As my regular readers know, I’ve long been skeptical of the “Religion of Peace” moniker for Muslims—for at least 3,000 reasons right off the top of my head. I think the evidence is going my way this week.
The culture editor of a newspaper in Denmark suspected writers and cartoonists were engaging in self-censorship when it came to the Religion of Peace. It was subtle things, like a Danish comedian’s statement, paraphrased by The New York Times, “that he had no problem urinating on the Bible but that he would not dare do the same to the Quran.”
So, after verifying that his life insurance premiums were paid up, the editor expressly requested cartoons of Muhammad from every cartoonist with a Danish cartoon syndicate. Out of 40 cartoonists, only 10 accepted the invitation, most of them submitting utterly neutral drawings with no political content whatsoever.
But three cartoons made political points.
One showed Muhammad turning away suicide bombers from the gates of heaven, saying “Stop, stop—we ran out of virgins!”—which I believe was a commentary on Muslims’ predilection for violence. Another was a cartoon of Muhammad with horns, which I believe was a commentary on Muslims’ predilection for violence. The third showed Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, which I believe was an expression of post-industrial ennui in a secular—oops, no, wait: It was more of a commentary on Muslims’ predilection for violence.
In order to express their displeasure with the idea that Muslims are violent, thousands of Muslims around the world engaged in rioting, arson, mob savagery, flag-burning, murder and mayhem, among other peaceful acts of nonviolence.
Muslims are the only people who make feminists seem laid-back.
The little darlings brandish placards with typical Religion of Peace slogans, such as: “Behead Those Who Insult Islam,” “Europe, you will pay, extermination is on the way” and “Butcher those who mock Islam.” They warn Europe of their own impending 9/11 with signs that say: “Europe: Your 9/11 will come”—which is ironic, because they almost had me convinced the Jews were behind the 9/11 attack.
The rioting Muslims claim they are upset because Islam prohibits any depictions of Muhammad—though the text is ambiguous on beheadings, suicide bombings and flying planes into skyscrapers.
The belief that Islam forbids portrayals of Muhammad is recently acquired. Back when Muslims created things, rather than blowing them up, they made paintings, frescoes, miniatures and prints of Muhammad.
But apparently the Koran is like the Constitution: It’s a “living document,” capable of sprouting all-new provisions at will. Muslims ought to start claiming the Koran also prohibits indoor plumbing, to explain their lack of it.
Other interpretations of the Koran forbid images of humans or animals, which makes even a child’s coloring book blasphemous. That’s why the Taliban blew up those priceless Buddhist statues, bless their innocent, peace-loving little hearts.
Largely unnoticed in this spectacle is the blinding fact that one nation is missing from the long list of Muslim countries (by which I mean France and England) with hundreds of crazy Muslims experiencing bipolar rage over some cartoons: Iraq. Hey—maybe this democracy thing does work! The barbaric behavior of Europe’s Muslims suggests that the European welfare state may not be attracting your top-notch Muslims.
Making the rash assumption for purposes of discussion that Islam is a religion and not a car-burning cult, even a real religion can’t go bossing around other people like this.
Catholics aren’t short on rules, but they couldn’t care less if non-Catholics use birth control. Conservative Jews have no interest in forbidding other people from mixing meat and dairy. Protestants don’t make a peep about other people eating food off one another’s plates. (Just stay away from our plates—that’s disgusting.)
But Muslims think they can issue decrees about what images can appear in newspaper cartoons. Who do they think they are, liberals?