Posted on 02/08/2006 2:29:51 PM PST by weegee
The Danish newspaper published cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad last September, but the backlash from that has sparked renewed anger in the Islamic world — the latest being the burning of the Norwegian and Danish embassies in Syria. The roots of it all actually go back to Sept. 11, 2001, which created a highly charged environment where apparently, no subject is sacred in the West, especially topics related to Muslims and Islam.
The embassy burnings are reminiscent of another controversy that brewed in 1988 and still simmers today. Salman Rushdie — then an obscure novelist of Muslim-Indian origin, wrote The Satanic Verses, in which he attempted to defile Islam. After the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's fatwa (edict) calling for Rushdie's death, Rushdie became, in Western eyes, a champion of freedom of expression. In Muslim countries, he instantly became an embodiment of Satan.
Now world attention is focused on European newspapers — notably in Denmark, Norway and France — that published insulting cartoons of the Prophet of Islam. In the West, freedom of expression is considered sacred. For some, that freedom is absolute, even allowing someone to insult a person's faith. In Muslim countries, there are equally absolute standards regarding Islam, and there, nothing and no one is above Islam, and love and respect for the Prophet are requirements for adherents to the Muslim faith.
On this issue, the long-standing chasm between the West and the world of Islam is getting wider. It may even be heading toward a "civilizational war" like the one Samuel Huntington (wrongly) described as occurring in the early 1990s in his book The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.
The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States clearly widened that chasm. Osama bin Laden emerged as a new hero in the Muslim world and villain in the West. But he caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people, so why should he be admired for that? The answer lies not in the Sept. 11 attacks, but in the context of a larger struggle taking place inside the world of Islam.
Among Muslim regimes, the dominance of the United States and the West has been taken for granted. And in those countries, there is little hope about the prospects of political change and economic progress. Moreover, the rot of authoritarianism, nepotism and corruption has been so entrenched that people cannot realistically aspire to be free, prosperous or see prospects of technological advance.
To most Muslims, the West appears content about the state of backwardness, obscurantism and darkness that currently prevails in Muslim countries in the Middle East and elsewhere. And along comes bin Laden, who voices anger over the state of affairs in the world of Islam.
People do not necessarily buy into his murderous philosophy of transnational terrorism, but they agree with his criticism of what is wrong with the world of Islam and why it remains backward.
Freedom of speech is indeed a noble idea. To state that it should have no limits (or that it should be absolute) may be a useful academic exercise, but we also need to keep in mind that exercising that freedom could also lead to the same kind of terrible consequences as when someone yells "fire" in a packed theater.
To Muslims, the West appears stubbornly against compromising on the freedom of expression, and they see hypocrisy in this because this freedom is not as absolute as it is pretended to be in some quarters. Nothing in human affairs can be "absolute."
And at the same time, Muslims are equally uncompromising and "absolute" in their responses to anyone being disrespectful of their religion and their Prophet.
So how to end the confrontation?
In a world that is more of a global village than ever before, there must be compromises. Muslims make a point of not insulting Christians about their faith.
As a quid pro quo, a similar courtesy is warranted toward their religion. As the recent violence underscores, the global village is like a packed theater. Good judgment is a requirement before yelling "fire," even in the name freedom of expression.
--Ahrari is the CEO of Strategic Paradigms, an Alexandria, Va.-based defense consultancy, who writes frequently about issues in the Middle East and South Asia.
If this guy's company is getting paid by our government, there's something amiss.
Um...correct me if I'm wrong but weren't the cartoons published in the WEST, not the ISLAMIC WORLD?
I guess beheading the infidels doesn't count as "insulting".
But, bash Jews every chance they get.
The West does not care about the state of culture in the ME, so long as the oil can be produced. Columbus was trying to find an alternate route to Indian and China so shipping didn't have to go through the ME. Nobody wanted to ship through the ME. Still don't.
? ? ? ? ?
What global village is missing this idiot?
"Muslims make a point of not insulting Christians about their faith. "
Broke my BS meter.
No mention of the Jews I note.
Hey, Einstein, you're missing the point. The problem is that Islamic absolutes are not limits on the West. At least they weren't until the MSM was taken over by cowards and hypocrites.
(steely)
In the West, freedom of expression is considered sacred. For some, that freedom is absolute, even allowing someone to insult a person's faith. In Muslim countries, there are equally absolute standards regarding Islam, and there, nothing and no one is above Islam, and love and respect for the Prophet are requirements for adherents to the Muslim faith.
In Islamic nations, nothing is above Islam, other faiths are beneath Islam (in respect and civil rights), and everyone must have love and respect for "THE Prophet" even if you are not an adherent to the Muslim faith. Supremacist belief system at its finest.
To me, your sacred prophet is just another Antichrist figure leading the flock astray.
Now, now, they are very respectful and don't make blasphemous statements against Christians as they saw through necks.
Uh, blatantly false!
Virtually every week newspapers throughout the Muslim world run stories and cartoons, nasty, disgusting cartoons, about Christians and Jews.
These are also printed in books, taught to school children, etc.
This author is making excuses for barbaric behaviour.
His whole premise, that in the West freedom of speech is an absolute, is wrong. Even here in the US where freedom of speech is still being fought for more successfully than some other areas in the Western world, we put limits on speech such as the much trotted out "can't yell fire in a crowded theatre."
Bully for them. Move back there if that is so important to you.
Otherwise, realize the absolute fallocy of expressing views in an American newspaper that freedom of speech is subservient to your religion.
Everything muslims say insults my faith. They deny Jesus' divinity (which can be challenged), they deny His crucifixion and death (but they don't deny His existence), and they deny His resurrection. Then they tell me Jesus is still an important figure to them.
I let them go on with their false prophet, but I don't have to embrace their false path. When people ask for reformation of Islam, I say return to the original Judeo-Christian Bible as either Jews (if they still won't accept Jesus) or Christians.
Fundamentalist Islamic fascism is not the global yard stick by which those in free societies measure their liberty.
Where have all these apologists for violent Muslim reaction to CARTOONS,for pete's sake,been when Christian icons have been insulted and Christians offended? Oh that's right,offended Christians will at most boycott their commie papers-they probably don't subscribe in the first place-they certainly won't burn buildings and decapitate people. So the apologists are on solid safe ground when Christians or Jews are offended. Now all of a sudden they're defending a concept that has heretofore been foreign to them-with freedom comes responsibility. Because they're SCARED. What a lot of two-faced hypocritical cowards.
The difference is that in muslim countries, if anyone disagrees the muslims threaten, intimidate or murder them. That's more than a subtle difference.
Sooner or later the Muslims (if allowed) will attack the west with WMD and will be defeated by massive retaliation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.