(Note: my previous post regarding the offensive cartoons of Mohammed is here. And if you're interested, I also penned an apologetic piece comparing Christianity and Islam after Muslim riots were sparked last summer by stories of abuse at Guantanamo Bay. That essay is here.)
The fear sown by the recent incitement of Muslims over a series of offensive cartoons published in a Danish newspaper is best summed up by this recent London Times headline:
Danish Cartoonists Fear For Their Lives
In the Christian West, we place a very high value on personal freedom and the right to freedom of expression. It would be unthinkable for us as a society to rally by the hundreds of thousands in support of the deaths of people who had done nothing more than draw an offensive cartoon.
Through two thousand years of Christianity and continual progressive reformation, the governments of the West have divorced themselves from the business of missionary work, and have ceased to enforce the edicts of the Christian Church. What may dishonor or contradict the doctrines of the Church no longer dishonors or threatens the governments of our largely secular states; therefore, these things are no longer considered to be crimes. We have the freedom to deconstruct, criticize, or lampoon Christianity to our heart's content without fear of imprisonment or death. (Though for the sake of political correctness , we tend to shy away from the mockery of other religions.)
But in the Muslim umma, such freedoms do not exist. And those who wish to spread the umma into continental Europe and elsewhere have no qualms about killing anyone who would dare commit the sin of blasphemy.
And so, being largely secular and therefore placing a high collateral value upon our mortal lives, we take these death threats seriously. And devout Muslims, particularly the fanatical ones who place far more value on religious orthodoxy than on human life, and and who consider it an act of worship to die in the defense of their beloved Prophet, understand this fact very well:
As I said, our boys were shocked by the low morale of the American soldier and they realized that the American soldier was just a paper tiger. He was unable to endure the strikes that were dealt to his army, so he fled, and America had to stop all its bragging and all that noise it was making in the press after the Gulf War ... After a few blows, it forgot all about those titles and rushed out of Somalia in shame and disgrace, dragging the bodies of its soldiers. America stopped calling itself world leader and master of the new world order, and its politicians realized that those titles were too big for them and that they were unworthy of them. - Osama bin Laden, 1998
Many newspapers around Europe, in an admirable act of defiance, have republished the Gyllands-Posten cartoons. Blogs too numerous to list have written about the story and published the pictures. But many legacy media outlets, including NBC and CNN, have refused to publish the pictures.
They refuse for the same reason that CNN self-censored its reports during the reign of Saddam Hussein. CNN claimed that they caved into Saddam's censorship demands as a favor to the Ba'athists; in return, they were promised first dibs on breaking news stories within Iraq. But the deeper reason behind their decision was a permeating fear of the repercussions that would come if Saddam's atrocities were accurately reported. Simply put, defying Saddam meant imprisonment, torture, and death.
Likewise, after witnessing countless bombings, kidnappings, and hostage snuff videos all done by radical Muslims, the press has no misunderstandings about how they will be punished if they insult Islam.
The Western press is universally proud of its accomplishments as a "free" press. It reports the most sordid scandals and outrageous government abuse with little fear of reprisals or recrimination. But the press should not be so hasty in congratulating itself, for the free press is simply an indicator of the stability of the society that supports it. A free press exists only when its benefactors -- the people -- want to have a free press. And the people (or by extension, the government that rules the people) can only tolerate a free press when the foundations of their society are deep enough and strong enough to weather the flood of information that unrestrained communication spawns.
The leaders of radical Islam want no such thing, because their fragile hold on their people depends primarily on the ability to control and structure the flow of information that their followers receive.
_______________________________________
One of the things that always strikes me when Muslim violence breaks out (such as the recent Paris riots or the riots that ensued after Newsweek's "Koran in the toilet" story last May) is just how easy it is to incite mass hysteria and violence in the Muslim "street."
Whenever we in the civilized West see large-scale panic over something that we consider to be silly, such as the hysteria that ensued a few years ago in India over reports of a "monkey man" terrorizing its cities, we usually chalk it up to wholesale ignorance of the population. Dare we make the same observation about the Muslim "street"? Or is it simply because Muslim society considers independent thought to be a form of blasphemy?
And are Muslim leaders taking advantage of their own people in order to perpetuate hatred of the West, perhaps in an attempt to shore up support among their people in anticipation of an impending large-scale show-down between Israel, the US, and Muslim states like Iran and Syria?
Astute observers are now wondering how Muslim protesters around the
world suddenly seem to have an abundance of Danish flags to burn.
Couple that observation with the fact that Danish Muslims prepared and
distributed propaganda about the Danish cartoons -- and padded the
actual Danish cartoon portfolio by adding their own fake offensive
cartoons -- and it stands to reason that this whole incident could be a
planned event. And let's not forget that the Gyllands-Posten published the offensive cartoons five months ago, without a whisper of protest from Muslims at the time.
________________________________________
The glut of garbage that fills my email inbox, coupled with the endless assault of spiritually-destructive messages emanating from TV, advertising, movies, and popular culture in general often makes me justifiably angry. Yet at the same time, I have the ability to freely access a wealth of information through each of those media. I can use it to enrich my own life and to guide my children toward the truths that will allow them to accomplish more things than I could ever dream of. This is possible because, as an educated man and a Christian, I have been taught how to develop a stable worldview based on reason and a standard of truth. I also know that even though misfortune and suffering are a part of the world we live in, my God does not throw tantrums like an unruly child, and I do not have to live in fear of being struck down because I or a member of my family did something to displease Him.
But a devout Muslim man living in the umma, the same age as me and with a wife and three children, does not have that freedom. His worldview is centered around the notion that his people suffer because they have failed Allah. He is taught -- and therefore teaches his children -- that the reason his people have failed Allah is because they have been corrupted by evil, sub-human animals, the Jews and the Americans, who have polluted and defiled the umma. His access to information is restricted by his religious teachers to the narrow bigotry and religious fundamentalism that perpetuates this world view, thereby alleviating themselves of any responsibility for the plight of their own people. He is taught to fear anything that will provoke the wrath of Allah, and that his only certain path to salvation comes through his own death in a holy war against the enemies of Islam.
Warfare -- and by extension, violence in general -- then becomes a permanent mark of his culture, for it is the only way that the devout Muslim can be sure that he will enter Paradise.
Many intellectuals have questioned whether or not Arabs and others living in the Middle East under the thumb of Islam are ready for freedom and democracy. Perhaps a better question to ask is, how long will the nations of the Middle East survive without it? The theocratic totalitarianism of Middle Eastern states has stagnated their economies and turned their once-productive citizens into angry, fearful mobs. Those who continually argue for "stability" in the Middle East need to evaluate desperate lives of its people and ask themselves if the current state of affairs really needs to be perpetuated. The fragility of Islamic society is self evident, and the ease at which out of control, bomb-throwing, machine gun-toting crowds can be assembled in any Muslim nation should be of utmost concern to the West.
Sadly, history teaches us that cultures which have become so saturated by fundamentalism and hatred can be reformed only after a thorough and bitter military defeat. The war has already started; Muslim riots and terrorism are simply the equivalent of warning shots being fired across our bow. Europe, particularly Spain, has already tried to appease Muslim fanatics. This past week's riots and those in Paris three months ago should be a lesson that such attempts are a waste of time. Radical Islamists are interested only in full surrender and the imposition of sharia law, with their leaders sitting in judgment of the conquered people. Only then can the blessings of Allah be restored.
There is every reason to believe that Muslims will continue to provoke Europe and the United States until a showdown is inevitable. I sincerely hope that Europe will not choose surrender in an attempt to avert bloodshed. For if they do, the bloodshed that will follow, as radical Islamists condemn masses of infidels to death and then begin to slaughter each other, will be like nothing seen on the Continent since World War Two.
America has repeatedly walked away from conflict with radical Muslims in an attempt to placate them, only to have them destroy the World Trade Center and declare jihad against us. Unless we would foolishly try further attempts at appeasement in a vain effort to postpone the inevitable, we will soon be forced into a major war.
The only hope of avoiding all-out warfare in the Middle East is the spread of freedom. That is why nations like Israel are such a threat to radical Islamists, and why the success of the democratic government in Iraq is so critical -- free nations give their people unfettered access to information, and they encourage education, debate, and cultural and religious diversity. The only tool that can pry open the death grip of radical Islamist leaders is freedom of thought -- and they know it.
The race is now on, and if we have our way time will soon be running out for Osama Bin Laden and his ilk. We can only hope and pray that the inspiration and hope of freedom overwhelms the death cult of radical Islam throughout the Middle East before an all-out bloody war occurs. Of all the reasons for America to be successful in our current efforts to neutralize terrorists and spread democracy, this, right now, is the most important one.
I really was upset about the cartoons. Why make such cartoons when they are infactual and false?
If people really read about the prophet peace be upon him they would realise he was a mercy to mankind.
Moreover, as Muslims we aren't allowed to draw pictures of Prophets, furthermore, we aren't meant to disrespect someone elses religion. We respect all prophets, Moses, Abraham, Jesus, so why not respect our dear Prophet?
Posted by: be | February 06, 2006 at 05:52 AM