Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - May 20, 2010


Michael Stuart Kelly

Recommended Posts

Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - May 20, 2010

An artist, Molly Norris, became outraged over the South Park episode of editing parts of the show to appease threats of violence from Muslim fanatics and Muslim bullies. So she drew a cartoon that declared May 20, 2010 as "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" and went viral all over the Internet. I referenced a newspaper article on this (see here), where Ms. Norris decided to keep the cartoon up, but not be involved in any crusade. Here is the original cartoon. The one on her site is now edited to water it down a bit.

drawmohammedposter.jpg

Here is what Ms. Norris said on her site (as of this posting--as it appears that she has changed this several times since the thing erupted):

I make cartoons about current, cultural events. I made a cartoon of a 'poster' entitled "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!" with a nonexistent group's name -- Citizens Against Citizens Against Humor -- drawn on the cartoon also. I did not intend for my cartoon to go viral. I did not intend to be the focus of any 'group'. I practice the first amendment by drawing what I wish. This particular cartoon of a 'poster' seems to have struck a gigantic nerve, something I was totally unprepared for. I am going back to the drawing table now!

Some groups are using this to advance an anti-Islam agenda and some are using it to stand up against the bullies.

My intent here is to stand up against the bullies, but this one is going to be really hard to control. Still, that's my intent. I hope this, instead of bigotry, is the same for most of the readers, also. This issue is freedom of speech and bashing the bullies right back, not the "all Muslims, or Mohammed, or Islam, are evil and need to be destroyed by violence" message.

If anybody wishes to add other sites discussing this, or drawings, etc., go for it. Even the more spiteful stuff (but no porn, please).

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 98
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If anybody wishes to add other sites discussing this, or drawings, etc., go for it. Even the more spiteful stuff (but no porn, please).

Here's the pre-9/11 South Park depiction:

South_park_muhammad.jpg

Big freaking deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple more, first is the Bologna fresco, illustrating Dante's description of Muhammad in hell:

Bologna.jpg

Next is a comment on the Danish imbroglio:

112.gif

Finally, just to show we can take it as well as dish it out, look at this offensive drawing. Shocking!

av-6683.jpg

Pretty cute actually. BTW I'm sticking to the Wikipedia spelling of Muhammad, basically because I'm pretty stubborn. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael; With all due respect people who stay silent while other people suggest murder because of cartoons should expect a little bigotry.

I am waiting for the Islamic denunciation of this latest outrage. I expect I will waiting a very long time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

Actually, I don't mind bigoted things flung against people who preach murder and fanaticism. That's merely paying back in kind. That's part of the reason for this thread, in fact. (Another part is that I take freedom of speech very seriously.)

For instance, I don't mind saying Objectivism a cult when I am referring to--or addressing--spiteful fundies (most especially ones who preach murder and fanaticism), but I would never do that to independent thinkers who agree with Rand, even if they are ARI folks.

The thing I really don't like is bigotry against innocent people and sanctimonious rationalizations for it.

Why hate one person, but bash another because he seems similar?

That's imprecise and epistemologically silly.

That's thinking in a fog.

Hate the spiteful and the bully. Why hate the dude who's only guilt is that he couldn't choose where he was born and raised, and he is just trying to get by and live his life as best he can?

Hate the bully who threatens South Park. Don't hate the grocer or factory worker.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

Actually, I don't mind bigoted things flung against people who preach murder and fanaticism. That's merely paying back in kind. That's part of the reason for this thread, in fact. (Another part is that I take freedom of speech very seriously.)

For instance, I don't mind saying Objectivism a cult when I am referring to--or addressing--spiteful fundies (most especially ones who preach murder and fanaticism), but I would never do that to independent thinkers who agree with Rand, even if they are ARI folks.

The thing I really don't like is bigotry against innocent people and sanctimonious rationalizations for it.

Why hate one person, but bash another because he seems similar?

That's imprecise and epistemologically silly.

That's thinking in a fog.

Hate the spiteful and the bully. Why hate the dude who's only guilt is that he couldn't choose where he was born and raised, and he is just trying to get by and live his life as best he can?

Hate the bully who threatens South Park. Don't hate the grocer or factory worker.

Michael

My usual view is hate the sin not the sinner. (Which doesn't mean not punishing the sinner, so to speak.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

Actually, I don't mind bigoted things flung against people who preach murder and fanaticism. That's merely paying back in kind. That's part of the reason for this thread, in fact. (Another part is that I take freedom of speech very seriously.)

For instance, I don't mind saying Objectivism a cult when I am referring to--or addressing--spiteful fundies (most especially ones who preach murder and fanaticism), but I would never do that to independent thinkers who agree with Rand, even if they are ARI folks.

The thing I really don't like is bigotry against innocent people and sanctimonious rationalizations for it.

Why hate one person, but bash another because he seems similar?

That's imprecise and epistemologically silly.

That's thinking in a fog.

Hate the spiteful and the bully. Why hate the dude who's only guilt is that he couldn't choose where he was born and raised, and he is just trying to get by and live his life as best he can?

Hate the bully who threatens South Park. Don't hate the grocer or factory worker.

Michael

My usual view is hate the sin not the sinner. (Which doesn't mean not punishing the sinner, so to speak.)

Dan

Aaich Ibn Abdullah al-Qarni in his book "Don't be sad" pg 343 writes:" Being killed in the way of Allah is a dream and pleasant whish for the righteous. " Some have fulfilled their obligations (i.e.have been martyred), and some of them are still waiting"" ( Qur'an 33:23).

In your opinion does one has to hate the idea of martyrdoom, the author who endorses it or the religion which inspires it? And in any case how you separate an idea from the person?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My usual view is hate the sin not the sinner. (Which doesn't mean not punishing the sinner, so to speak.)

In matters of sex, I have sometimes found myself hating the sinner while loving the sin. Must be some kind of mind-body integration problem. Or maybe it's just an example of what Woody Allen meant when he was asked if sex has to be dirty: "It does if you're doing it right."

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 11 months later...
  • 3 years later...

HOUSTON — Two gunmen were killed after they opened fire Sunday evening outside an event hosted by an anti-Islam group in Garland, Tex., featuring cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, local officials said. According to the authorities, the two assailants shot a private security guard and were, in turn, shot and killed by police officers.

Officials did not give the identities of the gunmen or the security officer and did not assign a motive for the attack. The Texas State Police and the F.B.I. referred reporters’ questions to the Garland Police Department. The City of Garland confirmed the episode in a Facebook posting.

The shooting began shortly before 7 p.m. outside the Curtis Culwell Center at an event organized by the American Freedom Defense Initiative, an anti-Islam organization based in New York.

“As today’s Muhammad Art Exhibit event at the Curtis Culwell Center was coming to an end,” the Facebook posting said, “two males drove up to the front of the building in a car. Both males were armed and began shooting at a Garland I.S.D. security officer.”

The posting said that the officer had been struck but that his “injuries are not life-threatening.” Garland police officers shot and killed the two gunmen, it said.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/04/us/gunmen-killed-after-firing-on-anti-islam-groups-event.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is Pamela Geller's group...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of Pamela Geller, or her approach, but I do NOT believe she is a bigot and I do support her right to express herself.

 

The CNN doofus, Alisyn Camerota, ironically in a her own leftish bigoted manner, tried to paint Geller as a bigot. And maybe she is, but I don't believe it. I believe her when she talks about her commitment to the First Amendment. I think she chose her niche based on being Jewish and living in New York during the 9/11 attacks. Also, I believe she is quite a showperson and a great media manipulator--I mean that in a good way, too. :smile: Just look at how she befuddled the CNN host, Camerota.

 

There is nothing in the video below I disagree with.

 

I am even glad Geller is antagonizing the fanatics to make them expose themselves. She's got balls to put the target on her own back.

 

 

This might surprise some folks, but I don't mind Geller's approach on OL. The problem is that when it happens, it does attract a number of bigots who then start preaching bigotry. I don't want OL to be a comfortable place for them or their message.

 

This is a delicate subject and how to deal with it often is a judgement call. But I see a clear line between two people who can express the same damn thing in the same words, but...

 

a. One is a good person who gets emotionally riled. This person (in a case like the present) fundamentally supports the First Amendment and freedom as priority and defends against Islamic fundamentalists and even Islam itself from that perspective.

 

b. The other is simply using the opportunity to spread the message of bigotry. This person fundamentally supports the demonization and annihilation of Islam as a culture and, ironically, works to oppose to the First Amendment (while saying the contrary).

 

When good independent people mouth off, a philosophy of reason has an opportunity to shine light.

 

When bigots show up, rational philosophy walks out of the room. 

 

OL a philosophy forum, not a church or Sacred Order Of The One True Path Against The Evil Them.

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The very end of this video made me tear up.

God bless you, Pamela Geller.

Michael

Amen.

Nice to see a free woman with a set of balls...

Chris Mathews should really get himself some help.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

The part that got to me was the exchange at the end.

Both Hannity and Geller were emotionally surfing on finger-pointing and ranting in the tone of (paraphrasing the underlying meaning), "It's THEM. It's the evil THEM. Everything would be all right except for THEM and the hypocrites who give cover to THEM."

And that's OK in this case. Guns are no laughing matter, even though this event is one among many publicity stunts Pamela has been promoting and I believe she got precisely the outcome she hoped for.

It's obvious she is milking it for all it's got. God knows she has every right to, but the nonstop outrage--even controlled outrage--is a tone I get tired of quickly. Especially because this is exactly the tone the bigots encourage to spread their hatred.

But, like I said, I don't believe Pamela is a bigot. The quote below, not just the words, but the way she said them, is an indication of why.

When Hannity asked her if she would die for the principle, she looked confused for a second. As if someone asked if she ate food or breathed air or minded wearing clothes. Her intense ranting tone dropped and became gentle.

By the end ("there's no question"), she was going back up in intensity, but that confused pause and gentleness came from a deep place inside her that were not part of the outrage show. Hannity's question caught her off guard.

This tells me I am right, that she's in it fundamentally for love of freedom, not the hatred. I can stand with that and it's an honor to do so.

Hannity: Are you willing to die for this principle?

Geller (sudden pause, then gently): Yes. It's give me liberty or give me death. It's a battle between freedom and slavery. There's no question.

It gets to me just to type out the words.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's hard to try to explain why I am parsing this so carefully. But a thought occurred to me that might help folks understand where I am coming from.

When a person crosses over--down deep--from love to hatred, then love of the hatred, they don't come back to love.

When fighting an enemy becomes an end in itself, when the emotional payoff of destroying becomes more important than the good life being fought for, when the only love left as a fundament is the love of humiliation and obliteration, there is no good life left to return to.

That doesn't make the person who loves a pushover. Nor perfect.

The best example I can think of to illustrate this is George Washington's habit of taking enemy prisoners to the enemy line and releasing them on promise they would abandon the fight. He could have just killed them or kept them in prison.

Washington hung and flogged his fair share of people over the years. But it was never for the love of hanging and flogging. Had he grown to love that more than the good life he was fighting to gain and/or hold--not just for himself but for everyone, he later would have accepted the crown and become King of the United States. A tyrant at that.

I honestly feel sorry for people who do not understand what "Give me liberty or give me death" truly means when, like Pamela, you are looking into the face of death for real. It's almost a religious experience once you get it.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jonathan,

Isn't that Bosch, not Botch?

:smile:

(I know you were quipping. :smile: )

From what I know, Bosch has gotten death threats, too. It doesn't matter what his art or personality are like in terms of death threats. He does not deserve to be murdered for his opinions and artwork. It is outrageous some people want to murder him for them.

Commentary-wise, if his intent was to stick a barb in the sore of the fundamentalists, he really did it, especially for fanatical Islamists.

Mohammad-Contest-Drawing-1-small-1_zpskp

I don't believe this resonates well with Westerners (kind of like, who cares?), but it drives Islamist fanatics apeshit. That's probably why it won first prize.

btw - If anyone wants to see all the entries in Pamela's event, they can at this Breitbart link:

Exclusive–Pamela Geller Calls Out Cowardly Conservatives, Says She’ll Organize Another Free Speech Event In Near Future **Full Image Gallery**

As of this post, there are about 200.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I honestly feel sorry for people who do not understand what "Give me liberty or give me death" truly means when, like Pamela, you are looking into the face of death for real. It's almost a religious experience once you get it.

Michael

Yes. I know Pamela's persona; She knows what she is doing.

The only reason that I watched it was that you spotted something. As a person who has judged speakers, I watch eyes.

You are correct, her kinesics softened, her shoulders did not, she even looked stunned for maybe a second.

Nice pick up.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

J,

There is much subculture chat of Mr. Fawstin’s win in the contest on Facebook, which is where most subculture chat seems to be now, rather than on these public posting boards. His interview with Greta on Fox concerning his participation and win and concerning the attack is here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one, anywhere, seems to be mentioning the fact that Objectivist loose cannon, publicity whore, and amateurish artist, Botch Fawstin, won the cartoon contest.

J

A "recovering Muslim?" Born in Albania.

While in another post, he said: "They came to kill us and died for it. Justice. ‪#‎GarlandAttack‬." Fawstin, who is an Eisner Award nominated cartoonist, is currently working on a graphic novel, titled "THE INFIDEL" (featuring Pigman).

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/who-bosch-fawstin-former-muslim-who-won-texas-draw-prophet-mohammad-event-631378

The Will Eisner Comic Industry Awards, commonly shortened to the Eisner Awards, are prizes given for creative achievement in American comic books, sometimes referred to as the Comics Industry's equivalent of the Oscar Awards.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisner_Award

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now