The MOST "offensive" depiction of Mohammed turns out to have been, in fact, an old AP photo of a Frenchmen competing in a hog-calling contest! (This was discovered by lowly blggers!)
This photo was appropriated by Abu Laban, given a new title and a new context. Appropriation iand re-contextualization is a standard way of making art, and has been since early in the last century.
Therefore, the real artist, the REAL CREATOR of this image was ABU LABAN! He is the blasphemer.
Maybe the Danes should deport him the Saudi Arabia where he can be PROPERLY punished: by beheading! After all Abu Laban is a Muslim himself - one who claims to believe in sharia. He would be getting his just desserts. Deliciously ironic dessert it is, too!
[ASIDE: Amir Taheri, in the WSJ, proves that depicting Mohammed has NOT always been considered a crime to Muslims.]
This photo was appropriated by Abu Laban, given a new title and a new context. Appropriation iand re-contextualization is a standard way of making art, and has been since early in the last century.
Therefore, the real artist, the REAL CREATOR of this image was ABU LABAN! He is the blasphemer.
Maybe the Danes should deport him the Saudi Arabia where he can be PROPERLY punished: by beheading! After all Abu Laban is a Muslim himself - one who claims to believe in sharia. He would be getting his just desserts. Deliciously ironic dessert it is, too!
[ASIDE: Amir Taheri, in the WSJ, proves that depicting Mohammed has NOT always been considered a crime to Muslims.]
2 comments:
All Things Beautiful TrackBack A Perilous Premise
I've asked the same question on my blog. I also made a manipulation of Abu Laban, and I guess he doesn't mind since he is into the same business. Rock.
Post a Comment