COMIC BOOK BUFFS RIDICULE THE SPLC'S ATTACK ON BOSCH FAWSTIN

Front Page Magazine says the SPLC's denounced cartoonist Bosch Fawstin as a "hate groupie" because of the anti-Muhammed cartoons he's drawn. But he's not phased:

When reached by phone on Monday night, Fawstin said Sunday's incident made him fear for his safety, but he would continue his work.

"It definitely is concerning. You do your work and people out there want to kill you for it," he said. "I understand the threat, but I'm not going to be cowed by it. I still intend to go up there and I still intend to speak out."

Fawstin, who said he is atheist, laughed when asked about the law center's report: "So they want to put a cartoonist on there who doesn't act out violently? Go for it."

That's the problem with the SPLC today - all they worry about is non-violent people, and come off sounding more like crime supporters than people truly concerned about making this a civilized planet. Over at the Outhousers, one of the people writing about this said that while he doesn't side with Fawstin's view, there are still some interesting queries to make, like:

If Fawstin belongs on the list of hate groups, does someone like Frank Miller, who wrote a similarly-themed (but less well-received) comic about killing Muslims called “Holy Terror,” belong there as well?

If so, what does that mean for major Hollywood movie studios promoting movies based on his work, such as the upcoming Superman v. Batman: Dawn of Justice, set to launch a multi-movie franchise?

Or for that matter, for DC Comics, who promoted Miller’s return to writing Batman comics as a major event just last month?

What about Charlie Hebdo, which the world was pretty much unanimously celebrating in January after an attack on their building killed several cartoonists and editors, and whose defiant “Je Suis Charlie” slogan can still be readily be found on t-shirts and social media avatars.

How do Charlie Hebdo’s anti-Islam cartoons and drawings of Muhammad differ from Fawstin’s?

Those are good questions to ask (but which I'm sure the SPLC won't answer), to which I can add at least one more: does the SPLC think Will Eisner belongs there too because of his last graphic novel, The Plot? As a matter of fact, they might, but because of the high regard he had when he was still alive, that's probably why they'd leave him alone, though I'm sure they'd villify him if they thought they could. Some of the commentors at CBR also criticized the SPLC's poor conduct. For example:

Watching the Southern Poverty Law Center go from a group that fought the Klan to a group that attacks artists is just sad.

And that's why they're an irrelevancy today. Another said:

SPLC are some of the biggest haters around, and like many such groups, they’re total hypocrites.

For example, I wonder how many blasphemous depictions of Jesus you’d have to produce to get on their list.

What do you think? I’m guessing the number is somewhere in the quadrillions.

Yes, they're just hypocritical apologists, and nobody should donate money to them.

It's pretty surprising that DC still maintains a respectable relationship with Miller, because they have quite a few people working there now who'd surely want to ostracize him for his changed views, and there's no chance they'd ever let him write them a Batman story even remotely similar to what he wrote in Holy Terror. For all we know, he could end up being blacklisted for real one day, and that would be bad, although I will say that with the way DC's going now, he really doesn't need to do them favors by lending them his talents that could be put to better use at smaller companies like Dark Horse.

I'm glad to see that Fawstin's not letting the SPLC get him down. It's also flattering to learn Jim Shooter's one the people supporting his work.