Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Ironclad
Published Letters: 68 Editor's Choice: 19
Is there a point to this article other than a swipe at the present government of Denmark being right of center (left of the post in most other places in the world)? Does it matter that the intent of the original article was to highlight that discussion (or more specifically) the making of an image of Mohammed was "difficult" because of concern by the illustrators for their safety? (Exactly the type of reaction that has occurred) And more to the point - does it matter than this only got kicked off after Danish Imams took the drawings to the Middle East with "enhancements" - read as faked, really provocative cartoons to stir up these riots. I missed all of that discussion of pertinent background in this article.
So we get cartoons of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban, with a knife in front of veiled women and with a crescent moon halo over his head. For this loutish insensitivity, we have embassies burned, trade cancelled, people killed and outrage raised to a fever pitch. And in ultimate retaliation, we will next be treated to a round of Holocaust cartoons from Iran. And we are also treated to the spectacle our so-called Guardians of Freedom in the west cower and make excuses over speech and open debate in the name of PC correctness.
My only hope is that when all this tones down, as it surely will, that the lessons of appeasement in the name of sensitivity will have taken a death blow. That the real nature of the “problem with Islam” will become apparent – that suppression of free thought and expression by a minority of radical Muslims, which has kept the Middle East in the dark ages for the last few centuries - is now beginning to leak into the West. Forbid debate and silence criticism in the name of religion here and they win. Ideas, innovation and open expression and yes, even insensitivity and satire are the strongest weapons in the Western arsenal against these threats. Let’s hope that we do not unilaterally disarm before it really gets nasty.
To paraphrase this article would be "Jane, you ignorant and racist slut, "Do not EVER criticize anything to do with Islam if you know what is good for you". Simple, easy and so very one dimensional. Just trash any idea of that any serious debates, scholarly studies or suggestion that arises from someone from the outside can suggest that something is perhaps wrong in the land of Dar Al-Islam.
Well, the last time I looked, "cultural sensitivity" never has been a big issue on the other side of the fence, and "freedom of expression" tends to lead one into an early grave or a prison cell. And this conflict certainly didn't start in 2001. And racism is not confined to the Western world - there are many Arabs who consider "other" Muslims to be lesser beings - take a walk in the Middle East some time if you don't believe me.
No one wants to start WWIII over the issue of religion, because I can assure you that if it does start, there is not going to be much left on one side of this argument. What is needed is a way to start talking without resorting to name calling "racist!" or to immediately limiting the discussion field to items that are not core issues. I hope that there are wise people that can initiate this discussion, and at the same time can dampen the fires (literally) that seem to break out at each "slight".
Sadly, I don't seem them on either side at this point.
I could summarize this article as "if those damn Jews would just move back to the 1967 borders, then we might have peace", but that would not really do justice to the naivety shown in this article. What a wonderful group of people to have met too on your trip - Assad, Assad's Lebanese puppet and Hamas - up for the higher bidder now - hear that Syria and Iran? Such a jolly group of imminently reasonable people to sit down and chew the fat over a warm cup of coffee!
Seriously, diplomacy is always useful to keep contact with folks like these, but one would be a fool not to insure that it is at the end of a 10 foot pole. I am certain that individuals like Mr. Keeley feel that if we just keep taking (like we have for 50 years now) that something would be accomplished. But in the Middle East, as happens in the rest of the world, actions tend to speak louder than words and trust is a commodity that is in precious short supply. Smoke and mirrors pronouncements such as “They don't recognize Israel as it exists” just show the level of denial of some people are willing to go to avoid the nasty fact that none of the groups named in the article even think Israel should exist – and that includes the Jewish side of the population in particular.
So, go to an international conference, say all the right words, sell more snake oil and please stay away from the real area where decisions are made. Solutions like this are the reason this problem will never get solved, because they do not recognize the motivations and goals of the participants. Because frankly, they are nasty, brutish and up to now (thank goodness) not short.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
