Muslims "warn" South Park Creators

rabbitt

rabbitt

CAGiversary!
Feedback
7 (100%)
Link here: http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2...uth-park-creators/?scp=1&sq=south park&st=cse

It's a short article, so I'll post the whole thing.

An Islamic group based in New York compared the “South Park” creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone to Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch filmmaker who was killed by an Islamic militant, and said that a recent episode of that satirical animated series insulted the Prophet Muhammad, CNN reported. The group, Revolution Muslim, published its post after a “South Park” episode last week that depicted the founders of various religions, including Moses, Jesus and Buddha, but declined to show the Prophet Muhammad outright and instead represented him as wearing a bear costume.

The post, written by Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, said that the episode “outright insulted” the Prophet, adding:

We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.

Mr. Van Gogh was slain in Amsterdam in 2004 after making a film that discussed the abuse of Muslim women in some Islamic societies. Mr. Stone and Mr. Parker have mocked Comedy Central for refusing to allow them to depict the Prophet Muhammad on “South Park” in a series of episodes that were broadcast after the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published cartoons satirizing Muhammad.

Update: In a telephone interview on Wednesday, Younus Abdullah Muhammad, a member of Revolution Muslim, repeated the group’s assertion that the post was a prediction rather than a threat. He said that the post on the group’s blog “was intended in a principle that’s deeply rooted in the Islamic religion, which is called commanding the good and forbidding the evil,” tying the group’s complaints about “South Park” to larger frustrations about U.S. support for Israel and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Comedy Central declined to comment on the group’s remarks or say if it was taking any precautions because of them.

An earlier version of this post stated that Jyllands-Posten is a Dutch newspaper; it is Danish.
Click to expand...

It was only a few years ago that the Danish cartoonist who depicted Muhammad was threatened by Muslims the world over. I only hope that people are smart enough to side with free speech this time.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I really don't care. But this double standard really pisses me off. How come everyone makes fun of those big religions but no one has the meatballs to insult the Flying Spaghetti Monster?
 
[quote name='IRHari']I really don't care. But this double standard really pisses me off. How come everyone makes fun of those big religions but no one has the meatballs to insult the Flying Spaghetti Monster?[/QUOTE]

Because you can't insult his noodlyness, he is too awesome and all-powerful. Anyone who has tried to has had their ass kicked before they could utter the words.
 
That sounds awesome, I have to catch up on my south parks. Reminds me of one of my favorite episodes:

"We need to know how to kill a giant stone Abraham Lincoln. Um....a giant stone John Wilkes Booth?"
 
[quote name='SpazX']That sounds awesome, I have to catch up on my south parks. Reminds me of one of my favorite episodes:

"We need to know how to kill a giant stone Abraham Lincoln. Um....a giant stone John Wilkes Booth?"[/QUOTE]

If that is your favorite episode you need to catch up ASAP.
 
[quote name='elprincipe']Apparently intolerant idiots are still intolerant idiots. *yawn*[/QUOTE]

You're talking about Muslims, right?
 
[quote name='The Crotch']...

I think the second "s" in the thread title is one word too soon.[/QUOTE]

If you're referring to the plurality, then I have two responses. The first is that it is a Muslim group warning the creators of South Park. I don't think I'm taking too much of a liberty by shortening Muslim group to Muslims. The second is that we know, from past similar (near identical) circumstances that there are, and will be, plenty of Muslims who support the censorship of any depiction of their Prophet Muhammad, whether the "offender" is Muslim or not.

So, if this were only one Muslim person making a fuss (and already, it's not), you'd be right up until the point when other Muslims join in the noise. And you can count on that happening.
 
Was part of the "humour" in last night's episode that Muhammad's name was bleeped out, or was Comedy Central being a bunch of wimps?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Was part of the "humour" in last night's episode that Muhammad's name was bleeped out, or was Comedy Central being a bunch of wimps?[/QUOTE]

I'm leaning towards the latter since we never really got a payoff or resolution to the Muhammad plot and he just sorta got brushed to the side near the end of the episode.

Damn shame too.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Was part of the "humour" in last night's episode that Muhammad's name was bleeped out, or was Comedy Central being a bunch of wimps?[/QUOTE]

It was Comedy Central. So fuck them, fuck Islam, and fuck Muhammad.
 
[quote name='evanft']It was Comedy Central. So fuck them, fuck Islam, and fuck Muhammad.[/QUOTE]
Oh I thought it was an intentional lame joke. So yeah, fuck comedy central for ruining a potentially funny South Park episode
 
I thought it was part of the episode proper because Tom Cruise gets the same treatment, and then has it removed when he gets Seaman on his back.

I think there's intentional mystery to all of this. Same with the episode from a while ago where CC supposedly edited out Muhammad again.
 
As a muslim, this whole issue is really ridiculous. I watched the first part of "200" and my only issue with it was that it wasn't all that funny or entertaining. I wasn't offended, I just didn't think it was a very good episode. It was cute to point out the hypocrisy of how the world has been conditioned to not offend muslims, while it's OK to offend christians, but beyond that, it was boring. I loved the earlier seasons, the later ones had lost a lot of their edge I thought.

Regardless, I actually wrote this to a friend after seeing the article elsewhere: "While I definitely want to see people treat the Prophet with the uptmost respect, just as Muslims don't expect Christians to fast during Ramadan, and not drink alcohol, at some point Muslims have to make their disdain known, then let up and let the offender settle their score with Allah. I'm getting tired of Muslims trying to strongarm the rest of the world into abiding by our customs and commandments. Bleh."

Bleh, indeed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='Strell']I thought it was part of the episode proper because Tom Cruise gets the same treatment, and then has it removed when he gets Seaman on his back.

I think there's intentional mystery to all of this. Same with the episode from a while ago where CC supposedly edited out Muhammad again.[/QUOTE]

Go to southparkstudios.com and try to watch the episode.
 
[quote name='rabbitt']This is disappointing:

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2...de-is-altered-after-muslim-groups-warning/?hp

I guess it's asking too much of a television station to stand up for free speech.[/QUOTE]

Meh, who cares. They have a right to air what they want and not air what they want. Trey and Matt have a contract with Comedy Central. It gives CC the final say. That's just business.

Free speech allows you to say most everything you want. It doesn't mean you should.

I'm not saying I'm against them showing this episode, far from it, but to people that always bitch about free speech, you should be more concerned with oppressive governments who kill you if you speak out. Not with a network telling a couple of guys under contract that they don't want stuff broadcast on their channel.
 
I'm more concerned with the Muslims that want everyone to be treated under Sharia Law, regardless of whether or not they're Muslim.
 
[quote name='rabbitt']I'm more concerned with the Muslims that want everyone to be treated under Sharia Law, regardless of whether or not they're Muslim.[/QUOTE]

That's such a Hannity/Michelle Malkin empty talking point. Please explain to me how, in any way, anyone has ever tried to make you follow a set of laws that aren't in place anywhere in the world.

That would be like me saying I'm concerned with the hawkish tv pundits that want to set up Muslim Concentration Camps.
 
Do you not remember when Muslims called for the death of the Danish cartoon artist? Or the Dutch filmmaker who was killed in 2004 (linked in the original article)? The creators of South Park owe no allegiance to Muslim tradition or law; they are not Muslims and should feel free to depict their prophet as much or as little as they like.

In Britain, where the Muslim lobby has much more weight, they've been a lot closer to instituting a separate Sharia Law for the large Muslim population to be treated separate from the rest of the population. If you cannot see what's wrong with this, I don't know what else to tell you.
 
bezirk makes a good point - do we blame "Muslims" for Comedy Central's capitulation not to religion, but to one specific one?

Or do we blame Comedy Central for responding to false bogeymen that scare them into thinking showing a cartoon Muhammad will get them killed?

superbestfriends.gif


OMG I'M DEAD!

fucking hell.
 
Do you not remember when Muslims called for the death of the Danish cartoon artist? Or the Dutch filmmaker who was killed in 2004 (linked in the original article)? The creators of South Park owe no allegiance to Muslim tradition or law; they are not Muslims and should feel free to depict their prophet as much or as little as they like.

---Dude, my first post in this thread was calling for muslims to quit insisting non-muslims respect Islamic customs. My friend agrees. So now I can use the same logic to say muslims call for muslims to quit expecting the world to be culturally sensitive. If Matt and Trey felt so strongly about it, they could release shows for free on YouTube. Their bosses are saying that they don't want certain content to be broadcast on their airwaves. As the employer, that is completely within their rights and ability to do so. Why that bothers you so much, I don't really understand.

In Britain, where the Muslim lobby has much more weight, they've been a lot closer to instituting a separate Sharia Law for the large Muslim population to be treated separate from the rest of the population. If you cannot see what's wrong with this, I don't know what else to tell you.

---The Muslim lobby in the UK is powerful? Umm...seriously? OK, let's pretend like that is accurate. If democratically elected leaders wish to allow for "Sharia Law" to be applied to muslims, then why are you fighting democracy. You're so strongly in favor of individual rights like freedom of speech, why would it be wrong for a representation of the people to approve something like this? It's this mentality that democracy is the most important thing in the world, unless the outcome isn't what you wanted it to be, that boggles my mind.
 
[quote name='berzirk']

---Dude, my first post in this thread was calling for muslims to quit insisting non-muslims respect Islamic customs. My friend agrees. So now I can use the same logic to say muslims call for muslims to quit expecting the world to be culturally sensitive. If Matt and Trey felt so strongly about it, they could release shows for free on YouTube. Their bosses are saying that they don't want certain content to be broadcast on their airwaves. As the employer, that is completely within their rights and ability to do so. Why that bothers you so much, I don't really understand.


---The Muslim lobby in the UK is powerful? Umm...seriously? OK, let's pretend like that is accurate. If democratically elected leaders wish to allow for "Sharia Law" to be applied to muslims, then why are you fighting democracy. You're so strongly in favor of individual rights like freedom of speech, why would it be wrong for a representation of the people to approve something like this? It's this mentality that democracy is the most important thing in the world, unless the outcome isn't what you wanted it to be, that boggles my mind.[/QUOTE]

You wanted an instance where Muslims have attempted to force non-Muslims under Sharia Law, and I gave you three. Put another way, only Muslims call for the death of someone when a cartoonist depicts Muhammad.

It is withing Comedy Central's right, as a business, to choose what it shows, which is why I only expressed disappointment. I didn't expect them to favor creative expression over covering their own asses.

On your second point, I'm of the belief that most people don't know what's good for them. And I said that Muslims are lobbying for a separate law for themselves. Not only could this exempt them from the UK's judiciary system, it would be sending the message that they are above the law that governs the rest of the population.
 
[quote name='rabbitt']Do you not remember when Muslims called for the death of the Danish cartoon artist? Or the Dutch filmmaker who was killed in 2004 (linked in the original article)? The creators of South Park owe no allegiance to Muslim tradition or law; they are not Muslims and should feel free to depict their prophet as much or as little as they like.

In Britain, where the Muslim lobby has much more weight, they've been a lot closer to instituting a separate Sharia Law for the large Muslim population to be treated separate from the rest of the population. If you cannot see what's wrong with this, I don't know what else to tell you.[/QUOTE]

[quote name='rabbitt']You wanted an instance where Muslims have attempted to force non-Muslims under Sharia Law, and I gave you three. Put another way, only Muslims call for the death of someone when a cartoonist depicts Muhammad.

It is withing Comedy Central's right, as a business, to choose what it shows, which is why I only expressed disappointment. I didn't expect them to favor creative expression over covering their own asses.

On your second point, I'm of the belief that most people don't know what's good for them. And I said that Muslims are lobbying for a separate law for themselves. Not only could this exempt them from the UK's judiciary system, it would be sending the message that they are above the law that governs the rest of the population.[/QUOTE]

I asked you to show one example of when Muslims personally tried to make you follow any Islamic custom. You came up with 2 violent acts that were directed at a couple of Dutch guys. Then you say "...only Muslims call for the death of someone when a cartoonist depicts Muhammad". Would you expect an Hasidic Jew to call for death when someone depicts Muhammad? Now for one of my least favorite rebuttals: All religions have their wackos, criminals, and mean people. It would be a waste of time to list out various attrocities done in the name of religion throughout history. Snooze.

Then you say: "I'm of the belief that most people don't know what's good for them." How is this to be applied. Should we assume you don't know what's best for you, and therefore invalidated any statement you make? I feel like you listen to too much talk radio and just regurgitate a lot of the talking points. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the UK has banned the death penalty, so if muslims are held to Sharia Law in the UK (which honestly, is never, ever, ever going to happen), then a murderer will be put to death. How above the law would that guy be?

Their is just so much hysteria over muslims taking over the world, that I find it laughable. But then again, Obama is a muslim, right? :|
 
[quote name='evanft']Go to southparkstudios.com and try to watch the episode.[/QUOTE]

I've seen the warning. I'm just asking why Tom Cruise gets the same treatment briefly. It suggests to me a jokey nature. Now, maybe CC did it just to make the whole thing more streamlined, and I imagine if you remove all of the CENSOR boxes, the humor still comes through.

No big deal. CC has done this in the past, but given that Trey and Matt are more or less gigantic trolls and VERY good at what they do, I could see it all being a Kaufmanesque routine. My money is on CC backing down though.
 
A Statement from Matt and Trey

In the 14 years we've been doing South Park we have never done a show that we couldn't stand behind. We delivered our version of the show to Comedy Central and they made a determination to alter the episode. It wasn't some meta-joke on our part. Comedy Central added the bleeps. In fact, Kyle's customary final speech was about intimidation and fear. It didn't mention Muhammad at all but it got bleeped too. We'll be back next week with a whole new show about something completely different and we'll see what happens to it.

http://www.southparkstudios.com/news/3878
 
[quote name='berzirk']Meh, who cares. They have a right to air what they want and not air what they want. Trey and Matt have a contract with Comedy Central. It gives CC the final say. That's just business.

Free speech allows you to say most everything you want. It doesn't mean you should.

I'm not saying I'm against them showing this episode, far from it, but to people that always bitch about free speech, you should be more concerned with oppressive governments who kill you if you speak out. Not with a network telling a couple of guys under contract that they don't want stuff broadcast on their channel.[/QUOTE]

Perhaps, but I would like to think that trying to make a rational point like South Park is doing (and not even making fun of the religion really) should be defended a lot more than it is. If South Park is getting censored for this but the people making the threats go without any sort of punishment, it makes our government look like a joke.
 
[quote name='4thHorseman']Perhaps, but I would like to think that trying to make a rational point like South Park is doing (and not even making fun of the religion really) should be defended a lot more than it is. If South Park is getting censored for this but the people making the threats go without any sort of punishment, it makes our government look like a joke.[/QUOTE]

But the difference is that Matt and Trey are looking to broadcast their material on a a commercial station. The station gets to decide what to show.

The asshats who made reference to the Dutch murder, and are trying to intimidate Matt and Trey did it on a website...which love it or hate it, is protected by free speech. If it offends the South Park guys that much, they can release a video on YouTube, with no censors, and say or do whatever they want. They are bound by a contract, the whackos with a website are not.

I don't see how this specifically makes our government look like a joke. The government doesn't run Comedy Central.
 
I dunno, I guess I'm kinda with berzirk on this one.

And of course Comedy Central doesn't give half a shit about free speech or artistic integrity. They're not gonna defend shit unless they get paid for it.
 
I truly, honestly want to understand the other side of this debate... But I can't wrap my head around it. What gives Muslims, or anyone else, the right not to be satirized? And since when do major corporations capitulate to vague threats of undifferentiated violence without even attempting to negotiate a compromise?
 
[quote name='mokmoof']I truly, honestly want to understand the other side of this debate... But I can't wrap my head around it. What gives Muslims, or anyone else, the right not to be satirized? And since when do major corporations capitulate to vague threats of undifferentiated violence without even attempting to negotiate a compromise?[/QUOTE]

It could be, in some way, shape, or form a similar principle as "white guilt". The idea that even though you didn't personally, and your ancestors may not have, by being white, you were historically tacitly supportive of slavery. Well, muslims have been screwed pretty heavily by external powers historically and contemporarily. I wonder if a PC backlash has taken place under the mentality of, "OK, so we're invading their land, dropping bombs all over the place, and we drew up boundaries in the region with the intention of extended in-fighting...maybe we should lay off the Prophet Muhammad cartoons".

I really don't know. I don't feel like there should be a double standard, there clearly is, and it goes quite a ways up the social status ladder.

Also keep in mind that most of the West tries to maintain a separation between church and state. This creates a more open, and free to criticize society. In Islam, the religion is a way of life, a political system, not just something that governs you on Friday afternoons during sermons.
 
I'm gonna disagree with that.

Our nation has, in some small ways, never recovered from 9/11. We're terrified of invoking the ire of a small, radical group of Muslims who don't care for our brand of economic colonialism. We don't really *revere* Muhammad any more than we do Vishnu, but we are scared that doing the former will lead to harm, while the latter is 'safe.'

(meanwhile, economic colonialism continues unabated.)

We're scared of a small, violent, reactionary group of people, and we've bought wholesale into the idea that "they hate our freedom" and other similarly preposterous rhetoric. So while our economic exploitation of other nations, and convenient/perilous alliances with other exploitative and harmful nations (Hi, Israel!), continues, we remain oblivious to the true reasons we were attacked on 9/11/01. furthermore, we're fucking dumb enough to believe that what happens on South Park is more important to al qaeda than imperialism.

But that's just me.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I'm gonna disagree with that.

Our nation has, in some small ways, never recovered from 9/11. We're terrified of invoking the ire of a small, radical group of Muslims who don't care for our brand of economic colonialism. We don't really *revere* Muhammad any more than we do Vishnu, but we are scared that doing the former will lead to harm, while the latter is 'safe.'

(meanwhile, economic colonialism continues unabated.)

We're scared of a small, violent, reactionary group of people, and we've bought wholesale into the idea that "they hate our freedom" and other similarly preposterous rhetoric. So while our economic exploitation of other nations, and convenient/perilous alliances with other exploitative and harmful nations (Hi, Israel!), continues, we remain oblivious to the true reasons we were attacked on 9/11/01. furthermore, we're fucking dumb enough to believe that what happens on South Park is more important to al qaeda than imperialism.

But that's just me.[/QUOTE]

Blunt and to the point. I agree. I do think fear (which is perpetuated by those who want the war to continue) is a central component, but maybe one that's bought into by a more conservative populace. I think you've got folks on the other side that feel like they need to love Islam to show muslims that they don't support the war and want out government to get out of the territory.

With regards to remaining obviously to the true reasons of the attack, I couldn't agree more. Having spent a bit of time in the middle east, pre 9/11, people would talk to me about Baywatch and Friends, literally asking me to talk to George Bush to convince him to let them move to the US. "They" didn't hate us because women can wear bikinis, and we have Bacon Cheeseburgers, they were pissed about our one-sided support in a central conflict (Israel/Palestine) and the precense of quite a few soldiers stationed in Saudi.

Regardless, great post.
 
[quote name='mykevermin'] I'm gonna disagree with that.

Our nation has, in some small ways, never recovered from 9/11. We're terrified of invoking the ire of a small, radical group of Muslims who don't care for our brand of economic colonialism. We don't really *revere* Muhammad any more than we do Vishnu, but we are scared that doing the former will lead to harm, while the latter is 'safe.'

(meanwhile, economic colonialism continues unabated.)

We're scared of a small, violent, reactionary group of people, and we've bought wholesale into the idea that "they hate our freedom" and other similarly preposterous rhetoric. So while our economic exploitation of other nations, and convenient/perilous alliances with other exploitative and harmful nations (Hi, Israel!), continues, we remain oblivious to the true reasons we were attacked on 9/11/01. furthermore, we're fucking dumb enough to believe that what happens on South Park is more important to al qaeda than imperialism.

But that's just me.[/QUOTE]

Great post. Regardless, you're an anti-semite.
 
[quote name='IRHari']Great post. Regardless, you're an anti-semite.[/QUOTE]

No, this simply makes him anti-Israel. I hate it when someone critical of Israel's foreign and domestic policy is labeled an Anti-Semite. Perhaps you're joking, but if you aren't this is really a total mischaracterization (Assuming Myke isn't actually an anti-semite).

My favorite though is when arabs, a semitic people, are also classified as being anti-semites.
 
It was a joke.

Agreed, anti-semite has been thrown around as carelessly as racist, and it worries me because when real anti-semites and real racists are labeled as such it'll be like 'the boy who cried wolf' or some shit.
 
Love Jews.
Hate Israel's "king shit of fuck mountain" attitude towards middle eastern relations.

Love Bacon Cheeseburgers.
Love Muslims who love Bacon Cheeseburgers.
I'ma hit up the dollar menu at Wendy's, you set the table for diplomacy!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']We're terrified of invoking the ire of a small, radical group of Muslims who don't care for our brand of economic colonialism. We don't really *revere* Muhammad any more than we do Vishnu, but we are scared that doing the former will lead to harm, while the latter is 'safe.'
[/QUOTE]
Yes! 100 times this!
[quote name='mykevermin']other exploitative and harmful nations (Hi, Israel!)[/QUOTE]
Aaaand there goes the respect you just "earned" from me
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top