They sinisterly misinterpret »« Snug

They are free to read it or ignore it, as we are free to read it and laugh

I gather that yesterday on BBC Asian Network Mohammed Shafiq said that Jesus and Mo shows the two “having gay sex.” Author sent an email correcting this falsehood, and the network read it in full. Author tweeted the text of the email. (It’s been retweeted 104 times so far.)

Embedded image permalink

There.

 

Comments

  1. captainahags says

    For those without image capabilities:
    Ni Nihal,
    I am the author of Jesus and Mo. Mohammed Shafiq said my comic portrays Jesus & Mohammed “having gay sex.” This is not true. They are shown in bed together- a comic tradition stretching back to Laurel and Hardy and Morcambe and Wise.
    For the record, the comic is designed to make atheists laugh. Of course some Muslims will be offended by it, as will Christians, Mormons, Scientoligists (sp)and any other religion we have taken a pop at. But the comic is not FOR them. They are free to read it or ignore it, as I am free to make it.
    Maajid Nawaz tweeted the picture with the express purpose of declaring that he was not offended by it as many other Muslims are not. For this, he is being attacked by people mativated (sp) only by their hatred of him, and the desire to increase their own profiles as “community leaders.”
    Regards,
    Author, Jesus and Mo.

  2. rnilsson says

    Aha! yet more code names! But not difficult to divine. The Laurel and The Hardy, eh? Mo and Wise?

    Anyone trained to expose graven images will see through those in a … oh wait, there’s something in your eye.

  3. abear says

    Some people are incredibly touchy when they or their beliefs are laughed at by others and react by saying they are being attacked, etc.
    They must be terribly insecure about the truth of their stated beliefs to react that way.

  4. Shatterface says

    I gather that yesterday on BBC Asian Network Mohammed Shafiq said that Jesus and Mo shows the two “having gay sex.”

    I always figured there might be more to gay sex than this. It seems to involve a lot of reading and not much hugging.

  5. Katherine Woo says

    For a ‘professional’ journalist to make an excuse like that can only be deliberate dishonesty. Since it may put the author at even greater risk, I think BBC needs to broadcast an apology or retraction on all its networks.

    The BBC was so cowardly during the Mohammed cartoon affair, I remember them apologizing for inadvertently showing them in passing during a video segment.

    Unfortunately the author is anonymous, otherwise they could blast Shafiq with one of England’s famously illiberal libel suits and make bank.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>