Cartoons that have sparked riots

[channonc 466]

Here is a link to the cartoons that have sparked the riots.

Cartoons

Here's the latest on the riots.

Riots

[TrueBlue72 0]

Looks like the pacifist europeans are now going to have to choose between giving up their freedom of speech and placating the Muslims. This issue points out basic cultural differences in western philosophy and that of the Muslims. Even we conservatives are more tolerant that the Muslims

The United States, and for the most part western Europe has thrived on people of diverse cultures coming together and merging to form a strong society. The Muslims have no desire to become a part of any other society. They feel they must bring the people in their new homelands to their beliefs, one way or another.

I hope the European cartoonists do not bow to the Muslim terror. I hope their next generation of cartoons is even more offensive to the Muslims and forces the issue of rights and rule of law. The more that the Europeans have to deal with the radical views of many Muslims, the more support we will have from them in doing with will eventually have to be done.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

"Tolerant Muslims" is an oxymoron.

[Jenny AU-92 0]

Neal Boortz had a good point today about the cowardice and hypocrisy of the media in reporting this story:

A STUDY IN MEDIA HYPOCRISY

Would you think that any major American media outlet would be more willing to offend the world's Catholics than those practitioners of the wonderful, peaceful religion of Islam?  Naw ... not in this country, right?  Well, you're wrong.  Let's take CNN as an example.  For the first part of this lesson in hypocrisy I'll direct you to a story that appeared on CNN.com on September 28, 1999.  The headline reads "Exhibit controversy makes coffee-table book a hot item."  This is a story about an eight-pound coffee table book that was flying off the shelves of New York City bookstores.  Why?  Because of a controversy over one picture in the book .. a picture of a work of "art" in the book titled "The Holy Virgin Mary."  The piece was done with elephant dung.  Catholics were less than amused.  So, what did CNN do?  It published the story complete with a picture of the offending piece.  Now .. we move to February 6, 2006 and another CNN.com story titled "Danes feel threatened in cartoon row."  This story, of course, is about all of those peaceful Muslims rioting and threatening death and mayhem because someone drew a cartoon of their pedophile-prophet Mohammed.  Now ... scroll down to the bottom of the story.  You'll see the notation "CNN has chosen not to show the cartoons out of respect for Islam."  Well, isn't that special.  Go ahead and show a painting of the Virgin Mary created out of elephant poo, but withhold the pictures of these cartoons that are causing carnage around the world.  We don't want to insult Muslims, do we?  Catholics?  Well, apparently they're on their own.

Link

On the other hand, maybe the NYT was trying to prevent their offices from being firebombed? That is wasn't so much a politically correct reason as it was a "cover our ass" reason? They make SUCH A HUGE DEAL about being the "Paper of RECORD" for this country that to not cover this story in its entirety is pretty cowardly in my mind... Or maybe they didn't want to get blamed if the peace loving religion of Islam used this as an excuse to go off in New York again? Just wondering...

The other thought that has struck me through all of this is that these same people freaking out about a cartoon have no problem with buring an American flag, a symbol of our country that many see as a religious type icon. But no protests there - no embassies from Muslim countries were firebombed.

It will be VERY interesting to see how the leftists in Europe handle this. I realize that these people have no concept of free speech and freedom of the press because of the repressive nature of their hme countries and their religion, but that is just another thing the Europeans are getting hit in the face with and now have to deal with - in the name of leftist cultural diversity, they have not encouraged their Muslim immigrants into assimilation into European culture. Hence, a Molotov rain.

Pitiful.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

How many times has Christ been portrayed in ways that Christians find deeply offensive and how many times has it sparked riots where people burn out buildings? I mean, I've seen crucifixes sitting in jars of urine proclaimed as "art", there's the (somewhat misguided) portrayal of Jesus on "The Book Of Daniel", the problems many believers had with "The Last Temptation Of Christ" from a few years back. What was the worst that happened? A few boycotts of theatres, TV shows and advertisers?

I just wish those who are so quick to explain to us why this is such an insult to Muslims would also point out that these people who are setting fire to embassies and going apes**t over a cartoon are idiots.

[AWK 0]

Let me show a little something that makes sense if you arent completely blind sided by your religion:

Islam is no laughing matter. The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten is being protected by security guards and several cartoonists have gone into hiding after the newspaper published a series of twelve cartoons (see  them all here, halfway the article) about the prophet Muhammad. According to the Islam it is blasphemous to make images of the prophet. Muslim fundamentalists have threatened to bomb the paper’s offices and kill the cartoonists.

The newspaper published the cartoons when a Danish author complained that he could find no-one to illustrate his book about Muhammad. Jyllands-Posten wondered whether there were more cases of self-censorship regarding Islam in Denmark and asked twelve illustrators to draw the prophet for them. Carsten Juste, the paper’s editor, said the cartoons were a test of whether the threat of Islamic terrorism had limited the freedom of expression in Denmark.

The publication led to outrage among the Muslim immigrants living in Denmark. 5,000 of them took to the streets to protest. Muslim organisations have demanded an apology, but Juste rejects this idea: “We live in a democracy. That’s why we can use all the journalistic methods we want to. Satire is accepted in this country, and you can make caricatures,†he said. The Danish imam Raed Hlayhel reacted with the statement: “This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims. Muslims will never accept this kind of humiliation. The article has insulted every Muslim in the world.â€Â

Flemming Rose, the cultural editor at the newspaper, denied that the purpose had been to provoke Muslims. It was simply a reaction to the rising number of situations where artists and writers censored themselves out of fear of radical Islamists, he said. “Religious feelings cannot demand special treatment in a secular society,†he added. “In a democracy one must from time to time accept criticism or becoming a laughingstock.â€Â

The affair, however, has also led to a diplomatic incident. On Thursday the ambassadors of eleven Muslim countries, including Indonesia, a number of Arab states, Pakistan, Iran, and Bosnia-Herzegovina, complained about the cartoons in a letter to Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen. They say the publication of the cartoons is a “provocation†and demand apologies from the newspaper.

Jyllands-Posten was also included on an al-Qaeda website listing possible terrorist targets. An organisation which calls itself “The Glorious Brigades in Northern Europe†is circulating pictures on the internet which show bombs exploding over pictures of the newspaper and blood flowing over the national flag of Denmark. “The Mujahedeen have numerous targets in Denmark – very soon you all will regret this,†the website says.

Meanwhile in Brussels a young Muslim immigrant published a poster depicting the Virgin Mary with naked breasts. Though the picture has drawn some protest from Catholics (though not from Western embassies, nor from the bishops), this artist need not fear being murdered in the street. On the contrary, he is being subsidised by the Ministry for Culture.

Link

Nothing is so fatal to religion as indifference.

Edmund Burke

[Tigermike 3,050]

Help me understand.

A Danish cartoonist draws a picture and they get mad at the United States.

They fly airplanes into buildings and we should be understanding.

The United States sends millions $$$ after the tsunami. Now in the wake of the Danish cartoons, "In Indonesia, a crowd attempted to force its way into a U.S. consulate."

They bomb the USS Cole and kill sailors.

We should hold hands and sing Kum Ba Ya.

The reason they are protesting against the United States is because they couldn't find a Denmark flag to burn. But the local al Qaeda HQ in Kabul, Somalia, Tehran, Damascus, Amman, Saudi Arabia, Mutan always has an extra US flag to burn and always has several thousand unemployed people ready and willing to protest the Great Satan.

[channonc 466]

An interesting op-ed piece.

Washington Post Op-Ed

[Jenny AU-92 0]

An interesting op-ed piece.

Washington Post Op-Ed

218572[/snapback]

I agree with him. To not publish, or to not report the story in the proper content is wrong. He totally hits the nail on the head - the Muslims want to be intolerant of others in their religion and their society - calling for the anahilation of Israel, for example - yet expect everyone else in the world to be tolerant of Islam. Unfortunately, many countries - including many people in the US - are bending over backwards to do just that - to be oh-so-careful not to offend Islam. Why do they get a free pass? Are the imams the Jesse Jacksons of Islam, only they are armed with Molotov cocktails instead of corporate boycotts? They are figuring out that they have the world by the short hairs with their use of violence and terror. The only thing that has kept Europe and the Middle East from completely going up in flames is that they fight and kill each other more than they do infidels. If they ever get truly organized, we are all in serious trouble.

[AWK 0]

Help me understand.

A Danish cartoonist draws a picture and they get mad at the United States.

They fly airplanes into buildings and we should be understanding.

The United States sends millions $$$ after the tsunami.  Now in the wake of the Danish cartoons, "In Indonesia, a crowd attempted to force its way into a U.S. consulate."

They bomb the USS Cole and kill sailors.

We should hold hands and sing Kum Ba Ya.

The reason they are protesting against the United States is because they couldn't find a Denmark flag to burn.  But the local al Qaeda HQ in Kabul, Somalia, Tehran, Damascus, Amman, Saudi Arabia, Mutan always has an extra US flag to burn and always has several thousand unemployed people ready and willing to protest the Great Satan.

218567[/snapback]

Ignorance and hatred does not equal sympathy, I dont understand the world. 3000 inncocent people die, everyone in these "nations" rejoice. We retaliate, people hate us. We dont retaliate, people still hate us, and we look weak. If it were up to me, I would have donated $0 to the Tsunami fund. Know, when I say that everyone looks at me like im a monster. However, how much money did these nations donate when Katrina hit, or after 9/11? Lets kill, bash, hate every American in site, do anything to hurt them, BUT when something bad happens to us, stand there with our hands open as if we deserve something.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

I complained to my friends on the Huntsville Times editorial staff that they were ignoring thjis whole thing. They now plan to do twin editorials this Thursday.

[AUJarhead 70]

However, how much money did these nations donate when Katrina hit

218577[/snapback]

Hurricane Katrina from Wikipedia

Over seventy countries pledged money or other assistance, including the single largest pledge of support from Kuwait for $500 million; $100 million from the country of Qatar; $5 million from India; $1 million from Bangladesh and $5 million from People's Republic of China. [54]. Countries like Sri Lanka, which is still recovering from the Indian Ocean Tsunami, Dominica, one of the smallest countries in the world by any measure, Cuba and Venezuela, despite their differences with the United States, have also offered to help. Countries including Canada, Mexico, Singapore, and Germany have offered to send in supplies, relief personals, troops, ships and water pumps to aid in the disaster recovery. Russia, whose initial offer was to send at least two jets was declined by the U.S. State Department; France, whose initial offer of concrete help was also declined.

[Tigermike 3,050]

By Clifford D. May 

February 7, 2006 

PENS & SWORDS: Kidnappings, beheadings and suicide-bombings carried out by terrorists claiming to represent the faith and tradition of Islam have inspired no demonstrations in Gaza, Amman, Damascus or elsewhere.

Such barbarianism evidently is not seen as an insult to Islam by those with the power and money to organize demonstrations.

By contrast, the publication of cartoon caricatures of the prophet Muhammad in a Danish newspaper has set off violent protests and the torching of embassies in several Arab and Muslim capitals.

Among the slogans held aloft by the protestors: "Europe, You Will Pay: 9/11 is On The Way;" "Be Prepared for the Real Holocaust;" "Europe is the Cancer, Islam is the Answer;" "Freedom Go to Hell." A group of moderate Muslims did create this Sorry Norway, Denmark website.

Also worth reviewing: The kinds of cartoons routinely published in these same Arab and Muslim capitals depicting Jews and Christians in the most defamatory ways. Examples can be seen on on Tom Gross's web site, on Mark Levin's web site, and on the web sites of Palestinian Media Watch and HonestReporting.com.

Author Ibn Warraq argues that democratic societies need to respond firmly. Freedom of expression, he says, needs to be defended -- not least because that is in the interest of Muslims.

"Without this fundamental freedom," he writes, "Islam will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality; originality and truth.

"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."

The rest of his essay is here.

David Schwammenthal, writing in the WSJ, says that so far, at least, the EU has not been standing up for freedom. In response to the attacks on Denmark for "nothing less than being a European country, for defending the values and norms the EU is based on," the EU has done nothing. "That silence has been heard and understood in the Muslim world," he notes.

He says also that it is by no means clear that the caricatures being protested are, in fact, an insult to Islam. Rather, he argues, they mock Islam's "abuse by militant Muslims." His column is here.

Our friend, Irshad Manji -- a self-described Muslim "refusenik" -- has a useful op-ed on the controversy here.

An interesting illustrated history/commentary on this controversy is here.

A SMALL STEP FOR MANKIND: In Vienna on Saturday, the International Atomic Energy Agency approved a resolution referring the Iranian nuclear program to the U.N. Security Council.

The European Foundation for Democracy, FDD's partner on the other side of the pond, has been working to better inform European policy makers and opinion leaders about the Iranian threat.

The measure passed by a vote of 27 for to three against, with five member states abstaining. The five countries that abstained: South Africa, Belarus, Algeria, Indonesia and Libya. The three countries that voted against the resolution: Syria, Cuba, and Venezuela.

The Syrian regime is, of course, a client of the Militant Islamist mullahs in Tehran. Cuba favors anything that may harm the United States; so, too, Venezuela under President Hugo Chavez.

BTW, Cindy Sheehan and Harry Belafonte recently appeared with Chavez and sung his praises. Surely Harry and Cindy will now criticize Chavez for what he is doing to help put nuclear weapons in the hands of a radical, terrorist-sponsoring regime that denies the last Holocaust and threatens a new Holocaust. Surely, they'll do that. Don't you think?

THE COLD WAR AND THIS WAR: Early historians of the Cold War placed the blame for the conflict on the Soviet Union's thirst for domination of Europe.

In the 1950s and '60s, revisionist historians blamed the United States and its economic interests, arguing that the Kremlin had merely reacted defensively.

For years, John Lewis Gaddis, widely considered the leading historian of the Cold War, took a middle view, citing misperceptions, domestic political considerations and bureaucratic inertia on both sides.

But now, writes James Mann of Johns Hopkins, "Gaddis has swung back nearly to where the early Cold War historians started by putting the onus of blame on Stalin and the brutal nature of his regime."

The significance of this for the current global conflict? Once again, there are two schools of thought: One blames the Militant Islamists. The other blames the U.S. and Israel, saying American and Israeli policies have sparked anger and outrage.

And once again there are those "moderates" who find fault with both sides, who split differences and/or argue that the solution to terrorism is to rid the world of poverty, oppression and unfairness.

As in the Cold War, so in this war: The truth is simpler.

Liberal democracy is a bold experiment. Liberal democracy has always had enemies.

It is useful to study and understand the enemies of liberal democracy -- whether Nazi, Communist or Militant Islamist. But it is a serious mistake to condone their hatred and aggression, to apologize for it, to attempt to appease them. Nor can anything we do make us inoffensive to them.

Also: Mann tells us that Gaddis cites as the heroes of the Cold War those "who challenged the Soviet regime in the realm of ideas and values, such as Orwell, Andrei Sakharov, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, Vaclav Havel and Pope John Paul II."

The U.S. took great efforts to support such dissidents. The U.S. has yet to make a similarly energetic effort on behalf of the dissidents of the Middle East, those who challenge Militant Islamism in the realm of ideas and values.

Gaddis concludes that the Cold War may be "the point at which military strength, a defining characteristic of 'power' itself for the past five centuries, ceased to be that. The Soviet Union collapsed, after all, with its military forces, even its nuclear capabilities, fully intact." Adds Mann: "Without ideas, the missiles won't matter."

Mann's review of Gaddis' "The Cold War: A New History" is here.

FOLK MARXISM: James Taranto writing in OpinionJournal last week:

Remember the Christian Peacemaker Teams, the outfit that had four of its members kidnapped in Iraq a while back? Today's Des Moines Register features an op-ed by one Pat Minor, a CPT member, in which she explains why she supports terrorism against Israel. But don't worry, some of her best friends are Jewish:

"What do you think about Hamas' victory?" I asked a co-worker, Sid Oxborough. He shrugged.

'Personally, I think it's great. But, it probably won't help their cause.' Sid, who considers himself a Diaspora Jew, says, "Obviously, the Israelis are Jews, so they are my people. But, the Palestinians are oppressed, so they're my people more."

This is an example of what Arnold Kling calls "folk Marxism":

Folk Marxism looks at political economy as a struggle pitting the oppressors against the oppressed. Of course, for Marx, the oppressors were the owners of capital and the oppressed were the workers. But folk Marxism is not limited by this economic classification scheme. All sorts of other issues are viewed through the lens of oppressors and oppressed. Folk Marxists see Israelis as oppressors and Palestinians as oppressed. They see white males as oppressors and minorities and females as oppressed. They see corporations as oppressors and individuals as oppressed. They see America as an oppressor and other countries as oppressed.

Folk Marxism leads a Jew to applaud the murderers of Jews, and a Christian to condone violence even while claiming to abhor it. And note what Oxborough said to Minor about the Hamas victory:

"Personally, I think it's great. But, it probably won't help their cause." Folk Marxism isn't actually about helping the "oppressed"; it is nothing more than a perverted moral vanity.

The Pat Minor op-ed from the Des Moines Register is here.

- Cliff May

http://www.defenddemocracy.org/publication...m?doc_id=355234

[AWK 0]

However, how much money did these nations donate when Katrina hit

218577[/snapback]

Hurricane Katrina from Wikipedia

Over seventy countries pledged money or other assistance, including the single largest pledge of support from Kuwait for $500 million; $100 million from the country of Qatar; $5 million from India; $1 million from Bangladesh and $5 million from People's Republic of China. [54]. Countries like Sri Lanka, which is still recovering from the Indian Ocean Tsunami, Dominica, one of the smallest countries in the world by any measure, Cuba and Venezuela, despite their differences with the United States, have also offered to help. Countries including Canada, Mexico, Singapore, and Germany have offered to send in supplies, relief personals, troops, ships and water pumps to aid in the disaster recovery. Russia, whose initial offer was to send at least two jets was declined by the U.S. State Department; France, whose initial offer of concrete help was also declined.

218586[/snapback]

Was referring to mainly France, Russia, and ETC. A few Jets and some concrete thanks a whole lot, no point proven

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

An interesting op-ed piece.

Washington Post Op-Ed

218572[/snapback]

I agree with him for the most part, particularly the last paragraph. But no one should ever accuse our State Dept. (current or past) to be a shining light of brilliance. But he seems to distinguish between Islam and Islamist Extremists. I don't think there is a difference. Islam is dedicated to destroying the Infidels. That's us folks. The Islamist Extremists are just the guys carrying things out.

[DKW 86 7,440]

That was very refreshing to read that the Liberal intelligentsia is STARTING to finally get it.

They have done everything in the last five years to undermine the work of the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Now, they finally see. Isnt that their crime of the last century anyway, not being able to see the need to fight until the Germans are marching down the Champs E'lysee? Maybe they will eventually figure it out, someday...

I understand that they dont want to resort to force until the last stone is overturned. No one thinks that more than a soldier or a vet however. Why cant they see that? Afterall, whose blood is spilt when we go to war? It is the soldier's, the sailor's, the airman's, and the marine's blood always being the first spilt. No one has a death wish in the armed forces. No one that has served there wants to spill a young man's blood either. We remember what it was to be there, to be the potential cannon fodder. What we do see however is that waiting until the last minute often times just exponentially increases the need for body bags.

But with this article, or series of articles, maybe they are bginning to see that the imposition of a caliphate ON THE WORLD is THE penutlimate goal of the Radical Islamofascists. That the taking away of all of our dearly held freedoms is the GOAL of the terrorists. I dont understand what the one fulcrum point was with the media heads but I appreciate that they are open minded enough to finally consider that it is time to react just like we did after 9-11.

You cannot argue or deal with a terrorist. To do so only begets more terrorists.

[LegalEagle 22]

Why don't we bomb 'em? What the hell is Bush waiting on? Fire two. . .

[AUJarhead 70]

Belgain Town bans art

Belgian town bans 'Saddam shark'

A town in Belgium has banned an artwork of Saddam Hussein for fear that it will put off tourists and offend Muslims.

The piece, called Saddam Hussein Shark, shows the handcuffed ex-Iraqi ruler suspended in liquid and wearing nothing more than underpants.

The mayor of Middelkerke, Michel Landuyt, said the work could "shock people", including Muslims.

He said he decided to ban Czech artist David Cerny's sculpture before the row over cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad.

The Saddam piece, which echoes British artist Damien Hirst's famous shark suspended in formaldehyde, was first shown in Prague last September.

'Too shocking'

But Mr Landuyt felt its exhibition would be too much for the small Belgian seaside town. "In my view, it was too shocking," he said.

"They wanted to put this piece in a location where many children come, so that couldn't be allowed," he told the BBC.

He added that the work was now going to be displayed in a museum in the Belgian city of Ostend.

"When you go to a museum and are prepared to see those things and there is an explanation, perhaps there is no problem. But when you come somewhere where you don't expect that, it can be a problem," he said.

Mr Cerny is an anti-conformist artist. His previous works have included a man hanging from a pole using just one hand, a series of "kits" including one of Jesus, and a pair of naked bronze figures urinating into a pond.

Damien Hirst's well-known shark installation, entitled The Physical Impossibility of Death in the Mind of Someone Living, was commissioned by art collector Charles Saatchi in 1991 for £50,000.

It propelled Hirst to fame when it first went on display in 1992.

Now, as Titan pointed out, placing the crucifix in urine and rubbing dung on the Virgin Mary both offend me, but what makes this different from that? Is it because Catholics aren't storming on the Belgium embassy and throwing bombs at it? Are Southern Baptists not hacking Belgium company web sites and putting up anti-Belgium messages? When these things offend us as Christians, we're told that this is "art" and that we "need to expand our horizons" or "if you don't want to see it, don't spend your money on it." But yet, when Muslims begin rioting over it, suddenly governments are not allowing it. I really fear for our future as a civilization.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Why don't we bomb 'em?  What the hell is Bush waiting on?  Fire two. . . 

218642[/snapback]

He's waiting to get approval from Congress. Just like he did w/ Iraq, ya big dummy.

[DKW 86 7,440]

Why don't we bomb 'em?  What the hell is Bush waiting on?  Fire two. . . 

218642[/snapback]

I see I was totally correct on the Libs just now starting to "GET IT!"

Seems only a few do at present.

[Tigermike 3,050]

February 08, 2006, 7:52 a.m.

No Joke

Jonah Goldberg

This isn’t about cartoons.

Enough with the cartoons. It's not about cartoons.

The riots and demonstrations across the Middle East and Western Europe (though not yet playing here) over some cartoons of the Muslim prophet Mohammed have set off a parallel intellectual riot in the West over the nature of free speech and free expression. Many pundits and editorialists have worked feverishly to keep this a debate about the propriety of running cartoons. Some news outlets are updating their procedures so as not to offend "religious" sensibilities in the future.

The quotation marks around the word "religious" should say it all. We're not talking about "religion." We're talking about a specific religion — Islam. Does anyone truly think that the burning of Danish embassies and calls for the "slaughter" of those responsible by Muslim protestors have really taught the BBC or the New York Times to be more polite to evangelical Christians or Orthodox Jews? Does anyone really think that Arabic newspapers — often state-owned — are going to stop recycling Nazi-era images of Jews as baby killers and hook-nosed conspirators because they've become enlightened to the notion that words can hurt? Considering that an Iranian newspaper just announced a contest for the best Holocaust cartoon, the odds seem slim. Besides, why belittle the Holocaust in response to something a Danish newspaper did? (Partial credit given for the answer: "It's always useful to pick on the Jews.")

Personally, I didn't think the cartoons were particularly good. They also seemed to be published out of a desire to offend Muslims. The editors, and many defenders of the Jyllands-Posten newspaper, claim otherwise, saying that they needed to prove there was a climate of fear in Denmark generated by Muslims. So they offended Muslims, and effectively proved, at the least, that there were Muslims eager to generate a climate of fear.

But the issue of "offense" is a distraction too. Let's assume that the publication of the cartoons was motivated entirely by a desire to offend Muslims — or at least some Muslims. How does that change the way we should view events now? If I needlessly offend my neighbor, shame on me. If, in response, he burns down my house and threatens to murder my entire family, who cares what I said in the first place? There has been a call for a worldwide Islamic boycott of Danish products because of what an independent newspaper did in a free society. (The boycott shouldn't hurt sales of Danish hams, thank goodness.)

Overreactions are usually about something bigger. The whole point of the "last straw" metaphor is that small things can set off disproportionate reactions. One Muslim protestor in Britain held up a sign saying "Freedom Go To Hell!" Do we really think that a handful of cartoons in Denmark transformed him from a Jeffersonian democrat into a jihadi? Was the holder of the sign "Behead Those Who Insult Islam" a pacifist until recently?

Maybe, just maybe, these guys brought some issues to the table long before they ever heard of these cartoons.

It seems obvious, to me at least, that this is clang and clatter that comes with a clash of civilizations. Last year the (false) Newsweek story that American interrogators were flushing Korans down the toilet caused lethal riots in Afghanistan. In Paris, Muslims riot or threaten to riot about everything from schoolgirls without headscarves to the lack of halal Brie. Around the world, Muslims suffer from a mixture of legitimate grievances and an enormous inferiority complex. Muslim, and particularly Arab, governments have a vested interest in stirring up this sort of thing because it distracts from their own corrupt regimes. And the Muslim "street" seems to fall for it every time.

And so does much of the Western press. Sure, this is about freedom of expression, but it's also about so much more. Journalists just love to talk about freedom of the press. But they don't like to talk about that enormous chip on the shoulder of the Muslim world, and they really hate to say anything offensive to "oppressed" peoples.

Denouncing the State Department for criticizing these cartoons only makes sense if you look at this situation through a very narrow prism. The U.S. government is fighting a conventional war in two Muslim countries and a clandestine and diplomatic "global war on terror" that involves the entire global Muslim community. I don't like the U.S. picking on little Denmark either, but we should at least recognize that the Bush administration has in mind a bigger picture than those who think this is just about some cartoons.

http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/gol...00602080752.asp