Special Features

Watch 128k stream       Watch 256k stream

A Debate Over the Publication of Cartoons of Prophet Muhammed and the Global Muslim Protests

Muslims are continuing to demonstrate around the world over the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad. At least six people have been killed in the worldwide protests -- in Somalia, Lebanon and four in Afghanistan - and violence has broken out in cities across Europe, the Middle East and parts of Asia.

The Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten originally published the 12 cartoons last September - including one that shows the Prophet Muhammad wearing a turban shaped as a bomb with a burning fuse. The cartoons were republished in European and other news media in the last week. Muslims say the images are blasphemous and contrary to Islamic tradition prohibiting depictions of the prophet. The reaction to their publication has stretched across the globe.

In Iran, Lebanon and Syria, the Danish embassies have been set ablaze and several Middle Eastern countries have recalled their ambassadors from Denmark. The Iranian government said it is reviewing trade ties with all the countries where the cartoons have been published. Denmark issued a list of 14 Muslim countries which Danish travelers should avoid and urged its citizens on Tuesday to leave Indonesia.

Some Muslim leaders have condemned the violence.

• Ahmed Abou-Llaban, Imam of the Danish Muslim Society.

Meanwhile, fresh protests erupted in Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan, where a NATO base used by Norwegian troops was attacked. On Monday, protesters turned out in Iraq, the West Bank, Turkey, Indonesia, India, Thailand and even New Zealand. Newspapers have defended the publication of the cartoons arguing their right to free speech. One protester in Auckland, argued otherwise.

• Naveed Hamid, of the Pakistan Association speaking in New Zealand.

The Philadelphia Inquirer became the first U.S. newspaper to publish the disputed cartoons on Saturday. The paper's editor Amanda Bennett said, "My view is that we need to publish it for a good news reason, we need to publish in context and we need to explain to readers why we did it."

In Washington, the Bush administration took a diplomatic approach to the issue.

• Sean McCormack, State Department spokesperson.

We host a debate on the cartoon controversy and the worldwide protests.

• Irshad Manji, author of the book, "The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith." She is currently based at Yale University as a Visiting Fellow with the International Security Studies program.
  Website: www.Muslim- Refusnik.com 
• As'ad AbuKhalil, professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus. He is the author of several books, his latest is "The Battle for Saudi Arabia: Royalty, Fundamentalism, and Global Power." He runs a popular blog called "The Angry Arab News Service."

AMY GOODMAN: Some Muslim leaders have condemned the violence. This is Ahmed Abou-Llaban, Imam of the Danish Muslim Society.

AHMED ABOU-LLABAN: Our issue is intellectual and cultural. In Syria, what is happening is wrong. Somebody make cartoons, he should be or this group or institution only should be held responsible about it. Setting fire to embassies' peaceful people, it's wrong, it's not acceptable in any terms. Moreover, in Scandinavia have been very peaceful, cooperative and helpful to the people in the Middle East and the total Palestinian issue, so I think this violence is completely wrong.

AMY GOODMAN: Meanwhile, fresh protests erupted in Pakistan and neighboring Afghanistan, where a NATO base used by Norwegian troops was attacked. On Monday, protesters turned out in Iraq, the West Bank, Turkey, Indonesia, India, Thailand and even New Zealand. Newspapers have defended the publication of the cartoons, arguing their right to free speech. One protester in Auckland, argued otherwise.

NAVEED HAMID: Freedom of speech does not mean insult. There is a thin fine line on that. So, have to be careful when attacking someone’s religion.

AMY GOODMAN: The Philadelphia Inquirer became the first U.S. newspaper to publish the disputed cartoons Saturday. The paper's editor, Amanda Bennett, said, "My view is that we need to publish it for a good news reason. We need to publish in context, and we need to explain to readers why we did it." In Washington, the Bush administration took a diplomatic approach to the issue.. This is State Department spokesperson, Sean McCormack.

SEAN McCORMACK: We understood why many Muslims found the cartoons offensive. We found -- we talked about the fact that we found, on Friday, the cartoons offensive. But we also spoke out very clearly in support of freedom of the press. As to what appears in newspapers, what is broadcast over the airwaves, those are decisions in free countries for a free media.

AMY GOODMAN: State Department’s Sean McCormick. When we come back from break, we will have a debate on the cartoon controversy.

[break]

AMY GOODMAN: As we host a debate on the controversy over the cartoons depicting Prophet Muhammed and the worldwide protest, we're joined in the Yale studio in New Haven, Connecticut, by Irshad Manji. She is author of the book The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in her Faith, currently based at Yale as a Visiting Fellow with the International Security Studies program. And on the phone with us from California is As’ad AbuKhalil, professor of political science at California State University, Stanislaus, author of several books. His latest is The Battle for Saudi Arabia: Royalty, Fundamentalism and Global Power. He also runs a popular blog called the Angry Arab News Service. And we welcome you both to Democracy Now! Can you respond to these worldwide protests against the publication of these cartoons of the Prophet Muhammed?

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Well, I will try to explain some of the orientations of Muslim Arab angers about the cartoons. Before I do so, I would like to say, right at the outset, where I stand. First, I'm very much in favor, and I relish the opportunity to mock every and other religion. What I think is very bothersome to many Arabs and Muslims is exactly what the other guest does, which is selective condemnation and mocking of one religion over others. I mean, I think if you mock all religion, that is consistent, free thinking, in support for the enlightenment, as well as secularism, but what comes out of many in the West is selective secularism, the notion that you can mock one religion, but all others have to be treated with reverence and sacredness. And this is why this entire defense, in the name of freedom of speech, doesn’t sell very much in the Arab world.

People very much know that offenses against Muslims and Arabs are often treated as defensive, and because they're in the name of freedom of speech, and The Philadelphia Inquirer, which among other western publications circulated and reprinted those cartoons again in the name of freedom of speech, and we all know that they wouldn't dare do so if these were offensive to Jews, for example. I mean, this entire debate of newsworthiness of those cartoons also is not very convincing. I mean, David Irving is a grotesque Nazi white supremacist so-called historian in England who was in trial, and I wouldn't think that The Philadelphia Inquirer would ever dare reprint some of his ugly hateful writings about the Second World era. I mean, this shows exactly the kind of hypocrisy that is striking many in the Arab Muslim world. The second thing I want to say is, I mean --

AMY GOODMAN: Let me get Irshad Manji to respond, and then you can respond to her.

IRSHAD MANJI: Well, thank you very much, Amy. I am, frankly, shocked that your other guest would already attack me for being quote/unquote “selective.” Certainly I have written a book called The Trouble with Islam Today, but as I have pointed out time and again, that doesn't mean that the other religions are problem-free. It’s just that there are no shortage of books in the libraries about the problem with Christianity, no dearth of books about the trouble with Judaism. It seems to me that we Muslims have a lot of catching up to do in the dissent department. And I think that a program like this very much appreciates the need for dissent of all belief systems.

And speaking of dissent, you know, I find it interesting that your other guest suggests or actually emphasizes that there is a targeting of Islam, but that no other religion, you know, can be mocked. How then does he explain the routinely and viciously anti-Semitic programming that comes out of the Arab world. And I would remind him that we Muslims never protest that kind of atrocity. So, how do we have integrity demanding to the rest of the world that they completely respect our religion, when we ourselves have trouble respecting other faiths?

AMY GOODMAN: As’ad AbuKhalil.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: Well, Amy, that’s very easy to respond to. First of all, I am aware of the pontification of the other guest on FOX News, among other outlets that relish the opportunity to have somebody like her --

IRSHAD MANJI: I'll let CNN know.

AS’AD ABUKHALIL: One second. One second. This is not FOX – O’Reilly show. This is Amy Goodman. Let me speak. Who are very much in favor of having people who are very much uniquely focused only on Islam. I mean, as it happens, the other guest writes on Islam without being trained or knowledgeable about it. If she would, she would know that there are many brave souls, free thinkers on the history of Islam who spoke out, and some of them died because they went against conventional wisdom, and they were braver against Islam, the religion. Many of them mocked Muhammed. Many of them mocked the Koran. And some of them lived with their heads on their shoulder, but she is totally ignorant about that, because that’s not her specialty.

I mean, her specialty is polemics against Islam, and that’s something very much appreciated in the United States. Yes, it is true there are many media in the Arab world that have published grotesque anti-Semitic depictions and images. But these are the responsibility of the government, and many of them are allies of the United States. And she is also, again, ignorant – perhaps she doesn’t know any Persian or Arabic -- to know that there’s a big debate and there’s a lot of condemnation about anti-Semitic writings that have come out in some of those publications.

But the issue here also is about something else. I mean, there is a notion in the West here that, you know, the issue is about the fact that Muslims ban depictions of the prophet, I mean, which is true even though in the history of Islamic art, if your guest knows anything about it, there are like tons of, you know, illustrations in Persia, among other places, where Muhammed was, in fact, in very clear detail depicted by Muslims at the time.

For many today in the Arab world, and, I mean, as far as a ranking of outrageous, this is not something that outrages me -- that outrages me. But you cannot, in the name of the freedom of speech, deny the Muslims and Arabs the right to be outraged about something that offends them. But that’s the whole issue, that we believe that offenses to Muslims should be defended as something that is in the name of, you know, speech. And there are many outlets today that are reprinting those same cartoons that are offensive to Muslims in the name of freedom of speech, while people do not treat offenses to other religions in the same manner. And it seems to me, if you insist on people having the right to depict in any way they want all prophets, as I do -- I mean, I would love to have mocking of all religions. But people don't do that. People are very selective in what religion can be mocked and ridiculed by comedians and by cartoonists in many Western countries.

AMY GOODMAN: Irshad Manji, your response?

IRSHAD MANJI: It seems to me that our friend here believes that the more angry you are, the more right you are. Boy, I certainly don't make that kind of an equation. And as far as, you know, reprinting and re-broadcasting these cartoons, I find it interesting that my favorite propaganda platform, according to your guest, FOX News, won't even go there. They won't rebroadcast these cartoons, and yet last night they were only too happy to trot out the viciously anti-Jewish cartoons that routinely appear in the Arab world. And you know why they believe they could get away with that? Because the Jews are not going to storm their offices. The Jews are not going to issue death threats against the journalists who are behind these cartoons. The Jews are not going to threaten the lives of people who carry American passports, whereas we Muslims, we do, you know, have trouble containing our own violence, and anybody -- anybody who denies that is clearly living in the world of theory, not in the world of reality.