Mohammed cartoonist 'head-butted' during speech
Options
TX_Made713
Members Posts: 3,954 ✭✭
STOCKHOLM (AP) — A Swedish artist who angered Muslims by depicting the prophet Mohammed as a dog was assaulted Tuesday as furious protesters interrupted his university lecture about the limits of free speech.
Lars Vilks told the Associated Press a man leaped from the front row and head-butted him as he was delivering his lecture at Uppsala University, breaking Vilks' glasses but leaving him uninjured.
Police later said the attacker was stopped before he could reach Vilks and that the artist may have bumped into plain-clothes officers who briskly evacuated him from the room. Three people were detained, but it wasn't immediately clear whether the attacker was among them.
A video clip of the incident by a Swedish newspaper showed police using pepper spray and batons to hold off an angry crowd shouting "? is great" in Arabic after Vilks was escorted out of the lecture hall.
Vilks has faced numerous threats over his controversial drawing of Mohammed with a dog's body, but Tuesday's incident was the first physical assault directed against him.
Earlier this year U.S. investigators said Vilks was the target of an alleged murder plot involving Colleen LaRose, an American woman who dubbed herself "Jihad Jane," and who now faces life in prison. She has pleaded not guilty.
Vilks said a group of about 15 people had been shouting and trying to interrupt the lecture before the incident at the university in Uppsala, about 40 miles (70 kilometers) north of Stockholm.
Some of them stormed toward the front of the room after the attack and clashed with security guards as Vilks was pulled away into a separate room, he said, describing the scene as "complete chaos."
"A man ran up and threw himself over me. I was head-butted and my glasses were broken," Vilks said before hanging up for questioning by police.
Uppsala police spokesman Jonas Eronen later said that the attacker was stopped by officers before he could get to Vilks. The physical contact Vilks described probably happened when police in civilian clothes evacuated the artist "in a brusque manner," Eronen said.
A man and a woman were detained on suspicion of violence against police while another man was held for disturbing public order, he said. All were just under 20 years old.
Uppsala University spokeswoman Pernilla Bjork said Vilks was showing an excerpt from a film by an Iranian artist about Islam and homosexuality that had been banned from YouTube when the commotion started.
"It was about when Muslims and Mohammed are represented in homosexual situations," said Anders Montelius, a 23-year-old student who attended the lecture.
"Some people started shouting, things happened really fast. About 10-15 seconds later it erupts. A guy from the front row gets up and sets upon Vilks. Several others followed this man. There was commotion and police pepper-sprayed a couple of people," Montelius told AP.
"When the university person responsible for the lecture announced that the lecture was discontinued, there were cheers and chants in Arabic," he said.
The video posted on the website of newspaper Uppsala Nya Tidning showed agitated police officers clashing with protesters at the front of the lecture hall. A female police officer uses pepper spray to subdue a young man. Another youngster is wrestled to the ground.
University officials said there had been a peaceful demonstration by Muslims outside the university before Vilks started to speak, and that about 260 people attended his lecture. Bjork said the university had been in contact with police and security guards before Vilks' lecture to ensure his safety.
"We think it is our task as a university to be able discuss difficult issues," she said. "We think it is very unfortunate that this has resulted in violence."
Vilks made his rough sketch more than a year after 12 Danish newspaper cartoons of the prophet sparked furious protests in Muslim countries in 2006.
A Swedish newspaper printed the drawing, leading to further protests, and revived a heated debate in the West and the Muslim world about religious sensitivities and the limits of free speech.
It also led to numerous death threats against Vilks, who was temporarily moved to a secret location after al-Qaeda in Iraq put a $100,000 bounty on his head in September 2007.
Lars Vilks told the Associated Press a man leaped from the front row and head-butted him as he was delivering his lecture at Uppsala University, breaking Vilks' glasses but leaving him uninjured.
Police later said the attacker was stopped before he could reach Vilks and that the artist may have bumped into plain-clothes officers who briskly evacuated him from the room. Three people were detained, but it wasn't immediately clear whether the attacker was among them.
A video clip of the incident by a Swedish newspaper showed police using pepper spray and batons to hold off an angry crowd shouting "? is great" in Arabic after Vilks was escorted out of the lecture hall.
Vilks has faced numerous threats over his controversial drawing of Mohammed with a dog's body, but Tuesday's incident was the first physical assault directed against him.
Earlier this year U.S. investigators said Vilks was the target of an alleged murder plot involving Colleen LaRose, an American woman who dubbed herself "Jihad Jane," and who now faces life in prison. She has pleaded not guilty.
Vilks said a group of about 15 people had been shouting and trying to interrupt the lecture before the incident at the university in Uppsala, about 40 miles (70 kilometers) north of Stockholm.
Some of them stormed toward the front of the room after the attack and clashed with security guards as Vilks was pulled away into a separate room, he said, describing the scene as "complete chaos."
"A man ran up and threw himself over me. I was head-butted and my glasses were broken," Vilks said before hanging up for questioning by police.
Uppsala police spokesman Jonas Eronen later said that the attacker was stopped by officers before he could get to Vilks. The physical contact Vilks described probably happened when police in civilian clothes evacuated the artist "in a brusque manner," Eronen said.
A man and a woman were detained on suspicion of violence against police while another man was held for disturbing public order, he said. All were just under 20 years old.
Uppsala University spokeswoman Pernilla Bjork said Vilks was showing an excerpt from a film by an Iranian artist about Islam and homosexuality that had been banned from YouTube when the commotion started.
"It was about when Muslims and Mohammed are represented in homosexual situations," said Anders Montelius, a 23-year-old student who attended the lecture.
"Some people started shouting, things happened really fast. About 10-15 seconds later it erupts. A guy from the front row gets up and sets upon Vilks. Several others followed this man. There was commotion and police pepper-sprayed a couple of people," Montelius told AP.
"When the university person responsible for the lecture announced that the lecture was discontinued, there were cheers and chants in Arabic," he said.
The video posted on the website of newspaper Uppsala Nya Tidning showed agitated police officers clashing with protesters at the front of the lecture hall. A female police officer uses pepper spray to subdue a young man. Another youngster is wrestled to the ground.
University officials said there had been a peaceful demonstration by Muslims outside the university before Vilks started to speak, and that about 260 people attended his lecture. Bjork said the university had been in contact with police and security guards before Vilks' lecture to ensure his safety.
"We think it is our task as a university to be able discuss difficult issues," she said. "We think it is very unfortunate that this has resulted in violence."
Vilks made his rough sketch more than a year after 12 Danish newspaper cartoons of the prophet sparked furious protests in Muslim countries in 2006.
A Swedish newspaper printed the drawing, leading to further protests, and revived a heated debate in the West and the Muslim world about religious sensitivities and the limits of free speech.
It also led to numerous death threats against Vilks, who was temporarily moved to a secret location after al-Qaeda in Iraq put a $100,000 bounty on his head in September 2007.
Comments
-
Damn...............kinda Crazy............then again if u gonna Act like a ? ........
-
You know I don't condone attacking the ? , just because he writes something disrespectful.
But when you disrespect people and act like an ? intentionally then you deserve whatever you get.
White people(yes white people) have a bad habit of disrespecting other peoples traditions and customs, and inciting anger in people and then when people respond they want to play the victim role.
He is not fighting for a noble cause, he just wants to be a troll.
I feel no sympathy for the white boy. Like Snoop said, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. -
You know I don't condone attacking the ? , just because he writes something disrespectful.
But when you disrespect people and act like an ? intentionally then you deserve whatever you get.
Agreed. When you go out of your way to ? with people you get what you get. -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »Agreed. When you go out of your way to ? with people you get what you get.
This also applies with wild animals. -
I don't agree with the cartoonist's antagonism, but I also don't think the mature, adult, rational, and most sensible reaction to something like this is violence or death threats. Are words and insults really that damaging to your ego?
-
oliverlang wrote: »I don't agree with the cartoonist's antagonism, but I also don't think the mature, adult, rational, and most sensible reaction to something like this is violence or death threats. Are words and insults really that damaging to your ego?
I agree up to a point. However, words can be very dangerous. ? started with words. Words can be the impetus to actions that are heinous. I think you mistakenly assume that it is strictly about ego. Some people want to preserve their way of life, and any thing that threatens that is seen as an enemy. Not saying that is the case in this instance, but in many it is. -
You know I don't condone attacking the ? , just because he writes something disrespectful.
But when you disrespect people and act like an ? intentionally then you deserve whatever you get.
White people(yes white people) have a bad habit of disrespecting other peoples traditions and customs, and inciting anger in people and then when people respond they want to play the victim role.
He is not fighting for a noble cause, he just wants to be a troll.
I feel no sympathy for the white boy. Like Snoop said, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it.
Yea.............CoSign -
I agree up to a point. However, words can be very dangerous. ? started with words. Words can be the impetus to actions that are heinous. I think you mistakenly assume that it is strictly about ego. Some people want to preserve their way of life, and any thing that threatens that is seen as an enemy. Not saying that is the case in this instance, but in many it is.
I agree also, up to a point lol. You can replace ego, with belief in this case. Either way, if it's really "true" and if you really believe it to be true then a cartoon is not going to change that. Also, I don't think ? and Vilks is a creditable comparison. I would also argue that ? was extremely influenced by his ego. -
oliverlang wrote: »I agree also, up to a point lol. You can replace ego, with belief in this case. Either way, if it's really "true" and if you really believe it to be true then a cartoon is not going to change that. Also, I don't think ? and Vilks is a creditable comparison. I would also argue that ? was extremely influenced by his ego.
Stop playin O,
Vilks and ? are not the issue. Words are. People can take words multiply by them by circumstances and create a hostile atmosphere, which leads to things like murder, war, and concentration camps.
Remember ? was inspired by Nietzsche words(or his sister some say). -
I still say them al queada ? need to lighten up. they always quick to try and ? somebody
-
Stop playin O,
Vilks and ? are not the issue. Words are. People can take words multiply by them by circumstances and create a hostile atmosphere, which leads to things like murder, war, and concentration camps.
Remember ? was inspired by Nietzsche words(or his sister some say).
I understand what you're saying, and I agree words can lead to things like war, murder, etc; however, this type of behavior proves that a huge problem exists within mankind. People have attachments to concepts and words that are actually meaningless. You know, I don’t think the words are the problem, in my opinion it's the behavior and how we've been condition to respond to the words. A word is just that, a word. When the Taliban blew up all those Buddhist sculptures in Afghanistan, you didn't see Buddhist bug out about it because in fact a sculpture is just that, a sculpture. However, if someone draws a silly cartoon of Muhammad people start losing their mind. They brought more attention to it by reacting this way. I just can’t relate to that behavior, nor would any rational being. -
oliverlang wrote: »I understand what you're saying, and I agree words can lead to things like war, murder, etc; however, this type of behavior proves that a huge problem exists within mankind. People have attachments to concepts and words that are actually meaningless. You know, I don’t think the words are the problem, in my opinion it's the behavior and how we've been condition to respond to the words. A word is just that, a word. When the Taliban blew up all those Buddhist sculptures in Afghanistan, you didn't see Buddhist bug out about it because in fact a sculpture is just that, a sculpture. However, if someone draws a silly cartoon of Muhammad people start losing their mind. They brought more attention to it by reacting this way. I just can’t relate to that behavior, nor would any rational being.
I don't think it had anything to do with the Buddhist not wanting to act up as much as they were in Afghanistan and they would have got ? up. Buddhist wile out too.
And your analysis of people going silly over a cartoon is over generalized and too simplistic, something you are vehemently against. There are over 1 billion muslims on the planet who did not respond to that nonsense. Why take a few and make it the rule? There are Muslims in Sweden. -
Long Live The Hype lol.
We live in a world where a ? getting slapped because he intentionally offends others gets more attention than a ? intetionally dropping clusterbombs killing and wounding thousands.
not many things are stronger than the spoken word. I never understood why the strongest never reign supreme though.;;; -
I don't think it had anything to do with the Buddhist not wanting to act up as much as they were in Afghanistan and they would have got ? up. Buddhist wile out too.
And your analysis of people going silly over a cartoon is over generalized and too simplistic, something you are vehemently against. There are over 1 billion muslims on the planet who did not respond to that nonsense. Why take a few and make it the rule? There are Muslims in Sweden.
Well, to be fair I didn't say Muslims, I said "people," meaning those that overreacted. Also, Buddhists didn't wile out because it's not in their nature to wile out over something like that. The international Buddhist community didn't stress it because they don't have any attachments to material representations of their belief. That is a fundamental principle in Buddhism. Also, that could have happened anywhere and they wouldn't have made a big deal over it. -
oliverlang wrote: »Well, to be fair I didn't say Muslims, I said "people," meaning those that overreacted. Also, Buddhists didn't wile out because it's not in their nature to wile out over something like that. The international Buddhist community didn't stress it because they don't have any attachments to material representations of their belief. That is a fundamental principle in Buddhism. Also, that could have happened anywhere and they wouldn't have made a big deal over it.
Please. I saw Russell Simmons go completely savage and he is a Buddhist. Principles are one thing, but to act like Buddhist don't flip from time to time is silly. Nirvana is not instantaneous. It is a process.
You gonna tell me Buddhist ain't had no violent clashes with Hindus?
FOH. -
Long Live The Hype lol.
We live in a world where a ? getting slapped because he intentionally offends others gets more attention than a ? intetionally dropping clusterbombs killing and wounding thousands.
not many things are stronger than the spoken word. I never understood why the strongest never reign supreme though.;;;
Finally. You say something that makes sense. -
Muslims wanna have their hummus and eat it too.
They want the freedom to make anti-Jewish art, but they will MURDER you if you make anti-Islamic art.
Well in all fairness, I guess that is because the Jews dispense the formalities and just start bulldozing and bombing. -
I don't think it had anything to do with the Buddhist not wanting to act up as much as they were in Afghanistan and they would have got ? up. Buddhist wile out too.
And your analysis of people going silly over a cartoon is over generalized and too simplistic, something you are vehemently against. There are over 1 billion muslims on the planet who did not respond to that nonsense. Why take a few and make it the rule? There are Muslims in Sweden.
the radical buddhists set themselves on fire in protest. no comparison. -
TheCATthatdidntDIE wrote: »the radical buddhists set themselves on fire in protest. no comparison.
I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about those who supported and participated in war in Japan when Buddhist reigned after the Shinto dynasties. -
You know I don't condone attacking the ? , just because he writes something disrespectful.
But when you disrespect people and act like an ? intentionally then you deserve whatever you get.
White people(yes white people) have a bad habit of disrespecting other peoples traditions and customs, and inciting anger in people and then when people respond they want to play the victim role.
He is not fighting for a noble cause, he just wants to be a troll.
I feel no sympathy for the white boy. Like Snoop said, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it.
hahm bruh..... -
First of all Nepal is a majority buddhist region, with a very strong and violent marital tradition, why do you think the chinese keep clashing? Secondly, dogs are considered "unclean" animals in the arab muslim tradition. When I say unclean, I mean there is a deeply rooted cultural "yuck" factor, similar to the look on your face when I tell you to go down a a chick on the rag. So yeah, this dude REALLY went out of his way to ? them off so he rightfully get what he deserved. ? him? No, but let whiteboy know that he needs to watch his ish next time...
-
i have this theory - and it could be wrong, of course - that the people most flipping out over this cartoon are not people who care most deeply about not ? off people THEY don't agree with. of course, it's just a theory.Emerald City Rolla wrote: »So yeah, this dude REALLY went out of his way to ? them off so he rightfully get what he deserved. ? him? No, but let whiteboy know that he needs to watch his ish next time... -
I'm not talking about them. I'm talking about those who supported and participated in war in Japan when Buddhist reigned after the Shinto dynasties.
hmm.... i guess they really werent so peaceful... you have a point. but that happened so long ago, if they were doing it at a much more savage time and place, why is it okay to do it now? when we are supposedly more advanced? -
i have this theory - and it could be wrong, of course - that the people most flipping out over this cartoon are not people who care most deeply about not ? off people THEY don't agree with. of course, it's just a theory.
I have a theory also. You always sidetrack issues , when white people do ? up ? and get called on it. Mainly because you have conflicting emotions over the world wide relationship they have with non-whites.
Sort of like during the civil rights movement, when white people were beating the ? out of black people, and they cajoled blacks to be non violent, while they were still beating the ? out of black people mind you. And when some blacks hinted at violent self defense, they were all up in arms saying these people promote violence and your going to damage the movement if you do such.
FOH, Janklow. -
TheCATthatdidntDIE wrote: »hmm.... i guess they really werent so peaceful... you have a point. but that happened so long ago, if they were doing it at a much more savage time and place, why is it okay to do it now? when we are supposedly more advanced?
We are more advanced technologically. But morally we are not.
Don't take this personal.
But most white people, globally don't respect civility and diplomacy if it gets in the way of their agenda. They understand brute force and power.They only respect you to the point of your ability to inflict pain on that ass. So to me if you got to ? a couple crackers head to get the point across, then so be it.
