Ari Siletz

*VPK* half right

In your approval of *benross*’s comments, you stated: “I find it interesting that Islamists come up with all kinds of excuses to restrict speech. Suddenly a cartoon turns into load speaker in the middle of night…”  So through inference you did call me an Islamist.  But from your further explanation, I surmise that you didn’t really mean it.  So it’s ok.

But you are correct about my faith.  I trust that you can appreciate the dynamics between the real Islamists and me.

It maybe practically impossible for me to have a conversation with the Islamists, but I acknowledge that there many descent Muslims out there too.  Obviously, I have many issues to debate with them (and they with me), but I prefer to discuss the real differences and substantive issues like: Does it make sense for Islam to be the very last religion for ever and ever?  Drawing a Muhammad cartoon is not conducive to the discussion I’d like to have with them.

But if you read all comments on this thread, you’ll realize that I’ve consistently defended the right of the cartoonists and never wished that they’d be banned or even harassed for that matter.  It’s just not my cup of tea.

Anvar

It is not out of proportion

It is not out of proportion Kourosh. After all, we are all discussing here freely and nobody is claiming owning freedom of speech.

When a death sentence is being issued from thousands kilometers away, by a guy who didn't even read the book of Rushdi, we are not talking about banalities.

My favourite cartoon of Mohammad is the pipe. Which one is yours?

VPK

Oh really?

I reached that same conclusion with you months ago. Thanks for showing me the "tolerant" part of this free speech thing you boast about. I team up with those who i want to team up. So don't you worry about me. Ok?

Oh, But i have plenty of facts to go on. what was demonstrated in that clip was a reasonable objection by a representative of an Islamic country, Not ISLAMISTS RUNNING TO UN FOR A BAN ON FREE SPEECH. Oh and by the way, As you can see, I did not, once agin, deny anything. If that is how it seemd to you, then You have major probelms.

You don't seem to see the difference though and insist on moving on with your "yek kalagh chel kalagh" method.

VPK and benross

You guys Just don't give up, do ya?

You are hell-bent on bending matter out of proportion. It has now been said a million times that the problem is not in the legal department but on moral grounds, yet...You keep on harping and repeating your own bogus views.

benross

Why is someone Guilt-ridden Just because he is expressing an opinion? Is that right reserved for those who support a democratic, secular, absolute monarchy? What is so Typical? It is you who are indeed coming out against freedom of speech by cussing them left and right.

The well-being of people is of all of Iranian people's concern, Not just you. So freedom of speech is only right and justified, when you decide to sing its praises and use it, and for everyone else, it is Mumbo-Jumbo?

If you really think this is a competition between who really cares for the iranians and who cares best, Then it probably is you who has all the wrong notions "being concerned".

 VPK

You are overreacting here, Nobody is calling you stupid, so you don't have to be on your guards and sound all defensive. It really is mind-boggling to me that here you are claimig to have seen  all the good things Freedom brings with it and you have seen it in action, yet you turn around and indiscrimanately calling those who disagree with you as Islamists and as those who "want to restrict free speech"

Yeah. Ok. Take a look inside of ya brother and see who is doing the actual restricting.

As ironic as Iranic

While some of us trying to convince Muslim population not to be offended by the freedom of expression, will the rest of us try to inform this site's admin of such a right's existence?

The challenge is to

The challenge is to determine where those lines should be drawn.

No that's not the challenge. Not now. It will be the challenge of free Iran and free Iranians. But non of us speaks for such entity right now. And here comes the distraction.

You are drawing lines based on your personal beliefs or preferences before the time and before freedom of expression is being established in Iran. This awfully looks like the guilt ridden bunch strategy, for not seeing at all that time coming. You are right. I don't know you. But the embarrassment for such similarity relies somewhere else.

Dear VPK, those not in favor of cartoons are not all

VPK aziz, Anvar is right, those not in favor of cartoons are not all Islamist.  On this thread, you and Anvar have been exchanging comments,  He has brought his arguments about why he is not in favor of the cartoons.  However, every time you respond to him, you keep talking only about Islamists.  You certainly know that Anvar is no Islamist.  It was only few nights ago that you, Anvar and I were exchanging comments on another thread and you got to know very well Anvar's position. Mine too. I am sure from my postings, you must know that I am no Islamist either.

On this thread, we can see commentators who are Moslem, people from other religions and Agnostics not being crazy about Mohammad' s cartoons. we also have Moslems, people from other religions and agnostics who support drawing Mohammad cartoons and keeping this issue visible. So as it happens and it is quite interesting that on this issue, lines are not drawn based on one's religious beliefs but their priorities in political issues and the role they believe defending Mohammad's cartoons has in advancing cause of freedom of speech and etc, etc.  So let's not reduce this issue to such simple categorization of Islamist versus non-Islamist.

Value of Ari's blog in bringing up this issue is that now we have had this discussion and it is becoming clear that issue is not black and white.

Kourosh

talking to you is a waste of time. Why don't you team up with Q and call all opposition KKK / Nazi / Faschist and so on. If you don't know who went to UN then you are not living on Earth. 

//blog.unwatch.org/?p=178

Your denial of this proves that you have no facts to go on. Sorry dude.

VPK

Ahura Jan

"From a legal point of view; the artists should be allowed to express themselves lawfully any which way they choose.  Some will regard them as heroes and some as fools.  The ones in the other camp (the offended), should never try to curtail this freedom or resort to violence.  In return, they should also use their own freedom of expression to peacefully counteract the first group.  Otherwise, they too would make fools of themselves".

 But where is the fairness in doing that? Someone has insulted what i cherish and deem as precious Under the Guise of protected speech and all i am supposed to do is protest peacefully? Why should i not at least return the sentiment with the same punity and intesnity? Where is my right to use my protected form of speech?

Anvar

I did not call you an Islamist. You are using some of their methods. But I am aware that you are Bahai. If not please correct me.

VPK

If you prove to me that any other group is as nasty as the above I will retract my statement. Remember I am talking about NOW not Middle ages or the Mongols or the Crusaders. Now!

Gee, I don't know. Why don't you draw up a set of acceptable  criteria, of Just what kinda "proof" would satisfy your opposing and enraged mind and i will see what i can do!

This game of " Muslim vs Islamists" are two different things that you are playing, really is getting old. Sorry. Won't work And again your list Applies To the actions and positions of IRI. How does that not qualify as a minority? The Saudi arabian Gov, never Issued A fatwas on anyone's head neither do they imposed the same rule with the same intensity on their citizens. Even if they do, There are ways to offset them. The create balance in their society. So What you said basically singles iran out.

Protected form of speech in a culture? Oh ok. IF i came up to you and used an F word right in your face, That is a form of protected speech too, if you Think about it. Can you prove to the Cops that i did this so they can arrest me and say that i violated your rights? But is what i am doing Immoral and i should have the decency and wisdom to not even think about doing it in the first place? Of course!

Which group of muslims is running to the UN demanding a ban on the free speech??? Where did you get that from The Onion?

Of course there are a lotta people with a diverse set of Opinions in the world, Which is Precisley what does not make your anymore superior to theirs. The Islamists that you are talking about are Like the new born christians, The remaining vestiges of the KKK. Do they not want a world governed by their rules and their opinions as well?

*VPK*

It is very disingenuous of you to refer to me(!) as an Islamist.  Truly disappointing.  

Anvar

Being Too Literal

*VPK* & *benross* - You both missed the point which was that free speech, in a civil society, must be regulated.  But I think even the two of you would agree with that.  The challenge is to determine where those lines should be drawn.

What am I distracting from and why?  I noticed you had nothing to contribute to the main portion of my post, but nitpicking my side notes.  Do not take my examples too literally.  Most people get those analogies.  Yes, the neighbor IS making noise even if he is singing the words of the Bible or the Constitution.  However, from his point of view, he is exercising his freedom of speech (which means he is a fool).

- We should have freedom of speech in society, but also use personal discretion.
- Both the societal laws and individual ethics should have a role in our behavior.
(These are my points in may last post.  We can discus them if you’d like, otherwise I don’t want to have to teach you that ‘you can’t yell fire in a crowded theatre’ and have you tell me I’m distracting.)

*benross* - In case your “Guilt ridden bunch who once sold their soul to Khomeini,…” post, and its ridicules conclusion of “They don't want to hurt them. So they better stop being free” was directed at me in its entirety; know that you are so wrong in your presumptions about me that you are actually embarrassing yourself here.  

And for your information, I have always been concerned about the ‘well being’ of others.  It’s strange that you’d object to even that.

Anvar

What do you want to achieve by these drawings?

Are you pretending that as the empty slogan of this site goes, Nothing is sacred? Bull@@@T! Do you like some one cuss your mother?

Benros

Very good points. I find it interesting that Islamists come up with all kinds of excuses to restrict speech. Suddenly a cartoon turns into load speaker in the middle of night. A drawing of Muhammad is compared to  kiddy porn.

Guys, we are not stupid and are not falling for it. Freedom has worked just fine for years. Thanks to IRI we were forced to go live in the West. Now we saw free speech in action and will not buy the Islamist BS.

Kaleh

thanks for posting this. It is unbelievable. In Pakistan the nut jobs are in the population. In Iran the nut jobs are in the government.

Guilt ridden bunch who once

Guilt ridden bunch who once sold their soul to Khomeini, now talk about freedom of speech as 'mumbo jumbo'. How typical.

Now it's 'well being' of people which is their primary concern, which obviously negates any reference to freedom of expression. It is a completely irrelevant fact that free people regulate their interaction through the law, which may include banning using loudspeaker in the neighborhood in the middle of the night. This is a minor distraction. The major thing is that THEY BAN USING LOUDSPEAKER IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT. So this freedom of expression thing is just a mumbo jumbo. Welcome to new Khomeini era.

They have a funny way of being concerned about the well being of people. They don't want to hurt them. So they better stop being free. 

Anvar

Just a few notes:

• Making noise in the middle of night or general nuisense. This is not speech it is not protected. We are talking about published stuff Not making noise. Please folks don't mix them up! A book does not go waking people up!
• Pornography is different. It must be regulated. Pornography while difficult may be defined. For internet they should have an xxsx domain like blah.xxx which is easily blocked. Then put the stuff there. 

Written stuff like books should be free to have whatever they want. I know porn is a tough one. Specially involving kids. It is also a distraction. Lets for now focus on political and religion related speech involving adults.

Muhammad is not a kid and the cartoons are not child porn so lets not go there!

An example of islamic

religeous tolerance par excellece,

//tinyurl.com/2v6rknb

Freedom of Expression - Legal vs. Ethical

I am one of the biggest advocates of Freedom of Expression and can’t wait for its implementation in Iran.  But I also recognize that, not only there is a time and place for everything, but there is also no such a thing as absolute freedom.  Limitless freedom of expression may effect chaos; hence, it should be regulated.   (See the end of my comment if you disagree)

From a legal point of view; the artists should be allowed to express themselves lawfully any which way they choose.  Some will regard them as heroes and some as fools.  The ones in the other camp (the offended), should never try to curtail this freedom or resort to violence.  In return, they should also use their own freedom of expression to peacefully counteract the first group.  Otherwise, they too would make fools of themselves.

Freedom of expression also gives people the freedom to make donkeys of themselves - and that is OK!

From an ethical point of view, I think individuals (cartoonists, the offended, and the rest) should consider the following options and act or speak out according to their own conscience and personal values:
A - Condone the arts / Condone the violent reactions
B - Condone the arts / Condemn the violent reactions
C - Condemn the arts / Condone the violent reactions
D - Condemn the arts / Condemn the violent reactions

For me, the clear choice is D.  (I’ll be happy to read why others might pick a different option.)

Freedom of expression may be paramount, but there ought to be other factors like respect, honor, empathy, and integrity at play too.  If something is legal it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is right too.

Side notes:  
Your neighbor cannot use his freedom of speech as a pretext to start singing through loudspeakers every midnight.  You’d call up the police in no time – to heck with his freedom of speech!  So there’s a time and place for everything.

Also, for the staunch supporters of unlimited freedoms, try threatening (in words only) the life of the US president in a blog.  Or better yet, draw a pornographic depiction of a fictional child and post it here.  I hope you’ll also be generous enough to share your “conversations” with the Secret Service and the FBI with us.  You’ll soon realize that even in the freest land on the earth, there are limits to free speech.

In case I need this disclaimer for the gullible; I’m just making a point.  Do Not accept the above challenges!  Both “speeches” are illegal (keep in mind that pornography is considered protected speech unless it is deemed to be obscene).

Anvar

KouroshS

Here are some responses:

 I never even dreamed of saying this to you, but here it goes: Stop sounding Like The Furer Man,

Name calling is not worthy of a response. I will ignore this statement.

Islamists are the sigle most!!! violent and intolerant people in the world!! yeah right

Note: I did not say Muslims. I said Islamists and I stick by my statement. Here are some examples:

• Fatwahs one people who so much as write something they find offensive.
• Sending assassins all over the world to kill critics. Skinheads are nasty but don't send murderers to other nations to spread their poision.
• Death sentences on anyone who decides to leave Islam.
• Stoning of women and sometimes men.
• Cutting limbs off as a method of criminal (in)justice.
• Going crazy over a bunch of stupid drawings.
• Gogig crazy over an even stupider book by Rushdi. I tried to read it but it gave me a headache. Maybe that was my divine punishment!!
• Imposing hijab on women like it or not. With the threat of violence.
• Imposing pretty much everything under the threat of violence.

If you prove to me that any other group is as nasty as the above I will retract my statement. Remember I am talking about NOW not Middle ages or the Mongols or the Crusaders. Now!

You sound like a Top-notch exteremist yourself.

Whatever you say. I don't go around banning things or killing people. Pretty radical idea I guess!

Please be mindful to
keep the "Islamists" and "Radical Islamists" and Those who have been
the traditional followers such as Many of the elderlies in many of the
families we have come across. In separate Categories. Who is doing all
the killings?? Ordinary people ? Our Elderly relatives? or only those
who are financed by certain regimes?

I do keep them separate. The former are Muslims; the latter are Islamists.

Is that what you consider and qualify as the basis for respect? The
actions of some minority factions? Just because they kill and maim and
Nobody protests, So They don't deserve respect? 

They are not a minirity. They are the Governments of: Iran; Saudi and many other Muslim nations. There are large number of people who practice these actions. Thankfully a majority of Iranians seem to be regaining their senses.

That is right. Let those Cartoonist Grow the hell Up and Understand the
difference between Criticizing and Mocking, I am glad you brought that
up. 

We agree on one thing: they are mocking. So what there is nothing wrong with it. I am just fine with mocking. It is not the same as libel. Is it upsetting? Maybe. But it is a protected form of speech in their culture and in my opinion.

Now the questions becomes: What are you so afraid of? who has been
threatening you lately? What are you so insecure about when you ask all
others to Go away and Hide? 

The question is irrelveant. I am not afraid. If I were I would be acting like the Islamists. Screaming "Nazi" and running to UN to ban free speech. I don't do that do I?

What Gives you the right to render Judgment against them as to who
should go where and How to define the Real world for them? keep yours a
real one and let them do the same babam jan:)

I have a right to my opinion. The real world has lots of people in it with their opinions. I am fine with that. Islamists want a protected world with just their opinions. It ain't gonna happen.

to Ari Siletz replies

1. I don't understand your reason here; just because it has "started" so we need to go along with it? Can't you just condemn it in words?

2. Racism is now secondary issue to
the freedom of speech issue...

This is what happens when people use their "right to freedom" without responsibility. Racism is not a secondary issue on the side, it is the direct byproduct of irresponsible behavior.

3. The Sahih Bukhari hadith that many Muslims have believed in througout
the centuries maybe anecdote.

Sahih Bukhari is not considered as a legitimate source of hadis of a great number of Muslims, including all Shia Muslims who totally reject it. And if you want to base your image of the Prophet Mohammad on selective religious anecdotes, then why not pick the ones that are more consturctive? There is also a hadis from the Prophet saying that "there are as many ways to God as there are individual human beings", which is the ultimate recognition of pluralism for a man of God.

But Khomeni's death Fatwa against Rushdie
happened my own life time. So did the assassination of Van Gogh.

Khomeini's reaction was definitely disproportionate and Salman Rushdi certainly had the "right" to write a book without fearing for his life. I am not questioning the "right" of such individuals to express a provocative idea but the ethical justifications of their action. And I am not challenging the Mohammad drawing contest on "legal" grounds but on ethical and moral ones.

5. People with sacred beliefs should not be regarded as animals with
predictable violent response to provocation...

From the 1 billion Muslims around the planet only a very small minority (mostly in Pakistan) reacted in a violent manner. The great majority of Muslims manifested their displeasure and outrage in a very rational way. In every society there will always be people who would act on impulse, their reactions should not be generalized for an entire diverse community (of 1 billion if the case of Muslims!) 

6 .... If the phenomenon can't be stopped or ignored, what do you suggest we
should do given that violence is not an option?

A drawing contest organized and supported by right-wing extremists is not an unstoppable "phenomenon".It can very will be condemned by the more rational and tolerant voices in the society.

7. I do not think a holocaust cartoon would be appropriate. On review
you will see that it contradicts your point 6, so you may wish to
retract your suggestion (number 7) for the sake of logical consistency.

I actually used your own logic to invite you to draw for the holocaust cartoon contest organized by the Kayhan newspaper. A few years ago, after the danish cartoon controversies,  Kayhan used the exact same line of reasoning as you do to justify their holocaust cartoon contest. They stated that the Zionist jews have used the holocaust to justify their "exceptionalist" policies in the region for decades..and that the jews have used their lobbying power to bully historians and researchers into never questioning the authenticity of their claims regarding the holocaust. So, the offense to Jews by drawing holocaust cartoons would be totally worth it if the taboo is broken. 

You see, any action can be "rationally" justified if you put some effort into it. But as Mosatafa Malekian stated so well: 

"I am not concered about traditions nor modernity nor culture nor civilization nor any other subject matter of that sort, what I truly care about are people of flesh and bones who come into this world, suffer and go..."

So if I see that people are hurting by my actions, I won't try to justify my deeds with some armchair "intellectual" mombo jumbo discourse on concepts like "freedom of speech"...etc I hope you do the same.

Anybody may show some level

Anybody may show some level of intolerance toward disrespectful portrayal of an idea and value or personalities reflecting it.

Peaceful 'intolerance', in defense of our own dignity -and sometimes not so peaceful- is actually what makes us human beings. This is what makes life interesting.

We Iranians, are guilty of tolerating anything that targets our dignity. Which is the other side of coin of this shameless violent intolerance imposed upon us by Islam for centuries. A complex reactionary thought system that forces us even, to be violently intolerant in defense of our dignity, meaning being always trapped in its sophisticated reactionary net. This is how Islam always wins, no matter how we react to it. It's been that way for 14 centuries. No more. Please don't try to change the subject. Yes, if you insult me, I insult you back. This is not the issue here. Don't trivialize the issue. We know what we are talking about in this blog.

BTW the 'pipe' is my favourite cartoon of Mohammad! 

Ari

If i may barge in a second here...

I don't think a holocaust entry would contradict seanj's point #6  in anyway.  as a matter of fact in theory it is totally a fair thing to do. It is Rather quite simple: You insult my sacred beliefs and the person whom i believe is devine, and you claim that you are doing that because it is your right to free speech, so In return I reserve the right to mock your Holocaust based on exact same thing.

Where is the contradiction in that?

Muslims are reacting on the same exact principle. It is just such a shame that this ends up in someone losing their life over it...

VPK

I never even dreamed of saying this to you, but here it goes: Stop sounding Like The Furer Man, as evidenced By using absolute terms such as Islamists are the sigle most!!! violent and intolerant people in the world!! yeah right As if It was not the Skinheads in Germany and sweden Who demonstrated the same kinda violence towards All Non-nationals. Oh I guess They were the "modern islamofascists" and the recent converts to Islam ha? A State of Transition between Christianity and Islam?

You sound like a Top-notch exteremist yourself. Please be mindful to keep the "Islamists" and "Radical Islamists" and Those who have been the traditional followers such as Many of the elderlies in many of the families we have come across. In separate Categories. Who is doing all the killings?? Ordinary people ? Our Elderly relatives? or only those who are financed by certain regimes?

Is that what you consider and qualify as the basis for respect? The actions of some minority factions? Just because they kill and maim and Nobody protests, So They don't deserve respect?

That is right. Let those Cartoonist Grow the hell Up and Understand the difference between Criticizing and Mocking, I am glad you brought that up.

Now the questions becomes: What are you so afraid of? who has been threatening you lately? What are you so insecure about when you ask all others to Go away and Hide?

What Gives you the right to render Judgment against them as to who should go where and How to define the Real world for them? keep yours a real one and let them do the same babam jan:)

seanj, replies

2. Yes, it is as close to fact as can be verifed that utlra right wings started this. Shrewd move on their part to use the freedom of speech loophole to push their agenda. The reason it worked is because freedom of speech is important to many people. Racism is now secondary issue to the freedom of speech issue at least in the minds of many (right wing or not) in the countries affected by the protests.

3. The Sahih Bukhari hadith that many Muslims have believed in througout the centuries maybe anecdote. But Khomeni's death Fatwa against Rushdie happened my own life time. So did the assassination of Van Gogh.

4. This blog may have done just that. A talented IC member has posted a humorous Ayatollah collage on this site.

5. People with sacred beliefs should not be regarded as animals with predictable violent response to provocation. As thinking beings the protesters are likely to recognize their error in communication and find better ways to express their displeasure--without threatening free speech in their host countries.

6. Yes that is what the right wing intended and accomplished. You (we) should try to salvage what we can with a rational approach. If the phenomenon can't be stopped or ignored, what do you suggest we should do given that violence is not an option?

7. I do not think a holocaust cartoon would be appropriate. On review you will see that it contradicts your point 6, so you may wish to retract your suggestion (number 7) for the sake of logical consistency.

****

Thanks for the encouragement VPK.

Alright

I want to be clear Ari has every right to publish whatever he wants. The religious types are too thin skinned. They are too willing to be violent. They are afraid of opposition. I am really sick of Islamists who murder and rape then pretend to be victims. 

Islamists are the single most violent and intolerant people in the world. They now have the nerve to cry like babies about their hurt feelings. If they want to be respected  they should stop killing and raping others. Then maybe they will get some respect.

Ari: good for you. Don't you let anyone intimidate you. We all have a right to free speech.

To all who are offended: too bad. Why are you so afraid of criticism? Grow up and live in the real world. Or go back and hide in 6th century ignorance.. Your choice. The more you threaten the less respect you will get. VPK

No matter

What i say, You keep deducing what You want outta it! That is quite odd.

Did I endorse a violent reaction or even came close to doing so???

Did I actually BLAME the satirist? If i tell you that Hey buddy, what you are doing is IMMORAL, am i actually blaming you? Fine. But please do not twist words and take them out of context. Seems like you have a habit of doing that!

to Ari Siletz

I will address your points one by one:

1. Religion is being used to keep the IRI power status quo in Iran.

So? How exactly this will change by hurting the feelings of a large portion of the population? If anything, these kind of campaign only help the I.R to recruite more supporters from the religious and traditional segments of the society. The very people that we need to a attract towards our democratic agenda.

2. Promoting intolerance is standard strategy for keeping out ideas that
could threaten the status quo. Art is the second biggest threat to a
religious status quo (a rival religion being the first) 

You are the one promoting intolerance not those who protesting the cartoons. The groups and organizations who are supporting such campaigns are not known for their tolerance and cultural relativism stand, they are the most right-wing ultra-conservative actors of the political scene. 

3. Mohammad played the intolerance game by ordering the assassination of
poets who spoke against him...

This is your biased interpretation of history based on unverifiable anecdotes. This is hardly a legitimate excuse to target a particular group of people and insult their beliefs. If anyone used the same kind of reasoning to take on the Jewish or Christian community, it would frankly look ridiculous; Moses himself did this 5000 years go, so now we are doing this...!

4. Iranian journalists, writers and artists are jailed and/or tortured
and/or harassed in this long tradition of silencing words and images...

I still don't get the idea, how do two wrongs make a right? If you want to break the status quo why don't you take on those you are oppressing the people today? Why don't you create a campaign to draw Khamanei or to condemn the concept of velayat faghih?  

5. As a result, freedom of speech is the foremost issue for the devoted
(or non-devoted) Muslims you mention as protesting in Iran against
the IRI.

Freedom of speech is an important issue but it is not the only one. If you oppose Freedom of speech to people's most sacred beliefs (which has become part of their identity), I can assure you that you will hurt more the cause of "freedom of speech" than the status quo. 

6. The irresponsible use of free speech by the orignal Mohammad cartoons
was unfortunate, but the offense to the Muslim community can be well
worth it if some of its consequences were used to further the cause of
free speech among Muslims.

Based on what psychological, social..machanism will insulting people's beliefs help to advance the cause of freedom? The danish cartoon accomplished nothing but setting back the integration of Muslims in Europe and I believe that is exactly what those who were behind the idea, intended.

7. If you can draw, I look forward to seeing your Mohammad portrayal,
next year...

Why don't you submit your holocaust cartoon to Kayhan's holocaust cartoon contest to advance the cause of freedom of speech, since you believe this is such a good way of promothing freedom?

vildemose

Carry the torch. For all of us of all religions. :o)