You know, if I were to go and torch an embassy every time I saw an
offensive or
anti-Semitic cartoon, newspaper article, television or radio program was produced in the Middle East, most of Washington D.C. would be in cinders.
I thought the cartoons were in poor taste, and I can certainly understand why people would find them offensive (I didn't think they were clever, funny or anything but rather childish), I also recall the Saudi newspaper that asserted in a "scholarly article" that Jews drink the blood of Gentile children on Purim. I remember the Iranian president saying that the Holocaust was "a myth." I remember the scads of cartoons I've seen coming from Middle Eastern papers that prominently feature racist drawings of big-nosed, sidelocked Shylocks plastered with swastikas. I remember the Egyptian airing of a made-for-TV version of
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. All of those things are every bit as bigotted, offensive and calculated to provoke anger as the cartoons in that Danish paper were, yet I didn't see anyone burning embassies. I didn't see anyone rioting. I didn't see anyone advocating beheading or death of the cartoonists or writers. The Hasidic Jews of Brooklyn weren't announcing that any Arab entering their midst would be kidnapped and killed in retribution for their offense.
So now I'm left wondering why so many of us who are offended by things like the cartoons and other incidents mentioned above manage to control ourselves and express our anger in peaceful protest without levelling death threats at people, but that's apparently an impossibility for a significant percentage of those who have seen these cartoons of Mohammed. I
know that it isn't the majority of the Muslim world engaging in this behavior- I simply refuse to believe that, because I'm quite sure that Muslims are just as capable of the rest of us of adhering to basic, fairly universal moors of good conduct. So why, then, are some people (I'm not referring to anyone in particular here, but I have encountered this on other web boards) attempting to excuse this ludicrous behavior?
Which harms the image of Islam more? Some deliberately offensive cartoons in a minor Danish newspaper, or the burning of several embassies (including those of Norway and Chile, countries who had nothing to do with the cartoons) and images of tiny kids holding signs that say, "He who insults the Prophet: kill him!"?
I'm certainly not saying that it wouldn't be completely reasonable, right and proper to engage in peaceful, nonviolent protest of the actions of these papers, to express offense and anger in letters to the editor or editorials in other publications, but is reacting with this kind of violence and hatred, thus proving right the accusations of those cartoonists, really in the best interests of Islam or anyone else? I would be inclined to say, "No."
Apparently there was one paper in the Middle East that published the actual photos. Its headline? "Muslims, Be Reasonable." I wish the article I read had mentioned the name of the paper, because I'd take out a subscription right now if I knew which one it was.