A fascinating story from the blog
European Tribune (
<--Linky) on the recent Muslim riots over the Muhammad cartoons. Doesnt this scenario sounds entirely plausible? One fact they point out, which isnt widely being reported anywhere in our media, is that these cartoons were published on September 30, 2005. That’s right, over four months ago. Why is the outrage only now brewing?
What CNN and the other traditional media failed to tell you is that the thousand gallons of fuel added to the fire of outrage came from none other than our old pals Saudi Arabia.
While it was a minor side story in the western press, the most important of Muslim religious festivals recently took place in Saudi Arabia - called the Hajj. Every able-bodied Muslim is obligated to make a pilgrimage once in their lifetime to Mecca, which is in modern-day Saudi Arabia. This pilgrimage can be done at any time of the year but most pilgrims arrive during the Muslim month known as Dhu al-Hijjah, which follows a lunar calendar that does not exactly match the western Gregorian calendar.
The most recent Hajj occurred during the first half of January 2006, precisely when the “outrage” over the Danish cartoons began in earnest. There were a number of stampedes, called “tragedies” in the press, during the Hajj which killed several hundred pilgrims. I say “tragedies” in quotation marks because there have been similar “tragedies” during the Hajj and each time, the Saudi government promises to improve security and facilitation of movement to avoid these. Over 251 pilgrims were killed during the 2004 Hajj alone in the same area as the one that killed 350 pilgrims in 2006. These were not unavoidable accidents, they were the results of poor planning by the Saudi government.
And while the deaths of these pilgrims was a mere blip on the traditional western media’s radar, it was a huge story in the Muslim world. Most of the pilgrims who were killed came from poorer countries such as Pakistan, where the Hajj is a very big story. Even the most objective news stories were suddenly casting Saudi Arabia in a very bad light and they decided to do something about it.
Their plan was to go on a major offensive against the Danish cartoons. The 350 pilgrims were killed on January 12 and soon after, Saudi newspapers (which are all controlled by the state) began running up to 4 articles per day condemning the Danish cartoons. The Saudi government asked for a formal apology from Denmark. When that was not forthcoming, they began calling for world-wide protests. After two weeks of this, the Libyans decided to close their embassy in Denmark. Then there was an attack on the Danish embassy in Indonesia. And that was followed by attacks on the embassies in Syria and then Lebanon.
Many European papers, including the right-wing German Springer media group, fanned the flames by reprinting the cartoons. And now you have the situation we are in today, with lots of video footage of angry crowds and the storming of embassies and calls for boycotts of Danish and European products
The difference between the Muslim world and everything else is that everywhere outside the Muslim world we have a rule of law. as a General rule if a Christian is upset over something like Victoria’s Secret catalogs or abortion or sex on TV or rock music with dirty lyrics, they don’t go out and riot or destroy property. Not saying it doesnt happen, but its not the "Norm".
They might start a boycott or take some other action, but their action is constrained by the laws of the society in which they live. Take, for instance, the controversy last year over the removal of the Ten Commandments from some courthouse buildings. I remember seeing a group of fundamentalist Christians outside the courthouse in Alabama going Apesh!t over the removal of the tablets. They were frothing and foaming and ranting and screaming with red faces and veins bulging from necks. But, ultimately, there was no riot or destruction on their part. Why? Because they live in a society which does not condone that sort of behavior, where religion does not trump the rule of law.
Conversely, the Islamic world has no such constraint. There is no law outside of Islamic law and the dictates of whatever thug happens to be running whatever country. In the Western world we understand that it is not in our best interest to have people engaged in violent protest, no matter what the cause. In Syria, for example, it is most definitely in their best political interest to see this happening. Same with Saudi Arabia. The Muslim world is a seething cauldron of anger and resentment, and the Arab governments understand this. The time is ripe for revolution in many of the Arab states, and thus they need a distraction, an external outlet for all of this displaced rage and hatred. Thus the cartoons.
It is human nature to be more outraged at the behavior of your enemy than you are at identical behavior from your friends. Look at the outrage the feminist left had for someone like Bob Packwood or Clarence Thomas, then compare it to the way they coddled Bill Clinton, a misogynist if there ever was one. Clinton was a friend, and so his behavior was excused, but the other two were Republicans, and thus it was as if the world was coming to an end. This is exactly the same dynamic we see at work in the Middle East. These cartoons are nothing more than a specific excuse that Muslims can use to justify their hatred, a rallying point they can use to vent their rage. Syria and Saudi Arabia love this sh!t, because the Arab media are whipping the public into a frenzy over it.