The battles over the cartoons published -- first in
Denmark and then in several other Euro nations -- depicting Islam's
founder Mohammed are still escalating. Danish PM Rasmussen
characterized the controversy as a clash between Islamic taboos and
western freedom of the press. In that, he is entirely correct. But
the EUnuchs had yet to sound off. Now they have, as reported
here in the Financial Times:
Peter Mandelson, European Union commissioner,
said republishing the caricatures was "throwing petrol on the
flames of the original issue."
"I can understand the motivation at one level;
they are standing up for freedom of speech. They also have to
understand the offense that's caused,'' he told the BBC.
Nadeem Elyas, chairman of the Central Council
of Muslims, a moderate German Muslim lobby, said the cartoons were
"insulting."
"Freedom of the press and of artists must be
protected. But it ends where you start trampling on people's
dignity," he told the FT, while adding that
he recognised newspapers had a duty to report the
controversy."
Elyas is echoing the sentiments of Kofi Annan
who said almost the same yesterday. Which of the EU nations will be
the first to outlaw cartoons depicting Mohammed? How soon will
Brussels declare the cartoons a violation of human rights? And how
long will it be before the hyperlibs here begin to apologize for
the European cartoons?
Salman Rushdie was condemned to death and a
life in hiding for "Satanic Verses." Which cartoonists will be
condemned as he was? Taboos or free speech? Which will govern in
Europe?
More important that European reaction is the
reaction of leading Iraqi Shia cleric Ali al-Sistani. Condemning
the cartoons, Sistani also said that radical Islamists were
partially responsible for distorting the image of Islam. His
comments show a courage sufficient to distance most Iraqi Shia from
Iran. He, unlike Ahmadinejad, is someone with whom we can
deal.
topics:
Islam, Law, Iraq, Iran, European Union
