« The new world order is the enemy of humanity | Main | A broader Orientalist depiction of Muhammad »

September 17, 2012



"Aren't there any Muslims out there who are just a teeny bit embarrassed by these tantrums?"

There are a few pictures of Libyans apologizing. I think it is only a handful, though.


Recruiting Animal

In The Toronto Star, Haroon Siddiqui, while deploring violence, sides with people rioting over these obscure offences.

The funny thing is, he appears to be a modern man. I've seen him on TV.


Mick H

Here's another similar piece, from Mustafa Malik at the San Francisco Chronicle - http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Benghazi-murders-Revisit-free-speech-3866748.php - blaming "Western insensitivity to the Islamic faith". It all sounds very reasonable, but ultimately it's up to the West to stop being offensive to Islam. And Muslims, of course, will decide what's defined as offensive. No doubt there'll be plenty more along the same lines.

Perhaps if we compared it to the kind of appeal we might get from a North Korean sympathiser not to say unpleasant things about the late Dear Leader - "freedom of speech is all very well, but it shouldn't go so far as to show insensitivity to the North Korean people's inviolable faith in the great Juche philosophy etc etc." - it'd be clearer what our response should be.


It's odd that freedom of speech even comes into it, as it does in the Malik article. The idea seems to be that the movie should have been banned. Yet the movie was never seen to begin with. It was self-banned, so to speak. No one cared about it, or heard about it, until the embassy was attacked.


It is bizarre that the slaughter of Muslims in Syria elicits far less concern in the Muslim world than a silly film. A strange sense of priorities.

sackcloth and ashes

Just as a matter of interest, how many riots and deaths were caused by Syrian State TV producing and broadcasting a drama based on the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' back in 2003?

The comments to this entry are closed.