Posted by Raza Rumi
Pakistan ambassador: “Are you satisfied?”
Fauzia Mufti Abbas is Pakistan’s ambassador to Denmark. She suspects that the recent bombing of the Danish embassy, in which six people were killed, was indeed linked to the publication of a cartoon.
It isn’t just the people of Pakistan that feel they have been harassed by what your newspaper has begun, I’d like to know if your newspaper is satisfied with what it has done and what it has unleashed? Danes know that they have insulted people around the world by printing and reprinting the Mohammed cartoons, which were done in poor taste.
Jørn Mikkelsen, Jyllands-Posten’s editor-in-chief, makes the obvious response to such outrageous drivel:
The decision to do so was in full accordance with Danish law, Danish press ethics and Danish press traditions. That the facts have been twisted in the rest of the world and misused for purposes that are no concern of Jyllands-Posten is something we can and will not take responsibility for.
16 Comments
June 5, 2008 at 7:32 pm
Violence has no justification. This shows the degree of denial that exist on part of Pakistani establishment.
When the King of Iran tore the letter of Muhammed, did persians were killed and robbed in Medina? , Did prophet of Islam or his companions announced a boycott of Iran?
Its sad how criminal inhuman behaviour is justified like that. An offence that was done with paper and ink is responded with blood and flesh—
June 6, 2008 at 5:18 am
Oh God,
look at the difference between the two responses. What was she thinking when she came up with such pearls of wisdom.
June 6, 2008 at 10:49 am
The Danes are making a statement: we will not let fear (of terrorism) compromise our proudest value and identity as a nation/people. The question is how far do you go in “indulging” a group of people, how far to take political correctness before it becomes hypocrisy unto self?
I’ve always thought of it as the “compromise” European Muslim kids have had to make while growing up, indulging parental/societal expectations – but to what extent do you let them dictate your actions? At some point you have to define and assert your individual ’self’ (that took 20/30 odd year to make)
June 6, 2008 at 8:08 pm
How can she be so insensitive!!! Thats supporting and encourging violence
June 7, 2008 at 9:06 pm
while the ambassador’s statement reeks of political incorrectness, she IS stating a fact (however unplatable that may be to many knee-jerk liberals). these KJLs are bending over backwards to show white people** just HOW liberal they are, ignoring in the process the realpolitik of the whole affair.
muslims (enough to have an effect) WILL react to what they perceive to be insults to the faith and it’s luminaries.
rolling one’s eyes, gritting one’s teeth and squatting by the wayside while willing it not to happen won’t make it not-happen.
i am not trying in any way to justify acts of violence in response to the cartoons. par jism ke kuchh dhakay-chhupay hisson mein log ungli karengay tau reaction tau hoga.
—–
** forgive me, i don’t usually use the term “white people” and mean it here in the sense that master michael moore did in his most famous book.
June 8, 2008 at 12:33 pm
This is neither about knee jerk liberalism, nor about , every action has an equal but opposite reaction. This is simple ruthless violence. A million “offenses” can always be shown to exist, it neither justifies nor provide a valid excuse for this sort of behavior and violence.
Blasphemy has always happened and moslems have never reacted in this way. Who hasnt commented what is called blasphemy, it was committed by Voltaire, it was committed by Carlyle, it was committed by Salvador Dali, it was committed by renaissance painters. Moslems had always loved the prophet the same , why didnt they reacted in the same way as today [as it is being claimed today] . In the life time of Arabian prophet King of Persia tore down his letter and used rude language , we never saw Omar , Ali , Abubaker , Othman, killing Persians , kidnapping them, calling for boycott of Persia?
were they too bending over backwards to please the Persian King?
Freedom of expression cant be judged against half baked theories of anger and disgust.
June 8, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Then again, as Tariq Ali pointed out, you have to wonder whether Jyllands-Posten would ever take a dig at Jews by publishing a cartoon of Moses with crooked eyes and a fat nose, carrying stolen pots of gold under his arms. So, targetting a poor minority by making fun of their religion becomes an issue of racism and class, and is just unfair. Freedom of speech is one thing, but there might be hints of a double standard here… that will inevitable cause bitterness in many Muslims, some of whom will (understandably) react.
June 9, 2008 at 5:22 am
>>> there might be hints of a double standard here
i just lurrrrrv the art of understatement
: )
June 9, 2008 at 8:06 am
and that precisely is what the whole thing is about. not mere blasphemy but the racism that prompts it. if the largely desnsitized western world doesnt have the same emotional attchment to an underlying belief system – and lets face it, consumerism has done that for them – and the response to something done with “paper and ink” only hurts them when its with flesh and blood not more pen and ink, then flesh and blood is what they ought to expect. thats not justification. thats human psychology.
and freedom of expression, theoretically, should allow soverign heads of state to question the veracity of the whole holocaust business without having to worry about their countries becoming the battlefields of world war 3.
June 9, 2008 at 6:06 pm
Shanz
Many thanks for visiting Pak Tea House and leaving the comment.
We value your views and those expressed by the Ambassador as well. However, the purpose of the discussion here is broader – it is to re-assess the Muslim ‘response’ and its parameters as well as how did a faith that was so accepting has become a vehicle for violence by its particularlist clergy and misguided followers!
cheers
Raza
June 9, 2008 at 6:08 pm
Let me also add that what Madam Ambassador remarked was perhaps a contextual response that is both valid and explains for the events..
June 9, 2008 at 6:42 pm
thanks for visiting Shanz , though i always fail to understand why a parallel for a religious offense is drawn with Holocaust.
Do u get arrested in Austria for making a cartoon of Jesus?
that is a better comparison and a fair one! Holocaust was a murder and people of Europe lost a lot thats why it causes such reactions.
For the millions and million of Jews murdered , how many Jews u know who even broke a glass of German Restaurant?? what to say of suicide bombings? as a reaction?
Speaking of contextulization every thing should be seen in a context.
After demolishing historic Buddha statues by Taliban, how many Afghan embassies or Islamic embassies were blown down in China, Japan, Burma, Thailand and Tibet?
How many Monks we saw with play cards saying “Chop their heads off?”
how many monks we saw traveling the Buddhist nations to save the honour of Lord Buddha . Anyways it was not bout Honorable Ambassador . Please keep visiting
June 10, 2008 at 7:52 am
you’re missing the point sherryx. religion is not the soft spot for the west at large any more – its race. in fact, it’s the idea that another race can progress. so you didn’t get people loudly threatening to”chop off their heads” when the buddhas were blown up but you did get favourable public response to “nuke the bastards” even when everyone said there were no WMDs.
and please let’s not elevate the jewish response to something very noble. callous as it may sound, they are the biggest direct beneficiaries of hitler’s misdeeds. and for some obscure reason, middle eastern muslims are signing the compensation check.
not that i condone violence. personally i don’t even boycott my beloved danish butter cookies. i just understand the reasoning that lets someone go that far – they may not be right but they’re not entirely unjustified either.
June 10, 2008 at 3:34 pm
Well thanks Xill e Ilahi, for taking time going through my comments. Well as convincing as it may sound , this thesis does not stand even a mildly rigorous analysis. Its not about any “race” either. Moslems are not a race by any definition. Perhaps we are talking about the 1960’s thesis of “colour-line”. The colour prejudice had some merit in those days. But now even this cant explain the world situation. This is only explainable by the concept of “imperialism”. But we are not talking bout what Jylland- posten did was “admirable” in any way or that we support it. We are trying to say that in a society many people will do and say many things which others dont accept or which will cause an offense to cultural sensibilities , but a civilized response is a sense of bad taste. thats all. Beyond it ,it will encroach upon the boundaries, which are too sacred to touch.
Jewsih response to Holocaust is noblest of all and this fact cant be denied. State of Isreal is a different matter, linking it to holocaust is yet another of Fascist tactic.
The only question of any importance that emerges out of jylland-Posten debacle is :
Are we prepared to give European state as an institution the right to control free press? to close down or control the published content in name of law, order, morality, religion, cultural sensibility?
If any one think yes, than just ponder on two facts
A) Remember the Europe of Hitler’s time
B).The rise of Neo Nazi and anti immigrant Right in Europe
This time the concentration camps will not hold jews. Moslem is the “new Jew” of Europe.
From Eqbal Ahmed to Tariq Ali thats why there is bitter support of freedom of expression, because no one wants to give back the White European Male what was taken from him through a bloody struggle and no cartoons, no matter how hideous should push us to a path to build a “new totalitarianism” in Europe
June 11, 2008 at 7:36 am
well we’ll have to agree to disagree. because while most of your comment makes perfect sense, the “Beyond it ,it will encroach upon the boundaries, which are too sacred to touch.” sentence works both ways.
everyone defines their own boundaries. they may not make sense to others but they exist and should be respected. the cartoons breached the boundary muslims in general set up. a violent response may not sit nicely on the palate but it is precisely what you called it – a crossing of the boundary. their boundary this time.
anyways, thats my opinion.
June 11, 2008 at 8:37 am
Thank you very much. it was really enlightening talking to you. i do agree with you that every one draws his or her own line. But this happens at a personal lever. A religious moslem will not drink Wine while living in Paris. But French society has to make this sure that it creates a system where” A” can live happily not drinking Wine, and “B” can enjoy a drink whenever he wishes to do so. This freedom is democracy. Problem will arrise when “A” will assert that he is “offended” by drinking habbit of “B”. or When B says any one who doesnt sips Red Wine is not French.
Freedom has its prices, drunk driving accidents, Cartoons, etc. But the alternate is too hidious and too dangerous. ill stick with freedom!
Cheers