Top Menu

THE 99 Superheroes Vs. The Loons

 

THE 99 is an animated series featuring superheroes inspired by Islamic culture and society. The series was scheduled to launch in the US last week on the The Hub children’s television network, but producers have since announced the broadcast will be postponed indefinitely. Vicious anti-Muslim bigots everywhere are gleeful, boasting that their small but boisterous outcry may have prompted the delay.

The New York Post published a scathing article by outrage peddler Andrea Peyser criticizing the series and calling on anti-Muslim bigots to protest loudly so they can “cancel THE 99 before it starts.”  Peyser says the series will indoctrinate impressionable young children with Sharia-compliant Muslim superheroes “masquerading as the good guys.”

For Peyser the Hateful, Muslims are always super villains, so characters who represent the 99 virtues of God in the Qur’an will naturally use their powers to wage the ultimate jihad. She conjures up fearsome images of Jabbar the Powerful dishing out a mean stoning, and Darr the Afflicter venting his rage on hapless dhimmis.

The looniest blogger ever, Pamela Geller, told CNN that THE 99 is unacceptable because Islam must be portrayed as misogynistic, violent, and oppressive to non-Muslims, and that there must be an emphasis placed on Islam’s bloody, violent history.  She said anything else is just “dawah proselytizing.”

Dr. Naif Al-Mutawa, the Kuwaiti-born, U.S.-educated psychologist who created THE 99, said he never expected to face his fiercest opposition to the series in the US, a country that prides itself on diversity and tolerance.  The whole point of  THE 99 was to bridge the gap between Islam and the West by promoting universal values and encouraging tolerance, cooperation, and mutual understanding. Al-Mutawa said  he wants to provide positive role models to all children:

“I told the writers of the animation that only when Jewish kids think that THE 99 characters are Jewish, and Christian kids think they’re Christian, and Muslim kids think they are Muslim, and Hindu kids think they’re Hindu, that I will consider my vision as having been fully executed.”

Geller is not appeased, and continues to describe the series as an onslaught of cultural jihad aimed at radicalizing American children. She says the true superheroes are “counter-jihadists” like  Ibn WarraqNonie Darwish, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, all of whom are in fact rabid anti-Muslim loons. She has also launched a crude online parody called THE 19, which features Spencerman and Gellerwoman as superheroes presumably fighting Muslim evildoers.

Last month, Geller and her fellow hate mongers must have been thrilled with the release of a comic series that suits their agenda perfectly.   Frank Miller is a legend in the comic world for writing and drawing  film noir-style comic book stories, including Batman:  The  Dark Night Returns.  Influential in Hollywood, he directed the film version of The Spirit  and co-directed  Sin City.  Miller also produced  the 2006 American fantasy action film 300, which some critics described as psychological warfare against Iran.

Miller released a post-9/11 propaganda comic series to correspond with the ten year anniversary of the terrorist attacks in New York City, and said he hoped it would “really piss people off.”  He was braced for a fatwa and seemed to look forward to a backlash that never came.  Despite the underwhelming response from Muslims, Wired Magazine said:

“Holy Terror is a screed against Islam, completely uninterested in any nuance or empathy.”  Miller has produced, “one of the  most appalling, offensive and vindictive comics of all time. “

Outrage over the 9/11 attacks inspired Miller’s dark comic series steeped in insatiable rage and vengeance, but the same events also inspired Al-Mutawa, who said he wanted to take Islam back from the extremists who had hijacked it.  He conceived of the idea for his series during a London cab ride with his sister in 2003.

Al-Mutawa envisioned THE 99 as a world-class comic book on a par with American classics, so he assembled a team of veteran writers and artists with experience creating comic icons like Spider-man, Power Rangers, and X-Men. In 2006, he launched his new series to audiences in the Middle East.

THE 99 quickly became the most popular comic book in the region, selling over a million copies per year, and prompting Forbes Magazine to declare the series as one of the 20 trends sweeping the globe. An English language version launched in the US in 2007 without opposition.  Industry giant DC Comics gave the series  a promotional boost in 2010 by producing a six-part limited edition crossover that paired THE 99 with classic American superheroes including Batman, Superman, and the Justice League of America.

In 2009, Al-Mutawa decided to turn his successful comic book into an animated series.  His company, Teshkeel Media Group, partnered with a Dutch company to co-produce and distribute the new series.  The cartoon version of  THE 99 has also been a smashing success, and it is expected to reach viewers in over 50 countries by the end of next year.

THE 99 was initially banned in Saudi Arabia when critics expressed concern that Al-Mutawa was violating Islamic Law with characters that personified God. Al-Mutawa eventually won approval for the series after he convinced religious authorities that the characters are not manifestations of God, but merely extol the 99 virtues mentioned in the Qur’an.

Saudi Arabia has since signed on for merchandise deals and even plans to build its own Disney-style theme park based on the series.  The 99 Village opened in 2009 in Kuwait, and several more theme parks are planned throughout the region.  Today no Arab country bans THE 99, which is also broadcast in a growing number of Muslim countries outside the Arab world, including Turkey and Indonesia.

Not everyone is happy about the widespread acceptance THE 99 has received in the Muslim world.  Phyllis Chesler, another rabid anti-Muslim bigot and friend of Pamela Geller, has criticized Muslims for what she describes as “disturbing double standards.”  She says they are turning a blind eye to Al-Mutawa while he creates 99 images of  God, but they terrorize Westerners with fatwas and violence for lesser offenses.

Chesler is apparently a fan of far right Dutch politician Geert Wilders, and she is outraged that the Moooslims want to stop him from “telling the truth about Islam.” Wilders is infamous for spreading vicious lies against Islam and Muslims, and he is still vigorously exercising his right to free speech.

She said Muslims (apparently all of them) have also terrorized American cartoonist Molly Norris for her Everybody Draw Muhammad Day hate fest, and Dutch cartoonist Kurt Westergaard for his infamous drawing of the Prophet Muhammad with a bomb-studded turban.

It is difficult to see the connection between these provocative events and the introduction of THE 99, but Chesler seems to think they should all inspire a backlash of equal proportions if the Muslims are to apply consistent standards. This is tortured logic, but in any case, shouldn’t it be a good thing that THE 99 didn’t cause a violent backlash?

Chesler and her loony friends certainly didn’t write any articles praising Muslims for their subdued reaction to Frank Miller’s provocative, hateful comic series.  For them, Muslims always deserve only criticism, no matter what they do.

Batina the Hidden

Batina the Hidden

Chesler also expressed concern over what sinister “Muslim values” the series might foist on non-Muslim children.  She asks, “Will children learn about democracy, modernity, tolerance, Enlightenment, women’s and gay rights from these ‘Islamic’ figures?”

Spider-man doesn’t typically lecture children on democracy, modernity, and Enlightenment.  Those seem like heavy topics for a cartoon series written for children.

As for gay rights, how many gay and lesbian characters can you name from the Justice League or any other mainstream comic series?  If Chesler is really an advocate for gay rights, she needs to expand her focus to the entire industry.

THE 99 does promote gender equality, which Al-Mutawa has elaborated on during numerous interviews.   Islamphobes like Chesler and Geller will simply not let facts stand in the way of their propaganda efforts, and continue to spread the lie that the female characters in the series are oppressed and forced to wear Islamic clothing.

On her website Atlas Shrugs, Geller quotes herself  telling CNN:

“Because [THE 99] is mainstreaming the institutionalized oppression of women under Sharia, as exemplified by the burqa-wearing superhero. One would think that the male superheroes would have superpowers strong enough to be able to control themselves without the women having to don cloth coffins.”

Batina the Hidden seems to be the loons’ favorite obsession.  The character is from Yemen, and her clothing accurately reflects what some women wear in that country. Al-Mutawa said the burqa is not Islamic, but it is a cultural tradition that is important to some people, adding:

“I believe that forcing someone to wear the burqa is despicable. But I believe that if somebody wants to choose to do it, that’s their right…And so, out of respect for people who choose to wear the burka, I have one character out of 99—one percent—that wears a burqa. “

Although nearly every one of their articles tries to generate hysteria about Batina, the Hidden, Islamophobes have yet to explain how merely seeing a cartoon character wearing a burqa will traumatize American children. Marvel already has two characters who are Muslim women. The character Dust is from Afghanistan, and she wears a black ensemble that covers her from head-to-toe, showing only her eyes.

Dust has been around since 2002, though it seems few of our hyper-vigilant hate bloggers have detected her “stealth jihad.” Marvel editor-in-chief Axel Aonso said,

“I don’t view a Muslim superhero as avant garde. Muslims comprise 23 percent of the world’s population, and we like our comics to reflect the world and its diversity.”

Despite all the controversy, Dr. Al-Mutawa remains optimistic.  He has faced many hurdles in the last eight years, and his frustrations have been chronicled in the PBS documentary Wham! Bam! Islam!  “One way or the other,” he says, “‘The 99′ will get on air in the U.S.”

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Pingback: The New Anti-Semitism: Phyllis Chesler | elcidharth()

  • The_BigT

    heres a list of DC muslim superhero (note they’re are all good guys):

    http://dc.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Muslim?display=exhibition&sort=alphabetical

  • Pingback: Have no fear, the 99 are here! « The Global Consciousness()

  • BetEl

    @Ali

    Sorry for the delay. I had totally forgotten about this. Hope it’s okay.
    The issue here is not whether or not the hijab is considered to be waajib or not, or whether the bulk of the ‘ulama has reached a legal concensus. That is not the angle I am approaching this from. It may very well be obligatory to wear it, however, these kind of issues are not and should not be discussed by men. Leave it to the party of people to whom these laws apply. As for the subject at hand: why would you even suggest that these fictious cartoons are to wear hijab? Even the hijab isn’t real for G-ds sake, if they were to actually paint one on their “heads.”

  • Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D.

    Stephen G. Parker writes: I’m a bit surprised that you were not aware of [the Muhammad Asad] version [of the Qur’an], as it appears to be fairly popular; not as popular as Yusuf Ali’s, but still fairly well known.

    Jazakullah khayr (“Thank you ~ May Allah return you better”). I have his 1980 edition, “The Message of the Qur’an,” from Dar al-Andalus, Gibraltar (printed in Dublin). I read his “Fatihah” and the first two verses of his “al-Baqarah” and added it to my collection of mistranslations (which I’ll explain presently), along with the Yusuf ‘Ali and the Saudis’ Hilali-Khan corruption (among eight or ten other widely-distributed mistranslations).

    I believe it was the first English edition of the Qur’an I came across when I decided to ‘investigate’ Islam almost 2 years ago. (I found it online by ‘googling’ for English translations of the Qur’an). My ‘investigations’ came as a result of reading one of those Islam bashing e-mails which are mass mailed. I couldn’t really believe Islam could be as violent and vicious as was being claimed, so of course I wanted to check it out at the source (the Qur’an) as well as from the writings of reputable Muslim writers. It’s been a very interesting and enlightening ‘journey’.

    I’m sure it has been. Even in the mistranslations, the Message is between the lines, and anyone with an atom of faith or common sense cannot remain unaffected. Forty years ago, when I had finished reading it for the first time (deferring my “questionings” until I had finished reading it), three thoughts came to mind: “Yes, this is The Book, without doubt;” “I need to learn to read Arabic;” and “This is a whole new world.” And all of my “questions” became meaningless.

    Of course, by that time I had taken the brothers at their word and had learned to make the prayer, in Arabic that I just barely understood from English translations; and had abandoned eating pork six months before, so my brain was running at functional speeds; and had been made to feel “accepted” as a brother by muslims whose entire lives had conditioned them to distrust and fear people of my considerably lighter skin color ~ all of which made a difference, as ‘Umar said:

    In the beginning people would come and learn to keep faith, and then be given the Qur’an; but today people come and read the Qur’an and never learn to keep faith.”

    When I finished reading it the first time, I realized that I knew nothing at all beyond “God Is.” My university education in “political science” and history ~ nothing; my military service, equivalent to a Command and General Staff College completion ~ nothing; my ability to teach undergraduate mathematics and physics ~ nothing; my readings in law ~ nothing; my intuitive mastery of mystical sciences ~ nothing; nothing; nothing; not a thing, just a wealth of ignorance. For perhaps the first time in my life, I was ready to learn, with the doors of Knowledge opening before me.

    And how did I get there? By answering a question, completely on a whim ~ “What is your religion?” (‘What stupid difference does that make?’, I thought; and to toy with the questioner, answered:) “Islam.” That utterly capricious whim led me to the door, bi-la kaifa ~ without “how.”

    I never looked back. I staggered … walked … stumbled … ran … fell … into a ruins fourteen hundred years deep, and never looked back ~ I knew the diamond could be found.

    When I find a new translation of the Qur’an, I look for the words “believer,” “unbeliever,” “interpretation,” and a few others, and when I find them, I put the book on “that shelf.” The Qur’an doesn’t open to those who “believe” in it ~ it opens to those who keep faith with it. There is no such thing as an “unbeliever” ~ there are deniers and falsifiers, and there is ignorance upon which they prey. “Interpretation” is a turning away from The Book ~ “those in whose hearts is a turning away, they follow the obscure of it, for the sake of argument and for the sake of their interpretation.” The Book is to be understood, comprehended, and attended, not “interpreted. It’s plain and clear, and explains itself, no one needs anything more to understand what he needs to understand.

    What The Book provides is a way of understanding for every reader ~ fiqh for the fuqaha of every degree, those who seek the certain way of doing right, of meeting necessity, of being responsible for channeling His Love into the world at hand to grow and transform the life around us. It’s a universal recipe for self-salvation; a map of reality, inside and out, big and small; a world protected from haste, anger, doubt, envy, suspicion, ignorance, caprice, and error. It’s a gateway, a meadow of paths leading straight to the water of His Knowledge, of knowing Him, of being those among whom He resides, upon whom He comes to rest on this Seventh Day.

    It’s a symphony, a dance, a garden of bliss, unendurable ecstacy indefinitely prolonged. And it’s a world that everybody lives in, knowingly or not, caring or not, believing or not ~ riding on the shoulders of those who keep faith. Without faith, fidelity, reliance and reliability, the will to persevere in the face of whatever may come, and the patience to wait for every storm to pass, there is only the fire, burning in the atoms of the expanding universe, the decay of entropy, and the death of the human spirit.

    Forty years ago, Islam was a religion “good enough” to be acceptable to someone like me. Someday, I’m sure, I’ll find out whether I was ever, for the briefest moment of my life, “good enough” for Islam.

    Meanwhile, I type, and then look to see what my fingers have done, now that they’ve touched the diamond half-buried in the sands of time.

    Q13:17 He sends a rain from the sky; and as valleys wash to their destiny the flood bears a rising foam. And from what they smelt in the fire to forge adornment and wares, a froth of its kind: that is how ALLAH coins the true and the vain. Then as for the scum, it passes uselessly; and as for what serves the people, it remains in the earth. That is how ALLAH strikes images.

    Be wary of riding the foam.

  • http://www.mystic444.wordpress.com Stephen G. Parker

    @ Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D. – Peace to you. The English version I quoted from is that of Muhammad Asad. This can be found online at http://www.altafsir.com/ViewTranslations.asp?Display=yes&SoraNo=1&Ayah=0&toAyah=0&Language=2&LanguageID=1&TranslationBook=7 . I know you can order a hardback edition at amazon.com. I have the hardback edition, but its big and heavy due to the kind of paper used, as well as all the material, other than the Qur’an itself, which it contains. (It contains the English Qur’an, the Arabic, and a transliteration of the Arabic, as well as many and sometimes lengthy explanatory notations).

    Usually I indicate the ‘translation’ I am using, as I don’t always use Muhammad Asad’s. I don’t know why I failed to make a note of it in my comment above; but I apologize for that.

    I’m a bit surprised that you were not aware of that version, as it appears to be fairly popular; not as popular as Yusuf Ali’s, but still fairly well known. I believe it was the first English edition of the Qur’an I came across when I decided to ‘investigate’ Islam almost 2 years ago. (I found it online by ‘googling’ for English translations of the Qur’an). My ‘investigations’ came as a result of reading one of those Islam bashing e-mails which are mass mailed. I couldn’t really believe Islam could be as violent and vicious as was being claimed, so of course I wanted to check it out at the source (the Qur’an) as well as from the writings of reputable Muslim writers. It’s been a very interesting and enlightening ‘journey’.:smile:

  • Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D.

    Stephen G. Parker quotes a number of passages from an English rendering of the Qur’an:

    Mr. Parker: I have seen over 110 English “translations,” have more than a dozen of them on my shelf, and do not recall seeing what you quoted. Whose rendering is that and where may I obtain a copy?

    Thank you.

  • Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D.

    IbnAbuTalib writes (to a legalistic understanding): Based on your view, since “daraba” has been interpreted by Muslim scholars to mean “beat,” anyone who offers a different interpretation of the word is wrong. Your view also implies that it is not permitted for Muslims to, for example, object to the idea that women are inherently inferior to men, a notion that majority of the classical scholars have held; or for them to object to the death penalty for apostates on which there is a consensus among classical scholars, etc. Appealing to consensus is fallacious since it is loaded with a number of presuppositions and biases. In reality, there is no “ijma” on the concept of “ijma” itself.

    That is all correct. Those legalistic understandings of Islam were forged by the Abbasid Tyranny and have little to do with what Allah ta’ala wrote on the muslims and mu’mineen of Medina two hundred years earlier. However …

    “Law” ~ which is an “ordering” of the intellect essential to human understanding and human society ~ is a means by which individuals can reach a personal discipline that can enable them to see the reality with which we have been entrusted. Once the intellect ~ which cannot by itself determine reality from imagination ~ has been brought under control, such that it is rational and operating with clear reasoning, like the computer that it is, then its perceptions can be influenced from within, by the heart, rather than predominantly from without, by sensory perception and “inspiration.” A focus on “juris prudence” ~ judgment by law ~ is thus a good thing, not a negative except to the extent that “the law” is misunderstood, extrapolated, speculated, or otherwise imagined to reach beyond its province.

    Thus in the early ages of humanity there was no “law” per se, other than the rudimentary elements of oath, contract, witness, etc., that are foundational to modern jurisprudence. Then we were given “law” ~ statements of inexorable consequence as unbreakable as the laws of mathematics and physics ~ by which we could differentiate beneficial and harmful behaviors. Later, the Children of Israel were given an elaborated “social contract” law that includes laws of mandate and prohibition, constituting Israel as a bounded and discrete society. And finally, their cousins, the children of Ishmael, were given a comprehensive law that includes federalism, comity, individual dominion, and some other elements absent from earlier law, that completed The Law of God and Nature for our comprehension and service.

    And of course, being inveterate “rule-makers” just as many of us are today, our predecessors elaborated it all to suit their temporal purposes, confusing it for those who came after them.

    What we need to do is “get back to the basics” ~ the fundamental understanding that God gives us with His Laws of human nature and existence ~ the “existential laws” if you will. There are four discrete sets of such laws, and comprehension comes from seeing the interrelationship of all four, each of which is sufficient for its defined people who subscribe to it, but no one of which is sufficient for all humanity without the other three.

    You appear, prima facie, to be on that path. May God guide you on it to its “end,” which is not ever going to “end.”

  • http://www.muslimamerica.net/mp/stranger.htm Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D.

    Ali says: Um actually hijab is a requirement, not a choice.

    That’s absolutely false. See The Straight Path and stop falsifying Islam.

  • http://www.muslimamerica.net/mp/stranger.htm Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D.

    Sir David asks: Talisman (and anyone else) I always wondered who the sabians are/were? Are these the same folks as the samaritans?

    No. The Samaritans are the Children of Israel who crossed the Jordan with Joshua and established altars on Mount Gerushim and did not follow a later renegade High Priest to the southern areas and eventually Jerusalem.

    The Sabians are a much older religious order. They are named in the Qur’an, but what else is said about them in the Qur’an is not identified with the name. Certain passages in the Qur’an ~ marked with isolate letters representing specific numbers (that is, they have a horizontal line drawn over the letter, which makes it an “Abjad” number) are addressed to their attention. They are mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures, but not identified as “Sabians.” They are extant today, in plain sight, but are scarcely seen. The world knows virtually nothing about them, but they have been the real guardians of human liberty all along.

    And that is more than enough information for anybody with no “need to know” anything about them at all. The last thing they are is any kind of “threat” to anything or anybody.

  • http://www.muslimamerica.net/mp/stranger.htm Shaykh al-Hajj Dawud Ahmad, M.S.J.D.

    Ali writes: Okay I’m definately not a fan of this. Firstly the female characters don’t wear hijab, nor (it seems to me) the loose clothing that doesn’t show off body parts.

    In a way I see this as a mockery of our religion, and if we go to such lengths to prove to westerners we aren’t terrorists, now we’re just acting desperate. This is not the way, whether its for entertainment or educational purposes, to spread Islam.

    As muslims, it’s not our function to “spread Islam” ~ God does that. Our function is to “make Islam known” by being muslim. Not by preaching, not by proselytizing, not by “pushing” ourselves or our understanding on people, but by following God’s advice on how to live our lives and behave with others.

    When all people see of Islam is intolerance, rejection, impatience, complaint, dogmatism, and other things that human beings are naturally disposed to reject, then the will not see the mercy, compassion, love, generosity, concern, neighborliness, and other human traits that Islam enables muslims to recover and restore in their own individual lives.

    I, too, prefer moving in a society where the ladies are dressed modestly, because otherwise they are an attractive distraction from whatever it is that I might be doing and a tempting pursuit. That’s the way the human being is wired, it’s our nature.

    But in many societies, human sexuality is so repressed that nudity ~ and clothing that is more “naked” than nudity ~ elicit responses that are totally unconscious, repressed, and expressed in ways that are not physically sexual. For those who have realized their original human nature, who would be rightly called “feral” human beings who have escaped their Skinner-box conditioned domesticity (that so many call “civilization”), the genetically-determined responses are conscious and often disturbingly so, when the sexual stimulus urges a response that we have to consciously suppress. But what a generosity it is to be able to exercise conscious self-control ~ while so many others are manipulated into doing things they wouldn’t dream of doing were they aware.

    No, I applaud the work. It attracts people to the values identified by His Attributes with which He clothes us. It gives people an opportunity to see those values in other people, and appreciate them, and adopt them. It’s an invitation to human behavior ~ to our true humanity in which He creates all of us, which life in the world too easily takes from us. And when it uses our biological drives and inclinations to attract people, it’s more effective than preaching from a pulpit to people who’ve heard it all before, ad nauseum, from people who too often do not live up to or represent the ideals they preach.

    We need to focus more on realizing our humanity ourselves, rather than on the struggles of others, or lack thereof, to regain theirs. The word “salama” (from which “salaam,” “Islam,” and all other “s-l-m” words derive) means “to restore a thing to its original condition.” That’s what we should work on ~ restoring our lost or diminished human nature for ourselves. Success in that endeavor is the only thing that will “spread Islam” as others see the fruits of our success in that.

    The last thing we want to do is fail to realize that one or another way of inviting people ~ attracting people ~ to human values is likely to be a runaway success. The 99 looks to me like a winner ~ it “speaks to people according to their understanding,” which we have been told is a right way to help others.

    Few people can understand “You have to pray five times a day, pay zakat, fast during Ramadan, and make Hajj if you can,” as an “invitation” to anything they want to reach. But people want to be friendly, loving, generous, kind, and peaceful ~ in a word, to be “good.” And the truth is that we don’t have to be superheroes to reach that ~ God helps those who pursue those desires for themselves.

    So take another look at this project from this perspective. You don’t need to look at the pictures of cartoon characters …

  • Red

    @DrM, you state,

    ‘The “super-hero” is an American concept, and one way past its prime.’

    Says you. The term ‘superhero’ is a universal concept. Who DIDN’T imagine themselves as a superhero ;flying through the air, fighting evil and saving the day? My nephews favorite hero is Spiderman. Everyone, both young and old, love to imagine themselves performing superhuman feats that exist only in the imagination. To claim it’s ‘past it’s prime’ is as inaccurate as it is ignorant.

    ‘Muslims have no shortage of REAL heroes from our history and don’t need to invent them.’

    Well, as Al-Mutawa lives in a part of the world where extremists and radicals are given an open mic and power, he seems to believe they DO.

    In this New York Times article, he explains how when he was pitching his idea in the documentary ‘WHAM! BAM! ISLAM!’

    ‘The Solotaroff documentary shows scenes of how Dr. Al-Mutawa, pitching the concept to investors, strengthened his case by talking about a sticker book created by an Arab businessman showing bloody scenes of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and of suicide bombers extolling the virtues of martyrdom. This sticker book, called an “Intifada Album,” was selling to thousands of children in the West Bank.

    At the end of one scene, Dr. Al-Mutawa says: “My message was very clear to investors: Muslim children need new heroes.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/28/world/middleeast/28iht-M28C-ISLAMIC-COMICS.html?_r=2

    The point of the comic was to appeal to young minds. They are written for THEM, not you. The heroes themselves may be fictional, but the ideals and values of justice, compassion and fairness are very real and cherished.

    Who are you to deem it wrong?

Powered by Loon Watchers