Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:41, 5 February 2006 editLightdarkness (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users12,130 editsm Reverted edits by 212.138.47.14 (Talk) to last version by El C← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:42, 5 February 2006 edit undo212.138.47.23 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{current}}<!--		{{current}}<!--
			dfdasdfn early February; In ], ], both the Norwegian ] and a building containing the Danish, ], and ] embassies were stormed and set afire by protesters.

		⚫	== The asdfasdfOn ] ], the daily newspaper ''Jyllands-Posten'' ("The ] Post") published an article titled "Muhammeds ansigt"<ref>{{da icon}}{{citenewsauthor\|given=Flemming\|surname=Rose\|date=]\|title=Muhammeds ansigt\|org=Jyllands-Posten\|url=http://www.jp.dk/login?url=indland/artikel:aid=3293102:fid=11146}}</ref> ("The face of Muhammad"). The article consisted of 12 satirical caricatures (of which only some depicted Muhammad) and an explanatory text, in which ], ''Jyllands-Posten'''s culture editor, commented:
	NOTE ABOUT THE IMAGE:
		⚫	:''The modern, ] society is rejected by some Muslims. They demand a special position, insisting on special consideration asdfFarsi]] chalkings, which translate into "The editorial team of Jyllands-Posten is a bunch of ] ]s". The boy is labelled "Mohammed, ] school, 7.A",asdf journalist ], carrying a sign saying: "Kåres PR, ring og få et tilbud" ("Kåre's public relations, call and get an offer")
	Removal of this image is considered VANDALISM and is detrimental
	to Misplaced Pages, and may result in blocking . For over three days,
	discussions have occurred on the talk pages of this article and,
	during the entire three day time span, the general consensus has
	been and continues to be to keep the image as is. If you wish to
	contribute to this discussion, please do so in a civil manner by
	posting in the discussion of this article rather than removing
	this image. Thanks!

	REMOVAL OF THIS IMAGE CONSTITUTES VANDALISM! DO NOT REMOVE THIS IMAGE!



	--><span id="mi">]'' in September 2005. for larger versions of the cartoons.]]</span>
	The '''Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy''' began after complaints were made about twelve ]s which depict the ] ] among other things, with a bomb on his head and meeting ] arriving in heaven. The cartoons were printed in the center-right ] daily newspaper '']'' {{Pronunciation\|Da-dk-Jyllands-Posten.ogg}} on ] ]. Some of the cartoons have been reprinted in newspapers in ], the ], ], and ].

	The drawings were meant as ] illustrations accompanying an article on ] and ]. ''Jyllands-Posten'' commissioned and published the cartoons in response to the difficulty of Danish writer ] to find artists to illustrate his ] about Muhammad, caused by fear of violent attacks by ] Muslims. Islamic teachings forbid the depiction of Muhammad as a measure against ] (see ]); however, in the past there have been non-satirical depictions of Muhammad by Muslims. Although ''Jyllands-Posten'' maintains that the drawings were an exercise in free speech, some people (Muslim and otherwise) in Denmark and elsewhere view them as offensive, blasphemous and ].

	In reaction to the articles, several ]s have been made, resulting in two newspaper ]ists reportedly going into hiding and the newspaper enhancing its security precautions. <!-- dead links - http://www.jp.dk/english_news/artikel:aid=3306572/, http://www.jp.dk/english_news/artikel:aid=3378236/ - dead links -->
	The ] was also swift; the ] of eleven ] demanded action from the Danish government, and ] eventually closed its embassy in Denmark in protest after the government refused to censure the newspaper or apologise. The Danish prime minister said, "The government refuses to apologise because the government does not control the media or a newspaper outlet; that would be in violation of the freedom of speech". A large consumer ] was organised in ], ], and other Arabic-speaking countries. Recently the foreign ministers of seventeen Islamic countries renewed calls for the Danish government to punish those responsible for the cartoons, and to ensure that such cartoons are not published again. The ] and the ] have demanded that the ] impose ] upon Denmark.<ref>{{citenews\|date=]\|title=Muslims seek UN resolution over Danish prophet cartoons\|org=AFP\|url=http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060129/wl_mideast_afp/denmarkislamsyriabahrainunreligion_060129160121}}</ref> Protests have also taken place against the cartoons, many of them violent. On February 4, the buildings containing the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Syria were set ablaze, although no one was hurt. Because of what has happened in Damascus, the Norwegian and Danish governments advise Danes and Norwegians to leave Syria.

	== Timeline ==
	{{main\|Timeline of the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy}}

	The cartoons were first published in late September of 2005; approximately two weeks later, nearly 3,500 people demonstrated peacefully in ]. In November, several European newspapers re-published the images, triggering more protests. Labour strikes began in ] the following month, and several organizations criticized the ] government. More protests occurred in January, and later that month a ] of ] goods began. Several countries withdrew their ambassadors to ], and widespread protests, some of them violent, began. The protests continued in early February; In ], ], both the Norwegian ] and a building containing the Danish, ], and ] embassies were stormed and set afire by protesters.

	== The events ==
	=== Debate about self-censorship ===
	On ] ], the Danish newspaper '']'' ran an article under the headline ''"Dyb angst for kritik af islam"''<ref>{{da icon}}{{citenews\|date=]\|title=Dyb angst for kritik af islam\|org=Politiken\|url=http://politiken.dk/VisArtikel.sasp?PageID=397712}}</ref> ("Deep fear of criticism of Islam"). The article discussed the difficulty encountered by the writer ], who was initially unable to find an ] who was prepared to work with Bluitgen on his children's book "''Koranen og profeten Muhammeds liv''" ("The ] and the prophet Muhammad's life"). Three artists declined Bluitgen's proposal before an artist agreed to assist anonymously. According to Bluitgen:
	:''One , with reference to the murder in Amsterdam of the film director ], while another the lecturer at the ] in ]. ] to non-Muslims during a lecture at the Niebuhr institute at the ]<ref>{{da icon}}{{citenews\|date=]\|title=Overfaldet efter Koran-læsning\|org=TV 2 (Denmark)\|url=http://nyhederne.tv2.dk/article.php?id=1424089}}</ref>. ''

	The refusal of the first three artists to participate was seen as evidence of ] and led to much debate in Denmark, with other examples for similar reasons soon emerging. The comedian ] declared that he did not dare ] the Qur'an on television, while the translators of an essay collection critical of Islam also wished to remain anonymous due to concerns about violent reaction.

	=== Publication of the drawings ===
⚫	On ] ], the daily newspaper ''Jyllands-Posten'' ("The ] Post") published an article titled "Muhammeds ansigt"<ref>{{da icon}}{{citenewsauthor\|given=Flemming\|surname=Rose\|date=]\|title=Muhammeds ansigt\|org=Jyllands-Posten\|url=http://www.jp.dk/login?url=indland/artikel:aid=3293102:fid=11146}}</ref> ("The face of Muhammad"). The article consisted of 12 satirical caricatures (of which only some depicted Muhammad) and an explanatory text, in which ], ''Jyllands-Posten'''s culture editor, commented:
	:''The modern, ] society is rejected by some Muslims. They demand a special position, insisting on special consideration of their own religious feelings. It is incompatible with ] democracy and freedom of speech, where you must be ready to put up with insults, mockery and ridicule. It is certainly not always equally attractive and nice to look at, and it does not mean that religious feelings should be made fun of at any price, but that is less important in this context. we are on our way to a slippery slope where no-one can tell how the self-censorship will end. That is why Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten has invited members of the Danish editorial cartoonists union to draw Muhammad as they see him. '' <ref>{{da icon}}{{citenews\|date=]\|title=Jyllands-Posten: Ytringsfrihed: Mohammes ansigt\|org=AvisNET\|url=http://www.aiu.dk/avisnet/show.php?id=812}}</ref>

	After an invitation from ''Jyllands-Posten'' to around forty different artists to give their interpretation on how Muhammad may have looked, twelve different ]s chose to respond with a drawing each. Some of these twelve drawings portray Muhammad in different fashions; many also comment on the
	surrounding self-censorship debate. In the clockwise direction of their position in the page layout:

	* The face of Muhammad as a part of the Islamic ] symbol. His right eye the star, the crescent surrounds his beard and face.
	* Muhammad with a bomb in his turban, with a lit fuse and the ] written on the bomb. This drawing is supposed to be the most controversial of the lot.
	* Muhammad standing in a gentle pose with a ] in the shape of a crescent moon. The middle part of the crescent is obscured, revealing only the edges.
	* An ] drawing of crescent moons and ], and a poem on oppression of women "Profet! Med kuk og knald i låget som holder kvinder under åget!". In English the poem could be read as: "Prophet you crazy bloke! Keeping women under yoke"
	* Muhammad as a peaceful wanderer, in the desert, at sunset. There is a donkey in the background.
	* A nervous caricaturist, shakingly drawing Muhammad while looking over his shoulder.
	* Two angry Muslims charge forward with sabres and bombs, while Muhammad addresses them with: "Rolig, venner, når alt kommer til alt er det jo bare en tegning lavet af en vantro sønderjyde" (loosely, "Relax guys, it's just a drawing made by some infidel ]". The reference is to a common Danish expression for a person from ].)
⚫	* An ~~Arab-looking~~ ~~boy~~ in ~~front~~ of a ~~blackboard~~, ~~pointing~~ to ~~the~~ ] chalkings, which translate into "The editorial team of Jyllands-Posten is a bunch of ] ]s". The boy is labelled "Mohammed, ] school, 7.A", ~~implying~~ ~~that~~ ~~this~~ ~~Muhammed is~~ a ~~second-generation~~ ~~immigrant~~ to ~~Denmark~~ ~~rather~~ ~~than~~ ~~the~~ ~~founder~~ of ~~Islam.~~ On ~~his~~ ~~shirt~~ is ~~written~~ "~~Fremtiden" (the future~~).
	* Another drawing shows an angry Muhammad with ] and a black bar censoring his eyes. He is flanked by two women in ]s, having only their wide open eyes visible.
	* Muhammad standing on a cloud, greeting dead ]s with "Stop Stop vi er løbet tør for Jomfruer!" ("Stop, stop, we have run out of virgins!"), an allusion to the promised reward to ]s.
	* Another shows journalist ], wearing a turban with the ]ial orange dropping into it, with the inscription "]". In his hand is a child's ] of Muhammad, refering to Bluitgens upcoming illustrated childrens book on the life of The Prophet. The proverb "an orange in the turban" is a Danish expression meaning "a stroke of luck" , here the added publicity for the book.

	And in the center:
	* A police line-up of seven people, with the witness saying: "Hm... jeg kan ikke lige genkende ham" ("Hm... I can't really recognise him"). Not all people in the line-up are immediately identifiable. They are: (1) A generic ], (2) politician ], (3) possibly ], (4) possibly ], (5) possibly ], (6) a generic Indian ], and (7) journalist ], carrying a sign saying: "Kåres PR, ring og få et tilbud" ("Kåre's public relations, call and get an offer")

	===The fate of the cartoonists===		===The fate of the cartoonists===
Line 61:		Line 9:
	All the cartoonists are now reported to be in hiding. Danish police are providing round the clock security for those who are hiding in Denmark. The cartoonist who drew the most notorious caricature is reported to be in hiding in the USA.		All the cartoonists are now reported to be in hiding. Danish police are providing round the clock security for those who are hiding in Denmark. The cartoonist who drew the most notorious caricature is reported to be in hiding in the USA.

			===Police asdfof these complaints on 27 October 2005. <ref name="danish_response_to_un_jan"/>
	===Police investigation on Jyllands-Posten===

	A number of Muslim organizations submitted complaints to the Danish police claiming that ''Jyllands-Posten'' had committed an offence under section 140 and 266b of the ]. <ref name="danish_response_to_un_jan"> {{citenews \| title = Official Response by the Danish Government to the UN Special Rapporteurs \| org = Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Denmark \| date = ] \| url = http://www.um.dk/NR/rdonlyres/00D9E6F7-32DC-4C5A-8E24-F0C96E813C06/0/060123final.pdf }} </ref>

	Section 140 of the Criminal Code prohibits any person from publicly ridiculing or insulting the dogmas of worship of any lawfully existing religious community in Denmark. Section 266b criminalises the dissemination of statements or other information by which a group of people are threatened, insulted or degraded on account of their religion. Danish police began their investigation of these complaints on 27 October 2005. <ref name="danish_response_to_un_jan"/>

	On 6 January 2006, the Regional Public Prosecutor in ] decided to discontinue the investigation as he found no basis for concluding that the cartoons constituted a criminal offence. He stated that in assessing what constitutes an offence, the right to freedom of speech must be taken into consideration and that the right to freedom of speech must be exercised with the necessary respect for other human rights, including the right to protection against discrimination, insult and degradation. <ref name="danish_response_to_un_jan"/>

	=== Jyllands-Posten response ===
	''Jyllands-Posten'' published two open letters on its website, both in ] and Arabic versions, and the second letter also in an English version. The second letter was dated ].

			On 6 January 2006, the Regional Public Prosecutor in ] decided to discontinue the investigation as he foundf

	===Reprinting in other newspapers===		===Reprinting in other newspapers===
Line 90:		Line 30:
	Many Muslims believe that any pictorial, or sculptural, representation of religious figures, or sometimes human figures, or even any living creatures, is wrong. However, the ], the Islamic holy book, does not directly prohibit the depiction of human figures; it merely condemns idolatry. Direct prohibitions of pictorial art, or any depiction of sacred figures, are found only in the ], recorded oral traditions. There are many thousands of hadith, many of which are regarded as "weak", and possibly permissible to disregard. Hence any view advanced as "demanded" by hadith ultimately rests upon personal choice: to accept or reject certain hadith, or to follow a certain scholar's interpretation of the hadith.		Many Muslims believe that any pictorial, or sculptural, representation of religious figures, or sometimes human figures, or even any living creatures, is wrong. However, the ], the Islamic holy book, does not directly prohibit the depiction of human figures; it merely condemns idolatry. Direct prohibitions of pictorial art, or any depiction of sacred figures, are found only in the ], recorded oral traditions. There are many thousands of hadith, many of which are regarded as "weak", and possibly permissible to disregard. Hence any view advanced as "demanded" by hadith ultimately rests upon personal choice: to accept or reject certain hadith, or to follow a certain scholar's interpretation of the hadith.

	Views regarding pictorial representation within the Muslim community have varied from group to group, and from time to time. ] Muslims have been and are generally extremely tolerant of pictorial representation of religious figures and human figures in general; ] Muslims have been less so. However, the Sunni ], the last dynasty to claim the ], were not only tolerant, but patrons of the miniaturists' art. Many Ottoman miniatures depict Muhammad. However, they often show Muhammad's face as covered with a veil or as a featureless void emanating light (depicted as flames). Pictorial surveys of Islamic religious art can be found at , , and		Views regarding pictorial representation within the Muslim community have varied from group to group, and from time to time. ] Muslims have been and are generally extremely tolerant of pictorial representation of religious figures and human figures in general; ] Muslims have been less so. However, the Sunni ], the last dynasty to claim the ], were not only tolerant, but patrons of the asdf== International reactions==
	. Note that the last site also contains some extremely and intentionally offensive modern depictions of Muhammad.

	Most contemporary Muslims now believe that portraits and photos, films and illustrations, are permissible. Only some ] and ] interpretations of Sunni Islam have condemned pictorial representations of any kind, consistent with their emphasis on strict observance of Muslim law. However, most Muslims still hold to the belief that depiction of Islamic religious figures, or perhaps even any religious figures, is prohibited.

	Offensive satirical pictures is a somewhat different matter; disrespect to Muhammad and Islam is considered blasphemous. According to the ] "t is the satirical intent of the cartoonists, and the association of the Prophet with terrorism, that is so offensive to the vast majority of Muslims."<ref>{{news reference\|firstname=Magdi\|lastname=Abdelhadi\|title=Cartoon row highlights deep divisions\|date=] ]\|org=]\|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4678220.stm}}</ref>

	== International reactions==
	{{main\|International reactions to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy}}		{{main\|International reactions to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy}}
	This includes official reactions of governments and similar bodies.		This includes official reactions of governments and similar bodies.

Revision as of 05:42, 5 February 2006

This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses, and initial news reports may be unreliable. The latest updates to this article may not reflect the most current information. Feel free to improve this article or discuss changes on the talk page, but please note that updates without valid and reliable references will be removed. (Learn how and when to remove this message)

While many nations where Christianity is the dominant religion also have a tradition of separation of church and state which dates back to the enlightenment, many of them still have historical blasphemy laws on the books which were once enacted to protect Christian beliefs, and which are occasionally enforced. As an example, there are blasphemy laws in Norway. However, the last person to be charged for blasphemy was Arnulf Øverland in 1933; he was acquitted.

In March 2005, Austrian writer Gerhard Haderer published the book "The life of Jesus" where he depicted Jesus smoking a joint, and as a surfer on lake Genesaret. He was called for a hearing in Greece and was sentenced for 6 months for blasphemy, but the sentence was later revoked. In general, satirizing religion is more widely accepted in these countries. On February 4 2006, for example, during the Muhammad cartoon crisis, the International Cartoon Festival in Belgium chose a 'yawning Christ on the cross' as winner.

Countries with strong Christian religious fundamentalist movements, such as the United States, have also seen frequent protests against movies, books, and other publications considered blasphemous or pornographic by these movements, sometimes culminating in public book burnings and calls for censorship. For example, the release of The Last Temptation of Christ resulted in death threats for director Martin Scorsese and one incident in France where a theater showing the movie was attacked with molotov cocktails, injuring thirteen people, four of whom were severely burned.

Some critics have claimed that Western prohibitions on freedom of speech are hypocritical, protecting groups like Jews or blacks while allowing attacks on muslims like the cartoons. Typical cited examples of this are bans on holocaust denial or hate speech. However it should be noted that Western counties typically draw a sharp distinction between secular matters of race or humanist ethics and the purely religious. Thus the Islamic prohibition on depictions of Muhammed is not considered an appropriate basis for the limitation of free speech. Other acts such as compromising national security, libel, or purely racist speech are usually considered outside the protection of free speech. However it is the case, especially in the United States, that usually even this kind of speech is tolerated so long as it is not seriously intended or is only published by a fringe group.