Jyllands-Posten Cartoons, Muslim Humiliation Or Hysteria?

The cartoons of Jyllands-Posten, the Danish newspaper that offended Muslims, is now the main topic of many Arab news channels, newspapers, and websites. People are calling for boycotting Danish products using email, websites, SMS, and leaflets. The whole issue has escalated into an international crisis for Muslims everywhere.

I'm sure almost everyone is aware of the cartoons published by a local newspaper in Denmark that offended Muslims by now. I won't talk about the main issue; it has been beaten to death, but I have several points to talk about:

Muslim Reactions

The whole issue could have been handled better than boycotting or other sorts of threatening. Such methods only make Muslims look intolerant, and make their image worse. For the whole world now, Muslims are easily outraged by things as simple as cartoons.

Local Muslims could have sent a friendly request to the newspaper, or even better, ignored the whole thing. They live in Denmark and have to go by Danish rules. Cartoons that touch on religious topics are allowed in that part of the world, and cartoons involving Christian symbols (and other religions) are common too. It is not a "conspiracy" targeting Islam; this is how things work. There is no need to assume bad faith from the very beginning and start protesting and threatening to bomb.

Cultural Differences And Tolerance

Every culture has its own rules and ethics. One culture may not be aware of what offends another culture, and what offends one culture may be a right in another culture.

Many Muslims still think that Islam was targeted in the cartoons, and that they have the right to react, because Christians would do so too if their religion was attacked. I've heard and read the "Let's see how Christians would react when Christianity is offended" argument often. However, this argument is not valid. There has always been cartoons that involve Christian symbols. There are websites and TV shows dedicated to such things, and still, no one makes a big deal of them (except perhaps for a very small minority), and definitely no one threatens to boycott or considers a whole nation an enemy because of such cartoons.

The keyword here is tolerance, there is no way Muslims could force all other cultures to follow Islam rules. Tolerance and friendly reactions, on the other hand, greatly help in making others respect Islam and Muslims.

Censorship, Is It Even Possible?

There are Muslim calls for an international law that bans acts that offends religions. This is simply not possible for two reasons:

A religion's belief or act might be an offense for another religion. Not all religions get along nicely. It's not possible to ban all acts that offend all religions, and at the same time maintain the rights of practicing every religion.
Censorship, and especially on the Internet, has been proved impossible over and over. There have always been websites that seriously offend Islam (or other religions). The newspaper cartoons are very tame and friendly when compared to some websites dedicated to offending Islam. Yet, it is simply not possible to take them down.

Over-generalization

I keep reading that Denmark is now a major enemy of Islam. Over-generalization is a fatal mistake. For example, seeing one Chinese person is not enough to make generalizations on all the Far East. The same can be applied to the cartoons issue. If one Danish newspaper publishes cartoons that offend Muslims, it doesn't mean that all Denmark is an enemy.

Boycotting, Does It Work?

The Muslim world is currently a consumer, not a producer. In the short term, boycotting may have an effect, but in the long run, producers and only producers have economic powers. Muslims need to look into becoming a producing economical power, not a consumer nation, instead of using the boycott card whenever Muslims feel oppressed.

A Final Word

Regardless whether the 12 cartoons were a serious offense to Muslims or not, how Muslims are handling the whole thing is just stupid. It further harms the image of Muslims, and Muslim efforts are turning against them. The cartoons are now everywhere, printed on many newspapers, shown on TV channels, and published on countless websites. More offensive cartoons are being created and published, and a campaign for supporting Danish products is running.

Instead of mindlessly following what a group of fundamentalists say, one need to think before one reacts, is it worth it? Does it help one's cause?

Note: Given that I'm a believer of freedom of speech, that I delete spam and offtopic comments only, and that hate speech in comments may further prove my point, please keep it civil. Thank you.

8220 reads
Printer-friendly version

Tags:

Politics

Submitted by Ayman on Fri, 2006/02/03 - 3:53pm

I'd disagree with you on minor aspects, but in the overall you present a very nice and respectful argument.

Thanks.

Feel free to point out what you disagree with if you like, I'd be interested in reading it.

Although I agree with you that things could be handled in many better ways but I also want to mention three things
1. The Danish prime minister refused to meet the Islamic ambassadors at the beginning of this problem and if he talked to them at that time I think things would have changed.
2. Sure you can't force all ppl to respect all religions, but accusing a religion of terrorism explicitly of a printed newspaper is different from throwing accusations and worse stuff on the net. the newspaper holds responsibility of its content. I am sure there should be a legal way to prohibit newspaper from accusing all Muslims(or any group of ppl that has a religious believe) of terrorism and intolerance, otherwise this is not freedom this is chaos, what was done by the news paper is the same is saying since a Chinese has a yellow skin because he speaks Mandarin ( UBL is a terrorist because he's a Muslim) all mandarin speakers have yellow skin ( all Muslims are terrorists )
And I mean all Muslims because targeting the messenger of Islam is the same as targeting all Muslims
3. No one if the "Free" Europe dares to discuss not offend Jews holocaust and this what they couldn't deny even on TV so they shouldn't say that they're totally free I now they talk about Jesus in ways even Muslims disagree but they don't talk about proved lies like holocaust and they even punished Roje Garodi for talking and proofing that it's a lie.

The Danish government has nothing to do with this at all. The situation there is different from the Arab world. A newspaper there represents its own opinion. It can be held responsible for what it prints, but you can't assume that all Denmark including its government is responsible for what happened. Unlike the Arab world where only newspapers represent governments are allowed, newspapers are like websites there. Anyone can start a newspaper and say whatever they want in it. It doesn't mean all other Danish people believe in what is said or even read it.

When it comes to Nazism, Denmark is different from the other parts of Europe. While Nazi parties are banned elsewhere like Austria and Germany, they are allowed in Denmark, modern Nazis hold meetings, run parties, and take part in elections in Denmark. And I'm sure you know that modern Nazism denies the holocaust.

1. When I was watching a TV interview with the chief editor of the newspaper that started all this he didn't answer the direct question "can you deny the holocaust on your newspaper", and I know there's no laws to ban him from doing this but he can't do it for other reasons which we all know.
2. The P minister has to do with the issue he should explain to the ambassadors his government situation, and that's what he did few days ago while he refused to do it months ago, if he did that at the beginning things could be understood at that time in a better way. the P minister doesn't has to talk the newspaper he has to talk to the diplomats and explain the laws of freedom in his country and after that nobody can ask more from him.
3. I told you, there's better ways and I agree with the post here and I think if the p minister accepted the interview with the diplomats at the beginning things might went to that way

1) What if he didn't answer because he believe it happened, not because he can't? Isn't having Nazi parties in Denmark enough proof that you can deny the Holocaust the way you want in Denmark?

And FYI, Al-Jazeera didn't translate the chief editor's apology into Arabic, this raises the question of whether the editor really didn't answer, or Al-Jazeera didn't want to broadcast that.

2) I'm sorry but I still don't believe this is an issue the prime minister has to deal with.

1. Is there enough time in the day for any head of government to apologize to every party who feels offended by any legal action of a citizen? Probably not. Should they even try? Certainly not.
2. Though you appear to have lived in the West, you have not caught on to what cartoons are, and what they are meant to do. Cartoons are almost by definition irreverent, and they are meant to be THOUGHT proviking among us. Elsewhere where people have given up their ability to think and act as individuals, they can provoke mobs, boycotts against the inocent, destruction of property, and deaths.
3. It's difficult to understand what the paragraph means. The quotation marks and the drift seem to indicate that you fell Jews are getting a free pass on criticism, that Jesus too has been denigrated somewhere, somehhow (but he was a Jew; did you know?), and that one is not allowed to say that the Holocaust did not take place (but you just said so. Did you notice?).

http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/archaeology/2001-03-22-afghan-buddhas.htm

Muslims cannot take the morral high ground on such matters
Such an act was extreamly offensive to Buddist

Those who point out that the role of government is not to apologize for the actions of their citizens are correct. Beyond that no one shoud apologize for the actions of another; we are all free here, and responsible only for our own actions.

There are people, and even cultures, where guilt is assigned to whole groups, though the individuals may be innocent. This seems to be the accepted norm in the Middle East, and among most Muslims. It appears that those who hold such beliefs are more easily manipulated into anger, and into atrocities, than we are in the West.

No one seems to be pointing out that behind the anger and the attrocities there are men who seek power, and who use the unthinking mobs as tools to achieve it. To the degree that Western governments, and uninvolved citizens, apologize for their newspapers' actions, the apologists are complicit with those who seek to present all Danes, all French, all English, all westerners as "guilty by civilization".

Fantatics, and fools, do not need the moral high ground. They know themselves to be completely right.

I'm Danish (although I wasn't born here) and I can't help thinking that all this really has little or nothing at all to to with the 12 drawings.

When I read the international mediacoverage, and in particular the arab newspapers (I read and understand Arabic), there is really many many misunderstandings, and in reality it's these misunderstandings combined with the very well-developed ability especially in the muslim world, to stir things up, that is the basis of all this fuzz.

I would like to point out, to whosever reading this, that Denmark in more than twenty years has been one of the main contributors - financially, politically and in all sort af other ways - in the efforts to create a free and sovereign Palestine.

Denmark is a wonderfull country, I love this country. This is incredibly sad...

They say they are not terriorists but all they are doing is proving them selves. They have nothing better to do then go out and kill people and destroy things. I still have yet to see any good Islam has done in the eyes of the world. It is scary that there are so many Muslums around the world. If they ever truely got together to make an army we would all be doomed. And from where I sit it does nto seem to far away fromt hat not. At the rate the work is going religion as in all will be the demis of the human race. As time passes and people do stuff like what is going on in the name of religion it just takes away from what it was suppoed to me. Myself, I do not beleive in god or follow any religion, I'ts almost like looking in the window at a shooping store seeing what is going on and from what I see it is not any good and what the hell would I ever want to partake in any of this. Ok I'm going to stop now and move on, I just wanted to drop a note to say that yes they need to lighten.

Don't you worry about Muslim armies. Those guys can't organize a two car funeral. It is the small terrorist groups we have to fear. And our own penchant for appeasement.

If you do not beleive in god it's your business, later or sooner you're gonna find you were wrong, I hope it's not later for you.

The resulting riots and demonstrations are nothing more than an easy out for those of the Islamic faith who view the American involvement in the Middle East as another Crusade. The anger and rage that has been repressed is now spilling out at the first possible target, ie the cartoons. Whether the cartoons are offensive or not doesnt seem to be the point anymore: it has grown into a wider dissaffection with Western society in general.

i think the behaviour of a group of people don't mean that all
people are like them so if groub of muslims have done wrong
things that never mean all muslims are like them as well as
what american's government practice in arab country doesn't mean

that all amircan are terroist people .
so instead of release judgements on muslim and suppose wrong

reasons for their behavior why we don't ask why they are

angry??? why u don't say that our prophet is the most important

one in our life .and not only muslims! any one (either muslim or
not ,believe in god or not) read about our prophet and know him
will not accept what was published and doing nothing to him.
at last i wanna to say that we have done a mistake when we

didn't make people know about our prophet so they are wonder

about what are happening so is our duty now to correct this

mistake and let all people know what our prophet is and the

newspaper was wrong when they published this cartoon.

i disagree to the fact that religion is responsible for all the problems in life. i'm a person who lives in a multi cultural society. i go to all the worship places of different religions. yet i dont hav any harsh feelings. one thing we all fail to realise, is that in today's fast moving time people dont have time. certain group of people just tend to emotional blackmail confused people with a promise for a better future. why do we just see the small fishes, y not see the bigger fishes? politics is behind each group. such group gain power by manipulating people by telling half truth. we should learn to see the action not the reaction!!!

I was going to comment on the original post but after reading the comments I don't know where to start...

I don't belive that there are ppl stil using the Free Speech argument - while if the cartoons were about me I could easily sue the newspaper according to the Danish laws and force them to publish an apology. So for god's sake enough with the free speech argument. we're not talking about freedom here we're talking about laws.
What we (Muslims) want is an international law that prohibits insulting Islam and its figures, and if a certin country won't sign on that law we'll boycott that country. Boycotting the Danish products isn't the primary issue here and Denmark isn't a hostile country any way.
It's not imposible to have such laws caus we don't have to have a similar law for every religion on planet earth. after all UN only recognize a certain number of countries and a certain number of languages it could recognize a certain number of religions too and protect them by international laws.
The violent reaction of some Muslims dos't represint what the majority of Muslims wanted. For example here in Damascus we wanted a peaceful demonstration but obviously that is not what the government planned.
And for those who attacked Islam and Muslims I'll just ignore them cause they don't worth a reply.

1) Untrue. Do you have anything to back up your claim? Satire is allowed in Denmark. On the other hand, organized hate acts are prohibited.

And suppose your claim was true; why didn't Muslims there sue the newspaper instead of turning this into an international crisis?

2) If Muslims demand that all countries prohibit acts against Islamic rules, then it would be reasonable for other religious groups to demand such laws from Muslim countries as well.

Hindus, for example, prohibit killing cows, are Muslim countries ready to stop slaughtering cows?

Refer to my original post, section "Censorship, Is It Even Possible?" and see why this demand is not possible.

3) Do you believe this is fair? Isn't this a discrimination against some religious groups?

What you are saying is: It's not OK if Muslims suffer, but it's OK if other religious groups suffer.

4) The "violent" Muslims aren't a minority either, it's obvious from all violent acts related to Muslims around the world. Violence among Muslims is very common; you can deny this as you like, but this does not change anything.

So you're saying personal offence is allowed in Denmark and a newspaper can accuse anyone with anything without having any proof (cause that's what I was hinting to)?!!
And Muslims in Denmark did try to solve the problem with the newspaper and the Danish authorities but obviously no one listened to them and that what caused the international problem.
And did you read my post! the whole issue is about having a law that prohibits this kind of actions so in the future any similar situation would be handled in courts.
Now you're being silly. I didn't say "prohibit acts against Islamic rules" I said a law that prohibits insulting Islam and its figures, actually this kind of law is only common sense but some people have lost their "sense" and need a law to remind them of that.
Oh really! Yes it's fair to recognize a certain number of religions just like it's fair to recognize a certain number of countries. Actually this will prevent us from going into total chaos.
And I'm not saying that international laws should prohibit other religions.
Yes I can deny it because it's not true. The "violent Muslims" are a minority (remember how many Muslim there are) and they exists because of the current regimes in Islamic countries. And above of that you can't call them "violent Muslims" because it would be like saying "honest thief".

1) Satire is not personal offense, and it is allowed in Denmark. OTOH, organized hate acts aren't allowed, and you can sue offenders in such cases.

2) You didn't respond to the "cow slaughter" point, if you want Denmark to publish a law that prohibits Islam offending acts, are Muslim countries ready to publish similar laws for Hindu people?

Having laws that protect all religions and at the same time and don't limit practicing of any religion isn't possible.

3) So? Why shouldn't laws protect other religions? From a western point of view, if Islam had the right to be protected, then some other religion followers would want that too, and this would result in a conflict.

4) I'm sorry but I think violent Muslims aren't a minority, I live here and know that myself, but unfortunately neither of us can provide hard facts or statistics.

Although this post is quite old but I would still like to add some thing for the authors sake. The answer to second question is very simple. Its not the banning of what one religion allow or one does not. It is about systematic targeting of Muslims in every sense. For instance, Drinking Alcohal and also eating Pork is strictly prohibited in Islam. But inspite of all the arguments that these two things are not good for ones health, does any one actually asking that their use must be prohibited in European countries. Forget European countries, "the so called extemist" countries like Pakistan even allow the non muslim community to use these. So if one thing is prohibited in one religion, it does not means that followers of other religion for whom it is permited, must also be abstained from it. Which country allow the voilation of ones right? Not a single. Even if other person is only excersing his freedom to do any thing he wants.

I know the muslims all over the world did not react the way they should have, the answer to this problem is really asking one self why do you reallly have to do some thing intentionally that hurts some one and then keep on insisting that I am justified. It is my right given by freedom of expression.

It is a global conspiracy and unfortunately muslims all over the world are falling into it, and living in a western country, I can see what frustration it leaves to even the noble westerner. But at the same time, I must remind every one, inspite of all this havoc, its only the muslims that are suffering world wide. USA did not have any moral or what so ever justification for many of its steps, but still no one declares it terrorist state, and unwilling other countries are helping it in the name of finishing the unfinished business......

Aamir

It is one of the greatest hoaxes perpetuated upon mankind. Muslims that fall into this trap were looking for an excuse to do it anyway, in my opinion. The God of the Bible is not Allah, just read the Bible and then the Quran (just).

You have taken very crucial topic in very polite manner & smoothly. I do agree muslims are consumers not producer the technique that they using that is boycott is not good for there future. World is big & they should not behave like cartoons. I know few of muslim communities like SIMI & Al- Something , they always promote good musilms to do such act , they simply ruin life of plain & good muslim people. Learn from the world . World is growing not fighting. Hitler & Boycott stories are now only found in History books.

Ayman Hourieh's Blog