Entry details

Chirol
Author

Chirol

Date

February 3rd, 2006

Tags

, ,

Comments

17 Comments so far.
Add yours.

We Are All Danes Now

My recent post on the cartoon controversy has received many a comment. Not long after posting it, a Jordanian tabloid editor decided to republish the caricatures so that people would actually see what they were protesting about. He added this:

“Who offends Islam more? A foreigner who endeavors to draw the prophet as described by his followers in the world, or a Muslim with an explosive belt who commits suicide in a wedding party in Amman or elsewhere.

Needless to say, the aversion to the truth that many Muslims have prevailed and he was fired hours later and gave a public apology. However, Spiegel Online has chimed in with a fiery editorial by an anonymous Muslim author that is a breath of fresh air and surprising coming from a radically left magazine:

The great British philosopher John Stuart Mill wrote in On Liberty, “Strange it is, that men should admit the validity of the arguments for free discussion, but object to their being ‘pushed to an extreme’; not seeing that unless the reasons are good for an extreme case, they are not good for any case.”

[...] A democracy cannot survive long without freedom of expression, the freedom to argue, to dissent, even to insult and offend. It is a freedom sorely lacking in the Islamic world, and without it Islam will remain unassailed in its dogmatic, fanatical, medieval fortress; ossified, totalitarian and intolerant. Without this fundamental freedom, Islam will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality; originality and truth.

[...]This raises another more general problem: the inability of the West to defend itself intellectually and culturally. Be proud, do not apologize. Do we have to go on apologizing for the sins our fathers? Do we still have to apologize, for example, for the British Empire, when, in fact, the British presence in India led to the Indian Renaissance, resulted in famine relief, railways, roads and irrigation schemes, eradication of cholera, the civil service, the establishment of a universal educational system where none existed before, the institution of elected parliamentary democracy and the rule of law? What of the British architecture of Bombay and Calcutta? The British even gave back to the Indians their own past: it was European scholarship, archaeology and research that uncovered the greatness that was India; it was British government that did its best to save and conserve the monuments that were a witness to that past glory. British Imperialism preserved where earlier Islamic Imperialism destroyed thousands of Hindu temples.

Whatever you do, read the entire thing!

Meanwhile, The Tension has some rather disturbing images of Muslim protesters with signs reading “Europe learn from 9/11,” “Massacre those who insult Islam”and more. You have to see it to believe it. The longer this goes on, the more pessimistic I become about the Middle East’s ability to fix its failing culture.

On a personal note, I was studying in Copenhagen on September 11th and received endless support from the Danes. They stood by us 100% and were calling for war while I was still trying not to jump to conclusions before the facts were in. While the Danes expressed their outrage and support of the United States, Palestinians burned US flags and danced in the streets upon hearing the news. Like the rest of us, I’ll never forget where I was on 9/11 and I’ll also never forget the outpouring of support, solidarity and sympathy I and fellow American students got on that day and the following months. Tak Danmark

Comments to this entry

Dan tdaxp
February 4, 2006
1:03 am
A: John Stuart Mill was a jerk and intellectual hoodlum.
B: Kos has a good take. Actualy, two takes.
tdaxp
February 4, 2006
3:00 am
Moonjets, Muslim Protest Babes, and more



Crazy props to the tdaxp reader who sent me this:

The lander descended the final few feet to the surface of the moon. There was a thump heard within the lander and then touchdown was announced to Mission Control. Buzz Aldrin slumped at the contr...
Mike
February 4, 2006
4:22 pm
The Danish cartoons are defensible only in the name of absolute free expression. Life is not about making judgments in the names of absolutes; that's how one ends up with terrorism and strife. Having looked at them, I think they're stupid and tasteless. That said, there's no excuse for threatening to kidnap people who aren't even connected with these lame-ass editorial cartoonists. And yes, they have the right to run them. But nothing is ever that simple.
Jay
February 4, 2006
6:12 pm
Cartoon row: Danish embassy ablaze
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/04/syria.cartoon.ap/
Chief Wiggum
February 4, 2006
6:16 pm
It's interesting that many newspapers chose not to print the cartoons because they might offend or anger Muslims. They weren't too concerned about offending or angering Muslims when they printed the Abu Ghraib photos, or spread those those phony stories about urinating on the Koran, and other claimed incidents of Koran desecration. Could that be they become more circumspect when Muslim anger may be directed at them? Swine.
Kirk H. Sowell
February 5, 2006
12:58 am
Chirol: In terms of what this says about the Arab world, just look at the results of last week's Palestinian elections. The Palestinians had a choice, and a majority voted for radical Islam. There was a secular, non-corrupt alternative to Fatah, the Third Way party led by Salam Fayyad, but they got just two seats. My full analysis: The Triumph of Hamas and the Future of Palestine.

Mike: I agree that the cartoons are absurd, and do not reflect the historical reality of what we know of Muhammad (see below), but my understanding is that the newspaper published them precisely because there had been death threats against Europeans (especially Danes and Dutch) who wrote or produced works critical of Islam. They were absurd, but they had a point.

To retyping my perspective, I've copied part of a recent post below:

This is a threat to the freedom of the press in the West. If Western governments appease protesting Muslims by restricting their press, then that will embolden them to protest for more restrictions on freedom when something offends them. Remember that blasphemy and apostasy are both punishable by death under Islamic law, and in many Muslim countries today. If an Egyptian Muslim were to convert to Christianity, or any other religion, he would be killed. I once knew a guy in Jordan who converted and had to leave the country.

The caricatures of Muhammad in question had clear "First Amendment" content, as we say in U.S. constitutional law. Radical Islam is a problem currently facing Western societies, and so if someone suggests that Islamic terrorism traces to Muhammad, even though this arguably is not accurate, it is protected. Indeed, that is the point to emphasize to the Muslim world: the accuracy of a portrayal has nothing to do with its protection as free speech (although under U.S. defamation law, a knowingly false statement causing harm to another would not be protected). As I have written previously on this, I don't have any problem at all with Muslims protesting or boycotting the newspapers in question, but their demand that Western states restrict the free press is a clear threat to freedom.

As a historical matter, for those who care, the claim that Muhammad was a terrorist will not hold up. According to Muslim tradition, most of Muhammad's warmaking was self-defensive. He did engage in some offensive operations (after capturing Mecca, his home town), but this does not make them terroristic. Muhammad engaged in a lot of caravan-raiding, but this might be considered analogous to Western nations using force to cut off each other's commercial trade, something which was pervasively practiced in World War II. Muhammad's most controversial act, again according to Muslim tradition, was the killing of all the males from a Jewish tribe in Medina (and selling the women and children into slavery) after suspecting them of turning against him (they had previously been militarily neutral). But even this does not fit the definition of terrorism - it was not an act of violence targeting civilians in order to instill psychological fear for the purposes of achieving a political goal. Moreover, the whole episode maay have been fabricated after the fact in order to explain a political break between Muslims and Jews. In short, if we accept Muslim tradition as reliable, then Muhammad was not a terrorist. If we do not consider it reliable, then there is insufficient historical evidence to base a judgment either way.
Daniel Nexon
February 6, 2006
5:21 am
"A: John Stuart Mill was a jerk and intellectual hoodlum."

And you think the latter because...?
USA-BOY
February 7, 2006
12:54 am
GO FOR IT DENMARK !!!! WE ALL SUPPORT YOU AS A CULTURE AND AS A COUNTRY
Dan
February 11, 2006
4:10 pm
And you think the latter because"¦?


The damange wrought by his definition of liberty (license) instead of the old one (right) is profound.

Like 2004ish politicians who knew that people wanted "homeland security," and so suddenyl defined social security as part of homeland security, Mill was pushing an agenda through intellectual dishonesty.

But to be fair, I'm far more upset by the consequences of his actions, than that he used deceiptful rhetoric. Many can conflate. Few can so confound nations.
tdaxp
February 11, 2006
4:32 pm
Sexy Veiled Iranian Banes (The Political Art of Amir Normandi)

I was browsing something else when I came across this at One Free Korea:


No tolerance for intolerance
No apology for being free
No Burka for the West. Support Denmark

I've been falling the cartoon controversy, and by clicking on the link I ...
Ansar Ali
February 20, 2006
2:37 pm
If Danes created and proudly supported those cartoons (which are crap) as a token of their Freedom of expression. They should take the world-wide reaction of muslims to this as Freedom of expression as well.

Also as part of so-called Freedom of expression one can not attack ones private life. I use word private because prophet mohammed is as private to millions of muslims as their own family members.

While British and Mughal rules on India have intelligently been compared in this blog, I must put it right across that it is not the full story. I accept British contributions in India but Mughal contributions cannot be ignored. How can one forget Taj Mahal (One of the seven wonders of world) and many more spectacular monuments constructed by Mughals. How can one forget King Akbar, who is respected even by Indian Hindus. The list goes on. Britians on the contrary took away 'kohinoor' diamond and other wealth from india and treated indians as slaves.
Chirol
February 20, 2006
4:59 pm
Ansar: Would you consider widespread violence, property destruction and death freedom of expression or the act of the immature and uncivilized? Even worse is the fact that the masses were simply manipulated by their own governments in order to vent frustration at the west and thus distract the people from their dire domestic problems.
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » The Real Free Speech Battle
February 20, 2006
10:06 pm
[...] Although many Muslims may not be able to handle freedom of speech and have demonstrated this with their childish and violent responses around the world, another battle for freedom of speech rages in Europe, one that hasn’t been on the front page, namely, that of holocaust denial. [...]
Feroz
February 22, 2006
8:54 am
Deal All, Appreciate concerns of all about the issue. I think, freedom of expression is basic human right until it doesnt affects others basic human rights. Are you saying whatever done by America in Iraq(....,etc) is right of expression? Whatever demonstrations done by Muslims through out the world, are the part of hatred which is created by West in their minds. From time to time, by attacking and spreading misconceptions about Islam, west has created a very bad image in the Muslim community. Now situation is like that even a small thing done intentionally or unintentionallly by some people, creats a havoc among the community. Thought its true and all Islamic scholars agree that demonstrations should be peaceful as Islam is the peace loving religion but its the people, whose mindset is set by the west, goes beyond the limits.Sometimes, this is done by the taking name of religion. So, I hope the main problem lies in the mindset of west and unless and until they change their mindset towards Islam, such things will happen. Islam is the religion given by the Almighty Allah, the creator of all the living and non-living things, Is it possible His teachings will be cause of problems?
Ansar Ali
February 22, 2006
3:02 pm
That blog was really divisive and lacking in complete reality. People from other continents are migrating to west more out of economic compulsions than cultural fascination.

I do not support violence. When I came to know about the cartoons and when I saw them, I really felt the pinch in my heart and was very disappointed. May god give some sanity to those who published such cartoons.

If such protests have taken place and various regional governments have tried to get some mileage out of it, then those people are also equally responsible for this who provided opportunities to them by publishing such non-sense. One must understand that an invisible terrorist is not the only Muslim; there are millions of peace-loving, law-abiding people who might be living in your neighborhood, working in an office as your colleague, are also Muslim.

In Islam, any visual depiction of prophet is regarded as one of the greatest sins, and the very same thing has happened. Danes are not to be blamed for that, it's their illiteracy towards Islam which is to be blamed. Its time they do away with this. I believe if Danes had known this they wouldn't have committed this childish act.

Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) even cared for a woman who did not use to believe in his teachings and used to throw garbage on him every time he passed-by her house. One day when that lady fell ill and did not throw garbage on him, prophet got worried and enquired about her health.

Let's hope that perpetrators of such an irresponsible act realize greatness of Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) and accept their mistakes.
Dan tdaxp
February 22, 2006
7:19 pm
In Islam, any visual depiction of prophet is regarded as one of the greatest sins, and the very same thing has happened. Danes are not to be blamed for that, it's their illiteracy towards Islam which is to be blamed. Its time they do away with this. I believe if Danes had known this they wouldn't have committed this childish act.


Well, certain strains of Islam may teach this, and all other things being equal we should be respectful of each other.

Likewise, the swastika is a sign of good luck, and all other things being equal, we should be delighted when we see one.

However, the Muslim rioters and the Nazis did a good job of making depictions of Muhammed Abdullah and the Swastika monsterous, giving them a power to inspite fear and trembling in others.

Mel Brooks did a good job with one. After the violent reaction to cartoons, perhaps Muahmmed smileys can do so as well.

Mature societies evolve away from reflexive cries of racism! and -ophobia!. The societies of Islam must do the same.
freedomfighter
February 23, 2006
5:34 pm
I read that article in Der Spiegel, too, and was very impressed.

I believe that, for the most part, the so-called leaders of the Western powers are, above all, amoral pragmatists, which is to say they will do whatever is necessary to realize their objectives. I believe that, for some time now, "freedom" has merely been a convenient "worship word" used by those in power to stop thought. "Oh, well," we think, when they invoke the worship word, "if it's for freedom, it's okay, then" -- with the unspoken assumption being, "Despite the vast gulf that lies between me and Senator Cheatem, we both believe in Freedom." And that's the flaw, because Senator Cheatem believes in nothing but power, for him, in quantity and for the duration.

Suddenly faced with a challenge to freedom that is broad is scope and fundamental in its essence, they have no clue what to do; and they end up doing what a lot of short-termers do: pandering to the loudest, most raucous voice, trying to calm the waters. They are satisfied with short-term solutions, because they don't want to re-examine their basic premises -- which is required when seeking long-term solutions.

All this bodes ill for the West. The Islamists have been migrating freely for some time. I believe New York City will be nuked with a smuggled weapon in the not-too-distant future. I believe the jihadists will cause a lot of pain and suffering before this is over. I believe they will eventually lose, but at significant cost.

I wish people could see how the Hutus treated the Tutsis in the Rwandan civil war ten or so years ago -- killing old people and children with machetes, etc. That is the kind of barbarity we are in for with these warriors of Islam.

I used to go along with the popular belief, that Islam is a religion of peace. I am no longer sure. I know there are peaceful Muslims; but that is quite a different thing. I am now gravitating to the view that Islam is a religion of violence. There seems to be too much violence in its history and in its scripture. And, as Thomas Mann said, tolderance becomes a crime when applied to evil; thus, if this is the true face of Islam, then it must not be tolerated, and we must make war upon it.

Whatever the true nature of Islam, however, we must make war on these jihadists. For they are at war wth us, and have been for many years.