Weather | Traffic | Surf | Maps | Webcam

 »Next Story»
 Local News
 Currents & Arts
 Night & Day
 The Last Week
 Weekly Sections
Subscribe to the UT

The San Diego Union-Tribune

Letters to the Editor: North Edition

More reader responses to Muslims' reaction to cartoons

February 9, 2006

It is indeed true that many Muslims consider it blasphemy to print any image of Muhammad, their prophet. Similarly, many Hindus believe it is a sacrilege to eat beef. And there are fundamentalist Christians who believe they, and only they, have a monopoly on salvation.

However, Hindus, Christians and members of other religious faiths do not resort to violence against those who do not share their ethnocentric religious values. As evidenced again these past few weeks, only followers of Muhammad believe in reacting with violence, mostly against the innocent, to a non-violent expression of free speech, such as a cartoon, thereby reinforcing one of the cartoons that depicts Islam as a violent faith.

Write us



Del Mar



This editorial not only takes a simplistic take on politics and history; it does not analyze the underlying reasons such cartoons have evoked such responses, most of which have been non-violent. In these cartoons, Muslims see not only an attack against the Prophet Muhammad but an attack on the spirit of Islam that he represents.


San Diego

I've been wondering about this massive outrage concerning a depiction of the prophet Mohammad. There are riots all over Europe and the withdrawal of ambassadors and other nonsense. My question is: Why such outrage? Was the cartoon so devilish? I ask you this because you have not published the pictures that have generated such outrage.

This is very interesting in a medium that is quick to admonish American actions and run stories on Abu Ghraib, with photos.

So why have you not published these cartoons? Fear? Its definitely newsworthy as there are riots and beatings going on.


I would like to congratulate the Philadelphia Inquirer for reprinting the cartoon of Muhammad that is part of the current controversy. A few days ago, I was dismayed that the images were not shown on TV. I finally found them on the Internet.

Americans need to see the full images of the cartoons with translations and explanation of the events surrounding the initial publication. They will see that the cartoons are quite tame.

I don't think Westerners have any responsibility to sympathize with Muslims offended by the depiction of Muhammad. They are not supposed to make images of him, but we don't have to follow the Koran. My Jewish friends aren't offended because I eat a ham and cheese sandwich. Are we to get rid of television and women's clothing other than burkas because those are offensive to them?

San Diego

I applaud the Union-Tribune's decision not to publish the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad and hope the editors stand firm in this decision. However, I must say that I think there is no reason this should be such a difficult decision.




Chula Vista






Billions in Western aid poured into the Indonesian tsunami area and to the victims. Billions in Western aid poured into earthquake areas and victims in Pakistan, Iran and Turkey over the last few years. Countless tens of thousands of lives were saved and injured cared for.

Where have the Muslim clergy, political leadership and press been in expressing thanks for this aid and care? Probably hiding in embarrassment at their total failure to provide the kind of infrastructure only successful Western societies have developed for dealing with catastrophe.

But now at last they can come out and rage in the streets again; a Western newspaper published a cartoon of questionable taste that offended a few. It was a cartoon that simply would have been wadded up and thrown out in most societies.

This is getting old fast: Mideasterners taking to the streets to rage against the West over some slight or the other, shouting death to the West and all the infidels. They blame all their problems on the West while ignoring their own complete institutional failures. If Middle Eastern countries actually had social, business and governmental institutions of substance and basis for national pride, silly matters like the Danish cartoon wouldn't get a second glance and such matters would be laughed off. Instead they become national celebrations of wounded pride and indignation, prodded on by the mullahs and kings.

Sadly, just the other day we thought it was going to be the 21st century all over the world, but again are reminded it is actually still the 19th century over there.

Scripps Ranch

For the last 30 years the world has watched as Muslims massacred Israelis in Munich, took over ships and planes and shoved Americans overboard or out the doors, blew up explosive-laden boats against our ships and flew airplanes into buildings. We've watched as they strapped bombs to their bodies and blew themselves up on buses, in pizza parlors, in marketplaces, in churches. We've watched as they planted Individual Explosive Devices, dragged the bodies of our soldiers through the streets, hung our citizens' burned bodies from bridges, beheaded men and women, and listened to hatred preached by their holy men.

And now we are confronted with Muslims rioting, demonstrating, burning of embassies and consulates, calling for the killing of all who publish political cartoons of their prophet.

It's time that the Islamic world and Muslims grow up. There is a world that doesn't think a political cartoon is cause for destroying buildings or killing people who don't agree with us. Those of us in the West who think the three pillars of democracy – free speech, free religion and free press – are vital principles are not about to lie down and succumb to Islam's demands.

If Muslims want the world's respect, they need to earn it. They won't earn that respect by planting improvised explosive devices, becoming suicide bombers or calling for the death of newspaper editors they disagree with. They will earn that respect by acting in a peaceful, respectful manner toward those who are different from themselves. It's called tolerance.

San Diego

Freedom of expression and the press is under siege by religious fundamentalists who disagree with the fundamentals of democracy. The Western press needs to stand up and define the issue for what it is: the basic human right to criticism versus blind, unquestioning support for authority.

By the way, where is the outcry from the usual defenders of free speech on the left, like the ACLU? It seems as though they are silent out of reluctance to criticize anyone or anything that is opposed to the United States and the rest of the Western world.

Mission Hills

The outrageous reaction of the Muslim world to the cartoons depicting Muhammad shows their hypocrisy and double standards. Muslim leaders never raise their voices to complain when Muslim newspapers publish offensive and heinous cartoons about Jews and Christians. Muslims do not seem to care if they offend Americans by burning our flag and, worse, there have been no rallies decrying the brutal beheading of Americans and other non-Muslim nationals.

Yet Muslims are issuing threats, burning embassies and being violent because of some cartoons. The Muslim world is in desperate need of some serious introspection and reform.

San Diego

What's all the fuss about? Isn't it in the general nature of political cartoons and caricatures to be equal opportunity offenders? Wasn't it just a few years ago that our cartoonists mercilessly depicted the French as cowards for not joining the United States in attacking a sovereign nation? Did the French bomb our embassy or take to the streets threatening bloodshed?

And it wasn't even that long ago that some cartoonists depicted Jews as hooked-nosed financiers and blacks as tap-dancing watermelon-eaters and Southerners as slow-witted, etc. Yet no one blew up buildings. Everyone simply just let bad taste slide and eventually it went away.

Now it seems as though the world is tip-toeing on eggshells, lost in a misguided miasma of political correctness; we may as well imprison cartoonists and Salman Rushdie and Howard Stern and all defenders of freedom of artistic expression. Wait a minute. Didn't the Third Reich do that?


 »Next Story»
