Is There Any Difference Between Exquisitely Refined Multicultural Sensitivity And Shari'a

'The Jihad Barbie'

Mark Steyn:

One day the British foreign secretary will wake up and discover that, in practice, there's very little difference between living under Exquisitely Refined Multicultural Sensitivity and Sharia. As a famously sensitive Dane once put it, "To be or not to be, that is the question."

Of course there is, but still, many of us have bitterly complained about the American MSM's lack of courage to stand up for what in pretty much any other circumstance it would have vociferously defended: Its freedom of expression. Whilst we can only speculate what might be the true motives for most of the editors' abstinence, again very much out of character mind you, it seems to me, that the MSM has for once done this nation a badly needed favor.

Yesterday in my update, I quoted the best-selling author and Muslim dissident Ibn Warraq in the German left-wing magazine 'Der Spiegel'. And I was taken for the moment by the strong and cogent tone thinking that I'd never see the day when 'Der Spiegel', even as a passive carrier, comes out all guns blazing for a righteous cause: 

Unless, we show some solidarity, unashamed, noisy, public solidarity with the Danish cartoonists, then the forces that are trying to impose on the Free West a totalitarian ideology will have won; the Islamization of Europe will have begun in earnest. Do not apologize. [...]

This raises another more general problem: the inability of the West to defend itself intellectually and culturally. Be proud, do not apologize. [...]

The west is the source of the liberating ideas of individual liberty, political democracy, the rule of law, human rights and cultural freedom. It is the west that has raised the status of women, fought against slavery, defended freedom of enquiry, expression and conscience. No, the west needs no lectures on the superior virtue of societies who keep their women in subjection, cut off their clitorises, stone them to death for alleged adultery, throw acid on their faces, or deny the human rights of those considered to belong to lower castes. [...]

Freedom of expression is our western heritage and we must defend it or it will die from totalitarian attacks. It is also much needed in the Islamic world. By defending our values, we are teaching the Islamic world a valuable lesson, we are helping them by submitting their cherished traditions to Enlightenment values.

That's the kind of rhetoric we've all been clamoring for from our own MSM; and, when it wasn't forthcoming, we've all been reproaching and chastising them and of course continue to do so.

Thus, NBC is celebrating Easter this year with a special edition of the gay sitcom "Will & Grace," in which a Christian conservative cooking-show host, played by the popular singing slattern Britney Spears, offers seasonal recipes -- "Cruci-fixin's." On the other hand, the same network, in its coverage of the global riots over the Danish cartoons, has declined to show any of the offending artwork out of "respect" for the Muslim faith.

Which means out of respect for their ability to locate the executive vice president's home in the suburbs and firebomb his garage.

But upon reflection, perhaps we as a nation can for once sit back during the predominantly European contest of who are the courageous and who are the cowards. Because, as The Telegraph affirms, "for let us not delude ourselves: it is organized violence, or the threat of violence, that has driven the decisions that have been made in the past week".

We as a nation are far beyond the point of rhetoric in proving our resolve to protect and defend our secular democracy and our civil liberties, and, may I remind you all, those of our allies too!

"What are you going to do?" asked a leaflet circulated in Beirut that called for Sunday's protest.

"Bush and his group have invaded and are fighting war by all means available," it added. "The goal: destroying the Islamic nation ideologically, economically and existentially, and stealing and looting its resources."

Despite not being appreciated, by far the most who are engaged in a most precarious battle to win both the hearts and minds of Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan and at the same time who fight the terrorists and opportunists are our fine men and women. Not in cozy offices, not in front of TV cameras, not in safe confines of our beleaguered secular democracies--although Theo van Gogh would want to argue this, if he only could-- but on the ground, right in the midst of if all.

As my commenter Stefan points out:

I am troubled by the dilemma of the nature of Islam itself. If we decide that the trouble is not just from a small radical sect of Islam, but rather that this radicalism itself is a natural extension of Islam’s core system of beliefs then we have declared our opposition to the very heart of the population of the Middle East. This would make our enemies not Bin Laden and his ilk but Islamic culture in its totality. I am not willing to make this leap because it is the recipe for a cataclysm and I still have hope in the US strategy of spreading democracy (even if the results are not to our liking), but I can not see the horizon from here. Once again, Europe finds itself on the front line in a global conflict and what happens there is the key.

Don't get me wrong, strong statements are important, especially from those whose reluctance in 2002/3 clearly signaled utter impotence to the aggressors. But they are still just that, words. In contrast, our men and women on the ground do need our unwavering and substantive support to complete their very real mission victoriously. And that, it seems to me, does not include for us to enter the rhetorical cartoon war right this minute. Through their grueling and dangerous work as well as by their sacrifices, we in turn, as a nation, can now portray restraint, for we have already established that we are not the barking-dog-who-doesn't-bite kind.

Not that any of these considerations have anything to do as to why our MSM doesn't speak out loud. But, albeit for all the wrong reasons, they are, for the time being, supporting our troops and the bigger picture.

So is Europe now finally at the front or will they retreat Madrid-like in the face of the inevitable second round of terrorist bombings and threats to come?

Americans are not confident, but we should remember at least one simple fact: Europe is the embryo of the entire Western military tradition. The new European Union encompasses a population greater than the United States and spans a continent larger than our own territory. It has a greater gross domestic product than that of America and could, in theory, field military forces as disciplined and as well equipped as our own.

It is not the capability but the will power of the Europeans that has been missing in this war so far. But while pundits argue over whether the European demographic crisis, lack of faith, stalled economy, or multiculturalism are at the root of the continent’s impotence, we should never forget that if aroused and pushed, a rearmed and powerful Europe could still be at the side of the United States in joint efforts against the jihadists. And should we ever see a true alliance of such Western powers, the war against the fascists of the Middle East would be simply over in short order.

Make sure you read the entire article by Victor Davis Hanson, it is as usual nothing short of brilliant.

Siggy disects a couple of my posts with his usual razor like precision, and sums them up in a sentence. I sometimes wonder why I bother to write more, I have always wanted to channel Glenn Reynolds. Tres simplement:

"What is clear from her posts (and implied) is equating of western values and Islamic responses are a non issue."

What more does one need to say. Except of course that I agree with him when he says:

It is absurd to believe that if the demands du jour of the Muslims protesting the publication of the now infamous cartoons are met, the blackmail of violence directed at civilized society the protesters have employed will not be used again. It is only a matter of time before some other perceived 'injustice' will serve as the catalyst for the next round of violence- and blackmail.

One must keep that in mind at all times for those who advocate restraint.

The talented Jay over @ Wizbang, is answering one Muslim with a rather loud slamdunk. He is also clarifying America's relationship with the former Yugoslavia which brings him straight onto my Christmas Card list (the one that has Merry Christmas on it, and not Happy Atheist Day)

UPDATE:  Thank you to the smart boys over @ Vital Perspective who always have their ears to the ground picking up the latest news in the Middle East: "Shari'a is picking up steam across the region. You've got to see this study from Jordan with all kinds of polling data." Make sure you bookmark them:

A crowd of about 200 people pelted the Austrian Embassy in Tehran with petrol bombs and stones on Monday in a protest over the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed.

"The bombs exploded in flames against metal grilles guarding the windows, but the building did not catch fire and the flames were quickly put out by police with fire extinguishers. Protesters also waved placards and shouted slogans against the EU's stance on Iran's nuclear program. Dozens of police, many carrying riot shields, prevented the protesters from storming the building."

From our resident Shrinkwrapped:

While there is no need for any Americans to purposely provoke the Islamists and their thugs and cannon fodder on the street, we should not for a minute believe that our behavior of restraint will have any influence on how this plays out.  I suppose one could argue that we could make things worse but we have no ability to make things better. That is up to the governments of Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, along with such ugly actors as Hamas, Hezbullah and Fatah.  To believe these types will do anything more than offer a "hudna" is to delude oneself.

UPDATE II: I just watched two excerpts, one @ CNN (thanks to Ace) and one @ Fox (thanks to Michelle Malkin) and the contrast is blinding!

This is just such powerful proof of how lame the Media-Left have become. The CNN interview of Abdurahmen Jafar of the Muslim Council of Britain conducted by Hala Gorani is just too aggravating. Especially when the rotten twit compares the 12 cartoons to anti-Semitic cartoons during the Nazi era in Germany as an indication that Europe is now 60 years on "re-learning to hate". Yeah right - he might as well have said in the middle of the night, the sun is up, let's switch off the lights with Hala obligently replying "Your right, it's practically glaring in here. Someone switch the lights of pleeease". How can she let him get away wih this blatant distortion; as CNN's hostess of ‘Inside the Middle East’, a half-hour programme featuring stories on the "most important social and cultural issues in the region", surely she must be aware of the daily plethora of precisely such Nazi style hate cartoons published unabatedly THROUGHOUT the last 60 years.

Watch both, but especially the Fox excerpt, which is very informative, and spares no punches - just tells it how it is. We are also being reminded that many of the translators around the world of Salmon Rushdie's book were killed. Did you know that? That is what I call great TV.

Finally a little something that is sure to wind you up. Via my friend Michael over @ The Reaction. One of his commenters Holly From Cincinnati wonders if the guy he is quoting is quite sane when he says: "No Muslim cartoonist would ever lampoon the Jewish and Christian holy figures in sacred history". YEAH RIGHT. This is the excerpt, and here is the full text:

Westerners cannot feel the pain of Muslims in this instance. First, Westerners mostly live in secular societies where religious sentiments have themselves been marginalized. Second, the Muslims honor Moses and Jesus, so there is no symmetry between Christian attacks on Muhammad and Muslim critiques of the West. No Muslim cartoonist would ever lampoon the Jewish and Christian holy figures in sacred history, since Muslims believe in them, too, even if they see them all as human prophets. Third, Westerners have the security of being the first world, with their culture coded as "universal," and widely respected and imitated. Cultures like that of the Muslims in the global South receive far less respect. Finally, societies in the global South are less policed and have less security than in Western Europe or North America, allowing greater space to violent vigilateism, which would just be stopped if it were tried in the industrialized democracies. (Even wearing a t-shirt with the wrong message can get you arrested over here.)

UPDATE III:  Ed Morrissey:

Instapundit links to a new website, We Are Sorry, that has issued an apology to Denmark and Norway for the rioting and the violence directed at them by mobs of Muslims around the world. Purportedly set up by moderate Muslims, the website makes a well-written and eloquent apology to those harmed by the protests over a series of editorial cartoons.

This leaves us with two options. Either the owners of this site aren't Muslim at all and just want to gain attention (and possibly dial down the heat), or the Muslims that sponsor the site intend on remaining anonymous. If the former is true, then this site means nothing. If the latter is true, it shows the marginalization that moderates within Islam feel when criticizing the Islamists -- which demonstrates why we have to support the publishers of criticism despite the outrage it provokes. Until we support the Danes and others who dared to criticize radical Islam and its claim on temporal as well as spiritual dominance, moderate Muslims will have no reason to stand up to the Islamists and risk their own safety.

UPDATE IV Tuesday Feb. 7th: Michelle Malkin has a great title: "American Newspapers Will You Please Stand Up?:

Kudos to the Philadelphia Inquirer for braving the forces of political correctness, foreign and domestic, and publishing one of the forbidden Muhammad cartoons. The point that needs to be hammered again and again is that the newspaper did not publish the cartoon to deliberately offend Muslims or to make an anti-Islamist statement, but to inform. Which is what newspapers, may I remind them, are supposed to do.
[...]
The Los Angeles Times, which had reportedly planned to run the cartoons, chose not to do so. The Christian Science Monitor rounds up the excuses from American editors who oppose fully informing their readers about the controversy in the name of "sensitivity" here.
As far as I know, there is still no mainstream American newspaper that has run all 12 forbidden pieces of artwork to give readers a comprehensive look at what the Cartoon Jihad is all about. (Just a reminder that conservative newspaper Human Events online did. Gallery is up here.)
[..]
I will not submit.

Related on ATB:

Is Western Liberalism Modifying It's Core Beliefs
Religious Dogma Has No Place In A Secular Society
Take A Walk On The Wild Side
The Cartoon War
The Effect Of Our Holy Trinity Of Multiculturalism, Moral Equivalence And Relativism On The War Of Destiny

More on the Cartoon rage @  Instapundit, Gateway Pundit, Dr. Sanity, Fausta's Blog, GOP Bloggers, Daily Pundit, The American Thinker, Two Babes and a Brain, Outside The Beltway, The Counterterrorism Blog  Independent, The Moderate Voice, News Blog, The Reaction, Sister Toldjah, The Strata-Sphere  A Blog For All BBC,  The Counterterrorism Blog, The Glittering Eye, Haaretz, Gina Cobb, Austin Bay Blog,   

Comments

[ipure]

Not all Indian like Gandhi.

A great many Indian hold him and Nehru responsible for the division of Bharat (Read undivided Pakistan , India, Bangladesh).

That India has the second largest Muslims is due to Gandhi.

Indian history what we read or you know is simply whitewash. Done and managed methodically for minority appeasement and controlling of power, where Hindus constitute more than 80%.

Search for "Rangila Rasool" (Playboy Mohammad ) in Google to know more.

[Darrell]

Sort of makes me wonder what else people like George Bernard Shaw and Mahatma Gandhi were wrong about? (It's a rhetorical question, by the way...) Getting to the truth is hard work indeed! Thanks for being my guide, Alexandra!

[Alexandra]

Girl on the bridge,

I never particularly like comments that consist entirely of copy pasting from encyclopedias. We are all educated people here and if you read the rest of the blog especially the posts dealing with Islam they are quite extensively researched. The point of blog commenting is to share your own opinion, as well as possibly provide some links which either support your own opinion or challenge the opinion of others.

Anyway dealing with your copy pasting:

1) No one knows anything about the life of Muhammad except through the legends contained in the "Sira", redacted by Ibn Hisham some 200 years after the events they purport to describe. You want scholarship: consult Patricia Crone, John Wansbrough, Michael Cook, et al on this subject.

2) According to that same "Sira," Muhammad a) made his wives go veiled and into purdah, which set the example for all Muslim women for all future time; b) "married" a 7-year old girl and consummated that "marriage" with her when he was in his 50s and she was aged 9; c) advised men in Surat al-Nisa' to beat their wives if they even suspect she might be thinking about being "disobedient". Now, all this may or may not have been an improvement upon women's status in pre-Islamic Arabia, but most free Western women living in the First World today consider this to be about as retrogressive as it gets;

3) Muhammad is said to have slaughtered an entire Judaizing Arab tribe down to the last child on a risible pretext (see Montgomery Watt's "Muhammad at Medina" or Michael Cook's "Muhammad"); expelled all non-Muslims from the Arabian peninsula, where they are legally banned from being citizens or permanent residents UNTIL TODAY;

4)Ordered his followers to wage violent Jihad upon the whole world until it either accepts Islam or (in the case of the Jews and Christians) accept degraded Jim-Crow status under the rule of Islamic law.

Now, maybe you think this is a wonderful paradigm of human behavior, but that is precisely why there is such a great cultural conflict between your civilization and ours. I don't think you would find any of that treatment so admirable if it were directed against Muslims rather than "the sons of pigs and monkeys."

Ma'a Salaam,

Do you have an opinion of your own?

[girl on the bridge]

DO YOU KNOW THIS PERSONALITY?!

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a mercy to all human beings, regardless of their religious background. We, as his followers, must live and spread this message today at a time when hatefulness and ugliness towards each other has become the norm.

The statements of the world well-known personalities about the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), like Sir George Bernard Shaw, Michael H. Hart, Encyclopedia Britannica, Thomas Calyle, Mahatma Gandhi, Lamar Tine and Prof. Rama Krishna Rao etc.

ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA confirms:

".... A mass of detail in the early sources show that he was an honest and upright man who had gained the respect and loyalty of others who were like-wise honest and upright men." (Vol. 12)

Sir George Bernard Shaw in 'The Genuine Islam,' Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936.

"If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam."

"I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion, which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence, which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity."

"I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today."

He was by far the most remarkable man that ever set foot on this earth. He preached a religion, founded a state, built a nation, laid down a moral code, initiated numerous social and political reforms, established a powerful and dynamic society to practice and represent his teachings and completely revolutionized the worlds of human thought and behavior for all times to come.

"HIS NAME IS MUHAMMAD" May Peace of God Be Upon Him (pbuh) He was born in Arabia in the year 570 C.E. (common era), started his mission of preaching the religion of Truth, Islam (submission to One God) at the age of forty and departed from this world at the age of sixty-three.

During this short period of 23 years of his Prophethood, he changed the complete Arabian peninsula from paganism and idolatry to worship of One God, from tribal quarrels and wars to national solidarity and cohesion, from drunkenness and debauchery to sobriety and piety, from lawlessness and anarchy to disciplined living, from utter bankruptcy to the highest standards of moral excellence. Human history has never known such a complete transformation of a people or a place before or since - and IMAGINE all these unbelievable wonders in JUST OVER TWO DECADES.

MICHAEL H. HART in his recently published book on ratings of men who contributed towards the

benefit and upliftment of mankind writes:

"My choice of Muhammad to lead the list of the world's most influential persons may surprise some readers and may be questioned by others, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels." (M.H. Hart, THE 100: A RANKING OF THE MOST INFLUENTIAL PERSONS IN HISTORY, New York, 1978, p. 33) Lamar tine the renowned historian speaking on the essentials of human greatness wonders:

"If greatness of purpose, smallness of means and astounding results are the three criteria of human genius, who could dare to compare any great man in modern history with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms, laws and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man moved not only armies, legislation, empires, peoples and dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then inhabited world; and more than that, he moved the altars, the gods, the religions, the ideas, the beliefs and souls.... his forbearance in victory, his ambition, which was entirely devoted to one idea and in no manner striving for an empire; his endless prayers, his mystic conversations with God, his death and his triumph after death; all these attest not to an imposture but to a firm conviction which gave him the power to restore a dogma. This dogma was two-fold, the unity of God and the immateriality of God; the former telling what God is, the latter telling what God is not; the one overthrowing false gods with the sword, the other starting an idea with the words.

"Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images, the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire, that is MUHAMMAD. As regards all the standards by which Human Greatness may be measured, we may well ask, IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THAN HE?"

(Lamar tine, HISTOIRE DE LA TURQUIE, Paris, 1854, Vol. II, pp 276-277)

The world has had its share of great personalities. But these were one-sided figures who distinguished themselves in but one or two fields, such as religious thought or military leadership. The lives and teachings of these great personalities of the world are shrouded in the mist of time. There is so much speculation about the time and place of their birth, the mode and style of their life, the nature and detail of their teachings and the degree and measure of their success or failure that it is impossible for humanity to reconstruct accurately the lives and teachings of these men.

Not so this man. Muhammad (pbuh) accomplished so much in such diverse fields of human thought and behavior in the fullest blaze of human history. Every detail of his private life and public utterances has been accurately documented and faithfully preserved to our day. The authenticities of the record so preserved are vouched for not only by the faithful followers but also even by his prejudiced critics.

Muhammad (pbuh) was a religious teacher, a social reformer, a moral guide, an administrative colossus, a faithful friend, a wonderful companion, a devoted husband, a loving father - all in one. No other man in history ever excelled or equaled him in any of these different aspects of life - but it was only for the selfless personality of Muhammad (pbuh) to achieve such incredible perfections.

MAHATMA GANDHI Speaking on the character of Muhammad, (pbuh) says in YOUNG INDIA:

"I wanted to know the best of one who holds today's undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind.... I became more than convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for his pledges, his intense devotion to this friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the 2nd volume (of the Prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of the great life."

THOMAS CALYLE in his HEROES AND HEROWORSHIP, was simply amazed as to:

"How one man single-handedly, could weld warring tribes and wandering Bedouins into a most powerful and civilized nation in less than two decades."

"The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only."

"A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world's Maker had ordered so."

DIWAN CHAND SHARMA wrote:

"Muhammad was the soul of kindness, and his influence was felt and never forgotten by those around him." (D.C. Sharma, THE PROPHETS OF THE EAST, Calcutta, 1935, pp. 12)

EDWARD GIBBON and SIMON OCKLEY speaking on the profession of ISLAM write:

"'I BELIEVE IN ONE GOD, AND MAHOMET, AN APOSTLE OF GOD' is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honor of the Prophet has never transgressed the measure of human virtues; and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion." (HISTORY OF THE SARACEN EMPIRES, London, 1870, p. 54) Muhammad (pbuh) was nothing more or less than a human being. But he was a man with a noble mission, which was to unite humanity on the worship of ONE and ONLY ONE GOD and to teach them the way to honest and upright living based on the commands of God. He always described himself as, 'A Servant and Messenger of God,' and so indeed every action of his proclaimed to be.

The famous poetess of India, SAROJINI NAIDU says:

"It was the first religion that preached and practiced democracy; for, in the mosque, when the call for prayer is sounded and worshippers are gathered together, the democracy of Islam is embodied five times a day when the peasant and king kneel side by side and proclaim: 'God Alone is Great'... I have been struck over and over again by this indivisible unity of Islam that makes man instinctively a brother." S. Naidu, IDEALS OF ISLAM, vide Speeches & Writings, Madras, 1918, p. 169)

In the words of PROF. HURGRONJE:

"The league of nations founded by the prophet of Islam put the principle of international unity and human brotherhood on such universal foundations as to show candle to other nations." He continues: "The fact is that no nation of the world can show a parallel to what Islam has done towards the realization of the idea of the League of Nations."

The world has not hesitated to raise to divinity, individuals whose lives and missions have been lost in legend. Historically speaking, none of these legends achieved even a fraction of what Muhammad (pbuh) accomplished. And all his striving was for the sole purpose of uniting mankind for the worship of One God on the codes of moral excellence. Muhammad (pbuh) or his followers never at any time claimed that he was a Son of God or the God-incarnate or a man with divinity - but he always was and is even today considered as only a Messenger chosen by God.

K. S. RAMAKRISHNA RAO, an Indian Professor of Philosophy in his booklet, "Muhammad, The Prophet of Islam," calls him the "PERFECT MODEL FOR HUMAN LIFE." Prof. Ramakrishna Rao explains his point by saying: "The personality of Muhammad, it is most difficult to get into the whole truth of it. Only a glimpse of it I can catch. What a dramatic succession of picturesque scenes! There is Muhammad, the Prophet. There is Muhammad, the Warrior; Muhammad, the Businessman; Muhammad, the Statesman; Muhammad, the Orator; Muhammad, the Reformer; Muhammad, the Refuge of Orphans; Muhammad, the Protector of Slaves; Muhammad, the Emancipator of Women; Muhammad, the Judge; Muhammad, the Saint. All in all these magnificent roles, in all these departments of human activities, he is alike a hero."

Today after a lapse of fourteen centuries, the life and teachings of MUHAMMAD (pbuh) have survived without the slightest loss, alteration or interpolation. They offer the same undying hope for treating mankind's many ills, which they did when he was alive. This is not a claim of Muhammad's (pbuh) followers but also the inescapable conclusion forced upon by a critical and unbiased history.

The least you could do, as Muslims or non-Muslims, as thinking and concerned human beings, is to stop for a moment and ask yourself: These statements/comments sounding so extraordinary and revolutionary come from renown and intellectually honest and internationally recognized persons of their times who were not Muslim. Isn't it time for all Muslims and non Muslims to respond to this tremendous challenge and put in some effort to know him, follow him and emulate him in our day to day life? It will cost us nothing but it may prove to be the beginning of a completely new era in our lives.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Courtesy: Abdullah AM [abdullahmamo@yahoo.co.uk]

Compiled, edited and adapted by Khalid Latif

[Papa Ray]

It is interesting and predictable, to me and my friends, that this latest blow up has been scripted by not only the stupid [people] contest for a few pictures but by the Imans, Islamic PR and Propaganda Sections of various Islamic Cult Terrorist organizations.

But in the big picture all this is immaterial as the Islamic terror cultists were just waiting for the chance (any excuse) to throw more gasoline on the fire.

While the Islamic extremist cult, doesn't need any excuse, they are not smart enough to take it slow and build resources and political strength for the take over of the world (unlike their "moderate" bros, who are working at it just as hard, but much smarter.)

Well, maybe Hamas will be, lets wait and see.

One thing that most Americans need to know (in my opinion) is that this President and his administration is well aware (more so than the rest of us) of what is really going on. They are at least three moves ahead of us and the Islamic terrorist cults.

Not to say that they have not made many mistakes, but they are learning, but just not advertising what they have learned and what moves are planned.Well, some leaks through the media is advertising. Leave it at that.

On the other hand, our President and his Administration can not look for anything but more aggravation from our media as they assist and give comfort to our enemy.

I won't address the aid and comfort given by members of our Congress, it is not good for my blood pressure.

Everyone says that Iran has been playing us and the world for time. Well, they are not the only ones playing for time. Figure it out.

What/who is our enemy? Well right now, saying Islam is our enemy would be counter productive. But in a few years it will be admitted, advertised and become the world wide battle slogan of the Civilized world.

But not yet.

Papa Ray
West Texas
USA

[Left Behinds]

Btw, you were right that the Piss Christ example was a bad example, since people were protesting reasonably. Sorry, I was typing quickly and trying to think of examples of people squelching free speech because of their extreme views (my ultimate point being that every group has extreme fringe members who go beyond peaceful protest).

[Left Behinds]

Stefan, I'm not talking about American conservatives. I'm talking about radical right-wing anti-immigration white supremacists in Denmark, who are the people who started this whole thing. I'm aware that this is a conservative site, but there's a huge difference between conservatives (who are reasonable) and white supremacists (who are not reasonable).

I am a total civil libertarian, so I would even protect the rights of white supremacists, I suppose, as long as it wasn't incitement to violence, etc. But my point was that it's important to denounce their tactics, which most definitely were intended to provoke a clash of civilizations.

FYI, here's the reaction of one sensible individual, an Egyptian columnist named Mona Eltahawy. She is much more representative of mainstream Muslim reaction than the crazies burning churches, yet she and people like her are not getting facetime on CNN.

A Mountain Out of a Molehill

[jgreen44]

Enlightened nations need to enact a "Reciprocity Statute" which states that the practice of Islam will be sanctioned within their countries only to the extent that the practice of infidel religions are sanctioned within Saudi Arabia.

[epaminondas]

AS I understand this, Jyllens-postens did this to assert freedom of speech in a time of intimidation of the kind which we see right now. In a similar vein the US Navy is sure to sail across any waters which a nation claims, and is outside the norms of 3 mi. Right away.

I see many arab acquaintainces wound up because their feelings about their faith is offended.

However, Islam is nothing special, and has been treated exactly in our culture as for instance Christianity was over the Piss Christ, and the fecal Mary, both of which saw 1st amendment victories here in the USA, via the court.

Thus treating their religion in the same way we treat ours, via the brutal force of assertion of feedom of speech is not good enough for many/most muslims. This is significant.

Last, supposing this offensive 'speech' is to be limited. Where does this end? WHy not for instance, excise the racist and offensive parts of Islam's major formative documents .. such as the Stone and the Tree and Apes and Pigs?

There can be no freedom of religion without freedom of speech, and if we do not assert it, soooner or later even well intentioned people will start teling us all how to believe what we believe. It can end no other way.

[Stefan]

Left Behind,
I think you are missing something here. The “Radical-Right Wing” (code for Conservatives) is not interested in fomenting a “clash of civilizations” at all. The US policy of spreading democracy would be deeply damaged by inflaming a clash. We would all prefer that Muslim countries were peaceful and free. Our blood and treasure spent in Iraq and Afghanistan are sacrifices to that very end. In other words, we want things to calm down but Iran and the suicide bombers in Iraq are not helping. 9/11, Madrid, Bali, and 7/7 are examples of a “clash of civilizations” which clearly conservatives would rather do without. One more thing, Christians who oppose vile “art” like the “Piss Christ” or those that protest a movie or TV program are not religious radicals. They are using appropriate, peaceful, civic means of expressing their opinion that such “expression” is ugly and offensive. It is called Freedom of Speech. Public pressure is very much a part of living in a free society. If advertisers feel the heat they may back down and stop funding or whatever. That is a billion miles from killing people, burning things, and threatening random attacks of rage. If our politicians say or do something stupid we rail on them, write them letters, type endlessly on blog, make fun of them, draw unfavorable cartoons, you name it; all in the hope that pressure from the public will get them to change their minds. It’s the American Way!!!

[the english guy]

I think I just snorted some coffee through my nose. That pic of the new barbie made me double up in laughter! (hope that's not too un-PC of me :))

[Left Behinds]

That's an interesting stat. If your point is that young men are more radical and aggressive, I totally agree. Though you can't paint the whole culture as aggressive and radical.

[Left Behinds]

Oh and btw, it would be inconsistent not to also criticize other affronts to free speech and a free press from religiously motivated fringe groups, such as Scientologists who harrass individual reporters who dare to write articles critical of their pseudo-religion, or radical Evangelical Christians who try to stop 'offensive' movies, or the many debates over religious sacrilege in the arts (the "Piss Christ" debate, for one). And then there are all the other non-religious fringe groups, including some liberal fringe groups that curtail free speech (Larry Flynt and Shirley Q. Liquor's attackers, for instance).

Everybody's got an extremist fringe element. The majority of mainstream Muslim criticism of the cartoons is much more akin to the Anti-Defamation League or GLAAD, who criticize media portrayals of their groups.

[Alexandra]

Not all Muslims are firebombing embassies -- it's only a tiny portion, most of them young men.

A curious statistic just sprang to mind, the average age in Iran is 26, and the majority are highly educated. After the revolution in 1979, the birth control advocacy during the Shah regime was replaced with material insentives and coercion to have as many children as possible. Families with 8-12 children were given far superior accomodation than those with one ot two, who had to struggle with tiny spaces. That has dramatically driven down the average age over the last three decades.

I have just posted some interesting UPDATES with videos, so check them out.

[Left Behinds]

Hi there. I discuss media coverage of the Lebanese protests on my blog. You and I will disagree about what the media bias is, but, tabling that discussion, surely you agree that the coverage has been sensationalistic. Not all Muslims are firebombing embassies -- it's only a tiny portion, most of them young men.

Radical right-wing provocateurs trying to foment a "clash of civilizations" started this whole thing, and we're all playing into their hands. It's vitally important to denounce the stupid, offensive cartoons while defending their right to be published. If you don't do both, you're alienating the majority of mainstream Muslims who are justifiably offended but who also recognize the rights of a free press.

[Alexandra]

Heroic,

You know I have been struggling with Hugh's post, and of course we both know which one. I have left it unchallenged because a) I respect Hugh too much, and my initial feeling was to completely pulverize it and b) there are parts of that post which do make sense.

The important thing to remember is that we have proved that we are not simply prepared to talk, we have put our men and women on the line, and our money where our mouth is. Let's see whether Europe is now prepared to do the same, or continue to advocate the appeasement policy. Talking a lot is what they have done in the past, we shall see what they are made of by their actions in the not so distant future.

And as you quite rightly said freedom does not come for free, and they know it only too well. But perhaps it is good to remind them of the days gone by when they knew that dying on your feet was a far better option than living on your knees.

[Heroic Dreamer]

You say: we as a nation are far beyond the point of rhetoric in proving our resolve...

Thank you for this clear analysis. I have been struggling to understand this line of reasoning (expressed more or less by Hewitt, whom I greatly respect). For the past few days, I have been hoping for a more engaged and active stance by our media. But you are right - we are already defending our freedoms.

If this cartoon publishing battle alerts Europe to the fact that freedom isn't free and they have to fight for it, this will be a very good thing.

[RL]

Yes, Adolph Ahmaghinejad's(the Iranian-
islamoterrorist version of hitler) plan for
fulfilling "imam" khomeini's maniacal vision
of a "caliphate" in the cradle of
civilization is beginning to bear fruit; this
must be a sure sign that imam mahdi's return
is just around the corner.
(imam mahdi as in The Pentagon's,
"Operation imam mahdi")

interesting article about this diabolical
and psychotic-vision of the evil
islamoterrorist revolutionaries in charge of
the Iranian govt. by Amir Taheri in the
Jerusalem Post.
("For Iran, Think Regime Change")

you can also read it online at,

regimechangeiran.com

all of us can collectively thank mr. peanut,
jimmy carter, for this horrific-nightmare
that has become a reality in the Middle East.
Thanks alot jimmy; "imam" khomeini sends you
his best-wishes from the darkest pit of hell.

[Boris]

Shari'a is picking up steam across the region. You've got to see this study from Jordan with all kinds of polling data.

[roaring lamb]

i suspect that the poster in question might
be algore(R2D2). he still hasn't recovered
from his crushing-loss in the '00 election.
plus the fact that he is a Vanderbilt University
"divinity school" dropout eminently qualifies
him to make such an assinine remark.

"We have deep depth."
Yogi Berra

; )

[Alexandra]

Well hey Trini thanks, there is someone out there though that thinks I have brass balls!!!

"It takes balls to be an avowed secularist these days, and the article above was written by someone who seems to have them in pure brass"

He is refering to my post Religious Dogma Has No Place In A Secular Society.

I was going to respond to him, then I looked at his other posts and realized I don't have that sort of time.

[roaring lamb]

hi Alexandra, i just wanted to congratulate you for being
the creator of the most politically-incorrect blog that is
produced by a woman.

i love it ! Please keep-up the radical political-incorectness.
Thank you and God bless you.

Predictions for '06,

Alexandra will continue to produce a creative, thoughtful,
and unique blog named, "All Things Beautiful".

"You can observe alot just by watching."
Yogi Berra
(Berra's Law)

; )

[Stefan]

It would be loudly and properly condemned. No one is saying Muslims can't or shouldn't condemn the cartoons but when violence is threatened and/or used the whole game changes. If jihad were carried out as a campaign of “Letters to the Editor” throughout Europe we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

[Al Capone]

Let's just change the point of view for a second. How would the discussion go if a right-wing newspaper would publish some lame political cartoons against jews in Germany? No, I'm not jewish, by the way.