>. They love that the Danish newspaper
> ran the 'toons. They've insisted that the Danish
> cartoons have no racist elements; to me they clearly
> do, but they won't hear any of it. This article
> about
> the Danish paper refusing to print similar cartoons
> about Jesus (also a Mid Easterner, incidentally)
> should be helpful.
Ok, so the newspaper is guilty of double standards. However, what if a newspaper that did not follow such double standards had printed the pictures? Muhammed strikes me as a rather vile, delusional ego-maniac. According to some of the textual criticism of the New Testament, Jesus may not have been the all-loving person as depicted in popular culture. Whatever the case, he is the poster-boy for a religion (Christianity) that has a long trail of blood. Why shouldn't Jesus or Muhammed be depicted in uncomplimentary terms? And why should one apologize for the burning of embassies as a reaction? How is this different from the Fatwa issued against Salman Rushdie? I am undecided as to whether I find these cartoons racist, however, my understanding is that the Muslims protesting the cartoons are doing so because (A) the cartoons show a depiction of Muhammed and (B) they depict Muhammed in an unfavorable light). In other words, they are not doing it to protest racism (am I wrong about that?)
-Thomas
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com