.
I realize this is now two months old, but not having seen it mentioned on CI perhaps some of the members would like to know about it.
.
Did you hear this being covered in the MSM? Because I didn't.
It's the kind of thing that fake news loves to pretend doesn't exist.
And it's too hot of a topic even for many conservatives.
But it is quite relevant for an awareness of current events and history in the making.
Comments section follows the article on the source site, with 26 comments.
.
.
.
https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/29283-dutch-anti-islamization-party-to-host-draw-mohammed-contest
.
Thursday, 14 June 2018
Dutch Anti-Islamization Party to Host “Draw Mohammed” Contest
Written by  Selwyn Duke
.
Drawing Mohammed draws ire, to say the least — but that’s not stopping a Dutch anti-Islamization party from hosting an event to do just that. As the Week reports:
.
The Netherlands-based Party for Freedom (PVV) is to hold a competition inviting its members to draw cartoons depicting Islam’s Prophet Mohammed.
.
The party, led by anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders, is the main opposition in the Dutch parliament, after coming second in elections in March last year.
.
“Dutch Counter-terrorism Agency NCTV gives green light to Muhammad cartoon contest in secured PVV quarters of Dutch Parliament later this year,” Wilders tweeted yesterday, along with a Mohammed cartoon.
.
“So that’s what we’re going to do and organize! With cartoonist/ex-Muslim Bosch Fawstin! Freedom of speech is most important of all!!”
Cartoons and other depictions of Mohammad have provoked violent responses in the past.
.
That may be the understatement of the year. “Depicting the image of Prophet Mohammad is consider [sic] blasphemy among many followers of Islam,” relates the Express. The paper then continues:
.
In 2015, Islamist terrorists killed 12 people at the newsroom of French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo after it printed cartoons of Mohammad.
.
In 2005, the publication of a dozen drawings depicting the Prophet in Danish magazine Jyllands-Posten led to violent protests across the Muslim world.
.
And American cartoonist Molly Norris has been deemed a “prime target” for execution by Islamic extremist [sic] after depicting the likeness of the prophet on several items. 
.
In fact, Norris drew the original cartoon for the very first “draw Mohammed” competition, a May 20, 2010 event declared the first annual “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day”; it was born of support for artists threatened with violence for creating representations of the Muslim “prophet.” One result was that Norris found herself on the aforementioned al-Qaeda hit list and has been in hiding since 2010.
.
Wilders has expressed a desire (2015 video below) to hold his contest ever since he spoke at the 2015 “Draw Mohammed” competition in Garland, Texas. Interestingly, it, too, was in part designed to support Mohammed-portraying artists and was also a scene of Islamic violence. In fact, two people were killed in an attack that critics say was actually encouraged by the Obama-era FBI (a man injured during it is suing the bureau on this basis).
.

.
Whatever the case, there’s no question that the media and pseudo-elites have no sympathy for those who “slander the prophet,” as Barack Obama once put it. Texas “Draw Mohammed” event organizer Pamela Geller explained that they’d “decided to have a cartoon contest to show we would not kowtow to violent intimidation and allow the freedom of speech to be overwhelmed by thugs and bullies.” Yet this cuts no ice with her critics, who condemn such events as incitement to violence and “purposely provocative.” This is rank hypocrisy.
.
Just this past Saturday there was a 600-strong protest at New York City’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, which is hosting the “Heavenly Bodies: Fashion and the Catholic Imagination” exhibition, found offensive by many Catholics. There was nary a peep from the media about how inappropriately “provocative” it is.
.
Then there were the works of “art” showing a crucifix immersed in a bowl of urine and the Virgin Mary smeared in elephant dung, and the Hollywood movies and shows that frequently — and purposely — take the Lord’s name in vain. Not only didn’t and doesn’t the Left complain; its minions often actually revel in mocking and offending Christians. “Grow up and suck it up — and how dare you try to engage in censorship and suppress freedom of expression!” is the response.
.
So what’s the difference? That Christians pray for their enemies and not kill them? If Christians mounted physical attacks, would the above also then be condemned as “incitement to violence”?
.
Of course not. Instead, Christians would be condemned as violent (which they often are already, based on revisionist history — e.g., the Crusades) and clamped down on hard.
.
Sadly, though, violence combined with protected-group status really does work. Charlie Hebdo, which prided itself on its irreverence and was one of the only leftist entities to draw Mohammed, said it would no longer do so after the attack on its offices. This all, by the way, puts the lie to the claim that Christianity-mocking artists are “brave.” They’re simply hostile, bigoted people who pick on soft targets — ones that won’t cut their bloody heads off.
.
Having said this, there is the deeper issue of what should be held sacred, a status that every civilization grants to certain things. For example, in accordance with our racial “religion,” we have our untouchable figures (e.g., Martin Luther King) and unforgivable transgressions, such as politically incorrect commentary and humor (see Rosanne Barr, et al.).
.
But while scholars disgorge philoso-babble about whether drawing Mohammed constitutes “hate speech,” they all miss the point. What should determine what’s held sacred?
.
Truth.
.
If Islam were true, then it perhaps would be wise to refrain from representing Mohammed. Oh, as a practical and politeness matter, we may also at times make certain concessions to certain people (e.g., when Thomas Jefferson rearranged a dinner party, as a matter of diplomacy, to accommodate a Tunisian envoy’s Ramadan fast). But elevating lies to sacred status — a practice occupying political correctness’ heart, mind you — can bring a civilization to destruction. And denying the truly sacred its rightful status can bring a land to barbarism. What a pity that today we sanctify all the wrong things.
.
.
Comments:
.

Oldtymepatriot • 2 months ago
Mohammed was a barbaric terrorist who founded the evil Satanic cult of Islam. Islam is not a religion of peace in any definition of the word, but a death cult in which those who choose to leave it are marked for elimination. Minor infractions, many not recognized in any society other than in the Muslim world, can lead to stoning or honor killing buy family members. 
Mohammed was evil and should be represented as such in any cartoons drawn.
.
SlowCookedProgs • 2 months ago
So, a declaration of war, then. Considering how the Muslims have overrun the Dutch and are changing their laws by sheer numbers of immigrants, you can't blame them for wanting to fight back. Kind of like many here in the U.S. feel about how Hispanic immigration is changing our way of life. It doesn't help when our own government treats them like a protected class and there is no assimilation. I'm all for free speech. Say what you will, but be ready to back it up with your life. The most committed wins.
.
On a side note, if I remember my history of Christian violence during the Crusades as so often mentioned to excuse Islamic violence, it was about repelling Islam in one of the many times they have tried to dominate the whole known world. Christianity is now a religion of peace. Islam has never been nor ever will be a religion of peace.
.
Flash Kellam • a month ago
I would like to see the “Draw Mohammed” contest offer a special prize for the artist who presents the best depiction of Mohammed that also satirizes a previously produced work of anti-Christian “art”. Say, a portrait of Mohammed made out of elephant dung, or a plastic star and crescent dipped in a vat of artist’s urine and titled “P*** Mohammed”.
.
In this way, we can expose liberal hypocrisy while we demonstrate how Islam is totally incompatible with Western Civilization.
.

• 
  Jim_AZ • 2 months ago
  In TX, they could attend their event well-armed. How's that work in Europe?
  
  
• 
  DBS • 2 months ago
  Which is worse, dying before your time because you've been murdered, or burning in Hell for the rest of eternity for doing the murdering?

Let the fundie Muslims get mad. If someone wants to kill people because there were images of a schizophrenic pedophile somewhere, that's their problem. Muhammad was one of the most despicable, vile and insipid people to ever live.

"Draw Mohammed contest?" I have my own entry:

With all the countless cogent, rational arguments to be made against Mohammedanism and its founder, it's more than a little disheartening that the best Post-Christian Judaized Europe can come up with is boorish, puerile nonsense like this "contest," which, while it may inflame many, will convince and convert no one. Equally disheartening, if not at all surprising, is that it's spearheaded by a Post-Christian Judaizer like Geert Wilders. 

This is pretty transparent stuff: the apostate Wilders is a shabbos goy gatekeeper who is keeping Europe's very well-founded hatred of the Mohammedan horde that has invaded its lands confined to the realm of the unreasoning, uncritical, reactionary variety that is useful to the Zionists who propagate it. All the better to keep the people from examining too closely the fatally de-Christianized condition of their continent, the economic and political machinations that brought these Mohammedans to Europe in the fist place, and, most of all, (((who))) is responsible for both.

The reason they forbid all drawing of Mohammad 1,300 years ago? They knew I'd be coming!

Not very heroic or manly to draw Mohammed today. Try Rabbi Moyses Maimonides, or Menachem Mendel Schneerson.

Not familiar with either of them.