Holy burning embassies, Batman! Egad, zoiks, and …
admin February 5th, 2006
Holy burning embassies, Batman!
Egad, zoiks, and what the heck?!?!?
(This post was written on 2/5/06. It is now 4/13/06, and I have not revised it. Therefore I will post it unrevised, and perhaps comment more on it later.)
I originally saw footage of angry protests in the Muslim world on Thursday, as I waited for my connection at O’Hare. I figured I’d write about it after I got home. However, by the time I get home, heaven knows what will have happened, so I’m starting now.
For anyone who has been off on Isle Royale or the moon for the past week or so, or has completely been ignoring the news, here’s the gist:
Last fall, a Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, had some 40 political cartoonists draw pictures of the Prophet Muhammad. Their post facto explanation, according to their chief editor, was “to examine whether people would succumb to self-censorship, as we have seen in other cases when it comes to Muslim issues.” (I seem to be missing my “link” feature right now, so I will add in links as possible later. For anyone who would like to check the quote, it’s an AP story titled “Militants Surround EU Offices in Gaza Over Militant Cartoons,” posted Thursday, February 2, 2006 on foxnews.com.)
So in short, Jyllands-Posten was playing with fire and they knew it. From where I sit, they wanted to see how far they could push the free-speech envelope, *within the bounds of Danish law*. (Not within the bounds of good taste, I submit, but within the bounds of Danish law.)
I’m not precisely sure how things got so out of hand. Muslims around the world have been protesting, peacefully in some cases (i.e. Britain) and not so peacefully in, for example, Syria (where the Danish and Norwegian embassies were set on fire). I have also heard seen and heard footage of protest signs, primarily on CNN, with threats like “Death to those who insult Islam” and “Europe, your 9-11 will come.”
I gather it started when Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Denmark over it, and then Jyllands-Posten and a couple of other European newspapers reprinted the cartoons to maintain their right to do so. That’s when things really started spinning out of control.
OK, let’s step back for a moment.
The main issue for Muslims seems to be that it is forbidden to depict the Prophet in any way, much like some Christian denominations extend the Old Testament prohibition of ‘graven images’ to include photographs and Trapper Keepers with ponies on them. It’s to prevent idolatry. OK – with the caveat that I do not think the people involved were Muslims, and therefore it’s questionable whether they are bound by Muslim law – Jyllands-Post is culpable.
The next issue for Muslims seems to be that many of these images were unflattering, including the oft-cited one of the Prophet wearing a lit bomb in his turban. Yes, it’s an offensive image. However, I submit that responding with death threats like the ones cited above, not to mention torching embassies, does not do a lot to convince the world at large that it’s an inaccurate image.
Quick caveat – I personally know several Muslims. I consider the Muslims I know to be good, honest, God-loving people; and I do not believe that Islam is inherently a violent religion. I do not believe that Muslims by and large are terrorists, or supportive of terror.
However, as always, the moderate voices seem to be lost in the global context. Cries in the wilderness.
Note to self: move to Antarctica.
