Well, actually, now that you mention it....
I really don't think cartoons are the answer. Cartoons are simply an expression of emotive stuff- they are not the stuff of reality.
The only points cartoons make are subjective emotional ones such as:
"I hate you"
"I wish to demean you"
"I wish to ridicule you"....etc.
Why would it be "fun" for a Christian to demean someone's beliefs, whether pagan or hetrodox? A Christian does not have "fun" by increasing hatred among people. A Christian exposes facts to the light.
If you want an "Islamic Icon" based on "facts" rather than emotion, have a look at this one- however, before you do, I must warn you that it is a gruesome scene. It is a photograph of Armenian Orthodox women being crucified by the Islamist "Young Turks" and Kurds during the Armenian Genocide, 1915. Was this an isolated incident? Nope. Four British citizens were tortured in Saudi Arabia and sentenced to execution by "partial beheading and crucifixion"ÃƒÆ’Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ãƒâ€š three years ago (see http://www.guardian.co.uk/saudi/story/0,,1797622,00.html).
These are the realities which the Islamo-fascists must be made to face- not some childish cartoon "hate mail", but rather, we need to show them these facts and say: "This is the reality of what your people have done and are doing in the name of Islam even in modern history. Islam is inhuman- it cannot possibly have come from God. Only something infernal could inspire such demonic behaviour."
I was really hoping to keep this light and emotional, but since you've decided to introduce discussion about our discussion in this thread:
From time to time I'll grant you the higher moral posistion, but not this time. Ultimately the presentation of facts is as subjective as my rhetoric. That is not to say that the facts themselves are subjective, only that their presentation is. I can collect any number of facts to to demonstrate any posistion, be it abuses by the Mohammedians, or abuses by Christians, or abuses by Atheists, or even Abuses by the Swiss; and, depending on how I present those facts, I will evoke a different emotional response. A wonderful example is the differences between your presentation of turkish history and genocide compared to the media's presentation of turkey; the latter is far more favourable and prevents emotional outrage on the part of the west...if the facts of turkish genocide were presented on a large scale, the west would be up in arms against them.
In the end, my Cartoons and your Facts seek the same end, emotional outrage. The difference is that you seek to offend us in the west and inflame us with righteous outrage. Whereas I seek to inflame the Mohammedians by mociking their pedophile 'prophet.' The results of both actions are the same, the only difference is what group is affected.
Now, you may argue that inflaming our own people is more profitable than inflaming the Mohammedians; but I would disagree, the ultimate result of your presentation of facts, if you were able to reach everyone and influence everyone's opinion, would be a strong public demand to a) stop mohammedian oppression in general and b) avenge those who suffered under mohammedian oppression in general. However, the act of actually of informing the entire western world of these facts that reveal the truth about the islamo-fascists is nearly impossible without support from the media, which I don't see on the horizon.
Because of this difficulity, let us consider my approach, inciting the Mohammedians to anger. This is a relatively easy thing to do as they are an unenlightened and superstitious people. Just look at the publication of a few cartoons by a Danish newspaper...if we had just pushed this a little further we may have provoked an attack. But ulimately we don't even incite the entire entire islamo-fascist society to violence, if our mockery reaches even one small but motivated group, they could launch an attack single handedly. Now, if such an attack is launched one of two things can happen, either it will fail, the conspirators will have revealed themselves, and we can neutralize them, delivering a blow against more fundamentalist elements of islamo-fascist society; OR, the attack will succeed, we'll suffer a small number of casualities, BUT the public opinion that you seek to establish in the west using a slow and uncertain procedure (education) will occur overnight, the media will be raining down condemnation against the islamo-fascists, heck, they may even be willing to present, to their massive audiences, the facts you are trying to present without their help, thus advancing your cause of education. Riding on this wave of anti-mohammedian public opinion that will last a few years (the opinion of the mob is a fickle thing, after a year or two they forget about the bigger issues and are only concerned about their personal well-being again, and, thus, need to be stirred up by another significant and well publicized event) we can actually do some good to undermind the rule of the islamo-fascists. Unfortunately this last opportunity we had was partially wasted by attacking a secular nation (Iraq) instead of one of their more religious neighbours (but at least we got rid of the Taliban). And, honestly speaking, what in the last 10 years has been more benificial to your cause of educating the west about the islamo-fascists than the specials that came out following the US attack on Afganistan on the Taliban and their oppression of Minorities and Women (at least I presume, and sincerely hope, you got a few of those specials down under; but I can say with certainty that they did wonders for the education of the American Populace about the true Islam, a religion of oppression).
So while I really didn't want to go here in this thread -- I was hoping to start and ride a wave of emotionalism -- there is even cold logical calculation behind my emotionalism.
And while it may be a bit underhanded and, shall we say, byzantine, on the most fundamental levels my actions are no different than your attempt to educate people...the results of success would be the same, I simply believe my methods to be more likely to succeed. You must reach hundreds of millions, I only have to reach one person.