Those blasted cartoons

HSBC recently had an TV advert boasting their "world's local bank" credentials by showing things which seemed innocuous in the West but would cause great offence in different parts of the world. Putting your feet on the table is ok here, displaying the soles of your feet in the Far East, not so.

And so we come to the cartoons from Denmark which have now spread across Europe. The West really need to understand the love there is for the Prophet, peace be upon him, amongst Muslims. It's an established principle that if you want to make comedy about a group - Asians, gays, Christians - then you get members of that group to rip themselves e.g. Goodness Gracious Me. No longer do you get people from outside poking fun.

Much has been made of the right to ridicule and cause offence, even if I disagree there is such a right. I don't remember it being in any UN charter or the Geneva Convention, but do know of many of these principles being violated in the world without much protest from these newfound upholders of rights in the West. The right to offend doesn't work on the playground and it shouldn't work on the international arena either. Even if there is a right to offend, surely there is also a right to be offended? And to complain and even boycott as a result.

But the cartoons have nothing to do with ridiculing. You just don't do pictures of the Prophet, period. It's a cultural thing, accept it and respect it. And you certainly don't do them with an ugly face and a bomb in his turban. I heard someone on the radio comparing it to having pictures of Jesus throwing Jews into gas ovens. Much work has been done to separate Islam and terrorism, and these pictures take the debate backwards.

It is this that has caused offence and I was interested in the parallel the New York President of the World Jewish Congress, Edgar Bronfman, drew with this and caricatures of Jews over the centuries in the Times:

"Over the past 2,000 years and until the creation of the state of Israel, Jews have always been a small minority in every country they have settled in. Our ancestors have suffered from pogroms, anti-Semitism and, finally, the Holocaust.

"Lies about Jews, the Jewish faith and traditions have never disappeared. In fact, they are staging a comeback, especially in Western democracies which we thought had become immune to anti-Semitism after the horrors of the Holocaust.

"Nonetheless, Jewish intellectuals and politicians have always been at the forefront of the fight for human rights, democracy and free speech. But there are limits to the latter that should be respected, and publishing materials considered offensive by a small religious minority is going too far."

Bill Clinton has also linked the cartoons to anti-Semitism.

At the same time though, I would advise many in the Muslim world to calm down. Some even seem to have jumped onto the death threats bandwagon. Just as the West needs to get to grips with the psychology of the Muslim world, the Muslim world also needs to understand the mores in the West. Taking entire nations to task over the actions of one newspaper is idiotic, and withdrawing your ambassadors in protest, as Saudi Arabia did from Denmark, says everything you need to know about the state of play in their rancid dictatorships.

Too often we're now seeing people completely misunderstanding what each other are saying. I'm coming to a conclusion that leaders in the Muslim world should simply stop commenting on European and US issues, and leave that to the large Muslim communities that reside here.

For more comment see Umar Lee, Svend White, Izzy Mo, UZ, all of which I got from Indigo Jo. Also Bloggerheads and Chick Yog.

Comments

[Luis Enrique]

What is the psychology of the Muslim world that the west needs to 'get a grip on'? That the Muslim world flips its lid because of some rubbish cartoons of the Prophet? So much the worse for Islam, if so. I think the Prophet can probably take it in his stride. Why can't his followers? Doesn't say much for their 'psychology'. One of the major criticism levied against Islam is that it has a culture of intolerance, and is imcompatible with free society, because freedom includes being free to do things that are "against" Islam.

[3abboud of rak]

I agree with luis enrique, completely, about the ruckus cause by some 'rubbish cartoons'.

Intolerance is a big problem in these parts. I used to be intolerant myself.

[UZ]

Yes, much is made about the supposed intolerance of Islam, yet we Westerners are chronically unable to look in the mirror ourselves. Anti-Islamic cartoons in general, including some of these, play upon intolerance. See the swarthy skin. See the big hook nose. See the wild eyes. See the foreign clothing. See them in the context of a Europe which is becoming increasingly and fanatically anti-Muslim. See the turban or 'igal in those cartoons replaced with a kippay, and see how many people stop yapping about the right to ridicule.

[UZ]

@@ (rolling eyes)

Kippah. Can I blame my typo on the baby in my lap kicking my arms?

[mike from canmore]

who the hell is this mohamd dude everyone is getting bent about?

[H Mahmood]

Islam is intolerant, but of the right things. It is intolerant of murder, oppression, injustice, it is intolerant of harming others, the environment, animals, it is intolerant of all that is wrong. That's what any civilised society is built upon: principles.

The West's so called tolerance extends so far as to be nearly indifferent towards the sanctity of human life which is why there have been more bloodshed in the world since the ascendency of secularism.

Tolerance inludes tolerance of muslim sensitivities.

Just because one has a right to do something doesn't mean one has to exercise that right. For example you have the right to go to work with just your boxer shorts on. But if you did you'd be sacked and deservedly so for being damn right stupid. In the same way it's obvious to everyone that those editors that printed the caricatures have been damn right stupid so should go.

Freedom is not absolute, even in the west. Free speech is never totally unqualified even in the west. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of defamation, of slander, of insult.

Having said that I agree with Osama that Muslims abroad have over-reacted and should pursue their objectives in a clam manner.

But it's difficult not to over react on such sensitive issues when you've been colonised for centuries, when your governments have been propped up as dictatorships by the very same people (in the eyes of the oppressed) who slander your Prophet(s), and when your countries and people have been bombed, raped and devastated by them.

[ainelivia]

I thought that secularism in Europe, (I cannot and will not attempt to speak for anything American) was an attempt to bring to an end the religous wars that we had for hundreds of years. It may not be ideal, but it is about equality before the law.

I am not sure where Free Speech ends and attention to anothers sensitivity begins, however, I suppose I can take it that those people demonstrating in London, carrying the posters with violent threats and intimidatory warnings to "the West", (west of what?) have exercised their right to free speech? I'd imagine they have also just provided recruits for the BNP. And I'd also imagine that is what any of these groups seek to do, inflame and incite. Be they "western" or Muslim, I am beginning not to see the difference between either, they are bullies and facists. And I include the BNP in that.

[Andrew Dean]

Muhamad peace be upon him would understand the bomb cartoon. It is right to pose the question: Is this Islam?- a comment on the awful indiscriminate violence in the name of religion. Fatwas involving death threats are an obscenity. Allah and his Prophet know this. Muslims who demand death to cartoonists are not Muslims. They should get over themselves and join the 21st Century.

[Michael C Feltham]

I am confused at an attitude which slates Stephen Green for his actions over the Spinger "show" and BBC broadcast,plus his personal views and perspective on Islam, yet seeks to preserve Islam, as a religion which ought to be inviolate of any act liable to concern Muslims.

I believe that it is high time that Muslims in Europe, recognised the perspective of many, such as myself.

As an Anglican Christian, I am highly tolerant off and compassionate and show deep respect for other faiths.

Simultaneously, I am increasingly concerned at how various groups have managed and manage to receive above-average treament for their real and/or imagined wrongs.

Additionally, I am concerned by various so-called fundamentalist followers of Islam, being involved with, influenced by and party to terrorist action and by default, various splinter political groups, who abuse the faith of Islam (even re-writing Islamic law, to their own expedient definition), in order to influence the young and/or justify their own heinous deeds.

Anyone who highjacks any faith, for their own ends and uses it, thereafter, to militantly act against the common good, must be viwed, correctly with grave suspicion.

Those Muslims who reside in this country (UK) are as subject to its laws on public disorder as all else. Sadly, the authorities discriminated against the majority, in terms of the recent demonstration: whilst an elderly protester at the Labour Party conference, was physically assaulted and arrested under Anti-Terrorism law.

Why should I suffer reverse discrimination, because I am a white, Anglo-Saxon Christian, who had the misfortune to be born in the UK? As were my parents, grand-parents, Great-grandparents etc, back for hundreds of years?

Unless Islam in the UK addresses its public face and treats with other faiths, creeds and anglo-saxon groups, then Nick Griffin and the BNP will all too sadly, enjoy a huge swing of frightened, dissafected and militant white anglo-saxons joining his fascist organisation in self-protection.

Finally, I would take a firm personal stand, on behalf of any righteous man or woman's personal freedom and faith, where such faith does not directly and/or indirectly conflict with an established society and its laws and people.

[Osama]

Michael, you're really going to have to put a bit of flesh on your sweeping statements here. What is this preferential treatment Muslims get? What is it that all of Britain's Muslims don't understand? What vibes are they all, not just 20 placard wavers, giving out to deserve the dogs of the BNP?

You seem to betray a complete lack of insight into what is going on when the only person you think has been affected by anti-terror legislation is an elderly protester at the Labour Party conference. Wake up.

[Michael C Feltham]

Osama.

Wide awake, thank you!

Well try this for size.

What about the lack of police prosecutions, after the banner waving and violent demonstration, in London, after the cartoon thingy?

Shame the authorities didnt take the same tolerant attitude, during the fuel protest, for example.

I did hope that my comments about myself and my personal attitude to respect of other's faiths and beliefs, would percolate through.

A growing number of male WASPS in the UK, are feeling very disaffected by continual organisational tolerance to ethnic groups. That's fact, whether you want to accept it or not. As I stated, the natural reaction to this, is a swing to right wing politics, as has happened and is happening in France with Jean Marie Le Pen and his party, Fact again.

Trouble is, I remember Mark Bonham-Carter and his Race Relations Act, the typical Ivory Tower dwelling sort of legislative cock up of a Liberal: and its result.

All I was suggesting, is that there exists a growing and urgent need, for all non-Christian religious and ethnic groups, to try and work with other members of this society a bit, rather than government and police.

Sadly, it is a fact, that for example, racial discrimination has created a new tactic used in the industrial court as has sex discrimination, thereby allowing certain people to "Play the "race card" and achieve above-average or differential treatment to others. Awards for unfair dismissal or wrongful dismisal are derisory, as is statutory redundancy, which are also both value-capped. Awards for both racial (and this can and does include religious discrimination) and sexual discrimination are not capped: and awards can run into hundreds of thousands of pounds. Study case law, dear old chap.

I do not, for a moment, think that "The only person who has been affected etc": I merely use this case as an illustrative example.

I could bore for Britain on my views of this government and its incompetent abuse of law such as the anti-social behaviour legislation being used as a universal panacea, by local authorities, for example.

However, back to my core focus: if you can't, or won't accept the honest condensed perspective, then sadly, in the not too distant future, I do very much fear that the inevitable backlash of shall we say, traditional Britons, who tend to be slow to anger, yet burn with a long and fierce-growing fuse, will eventually explode and correctly or not, associate any militant action, with their inate fear of terorist threats (and happenings) and the old dynamic of guilt by association will swing into gear.

If it walks and quacks like a duck: ergo it must be a duck. If that is erroneous syllogism, the mob don't stop to think, I'm afraid. Called guilt by association.

Additionally, there is a vast yet unspoken feeling of "When in Rome, do as the Romans do". That's growing, too.

It is up to you, to counter those feelings and hidden perspectives: not me. It cannot be achieved by law: to believe that is to believe in Santa.

Militant actions and protest, don't hack it!

Effective PR et al, is the probable solution.

Finally, please remember (these days, it is all too often forgot!), that central to English law, is the reality that the Church of England and Canonical law, are part and parcel of the unwritten British Constituion.

And HM the Queen, is the head of parliament and the Church of England. Fact. That's why the bishops automatically can sit in the Lords and form part of the law making process.

And with great respect, it's you who have to wake up, not me!

[Osama]

Michael, where I can perhaps agree is that there is a perception of inequality, of WASPS feeling under persecution.

That doesn't mean it is there. I certainly don't agree. If you're a minority, you're more likely to live in poverty, be unemployed, have lower qualifications etc. These are the real issues. Would people in this country rather be in the WASP situation or that of another minority? Let's be honest.

The key for Muslims in particular in regards to this perception we're speaking of is winning hearts and minds. Laws will not do this. They're useful but will not win people over. To paraphrase Martin Luther King, laws do not win hearts but they do restrain the heartless.

My fundamental problem with your analysis Michael is that there are a lot of grassroots initiatives taking place in building bridges away from the media and parliamentary bubble of speaking in terms of legislation and the such. Unfortunately they do not make headlines, and thus further feeds the problematic perception we're speaking about.

In that regard it also doesn't make it the Muslim community's fault that the perception exists.

PS Writing from Scotland as I am, I couldn't give two hoots who the head of the Church of England is! ;)

[Michael C Feltham]

Osama

It seems we are in truth, coming from the same orientation on this!

Important to remember that perception is a dangerous thing: most myths (including racial bigotry) emerge from illogical and/or erroneous supposition.

I do agree about hearts and minds and that was what I was suggesting: the PR thing.

People can be possesed of a WASP mindset, even though relatively poor in comparison. A result of hundreds of years of establishment brainwashing.

Very little truth makes headlines, sadly and this reality has been turbocharged by the present preoccupation of the media on (e.g.) celebdom and all its oderous manifestations.

The prelate of the Church of Scotland holds a smiliar position to his opposite number in England: and English law is paramount over Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish law!

Fault doesn't matter: actions, reactions and mass opinion do.

So, in conclusion, we agree that changing people's mindset (which is a lengthy process) is the key to countering the adverse publicity generated by the lunatic fringe (every race has them!) and the excessively militant actions of the narrow few.

Finally, I do, in fact, commend your site for promoting a restrained and responsible attitude.