"This view is wrong because there are laws in all Western countries against Blasphemy and Racism.'

I am unaware of any laws against blasphemy in any Western country. Some nations have laws against 'hate speech', but there is nothing racially hateful about associating Islam with bombs. Muslims do it all the time when they murder innocent people.

OWH was referring to speech that had tangible harm, like, as you said, shouting fire in a crowded theater. The fires now are being set by Muslims, by people who never read European newspapers, and in nations far away from them. In essense, all they are doing is proving the characterization correct. As for frustration, we in the West are very frustrated about Muslims who would riot in the streets because of a political cartoon, but who sit silently when innocent people are murdered.

Shall we start setting fire to Al Jazeera's property every time they allow a pundit who makes disparaging comments about 'Zionists' or applauds terrorist attacks? Shall we start shutting down mosques in Western nations when their leaders preach hate? Shall we close maddrassas that tell Muslim children that people who kill innocents earn paradise?

Islam should tread carefully when demanding an end to 'hate speech'. Parts of the Koran itself would be considered such by some. The same could be said for the Christian Bible. (Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live, and all that) This is akin to Christians that I know who demand religious instruction in schools. They would think of it differently if their children the next year had a Hindu or Muslim teacher.

It is easy for Islam to demand an end to any bias against them, but are they willing to give up centuries old biases? It is easy to demand repressive laws mandating religious adherance from people of other religions, but those who do rarely tolerate having such imposed on them. If we are expected to show reverence for the Islamic faith, can Jews expect the same reverence from the people rioting in Lebenon?

As for frustration, we in the West are very frustrated about Muslims who would riot in the streets because of a political cartoon, but who sit silently when innocent people are murdered.

The point of view that you wxpress is mainstream European or even American. All that I am saying is that Islam like any other world religion has its share of troublemakers and we should not tar the entire civilasation as being intolerant and bigotted. There is also the fact that the West is politicvally and militarily at an advantage today and this makes Moslems extremely defensive.

"The point of view that you wxpress is mainstream European or even American."

It is a valid point of view, though. Would you consider Al Jazeerah to be mainstream Arab media? Have you heard some of the things stated there about Israel? Are these really troublemakers, or is it the prevalent attitude in much of the Middle East? Are the Madrassahs in the Middle East showing concern for other ideals when they preach hate and turn out terrorists?

"Hate Speech" is a double edged sword. I have grown up seeing crowds chanting "Death to America" and burning our flag. I have heard the hateful rhetoric come from *mainstream* Arab media concerning Israel. You'll forgive me if I am dubious about Muslim respect for other peoples and religions. These cartoons are the opinions of some people, no different than the opinions seen in Muslim culture. Everyone should have the right to express them freely.

A question. When Muslims riot and destroy the European embassies in Lebenon, are they addressing the 'troublemaker' newspapers in Europe, or are they lumping the nations into it as a whole? When they chant "Death to..." do they mean all Israelis, or Americans, or whoever, or just the troublemakers?

What does "Infidel" mean when I hear it said it is good to kill them? Surely they don't mean people of other faiths?

How much mainstream Islamic dissent would be silenced if the standards they now promote were applied to themselves? Let them chant. I won't burn their embassies. On the other hand they should respect the same freedom of dissent when those who oppose them do the same.

Muslim campaign slogans in London...

"Kil the Kafir"

"Europe your 9/11 on it's way"

"7/7 the glorious four"

Vote Muslim!

Good points by respionders. I am against disrespecting anyone's religiion, race, etc. based solely on those things. On the other hand, a group can not preach disrespect for other religions and at the same time demand respect for their own. This is the stuff that oppression and tyranny are made of. Coincidentally, some of the most trannical and oppresive governments are in countries that are guided by those same standards of preaching intolerance for others while demanding tolerance for themselves.

On a side note, could the original poster post the exact quote (not interpretation of a quote) from the Quran that says something like those cartoons is wrong and is punishable by death and violence and where that quote is in the book? I am just curious, I am having trouble finding it.

Remember, respect is ALWAYS earned. Harmid Karzai was right. It may be against the teachings of Islam and wrong in the scope of humanity, but all the terrorists and governments (Iran comes to mind) who distort religion for their own power plays might just have something to do with it too.

Monsters of the Arab street

By Steve Muscatello

Feb 6, 2006

An irrational fear of evangelical Christians deprives secular America of a true understanding of the dangers posed by radical Islam. But those who fret over an imagined American "theocracy" run by Christian zealots should take note that it's not Bobby from Birmingham or Wally from Wichita that's burning down embassies, raiding buildings, threatening executions and otherwise behaving like animals on the streets of (to name a few) Damascus, Gaza City, Jakarta and Baghdad.

By now you know the story. Last October, a Danish newspaper printed twelve cartoons depicting the Muslim prophet Muhammad in various postures: walking through a field; in front of a classroom chalkboard; and even with a bomb tucked in his turban.

The initial reaction was tepid. But then an Austrian newspaper reprinted the cartoons in January, followed by French, German, Italian and Spanish newspapers this month. The reprints set off a firestorm (Islamic law forbids depictions of Muhammad to prevent idol worship). Violent protests have raged since, reaching a head Saturday as Syrian mobs burned down much of the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus.

If the outbursts were small, isolated incidents in two or three countries it would be easier to write them off—just the work of a vocal—and exceptionally radical—minority, we'd say. But the demonstrations have been large and widespread. Indeed, if airborne disease spread through the Muslim world as fast as outrage, a simple case of the flu might afflict millions in minutes. Things get contagious.

If only Muslims had a better public relations strategist they might have avoided this brouhaha. Instead of letting the little-noticed drawings drift into oblivion, Muslim protests lit the fires of Western curiosity. What do these cartoons look like? Then the media swarm came and suddenly newspapers on the other side of the world were printing editorials titled " The freedom to blaspheme" and galvanizing armies of free speech advocates.

Nevertheless, there are two reasons why it's better for the West (but not the Danish and Norwegian embassies) that it happened this way.

First, the timing is perfect. The latest issue of Rolling Stone depicts rapper Kanye West as a Christ-like figure in a crown of thorns with the title: "The Passion of Kanye West." The cover shot is a disgusting affront to Christians, and certainly as blasphemous as the cartoons were to Muslims.

As a result, no one was surprised when Christians firebombed Rolling Stone headquarters in New York.

Oh wait, didn't happen.

Okay, well no one was surprised when Christians threatened to firebomb the building.

Nope, didn't happen either.

Rarely does history provide such a perfect point of comparison, and the contrasting responses could hardly be more telling: When faced with a nearly identical situation, one faith resorted to violence, threats and rage like unruly savages; the other was civil, responding (if at all) with letters to the editor, calls for a boycott and many public denunciations.

Second, the rage of the Muslim world again lays bare radicalism for all the world to see. A similar fervor was set off in 2005 in response to purported Koran desecration at Guantanamo Bay. People died then, many of them Muslims. But it didn't matter. The rage is as overwhelming as it is contagious.

Victor Davis Hanson has called this the "lunacy principle," that is, "these people are capable of doing anything at anytime."

That's what makes Iran so scary. When President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denies the Holocaust and says "Israel must be wiped off the map" he really means it. And if his nuclear program continues unabated, he might just wake-up one morning and do it.

And that's the thing, for all their shrewd and secret plots, most radical Muslims are remarkably forthcoming: they seek the destruction of Western civilization, beginning with Israel, in order to establish a world-wide caliphate.

That blueprint should scare secular America more than, say, a well-organized group of pro-life activists. But in many cases, it doesn't. Trace it to comfort or laziness: it's easier to create a paper tiger out of the "Religious Right" and to rail against their "bigoted" and "intolerant" policies than to acknowledge the true threats posed by radical Islam.

It's early yet, but the cartoon protests may go a long way in changing this mentality, in expanding horizons beyond the water's edge. President John Quincy Adams once said that America should not go "abroad in search of monsters to destroy." Well, he might have added that America should not create monsters at home over relatively tame ideological differences. After all, these days we don't have to search very far for monsters. They're already in the streets, calling our name.

Steve Muscatello is a Townhall.com columnist.

Oh Noes, that dilbert cartoon offended me as a business professional. Let's go out in the streets and riot.

Oh Noes, they just chopped off that reporters head......oh well.....want some beans?

All that I am saying is that Islam like any other world religion has its share of troublemakers and we should not tar the entire civilasation as being intolerant and bigotted.

Share? Please. That's one damn big share. Quit apologizing for these scum. They are undeserving of your sympathy, or anyone else's. The tolerant among them are damn few and shameless cowards to boot or this senseless violence wouldn't be happening. If Islam can't control itself, I'm more than comfortable with a proactive defense against them including all the damn "profiling" and religious stereotyping we can muster (at least that's not blowing people up) - maybe then that poor "offended" peace-loving Muslim majority will deal with the hate-mongers & violent terrorists in their ranks. They can't just go hide, blame the West and hope their problem will just magically go away.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Seems like JU's local klan is seetting in more hate than most Muslims could even dream of.

Up yours, Mano. You clearly haven't a clue. I haven't killed a soul or so much as struck a match. So don't even go there and can the Klan crap.

I would also have no problem with a diplomatic offensive - closing embassies and pulling foreign aid from countries which encourage or wink at this kind of behavior.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Seems like JU's local klan is seetting in more hate than most Muslims could even dream of.

Not even close. Where has anyone from JU violently rioted, or burned down buildings? As usual turn it around, and don't offend the muslims.

stumbled upon b virupaksha's write up by chance;
I wonder if the author realises that Jesus Christ and mohammed the islamic prophet are not equals
for example Jesus can fight for himself and does not require humans to loot and burn property under the guise of
protecting his holy name.

think about it;
he came to this world and worked on his ministry for 3 odd years and never even wrote a single book
associated deliberately with illiterates and then was crucified and rose again from the dead,
and ever since the world has never been the same again.
Time is even named after him (2006 a.d- anno domini latin for in the year of our lord)

Now the other guy spread his beliefs by war and violence, got scribes to write his book(as he was unable to write) died and did not conquer death and ever since the world has had to contend with his unbelievably violent followers who cannot point to useful contributions to mankind or anything productive except sept 11 trade tower bombings etc

I imagine some might be offended by these truths but I do not seek to condemn- only to invite deep thinking and consideration of the facts.... that blind eyes might see and deaf ears might hear!

Muhammed was a mere man, he looted, pillaged raped and burned villages during his lifetime and also married a child. Not a man to be defended, Islam is based on violence and oppression.

steve muscatello's write up is brilliant check it out y'all