Muslim
cartoons debate about speech freedom
Sean
Cocca
When The Associated Press reported a few weeks ago about the outrage erupting
in the Islamic world over the publication of a series of political cartoons
in a Danish newspaper depicting the Muslim prophet Muhammad in various satirical
poses, most notably the one with his turban shaped like a bomb with a lit fuse,
I was left dumbfounded.
Muslims across the Middle East took to the streets and began protesting against
the cartoons in great numbers. Protesters became increasingly violent, throwing
rocks through the windows of Danish embassies and governmental buildings in
the Middle East and then burning them down.
Muslims leaders in countries like Iran and Syria started making public speeches
demanding righteous Muslims to bomb Denmark for publishing the cartoons and
advocating the death of the artists.
Since that time, numerous other newspapers across the European Union have published
these cartoons in support of Denmark, opening them up to the same criticisms
and violent outbursts that were directed at Denmark by the Islamic world.
This has only fueled the flames of outrage throughout many Islamic countries.
Demonstrations have become so violent police and security forces have had to
utilize deadly force to stop the crowds. Countries throughout the European
Union have denounced the violence and some are trying to work with Islamic
leaders to calm the fury these cartoons have generated.
Many fear retribution from the Islamic world if they publish the controversial
cartoons. Even the illustrious Associated Press, from which many publications
get pictures for national and international news stories, has taken it upon
themselves to censor the inflammatory images.
And yet they don’t censor American flag burning or artistic depictions
of Jesus Christ in urine.
Let me reiterate, because that last little tidbit needs to be said again. The
AP has refused to distribute the images of the cartoons to the numerous newspapers,
magazines and other publications that use their wire service. They have, in
effect, made an editorial decision for almost every newspaper and magazine
in the country without greater consent.
It is not the place for organizations like The AP, Reuters, or anyone else
for that matter, to decide for the world what can and cannot be shown. While
this has certainly made these cartoons more difficult to obtain and publish,
it has not made them completely unavailable, as any Internet search will show.
But that is not the point.
Another disturbing thing that has happened in the wake of this controversy
is the admission by President George W. Bush that the European newspapers were
partly at fault for publishing the controversial cartoons. Bush denounced the
violence, but claimed that while the media has the right to express itself
freely, it must act responsibly in that expression.
This stance was quickly endorsed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations
(CAIR). After about a week, the Bush administration apologized for sounding
it was siding with the protestors and not the Danes and took a more hard-line
stance, claiming some Middle Eastern nations, like Iran and Syria, are using
the controversy to incite anti-American sentiments across the Islamic world.
I think Bush missed a big opportunity here. He could have used this to unite
the nation and the world against radical Islam. Never before in the U.S.-led
War on Terror have so many nations across Europe seen radical Islam for what
it really is.
Countries all over Europe are standing up for freedom of speech and the press,
rights guaranteed to all Americans by the First Amendment, and what does Bush
do? He slaps them right in the face. Ideals central to the American way of
life such as freedom of speech and press are being assaulted. We as a nation
should be outraged.
Now I know it is against Islamic teachings to depict the prophet Muhammad in
any way. From what I have read and learned, this practice was imposed mainly
to deter idolatry. But even so, the reaction to these cartoons is completely
ridiculous.
It is made even more ridiculous when one takes into account the cartoons were
published in Egypt almost four months ago without so much as a peep from any
imam or sheik, according to the blog site littlegreenfootballs.com. If the
name is not familiar, it was one of the four Web sites that discovered the
memos Dan Rather referred to as credible sources alleging President Bush did
not serve in the National Guard during Vietnam were actually fake.
Where was the outrage four months ago? Egypt is over 90 percent Muslim, but
the rest of the world heard nothing about these cartoons until a Danish newspaper
republished them.
And do not, for one second, think Westerners could not and would not feel any
differently if the cartoons concerned something sacred to us. It happens every
day.
Iran’s former president Mohammad Khatami announced a contest to see if
Westerners could do just that. He called for artists to create cartoons depicting
scenes from the Holocaust in a less than reverent way.
This is not the same thing. It is not even in the same ballpark. One was a
violation of religious dogma and the other was the extermination of over 6,000,000
people. There is no comparison. Khatami just wants to ruffle the West’s
feathers.
We, as Americans, should be outraged.
How much sense does it make that Muslims across Europe and the Middle East
are protesting depictions of Muhammad that show him with a bomb for a turban
by burning down buildings and threatening to bomb the offending countries?
These supposed holy men are advocating the deaths of those responsible for
both the creation and the publication of the cartoons.
These are the people we are fighting in the War on Terror. It is these radical
fundamentalists who take to the streets, burn down buildings and threaten the
lives of others, all in the name of religion, who we must overcome.
This is not about cartoons. This is about freedom of speech. This is about
the ideals upon which this country was founded. This is a war on an intellectual
and idealistic scale. We must protect our freedoms, even at the cost of angering
a few religious zealots who would rather encourage violence than peaceful negotiations.
|
