The next time someone tells you "we're just one world" or that "everyone is the same," or that "that we're not in a clash of civilizations," be sure to tell them to grow up and get real.
We're not one world or one people and, at the rate we're going, it's going to be a long time (in my opinion, never) before that happens.
Let's think: Why might punches be pulled when dealing with Islam?
Hint: Look at the headlines.
It's said that if a picture is good enough, you don't need words. Indeed, we're told a picture is worth a thousand words.
But in our real world, certain pictures, intended as cartoons – ranging from funny to political to opinionated – have been worth many more than a thousand words and those words aren't nice.
It seems those cartoons, published in September in a Danish newspaper and reprinted recently in newspapers in Europe and the Middle East and now on the Internet, have sparked angry and threatening words from Muslims around the world – the gist of which you can determine from some of the chanting heard in London protests, calling Muslims to "massacre" those who insulted them and others shouting, "Britain you will pay. 7/7 is on its way."
That sounds threatening.
The reaction to what was begun by the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten as an attempt to illustrate how some newspaper cartoonists envision Muhammad, is still growing.
It's reported that 25 cartoonists were invited to submit their illustrations. Twelve responded and their work was published. One showed the Muhammad with a turban resembling a bomb and another had him telling suicide bombers that there were no more virgins in paradise.
Then everything hit the fan and it doesn't appear to be ending soon. In fact, Muslim outrage is spreading and the cartoonists are in hiding and under protection.
According to Islam, it's blasphemous to portray the likeness of Muhammad or Allah. It doesn't matter whether the blasphemer is Islamic or not. Anyone who does it has committed a grievous error and must be punished. Judging by the chants of the crowds in countries across the Middle East, Europe and Asia, what happened was such an egregious offense and some sort of payback is required.
Echoing in the streets of Khartoum: "You Danish Satan, the Muslim people are now out after you." From the streets of Gaza, Palestinian voices called the cartoons an "attack on Islam," and armed men went from hotel to hotel searching for westerners. From Pakistan, shouts of "Death to France and Denmark."
There's graffiti, flag tearing and burning, marching on embassy offices, property destruction, a kidnapping, shots being fired, bomb threats and vows of reprisal targeting the European Union, European citizens and churches. A boycott of Danish products is under way.
Video coverage of ranting, rampaging mobs makes for great television and as the reports continue, so do the demonstrations. It's difficult to see how it will stop because we're in a TV rating period and the cameras love those pictures. Television gets the ratings and Muslim outrage is seen by the world, inciting more of the same.
News cameras also love the political and newspaper reactions to such attacks on what is essentially an issue of freedom of speech and the press. There are questions of censorship – government and otherwise. Press reaction has been mixed.
The French tabloid France Soir fired its managing editor and the editor of a Jordanian paper also was fired. But, papers in Germany, Spain, Ireland, Norway, Switzerland, Hungary and Italy have published the cartoons, defending press freedom.
The original Danish paper has apologized for hurting Muslim feelings, but not for publishing the cartoons. The editor, Carsten Juste said, if he'd known what would happen, he wouldn't have published them, but the Associated Press also quotes him as saying the anger is a victory for the opponents of free expression and that "The dark dictatorships have won."
Alas, that hasn't stopped the government of Denmark from apologizing, as has Norway.
Hamas legislator Jamila Shanty said, "No one can say a bad word about our prophet."
Afghan President Hamid Karzai said "Any insult to the holy prophet – peace be upon him – is an insult to more than a billion Muslims."
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the press must respect religion.
Pakistan and Turkey condemned the publication and the British government sided with them. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw called the publication of the cartoons as "insulting ... insensitive ... disrespectful and wrong."
Arab countries demand punishment for those responsible for the publications and want apologies from Western countries.
In France, there are threats of lawsuits against France Soir because the pictures disturbed and hurt the feelings of Muslims.
But French Interior Minister Nicholas Sarkozy, quoted in the Los Angeles Times, said, "We must defend freedom of expression, and if I had to choose, I prefer the excess of caricature over the excess of censure."
Too bad we didn't hear such strength supporting press freedom from the United States. The U.S. State Department said, "... inciting religious or ethnic hatred in this manner is not acceptable."
And ...?
Later, another administration comment about the cartoons was reported in the New York Times: "We find them offensive, and we certainly understand why Muslims would find these images offensive."
What does that mean? Because you're offended, it's OK to rampage?
Funny, I don't ever recall any administration distaste or condemnation of ridicule or denunciation of the Roman Catholic religion or Judaism and Jews or any Christian denomination.
Perhaps it's because Jews and Christians don't riot every time they're ridiculed and insulted. Good thing, too, or they'd be in the streets all the time.
The truth is, it's open season on Western religion and Jews, but Islam and Muslims are seemingly untouchable. You can't have it both ways, although that's what's happening.
CNN in its coverage of the issue showed part of the drawings, but blurred out facial details, they said, out of respect for Islamic beliefs.
Even a spokesman from the Vatican has caved. Cardinal Achille Silvestrini condemned the cartoons saying, "Western culture has to know its limits."
That's shocking. How would he respond if the Vatican or a cathedral were attacked because a Catholic might have "offended" a Muslim? I can't seem to remember his denunciation of attacks on synagogues or of hatefully racist cartoons about Jews and Catholics.
Cardinal Silvestrini, just where are those limits?
The L.A. Times editorialized with the headline "The Freedom To Blaspheme," which supported the separation of government and the press and the dangers of "self-censorship."
But they wussed out at the end:
Â
For our part, the Times has not reprinted these insensitive images, even as a means of shedding light on the controversy in Europe. But it is not necessary to agree with these cartoons to defend another's right to publish them.
Â
How courageous.
You might give some thought to what Patrick Chappatte, a cartoonist who was quoted in Le Temps, a Swiss newspaper, said:
Â
The reaction in Muslim countries shocks me because it confirms the weight that radical Islam has acquired." A real totalitarianism is at work in the world and wants to impose its views not only on Arab Muslims, but also on the West. The same way that they veil women, Islamic radicals want to veil cartoons in the press.
Â
That is courageous.
There is no doubt such cartoons are offensive to Muslims, but offense is not license for mayhem. Such reaction illustrates the crux of the differences in culture and the problems inherent in the migration of Muslims into the West and their deep-seated beliefs that the world must change to accommodate their religion, even in countries where there is religious freedom.
Scholars wiser than I say that is the pattern of history and we all know what happens when history is ignored.
Don't we?
Â