Muhammad Cartoons Seven Years On: Danish Cartoons and the (Un)Reciprocity of Hate Speech

(In keeping with Daniel Pipes’ suggestion of a Muhammad Cartoon a Day, I’m both publishing Muhammad Cartoons and republishing the series of posts I put up at the time of the scandal, when I first started blogging.)

For over a decade now a growing chorus of voices has pleaded with the MSM to expose the larger public to the demonization of Jews and Israel in the Arab world. This seemed particularly important in helping people understand the vital role this hate-mongering played in the production of violence in the Middle East (e.g., it’s role in suicide bombing), especially since 2000 and the outbreak of what the MSM (mistakenly?) call the al-Aqsa intifada. (It was really the opening round of a new phase of global Jihad.)

The effort ran up against the wall of a PCP commitment to the “cycle of violence” framework of tit-for-tat with which the MSM preferred to present the conflict. Shoe-string organizations people should consult at least every week, like PMW and MEMRI, try to give just a taste of the avalanche of hatred that permeates the media of the Muslim world, alongside which, the Danish cartoons pale in their “disrespect” for the “other.”

But little has made it through to the public, and now, apparently, we have convincing evidence that little of it has made it through to the political and media elites in this country (we’ll leave Europe out for the moment). How else to explain their current behavior, faced with the Danish cartoon scandal. The obvious response here is:

“Are you kidding? You demonize everyone in sight, including us all the time. Indeed much in the violent demonstrations in your streets comes precisely from this kind of demonization. These cartoons you object to so violently, are mild not only in comparison with your own “political cartoons” about us, but even by our standards. This is part and parcel of a free and reliable press: you make public claims… expect to get criticized. (And oh, do you make claims!) Clean up your own deeply disrespectful act and then come talk to us about our showing respect for the religious “other.”

do you know how offensive that is?
(Thanks to Filibuster cartoons, hat tip Josh Katzen)

But alas, we haven’t heard much like that from our newspapers who have almost unanimously refused to publish the cartoons.
Update: One cheer for the Philadelphia Inquirer, two for the New York Sun.

Instead as one spokesman opined:

“Readers were well served by a short story without publishing the cartoon,” said Robert Christie, a spokesman for Dow Jones & Company, which owns The Wall Street Journal. “We didn’t want to publish anything that can be perceived as inflammatory to our readers’ culture when it didn’t add anything to the story.”

(If that’s our MSM’s idea of serving us well on this issue, then we are in trouble.)

Nor have we heard anything like that from our State Department which issued the following remark: “the publication of cartoons that incite religious or ethnic hatred is unacceptable.” Now were this an opening to denouncing the incitement to ethnic hatred that permeates the Arab press, it would be a courageous statement. But it apparently targeted the mild Danish cartoons, with no reference to the avalanche of this kind of unacceptable material in the Arab and Muslim world.

PCPers will applaud this as a sign of “the peace of the strong”: we will benevolently respect your religious sensibilities without asking for a reciprocal respect and benevolence from you. We who are strong can make unreciprocated concessions. Maybe that will calm your roiling waters and begin the healing. After all, we have injured you, and you feel understandably marginalized and frustrated.

HSJPers see this kind of logic as patronizing and look at our behavior through the eyes of those who fan the flames of these explosions of the “Arab street.” For them, this is about spreading Sharia into the realm of the as-yet unconquered and un-subdued peoples. If Muhammad should not be depicted by Muslims, that is an internal matter. But if we outsiders can’t do that, then we submit to a Muslim law, we voluntarily accept upon ourselves the yoke of dhimmitude. Our “peace of the brave” registers on their screens as the submission of the weak.

We are weak — or at least act weak. As Ibn Warraq puts it, we don’t even know how to defend ourselves intellectually.

Here we have a dispute over a very important modern principle — freedom of the press, separation of Church and State, the right to criticize. We are faced with an effort on the part of an ever-more aggressive global Islam, hyper-sensitive to any criticism however deserved, to claim more territory, to intimidate, to demand at the threat of unleashing violence, the kinds of rights that they do not grant to others. In the history of the battle between decency and fascism, between demopaths and civil society, in the annals of 21st century civic heroism, this seems like a no-brainer. All we have to do to win a decisive victory for freedom, to show courage in the face of threats, and develop real mutual respect, is open their own demonizing book to the gaze of the world and say, “withdraw the beam before you scream about my mote.” What a precious teaching moment!

Instead, this looks like it will serve as yet another key moment in a growing sense of global Islam, an identity, media created and mediated, that links Muslims the world over together in their sense of aggressive grievance and easy resort to violence at the intrusions of modernity. And that identity — full of rage, completely absent of self-criticism, entitled to violence — is not a pretty face. Why on earth would we want to encourage it? Why are we blowing this fantastic opportunity to quietly but firmly administer a lesson in the rules and regulations of free peoples.

Thank God for blogs and Honest Reporting.

6 Responses to Muhammad Cartoons Seven Years On: Danish Cartoons and the (Un)Reciprocity of Hate Speech

  1. “…another key moment in a growing sense of global Islam, an identity, media created and mediated, that links Muslims the world over together in their sense of aggressive grievance and easy resort to violence at the intrusions of modernity. And that identity — full of rage, completely absent of self-criticism, entitled to violence — is not a pretty face.

    Fear of modernity leads the Muslims to fear the western-originated globalization that might result in modernity’s demands superseding the Muslim cultural demands in the minds of Muslim populations, that’s the gist of Muslim grievances against the West – and this could explain the fact that Muslims hate not just Israel, but the whole of the West.

    I would propose that one of their biggest fear of modernity has to do with women and gay emancipation: they can’t stand the idea that a woman should have the right to put on a mini-skirt (Muslim male insecurity of losing possession of the female?) or stand the spectacle of a man openly feminine in mannerisms (again, Muslim male insecurity of being seen as a weakling?).

  2. “For over a decade now a growing chorus of voices has pleaded with the MSM to expose the larger public to the demonization of Jews and Israel in the Arab world.”

    But the MSM observe the paradigm of the radical Left (that part of the Left that Dr Landes has called “self-destructive Left”).

    And the radical Left (especially the academic elites) cannot possibly allow the exposition of Islamic anti-Semitism, because the bad colonial Israel should cease to exist, and Islamists are their best buddies for doing the dirty job.

    And that’s why we see such blunders as “appointing an advocate of Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel to chair a committee aimed at combating anti-Semitism in the California State University system”

    http://frontpagemag.com/2012/lee-kaplan/israel-bashing-csu-prof-to-fight-anti-semitism/

    • mika says:

      “But the MSM observe the paradigm..”
      ==

      The best antidote to the Vatican/CIA msm propaganda is to kill it by turning it off. It is a vacuous echo-chamber meant to obfuscate and distract from reality, what is important, and the hidden mechanisms of power and control. There’s NOTHING on the Vatican/CIA msm propaganda outlets that conveys any kind of truth. It is all outright lies, lies of partial-truth and deliberate distortions, and made up theater. And none of this is accidental. There’s NOTHING in our world that happens by chance. EVERYTHING is planned years and often times decades in advance in a choreographed false dialectic. Read Anthony Sutton, Carroll Quigley, Edwin Black, and you will get an idea of the completely false narrative and lies which the government mafia propagandizes everyone to believe.

  3. “PCPers will applaud this as a sign of “the peace of the strong”: we will benevolently respect your [Muslim] religious sensibilities without asking for a reciprocal respect and benevolence from you. We who are strong can make unreciprocated concessions. Maybe that will calm your roiling waters and begin the healing. After all, we have injured you, and you feel understandably marginalized and frustrated.”

    A wonderful attitude, only it should be applied at a time that the “understandably marginalized and frustrated” is NOT attacking us.

    Any behavioral psychologist will attest to the fact that rewards should be administered in an effort to reinforce the desired behavior.

    Is Muslim aggression the response we want reinforced?

    Isn’t it better for us to wait until the Muslim world exhibits some sort of positive behavior, and reward that behavior?

    Radical leftists are not that thick to ignore the above truism, nor that much of bleeding hearts to acknowledge it but want to proceed anyway with Muslim appeasement.

    They just can’t help hating the West – so much as to be willing to destroy themselves along with it.

    • mika says:

      “Radical leftists..”
      ==

      Radical leftists, like anything else, don’t just occur. They are cultivated, they are financed, they are given a propaganda platform, or else they wither and disappear. This is what the Vatican/CIA gov mafia does. They did they this with Stalin, with Hitler, with OBL and al-CIA-da, etc. Once you understand this, you begin to understand that you’re really fighting a projected propaganda hologram created to advance an agenda through a false dialectic.

      You need to go beyond the radical leftists, because that is just staged theater for ignorant people with zero grasp of the grand historical narrative and no clue of how the world really works. It’s for people who can’t see beyond the projected shadows in Plato’s cave, believing the projected shadows to be reality.

  4. James says:

    I think the most important fact about the whole Motoons episode is not the craven cowardice of the western media and politicians (the same people who extolled the art-work “piss christ” and defended the right to offend did a volte-face when it came to cartoons about islam). http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/09/white-house-wont-denounce-piss-christ-after-repeatedly-denouncing-muhammad-movie.html Clinton not only defended the “offensive” piss-christ, but also extolled the South Park attack on Mormonism. The only religion these liberal-leftists are interested in protecting, is islam.

    The most important point is that Motoons outrage was fabricated by muslims. The story has been exposed various times, but the media refuse to re-tell it.

    In 2006 Paul Belien explained it all: ‘Radical Danish imams have deliberately incited hatred against Denmark, the country that had hospitably welcomed them in. To this end, while on a visit to Arab countries last month, they added three false, extremely offensive Muhammad “cartoons” to the twelve relatively mild ones published byJyllands-Posten…’

    http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/775

    In fabricating the 3 most “offensive” images of Mohammed, those muslim fundamentalists, on their own principles, should have been executed. And it’s not as though the muslim world did not know that the collection of “offensive” images that “caused” the eruption were not already known to them. The year before the Motoons outrage was fabricated by muslim fundamentalists, 6 of the original cartoons were printed by a newspaper in a muslim country (Egypt), and went more or less unremarked. No riots, no-one killed, no embassies attacked. It was only once the Danish imams failed to get Jyllands Posten prosecuted that they toured the muslim world stoking up outrage.

    ‘They condemned the Danish editor while turning a blind eye to the Muslim editor of El Fagr who published six of the original 12 caricatures (October 17 2005).’

    http://4freedoms.ning.com/group/reformers/forum/topics/denmark-12-fair-cartoons-and-3-dirty-muslim-lies?commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A106293&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A101485

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>