Cartoon Jihad Continues

|

The Washington bureau chief for the German newsweekly Die Zeit, Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, writes an insightful op/ed on the jihad against cartoons in todays Washington Post entitled "Tolerance Toward Intolerance." He makes the excellent point:

In this jihad over humor, tolerance is disdained by people who demand it of others. The authoritarian governments that claim to speak on behalf of Europe's supposedly oppressed Muslim minorities practice systematic repression against their own religious minorities. They have radicalized what was at first a difficult question. Now they are asking not for respect but for submission. They want non-Muslims in Europe to live by Muslim rules.

Instead of burning down buildings and threatening to kill people, write a letter to the editor and cancel your subscription. Enlightened people know that if someone demands tolerance, they must exercise tolerance themselves.

NEXT: One Cotton Picking Minute

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Enlightened people know that if someone demands tolerance, they must exercise tolerance themselves.

    I don’t think we’re dealing with enlightened people here. Rather, we’re dealing with people who wish the Enlightenment had never happened.

    Yours truly,
    Mr. X

    …tricky…

  2. Those of us who Germany has taken away passports to attend a Teheran research session of the law edicted by Reinhard Heidrich at the Wannsee conference know
    of what they speak if they never use or mention Hebrew forged terms(two examples:[ 1.] the Walther & Herbert Bush clan attending a church or chapell always at the eve of a decapitation strike or else a bridge bombardement in Baghdad; [2.]Catholic Cross in the air Imitations: a smile to all those of us who don’t hail the Hebrew language of a Pope & Priest decoy as the shadow CINC Kerry did on all tv screens during the burrial(“pompes funebres”) of Roni Reagan in Washington and Arlington.
    I welcome instead the “international festival of cartoons” of “Farid Mortazavi, graphics editor of Hamshahiri”(compare please: Anthony Browne, The Times, February 07 2006 ,”Cartoons””World leaders rally round as crisis deepens”) which will in a nice try _d_r_a_w_ us the proof that the Western World [_ _— actually —_ _] _i_s__or__i_s__n_o_t_ so free as they pretend. Till today the Western world reacted with interdictions to the Reasons and Causes about the Wannsee Conference Decisions even when it is in form of a funny _Not-Hebrew_ cartoons festival in Teheran(Iran).

  3. “Instead of burning down buildings and threatening to kill people, write a letter to the editor and cancel your subscription.”

    Or just keeping posting comments to the magazine’s blog threatening to cancel your subscription, see, e.g., Mona.

  4. Or go to the magazine’s blog to post comments suggesting that the cartoonist owns stock in…um, companies that rebuild embassies? I dunno.

  5. I think there’s a lot of conflation of issues in the quoted passage. I think the essence of the issue is what is essentially the libertarian way of looking at it: violence is not a proper response to a cartoon no matter how offensive you find it. Sure, I also wish those folks didn’t take offense so easily and recognized the need for (and value of) mutual tolerance within liberal societies, blah blah blah, but I respect their right view things differently. I don’t respect their right to resort to violence.

  6. Oh the cartoon wars.
    I think Minnie mouse is fucking Goofy.
    Kill him Mickey!

  7. Gao,

    HUH?

  8. Methinks gao needs to adjust his tinfoil hat. Some of the NSA’s mind-control rays are seeping through.

  9. linguist, mediageek,

    Transalation follows –

    1. Gao’s had issues with immigration when he was in Germany for some conference & he ain’t happy. I’ve read that immigration authorities in Europe, who can be extremely rude & creepy, sometimes confiscate passports to prevent overstays etc.
    2. There’s been news lately of some sort of “Holocaust Myth” International Scholarship Conference in Teheran. I suspect he’s saying that any western opprobium against the Conference would be hypocrisy.

    I have no idea what all the Catholic clans and jewish crosses talk means but I being a fan of the Illuminatus trilogy I always dig posts of this nature.

  10. And the winner for the least use of punctuation while forming two “sentences” is….gao.

    seriously wtf

  11. I suspect he’s saying that any western opprobium against the Conference would be hypocrisy.

    Somebody else who doesn’t grasp the distinction between violence and threats of violence, on the one-hand, and non-violent “opprobrium”.

    This whole cartoon thing has really brought the idiots out of the woodwork.

  12. I suspect that English gao’s first languange is not. Did anyone else get that impression or did you just think he was a retard?

  13. I would suspect you are right about the non-native English (though, that said, my guess is gao IS fluent). But I never like to say that unless it’s obvious; people can get easily offended. Wouldn’t want THAT to happen, in today’s climate!

  14. Well, well, well – I put on the old Inverness & deerstalker and googled “wannsee conference”, “Reinhard Heidrich”.

    http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/biographies/Reinhard Heidrich
    http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/wannsee.htm

    I believe my investigations have brought us closer to understanding what “Hebrew language of a Pope” means.

  15. Mickey is talking to his shrink.
    The shrink says, “I’m sorry Mickey, I’ve talked to Minnie for hours, and you’re wrong; she’s not crazy.”
    Mickey replies, “I know that! I didn’t say she was crazy, I said she was fucking Goofy!”

  16. I believe it’s spelled Heydrich.

  17. What a pathetic, miserable people they must be to feel that their way of life is threatened by a cartoon.

    They deserve their fate.

  18. Reference the State of the Union, it would be really nice if Bush had something up his sleeve.

    Imagine if we could say, “One more explosion and we quit buying your oil.”

  19. Is it me, or are we getting more bizarre commenters around here lately? That’s a high bar, I know, but we have some overachievers. amazingdrx comes to mind, for instance.

  20. No one checked this?

    http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/2/5/13149/60748

    The saudis are behind the intoonfadah, they did 4 stories per day on it after the hajj tramplings, to deflect blame.

    As they have deflected protest from within over their oily kleptocratic dictatorship for decades by funding the jihad against Israel, fatwah spewing mullahs, and hate mongering maddrassahs.

    It helps all their friends, queada, Bushco, big oil (by raising prices), gives the rationale for the Iraq war and bombing Iran a big boost.

    And bolsters the talking point attack by the neocons(and the neoconned) “we protect you from terror the dems protect your constitutional rights”.

    It’s election season folks, that means fear is back! Fear of the angry hordes!

  21. PL, I blame AOL.

  22. Wow, like on cue. Eerie.

  23. “The saudis are behind the intoonfadah, they did 4 stories per day on it after the hajj tramplings, to deflect blame.”

    Hi. Welcome to six hours ago.

  24. mediageek, I agree completely, though I most shamefully must confess that I still have an AOL account. Not that it’s my primary e-mail system or anything, but I’ve held onto it for some strange, likely actionable, reason. Soon, though, I shall purge my home of its evil. Although, now that I think about it, my main account is with, egad, Road Runner. Aiiiiiiiiieeeeeeee!

  25. “The saudis are behind the intoonfadah, they did 4 stories per day on it after the hajj tramplings, to deflect blame.”

    Hi. Welcome to twelve hours ago.

  26. Somebody else who doesn’t grasp the distinction between violence and threats of violence, on the one-hand, and non-violent “opprobrium”.

    I wanna make sure I get this distinction. I have to admit, I sometimes do get a little confused about what people are saying.

    In this case, “violence” is when we bomb, invade and occupy a Muslim nation, for instance, and then attempt to remake its culture in our image.

    And “threats of violence”, well, that must be when Muslims burn down some embassy or demand executions for blasphemy and such.

    And “non-violent opprobrium” is when we look at burning embassies and execution demands and shake our heads.

    …Am I right? How’d I do?

  27. You did weirdly. You did tendentiously.

  28. Uhh yeah geek but all you duuuhbyatarians ignored it. So much more fun to engage in more mindless muslim bashing than understand the underlying cause.

    And of course aid the administration big lie tactics while pretending the purity of real libertarians?

    And you all get to pretend you are taking the free speech, civil libertarian stand while doing it. The neoconned playing “let’s pretend” you believe in the US constitution.

  29. The cartoons are just an excuse. Nothing more, Denmark was “at the wrong place and the wrong time” (historically speaking).

    The muslim clerics have been fighting a war against becming irrelevant for some time now. (the Christian clergy had this fight too, we know it as the enlightment)

    They are rallying the troops that’s all. And sending a not so subtle response to the west that things could get a lot uglier.

    If US was doing well in either Iraq or Afghanistan none of this would be happening. The Islamic clerics would be proven wrong. But strangely enough, we’ve given them enough ammunition (how do you say abu gharib?) for them to selectivly pick and choose the images of America; even Americans would find distasteful (Jerry Springer Show anyone?)

    you see to an average Arab the concept of Freedom of Press is as familiar as Einstein’s Special Relativity is to a Wyoming peanut farmer. So to them, if it comes from the West, it’s coming from the western government. To the average arab, the government controls everything, what else would a government do??

    But the more important question is why have the Muslim clerics across the board chose this particular incident to make a cause?

    I have a bad feeling about this…

  30. Thanks Dr. X, for helping me understand the “underlying cause.”

    The underlying cause of protests against cartoons being (scrolling up to earlier wisdom)… that they’re staged by bad-acting governments in the Middle East to aid “queada”, help elect more Republicans in the U.S., boost the price of oil, help justify a war in Iraq, and pave the way for a future war in Iran. Got it.

  31. “Uhh yeah geek but all you duuuhbyatarians ignored it. “

    Classic projection.

  32. You did tendentiously.

    You may have a point there, Larry.

    I suspect in this case, bombing, invading and occupying a Muslim nation, and then attempting to remake its culture in our image is the “threat of violence”. Because the impliciation is–aw hell, there’s nothing implicit about it–the express intent is to remake Muslim culture into something more suitable to us. …and if you’re in a Muslim nation, it’s comin’ to a town near you! …right?

    I’m sure both RC Dean and you can see how easy it is to confuse “bombing, invading and occupying” with violence, especially if you happen to be a denizen of the Muslim world. I can see now that by “violence” RC Dean must have meant the burning of embassies, etc. …but I wonder, do you think those two things, “violence” and “threats of violence” are somehow related?

    Did I do better this time?

  33. Meat hea..er..BP (british petroleum?) just read the Koss piece, the saudis placed 4 stories per day in their state controlled press on the cartooning in question… months after they were published. Right after the hajj trampling, which the queada friendly press and others were blaming on them.

    The saudi “royals” keep a shaky hold on their stolen oil by deception, they keep the potential revolutionaries of the middle east from instituting an overthrow with hate mongering against the “jews”, which they define as any handy target.

    This time the “jews” were the cartoonists and their publishers.

  34. Over and out, carry on. Oh yee of bushie faith. Off to the ski trail!

  35. Kos only has one “s”.

    PL: Yeah, I miss when Hak and gaius were the craziest.

  36. You know, I used to love George W. Bush. I thought that he, like Jesus, could do no wrong. But now that I’ve been called a duuuuuuuuhbyatarian, suddenly I view the whole world through a different lens!

    Or maybe what made me change my mind was seeing the President’s name spelled “Bushitler.” Either way, presumably clever name misspellings are much more effective than reasoned debate to get people to change their political viewpoints. God knows I’m proof of that.

  37. Nice try, Kenny, but I was contrasting the reaction to the cartoons (violent) and the reaction to the anti-Semitic conference (non-violent).

    Bringing up a war being fought in a country not involved in either the cartoons or the anti-Semitic conference is kind of a non-sequitur, no? I’m trying to decide if your non sequitur means you are just stupid, or trying to muddy up the waters as an act of bad faith. Can you help me out with that?

  38. Thanks for clearin’ that up, RC.

    Could you refer me to somebody else who doesn’t grasp the distinction between violence, threats of violence and opprobrium?

  39. I have 2 questions.

    “At least one of them [cartoons] seems to equate Islam with radical Islamism. That is exactly the direction nobody wants the debate about fundamentalism to take ”

    Question number 1 is how do we distinguish between Islam and radical Islamism? Is there a Muslim version of Mein Kamf floating around out there? Are the radical Islamists using a different religious text? As I noted in a different thread, a Muslim cleric is being defended in a prosecution for preaching murder of infidels by claiming the cleric was simply preaching from the Quran.

    “Instead of burning down buildings and threatening to kill people, write a letter to the editor and cancel your subscription. Enlightened people know that if someone demands tolerance, they must exercise tolerance themselves. ”

    I am going to go way out on a limb here and predict that they — the few hundred thousand people protesting the cartoons by burning down buildings and such — are going to ignore your advice.

    Question #2 is: What do you suggest then?

  40. “Instead of burning down buildings and threatening to kill people, write a letter to the editor and cancel your subscription.”

    Yeah, like that’s gonna happen. The same people who would “reason” with the rioters apparently also think we can ask Al Qaeda nicely not to attack us again, without ever resorting to nasty surveillance.

  41. Over and out, carry on. Oh yee of bushie faith. Off to the ski trail!

    Heehee! Did anyone else picture a little cartoon rabbit signing off his computer, donning a knitted hat, and hopping out into the snow?

  42. It is interesting to note that most protests in “tolerant” nations (ie: Western Europe) have been peaceful while the most violent outcomes occurred in totalitarian states like Syria and Iran, as well as failed nations such as Somalia and Afghanistan.

    Interesting twist to multiculturalism: the outcry was partly the result of Danish Imams who, unsatisfied with the response from the newspaper, publicized the issue when touring the region. Coming on the heels of the outbreak of violence in France, you have to wonder how this incident is going to affect the fortunes of the anti-immigration right in Europe.

  43. I note that the first time these cartoons was through a Mr. Fleming Rose at the Danish paper, and Mr. Rose is an old pal of Daniel Pipes. Yeah, THAT Daniel Pipes.

    So we have Mr. Rose, an newly avowed champion of free speech when it comes to infuriating Muslims, being close pals with the boss of Campus Watch? an organization formed to shut up Israel’s critics at US Universities.
    That fact is, neither Pipes nor Rose cares a fig about free speech. What they care about is first, marginalizing Muslims, then demonizing them.
    I revere the 1st amendment but I don’t appreciate being played for a sucker.

  44. Don’t shoot me for ducking my head in between you, Ken and R.C., but

    Ken: isn’t arson (burning down an embassy) an act of violence?

  45. Cartoon Protests Rage in Muslim World

    Nope, you just can’t make this stuff up.
    Wascally Muswims.

  46. for what it’s worth:

    Iran now says the publication of the cartoons was a Zionist plot.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5393720-119665,00.html

    Also, the Mohammed = Holocaust as sacred cows analogy doesn’t hold.

    There is a much closer analogy that everyone is forgetting: idolatry (representations of God) is forbidden in Judaism too. You’re not even supposed to write his name, for G-d’s sake. Yet I don’t remember reading anywhere about Jewish mobs threatening death to non-believers who dare depict the Jewish god or prophets.

  47. Jehovah!

  48. I’m not exactly one of Dubya’s biggest fans, but every time I read a post by amazingdrx I wish I could vote for the bastard again.

  49. Ken: isn’t arson (burning down an embassy) an act of violence?

    I thought it might be, but I’m so “stupid”! I try not to muddy up any waters, but I just can’t seem to figure out what’s violence, what’s the threat of violence and what’s opprobrium! …Apparently, there are a lot of people like me. I was hoping RC Dean could point them out–maybe I could ask ’em if there’s some kinda support group for people like us.

  50. Well Ken, let’s work this out. Violence, Threat, or Opprobrium? Here’s my take.

    Developments Tuesday in the controversy over drawings of the Prophet Muhammad:
    http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/3642093.html

    V_ NATO peacekeepers exchange fire with protesters who attacked their base in a second straight day of deadly demonstrations in Afghanistan over publication of caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad. Three demonstrators are killed and dozens wounded.

    O_ An Iranian newspaper announces a contest for cartoons satirizing the Holocaust in response to the caricatures of Islam’s prophet. The country’s commerce minister announces Iran is cutting all trade ties with Denmark, where the drawings were first published.

    ?_ Police fire tear gas to disperse hundreds of Muslim protesters in Srinagar, India, wounding at least six demonstrators and two policemen.

    O_ Chanting and burning effigies, about 5,000 people gather in Peshawar, Pakistan, to protest the caricatures.

    T_ Masked Palestinian gunmen riddle a picture of the Danish prime minister with bullets and set fire to a mock Danish flag in the Gaza Strip town of Rafah.

    O_ Thousands of Egyptians demonstrate peacefully in Cairo, demanding a boycott of Danish products and the expulsion of the Danish ambassador.

    V_ About 50 protesters in Tehran hurled firebombs at the Norwegian Embassy; a small fire outside the embassy was quickly contained.

    O_ Lawmakers in northern Nigeria burn Danish and Norwegian flags and bar Danish companies from bidding on a major construction project.

    O_ Hundreds of Muslims burn a Danish flag in the Philippines in protest and urge a boycott of Denmark’s products.

    ?_ An aid group that provides food to tens of thousands of people in Chechnya suspends operations after officials ban all Danish organizations.

    O_ China’s government criticizes Western newspapers for publishing the drawings and appeals for calm.

    N/A_ Japan expresses concern about mounting violence linked to the drawings and urges protesters not to further inflame tensions.

  51. I thought only graven images of things in the heavens was considered idolatry (Moses was given a special exception one time to depict keruvim (cherubs), right?) while a statue of Jeezzus or The Vurjun Murray is not.

  52. It looks like a vicious cycle of violence, on our enemies part, and opprobrium on the part of fine, upstanding, western civilization, doesn’t it?

    I think I passed your test, that is, or, at least, I think you’d give me a “C”. …I’d just add that the “threat of violence” thing–you didn’t seem to address that bit, linguist. …and I think it’s a really important part.

    Our President is openly engaged in a policy that attempts to alter the culture of the Muslim world. In so doing, he has bombed, invaded and occupied a Muslim country. The President’s plan would have blasphemy tolerated in Muslim culture, and I think ignoring this is to ignore what’s really going on. I think the people who are perpetrating the violence you’ve mentioned, I think they think they’re retaliating in kind. …Surely, they can point to our acts of violence.

    Some people can’t tell the difference between our acts of violence and… …Some people don’t seem to consider it violence when we do it.

  53. “Our President is openly engaged in a policy that attempts to alter the culture of the Muslim world.”

    Well, yes that’s not an unreasonable way of putting it. The US went to war with Afghanistan and Iraq for the express purpose of changing the political culture of those countries to something that might be more comfortable to Western civilization. If you don’t believe that the Muslim culture is in desperate need of significant alteration, that is your problem.

    While we’re at it, how do you excuse both World Trade Center attacks, the embassy bombings, etc. etc which occurred before GW ordered the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq

  54. Well, yes that’s not an unreasonable way of putting it. The US went to war with Afghanistan and Iraq for the express purpose of changing the political culture of those countries to something that might be more comfortable to Western civilization. If you don’t believe that the Muslim culture is in desperate need of significant alteration, that is your problem.

    Exactly! …but it isn’t just my problem, it’s our problem. Does the term “imperialism” mean anything to you? Ever read anything about the British going into the Sudan to help with the slavery problem? …British colonial history of the 19th and 20th centuries? …Oh, the white man’s burden!

    Those adventures, in the past, they’ve ended rather badly, don’t you think? …and if it hasn’t sunk in yet, the people of the Muslim world don’t seem to want American style cultural reform. …not that would have them tolerate blasphemy in print, anyway.

    …and if I don’t want to take on the cultural reform of the entire Muslim world, then that’s just my problem, huh? How rich! Wow, a real live jingoist! …Right here in the 21st century–who’d a thunk it? Buddy, you’ve got a big mountain of historical failures to climb up and over.

    While we’re at it, how do you excuse both World Trade Center attacks, the embassy bombings, etc. etc which occurred before GW ordered the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq

    Who excused the invasion of Afghanistan? Afghanistan was a war of self-defense. …Very few people in the Muslim world faulted us for the invasion of Afghanistan. Excuse embassy attacks? Who excused anything?

    The invasion of Iraq? …Well that’s another story, isn’t it? …didn’t have much to do with self-defense, did it?

  55. “Who excused anything?”

    It seems to me you are providing all sorts of excuses for the Muslim reaction to these cartoons. That they are justified because we invaded Iraq. Whether you agree with why or not, what th US is doing in Iraq is in response to the acts of war against our country and allies before GW Bush decided to topple Saddam’s regime. My question was, do you think the Islamists were justified in the attacks carried out prior to 2002 as you seem to think they are justified in what they are doing today?

    “…and if I don’t want to take on the cultural reform of the entire Muslim world, then that’s just my problem, huh?”

    My point was that you don’t seem to think that there is much wrong with Muslim culture. On the other hand, with these protests, it is clear that Muslims think there is something wrong with Western culture, and they mean to reform it, in their image by violence, threats and intimidation. Western culture may not be perfect, but it is better and certainly not as pathological as what we are witnessing out of the Muslim world. So, you just go on whistling past the graveyard. I think doing something proactive is less dangerous than being passive.

    “Does the term “imperialism” mean anything to you?”

    Yes it does. It means that when I’m reading someone who uses it in this context, then I am seeing the words of a fool, or worse.

  56. It seems to me you are providing all sorts of excuses for the Muslim reaction to these cartoons.

    Bullshit!

    If you can’t tell the difference between, for instance, looking at Palestinian grievences and making excuses for terrorist violence, then you should have your head examined.

    My question was, do you think the Islamists were justified in the attacks carried out prior to 2002 as you seem to think they are justified in what they are doing today?

    Who said anyone was justified in what they’re doing today? Does the term “straw man” mean anything to you?

    My point was that you don’t seem to think that there is much wrong with Muslim culture.

    I have plenty of problems with the culture of the Muslim world–they have plenty of problems with American culture also. My point is that we have no more right to invade and occupy the Muslim world to change their culture than they have a reight to invade and occupy the United States in order to change our own. …My other point is that imperialism is about as likely to be succesful as central planning–for many of the same reasons.

    On the other hand, with these protests, it is clear that Muslims think there is something wrong with Western culture, and they mean to reform it, in their image by violence, threats and intimidation.

    …which is exactly what we’re doing to them.

    Western culture may not be perfect, but it is better and certainly not as pathological as what we are witnessing out of the Muslim world.

    You opinion of the culture of the Muslim world is completely beside the point.

    I think the people of Swaziland would be better off if everyone ate more vegtables, didn’t have sex before marriage and worshiped a magic rock. …Should we start the invasion now?

    Yes it does. It means that when I’m reading someone who uses it in this context, then I am seeing the words of a fool, or worse.

    If using the military to enforce cultural changes isn’t imperialism, then what is?

  57. “Very few people in the Muslim world faulted us for the invasion of Afghanistan. Excuse embassy attacks? Who excused anything?” – Ken Schultz

    Once again, KS talks through his hat.

    Evidence, please– Like one spokesman for a foreign group of Muslims who supported the invasion of Afghanistan?

    Because I know of several counter-examples to this.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.