veiled4allah: freedom and responsibility

Now things are really getting out of control: Mohamed cartoons provoke bomb threats against Danish newspaper. No, no, and no again.

But at the same time, I can only agree with this:

I'm finding it difficult to find a way of defending the Danish newspaper which decided that the way to demonstrate against censorship is to roll out stereotypes about stupid Arabs with swords, suicide bombers seeking virgins and jokes about how Muslims would stick out in an ID parade, whilst at the same time deliberately trying to provoke people by printing an image of Muhammad. While free speech is essential to democracy, I despair when this is held up to be an example of that exercise. Without knowing the context that the images were printed, and without translation of some of the Danish writing, the exact intentions - whether good or bad - are doomed to remain obscure outside of Scandinavia. But I have to wonder what the reaction would have been here if, to provoke "debate" about censorship, a newspaper like the Sun published a series of "satirical" cartoons featuring a series of stereotypes regarding black people and Jews in a particularly vicious manner. The Sun would be accused of having the morals of the 1930s, and would be put on the same ideological shelf with Mr Griffin.

This is a lot bigger than just the cartoons, it's about Muslims feeling under siege, that things that would be considered beyond the pale if they were about another religion or another ethnic group are OK as long as they're about Muslims. It's about all the other perceived double standards, like the U.S. claiming the right to use nukes even pre-emptively but not allowing Iran to develop even a peaceful nuclear power program.

I'm a very strong defender of free speech, but we would get a lot further in solving our problems if instead of trumpeting our right to insult and deride others in the name of that free speech, we spent more time trying to build bridges of understanding and to work for justice.

Why not challenge ourselves to use our freedom for good? No one can force another to be good, and that's why the freedom is there, but as moral people, don't we each owe it to our own conscience to aim for the best and to use our freedom in a responsible manner?

Update: Steve Gilliard has a couple of very good posts about this.

First:

The Europeans are full of shit here. Those cartoons are deeply offensive and are no better than if the WaPo or Boston Globe had a cartoon of Al Sharpton being lynched. Freedom of the Press is fine, but depicting Muhammad as a drunk with women is asking for a major reaction...

...Europeans have made it clear that Muslims are outsiders. Then, in the crudest way possible, they insult their faith and wonder why muslims refuse to buy their products, withdraw their ambassadors and make bomb threats.

Hint: this is a direct assault on their faith.

Muhammad didn't tell anyone to bomb anything. It is lazy, cheap thinking to say that and then hide behind press freedom when people are pissed beyond words.

Then:

While the cartoonists have the right to say what they want, and no one should bow to terrorism, the problem with the cartoons was that they were genuinely offensive, bigoted, actually. Many suggested that Muhammad was a terrorist or approved of terrorism. It's easy for people in the West to assume Muslims are not rational people, who get upset at the slightest mention. But this isn't that case. These cartoonists went out of their way to find the most offensive way to depict Muhammad and then sat back, stunned that people didn't like their uninformed takes on Islam.

It's really a slap in the face to law-abiding, hard working muslims and says "this is what they really think about you".

What truly offends me is the way people are saying "well, they have the right to say it". We have the right to say many things, but why avoid the responsibility for your words.

I am very saddened to follow this story, because of the rhetoric on both sides. Certain Muslims who are over-reacting (though it's a very small number compared to how many Muslims there are in Denmark and other European countries, and a small percentage of the population in Muslim countries who are protesting). And also some of the Islamophobic comments being made by Americans (just check out the comments on Gilliard's first post, see some responses to similar comments at Daily Kos: 1, 2).

Meanwhile, Thabet has a round-up of Muslim posts on the issue, and here's another rare sensible blog entry to highlight because there are so few.

Later: Paul Vallely has a reasonably decent overview of how Muslims approach the issue. One thing that seems to be getting lost in all the shouting is that this is not just about the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) being depicted - but that the depictions are racist stereotypes. I see so many liberals boasting about their "right to blaspheme" and how "brave" they are because they want to re-publish the cartoons.

What they don't seem to realize is that to most Muslims, this is like boasting about how "brave" you are to publish anti-semitic cartoons. I'm pretty darn sure that nearly everbody who's doing the boasting would change their tune in a big hurry if that were the case. Is it open season on Muslims now? That's what we have to wonder. We need to do a lot better job of making our case, but Western liberals might actually want to look at the cartoons, imagine if there were similarly stereotypical and offensive images of Jews or blacks or another minority group, and decide whether they would be in such a big hurry to promote these cartoons.

More (frequently updated): Akram's Razor and scorponic provide useful background on the political and social situation in Denmark. Necessary context for understanding where the cartoons came from. Chapati Mystery, meanwhile, looks at the history of portrayals of the Prophet Muhammad in European history and culture. This fits right in, but not in a good way. Good commentary from Thabet, Osama Saeed, Umm Yasmin, As'ad, Umm Zaid, Umar, Haroon, Saracen.nu, Indigo Jo, Yunus and Bloggerheads. Also, thank you, Bill Clinton.

Ben P again looks at the larger context in Denmark and Europe. When you read to the end, onanyes gets it. Also excellent are Jamie and Helena Cobban. Steve Gilliard comes back again with a reminder about what European colonialism did to Muslim countries and the kind of treatment Muslims in Europe have faced. Along similar lines, Vespertine reminds us that this has happened in the wake of Abu Ghuraib, and I could add Guantanamo and CIA black sites in Europe, all of which places Muslims have been tortured and religiously humiliated as a matter of American policy. Brad Spangler mentions the West's "bloodthirsty imperialism" in making war on Iraq. This didn't happen in a vacuum, folks. Other good thoughts from SulaymanF, quaoar, Andrew Bartlett, lenin, Atrios, Juan Cole, and Natasha. In a somewhat different take, Curious Hamster suggests that we not play into the hands of extremists with this.

Juan Cole fact-checks where the violent protests are actually occurring, and BBC reporter John Simpson how widespread they actually are. The British newspaper the Guardian discovers that that Danish newspaper refused to publish cartoons lampooning Jesus because they feared it would cause offense. Double standards, anyone? For those Muslims who need to see it, Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz prints columns (1, 2) criticizing the cartoons because of the long history of anti-Semitic cartoons (so let's get those out of publications in the Muslim world, mm'kay?). Muslim views by Tariq Ramadan, Aziz Poonawalla (1, 2), and Qadeeb al-Ban (1, 2). And some non-Muslim views from remove office, qrswave, Suzanne Nossel, and Sisphyus Shrugged. I am also collecting some commentary from the mainstream media here.

Given its recent actions, I suppose the Iranian government couldn't help but bring the Holocaust in. Raiyan condemns. Also see posts from Tristero, Karie B in Denmark, and Beowulf, plus more from Umm Zaid, Qadeeb al-Ban, Haroon, and Svend.

CAIR condemns the Iranian holocaust cartoon contest. Originally, the Danish newspaper at the heart of the controversy was going to publish these cartoons but later backed down. This must prove somebody's point about something. Most of the protests are peaceful but radical groups are infiltrating to cause violence. Meanwhile, European journalists are thinking again. Contributions to the debate of note are lenin, Marc Lynch who links to some Arabic-language condemnations of violence, Amir Hussain, and Rahul Mahajan.

Either the story is starting to die down now, or other things are occupying people's attention. Less commentary, but the quality of these three is very high. Muslims Anas Altikriti and Zaid Shakir, both community leaders, explain why Muslims are upset while urging non-violent response. Steve Gilliard talks about being an outsider, as Muslims are in Europe. And, saving best for last, Arthur Silber compares it to the earlier incident of Quran descration at Guantanamo, and peoples' responses to that. He then has some truly excellent commentary about propaganda and how this controversy serves the interest of war proponents. A must read.

Digby does an excellent follow up to Silber's post. Dervish reports on a conference in Qatar attended by some leading Islamic scholars in the West and what they said about the cartoons. And interesting contributions from Helena Cobban and Abdullah Al Rahim at Tabsir.

In an unfortunate development, Muslim graves vandalized in Denmark. Jeffrey Feldman has an excellent discussion of this. Elsewhere, thousands of Muslims marched peacefully in London against Islamophobia (blogger report, news report). Thoughtful contributions from scholar of Islam John L. Eposito and British Muslim Fareena Alam. Helena Cobban shares the view from France. Arthur Silber looks at the extreme reactions of right-wingers. Some pretty disturbing stuff there.

Although this issue has mostly disappeared, Lawrence of Cyberia posts an excellent discussion of hate speech.

Best response yet: Ahmad Humeid uses examples from the Prophet Muhammad's own life to illustrate how Muslims should actually respond to insults and attacks. Along similar lines is Hesham Hassaballa's What Would Muhammad Do?. CAIR has an op-ed under the same title: What Would Muhammad Do?. And the same advice is given in British imam warns against overreaction. Sincere Muslims can take heed.

Elsewhere, the Organization of Islamic Conference, an international body of Muslim countries, condemns violence. Florida Muslims condemn violence. Religious groups decry reaction to caricatures. U.S. Muslims Reject Violent Response to Cartoon Controversy. Muslims are reaching out to fellow Canadians in hopes of erasing images of cartoon violence. FROM OUR READERS: Muslim protests overreact to cartoons of Muhammad. U.S. Muslims react to furor with deft diplomacy: Muslim-Americans condemn cartoons - and violence that's come with them. LETTERS: Rejecting violence, debating free speech. CAIR Responds to Cartoon Flap with Educational Campaign. Assimilation, tolerance mark U.S. Muslims' reaction to cartoons. U.S. Muslims Try to Ease Europe's Discord. U.S. Muslims put cartoon dispute in perspective. Muslim Group Launches Education Campaign. Muslims Launch Campaign to Educate About Prophet Muhammad. Islamic education campaign demystifies faith. Sacramento Muslims join educational effort. S.C. Muslims to teach about prophet. Detroit Muslims plan drive to teach others about Islam. Cartoon furor is chance to teach. Muslims Launch Teaching Effort to Counter Furor Over Cartoons. Making the episode a 'teachable moment'. Islamic education campaign to counter cartoon criticism. Philadelphia Muslims seek to counter backlash. Muslim group sets education effort. Delaware County Muslims address controversy. Muslims to teach others about Muhammad. Event will discuss life of Muhammad. U.S. Muslim Group Launches Education Effort on Islam's Prophet. Islamic group tackles cartoon controversy. Davis Muslims react by reaching out. Islamic Group Promotes Mutual Understanding. Muslim groups launch project about the life of Muhammad. Muslims distance selves from rioting: Violence Condemned In Open Forum. Forum: Islam Is Not About Violence. A Muslim call for peace and solidarity. Islamic Center reaches out with welcome mat. Faiths unite to counter 'clash of the uncivilized'. Philly Muslims react to the Muhammad cartoon controversy. Fatwa by group of prominent Muslim scholars condeming violence and aggression. OIC denounces cartoons violence. Seattle area Muslims seek to educate others about Muhammad. Open house at Tempe mosque. CAIR Responds to Muslim Cartoon Controversy. Forum examines outrage about Muhammad cartoons. Ohio Muslims balance respect, their beliefs in cartoon debate. Mosque opens its doors to neighbors. Islamic education effort starts. Open house to provide understanding of Islam, the Prophet. Egyptian students find peaceful way to protest Muhammad cartoons. Muslim activist speaks on Muhammad's life. Bay area residents should consider Islam education events. Fremont Muslims hosting events to educate public about Islam. Cartoons spark local educational effort. Missouri center announces open house to discuss beliefs of Islam. A campaign to promote understanding. In cartoon debate, a chance to educate.