/ Jimmy's Corner: Who is responsible?

« Home | Luxor and Aswan tour pictures » | And rumors never stop!!! » | No bravery! » | Karim's word » | A message in my inbox! » | Requests to come if the boycott is to end! » | Bin Laden's will! » | NIDO, the enemy... » | Finally, I am on the way home! » | Finally a holiday out of Cairo! » 

Wednesday, February 22, 2006 

Who is responsible?

I have received a whole file on the Danish cartoons a week ago, I did not open it till yesterday as I was busy preparing myself for the Luxor and Aswan tour. When I opened the file I found nothing new about it, it is a printing of the same emails I have been receiving for months now. However some words written in bold stopped me:

"A short time ago, precisely 3 months..." I don't know, do they really think that 3 months is not a long period of time?? Or is it an excuse for the late reaction on the Jyllands-Posten's cartoons?? Do they really need 3 months to react (in fact they are now 5 months not 3)?? As soon as I read this I expected the stupidity coming next...

Then on the cartoons the file says:
"In one of the cartoons Prophet Muhammad is depicted wearing a bomb-like turban, in another he appears like a terrorist waving his sword with women wearing burqas behind him, and another one he is depicted praying in a very insulting manner" Once again, everybody is talking about this cartoon that was never published by the Jyllands-Posten despite the fact that the whole world now knows it is false... I guess the news about has not reached the ones who prepared this file yet.

Then comes a call for all Arab business men to stop their business with Denmark (now I know why they made it in a file not just some sheets of paper handed over in the streets). The funny part is, it called them to boycott Denmark till the newspaper apologizes officially and publicly. To be honest I got lost at this part, well, they are asking the newspaper to apologize... not the Danish government like our government requested... But hey, is this a puzzle, the newspaper apologized several times by now, so why publishing the file now?

I guess this just shows the fact that these people know nothing of what they write or talk about and they just collect bits and pieces from here and there and put them in a good looking file and send it to those they think it might affect. But still who is responsible???

And the end of the file there are some sheets of paper on which the Jyllands-Posten's cartoons are printed... and guess what I found among them?

(The English tags under each cartoon is a translation of the Arabic comments on each one. These Arabic comments are supposed to be a translation to the Danish written next to each picture. My Danish readers please try to send me an English translation to the Danish comments next to every picture.)

What editor-in-chiefs and the Prophet have in common is "to ignore"

Santa Muhammad 2005...

This is the Prophet's leg when he went to heaven

This chair, specifically, is Prophet Muhammad!

Can you prove that the Prophet was not a woman?

To be honest it was my first time to see such cartoons, even on the web, I have seen all the cartoons falsely related to Jyllands-Posten, and these were not among them. The question again is: who is responsible for misguiding people and who is responsible for spreading all these lies?? Who is responsible for inciting the fury about the stupid cartoons that this stupid Jyllands-Posten published??

The answer could be... extremists? No
It is ignorance...

Salaam Jimmy - I don't know about this cartoon, however it's very easy to find any picutre - as those you published in this post from this file - and then adding the arabic comments even via PaintBrush to make Muslims feel angry about something we don't know the real soucre for.

That's why I think those toons are FAKE, espcially that the picutres are not clear. It's a stupid try and I think we should not give them real concern.

On the other hand, when it comes to Jyllands-Posten's cartoons, things are totally different; simply because their 12 insulting cartoons were published via them, i.e. source = Known.

P.S.: Jimmy: JP didn't apologise for publishing the cartoons; rather they apologised for making Muslim feel angry. It's totally different

PS: OOPS! sorry for the long comment!

I cant get ur point SomeMuslimMan, is it because we dont know the source of such fake cartoons that aggitate the Muslims' anger and push people to go burn embassies we should not give them much concern???

Yeah, the stupid 12 cartoons JP published have known sources, we pressed and they apologized. If something is to happen now it is to try to find those who just keep on escalating the crisis and shut them up because what they say is simply fake. And head towards a talk, a debate and work well on being real representatives to our religion.

Am I right?

PS: Long and short comments are all welcome in the Corner. Waiting to hear from you!

Jimmy - as far as I can tell from the photos; the translations are ok.

The first and the last picture lookes like something from a newspaper and they could be Danish. The first one is a caricature of the editor Flemming Rose and has nothing to do with Mohammed; except from what is mentioned in the text.

The one with santa lookes like something homemade.

According to the Danish laws on blasphemy they are not likely to be considered criminal.

The might be offensive to a muslim, but that´s a different story.

Jimmy - I have been looking at the pictures with the leg and the chair and they seem kind of homemade aswell but in a better quality in technical terms than santa.
I don´t think they are from any of the newspapers, but maybe from a magazine with very few readers or perhaps they are made by the extremists on the right for their own amusement (or lack of same).

In my oppinion none of these pictures would have been used by Jyllands-Posten in their debate about selfcensureship. It would make absolutely no sence in Danish terms or logic.

The text next to the chair says (more or less): "This is the profet" is the words in the application from our furniture designer who wanted to participate."

Hi Jimmy.
If i'm not mistaken the pictures are from the funny-pages of another danish newspaper, Weekendavisen. I think they were printed over a year ago.

Some translations are lacking. The first should read:

Dagsavisen decided, in the nick of time, to include a drawing of one of its editors. "the similarity between prominent members of the editorial office and the prophet is just to striking to ignore" it says.

Chair picture:

"This is the prophet" reads the short memo from our furniture designer, who also wanted to get in on the action.

- Norwegian fellow

Oops,a bit too fast there I suppose.

It should be "editorial office of the last page" (baksideredaksjonen) not Dagsavisen.

The first one says:

"the backpage editors recieved shortly before publication this drawing of one of the newspapers editors. "the likeness between leading members of the editorial staff and the prophet is too striking to ignore".

The next one says:

"Santa Muhammed, 2005" - if im not wrong the text that goes with this one has been left out in the scanning.

The 3rd one says:

"the prophets foot when he went to heaven"

The 4th one says:

"This is the prophets chair" is is being said from our furniture designer that also wants a piece of the action"

The last one says:

"Can you prove the prophet was not a women" it was said when ARTYFARTY - the backpages always strong feministic artist-group - added their contribution.

- These are actually from the "funny coloums" of the backpages of the newspaper weekendavisen (an intellectual weekly published newspaper). They usually make fun about different stuff on their backpage - as a going commentary with an odd angle on what is happening. These are making fun of several different things and I think they are quite funny.

First of all they are making fun of the cartoonists - which are being dispicted as a bunch of nutters that have not got smarter thing to say about Muhammed than the backpages "invented" people that contributed with these things. For example the 4th one with the artist group - there is no such thing. Back in the seventies and sixties there were a bunch of that kind of groups - but they are considered "nutters" by todays measurements - the same goes with the "our furniture designer".

The whole concept - especially in the first one - is making fun of newspaper editors that publishes anything without any point (a reference to the JP). "We choose to publish this because it looks like our editor". I think its amazingly funny because there is such a strong reference to editorial reasons for publishing stuff like the original drawings.

Anyways: these are legit - but they are not making fun of either muslims or muhammed in any way. Too bad those people did not include everything from those pages. There is missing quite a bit of text if I remember right (which explains the context). Anyways -- for anyone to be offended by these they would have to completely misunderstand what spirit it was made in ;)

You can contact the newspaper if you want:


Where is says "TIL" you should select "weekendavisens redaktion".

"Vedr" is the "about field"

and "tekst" is the field for the text.


Navn = name
Stillingsbetegnelse = "occupation"
Adresse = "address"
Postnr/by = postal and city
Telefon = phone
Mail-adresse = mail



This is very interesting site... »

Where did you find it? Interesting read »

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link

About me

  • I'm Jimmy
  • From Cairo, Egypt
  • This is a scrapbox in which I put the outcome of my brain-surges and freak-outs; that usually come out during intense loneliness or frustration. Not all... but some!
My profile

What I Believe

    Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

What is Islam?

Photo Album

Powered by Blogger
and Blogger Templates