Jesus Cartoons Everywhere and Christians Are Not Rioting - Comments Page 2

I Googled and Alta-Vista-ed "Jesus Cartoon" and found many. I checked for "Muhammed Cartoon" and found . . . nothing. Google and Alta Vista have apparently blocked access . . .

I "Googled" and "Alta-Vista-ed" the phrase "Jesus Cartoon" this morning and found that there were quite a few to choose from. Most were from Christian sites, some from anti-Christian sites, some were whimsical, some were coarse and degrading, many were from European sites (mostly German with cartoon dialogues that defied translation by Babel Fish). There were even political cartoons from American newspapers.…
Read comments below, or read this article from the beginning.

Article comments

  • 26 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 22, 2006 at 3:58 pm

    Yeah..it's called retaliation...from a link on the link you provided...

    The violence appeared to be in reprisal for anti-Christian violence on Saturday in the mostly Muslim northern city of Maiduguri in which thousands of Muslims protesting against caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad attacked Christians and burned churches.

  • 27 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 22, 2006 at 4:00 pm

    Maybe, now that these people that seem to think that cartoons are worth rioting over get a little taste of their own medicine they'll knock this stupid shit off!

  • 28 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 22, 2006 at 4:02 pm

    More from a link on the link you provided....


    Saturday's protest over the controversial cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in Maiduguri was the first violent demonstration over the issue in Nigeria.

    Police say at least 18 people, most of them Christians, died, and 30 churches were burned down.





    Real nice...I'd like to ask those people how it feels to get it back! You assholes bring that shit to my neighborhood you can expect the same thing!

  • 29 - gazelle

    Feb 22, 2006 at 7:28 pm

    ya Bird, i think were on the same level.

    there are total misperceptions on both (all) sides and i can see those, i know both.

    the whole thing is nothing but dust kicked up - blame the straw... :)

    the little parties (and people) take advantage of the gap for their own local agendas too... that helps in things getting truly out of proportion.

    i'll take deep breathe here. nice talking...

    g

  • 30 - Richard Brodie

    Feb 22, 2006 at 9:41 pm

    gazelle: there are total misperceptions on both (all) side

    Yes. And as I pointed out in #22 (which you completely dodged) the central misconception on the part of rioting Muslims, is that the so-called "Mohammed" cartoons were pictures of Mohammed. They are not.

    If a cartoonist draws a derogaroty picture of Dick Cheney giving the Nazi salute, and then labels that cartoon "George Bush", No one would take it as an insult to Bush. Why? Because the drawing bears no resemblance to Bush.

    Likewise if a cartoonist draws a picture of a man wearing a bombturban, and labels his cartoon "Mohammed", it could not possibly be taken by any rational person as an insult to Mohammed. And for the same reason. Because, since no one even KNOWS what Mohammed looked like, there is no chance that it bears any resemblance to Mohammed - unless you want to subscribe to the demeaning notion that all Arabs look alike!

    THEREFORE, since it is NOT POSSIBLE to produce a pictorial representation of Mohammed, Muslims do not need to worry that their ban on representations of their prophet will ever be able to be violated. Corollary: they don't need to be rioting, killing, and making death threats!

  • 31 - Bliffle

    Feb 23, 2006 at 4:23 am

    Richard,

    I don't think muslims care about these images. They just want to make a big fuss over an imaginary insult to harass other people. I don't think they argue in good faith.

  • 32 - jamal

    Feb 23, 2006 at 11:48 am

    "THEREFORE, since it is NOT POSSIBLE to produce a pictorial representation of Mohammed, Muslims do not need to worry that their ban on representations of their prophet will ever be able to be violated. Corollary: they don't need to be rioting, killing, and making death threats!"

    Correct. But then this doesnt change the fact that the cartoons were designed to depict the prophet and were advertised as such.

    As I said, the Christians are rioting too. Lets hope the anti-abortionists dont get involved as then there really will be mass violence by Christians.

  • 33 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 23, 2006 at 11:51 am

    I'd say that islamists can have as many abortions as they like...I'd even go as far as to condone retroactive abortions

  • 34 - jamal

    Feb 23, 2006 at 12:04 pm

    Andy, You should go to a Baghdad market place and say that, you may build a following ;)

    Back to the article:

    Newsflash: "Nigerian human rights workers say they have counted 80 bodies following two days of reprisal attacks by crowds of Christians armed with machetes".

    ..and could this lead to a Christian cartoon riot?

  • 35 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 23, 2006 at 12:17 pm

    but would it be a following I'd like???

  • 36 - jamal

    Feb 23, 2006 at 12:45 pm

    Yes, if stoning to death sounds appealing to you?

  • 37 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 23, 2006 at 12:51 pm

    jamal - I have no desire to go to Baghdad...I've spent plenty of time in much more peaceful middle eastern locations...but thanks for the invite...I'll stay home and get myself stoned...thank you very much!

  • 38 - Kayla

    Feb 23, 2006 at 8:20 pm

    The sons of Ishmael will be a "wild ass of a man" In other words, crazy, wild, unpredictable and full of strife.

    I know the pentatuch addresses that point, I wonder if the Quran does?

  • 39 - sr

    Feb 23, 2006 at 10:25 pm

    NUKE THE UNBORN GAY MUSLIMS.

  • 40 - Oliver

    Feb 24, 2006 at 3:09 am

    try googling 'mohammed cartoons' and you'll find them ;)

  • 41 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 24, 2006 at 4:48 am

    The story so far: hardcore fans of the 1400 year old classic work of fiction "The Koran" are outraged that supporters of a rival novel, "The Bible", whose roots go back 2000 years, drew some cartoons mocking their figurehead.

    Meanwhile, fans of the book that started the whole one god trend, the mysterious and ancient stories we know as "The Torah", which are believed to be up to 7000 years old, look with disapproval on both wayward sons.

    Is that it?

  • 42 - Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Feb 24, 2006 at 5:04 am

    You have it close, Chris. Let's edit the last sentence just a bit.

    ...The Torah", which they believe to be about 30,000,000 years old, look with disapproval on the descendants of both wayward sons as they seek to blame them for the entire controversy.

  • 43 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 24, 2006 at 5:48 am

    Ruvy: I don't know if you're familiar with the Wikipedia site but it's a fully editable encyclopedia in many languages.

    It's entry for Ancient History says

    Prehistory

    * c. 60th millennium BC - Modern humans migrate out of Africa and begin spreading across Asia
    * c. 40th millennium BC - Australia first reached by modern humans
    * c. 35th millennium BC - Europe first reached by modern humans
    * 14th to 10th millennium BC - Americas first reached by humans
    * 10th millennium BC - Invention of agriculture is the earliest given date for the beginning of Ancient Era
    * 5th millennium BC - Possible invention of writing, Tartaria tablets in the lower Danube Valley date from this period
    * 4th millennium BC - First writings in the cities of Uruk and Susa (cuneiform writings); followed by inscriptions in Harappa and hieroglyphs in Egypt
    * 33rd century BC - Oldest historical documents


    That sure is hard to square with your 30 million years theory...

    Separately, I think you ought to consider registering at wikipedia and make some contributions and or corrections there. I'm an editor already though I have precious little time for it and there are other Blogcritics who contribute too. There's even a version in Hebrew which could surely benefit from some disciplined scholarly work from you.

  • 44 - Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Feb 24, 2006 at 5:57 am

    I apologise, Chris. I meant to write 30 thousand million years old, not 30 million. This is a concept of m'kubalim, rather controversial in Judaism, but one I subscribe to.

    I do not argue with any of the data in Wikipedia as you present it.

  • 45 - Chromatius

    Feb 24, 2006 at 6:30 am

    I find it strange how many Americans and American Christians find the Muslem position on images of the Prophet hard to understand; after all, the 'American' story begins with Puritans fleeing Britain and Europe. Puritans who believed the same thing about images of Christ, God, angels, in fact religious images of all sorts.

    They, their associates and predecessors had been excluding and even trashing church decorations for years.

  • 46 - Andy Marsh

    Feb 24, 2006 at 8:49 am

    ...and how many puritans are left in this country? The puritans are a small part of our history.

    The only people I've ever heard about in the U.S. that trash church decorations don't fall into the category of christian.

  • 47 - Bird of Paradise

    Feb 24, 2006 at 8:15 pm

    Jamal, as a Christian pastor I condemn the killings in Nigeria by rampaging Christians. I will dare to assert that virtually every Christian leader in Nigeria also condemns that behavior but understand the frustration of living under a government that has 1. provided no protection for Christians and, 2. has yet to prosecute any Muslims for any of the deaths and destructions of Christian lives and property over the past five+ years. These Chrisians as not fighting over cartoons, but in response to continuous and urestrained violence directed against them by Muslims.

    Several years ago in Northern Nigeria, local Christian (Prostestant and Catholic) leaders literally joined arms with local Imams to march through city streets in an attempt to quell the Muslim violence and the Christian response to that violence.

    Islamist agitators have continued to stir up these riots against the will of local Imams who have lived peacefully with their Christian neighbors for many, many years. These moderate Muslims are now being completely overwhelmed by the radical fundamentalists who are on jihad to turn Nigeria into an Islamist state.

    Please do not equate the intentional and malicious behavior of fanatic Muslims with the angry response of those who have been repeatedly attacked by them.

    Every reputable Christian leader in Nigeria and elsewhere around the world rejects and condemns this violence. Is the same true for Muslim leaders?

  • 48 - Bird of Paradise

    Feb 24, 2006 at 8:37 pm

    Christopher and Chromatius, Please remember that the Christian "religion" is simply the organized attempt to apply Christian "faith" to personal and social life (including political, economic, etc.). The Bible (Old and New Testaments) gives us the over-arching principals of how we ought to live with one another (for Christians the primary principal is that of agape love, the sacrifical love of Jesus Christ who put the highest and best interests of others ahead of himself). The Bible does not specifically address every situation and circumstance and every context of every historical era.

    In their attempts to be faithful Christians often arrive at different conclusions (for example: to be pacifists as my mother's side of the family or socially active in national service as my father's side of the family).

    The historical conditions that created the Puritan (ie. Church of England Calvinists) approach to faith and life have changed. Accordingly, the vast majority of contemporary Christians do not find the issue of images (especially in a pluralistic, constitutional social envioronment as we have in the United States) to be an issue for which they feel compelled to die for.

    Christians do not pretend (or ought not to pretend) that they have all the answers to every moral or political question that arises. They do try to live out their faith and love in the best way they can. It is not an easy matter to know how to live out Jesus' commands to "love your neighbor as yourself" and "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" when your neighbor is your enemy and wants to kill you.

    In Ezekiel, God declares that, "I do not take pleasure in the death of anyone. So turn (repent of evil) and live instead!"

    This is in stark contrast to the Qur'anic rhetoric being tossed around by Islamist agitators who not only justify violence but proclaim that the death of infidels in the cause of jihad pleases God and that dying in such jihad guarantees entry to Paradise.

    The sword, while necessary, perhaps, to restrain evil in this world, has no place in the Kingdom of Heaven (where it is destined to be turned into a "plowshare"). The way to Heaven for a Christian is not the sword, but the cross.

  • 49 - Chromatius

    Feb 25, 2006 at 3:56 am

    #46 Nonetheless, as such a core part of the story - Mayflower, Plymouth Rock, Thanksgiving and all that - you'd hope at least their main ideas and beliefs were well known....

  • 50 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 25, 2006 at 10:46 am

    BoP: That's all well and good but as I don't accept the god hypothesis to start with, it doesn't really get us anywhere...

  • 51 - Bliffle

    Feb 25, 2006 at 12:29 pm

    Chrom: "#46 Nonetheless, as such a core part of the story - Mayflower, Plymouth Rock, Thanksgiving and all that - you'd hope at least their main ideas and beliefs were well known...."

    The salient document of the Mayflower was the "Mayflower compact" which outlined the civil law the pilgrims would live under, but I doubt that few people know it's content, or even that it exists! I doubt that it's even taught in the schools anymore. What we ignorant americans know about pilgrims is funny hats and eating too much at thanksgiving, i.e., the lore that sells advertising on TV.

  • 52 - Ruvy in Jerusalem

    Feb 25, 2006 at 1:47 pm

    Jamal writes,

    As I said, the Christians are rioting too.

    BoP writes as a Christian pastor. I have no such constraints on representing Christianity or following its concepts.

    From my point of view, Nigerian Moslems are attempting, state by state, or region by region, ot impose Islam as the official religion in Nigeria. The federal government there does not protect Christians. So If Christians riot and murder in response to Moslem violence, it comes neither as a surprise or something that disturbs me.

    At least the Christians in Nigeria are standing up for their rights, which puts them head and shoulders above Europeans - who refuse to help the Christian Nigerians and who do not stand up at least for a peaceful society in their own countries - you know, like no gang rapes of Christian girls by Moslems who feel "entitled" to the privilege, or torture murders of Jews...

  • 53 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 25, 2006 at 2:01 pm

    So basically all three strands of the god cult are fighting each other. This is really starting to take on the tenor of a really ugly family feud that has been allowed to spiral out of control. Debating which one of the three of you is the least to blame is frankly offensive.

    Watching this endless empty debate about which one of you has the right understanding of the totally unsubstantiated claim for the existence of some all powerful alien that you all worship just makes non-subscribers laugh, albeit a little nervously.

  • 54 - Bird of Paradise

    Feb 25, 2006 at 3:51 pm

    Christopher, I would be interested in your response to #47 & 48.

    It is also useful as an academic exercise to consider the number of 20th century deaths caused by the following (my estimate in ascending order): Buddhists: Not many. Jews: 40-50,000? mostly in defensive wars. Hindu: I have no idea but certainly more than Jews. Christian: Quite a few, of course, but mostly from killing each other during two world wars. Muslim: Millions, mostly one another but especially the Armenian genocide. Shinto/Japanese nationalism: Millions in China especially. Anti-Christian/Atheist: Nazi Germany, Soviet and Chinese Communism, Pol Pot Cambodia, etc. Hundreds of Millions (and this is not even counting those who died during declared wars).

    I suppose that a reasonable person could conclude that it would be far safer to have a Buddhist as a neighbor than an atheist!

    Another scale to measure by would be one that factored in which groups have contributed most to a better world for the most people.

    This scale would be far more subjective but I should think that it would be obvious that Jews would win by a mile, simply because of the disproportionate positive contributions to the world relative to their numbers. I'm not sure where to but Buddhists here but Islam must be very far down somewhere, especially given that there are over 1 billion of them. Anti-Christian/Communist/Atheists have contributed much to the hard sciences for which we can all be grateful. Chrisian nations, on the other hand, have taken the lead in sharing their wealth, sending medical care, education and emergency relief to every corner of the world.

    There are flaws with every groupm of course. Some are too passive to help others much. Some are too agressive and oppressive at times. Some smother freedom and others work hard to create it.

    In the end I suppose that if I wanted to live in a peaceful world that was free of conflict I would be a Buddhist. Given that the world we live in is a violent and threatening one I am content to be a Christian in my pusuit of peace and reconciliation between people.

    If I wanted to make a positive difference in the lives of the most people, I would choose to be a Christian as well.

    I would certainly not choose to be an atheist on either account!

    Note that I am not discussing this from a "religious" or "theological" angle. I am not even commenting on the matter of what constitutes "truth." I am simply trying, Christopher, to address these concerns on your terms where God and Spiritual matters are not a central issue.

    Jesus (who for our present purposes can be considered a teacher/philosopher) once said, "By their fruits you will know them."

    There is good and bad in all religions and beliefs but, after weighing them all in the balance I will not consider being a Christian to be an illogical choice.

  • 55 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 25, 2006 at 4:06 pm

    BoP: Please see #50 for your answer.

    I couldn't really find any meaning in the rest of your comment so I'll just stop here.

  • 56 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 25, 2006 at 4:09 pm

    Oh yeah, please knock it off with the atheist thing, I find the term offensive to my beliefs. Thank you.

  • 57 - Bird of Paradise

    Feb 26, 2006 at 5:12 am

    Christopher, It seems we are conversing at two postings. More bang for the buck, I guess!

    I am a "theist" meaning I believe in a god.

    Those who do not believe in a god are called "a-theists." Those who are not sure are called "a-gnostic." None of these terms has ever been considered to be derogatory by anyone I have ever known, only descriptive.

    Also, after re-reading every one of my comments I cannot find a single place where I either referred to you or called you an "atheist."

    Frankly, I don't know what you believe. I only am aware of what you don't believe. And that you are not particularly respectful of those who entertain ideas or beliefs that you don't like.

    Help me with this. What do you believe? On what DO you base your life, your values, your relationships with others and why?

    Just wondering.

  • 58 - Christopher Rose

    Feb 26, 2006 at 7:09 am

    BoP: It may be technically true that you didn't directly call me an atheist but the word did pop up 4 times in your #54 !

    My point is that people who are religious use the term atheist. The very word itself is of the believers' lexicon, so I object to being cast that way, as it is simply a subtle way of drawing me into your erroneous and simplistic world view.

    It is not a question of not liking faithists views, I simply find them to be implausible and totally lacking in any coherent or comprehensible set of ideas. Also too sure of what's what for my liking.

    As for my own beliefs, well, I'm just a ordinary person trying to muddle their way through life on an odd little ball of rock where most of society's so-called leaders seem to be a mixture of incompetent, delusional or dishonest.

    I try to focus on the positive whenever possible and generally think it's not a bad idea to try to leave a place a little better than when you arrived.

    I also believe that all life is connected, that there is no afterlife at all, that our time here is cruelly short - so I have little tolerance for timewasters, although quite an ability for wasting time! I also think it's usually better to tell the truth than to lie and you shouldn't let your principles stop you doing the right thing.

  • 59 - Scott Butki

    Feb 26, 2006 at 9:20 pm


    Bird, you wrote:
    "Please do not equate the intentional and malicious behavior of fanatic Muslims with the angry response of those who have been repeatedly attacked by them."
    to which I'll say

    "Please do not equate your google searches with the conclusion that search engines and the news media are blocking you from seeing the cartoons. If you'd go to most Internet stories about the issue you'll see links to it.

  • 60 - Bird of Paradise

    Feb 27, 2006 at 1:11 pm

    Scott, thank you for proving my point. I did not say that I could not find reproductions of the Danish Muhammad cartoon caricatures on the internet, I said that the cartoons have apparently been blocked by Google Images et al from being accessed by typing "Danish Muhammad Cartoons" etc. This is especially remarkable BECAUSE the cartoons are easily found on the internet.

  • 61 - Aaman

    Feb 27, 2006 at 2:48 pm

    BoP, Google Images does not follow the same index model as the rest of Google, further, Google Images is very inconsistently updated. Further, as long as the images are available via a google search, the need to go to the vertical Image search is redundant and much ado about nothing

  • 62 - Scott Butki

    Feb 27, 2006 at 6:34 pm

    But Bird, you are still taking the results of a google search and using it to try to make some larger point.

    I just typed "muhammed cartoons" and got this result:

    Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy - Wikipedia, the ...The Face of Muhammed - The controversial cartoons of Muhammad, first published in Jyllands- ... The page of Jylland-Posten that contains Muhammad cartoons ...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_ Muhammad_cartoons_controversy - 101k - Feb 25, 2006 - Cached - Similar pages


    Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy - Wikipedia, the ...The Face of Muhammed - The controversial cartoons of Muhammad, ... In 2005, the Muhammad cartoons controversy received only minor media attention outside of ...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons - 101k - Feb 25, 2006 - Cached - Similar pages


    Face of Muhammed - Drawings of Muhammed1 newspaper publishes 12 satirical Muhammed cartoons. The sword:. Moderate muslims protesting peacefully against unconditional freedom of speech, ...
    face-of-muhammed.blogspot.com/ - 62k - Cached - Similar pages


    HUMAN EVENTS ONLINE :: Muhammad Cartoon GalleryMuhammad Cartoon Gallery. Posted Feb 02, 2006. Below are the cartoons published in Denmark's Jyllands-Posten. Click each image to enlarge. ...
    www.humaneventsonline.com/sarticle.php?id=12146 - 37k - Cached - Similar pages


    BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Muhammad cartoons 'global crisis'The Danish PM urges Muslims to refrain from violence in what he dubs a "global crisis" over the Muhammad cartoons.
    news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4690338.stm - 52k - Cached - Similar pages


    Michelle Malkin: SUPPORT DENMARK: WHY THE FORBIDDEN CARTOONS MATTERThe Muhammed Cartoons blogburst under attack · We are in this together · Origins of a fake Muhammed cartoon · Iran is burning ...
    www.michellemalkin.com/archives/004413.htm - 41k - Feb 26, 2006 - Cached - Similar pages


    -----------------------
    So google's first 20 links are to places with the cartoons.
    How does that constitute "blocking" by Google?

    Ok, so maybe your point is you can't find it on google images.

    So I just did that and of the first 20 pictures at least 10 were the actual cartoons.

    There is no conspiracy here.

    Maybe you just don't know how to do a google search.

  • 63 - Bird of Paradise

    Feb 27, 2006 at 10:14 pm

    Scott, I just searched "Muhammed cartoons" on Google images and found 7 out of 140. Your google must be different than mine! Back on February 21 (see comment #14 and found three. Perhaps they appear and then disappear. Let's check the same search again in one or two days and see if any of the Muhammed images have disappeared.

    My posting was inteded to only refer to "image" searches. I made no claims regarding topical searches (see comment #19). For my personal opinion on the "caricatures" you can read my posting on my own site here.

  • 64 - mark

    Mar 13, 2006 at 6:37 pm

    If you try to check for jesus cartoon then you will see if you try Sheaf in Un of sask. that a very ugly one has been published, On another note both Alberta papers that reprinted the Danish cartoons are required to go before the alberta Human Rights Commission. No cartoonist nor paper publishing ant-Christian comics has been fined nor jailed.

  • 65 - Akin Nowahalla

    Oct 06, 2007 at 7:44 am

    i felt the muslims are over reacting.., both religion preaches peace, why then the killing.
    No Human can fight for God. Rgrds.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for Nov 28, 2009

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for October

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs