Rotten in Denmark : Flemming Rose and the clash of civilizations

[RJnAbbysNana]

Antiwar.com
By Justin Raimondo
February 8, 2006

Rotten in Denmark
Flemming Rose and the clash of civilizations

The publication of 12 cartoons in Jyllands-Posten, a Danish right-wing newspaper, that caricatured the prophet Muhammad was clearly a provocation – and it has had its intended effect. The editor responsible claims the genesis of the cartoons was the alleged reluctance of artists to illustrate an upcoming children's biography of Muhammad: they are supposedly too afraid to step forward, fearing violent retaliation. All this before anyone had so much as raised their voices over the matter: now, of course, the subject dominates headlines throughout much of Europe and the Middle East.

Riots throughout the Muslim world, demands for the expulsion of the Danish ambassador from a number of countries, attacks on the Danish (and Norwegian) embassies in Beirut and Damascus – this incident couldn't have roiled relations between Islam and the West more if it had been planned that way, which raises the question: was it? Is something rotten in the state of Denmark? We don't know, and probably will never know, but it is worthwhile looking into the origins of this particular incident, because a very definite odor is wafting in from the general direction of Copenhagen.

To begin with, the real impetus for the demonstrations and declarations of outrage coming in from all across the Middle East wasn't merely the publication of these rather juvenile scribblings in Denmark, but their republication in several European countries. If this wasn't a coordinated provocation, then it is certainly an amazing coincidence that it bears all the earmarks of one.

Secondly, let us examine the venue – a newspaper that today describes itself as "liberal" in the classical sense, but yesterday openly supported fascism – and particularly the man most responsible for starting this ruckus: Flemming Rose, the "cultural editor" of Jyllands-Posten, who commissioned the cartoons and now is at the center of a rapidly-escalating controversy.

<snip> (reluctantly - excellent read)..........

http://antiwar.com/justin/

[Vinnie From Indy]

1. Yeah, it was planned.

BushCo needed hordes of Muslims in the streets to keep the "FEAR" message potent.

[RJnAbbysNana]

3. Would you care to address

Mr. Raimondo's allegations of a pro-Israeli connection, or did you read the entire article? It's an intriguing "angle," wouldn't you say, especially in light of the strong anti-Israeli sentiments in some of the ME countries at this time.

Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[400Years]

2. I saw alot of anti-arab racism in Denmark back in the early 90's

they don't like dark skinned people

[bloom]

4. So Rose is a big fan of Daniel Pipes - whatdoyouknow!?!

I went to a Pipes lecture a couple years ago - and would be totally not surprised to have him be behind the start of the next world war. And how ironical that the cartoon thing has become a free speech issue for so many as Pipes tries to silence opposing views.


From the article you posted:

Rose is apparently a big fan of Daniel Pipes – the controversial anti-Arabist appointed by George W. Bush to the U.S. Institute of Peace ( :eyes: ) – and authored an entirely uncritical profile of Pipes, originally published in Jyllands-Posten and translated here.

Pipes is the founder of Campus Watch, an organization devoted to stamping out any and all academic treatments of Middle Eastern affairs that don't conform to his narrow strictures, which might be mildly described as fanatically hostile to Islam, Arabs, and anyone who opposes his extreme Israeli nationalism. Campus Watch is engaged in compiling blacklists of professors who refuse to spout the pro-Israel party line, and actively encourages students to spy on their teachers and report miscreants.

None of this is mentioned in the profile authored by Rose: instead, we are given a long disquisition on his subject's view of "militant Islam" as a threat supposedly on a par with communism and fascism – again, uncritically, in spite of the lack of proportion evinced by such an extravagant claim, to say nothing of the lack of evidence marshaled by Pipes.

(Flemming Rose interview of Pipes: that is posted on Pipes site)
The Threat of Islamism
by Flemming Rose
Jyllands-Posten
October 29, 2004

According to Daniel Pipes, the Muslim world at the moment is trying, for the third time, to define itself in relation to the West. The two first attempts aimed at (or resulted in) imitating various aspects of the West. The third represents a totalitarian ideology, commensurate to fascism and communism.

Europe baffles

But this should not give us reason to lean back and wait for things to happen by themselves, Pipes thinks. He is amazed that Europe is not more alarmed about the challenge that Islam poses, considering plummeting birth rates and a weakened perception of its own history and culture. "This is one of the biggest stories of our time. The reactions in Europe are bafflingly relaxed. There is much denial at work. It is paradoxical that Muslims, coming from countries that are weaker in economic and political terms, within rich and strong Europe show more cultural ambition than the Europeans themselves. That baffles me as an American. Europe has been the driving force of history throughout the past 500 years, but now it looks as though that era has come to a close. Here in the U.S., the situation is far less dramatic." According to Daniel Pipes, Muslims do not account for more than about one percent of the (U.S.) population, 3 to 4 million people, and their social status differs from that in Europe. "There are groups calling for Islam in schools and intimidating politicians and Muslims who insist on their right to freedom of speech. Militant Islam has an extensive non-violent agenda. Muslims in the U.S. consist of two groups, immigrants and Americans converted to Islam. Muslim immigrants have a higher social and economic status than they have in Europe. There are doctors, engineers and others with a professional education, making serious money."

Failed research

Daniel Pipes has fallen out with a large part of the academic world. He is critical of much of the research undertaken in Middle East Studies and thinks it has neglected or ignored important movements, while in other areas it has too quickly ascribed a modernizing or democratizing effect to the fundamentalists. It has, he thinks, often politicized with a (liability to) penchant for a left-wing twist. "Left-wingers are dissatisfied with the societies formed in the West, while conservatives are content. The discontent and feelings of guilt among left-wingers often make them go too far in their accommodation of opponents. They seek understanding and compromise, whereas conservatives are more inclined to take on a confrontation. People in Middle East studies have not perceived the hostile and violent elements in radical Islam. They have ignored Saddam Hussein's brutal regime, widespread anti-Semitism, slavery in Sudan, cultural repression of Berbers in North Africa, and they have attempted to convey the impression that the word jihad means something entirely different than military efforts to extend Islam's territory. Some even believe that jihad is about becoming a better person. As if Palestinian Islamic Jihad uses the word in the sense of becoming better men."


Biographical facts ("Blue Book")

Daniel Pipes, 54 years. Educated in history at Harvard University. He has held positions in the U.S. Department of State and the Department of Defense. Since 1994, he has concentrated on the operation of the think tank "Middle East Forum", as well as on an unusually popular website, www.danielpipes.org, that receives more than 2 million hits per year. Pipes also has 20.000 subscribers to a free newsletter on the web. He established the Middle East Forum at his home with two friends, but today his office is run from a select address in central Philadelphia, has 15 employees, and a budget of more than 1 million dollars. Pipes has authored 12 books, the latest being Miniatures: Views of Islamic and Middle Eastern Politics.

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3362

[RJnAbbysNana]

6. Thank you for adding the information regarding Pipes.

I wonder if he isn't also behind the campaign in California where they're paying college students to spy on and report their professors who might speak out against the Bush regime. I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

5. FYI

Recently I saw a cartoon film, designed for children, on the life of Mohammaed (pbuh). The Prophet's face was never seen, yet the story of his life was told, and quite beautifully. This cartoon was endorsed by several Muslim councils, including Shias from Iran. I've heard the story about someone writing a children's book on the Prophet before, with the details that they were terrified to even draw any pictures at all, etc, etc. The film I saw belies the notion that Muslims are maniacs who won't allow any representation or telling of the story of the beginnings of Islam.

[RJnAbbysNana]

7. I think that may vary from one Muslim group to another.

I know that the Shi'ites and Sunnis believe differently regarding life after death and, perhaps, other things as well.

Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[tocqueville]

8. I'm sorry but this is bullshit

1) Jyllands Posten is about as RW then the WP. For people from antiwar, anybody who doesn't subscribe to a communist or socialist paper is a fascist

2) what Rose says isn't controversial, except for left-wing extremists :

"we are given a long disquisition on his subject's view of "militant Islam" as a threat supposedly on a par with communism and fascism – again, uncritically, in spite of the lack of proportion evinced by such an extravagant claim"

3) "About the question of integration and how compatible is the religion of Islam with a modern secular society – how much does an immigrant have to give up and how much does the receiving culture have to compromise."

what's wrong with that ? antiwar forgets that European societies are secular societies and cannot accept that exceptions to common laws and rules are made in some religion's name : islamic militants have been the ONLY group to ask for those changes for example in schools. The most preposterous example was a trial in Sweden of an iraqui shiite for the beating to death of his daughter (she was dating a young white Swede) : his defense was "you cannot judge me because my religion and my culture allows it".

4) 'Religious feelings cannot demand special treatment in a secular society,' he added. 'In a democracy one must from time to time accept criticism or becoming a laughingstock.'"

yep that one of the fundamentals of a democratic society : separation of Church and State



in other words : antiwar does as usual : sides with the fanatics. Yesterday Saddam, today the Mollahs.

[RJnAbbysNana]

11. And?

n/t

[tocqueville]

12. still bullshit

antiwar is complaining about an absolute European consensus that religious claims CANNOT be a ground to change laws and rules, not to talk about behaviours in a secular democratic society. Antiwar should look to gain support from Pat Robertson. He'll understand them.

[RJnAbbysNana]

18. 'Splain, please!

"Antiwar should look to gain support from Pat Robertson. He'll understand them."

I see no connection whatsoever between the two. I think you're just fishing for something to say to degrade Antiwar, aren't you?

Regards,

RJnAbbysNana

[tocqueville]

21. it's very simple, read the whole article

the statements from Rose that :

militant islam can be compared with fascism and communism is according to antiwar outrageous. Fact is that Rose is right : militant Islam is a totalitarian ideology.

That doesn't mean that all people of muslim faith are terrorists or totalitarian no more than all catholics are potential pedophiles. Antiwar is falling into simple demagogery by equating criticism of militant Islam with racism. It's exactly the tactics used by the Islamic fanatics. You know the ones with bombs. Not the billion others.

Rose states (outrageous accordind to antiwar):

"About the question of integration and how compatible is the religion of Islam with a modern secular society – how much does an immigrant have to give up and how much does the receiving culture have to compromise."

'Religious feelings cannot demand special treatment in a secular society,' he added. 'In a democracy one must from time to time accept criticism or becoming a laughingstock.'"

this is the core of democracy and Separation of Church of State. We Europeans thought that this was settled (mostly at that time regarding Christianity) 200 years ago by 2 revolutions, Voltaire, Jeffersson et al...

Who is saying the contrary of what Rose states today ? Pat Robertson, Falwell, Mullah Omar, OBL and.... antiwar


see my post below : even the trotskyites and the Pravda are saying the same stuff than antiwar, they nearly COPY eachother.

the core tenets of separation of Church and State and Freedom of expression are questioned by all those guys, using the fallacious argument that it is "disguised racism". This is nothing else than utter BS.

Besides, facts show that similar cartoons and similar statements than Rose's have circulated before causing nothing else than local polemics. Fact is that the ones that started the "cartoon war" are fanatic clerics who that time got backup from Iran and Syria, two countries feeling (with all right) threatened by an invasion...

unless there are millions of Danish speaking muslims in the ME and Asia, spouting up their mint tea when in the morning they open the latest edition of Jyllands Posten and see the "horror"...

I can tell you that my neighbour Mohammed (we call him Momo) was the other day sipping his wine (he'll go to hell) and laughing his ass off when he saws the reproductions...

[mmonk]

14. Haven't read that article yet

but your description of the people of antiwar is interesting given they are primarily Libertarian.

[tocqueville]

16. sorry I mixed them with another group

Several themes and concepts recur quite regularly in Raimondo's writing, mostly derived from his libertarian and paleoconservative ideological roots. He is uncompromising in his beliefs that initiatory war is wrong, immoral, and counterproductive, that a small group of neoconservatives in both major American political parties has been responsible for "lying us into war" repeatedly, and that the ideals of the Old Right conservative movement have been consistently sold out since around the time of the Vietnam war, when neoconservatives united with religious conservatives to pursue an expansive foreign policy, often in support of the country of Israel. Raimondo often condemns the government of Israel, though he has explicitly condemned antisemitism on many occasions -- including a piece in which he calls anti-Semites "deranged" <4> -- writing that he has "respect and great affection for the Jewish people."<5>


you are right. But it comes down to the same. You can read exactly the same thing from trotskyites.

[bloom]

9. More Pipes nonsense

Cartoons and Islamic Imperialism

"...More specifically, will Westerners accede to a double standard by which Muslims are free to insult Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism, while Muhammad, Islam, and Muslims enjoy immunity from insults? Muslims routinely publish cartoons far more offensive than the Danish ones . Are they entitled to dish it out while being insulated from similar indignities?"

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3360


The United States Government: Patron of Islam?

"...But this is simply not true anymore. Islam, the most political of religions, now enjoys a privileged place in Washington, just as it does in almost every capital around the world."

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/90

-------

Pipes is delusional.

For one thing hate speech laws in Europe protect Jews if they protect anybody. So Muslims insult Jews in Iran or something? Do Jews never insult Muslims in Israel? I find that hard to believe.

And by "privileged" - he means that Muslims are given a modicum of respect - and he finds that offensive.

[fishnfla]

10. The cartoons were publish in Sept

Them Muslims sure are slow on the uptake huh? Either that or it is the slowest provocation in the history of the world

[tocqueville]

13. it's not a provocation

the French libertarian satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo published a cartoon about two years ago with the following description (I won't post the picture for DU rules) :

a fake cover of "Al Islamiya news" shows Mohammed portrayed with a not very nice facial expression attending the "annual miss potato sack contest" (a bunch of burqua wearing misses) holding a cigar and a Cognac glass in his hand. This is pure blasphemy.

A minor Islamic organisation filed a lawsuit against the magazine for "racial discrimination" (which is illegal in France), since there is no law against blasphemy. They were immediately turned down with the motivation of freedom of expression.

Were they any burned embassies ?

[bloom]

15. Take the Quiz !!!

This was linked to in the article:

http://www.drmenlo.com/lgfquiz/




I got a 46% :(

[RJnAbbysNana]

17. So, your point is?

n/t

[bloom]

19. The article you posted

linked to the quiz as the neoconservative view of the Muslim world.

"So much for getting "behind all the stereotypes" and seeing the "complexity" in spite of his "blind spots." These days, it seems, Rose has been entirely blinded by the kind of hate exhibited in those cartoons, which dramatize the neoconservative view of the Muslim world as inherently terroristic – a view that the perpetrators of this provocation were hoping would be demonstrated in the Muslim reaction."


From the site of the quiz:

about this quiz
I was inspired to build this quiz when I noticed that comments on Littlegreenfootballs.com (a popular warblog) tended to be indistinguishable in tone and content from the writings of Adolf Hitler, Heinrich Himmler, and the other architects of the "final solution."

Always indistinguishable? Well, maybe not - but close enough and often enough to be pretty disturbing. Yes, the quotes I've used here are all "cherry-picked" - from LGF and the Nazis both - but since the webmaster patrols LGF pretty thoroughly it's fair to say that his site is as defined by what he allows (e.g., calls to "sterilize" the "subhuman" Palestinians) as it is by what he doesn't (e.g., criticisms of Israel or George W).

I think people can draw their own conclusions.

[tocqueville]

20. exactly the same "arguments" from communists...

European media publish anti-Muslim cartoons: An ugly and calculated provocation
By the Editorial Board
4 February 2006
Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author

http://wsws.org/articles/2006/feb2006/cart-f04.shtml

The World Socialist Web Site unequivocally condemns the publication by a series of European newspapers of defamatory cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad as a terrorist and killer. These crude caricatures, intended to insult and incite Muslim sensibilities, are a political provocation. Their publication, initially by a right-wing Danish newspaper with historical ties to German and Italian fascism, was calculated to fuel anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant sentiment.

The decision of the right-wing Danish government to defend the newspaper that initially published the cartoons, and of newspapers in Norway, France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Iceland and Hungary, both conservative and liberal, to reprint them has nothing to do with freedom of the press or the defense of secularism. Such claims make a mockery of these democratic principles.

The promulgation of such bigoted filth is, rather, bound up with a shift by the European ruling elites to line up more squarely behind the neo-colonial interventions of US imperialism in the Middle East and Central Asia. It is no accident that it occurs in the midst of the ongoing slaughter in Iraq, new threats against the Palestinian masses, and the preparations to launch sanctions, and eventual military aggression, against Iran.

It is, moreover, a continuation and escalation of a deliberate policy in Europe, spearheaded by the political right and aided and abetted by the nominal “left” parties, to demonize the growing Muslim population, isolate it, and use it as a scapegoat for the growing social misery affecting broad layers of the working class.

and here the PRAVDA :

Some who defend the publication of the cartoons claim they are examples of satire—as though crude appeals to the basest and most bigoted impulses can be equated with genuine social or cultural criticism. In fact, the images plastered on the pages of European newspapers and broadcast on television news programs have far more in common with the type of anti-Semitic caricatures made infamous by the Nazis than they do with satire.

That such outpourings can have anything to do with a struggle for secularism in opposition to religious belief is absurd. A genuine critique of religion can be conducted only on the highest intellectual level, appealing to science and reason—not ignorance and fear.

The current episode reveals the enormous dangers facing the working class from the visible decomposition of democracy in all of the capitalist countries. The promotion of anti-Muslim chauvinism, and all forms of communalist and nationalist poison, is the expression of a social system that is mired in insoluble crisis and incapable of meeting the most basic needs of the broad masses of the people.

The only antidote to such backward and reactionary politics is the development of a united movement of workers of all countries, religions and nationalities in opposition to war and in defense of democratic rights against the capitalist ruling elites and the system they uphold. The program upon which such a struggle must be based is socialist internationalism.

http://engforum.pravda.ru/showthread.php3?threadid=158687
____________________________________________________________________________________________

conclusion : two different agendas (libertarians/communists) = same results. Same tactics "I side with the oppressed" not matter who represents them.