“Vehement hatred has already come into the open from out of their (belligerent enemies) mouths but what their hearts conceal is yet worse” (Quran 3:118)
“The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only.” (Thomas Carlyle)
“Something is rotten in the state of Denmark” (Hamlet, William Shakespeare)
A tiny nation like Denmark would not antagonise a population of over one billion, unless it knew that it can do it with impunity. Earlier, the Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, refused to meet the ambassadors of eleven Muslim countries regarding the offensive cartoons published by Jyllands-Posten. Thus, the Danish government knowingly allowed the publishing of the offensive materials, with total disregard for their Muslims citizens at home and the Muslims abroad. The criminal act was initiated by Denmark without provocation; it constituted declaring war on Islam and Muslims. They deserve a response of war accordingly, burning of the embassies in Syria, Lebanon, Indonesia are signs that future responses will be through deeds as well as words. The Muslims, disunited and weak, lacking economic and military power emboldened the Danish to insult Islam and Muslims. Also, Islam continues to spread in the heart of Europe, despite the constant vicious media campaign, and unable to confront Islam intellectually, it has built up considerable frustration. Thus, Denmark and some of the other militant European nations have resorted to primitive vulgar criticism, in line with their crude porn-culture. Many have argued that mocking and insulting others is part of European values, licensed by free speech. Indeed, one can see this daily, in the semi-porno tabloid papers to the broadsheet. The challenge for the Muslims is: how they can elevate these Europeans, so that a civilised dialogue can take place. Listed below, the key arguments are analysed. Is the cartoon issue one of freedom of expression (free speech)? If the Danish newspaper had insulted the blacks or some other community, they would have been instantly vilified as racists. If they mocked homosexuals they would have been attacked for being homophobic. The mere mentioning of these sacred words: “Jews”, “Israel” or the “Holocaust” leads to facing the anti-Semitism inquisition! Before insulting others, the Danish newspaper should have led by example by ridiculing the founder of Protestant Christianity, Martin Luther (who was rabid anti-Semite as he hated Jews and Arabs), as Lutheran Christianity is the state religion of Denmark.
Under the guise of free speech, would the Danish paper dare to publish satirical cartoons of the Holocaust and the Jews. Is the bankrupt concept of free speech restricted only to abusing, offending and vilifying Muslims and Islam? This is the same Danish newspaper that refused to print the offensive pictures of Jesus last year (Rightly so! – Islam condemns the vilification of any Prophets or Religion). So once again confirming that vilifying Islam and Muslims is almost the exclusive test for freedom of expression, and this is the only definition of ‘freedom’ of expression that makes any sense. However, no one is honest enough to admit to this definition, even though, this is what they practice. ‘Freedom’ of expression in reality a one-way traffic lane but the Muslims are expected to see it as a two-way lane! If the trend continues, the Muslims will be expected to view Camp-X-Ray as a symbol of human rights and Abu-Ghraib as some kind of deviant sexual emancipation and bombing cities as liberation! If the West truly believes in freedom of expression for all, then they should apply it consistently or not at all. If the Danish newspapers have the right to mock the Prophet (SAW), then by the same criteria of free speech, they should accept the right of the Muslims to express and call for the execution of those responsible. Before anyone moans about incitement to violence, they should remember that there would be no incitement, if there was no provocation. Why focus on the effect, instead of the cause? Indeed, why do you start a fight by throwing a punch and then complain that you got kicked in the groin in retaliation. The reality of so-called free speech is this: the West wants to award themselves with a full license to abuse Islam and Muslims, whilst curbing the Muslim responses.
If freedom of expression gives you the right to insult the Prophet of Islam, then that should extend to everyone, if we are all equal. In that case why the West have libel laws and censorships? Is it because, their ‘free’ speech permits them to vilify foreigners, particularly those who have passed away. Yet, when their loved ones are mocked, they cannot tolerate it, they file libel cases in court, and simultaneously they demand tolerance from the Muslims while hurling abuse and insults at them. This duplicitous hypocrisy is a constant theme in the Western psyche; only the West and their allies can have nuclear weapons, the right to Veto in the Security Council, bomb countries inflicting endless collateral damages, using any pretexts. Who is violating whose sovereignty? Another response has been that publishing the cartoons is a demonstration of Danish sovereignty and they should not be dictated to by the Muslims. The Muslims have never complained about the Danish way of life, nor have they demanded that they are to be ruled by Islam. Publishing such offensive materials served only one purpose: to abuse Islam and Muslims, it had no relationship to their way of life. Denmark initiated an act of aggression against others using the fig leaf of free speech and sovereignty. If upholding their sovereignty was an issue, they should have thought twice about being part of a coalition that has invaded sovereign Iraq and Afghanistan. Reversing Roles One of the cartoons showed Prophet Mohammed (SAW) wearing a turban, shaped as a bomb with a lit fuse. Stereotyping Muslims as terrorists is a classic example of the media reversing the roles; portraying the victims as terrorists and the real terrorists (state terrorists) as victims. So their media projects the rage of the victims as manifestation of intolerance and fanaticism: in contrast, the initial unprovoked attack by the aggressor is depicted as a virtue. Be it the free speech issue in Denmark to the invasion of Iraq by the US, the principle is the same, reverse the roles. Accordingly, the Palestinians are always depicted as terrorists, only if they could exchange their Semtex for cruise missiles and cluster bombs that would make all the difference. Perhaps if they killed the same number of Israelis as the Palestinians who have been killed, that would make them peaceful like the Israelis! Even better, if they managed to expel the Jews back to Europe (who should be the ones providing them with compensation and a homeland), it would make the Palestinians more like the Europeans! One wonders if some of these ‘journalists’ and politicians in the West are born as racist bigots and fanatics, unable to understand the basic concept of natural justice. The Muslims in retaliation could have depicted Jesus as an F16 fighter pilot dropping bombs on cities, each one of those bombs labelled with “freedom”, “democracy”, “Christianity” etc. But the Muslims cannot, as they revere Prophet Jesus more than Christians do. The Christians are really tolerant towards the mocking of Prophet Jesus, while they could not show a fraction of that tolerance in their history, towards other religions (especially Islam). Furthermore, why mock someone who is innocent and who is dead, unable to defend himself, such an act by nature is morally bankrupt, abhorrent and obscene to say the least!
The virgin factor again
Another cartoon, placed the Prophet (SAW) at the gates of heaven shouting to suicide bombers "Stop, stop. We have run out of virgins!" We as Muslims can empathise that Danish men are deprived of virgins, as it is a rare commodity in their society, where it is a social crime and not a virtue. Perhaps this is why they run off to the Far East, to purchase the poor young men, women and children, to obviously practice their freedom upon! Think about this next time you open your mouth on women’s rights to lecture the Muslims. Real shortage of virgin has led to frustration and envy of the Islamic world, where virgins are plentiful and the norm; ‘suicide’ bombers do not need to get to paradise or run to the Far East seeking virgins.
The response of the Muslims
The Muslims to the contrary are happy to engage in an open civilized debate not trade insults by hiding behind free speech. There is no Islamic literature where volumes of information containing lies and vulgar profanities targeted against other faiths. Even the awful medieval crusades did not lead to such materials emerging in the Islamic world and that is true even to this day. Islam has great resilience; it has stood many tests of time and continues to remain strong to this day. History and current reality proves that the West are only capable of containing Islam through the annihilation of Muslims e.g. Spain, Bosnia, Sicily etc. but never through intellectual dialogue! Now the question is apart from economic boycotts and political protests, how to respond to insults. Insults are below the belt, akin to a beast on its four legs biting at our ankle. Should we go down on our four limbs and respond in kind? Nope, instead we should find ways to restrain the beast with a chain around its neck, then attempt to tame it, so that it can live with others on this Planet. Alternatively, after chaining the beast, we too can proceed to exercise our freedom on it, so that the beast gets a taste of its own medicine and thus restrains itself. However, the readers need to contemplate the following points to get a glimpse of how the Muslims would have responded if they had the mentality of those Danish and other European people that published the cartoons. The Muslims could have made satirical cartons of Danish men and women fornicating openly like the beasts in the jungle, reflecting their crass culture of porn and Viking heritage. We all know that porn is a Scandinavian ‘delicacy’, shared also by the French, Germans and Italians, some have even allowed paedophiles to operate their websites in those places. The Muslims could also have drawn cartoons exhibiting a Danish child trying to identify his or her father standing in a line, as part of some new Danish TV game show. We could have coined the term: “a nation of Bastards” based on the statistics of huge number of children (30% to 50%) in the West born out of wedlock and it is increasing. Given the recent pictures from Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan and the cartoons are all corroborative evidences of that bastard nature!
The Muslims could have also used the label, “a nation of pimps” as the flesh trade is flourishing in European countries, in most places women can be purchased less than the price of Danish Bacon. The Muslims could have referred to the Pig like promiscuous behaviour of those Danes using the old saying, “you are what you eat” as it is the only animal that does not fight for its mate when another pig approaches it! Either way everyone can smell and see the bacon walking on two legs; they are allegedly either exhibiting their freedom and/or demonstrating their Viking heritage. Muslims are forbidden from consuming swine, but many must be considering at this moment that they “could murder a Danish” … pastry of course! In time we will use these swine (Danish Bacon and other European Bacon) to clean their own faeces, something that the animal is known for. Yamin Zakaria (www.iiop.org)London, UK |
