Have I been told that I am not allowed to publish cartoons of he holocaust when I have the right to?

To me, there is no comparison, really. Mohammed isn't a victim, and the people of the holocaust were. Muslims constantly publish their diatribes about the relative value of "Infidels", and yet any act of demeaning their religion is met with outrage.

A better comparison would be Moses. Or God. The reason the Iranians chose otherwise is they know we aren't as anal as they are, and we parody Moses and God all the time. So they have to choose the victims of a horror they often applaud or deny in their media.

So, I guess if I had been bullied and threatened by holocaust victims, then sure. Not much chance of that, though. There isn't much point in asserting my publishing rights in terms of Jews, because they really aren't threatening my rights. Muslims, on the other hand, had pressed the issue because of the original cartoon, which brought about these most recent ones.

That said do I think there should be some law against making holocaust cartoons? Never. I don't appreciate people like Larry Flynt, but no doubt he's done a few. I feel he has every right to, and I feel that anyone who differs with him has the right to boycott and protest. Never should anyone try to take away his right to, though.

As an aside, I don't think they could have done anything so self-defeating as this. As I said, God we would have laughed off. Maybe a lot of newspapers would have done that, too.

They just took an issue they are known to be insensitive about, and proven how utterly hypocritical their original outrage about the Mohammed cartoons was. They don't care about respect, because they don't offer it in their media. This just proves that those who are demanding to take rights away aren't interested in keeping to the standards they impose.

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the Holocaust's special status means it's not equivalent to the special status of the prophet Muhammad and therefore you wouldn't publish?

cacto, what they do is making provocations. I would not lower myself to their level and indulge with their fantasy.

Would you take the Iranian challenge and prove that the freedom of the press to publish anything is sacred? Or would you choose not to, deciding that there's no point choosing to fight for the freedom of the press on such a divisive and unsavoury issue, particularly when it serves no great purpose even in victory?

Freedom of press is just one side of the issue. The other side is responsibility to create a better world. While I believe in freedom of press. I believe that seeing the big picture is more important -- what are the costs and benefits of publishing such material. I prefer the middle way. Muslims need to take themselves more lightly but the newspaper also needs to restrain themselves for a while. This whole issue escalates because some newspapers try to "prove their points" by unnecessarily republishing the material immediately after it was being pulled out. I dare not to say the editors are silly because it is well within their right and culture to do so. But I think it is ill-advised as it does not serve any purpose.

Also I'd like to add this:

I am a chinese catholic indonesian and I can see the outrage in JU. I completely emphatize with you. I have been in canada for a while which allows me to know some amazing westerners here. And I am hoping that my dear westerner friends could restrain themselves from making the same mistake as this newspaper.

Give the benefit of doubt to the muslims because you have to understand not all news makes it into the media. At least indonesian muslims is not as bad as you think -- I have known some great muslim friends. I can debunk so many things that some of you said but it would take many articles. So I am just hoping that you could please step back from the controversy for a while and let the issue cool down before adding fuels to the impending world war.

The differences here will be that many will be offended by holocaust cartoons, but they will not call for the beheading of the cartoonists or paper editors.

Give the benefit of doubt to the muslims

What do you think we've been doing as a nation for years?

But the Muslim nation can't count on our good will forever. If it wants the benefit of the doubt it NEEDS to use its 1.6 BILLION members and get its house in order.

Yeah J? Dari mana? tahun yg lalu aq belajar di Jogja dan malang, di UGM dan UMM. Small world ya!

I wrote this article because I had a suspicion - probably unfounded - that there was more than just a freedom of the press angle to the publishing of those Danish cartoons. I was wondering what it was, because presumably if it was purely freedom of the press and the airing of linen then the papers would see nothing wrong in theory with publishing anti-holocaust cartoons. After all, nearly everyone self-censors when it comes to the holocaust.

The differences here will be that many will be offended by holocaust cartoons, but they will not call for the beheading of the cartoonists or paper editors

So freedom of speech should only be practised when there are people to defy? I think there might be a large fuss about the Holocaust as well, although presumably Jewish groups have rather more political clout than Muslim ones, and can therefore bring a halt to it without the traditional anti-dictatorship power of riot and threat.

I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the Holocaust's special status means it's not equivalent to the special status of the prophet Muhammad and therefore you wouldn't publish?

I think that is part of what he is saying.  The 2 do not equate.  They can publish anything they want, but like the Washington Post Cartoon reveling in the misfortune of a soldier, parodying a man of religion and parodying 6 million people brutally tortured and slain are not the same.  Unless Iran is equating Mohammed with Hitler?

Now that is an interesting take.  Maybe my entry will be Mohammed welcoming Hitler to hell.  That would equate with what iran is trying to do.

" I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that the Holocaust's special status means it's not equivalent to the special status of the prophet Muhammad and therefore you wouldn't publish?"

Eh, i didn't say the holocaust has special status. I thought I was pretty plain. The reason these Muslim caricatures were posted was because of Muslim response to another cartoon even earlier, stating it was wrong to post images of the Prophet.

So far, I know of no holocaust victims that are trying to limit my freedom of speech. So the answer is no, I wouldn't publish the cartoons, but not because I think it is "wrong", but because there is no good reason to other than being bigoted. You can associate Islam with terrorism without being a bigot. I know of no reason other than racism or bloodthirstiness to lampoon the holocaust.

If Jews had been imposing their religious edicts not to lampoon Moses, aybe I'd be more apt to answer it with a caricature. If a bigot looks at you and says "Hey, lets draw funny pictures of Jews", you aren't responding to something Jews have done. If you can't see the difference between lampooning the victims of horror and lampooning religious figures, well, I'm not sure you're really equipped for the conversation.

In the end you are either discussing free speech or taste. I wouldn't lampoon the victims of genocide unless there was a good reason to, and there isn't here. Even then, it would be in bad taste. People should be free to do so,regardless, without fear of violence.

If it wants the benefit of the doubt it NEEDS to use its 1.6 BILLION members and get its house in order.

They are. But guiding 1.6 billion members is not an easy thing to do. Not all the news reach to the mainstream media. But at least in Indonesia, there has been big improvements in that area.

Our government has worked very hard in arresting and executing terrorists. More than 200 has been arrested and it won't stop now. Our country as a whole is much more respectful to ethnicity if you compare that with 10 years ago when Soeharto was still in power. More and more muslim leaders in Indonesia denounce terrorism. Of course some are just too thick. But please also consider the diversity of the people. We have a population of 220 million which are not as well as educated as in the U.S. So it is way more easier to provoke them to do irattional actions.

I was born there and I lived there. And the perceptions that Islam is violence is just wrong.

Yeah J? Dari mana? tahun yg lalu aq belajar di Jogja dan malang, di UGM dan UMM. Small world ya!

Aku dari Jakarta tapi setelah highschool pindah ke Canada. Wah di Jogja enak tuh -- orangnya ramah-ramah. Apa kamu menikmati kunjungan ke Indonesia?

"I was born there and I lived there. And the perceptions that Islam is violence is just wrong."

But don't you find it odd then that people who oppose these caricatures say "They shouldn't have printed them, they should have expected violence." Doesn't that mean that when dealing with Muslims, we should expect violence unless they get their way?

It can't be one way or another. Should we assume Islam is peaceful and treat them as we would treat any other religion (i.e. lampoon God and whoever else without fear), or should we walk on eggshells and assume that anything we do to insult Islam will result in innocent casualties?

That seems to be what we are being told. If you offend them, look out. Yet that seems to be the opposite of "Islam isn't violent"

If you can't see the difference between lampooning the victims of horror and lampooning religious figures, well, I'm not sure you're really equipped for the conversation.

Um thanks for the condescension, but I do know the difference. I wonder though why lampooning Muhammad was so important for the continuance of free speech as to require a special cartoon competition. Can you shed any light on that? Do you agree it was important for those cartoons to be published, or do you consider them bad taste as well?

[quoteBut don't you find it odd then that people who oppose these caricatures say "They shouldn't have printed them, they should have expected violence." Doesn't that mean that when dealing with Muslims, we should expect violence unless they get their way?

Excellent point, I wish to expand on that but I have to leave for work now. I will get back at you later.