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
B: Kos has a good take. Actualy, two takes.
tdaxp
February 4, 2006
3:00 am
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
Jay
February 4, 2006
6:12 pm
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/04/syria.cartoon.ap/
Chief Wiggum
February 4, 2006
6:16 pm
Kirk H. Sowell
February 5, 2006
12:58 am
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:
Daniel Nexon
February 6, 2006
5:21 am
And you think the latter because...?
USA-BOY
February 7, 2006
12:54 am
Dan
February 11, 2006
4:10 pm
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
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
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
ComingAnarchy.com » Blog Archive » The Real Free Speech Battle
February 20, 2006
10:06 pm
Feroz
February 22, 2006
8:54 am
Ansar Ali
February 22, 2006
3:02 pm
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
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 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.