Muhammad and the Robberies

16.-18. March 650 will meet journalists at the Foundation for Critical and Investigative Journalism (Skup). But one case is not up for thorough discussion: The coverage of the most talked about case of the past year, the caricature battle. Norwegian media has written about 5500 issues about Jyllands-Posten (JP) and Muhammad after the twelve caricatures were printed 30. September 2005. The Christian Newspaper Magazine has received media coverage of over 5000 articles since the 10. January 2006, as the first Norwegian newspaper, was allowed to reproduce the entire JP caricature page.

But common to the articles, the TV debates and the radio features is that the core of the case has not emerged. 14 months after the Magazine's publication, Ny Tid brings here some of the most widespread opinions about the case in the Norwegian press, as well as the information you never received.

Children's book and the cartoonists

The most important reason for JP's Mohammed invitation to Danish cartoonists was the Kåre Bluitgen 16. September 2005 claimed in the media that he had no one to draw Muhammad in his planned children's book. Bluitgen broke through as an Islam critic in 2002 with a proposal to "sprinkle the Quran with menstrual blood". Three days later JP then invited illustrators to draw "Muhammad as you see him".

The magazine's editor Vebjørn Selbekk wrote 10. January 2006 that 40 Danish cartoonists were invited to draw Muhammad for JP because "freedom of speech was in danger". "Only twelve of the 40 took the chance to comply," Selbekk writes.

Even highlighted JP 30. September how many it was that on four days flipped around and got Muhammad drawn for them. The newspaper does not mention that any of the 40 contacts should not have "taken the chance" to draw Muhammad, as the magazine claims, but points out that only 25 of the 40 are now active drafters.

It was JP's own cartoonists who drew the most controversial caricatures: Mohammed with something resembling horns, the first page drawing with a menacing Muhammad with saber and two burka women, and the Prophet with a lit bomb in the turban. External cartoonist Peder Bundgaard is among those who feel abused: "I feel myself and my colleagues have been lured into the trap of a newspaper whose motives have been self-assertion and provocation for the sake of provocation." (Politiken 20.10.05).

In JP's own editorial, the expert journalists were against the printing press before it happened. Culture editor Flemming Rose later admitted that they were nevertheless printed "more or less random".

In January 2006, Bluitgen's anti-Islamic children's book The Qur'an and Muhammad's Life came to Denmark. No demonstrations, no protests. In a press release from 26 Muslim organizations, they disagreed "whether the scientific and objective have been adhered to in the content of the book", but they stress that the criticism "does not violate the right to express criticism and use the free word". Bluitgen's book has become a bestseller in Denmark, and it is also available for purchase at one of Oslo's bookstores.

rationale

In the preface to Selbek's Threatened by Islamists, Per Edgar Kokkvold, Secretary-General of the Press Federation, writes that the Muhammad caricatures were "intended as a satirical settlement not with Muhammad but with those who terrorize and kill in the name of Muhammad".

One of the cartoonists has said this in retrospect, but in the Jyllands-Posten's own reasoning there is nothing about a settlement with terrorists, but rather one with Danish imams and Danish Muslims who "insist on particular consideration for their own religious sentiments", such cultural editor Rose's Grounds 30. September 2005 sounds.

Rose prints the caricatures because “we are heading into a slide where no one can predict what self-censorship will end up with. That is why Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten has urged members of the Danish magazine's association to draw Muhammad as they see him ”. He points out that taking into account the religious sentiments of Muslims is "incompatible with worldly democracy and freedom of speech, where one must be prepared to be mocked, ridiculed and ridiculed".

In editor-in-chief Carsten Justes's head, "The threat from the dark" the same day, the Danish Muslims are also attacked: "The Muslims who draw Islam in public ... have one common feature: a monumental self-celebrity. With such self-solemnity comes an almost morbid hypersensitivity to any contradiction, which is readily interpreted as provocation. ”The conclusion is that Danish Muslims should stop listening to their imams.

provocation

According to Kokkvold's foreword, JP and the magazine printed "some innocent drawings of Muhammad". What no Norwegian media has mentioned, but what is known abroad, is that the most talked about caricature, with Muhammad wearing a turban with a tented bomb, has the very Islamic creed placed in the Arabic calligraphy in the bomb: "There is no deity except God and Muhammad is the messenger of God. "

Therefore, many view it as not targeting terrorists, but in practice against Muslims who can recognize their personal beliefs in Muhammad's lit bombeturban. The magazine printed this drawing 10. January 2006, on Eid ul-Adha (Abraham's Sacrifice Day), the day of forgiveness which marks the end of the pilgrimage to Mecca.

But even this bomb designation has been published without protest: In the autumn of 2006, the Jordanian cartoonist Emad Hajjaj drew a copy of the bomb turban, which he imagined drawn by Pope Benedict, without demonstrations – the context was different and the creed was removed.

"According to the Qur'an, it is forbidden to depict Muhammad," Selbekk claimed in his article 10. January 2006. Kjell Magne Bondevik and others who criticized the caricature drawings also stated this.

But the Qur'an does not say that it is forbidden to depict Muhammad. The tradition originates from some hadiths, but especially in Shia Islam it has been common to draw Muhammad. A number of books have been published in Denmark, Norway and other European countries in the last century with Mohammed drawings, without protests.

Of course, Imam Fatih Alev explains that Muhammad's image ban does not apply to most Danes: “This is a rule for Muslims. Non-Muslims must do as they please, in the same way that I cannot be annoyed that a non-Muslim drinks, eats pork and has a sexual life outside of marriage ”(Information 17.09.05).

Reproductions of the Muhammad cartoons have been printed in over 150 newspapers worldwide, most without Muslim protests. Political editors Rune Engelbreth Larsen and Tøger Seidenfaden, authors of the Caricature Crisis (2006), point out that this is because the caricatures are interpreted in context. It is protested when the caricatures are seen as part of an Islamophobic campaign to expose Muslims to "mockery, ridicule and ridicule", as JP put it.

ambassador letter

On 12 October 2005, 11 ambassadors sent a letter to the Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen (Venstre) requesting a meeting. When the Magazine printed the Muhammad cartoons on January 10, 2006, they brought a facsimile from the letter – but the entire content was cut out, only the signatures were shown. The text read: "Here are the signatures that show that the ambassadors from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Egypt, Indonesia, Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Liberia, Morocco and the Palestinian Authority tried to get the Danish Prime Minister to intervene against Jutland. -The mail."

However, neither the magazine nor other Norwegian newspapers have been told what the letter contained. The ambassadors' letter did not mention specific requirements with regard to the twelve caricature drawings in the Jutland Post. Rather, it is the general Islamist and racist climate in Denmark, as demonstrated by the UN, that the ambassadors want a meeting about: “This concerns an ongoing black campaign in the Danish public and the media against Islam and Muslims. Radio Holger's statements for which they were indicted, the Danish People's Party MP and Speaker of the People Louise Freverts derogatory statements [on Muslims as "cancerous", ed. note], Minister of Culture Brian Mikkelsen's declaration of war on Muslims and the Jyllands-Posten cultural sites that invite people to draw the Holy Prophet Muhammad are some recent examples. ”

In the NTB message from 21. October 2005 on the Ambassador's letter states: "A number of Muslim countries' ambassadors to Denmark have objected to caricature drawings by the Prophet Muhammad (...) they feel offended by the drawings and demand a public regret from the newspaper."

But the letter does not say that the ambassadors, as NTB claimed, demand a public regret from the newspaper. Nor is it only the "ambassadors of Muslim countries" who protest. Palestinian Ambassador Maie FB Sarraf is a Christian and led the diplomatic initiative against Rasmussen along with Egypt's Mona Omar Attia. Turkey's female ambassador Fugen Ok is at the top of the list of signed ambassadors, while Algeria's Latifa Benazza is also included. Indonesia's Christian Perwitoroni Wijoni is the last of the five female ambassadors behind the letter and the desire for dialogue. Their arguments do not win.

Da Fogh Rasmussen in his answer 21. October refuses to have a meeting with the ambassador women, he writes: “Freedom of speech is the very foundation of Danish democracy. Freedom of speech goes far, and the Danish government has no influence on what the press writes. ”

The Danish Prime Minister's claim that the letter and the case is about "freedom of expression" has prevailed, although Egypt's Mona Attia, among others, stated in Politiken 27. October 2005 that "there is a great misunderstanding (...) We have wished he encouraged the responsible and respectful use of press freedom."

Magazine first out

The magazine sold its caricature print to other media 10. January 2006 in this way: "Today the magazine publishes as the first Norwegian newspaper the disputed Danish drawings of Muhammad". That's how they came on the TV Norway news that night.

Only after the fight began did Selbekk claim that he wasn't the first one anyway. “There are several major Norwegian newspapers that have printed the Mohammed drawing, including Aftenposten and Dagbladet.no. It is convenient to blame a small Christian newspaper like the Magazine, ”Selbekk told the News Agency 4. February 2006. This was repeated in the TV 2 documentary about Selbekk autumn 2006.

But JP had since 30. In September, others refused to publish the drawings, so only unapproved small facsimiles were printed in other Norwegian newspapers, to show what the case was about. When the magazine got in touch in January, chief editor Juste abolished the lock, and the Norwegian newspaper receives the page by mail so that they, as the first, print the JP drawings large and in an Islam-critical context.

Politics editors conclude in the Caricature crisis that it is "the magazine's reprint" that triggers the protests, after the case was being resolved. The storm Mufti in Jerusalem, Ekrima Sarbi, concludes: “… we only started to react seriously after the Norwegian publication of the drawings. This is because for months we were patient with Denmark and because we hoped the matter would be resolved in all silence ”(Kristligt Dagblad 07.02.06).

The Danish cartoonists have "received warm and wholehearted support" from the Danish Attorney General, the cartoonist Roar Hagen wrote in VG 16. January 2007.

But Denmark's Attorney General Henning Fode came 15. March 2006 with criticism of JP's caricature print and justification 30. September 2006. He points out that Denmark's racism and blasphemy paragraphs protect religious sentiments, and that "there is therefore no free and unlimited access to comment on religious subjects".

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said 26. February that the reprint of the caricatures has strengthened the extremists.

In February 2006, UN racism reporter Doudou Diène points out that the caricatures and opposition in Denmark to admit mistakes are "symptomatic" of "the political banalization of Islamophobia". UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbor "regrets" printing.

In February, Bill Clinton calls the drawings "shameful," both the United States government and Jack Straw criticize the publication. Jaques Chirac "condemns all obvious provocations", as did Desmond Tutu and Shirin Ebadi, who point out that "terrorists have been delighted to have copied the newspaper's drawings".

The "new" censorship

“Of course, this is about freedom of expression and cultural values ​​in the broad sense. Two worlds have dried up. In the Western Christian cultural circle, the blasphemy paragraph is largely dormant, ”wrote Arne Dvergsdal in Dagbladet 7. January 2006.

But the judicial system in Europe has long and regularly restricted freedom of expression. In Denmark, Lars Bonnevie in 1999 was convicted of writing that Pia Kjærsgaard is racist, a politician who in 2003 was convicted of racist statements. The European Court of Human Rights has given countries the right to prohibit statements that are blasphemous or offensive. The French satire visa Charlie Hebdo has been brought to court several times for insulting Catholics, once convicted of drawing the pope under the guillotine.

This week's decision in Paris could thus be a sign that the world is like before.

Admits wrong

The magazine's editor admits factual errors regarding image bans in the Qur'an, and he cited errors in the Jutland Post's discussion of why not all the cartoonists provided caricatures. He did not know that the bomb caricature contained the creed of Islam. He says he has read the ambassador's letter, but does not admit to reproducing the entire content, and he did not know that Christian ambassadors also signed.

- Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said that the ambassadors in their letter tried to get him to intervene with Jyllands-Posten, so we wrote it, says Selbekk.

- Does this new information have anything to do with your perception of the case?

- No, the ambassadors speak on behalf of the regimes, not themselves. I have always believed that the bomb cartoon was the most interesting. But I have said before that I regret the case and would not have done it again, says Selbekk.

Per Edgar Kokkvold states in his statements:

- I maintain that we are talking about innocent drawings. One of the drawings was exclusively a settlement with Jyllands-Posten's editors. Two are caricatures by children's book author Kåre Bluitgen, with hints that from his side it was exclusively a PR stunt. The drawing Ny Tid mentions in particular, with Muhammad wearing a turban with a fuse-lit bomb, is made by a cartoonist (Kurt Westergaard) who has never spared any religious or political dogma, and is therefore criticized, but not threatened, by both Jews and Christians, says Kokkvold .