Tag Archives: anti-Muslim

Cartoon Wars Revive Due To Japanese Cartoon Series

A scene from an animated version of a popular Japanese comic book has sparked an outcry int the Muslim world which could become another version of the Danish cartoon wars which raged last year. At issue is a 90 second “JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure” video segment that depicts Dio Brando, a villain, picking up a Quran from a bookshelf and apparently examining it as he orders the execution of the hero and his friends. The animation is based on the widely popular manga by Hirohiko Araki which appeared weekly from 1987 to 2003. A pirated version of the cartoon seres with Arabic subtitles has been available on the Internet since March, 2007.

Someone posted a still on the Internet and now it has spread all over the Muslim world. Sheikh Abdul Hamd Attrash, chairman of the Fatwa Committee at Al-Azhar, the highest Sunni authority, called the cartoon an insult to Islam. He noted: “This scene depicts Muslims as terrorists, which is not true at all. This is an insult to the religion and the producers would be considered to be enemies of Islam.”

The producers of the cartoon admtted it was a simple mistake and said “we applogize for the unpleasantness tthat the cartoon may have caused and will carefully consider how to deal with religious and cultural themes.” He said one of the animation authors merely had tried giving the scene a sense of authentcity.

Many Arabic and Muslim web sites are now arousing anger by accusing the Japanese of attacking all Muslims and trying to engender feelings of hate toward the Muslim world. Cries of boycotting Japenese products are now being heard.

It was a mistake, nothing more than that. Of course, the same people who are upset at a cartoon series propogating hate have no problem with Muslim cartoons which depict Jews as evil and urge children to hate them. How about issuing a Fatwa against all forms of hate toward religions which appear on children cartoon programs?

Dutch Cartoonist Arrested For Stupidity!

The ongoing cartoon wars in Europe over attempts by cartoonists to portray Muslims and dark skinned people as inferior or terrorists. A vigorous debate erupted in the Dutch parliament over the arrest of a cartoonist who had published material the public prosecutor considered to be of such a grave offence as to warrrant a night in jail. Justice Minister Ernst Hirsch raised questions as to whether the arrest on grounds of inciting racial hatred was warranted.

The cartoonist, GregoriousNekscht, published eight cartoons which the public prosecutor claimed were insulting to Muslim and “people with dark skins” and were an example of fostering public hatred. Many MPs thought the reaction of the public prosecutor was out of all proportion to the alleged crime. Some were also concerned if the government was trying to extend the definition of blasphemy by the arrest.

If insulting people through the medium of a cartoon was a criminal action, then thousands of American cartoonists would be in jail, given their constant attacks and mocking of President Bush. Perhaps, if the laws were changed to make criminal insulting white skinned people, we could begin building hundreds of jails to house the criminals. Let cartoonists ply their trade and respect the intelligence of most people.

Danish Politicians Argue Over Who Is Anti-Muslim

Kristian Dahl of the Danish People’s Party sent out a press release saying he regetted his coment the previous day that the party was “anti-Muslim.” He noted, “if I had to do it over I would have chosen a different ways of saying it.” He was commenting after Birthe Ronn Hombech, of the Liberal Party, called the DPP “fanatically anti-Muslim.” Dahl explained the source of his anti-Muslim feeling in the following way: “We are in many ways anti-Muslim becassue we can see some deeply problematic things about the way Islam functions. When we fight against 10 year-old girls getting castrated or are against segregated swimming classes, then it is those types of examples I think of when I say we are anti-Muslim.”

In a sense, Dahl raises important issues. What if an individual finds a group’s practices violate his/her own sense of democracy and respect for human dignity. If the individual makes comments about the practices, does that mean the person is biased and prejudiced or does it convey a sense the person simply does not agree with certain religious practices.

Catch Them Before Action Assuming They Have Plan

Australian pollice raided two homes in Sydney allegedly containing two men who were planning or maybe planning or the police assumed were planning some terrorist action. The men were believed to have extreme “Islamic views” which undoubtedly made them targets of a police search for terrorists. The police have been monitoring the two men for over two years and had yet to catch them in the act of committing a terrorist act, but in this day and age, suspicion of maybe committing an act or terror is sufficient to arrest people.

Police sources comented: “These are a couple of blokes who may have been thinking about something. We wanted t satisfy ourselved that nothing is going to happen. We also wanted to send out a message to them.” The men undoubtedly got the message — if you are a Muslim, then, by definiton, you just might be planning something. We of course don’t know exactly what you are planning despite keeping close tabs for two years, but since you are Muslims with beards and all that stuff, we knew you were concocting some devilish action.

The behavior of the police comes across as though it was a scene in an old Keystone cops serial. Since when do police check out the thinking process of suspects who have never committed any action? If thinking about a crime is a crime, then we might as well lock up the entire population of Sydney, including its police department.

Veiled Women And Swimming-Can They Co-Exist?

it was a ot summer day in the city of Gothenburg, Sweden when two Muslim women decided to take their children for a swim in the local city pool. The children entered the pool and both mothers sat on the side watching them swim around. The women were wearing long pants and short-sleeved shirts as well as veils to cover their face. A lifeguard approached and told them their clothing attire was a danger because neither one was prepared to enter the pool and take care of their children if anything happened. He then kicked the women out of the pool. Both sued on grounds of discrimination.

A local court in Gothenburg agreed with the petition of the women and warded them each $3,230 in compensation. The city is appealing to the nation’s highest court. There is something strange about this story. If a lifeguard was present to assist people in need of help while in the swimming pool why did the mothers have to be dressed in swimming attire? I have gone to dozens of swimming pools where people sit around dressed in their everyday clothes and none has ever been ejected because they were not ready to jump into the pool. Why hire lifeguards– to tell people to wear swimming attire so they can save people in danger of drowning?

This a blatant example of anti-Muslim prejudice.