Western Resistance

« WR: Is This Another Cartoon Jihad? | | Europe: EU Parliament Votes On Guantanamo Closure »

June 13, 2006

Muslim Cartoon - The Artist Responds

You will find below that we have received a demand to remove our image of "Mohammed" on the spurious grounds that it is a "pornographic photo". This is the communication that I, as the artist, have sent to "M.A" at sociohistory@yahoo.com.

Subject: Your attempt at censorship

Dear "M.A."

If you see the picture in its original context, here:

You will see the following quotes from Sahih Bukhari and Tabari:

Bukhari Hadith Vol VII, Book 62, Number 64: "Narrated Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death)."

To see the picture from the main page, click on the link below. If you are Muslim, you may prefer not to view it. It is a new illustration, and was not part of the Jyllands-Posten collection, which we discussed below.

Bukhari Hadith Vol VII, Book 62, Number 65: "Narrated Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)."

Tabari Hadith: IX:131: (Aisha narrated) "My mother came to me while I was being swung on a swing between two branches and got me down. My nurse wiped my face with some water and started leading me. When I was at the door she stopped so I could catch my breath. I was then brought in while the Messenger was sitting on a bed in our house. My mother made me sit on his lap. Then the men and women got up and left. The Prophet consummated his marriage with me in my house when I was nine years old."

It is an illustration of an abominable act against a child, committed by a pedophile adult, who happens to be the founder of a violent faith.

I am the artist, and no matter which way you look at it, the image is not pornographic.

The fact that you find it pornographic, or claim to find it pornographic, says more about your own values than my own.

The child is clothed, the child is "in shock". Mohammed the so-called "prophet" is sexually aroused (or is that a scimitar in his pocket?), but no penis is portrayed.

I suspect that your reason for wanting this image removed has nothing to do with pornography, but is political or religious. The image depicts Mohammed, which is offensive to some Muslims, but more importantly, the image depicts in unambiguous terms an aspect of this so-called prophet that Muslims and their toadies would rather not be seen.

People are free to reproduce this image wherever they see fit. The image has already been copied numerous times in websites and blogs around the world. And they all have my permission, as I hold the copyright.

You have no case to suggest that this image is "pornographic" as the image is neither sexually titillating nor designed to be titillating.

Only a pedophile would find such an image remotely pornographic, but even then, only if they mentally place themselves in the upturned shoes of the so-called prophet.

We are not going to remove this image, so do your worst. You are trying, it appears, to use cheap intimidation tactics, to scare us into submission, which makes me believe you must be a Muslim (Islam means "submission") or an appeaser of Muslims.

I would suggest you get a life, but if you have chosen Islam, you obviously would not appreciate the beauty and joys of a natural life.

Feel free to respond as you see fit. For you and your ilk do not threaten me. And legally there is not a thing you can do about it.

And if you cannot tell the difference between a "cartoon" and (your word) a "photo" I suspect you would not have the ability to mount a legal case regarding what constitutes pornography and what constitutes our freedom of expression, as protected under the first amendment of the US constitution.

If you wish to intimidate, you really must try harder than this.

Gerald Cambrensis

UPDATE: I have received this response from our hyper-intelligent critic, "M.A.", 8 minutes ago (1.15 am GMT):

"I did not ask for your dim wit argument based on ahistorical sources. I will be contacting your web host and informing them of this."

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at June 13, 2006 2:05 PM

Comments

Posted by: prodos at June 13, 2006 5:12 PM

Post a comment