The furore over the 12 Danish cartoons continues apace with sickening protests in London.
I do believe that anyone has the right to feel offended. I'm offended on a daily basis by something or other. I believe that anyone has the right to boycott (even if it's a bit over the top) or write strongly worded letters to the editor. People have the right to protest.
But I think this craziness over the 12 Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed and their publication in other newspapers across Europe demonstrates that there's real difficulty in trying to accommodate our traditional Western freedoms and certain types of Islamic worldview. A Danish Imam summed it up nicely in a quote from The Telegraph.
A Danish imam, Ahmed Abu Laban, told worshippers in Copenhagen: "In the West freedom of speech is sacred; to us, the Prophet is sacred."
And that's fine. But you have to understand that our free speech means we don't have to follow your religious dictats - and equally our profane speech doesn't really affect what's sacred in your heart.
I think we must stand firmly for our traditional liberties. Unlike the Bush administration State Department which has decided to appease Islamists on this matter.
No newspapers in Britain have republished the cartoons, but the BBC showed a few pictures of the cartoons as part of their coverage of the reactions. In their piece, which I saw, a Danish Imam was flipping through a portfolio of the cartoons and was explaining to the Jyllands-Posten editorial staff why each and every one of them was deemed offensive. That was enough to spark protests in London. Protests which I believe were not only offensive (fair enough), but might also have breached the acceptable limits of free speech - a direct incitement to violence - and could certainly have fallen under the description of "glorification of terror" - one provision in a recently proposed terrorism bill.
Here's some of what was said in the protest - according to The Times:
- Protesters screamed: “UK, you must pray — 7/7 is on its way.”
- Banners made references to the British suicide bombers with slogans such as: “Europe, you will pay. Fantastic 4 are on their way.” [a reference to the 4 7/7 bombers]
- Behead those who insult Islam
- Massacre those who insult Islam
- BBC = British Blasphemic Crusaders*
- As Muslims we unite & we are prepared to fight
And despite the fact that many of the banners called for violence, police prevented passers-by from snatching offensive signs and banners - and apparently the protest was largely peaceful (if that's the right word).
____
* I think that sign is perfectly acceptable but included it because I thought it was kinda clever. I've felt similarly about the sneering BBC, too.
7 comments:
I agree, the reactions are more than inadequate. Anyways, I dpn't believe that the cartoons were protected by the freedom of speech. Look here
eh, none of this is new (salman rushdie??), and the media just enjoys adding fuel to the fire, which only riles up the protesters even more. if the media coverage went away, the story would be over tomorrow. i truly believe that. it's almost as if this is the sort of thing the original publishers were hoping for.
i think even saying ridiculously inflammatory things is okay. i think acting on them is another thing entirely, and any of the violence/arson is to be condemned.
but at the same time, i don't think your average law-abiding, Muslim should have to disavow stuff they're not involved with to begin with. that pisses me off.
(sorry for the long comment - my blog is down and i'm going through withdrawals!!)
The Salman Rushdie affair was almost 20 years ago, so I think this is new to a lot of people. I don't think the media is driving this. I think many of the regimes in the Middle East are driving it because it takes the spotlight off them. They want to have their citizenry angry at the West to serve their own political purposes. If they didn't want those embassies torched, they wouldn't have been.
I'm all for picking on religion just like anything else, but why not use known deadbeats like Bin Laden, Zawahiri, Zarqawi, Pat Robertson, etc. There are already lines that editors won't allow cartoonists to cross for other things, I suggest the trashing the main icons (Christ, Mohammed, Buddha, etc) be among those.
Does that mean I favor the Danish backing down? Nope. The typical idiotic reaction doesn't call for an apology, even if one were to be warranted.
By the way, thanks for dropping by my little place. It's been a warm winter down here in Vol land but we're fixin to get some snow soon.
Cheers
"Anyways, I dpn't believe that the cartoons were protected by the freedom of speech"
Of course they were protected by the right to free speech. Only speech which directly incites violence is not protected.
Talking of which, the Islamonazis' placards certainly inspired thoughts of violence in yours truly. They were intended to inspire fear, but I think they mostly inspired anger, at least in the UK. Admittedly much of my anger is directed at the likes of Peter Mandelson (*yuck*), Jack Straw and the US State Department for their craven comments. And kudos to the French for taking a firmer line.
I don't agree that freedom of speech is "sacred"; I certainly don't worship it.
I don't think you can equate civil liberties to religion, when so much blood has been shed over religion, and our civil liberties are stomped on every day without protest from a large majority.
I'm a libertarian, it's sacred to me. I'd die for it (and conceivably will die for it, the way things are going).
Post a Comment