More on Free Speech vs. Islam in Denmark
The Brussels Journal reports:
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.”
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.
The very fact that terrorist threats are being made and “respectable” politicians are demanding an apology are precisely why no such apology should be issued and why the cartoons needed to be published. These cartoons have revealed an inability of the Muslim community, even Muslims communities in the West, to accept criticism of their religion and of the founder of their religion. So long as that continues to be the case, Islam will be an enemy modernity and liberty.
Reporters Without Borders reports on the Jordanian parliament’s call for the cartoonist to be punished:
“Islam forbids any representation of the Prophet and we realize that these cartoons may upset some people, but it is not acceptable for the parliament of a supposedly democratic country to call for the cartoonists to be punished,” the press freedom organisation said.
“Those who so desire may bring a complaint against the newspaper, but politicians should under no circumstances should call for direct reprisals against journalists,” Reporters Without Borders continued. “The cartoonists have already received death threats and these new statements put them in further danger.” [...]
Jyllands-Posten editor Carsten Juste received several death threats after he published the cartoons last September and hired bodyguards to protect his journalists. The two threatened cartoonists were forced to go into hiding. Similar threats have been made against Magazinet since it republished them two weeks ago.
It’s ironic that a Muslim artist in Brussels has created a poster which depicts the Virgin Mary with nude breasts — hardly unusual, given how often such depictions appeared in the Middle Ages. Still, the nudity is likely to upset at least few Christians, but are any protesting? Are any making terrorist threats? Are any bishops demanding that the artist be punished? In fact, the artist it being subsidized by the Ministry for Culture in Belgium.
In a sign of just how much Muslims respect the symbols of other groups, Palestinian Muslims burned a Danish flag in the West Bank and Muslims all over the Middle East are boycotting Danish goods:
The protests follow Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s Oct. 21 refusal to meet ambassadors of 11 Muslim countries to discuss censuring the Jyllands-Posten paper after it printed 12 cartoons of the prophet on Sept. 30, including one showing Muhammad wearing a bomb instead of a turban. Muslim leaders want an official apology. [...]
Flemming Rose, cultural editor at Jyllands-Posten’s Copenhagen office, said the paper won’t apologize. ``An apology would imply we regret what we’ve done, which we don’t,’’ Rose said in a telephone interview on Jan. 23. ``We do satires of Jesus, the royal family and politicians; not to do satires of Muslims would show prejudice as we would be treating them differently from all other groups.’’
This refusal to apologize was, sadly, not matched by Norway where the government did apologize for the fact that a Norwegian newspaper reprinted the cartoons:
Opposition politicians reacted to this message with indignation. Jon Lilletun, the spokesman on foreign policy for the Christian-democrat Kristelig Folkeparti, points out that it is not the ministry’s task to express an opinion on the content of the cartoons. Carl I. Hagen, the leader of the Progress Party, fears that freedom of expression is being swept under the carpet.
Eventually, though, the newspaper did offer a sort of apology, motivated apparently by the economic boycott:
After Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Copenhagen and declared a boycott for all Danish products, the Danish Industrialists Association asked Jyllands Posten to make an official apology. ... The letter read: “We are sorry that the incident reached this point. We want to express again and again that our goal was not to offend or disrespect anyone. We respect freedom of religion just as Danish society does.”
According to the Danish Industrialists Association, “Freedom of expression requires responsibility.” That’s true — people who express something offensive have to take responsibility for that, but such responsibility doesn’t necessarily mean apologizing every time someone takes offense at something written or said. Responsibility doesn’t mean not saying or printing things which might offend someone.
Moreover, freedom of expression also requires responsibility on the part of listeners and readers — the responsibility not to demand that they not be offended. If no one is ever to be offended, there is no freedom of expression. Unfortunately, I think that's precisely what many Muslims around the world wish — an end to the freedom to express strong criticism of Islam and Muslims.
Many Muslims don't accept the apology as genuine:
The use of freedom of expression as a justification to hurt the religious sentiments of hundreds of millions of Muslims the world over, is indicative of double standards, respondents told Khaleej Times. ... ‘Freedom of expression is a very convenient cliché for many Western nations. Everyone knows what happened to freedom of expression in the US and the UK following the debacle in the war on Iraq and Afghanistan,’ said Majid Ali, a Dubai resident.
America isn’t perfect when it comes to protecting freedom of expression, but how is that a reason to refuse to express criticisms of Islam? Freedom of expression is not something people are hiding behind; instead, it’s an important principle of liberty which few Muslim nations honor or respect. In most of the Muslim world, any expressions of hostility, attack, or criticism towards Islam, Muslims, or Muhammad are punished severely. They don’t understand why it’s allowed in other nations — which means they don’t understand the principles of freedom of expression or freedom of conscience.
‘I don’t know about people of other faiths, but Muslims are very sensitive when it comes to religious issues, and this is what allows provocateurs to fan sentiments and become ‘popular’ internationally. How many of us knew the newspaper’s name, and am not going to mention it, before this ugly episode happened?’ he asked.
Why is being “sensitive when it comes to religious issues” a reason not to express criticism of Islam? Maybe it’s the responsibility of Muslims not to be so sensitive?
Mohammed Nakhira Al Dhahiri, Minister of Justice and Islamic Affairs and Auqaf... called upon Denmark and all countries in the world to respect religions. Islam is a religion of peace, love and mercy.
Here, “respect” seems to mean “deference” and a refusal to criticize. Religion doesn’t deserve that sort of respect, and Islam in particular certainly does not deserve it. Given how much trouble there is with Islam in the world today, Islam and Muslims are in the greatest need of critique and criticism; their refusal to accept and deal with it is merely a symptom of how needed it is.
‘But even if the government of Denmark apologises, Muslims should continue to boycott their products. This will be a lesson for all, not to dare abuse Islam,’ [Nawarah Al Maghribiya, a 20-year-old from Morocco] opined.
If Muslims are so sensitive that they can’t bear criticism of their religion, then that’s just more reason to engage in even more and stronger criticism of Islam.
This unsigned editorial in Greater Kashmir, called "Blasphemy Unbearable," is even worse:
There is no denying the fact that the freedom of speech and expression is an important right and must be respected and enforced strictly to ensure a free press, but in the garb of this right nobody should encroach upon the honour of others. This right ends where somebody’s honour starts.
It would be difficult to understate just how absurd this is. A “right” to free speech that is curtailed whenever someone claims that their “honour” has been encroached upon is no “right” at all. I could claim that my “honour” as a defender of free speech has been encroached upon by this editorial — would anyone help me by having the author punished?
Of course not — in cases like this, people only go after the speech of dissenters while protecting the “honour” of the powerful. Defending “honour” is nothing more or less than a shameful and dishonest attempt to protect privileged groups from the criticism of minorities or the disenfranchised. What the author or authors of this editorial want is the ability for themselves and their religion to be free from criticism — to do whatever they want without being held accountable by outsiders.
In the whole of Europe and even in America blasphemy against Christianity is an offence.
This couldn’t be more wrong. It’s possible that the author or authors are unaware of the simple fact that blasphemy, at least in America, is legal — in which case they didn’t do the homework they should have done. Then again, maybe they do know better and are simply lying in order to help their Muslims readers feel better about themselves and more outraged that non-Muslims would have the temerity to criticize Islam. Either way, it’s clear that the author or authors are unreliable.
Of course there are good people in the west who have accepted the greatness of Prophet Muhammad (SAW).
What are the chances that the author or authors of this editorial define “good people” based on whether they are Muslims or at least deferential to Islam? All of this simply continues to demonstrate the fact that an Islam which isn’t criticized — a situation created in Muslim nations by laws that punish blasphemy — result in an insular community where violence and bigotry against nonbelievers runs rampant. Islam is far worse off today precisely because criticism and critique are taboo.
It’s no wonder that the editorial is unsigned — being associated with it would be an incredible embarrassment.
Libya demonstrated just how much they understand liberty and democracy by shutting the Danish embassy because the Danish government has refused to take action against the newspaper in question:
“Because the Danish media had continued to show disrespect to the Prophet Muhammad and because the Danish authorities failed to take any action on that, Libya decided to close its embassy in Copenhagen,” the Libyan foreign ministry said in a statement. Libya also said it would be taking “economic measures” against Denmark, but did not say what they would be.
This problem seems to exist in other Muslim nations as well: they simply don’t understand that in a free society, the government doesn’t have the authority to “take action” against the media for expressing opinions which some group doesn’t approve of. Especially bizarre is the fact that Palestinians are demanding the exit of not just Norwegian and Danish citizens from the West Bank and Gaza, but also Swedish citizens. What have the Swedes done? Nothing, except come from a country which is near Norway and Denmark. This, I think, says something about the level of reasoning skills of the people in question.
Read More:
Comments
*incoherent profanity against Danish citizens deleted*
I am an Actor and Fervant disbeliever in ANY Relegion, how about building a movement to pursue the agenda of freedom of speech, expression and the point out the insanity and infantile belief in god(s)