Nuff Said February 16, 20061 min read Ã¢??A cartoon targetting the prophet, tadalafil BushÃ¢?Â Sharing is Caring:Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)Click to print (Opens in new window)Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) RELATED STORIES
Why don’t you write a translation to the arabic title of the cartoon?
“A cartoon targetting the prophet, Bush”, or whatever else matches…
thanks for reminding me ohoud 🙂
thanks for the cartoons, nas. mahjoob is an amazing cartoonist…
‘Messenger’ would be more of an appropriate translation, I believe!
I am back!
I do not like the text attached to Hajjaj’s Cartoon. In fact, I hate it, especially after nas (sorry nas :oops:) translated it! perhaps it’s just me, but I seriously have a hard time placing the term ‘Rasool’ in a context other than that of religion. It could have to do with the translation … technically, in all contexts other than religious figures references, Rasool translates to ‘Messenger’ and not ‘Prophet’
So, can you please change the translation? 😛
lol, i’m really enjoying you feeling bugged Iman:D
Nas dont change it:D
serious mode on: messenger would be more appropriate out of this context, but here I think it fits perfect ,cause its comparing both cartoons, this with the Danish, and thus the word Prophet is vital in my opinion.
Actually, I agree with Iman… using the term messenger would be better.
Ohoud… Enjoy it 😛
The cartoon itself is experssive, I give it that! but I don’t see – what-so-ever – how the text as it is written fits!
so not needed!
i vote nas keep the translation as is. “the messenger” clearly was meant to draw a parallel to mohammed and the related cartoon controversy. i think the average english reader seeing the word “messenger” wouldn’t realize the religiious implication.
besides, i think the artist himself intended it to be translated as “prophet”, check out the english title they put on the cartoon in the mahjoob archives page
lol, i wasn’t demanding a change!
excuse me, but you lost me there!
Allow me to say that the translation is very inaccurate and doesn’t make sense! and if you want to take it in a literal sense and make it a big deal (which I don’t intend to do) then referring to Bush as a Prophet is insulting …
Bottom line: Prophet = nabi; Messenger = Rasool
i’ll certainly defer to your translation (i assume you’re a native speaker. i’m just learning the language)
i know that rasool definitely means “messenger”, but isn’t it also a word used to describe the prophet? (wasn’t there even a certain movie by that name?)
the english word “messenger” has absolutely no religious connotation. if the average english speaker read the word. the cartoon is obviously trying to draw a parallel with the mohammed cartoon controversy (the image on the cartoon is actually a take-off of one of the danish cartoons). by translating the word as “prophet” indicates to the reader that there is a parallel–something that an arab would get just with the word “rasool” whereas an english speaker probably would not.
and again, based on the english title the artist gave the cartoon on his own web site, it seems like he also translates the word as “prophet.”
i hope that explained what i was saying better
referring to Bush as a Prophet is insulting
i suspect that’s why the artist himself avoided using the word “nabii” in the arabic caption.
lol really guys, does it really matter?
the word is not the point of the cartoon
Thanks upyrnoz, clear enough!
P.S. I still don’t like the text as it appears in the Cartoon!
Nas, but the text takes away from the effectivness of the cartoon .. at least to me!
Rasool=messenger be it a messenger of religion or anything else but in this context Emad meant to say messenger of Allah which can be also translated to prophet (in Arabic there is a difference between the two, just for the record).
translated as: “caricatair yastahdiff il nabi Bush!”
The original caption (which is not the point of the cartoon) read: caricatir mosee2 lal-rasool Bush
translated as: A cartoon offensive to the Messenger Bush!
But seriously, if the wording is not the point of the cartoon, why include it to beging with? Pictures speak louder than words, moo sa7? and in this particular cartoon, the choice of words simply sucks!
Considering the fact that Bush said God spoke to him and told him to go to war in Iraq, Hajjaj’s comment is on the money.
Although, if I were Emad Hajjaj, I would have replaced the soldier’s head with the head of President Bush without properly morphing it into the soldier uniform, to further illustrate the fact that it is men in suits who sent American kids in combat gear to fight their battle for them.
I guess if you want to put it this way Hamzeh … hahahah …and yes you’re right!
P.S. I still think Hajjaj didn’t do such a ‘brilliant’ job with this one 😛
But — a fair editorial cartoon of the news lately. I don’t agree with the sentiment — but, kind of funny all the same.
I think for most ppl in Jordan, the aim of Hajjaj’s art is just the laugh of an idea that is already recognized. Usually the message is a witty one.
But this specific caricature might be perceived by others non-Jordanians, mainly westerners, as “those who has a house made of glass, should not throw others with stones”(you know the Arabic say). And that is not quite the right message to convey here.
I wonder if the Jordanians among you would like to draw a cartoon of Jordan’s torture chambers? How about you make a joke of the fact that the biggest killer of Palestinians has been the Jordanian army? It’ll be just hysterical, I’m sure.
neoleftychick, im sure you have an album of evidence proving the existance of such chambers. But you’re right, we could have them; and Iraq could have WMDs.
the biggest killer of palestinians has been israel. the biggest killer of iraqis has been the U.S.
deal with it.
most of the jordanian army is made up of palestinians 😉
Is there some type of mass blinding drug that prevents people from seeing facts or do we just not watch – read the news?!?
It’s a known fact that egypt and jordan are amongst the countries that the USA transports prisoners to in order to extract information from them by methods of torture. i mean i don’t have photographic evidence but anyone who’s watched the news within the last year knows this and the fact that the CIA has black sites spread all over the world.
These black sites are sites the CIA has admitted having in eastern European countries that are used to interrogate (probably also torture) major terrorism suspects. Then there’s a second tier of suspects Ã¢?? who are not considered major – that are transported to countries such as Egypt, Jordan and Morocco also for interrogation and torture
This is from the Washington Post:
A second tier — which these sources believe includes more than 70 detainees — is a group considered less important, with less direct involvement in terrorism and having limited intelligence value. These prisoners, some of whom were originally taken to black sites, are delivered to intelligence services in Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Afghanistan and other countries, a process sometimes known as “rendition.” While the first-tier black sites are run by CIA officers, the jails in these countries are operated by the host nations, with CIA financial assistance and, sometimes, direction.
Morocco, Egypt and Jordan have said that they do not torture detainees, although years of State Department human rights reports accuse all three of chronic prisoner abuse.
Also, amnesty says:
Long before GuantÃƒÂ¡namo opened its gates to “war on terror” detainees, however, the USA had been secretly transferring terror suspects into the custody of other states, states where physical and psychological brutality feature prominently in interrogations.
Known to the US Administration as “extraordinary rendition,” and to its critics as the “outsourcing of torture”, the program has expanded considerably, reportedly under a classified directive signed by President Bush in late September 2001.
It has been estimated that the CIA, often using covert airplanes leased by fictional front companies,(9)has flown hundreds of war on terror suspects to countries including Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Syria.(10)
These are the sources that said jordan is used as place to torture prisoners…Egyptian and Jordanian authorities may deny that but their ally, the USA, has reports that show the exact opposite
iman, lol so you’re saying if its on the news then it must be true. none of that is evidence. when did the cia admit they have torture chambers in jordan? its basically reports issued by amnesty or human rights that are usually based on very weak (and paid) sources at best and estimates at worst. as for interrogation, of course jordan interrogates suspects, mostly because they’re planning to carry out attacks on our soil.
lastly, your basically saying that jordan has been the biggest killer of palestinians?
Wow, it seems my friends that we have an alien between us who just landed on this planet two days ago on a mission to annoy the hell out of us with out-of-this-world statements like the one I just quoted above.
No, no, Israel didn’t kill thousands of Palestinians in just the last 4 years. No, Israel didn’t illegally tear down 4000 Palestinian homes in the period of just one or two months. Palestine is not occupied, who says it’s occupied? Palestine is free. What 58 year old occupation? What 4 million refugees? There are no refugees!
It really strikes me people’s willingness to interfere in others’ business when the have no freakin clue what the hell they’re talking about.
Nas, Jordan’s army isn’t mostly made of Palestinians. At least I don’t think it is.
Of course not … and certainly I doubt that you’re a passive reader!
but I must say it is rather interesting how you disregarded the Washington Post’s comments, however, since you don’t seem to be willing to doubt its credibility, you may be interested to know that the Washington Post’s sources were U.S and foreign officials that are familiar with the arrangements of the black sites… here are some more quotes taken from the Washington Post:
“Although the CIA will not acknowledge details of its system, intelligence officials defend the agency’s approach, arguing that the successful defense of the country requires that the agency be empowered to hold and interrogate suspected terrorists for as long as necessary and without restrictions imposed by the U.S. legal system or even by the military tribunals established for prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay.”
~~ this hopefully answers your question of when/did the CIA say whatever
“It is illegal for the government to hold prisoners in such isolation in secret prisons in the United States, which is why the CIA placed them overseas, according to several former and current intelligence officials and other U.S. government officials. Legal experts and intelligence officials said that the CIA’s internment practices also would be considered illegal under the laws of several host countries, where detainees have rights to have a lawyer or to mount a defense against allegations of wrongdoing.”
“Host countries have signed the U.N. Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, as has the United States. Yet CIA interrogators in the overseas sites are permitted to use the CIA’s approved “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques,” some of which are prohibited by the U.N. convention and by U.S. military law. They include tactics such as “waterboarding,” in which a prisoner is made to believe he or she is drowning.”
~~ and this hopefully answers your doubts concerning the tactics of interrogation in the host countries one of which is Jordan.
For the full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/01/AR2005110101644_pf.html
Of course Jordan has the right and should carry out interrogations of suspects who carry out attacks on its soil — No doubt … but enough said about who’s doing whose dirty work … I really don’t understand why you try to gloss over it with statements such as the quoted above!
ummmmm. nope! what I am saying is that from King Faisal’s acceptance (Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919 of the Balfour Declartion (1917) to the current day, Arab countries that consider themselves allies to israel have accumulated just as much Palestinian blood on their hands as the israelis have…in fact they have been major players in helping cause it to be spilled by initially accepting to shake hands with Chaim Weizmann…a man who openly referred to Palestinians as “treacherous, arrogant, uneducated and greedy.”