Dutch Cartoon, No Jewish Mobs On Streets !

Remember the "Danish Cartoon" row, with mobs of Muslims burning and looting because someone had dared to print *some cartoons of "Mohammed"?

This despite the fact that 'free speech' is the very thing that allows them to propagate their creed in the West, and the fact that Muslims themselves have **portrayed Mohammed at various times in history as well as there being various western depictions of him in the past without comment.

Well now in an ironic twist, an Arab organisation, the Arab European League (AEL), is to be put on trial in the Netherlands over its publication of *a cartoon deemed offensive to Jews. Dutch prosecutors said the AEL cartoon was "discriminatory" and "offensive to Jews as a group... because it offends Jews on the basis of their race and/or religion". The AEL at first took the cartoon down after the prosecution threat, then reinstated it as as an "act of civil disobedience" because of 'double standards' being applied against Muslims.

Oddly, no Jews rampaged through the streets of Europe, burnt Arab flags, defiled Korans, or boycotted Arab goods (are there any?) ....... instead Jewish groups rather mildly said it was not reasonable for the AEL group to express its opposition to alleged bias against Muslims, by attacking Jews.

Ronny Naftaniel of the Center for Documentation on Israel, said: "Imagine if Dutch Jews insulted Muslims every time they heard an anti-Semitic remark. What kind of perverse world would we be living in?" ....... I'll answer that, we would be living in the Islamic world.

* Warning: These links may offend Muslims or Jews.

** In 1999, Islamic art expert HRH Princess Wijdan Ali (Jordan) who is herself a descendent of Mohammed, wrote a scholarly overview of the Muslim tradition of depicting Mohammed, which could be downloaded in pdf format. In that essay, Wijdan Ali demonstrates that the prohibition against depicting Mohammed did not arise until as late as the 16th or 17th century, despite the media's recent false claims that it has always been forbidden for Muslims to draw Mohammed. Until comparatively recently in Islamic history, it was perfectly common to show Mohammed, either in full, or with his face hidden. Even after the 17th century, up to modern times, Islamic depictions of Mohammed (especially in Shi'ite areas) continued to be produced.

"Human representation in the form of a portrait is considered a taboo among a minority of Muslims who believe that any representation of a living being is banned in Islam. The subject of the Prophet Muhammad's portraiture, however, is considered a taboo among the greatest majority of Muslims, including those who do approve of and practice human figurative representation. Yet, there were many illustrations of the Prophet in early Mongol manuscripts from the Ilkhanid Dynasty down to the Ottoman period. This paper will look into these early portraiture's and their development from the fourteenth up to the seventeenth century. It will investigate the motives behind the transformation that had occurred on the depiction of the Prophet, which included the development from the open face to the written word." Unfortunately the article link from which this excerpt was originally taken was removed but I have found another here. But remember this has pictures boys and girls, so don't open unless your sure you won't be religiously offended.