Flemming Rose - Man of the Hour!
Flemming Rose discusses why he published the cartoons of Muhammad in an Washington Post editorial (reprinted here). Money quote: “But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. … one should not be tolerant with the intolerant..”
The International Herald Tribune has a story about the man himself. According to the IHT, Flemming learned to despise censorship during his 13 years as a journalist stationed in Moscow during the communist era. “His worldview changed, Rose said, when he went to Russia in the 1980s and saw firsthand the repression of the Soviet regime. He befriended dissidents, devoured books by Solzhenitsyn, Hannah Arendt, and Ayn Rand, and traveled throughout Asia and the Middle East, eventually covering the fall of communism in the Baltics and the war in Chechnya.”
The above cartoon is one of the originals published in the Danish newspaper but with text added by ROR (hat tip Dougout), suitable for posting in public venues: lamp posts, bulletin boards, etc.
Update: Flemming Rose in his own words. Hat tip: Katy.
The International Herald Tribune has a story about the man himself. According to the IHT, Flemming learned to despise censorship during his 13 years as a journalist stationed in Moscow during the communist era. “His worldview changed, Rose said, when he went to Russia in the 1980s and saw firsthand the repression of the Soviet regime. He befriended dissidents, devoured books by Solzhenitsyn, Hannah Arendt, and Ayn Rand, and traveled throughout Asia and the Middle East, eventually covering the fall of communism in the Baltics and the war in Chechnya.”
The above cartoon is one of the originals published in the Danish newspaper but with text added by ROR (hat tip Dougout), suitable for posting in public venues: lamp posts, bulletin boards, etc.
Update: Flemming Rose in his own words. Hat tip: Katy.
posted by Jason Pappas at 6:55 AM
19 Comments:
Hmmm. . . How about using it as stickers for all your outgoing envelopes?
BTW, I already have a little sign stuck on the back window of my care that's the international nullification symbol with the words "sharia, dhimmitude, jihad" in it.
By tomorrow, I will have a facsimile of that "Baby on Board" thing you see in car windows, only it's being modified to read "Kafir on Board."
I have made a bumper-sticker that reads, "It's the Borders, Stupid," and I'm ready to make another saying "It's the Ports, Stupid."
So far, all I've gotten out of this is a phone call from a man with a heavy Arab accent wanting to "confirm" my address. I told him to go sit on it, but with my increasing numbers of un-PC messages on my car, I expect to have my tires slashed or, at the very least, have the car keyed.
DAMN THEM! When will the world grow sufficiently weary of them to do something REAL?!!
"of my CAR. . ."
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jason,
keep up the good work, I've got your article linked to my blog;
http://amboytimes.blogspot.com/
2006/02/more-cartoon-news.html
Jason,
Coincidentally, I too linked to Flemming Rose's article.
This portion really resonated with me:
As a former correspondent in the Soviet Union, I am sensitive about calls for censorship on the grounds of insult. This is a popular trick of totalitarian movements: Label any critique or call for debate as an insult and punish the offenders. That is what happened to human rights activists and writers such as Andrei Sakharov, Vladimir Bukovsky, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Natan Sharansky, Boris Pasternak. The regime accused them of anti-Soviet propaganda, just as some Muslims are labeling 12 cartoons in a Danish newspaper anti-Islamic.
The lesson from the Cold War is: If you give in to totalitarian impulses once, new demands follow. The West prevailed in the Cold War because we stood by our fundamental values and did not appease totalitarian tyrants....
Did you hear that Clinton has called for punishing the cartoonists? Good grief!
I think the artists had no idea of the serious reaction. The reaction is silly
Jason, I read this article this morning but had no time to post on it. I got back and had found that you had. So, I too linked to you. The part you quoted was also the part that resonated with me too.
Good job, sir.
Beak,
If they had known just how much the islamofascists would overreact, I wonder if they would have printed them at all.
Cubed has the spirit. I wondered about getting the Mo-the-bomber on a button to wear on my lapel. (We New Yorkers don't have a car! Except Beakerkin!)
Thanks, Kevin, I keep meaning to add you to the blog roll … I like you drawing of Mo, it looks like Bluto from the old Popeye Cartoons.
AOW, has extensive coverage on Flemming Rose’s article and explains how this is part of a larger problem. Clinton did what? That’s outrageous! What right does he have to tell any foreign leader to jail their citizens for telling the truth? And Carter comes to the aid of Hamas! Bush wants to hire Arabs to protect our ports! When you can’t speak the truth, you blind yourself and fail to act appropriately. Lying (by commission or omission) hurts the liar more than anyone else in the long run.
Thanks, LA, it’s good to see you and AOW are support Flemming Rose. He’s taken a brave stand. The least we can do is lend our moral support.
Getting the truth to the public isn’t easy but if it takes a cartoon to let other know what we think about Mohammad and Islam, so be it. Some people won’t read a book or even a blog. But they may ask, “Why do you think that?” That’s what is missing from the discussion. No one asks if it is true. But everyone knows the answer when they see the violence by jihadists in response to the cartoons. Perhaps the question isn't needed! I’ve heard of polls showing greater suspicion of Islam or Muslims since the Cartoon Intifada but I don’t remember where I read that. Does anyone know of such a poll?
Should we really be surprised that Bill Clinton would call for the cartoonists to be punished?
Nothing gets a leftist erect and ready to goose-step like the chance to stomp on human freedom.
Mr Beamish
I am sure that Clinton would love to punish the Author of Mallard Filmore .
Jason: AOW, has extensive coverage on Flemming Rose’s article and explains how this is part of a larger problem.
I do ramble on when I get frustrated. But I believe that one reason for the msm's self-censorship is fear. One day, we'll hear this: "If only those cartoons hadn't been published, the Muslims wouldn't be mad at the West." That's dhimmitude and appeasement!
Clinton, Carter, and Gore have been shooting off their mouths. GWB supports UAE's involvement with our ports, one of the weakest link in our national security. Staggers the imagination!
Interview with Flemming Rose and Imam Ahmed Abu Laban, the Danish Muslim leader here.
Well worth a look.
AOW: I agree, its fear.
Its great that Flemming Rose had the courage to stick to his principles-- and to express them so well.
And, of course, most of the media hypocritically pretend its not fear, but rather its "out of respect" for Moslems. Jeff jacoby of the Boston Globe has spoken out about this.
In addition to him and Flemming Rose, a few others (notably John Howard) have recently had the courage to tell the truth about some of these things: Courage & Cowardice.
I don't think it's fear. Journalists have gone into dangerous situtations like war zones and many have been killed. So many do have the guts if they believe in the cause.
They really believe the cartoons violate the taboo against "racism" or "bigotry." They don't realize that they are true and worthy of discussion.
Plus, they think being critical of Islam is helping Bush. And they hate Bush so much that solidarity with fellow journalists is secondary. Just like feminists who've called off their criticism in order not to "play into Bush's hands," they don't have principles, they only take sides.
Jason,
I don't think it's fear. Journalists have gone into dangerous situtations like war zones and many have been killed. So many do have the guts if they believe in the cause.
They really believe the cartoons violate the taboo against "racism" or "bigotry." They don't realize that they are true and worthy of discussion.
Some food for thought. But I still think that fear plays a big part in this. Maybe the kind of fear generated by pc? The fear of even considering that Islam itself is the problem? Facing that second fear would require some major upending of multiculturalism, to say the least.
As a rule, the press is quite irreverent about faiths. Not Islam, though.
This is absolutely true: Plus, they think being critical of Islam is helping Bush.
Folks,
I'm running around this morning trying to decathect the news I'm hearing; it's OT with respect to Flemming Rose, a definite hero in my books!
Here's what's driving me nuts this morning:
1) It is being widely reported on TV news programs this morning that Bush says that he "didn't know" that DPW was owned by Muslims before the deal was done!
2) Part of the "deal" was that "no investigation into the deal was to be made" after it was concluded.
3) Senator Robert Menendez is saying that "additional security concessions have been made to DPW" as part of the "deal."
And my daughter tells me that the White House (comments@whitehouse.gov) has been so overwhelmed by email that a temporary additional link has been established. . .
GO FOR IT! WE'VE GOT 'EM ON THE RUN!
I swear to God, I've never thought of the "I" word until now! I DON'T CARE if it's naivete, ignorance, if he's a good guy who's been too trusting and has been deceived, whether he has a "religion blind spot" where he just can't grasp that not all religions are good, or whether it's out and out treason.
In this day and age, someone who pulls off stunts like this cannot be in charge!
Tom Tancredo; Paul Sperry; Ralph Peters; Michelle Malkin; Diana West; Robert Spencer--any of these people for President!
Yes, I am pretty upset right now. . .
Thanks. I don't quite feel better yet, but it helps!
Jason,
Hadn't thought of buttons--but of course!
I have to disagree with AOW and agree with Jason that the primary problem with our friends in the MSM isn't fear, it's that they are in fundamental philosophical agreement with Islam. They both originate from Plato, and while they split from each other around 900 or so C.E., and developed their own little characteristics, the basic ideas resemble each other far more than either resembles Aristotle's ideas.
The paradigm shift that occurred with Greek civilization was a direct result of a new way of thinking started by Aristotle--too long to go into here, unfortunately, but it was his thinking that gave birth to the Renaissance and ultimately to the United States.
It was in the mid-1800s that because Americans were still pissed off at Britain because of two wars with the Mother Country that we began sending our kids to German, not British, universities to complete their educations.
Germany (among others) had never let go of the Platonic thinking that gave birth to everything with a collectivist point of view, from the American Liberals to Islam.
Our boys came back infested with Plato (via the Three Stooges of Philosophy, Kant/Hegel/Marx) and entered all fields: Education, Journalism, Politics, Publishing--you name it.
From there, those highly destructive viewpoints began to spread wildly, and in the 50s they reached "critical mass." In the 60s, the evidence of their success was undeniable.
The main conduit for the spread of these faulty ideas was our (by then) government-run school system, where both attendance and curriculum were compelled.
That was our fatal flaw; it isn't that the PC crowd (they are the primary legacy of the Three Stooges) is AFRAID, it's that they AGREE!
We can't take back the schools; we have to do an end-run around this behemoth.
AOW, it's people like you who are heavily involved in the home-school movement, who are our last chance. It is only people like you who have the necessary freedom to teach the truth.
Jason:
Just like feminists who've called off their criticism in order not to "play into Bush's hands," they don't have principles, they only take sides.
This is a very interesting observation. It really does provide a logical reason for their complicity with radical Islam.
They had better watch out, though; since if radical Islam wins this, all the feminists have fought for will be for nought!
I think we’re all correct in our analysis if we put the parts together. The media failure is a combination of the fact that they loathe to support our nation and values, their inability to condemn the culture of Islam, and fear. After all, courage is moving in the face of fear when you believe in something. They just don’t have a passion for our values and moral superiority! Imagine their even contemplating the ‘s’ word: superiority. Or moral for that matter. The combination?
Cubed is right, let’s bombard our representatives with the message to scuttle the UAE sell-out. Nice capsule summary of the underlying roots of Islam and continental philosophy. I was going to write more about Islam’s reliance on Plato during the period when philosophy was competing with Islam. Even though they got rid of philosophy, they retained the Platonic paternalistic monarch/caliph/dictator model to this very day. So no wonder they’ve been so easily influenced by 20th century totalitarianism even when they’ve marginalized their religion. It’s so ingrained in the culture.
How about using it as stickers for all your outgoing envelopes?
Cubed, this is a great idea. Did you know you can create your own postage stamps?
Imagine the uproar...
<< Home