Skip to content
Join our Newsletter
Join our Newsletter

Artist responds to cartoon outcry

Wow! I've never been called "abhorrent" or "repulsive" before! I am mystified, though, as to how the July 4 editorial cartoon managed to drift casually over the complainant's head without him grasping the meaning.
let-masson.11_7112018.jpg

Wow! I've never been called "abhorrent" or "repulsive" before!

I am mystified, though, as to how the July 4 editorial cartoon managed to drift casually over the complainant's head without him grasping the meaning.

I see no "sacrilege" or "denigration" of the Saviour depicted there. The ridicule was, I

thought, clearly directed at the other figures in the scene, and the unseen evil (and very stable) genius behind them who devised and constructed the policies they are enforcing, on the same premise that Nazi SS officers used... just following orders.

I just found it interesting and humourous that a country that crows so loudly about being Christian, if they followed their own profiling of whom they want to exclude from their country, Jesus wouldn't make it in!

That's not a denigration of Christ. That's pointing a spot light at the New MAGA America, one that we hardly recognize any more.

You are right on one point. I wouldn't use Mohammad in the depiction. First, it

removes the irony (it's Muslims that the Baby Jailer is banning). They see it as striking a blow against radical Islam. And one of their tools is radical Christianity, as Attorney General Jeff Sessions actually quoted the Bible to justify separating children from their mothers at the border.

The second reason I could not include Mohammad is that the radical Muslims

worldwide would pronounce a death sentence fatwa upon me because it's against their law to create a depiction of their prophet and I would be publicly beheaded by sword.

You wouldn't do that, would you, Mr. Klassen? You don't have a sword, do you? Or a pen?

Ray Masson

Prince George