Two weeks ago, terrorist charges were brought against two Chicago Muslims, who were allegedly planning to murder Kurt Westergaard, the man who drew the infamous cartoon which depicted the Muslim prophet Muhammad with a bomb in his turban.
Prosecutors claim that one of the suspects admitted to FBI agents that the pair originally planned to attack the offices of Jyllands-Posten's, the Danish newspaper which originally printed the cartoon, but their plan later changed to simply killing the paper's former cultural editor as well as Westergaard.
The two alleged terrorists, David Coleman Headley, 49, and Tahawwur Hussain Rana, 48, were both charged with plotting to provide material support to a terrorism conspiracy.
Headley who was arrested in Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport, was also charged with conspiracy to commit terrorist acts involving murder and maiming outside of the U.S. After his arrest, Headley admitted that he has received training from Lakshar-e-Taiba in Pakistan.
Headley, who in 2006, changed his name from Daood Gilani, has allegedly traveled to Denmark twice this year in order to plan the attack.
The uncovered plot, was only the latest targeting the Danish cartoonist.
In February 2008, Danish police arrested two Tunisian nationals for an alleged plot to strangle Westergaard at his home. While the case was dropped due to lack of evidence, police placed Westergaard and his wife under special protection, moving them about from place to place.
The controversy began in September 2005, when Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten printed a series of cartoons which depicted Muhammad as a bomb-laden terrorist. Of course, radical Muslims sent countless death threats to the cartoonist, and diplomats from ten Muslim nations called upon the Danish government to remove the cartoons. There were also several Western embassies set ablaze in Muslim countries over the controversial images. However, the newspaper refused to give into intimidation and continued running the cartoons.
French newspaper France-Soir as well as German paper Die Welt also ran the cartoons.
France-Soir editors released the following statement: "The publication of 12 cartoons in the Danish press has shocked the Muslim world for whom the representation of Allah and his prophet is banned. But because no religious dogma can impose its vie on a democratic and secular society, France-Soir publishes the incriminated cartoons."
Die Welt editors issued their own statement: "Democracy is the institutionalized form of freedom of expression. There is no right to protection from satire in the West."
Wetergaard has refused to issue any sort of apology for his cartoons.
He recently told a Danish broadcaster: "I realize that when issues of religion are involved emotions run high, and all religions have their symbols, which possess great importance. But when you live in a secularized society, it's clear that religion can't demand some sort of special status. ... "I have a problem with the fact that we have people from another culture who don't accept that we use religious elements in a drawing."
Now for the contrast in civilizations...
In 2006, there was a painting (which looked very much like a cartoon) displayed in New York's National Black Fine Arts Show which blended the images of Jesus Christ and Osama Bin Laden. The work showed an upside down Christ (crown of thorns and all) with Bin Laden's face. The canvas also contains the words: "mujahadin" and "McCarthyism."
The artist responsible for the painting, a rather angry Harlem man, known only as “Tafa,” told WCBS reporter Morry Alter that the piece spoke for itself, and that the blending of Jesus and Bin Laden was purposeful.
There is no doubt that a work which equates Jesus with a bloodthirsty terrorist is extremely offensive to Christians. However, the artist did not received any death threats, nor did the Puck Building receive any bomb threats, and the artist still and the show live on.
The much maligned Christian Coalition did not demonstrate in front of the gallery, nor did Christian clergymen called for Tafa’s death.
The two very different reactions to equally offensive artwork speak volumes to the difference between our two worlds. It is the difference between the savage and the civilized. It is the difference between the 7th century and the 21st century. It is the difference between a culture of death and one of life.
Comments
Being politically correct is what is wrong with society today. Put your heads in the sand, and see what happened at Fort Hood.
"Being politically correct is what is wrong with society today. Put your heads in the sand, and see what happened at Fort Hood."
What does being politically correct have to do with Fort Hood?
Being politically correct is being afraid to say what happened at Fort Hood is a terrorist act. Obama tried to dance around the issue in his speech last week. People are afraid of the repercussions if they do speak out about Islamic terrorism. This man had a cartoon, and those crazies burned down buildings and destroyed property. They were even trying to kill a man for drawing a cartoon. People can't say anything about these extremists, because you are a racist these days, but they can portray Jesus as Osama? Give me a break. The same goes with Fort Hood. How many newspapers did you see in print call this a terrorist act? Politically, PC my friend. Dance around the issue.
Oh, the man was just depressed. Oh, boo hoo.
I know those nutbags get all up in an uproar over a cartoon, and they go bat crazy and threaten this man's live. If an American did this, he/she would be considered a racist. You are right about that one even though they are the crazies.
Feeling threatened over a cartoon? It is just a picture. They are the ones who are blowing everyone up to kingdom come and chopping off people's heads.
I think what Daisy meant was that people were afraid to speak out against Hasan, because they would be tagged as being "racist". Because some people were silent, thirteen people were killed at Fort Hood. Therefore, you got to watch out for the PC police. Any time a person speaks their opinion, they get labeled.
For example, the Jesus and Osama portrait, it is okay to do that to Christians. Heaven forbid if any other group gets offended.
The cartoonist drew the cartoon over 4 years ago. Those nimrods need to get over themselves.
I think the question we all want to ask but haven't: What in freaking H#$% are these people doing in our country, let alone our military? NO, I'm not a "racist" but I'm not stupid either. We've got to start making our voices heard while we still can...
"What in freaking H#$% are these people doing in our country"
They're here because our government allows them in. They're here because we the sheeple continue electing treasonous whores into office, those that preach diversity at all costs. They're here because our borders are wide open & we don't demand that they be secured. They're here because our government allows 30 million plus illegal aliens from hostile foreign cultures to roam our country & our streets with impunity
Keep electing democrats & open borders republicans & this will never end
Amen MikeN! I couldn't have said it better.
classy article.
There is no comparison between the two ssenarious. The Bin Laden /Christ piece by TAFA is about good masquerading as evil. I have seen this painting. It is not an attack on Christ or Christianity. You cannot compare a seriously complemplative art to the Mohammed cartoons. Without the text around this painting, it loses its bite.The photos here are misleading.
The Mohamed cartoons were a shame, and a sheap shot at another's faith and religion.
You are right Joan. The painting by Tafa was not against Christianity or Christ. Tafa's piece was a satirical statement against evil. He uses Christ whose message of love and peace has been subverted and turned upside down. The writer should not have used the two examples, they just dont work. The Mohammed cartoons were a stupid prank by juvenile, insensitive people who were stroking the flames of hatred and religious intolerance.
Tafa is a brilliant artist, and it is sad that his beautiful work would be reduced to this. The cartoons were a shame, honestly. Tafa created a deeply moving and intellectually stimulating artwork.
He did not attack christianity in any way. The above picture of tafa's work is a cropped vertion.it tells a quarter of the story.
This is no surprise to me that the U.S. president always finds his way around such issues, and will sugar code his speeches, instead of speaking out directly against those Muslim extremists. I be damned if I am going to tolerate the U.S.'s ignorance of the hidden agenda of Islamic law, such as the Sharia. Those of us who've seen the reports on people being imprisoned, beaten, and even killed under the Sharia Law, and I get the sense that America is becoming too tolerant of Islam as a peaceful religion. It is not that hard to adhere to the meaning of the metaphor: "A good tree does not bear bad fruit, and a bad tree can't bear bad fruit. You will know a tree by its fruit." After you understand its meaning, why would anyone want to convert to Islam????
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!