The OIC Takes Note of the DPP

The Danish People’s Party and its election ad campaign involving the new/old Motoon has not escaped the notice of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC issued this press release a couple of days ago:


Referring to the hand-drawn picture depicting the Prophet Mohamed, used by the Danish People Party as an electoral campaign material, the OIC observatory on Islamophobia, issued a statement in Jeddah,

The new MotoonReferring to the hand-drawn [“Hand drawn”? What else do we have of ol’ Mo? Photos? — ed.] picture depicting the Prophet Mohamed, used by the Danish People Party as an electoral campaign material, the OIC observatory on Islamophobia, issued a statement in Jeddah, in which it denounced this action, qualifying it as irresponsable [sic] especially as it is emanating from a political party, with the sole aim of inflaming hatred against a sector of the citizens of Denmark. The statement went on to indicate that the short sightedness of this “add” is made apparent through claiming that it is done with the purpose of defending the Danish Values.

– – – – – – – –

The observatory drew the logical conclusion from the “add” that the “Danish Values” are based on giving freehand to hate speeches and on exploiting the noble principle of freedom of expression to insult others while denying the respect of cultural diversity and plurality in modern society.

The Muslim world, while taking note of this unprovoked propensity of some Danish circles to demonize Islam, its figures and symbols remains vigilant and watchful to this trend which might, again, lead to increased tension.

This sounds to me like the first step of the usual sequence of events whenever the outrage of 9.7 octillion Muslims is aroused.

This is The Veiled Threat. Next comes The Demand For Apology, and then The Denial of Responsibility for Violence. The process reaches its dénouement with The Shakedown.

It didn’t work very well with Denmark last time. We’ll see what happens this time.

Hat tip: CG.

8 thoughts on “The OIC Takes Note of the DPP

  1. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem is also on the warpath. However, Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Møller (Conservative Party) defends the use of the drawing.

    From daily Politiken (link in Danish, excerpt roughly translated by yours truly):

    “The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem urges the Danish government to do something about DPP’s poster as it is seen as offensive.

    Per Stig Møller: “I can’t do anything and I won’t do anything about it. It is the governments task to guard democracy and freedom of speach. And we [the gov. ed.] don’t set boundaries for freedom of expression, that’s up to the courts. (…)

    The drawing was made some 300 or 400 years ago. I can’t see how it can be forbidden to use an already existing drawing.”

    Q: The Grand Mufti calls the use of the drawing “uncivilized” and “hateful”.

    I have a hard time understanding the uncivilized part considering it’s a 300 year old drawing. I’m not standing here defending DPP(* but since it’s an already existing Muslim drawing, it can hardly be described as uncivilized. (End quote).

    So, no official backing down this time either!

    (* DPP and the Conservative Party are competing for some of the same votes, so naturally the the Foreign Minister can’t “defend” the DPP. Don’t worry about it, it’s not a crack in the stance. Just the usual spin in an election campaign.

  2. “Grand Mufti”!? Is that for real?Is there actually someone called the “Grand Mufti”in the 21st century?
    If true I have to laugh. I feel like I have drifted into a “Sinbad the Sailor” movie. Does he use a magic carpet?

  3. Baron, what does “Holger Danske Vagner” mean? And please translate the Danish caption on the political poster with the drawing of Mohammed for us.

  4. DAMN this idea of mandatory “Respect for Cultural Diversity” without any question or discussion!

    People who insist on such uncritical “respect” assume that any/every culture has equal worth, no matter what the implicit or explicit values of that culture may be. While each-and-every-culture may indeed have SOME values that are exemplary, we have the right AND the duty to analyze the culture in toto; to evaluate its customs and practices; to refuse to accept those customs that we judge to be harmful or degrading. (There may be many fine things about head-hunter cultures, but we DO reject the head-hunting part of them. Same with incinerating widows, or marrying off 9-year-old girls in exchange for goats or cattle.)

    I hope that we “free” nations can find a way to bypass the accusations of “hate speech” and start to seriously debate the wisdom of allowing our current immigration policies to continue.

  5. dchamil,

    “Holger Danske Vågner” means “Holger Danske Awakens”.

    And the caption of the DPP poster says: “Freedom of speech is Danish, Censorship is not” — “We stand firmly for the Danish values” (in handwriting)

  6. By the way, saw this little manipulation of the Asmaa counter-drawing. If you replace the comma, the text will read: “Freedom of speech is Danish idiocy, don’t you think.”

    Darn, why didn’t I think of that? 🙂

Comments are closed.