sacrifice something on my behalf [when] they don't get anything in exchange? They will only see that everything becomes more complicated. You can question how one could understand things in such a way, but it is a fact that it is something that a person would be careful with.

It is interesting that this is how things are. I really think it is telling us something about our time. A fear has appeared, a McCarthy-like history has arrived in which political correctness is an absolute necessity and this political correctness, this story, cannot be disturbed and doesn't want to see any criticism.
VIlks' cartoons sparked protests across the Muslim world in 2007.
VIlks' cartoons sparked protests across the Muslim world in 2007.

RFE/RL: What is your view on the film "Innocence of Muslims" and the uproar it created?

Vilks: The film is made in an amateurish way but that is not the point. The point is that that both good and bad films are made and that bad films are allowed to be made. If you have intentions to attack the Prophet, then you are, of course, allowed to do that. Nobody can stop that. Freedom of speech exists as a tool to promote one's views.

RFE/RL: Would you consider targeting other religions and their extremists, or are you stuck with Islam?

Vilks: One has to remember that I am not particularly interested in Islam. This [the cartoon] was something I did in 2007 which I didn't think would create a big fuss, because most things that are produced concerning this topic pass unnoticed.

It is when attention is created and enough reaction is triggered that something like this can accelerate. I haven't really done much else since these drawings in 2007, but since then I have been pulled into this. And the issue itself has become an art project since I have followed its entire development.

So I am involved in this, but in a way it is the rest of the world that has created this, not my burning interest [in Islam]. I have become engaged in the question [of freedom of speech versus religion] so I have, in a sense, ended up here. But I don't see myself as a salaried employee engaged in attacking religions.

RFE/RL: You now have bodyguards who are by your side around the clock. How would you describe your life today?

Vilks: I live under a type of house arrest. I cannot leave my home without informing the security police. In that way it has changed. But on the other hand, I cannot say that there have been any cataclysmic changes. It is a way of organizing one's existence. It works well for me.

I cannot say it has been a big problem but, of course, this situation is not something one aims for. Obviously, one wouldn't want things this way. But it hasn't been as difficult for me as it might have been for others.

RFE/RL: Very few galleries want to accept your art these days. How do you make a living?

Vilks: I have made several variations of my original drawing. A recurrent complaint is that many think that it [the drawing] is bad, I don't consider it to be bad. So, in order to satisfy different technical and art directions, I have made different variations and also many oil paintings where I have placed it [the dog] in different traditional and well-known artworks throughout history. I sell these privately on the Internet. There has been quite a lot of interest.

The reason I do this is not only because it provides income. It is also because they cannot be exhibited [due to the reluctance of galleries to display Vilks' drawings], even if you may think they are quite innocent. The dog element is reduced quite a lot and involved in different contexts, and it would be a fun exhibition, but it cannot be done. The [Muhammad drawings] can't even be sold at auction on the Internet. They are being removed even there.
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: saucymugwump from: USA
November 13, 2012 17:39
Lars Vilks said "A fear has appeared, a McCarthy-like history has arrived in which political correctness is an absolute necessity and this political correctness, this story, cannot be disturbed and doesn't want to see any criticism."

And the political correctness is based on ignorance. Many people compare the Bible with the Koran, saying that both contain lots of violence, so we should simply accept both to be mainstream religions. However, Jesus in the New Testament repudiated the violence of the Old Testament. In contrast, Muhammad's writings at the beginning of his life were peaceful, but his writings at the end of his life are the most violent and intolerant in the entire Koran. The politically-correct crowd always points to the early writings of Muhammad as proof of his peaceful greatness, yet Islamists consider his later writings, the really nasty ones, to be of the greatest importance.

We either have freedom of speech or we do not. If we allow Islamists to dictate to us what we can say, write, or draw, then we have surrendered our freedom of speech and we will forever dance to the tune that Islamists play.
In Response

by: Camel Anaturk from: Kurdistan
November 13, 2012 22:40
`If we allow islamists to dictate to us what we can say,write or draw...`-you have Sassy,you bloody have a long long time ago.Way back in the thirties Holly wood decided to film Franz Werfel`s classic `The 40days of Musa Dagh`-Cold turkeys diplomats intervened and the Hollywood cossax duly pandered to their demands-to this day Shamerica refuses to recognize the Armenian Genocide,thanx to the wishes of its wild turkey concubine.You are already dancing the Antic Hay Rigadoon dance with the islamists installing them in power with the so called springs -thats your freedom of expression,but you will not dance to their tune forever-only till Kigdom Come.And after that-its the firery furnace and I am sorry to say that this time it will be forever and a day, dearest Sassy.Amen!!!
In Response

by: saucymugwump from: USA
November 14, 2012 20:18
Camel Anaturk from Kurdistan wrote "in the thirties Holly wood decided to film Franz Werfel`s classic `The 40days of Musa Dagh`-Cold turkeys diplomats intervened"

There is a good reason why many people sarcastically refer to Hollywood as "Holly-weird" or California as "the land of fruits, nuts, and flakes." If I were a Hollywood director, I would create a movie based on Peter Balakian's "The Burning Tigris: The Armenian Genocide and America's Response."

I will also say that Barack Obama promised to recognize the Armenian Genocide during his first campaign, but he somehow forgot about his promise after he was elected.
In Response

by: Camel Anaturk from: Kurdistan
November 14, 2012 21:54
Dear Saucy,Balakian`s book deals with the american response to the Genocide at the time when there was no NATO, it doesnt tell how things have changed since the times of prez.Wilson,besides its a documentary account of history,while Werfels book is a novel based on a true story.A few years ago PBS aired a documentary on the genocide which made the wild turkeys even wilder sending them into a cold turkey state of mind.The best book to read on the subject is Christopher Simpson`s `The Splendid Blond Beast`-most of it is on the Genocide Watch website.
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
November 13, 2012 23:33
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - attributed to Voltaire (but assumed to have been written by someone else).

Therefore, I support the freedom of the individual to speak as they wish, and for others to demonstrate and protest if they do not like it - the two are not mutually exclusive.

In Response

by: saucymugwump from: USA
November 14, 2012 19:54
William from Aragon wrote "Therefore, I support the freedom of the individual to speak as they wish, and for others to demonstrate and protest if they do not like it - the two are not mutually exclusive."

Sounds good in theory, though it hasn't worked out that way. One can easily find hundreds of Internet stories on the subject of Islamists demanding that people not be allowed to communicate anything that "insults Islam." Vilks is just one of many people who ignored that dictum and now live their lives surrounded by bodyguards. The irresistable force meets the immovable object. The definition of "protest" does not include violence or the threat of it.
In Response

by: rebecca smith from: sweden
November 14, 2012 21:53
We're not talking about demonstrations or simple protests, we're talking about death threats, violence and murder. As far as I'm concerned THAT type of demonstration should most definitely be excluded.

by: Muslim from: world
November 14, 2012 02:44
On 16 October 1946, Julius Streicher was hanged at Nuremberg after being convicted by an International Military Tribunal for crimes against humanity. Streicher was not a member of the Nazi military and did not take part in planning the Holocaust or the invasion of any country. He was the publisher of a tabloid newspaper, Der Stürmer, which for 22 years denounced Jews in the most crude, vicious, and vivid ways. Despite its increasing popularity, the newspaper was even condemned by many Nazi leaders at the time and Streicher was brought before the German courts on several occasions.

Despite Der Stürmer not being an official arm of the Nazi government, Streicher’s pivotal role in inciting loathing and hatred of Jews was considered significant enough to include him in the indictment of Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. In essence, the prosecutors took the line that Streicher's incendiary speeches and articles made him an accessory to murder, and therefore as culpable as those who actually ordered the mass extermination of Jews.

Camouflaged in the rhetoric of anti-terror, counter-extremism, and freedom of speech, the rank hatred and loathing of Muslims and Islam has become the acceptable face of racism today.
In Response

by: Eugenio from: Vienna
November 14, 2012 09:08
A very interesting account of the life and death of Julius Streicher. What comes to my mind in this respect is a life and death of another member of the Nazi elite - Werner von Braun. The guy was different from Streicher - in that he was discrete. And yet, von Braun spent a number of years helping Adolf Hitler and his military to develop a nuclear bomb - which, had they had enough time to build one, would have caused millions of deaths that one could have added to those 50 mln+ that the Germans killed in WWII.
And, was this Nazi war criminal put on trial and then hanged? Of course not - he went to live for the rest of his life in the United States, where he helped the Beavuses and Buttheads create a nuclear bom of their own, with which they then killed hundreds of thousands of people in Japan in August 1945.
So, it appears that while some Nazis (those who publish newspapers) might get hanged, other Nazis (those who help the US carry out their genocidal policies all over the world) happily live the rest of their lives somewhere in Arizona or elsewhere on the territory of the Fourth Nazi Reich.
In Response

by: Camel Anaturk from: Kurdistan
November 14, 2012 16:24
Dearest austrian Beavus and Butthead All-in -one it was the american A bomb which helped your paymasters develop an A bomb of their own,thanx to the intelligence effort of some yahoodies,so finally the USSR-the reds must thank Herr Brown as well.It is very funny when a red fascist like you,or the other B&B-jack criticizes a brown communist,but stupid is as stupid as!!!
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
November 14, 2012 22:13
Hey EUgenio, I think that was missiles, not the A-bomb. Which means that Herr Braun's creations rained down on London - the V1 and the V2 missles - killing many British civilians. This makes your argument even stronger.
In Response

by: saucymugwump from: USA
November 14, 2012 23:43
Eugenio from Vienna wrote "they then killed hundreds of thousands of people in Japan in August 1945."

You obviously believe we should have just allowed Japan to continue killing Chinese people, often using them for bayonet practice. And you must also believe we should have allowed Japan to force even more Asian women into being prostitutes for the Japanese army; 300,000 women, 80% of them Korean, had their lives ruined in this manner. And clearly you believe that Japan's treatment of POWs, starving, torturing, and/or executing them, was acceptable.
In Response

by: Abdulmajid
November 14, 2012 15:51
"Camouflaged in the rhetoric of anti-terror, counter-extremism, and freedom of speech, the rank hatred and loathing of Muslims and Islam has become the acceptable face of racism today." Yes that's 100% the truth. What was true about Julius Streicher is true for the Islamophobes too. Compare the caricatures of this man, of Westergaard and of Charlie Hebdo to those of "Der Stürmer" and you will see how similar they are in their crude and insulting jingoism. Islamophobes say things about Muslims that would land them in jail if they were said about Jews, with total impunity. Talk about double standards here. Besides that such caricatures and talk are incitation to murder. No need to be a rocket scientist to tell where such luminaries of mankind like the islamophobe who stabbed a pregnant Egyptian woman to death in a Dresden courtroom, those who assault Muslim men wearing hijab and Sikh men (because of the turban Sikhs wear, and also because they are too dumb and ignoramt to distinguish Sikh from Muslims), Anders Behring Breivik and Radovan Karadzic and his tens of thousands of willing executioners got their inspiration from. Not to forget the American soldiers who murdered Iraqi and Afghan civilians and urinated on dead Afghans' bodies.To say that crude anti-Muslim jingoism, Muslim-bashing, Muslim baiting and anti-Muslim hate speech fall under "freedom of expression" is akin to saying that the anti-Bosniak genocide in Eastern Bosnia, involving mass murder and mass rape of mostly defenseless civilians and the wholesale destruction of priceless cultural heritage is "a honorable fight for freedom and independence of Bosnian Serbs". Nothing could be farther from the truth. Instead Islamophobes keep on ranting about how Islam is a "Cult of hate" and deny that they want to see Muslims destroyed. Like genocidals always deny genocide. The more the genocidals deny they are genocidal, the more they deny genocide is their intention or that they ever committed genocide, the more they prove it. And a typical Goebbels tactic of theirs is to blame their own wrongs on their victims. I also can't stand their hubris. Watch Karadzic and Mladic in the dock and compare them to Goering. They all consider themselves to be something better, superhuman, and think "how dare ordinary people judge us". Like the islamophobic and bosniakophobe fascist twerps who put my comments down. They think about me: "how dare you judge your betters." They are certainly no betters. Not of Muslims.
In Response

by: rebecca s. from: sweden
November 14, 2012 21:59
Maybe we are just sick of all the crime, hatred and arrogance you bring to countries that support you financially and did not ask for your demands.
In Response

by: Camel Anaturk from: Kurdistan
November 14, 2012 22:11
Dear Aptalmudjahedin djan,congratulations for your excellent english-where did you achieve such a perfect command of the chief language of the Islamophbes-in the Kosovo primary school,the Bosniak kindergarten or at the Saudi Arabian Academy of sciences???Your posts show the etymological history of the idiom `talking turkey`,and all your childish rants can be summarized in 3 words-blah blah blah.Now,cool down and give us all a simple answer to a simple question:Were the great moslems enemies or were they allies with the bad old nazis ,you rave against,my dear muslim Streicher?Just a simple yes,or no ,dear Aptal,and thanx in advance for the answer we all know.Now if you are a true muslim,which of course you are not ,you will cut down on the pork and moonshine which give you such an inspiration to write crap,then you must fall on your knees,and ask Allah forgiveness for your multiple sins.As you must know Allah is great and he will forgive those who are closest to his heart-his allahtans.
In Response

by: Abdulmajid
November 17, 2012 22:31
Bah, since you have nothing to refute me, the only thing you can do is respond with slander, insult and incoherent babble. Most of the people who camouflage their islamophobia under the guise of "fighting for freedom of expression" are at best closet fascists, racists (most Muslims happen to be of darker skin; and Bosniaks are to those people traitors to Christianity or the white race) or bigots. They approve of the Serb anti-Bosniak genocide. That camel anaturk character hates even the people who agree with him. Just read his incoherent babble and insult. He insults everybody. A typical misanthrope and possibly sociopath. I will not even bother to reply to him; unless to throw back some of his visceral hatred and inhumanity at him. But maybe it's just that his lack of intellect does not allow him to say any better (allahtans, whats that supposed to mean?)
And I'll say it again: Islamophobes dispute Muslims' right to exist, including my own, and I have as much sympathy for them as any decent person has for the Nazis. They are the fascists of our era. OK, there are some things among Muslims which I don't approve of, but to generalize them and make us all guilty by association as some here do is Fascism. Since I, and a large proportion of Muslims as well, don't approve of the way women or certain miorities are treated in some Muslim countries, nor of Sept. 11th, I refuse to be made responsible for them, I don't want to be associated with them, nor to apologize for them, nor to be told I overlook them. But should I for reason of these things subscribe to your point of view that the anti-Bosniak genocide, especially the massacre at Srebrenica was really nothing, is of little account, or perfectly understandable in the view of inhumanities Muslims did in the past or are doing or alleged of doing now, eh, Rebecca? Do the Nazi atrocities against Serbs during WWII in any way mitigate or exonerate Serb atrocities against non-Serbs in the 1990s? And that therefore Bosniaks must suffer inhumanity from the Serbs and all territories and towns from which Bosniaks were expelled must remain in Serb hands? Would you be so kind to answer me that? But I'm not holding my breath. And anyway a honest answer isn't something that can be expected from genocidals.
In Response

by: Caucasus from: Kavkaz
November 14, 2012 19:47
Muslim from world there is always something good coming from the islamophobes. Tell me the truth if they didn't attack your religion what would you do? That's right sit on your butt and do nothing. Now they attack and you at least start to educate yourself, as I see from your post above. Allah knows what is best for us. Islam was given to people when they were in chaos. The chaos will return to the planet Earth and the only force which will bring order is going to be Islam we all know it even people who do not believe in Allah know that.
In Response

by: Abdulmajid
November 14, 2012 23:23
I do happen to know but the idea that I must go through Hell on Earth before I can see Džennet is not a comfortable thought.
I have come to the Faith only late in life. I have to confess that I have sinned badly, and continue to do so. If I am killed for what I am, will my sins be forgiven? Don't nobody get me wrong, I'd never do a suicide bomb attack because to intentionally seek death of oneself and of others is an unforgivable sin (except for a wounded soldier in battle who has no hope of surviving anyway and who has the duty to take along as much enemy soldiers as he can; and I mean soldiers. This is true also for non-Muslims; during the Raid on Tokyo Col. Jimmy Doolittle had planned that if he was shot down he would steer his plane into a worthwhile target; that was in 1942, a full 2 years before Japanese Admiral Ugaki came up with the concept of Kamikaze; some Muslim he.) If it is the will of the All-Merciful that I'm murdered by my enemies -not shot in battle but foully murdered when I'm defenseless like the 8.347 and counting at Srebrenica were, or burned in my house when I'm asleep like those Afghan villagers- what can I do against it, after all our fate is written? Not all of these 8.347 were practising Muslims; everybody knows there are quite a lot of Bosniaks who don't abide by the Muslim faith at all yet the whole islamophobic and serbofascist lot smears them as "jihadists". I don't condemn these non-practising Muslims, it's their own decision and their own fate. But will they be received in Heaven or not if they are murdered for being Muslims (even if Muslims in name only)? And even if one isn't a particularly religious person and more concerned with matters of this world - what kind of world are we leaving to our children? One where might makes right and the biggest and baddest bully always wins? For that is what the serbofascists and islamophobes want. They just disguise their true intentions with their nice words about "freedom of exspression" because they think they are our betters and invincible. Of course I am confident that my kid will do all right. Yes, chaos will return to this planet, is indeed already returning, since the end of the Cold War we already have so much of it and I wonder, even if I should be so lucky to end my days in peace, will my children and grandchildren too? Or will they be subject to slander, persecution and death just for what they are? Like the Spanish Muslims in the 15-17th centuries and the Bosniaks in our time? Alija Izetbegović said the Bosniak people would not be destroyed; and so did Husein Kapetan Gradaščević before him. If the Bosniaks manage to prevail over their seemingly indestructible and seemingly invincible enemies they will have earned respect for all Muslims in Europe, and have discredited Islamophobia as much as the Jews discredited antisemitism by establishing Israel - through naked, brute force because that's the only thing that counts in this brutal, might-makes-right, law-of-the-jungle world of ours. At least the concept of medieval and Hitlerist antitsemitism was thoroughly discredited. Like Japan avoided being colonialized by defeating the Russians in 1905. Even so the British still considered the Japanese to be racially and technically inferior until 1942 and it cost them dearly in Malaysia and Singapore. (The Japanese lost to the Americans in the end because they too became guilty of arrogance and hubris and considering all others inferior, and in consequence commited a series of grave blunders in their campaign. Then American numerical and material superiority broke them. But the British never got Malaysia and Singapore back alone and even so nobody today considers the Japanese to be inferior) If they could do it, so can we. I mean us "balije, Turks, turncoats" in the Balkans. Will not be brought to our knees.
In Response

by: saucymugwump from: USA
November 14, 2012 23:34
Caucasus from Kavkaz redundantly wrote "Allah knows what is best for us."

If Allah needs mere mortals to defend his honor, doesn't that make him a powerless wimp?
In Response

by: saucymugwump from: USA
November 14, 2012 20:09
Muslim from world wrote "Camouflaged in the rhetoric of anti-terror, counter-extremism, and freedom of speech, the rank hatred and loathing of Muslims and Islam has become the acceptable face of racism today."

You have it exactly backwards. Before 9/11, the West thought Islam and Muslims were exotic. James Bond and other movies featured the Islamic world as an interesting and safe place to visit.

But then we had 9/11, the killing of Theo van Gogh, the 2005 London Underground bombings, the 2004 Madrid railway bombings, the 2002 & 2005 Bali bombings, and many other acts of violence. Not only hasn't the violence diminished, it increases every day. One can read thousands of articles on the subject by searching for "religion of peace" using Bing.

If Muslims want anti-Islamic actions to cease, they should first stop killing, maiming, kidnapping, and otherwise terrorizing non-Muslims.
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
November 14, 2012 21:54
I say on this website once again, after so many times: You cannot take the actions of a handfull and generalise that to be all Muslims - 1.4 billion people, or 24% of humanity. There is no such thing as the Moslem World - this religious movement is more fractured by sectarianism than Christianity. Moslems are not at war with us, as "us" has yet to be defined. Who exactly?

You started down the path of supporting freedom of speech, which I am sure most readers agreed with you and assessed by the readers as a reasonable person. You would have been wise to leave it at that and left others alone. Then, you have managed to lose control and degenerated into an anti-Moslem rant, which was based on generalisation. So now you appear in the one article not to be a reasonable person, and your initial position on freedom of speech is now suspect.

Sometimes it is best to quit the game when you are ahead.
In Response

by: Abdulmajid
November 14, 2012 22:35
I do not deny that those things happened. But first there was Bosnia. There was Sabra and Shatila. There was the colonial war in Algeria and Morocco, to name a few. What do you say to that? Do you think that doesn't count? 8.347 people killed in Srebrenica alone, after being terrorized for over 3 years, that's about 3000 to 5000 more than 9/11 and all without need of such a complicated operation, just a handful of bloodthirsty trigger-happy thugs was sufficient. You say "9/11" as if all Muslims were guilty of it. Guilty by association. So, because I have chosen Islam, according to you I am guilty of 9/11 as well? So I must get on my knees before every non-Muslim and apologize for it??? Rather be dead than do that! The people of Srebrenica had to pay for something the Turks did? Making me responisble for something I have no say about (and which I profoundly reject anyway) is to behave with blind idiocy or pure malevolence. Then with the same right I can say all Serbs and all Croats are guilty of the anti-Bosniak genocidal crusade and all to the last man, woman and child should be made to answer for it. But I do not because contrary to you I'm not a genocidal. By your words you show yourself to be an anti-Muslim genocidal. If it were left to people like you you'd make a graveyard out of Bosnia and a radioactive wasteland of all Muslim countries. And like I said I hate nothing more than the arrogance and hubris of christofascist racist white supremacists who think they are my betters and how dare I criticize them. Those, ah, people, do exactly the opposite of what their religion "of peace" preaches and think it is a good deed to kill and rape infidels. Like the "killer squad" in Afghanistan, the US Marine who raped an Iraqi schoolgirl and then murdered all her family to cover his crime, the killer of the pregnant Egyptian courtroom in Germany, Radovan Karadzic and his minions, Anders Behring Breivik and of course people like you. All poisoned by islamophobic diatribe. Still I refuse to believe that all non-Muslims are genocidal anti-Muslim crusaders (more and more difficult as it gets for me courtesy of all the anti-Muslim diatribe I have to swallow here every day), unlike you who believe all Muslims are fanatics and murderers. And the more strenuously those anti-Muslim genocidals deny that they are genocidals the more they prove that they are. Don't bother answering back, I do NOT need a lesson in history from declared enemies of my people. And much less another confirmation of simple-minded genocidal malevolence.
In Response

by: rebecca smith from: sweden
November 14, 2012 21:57
Right, and the oppression, persecution and murder of Christians in the muslim side of the planet is what, in your 'opinion'? Obviously nothing.

You say you are from 'world' but you are only complaining about a small portion of 'the world' the part that doesn't want you here.

I hear no complaints about a billion muslims demanding separatism but still want to be included in welfare or protection by city services (fire, ambulance) in European countries, while perpetrating a not so slow genocide on all non muslims in virtually every country that is majority muslim.

By the way, ISLAM is not a race, therefore it is not racism.

Muslims hate freedom of speech, so your lousy biased point of view is expected.
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
November 15, 2012 21:04
Regarding your earlier comment to me, you too are generalising, Rebecca. There are not 1.4 billion Muslims participating in "death threats, violence and murder". There are some Muslims, as there are some Christians, Jews, Hindus and Bhuddists. You need to be more specific in the comments that you offer. Then the become less assailable.
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
November 14, 2012 22:09
The US-based western media is responsible for promoting Islam as a threat to "our way of life", although the same media cannot define what "our way of life" is. This is being done for political purposes. When a government has no idea what to do about a country's internal problems, it promotes external threats, be they existent or non-existent. This keeps its citizens from asking the difficult questions, like how is the economy going (EUgenio can elaborate). If you look at the US experience since World War 2, it has been "threatened" by: Soviet Russia, monolithic International Communism, "The War on Terror", Iraq, North Korea, Iran, and "the rise of China" depite China being the US's main financier. Throw into this mix the hard-to-define "the Muslims" and you have the perfect recipe for keeping your population living in fear and under control.

"Home of the Brave"? I think not - paralysed with fear and self-doubt is more like it.
In Response

by: Eugenio from: Vienna
November 15, 2012 09:34
Hey, William, absolutely agree with what you are saying about those govts that "have no idea what to do about a country's internal problems" and then - to distract people's attention from the latter create "external threats, be they existent or non-existent".
And I also think that the stuff of the RFE/RL deserves a Nobel Prize of Distraction of public opinion, given that they manage to drag just so many people (rebecca smith, Abdulmajid, saucymugwump, Caucasus etc etc etc) into those ABSOLUTELY SENSELESS pro-/anti-Islam discusstions whose only purpose is to distract people's attention from, for example, the fact that yesterday (Wednesday) MILLIONS OF PEOPLE all over Europe went to the streets to protest against the criminal economic policies of Frau Merkel and the bankrupt capitalist oligarchy she represents.
VIDEO: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSDGIURSNJk&feature=youtube_gdata_player
In Response

by: Abdulmajid
November 17, 2012 22:48
Dear Eugenio, what do YOU propose I should do against the bankrupt corrupt oligarchy? Don't you think I follow the news tpo? They saw the strike and they thought "so what?" The world didn't stop turning for this you know. It was an understandable but in the end futile gesture, for to move anything the whole population would have had to join in and those who still have a job are much too afraid to lose it, knowing they will never get another one, or one that is half as well paid as their current job is, meager as their salary may be; so they knuckled under. Unless things get as bad as in France in 1789 nothing much will happen to oust that corrupt oligarchy you purport to hate so much (unless it 's tycoons loyal to Putin; right?) . And then chaos will follow. You want that? Well, as a friend of Milosevic's policies surely you do.
And it surely won't help if I joined the ranks, or endorsed the viewpoints of the declared enemies of the Bosnials or generally of Muslim people. Not that I would ever do it anyway. And on this pages I'm more concerned witzh making sure thatthegenocidal anti-Bosniak viewpoint does not get the upper hand, thankless a job as it is. Anti-Muslim caricatures help in spreading or affirming this viewpoint. Like Julius Streicher's they are potentially conductive to murder and genocide. That's why I condemn them. So please don't distract the issue at hands.

by: Jack from: US
November 15, 2012 15:29
Nothing sums it better than this,

when black people are insulted its racism,
when Jews are insulted its anti-Semitic
When Muslims are insulted its "freedom of speech."
In Response

by: Abdulmajid
November 17, 2012 22:36
Hey man for once you spoke the truth!

Most Popular