This material included the 12 drawings of Mohammed from JyllandsPosten, which I have already posted (see the top, right corner of this page) - and it included 3 really insulting images, which the imams ought to have quietly destroyed, but instead have chosen to immortalize by distributing copies all over the Middle East (Imams showed pedophile Mohammed).
The case file also included a silly page from the back of the newspaper WeekendAvisen. This page was printed November 10th 2005 and I have never heard about this page before it appeared in the imams' material - which of course was never meant to be published in Denmark.
According to the text in the case file "an almost extinct newspaper brought images that were more powerful and worse" i.e. worse than those in JyllandsPosten. This opinion was repeated in several newspapers 4th January 2006 by Kasem Ahmad, spokesman for Islamisk Trossamfund (The Danish Islamic Society) "WeekendAvisen has shown images that are worse than Jyllands-Posten. This is a campaign to insult Muslims in Denmark" (Danish article - my translation).
This is where you begin to feel that either Muslims are speaking with two tongues - or at least that the left hand knows not what the right hand doeth: Two days later, January 6th 2006, another leading imam, Fativ Alev, was interviewed. He was shown the "offending" page from WeekendAvisen, which was now almost 2 months old - a page which according to Mr. Ahmad was worse than JyllandsPosten (which has enraged 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide) - and Fativ Alev had never heard about this page before.
Fativ Alev took a few looks at the page and WeekendAvisen pressed him several times for his opinion (Danish article - my translation):
Reporter: "Our satire page is OK?"
Alev: "That is... yes, of course it is. I don't think it's funny, but I wouldn't say I'm insulted either. As humans we have different taste, and this isn't exactly my taste."
So whom are we do believe? Ahmad or Alev? Has WeekendAvisen exceeded JyllandsPosten when it comes to hurling deadly and blasphemous insults at 1.5 billion Muslims - or was it a harmless joke, which nobody would ever have heard about if Ahmad hadn't included it in his propaganda material?
Let's look at a few samples. I have never seen the page myself, but luckily the imams have preserved the "blasphemy" for all eternity in their case file.
The alleged joke is that the newspaper's staff have a contest to paint a picture of the prophet:
Exhibit A: "This is the prophet" is the short recommendation from our furniture designer, who also wanted to participate.
Funny, no? I tend to agree with Alev, "this isn't exactly my taste".
 |
| Mother with Prophet |
For those who don't know this old joke: If you don't know what to call an abstract painting, you can always label it "Mother with child". Funny, no? The worst picture on the page is a fin-de-siecle drawing of woman - a large beard has been painted on her face and the text says, "Can you prove perhaps that the prophet wasn't a woman?"
There's no need to go through all the non-funny non-jokes - none of which shows Mohammed - we already have Imam Alev's word that this is not blasphemous.
But we are left to wonder, how an Infidel Dane is supposed to know about Muslim laws, when two leading members can hold so diametrically different opinions.
Added: It turns out that the imams made a totally wrong translation of Mother with Prophet.
Added: I updated the original post to replace the illustrations with copies in colour and to add a copy of the original page.
