Ian Boyne

Will the terror tactics and bullyism of the militant Muslims force us in the West to be gagged for fear of our lives? Shall we squelch freedom of speech just to appease these bigots? And will the so-called moderate Muslims who eschew violence and vouch for Islam's civilised nature please stand up?

The violent and deadly reactions in the Islamic world to Pope Benedict's quotation of a Byzantine Emperor equating Islam with violence again highlights the threat which militant Islam poses to free speech and civil liberties. It again painfully demonstrates that Islam today represents the greatest ideological force for repression and authoritarianism. It has replaced communism as the greatest global threat to civil and political liberties.

I want no leftist to tell me any nonsense about the evils of the democratic West - I am aware of them. Don't give me any treatise how "bourgeois democracy" is really a sham, a facade, something of value only to the ruling class. Don't tell me how freedom of speech is really restricted in the United States.

What we do know is that Chavez can go to the United States and make a fool of himself, say the most embarrassing (to himself) and clownish things, be undignified to the President of the United States and get coverage on all the networks and in all the leading newspapers of the ruling class. And he can go back to the United States and say even worse next year. If he had ever dared to say that about any revered Islamic leader in that leader's country, or about any communist leader during the Cold War he might hardly have made it out of the country, let alone to go back.

Whatever the weaknesses of bourgeois democracy - and there are many and well documented from U.S. publishing houses themselves - the fact is that you can curse and abuse George Bush or any European leader in his country and be protected in doing so.

Unfair world

You can criticise, ridicule and lampoon Jesus Christ and the Christian religion - as is regularly done by the secular press - and Christians won't burn down your houses, smash your business places and kill atheists. Yet, these Muslim fanatics and looneys can kill an elderly nun, burn churches, come out in their multiple thousands to chant death to the Pope because he dared to quote someone expressing an unfavourable opinion about their prophet Muhammad.

And yet a serious intellectual like Karen Armstrong can be so blinded by her liberalism that she can bemoan in the Guardian that "Hatred of Islam is so ubiquitous and so deeply rooted in Western culture that it brings together people who are usually at daggers drawn." There is something about us who age progressive which makes it extremely difficult to acknowledge the atrociticies committed in the name of Islam. If Islam is the peaceful religion it is made out to be by its Western defenders and apologists, where are the voices of peace and reason within the religion - or are they frightened by their more militant and murderous brethren?

Hunt down and kill the pope

A Somali Islamic leader called for the Pope's death, saying that Muslims should "hunt down and kill" Pope Benedict for his quotation about Prophet Muhammad. Said this enemy of freedom: "We urge you Muslims wherever you are to hunt down the Pope for his barbaric statements as you have pursued Salman Rushdie, the enemy of Allah who offended our religion." He went on to say that, "Whoever offends our Prophet Muhammad should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim." What do people like Karen Armstrong and other liberals and leftists say about this, aside from pointing out that "Bush is killing more people in Iraq and other places in the world"? So let's attack Bush, but don't fail to deal with the issue of Islamic violence. Why would we see the violence of US militarism reprehensible and the violence of Muslims acceptable - because one is by the powerful while the other is by the oppressed and aggrieved?

The warning

The Associated Press last week reported that "Al-Qaida in Iraq warned Pope Benedict XVI on Monday that its war against Christianity and the West will go on until Islam takes over the world." That is not a world I would want to inhabit. All peoples who respect the tradition of pluralism, multi-culturalism, tolerance, freedom of speech and freedom of the Press should do everything legal and moral to oppose al-Qaida and all those who are fighting to bring about that barbaric world. We have to call a spade a spade on these matters and stop pussyfooting around with these fanatics and extremists.

Let no one accuse me of pushing for Christianity over Islam. I am for religious pluralism and tolerance. Not only President Bush, but all well-thinking people should oppose strenuously the encroachment of Islamic fundamentalism. It is not good for Jamaica and it is not good for the world.

The European Commission put it well this past week: "Freedom of speech is a cornerstone of the EU's values, as is respect for all religions, Christianity, Islam, Judaism or laicism." These are not just European values, humanitarian values. We have come too far a way from the barbarians of the past to be entangled once more in the quagmire of Islamic totalitarianism.

Freedoms

Freedom of speech means the right to offend. The right to insult. Disrespect and discourtesy should not be punishable by death. Rudeness should be condemned, but its perpetrators should not be condemned to death. People must be free to draw cartoons ridiculing Muhammad, Buddha, Zoroaster - and, yes, Jesus. This is a freedom people must have in a democratic society. Let Jesus or Muhammad send them to Hell at the Judgment but secular society has no right to impose any punishment on people who do that.

Jews and violence

Cartoonists should be free to attack Islam, Christianity and Judaism just as they attack politicians and businessmen. It is a fact that many Jews are also hyper-sensitive and tend to label any criticism anti-Semitism. By who says the bigots are limited to Muslims? It is just that they have a jihadist ideology which encourages violence and militant protests. The Jews will use their economic and political power to suppress your freedom and squeeze you if you criticise them.

There are countries in Europe which have the absurd and unjust law which punishes people for displaying the swastika or for denying the Holocaust. Absurd. People should have the freedom to express their racist views but at least in the West even where there are illiberal and unjust laws, people are not killed summarily. But the totalitarian impulse is not limited to Muslims. It is just that there are cultural traditions and systems which protect certain freedoms and civil liberties in our societies.

Some of the very Christians who are vehemently opposing the militant, fanatical Muslims would not hesitate to say that Hollywood should not be free to depict Jesus in a certain way. I say Hollywood should have that right. If Christians want to peacefully protest when the movies come out, that is their democratic right. But they should not be calling for holy warriors to kill the movie directors and actors, like the Muslim fanatics would. Have your street protests, yes, and blast the offenders, whether or not he is the Pope. The Pope should not be above criticism, whatever fanatical Catholics want to say. They might see him as the Holy Father but for those who see him as just another sinful, flawed man they should be free to blast him. We have to be consistent.

Yes let's talk about good taste but good taste and the right to life are two different things.

The Pope was appallingly insensitive and irresponsible in quoting the slander by the Emperor without clearly and unequivocally distancing himself from it. That someone of his high office could do that suggests either shockingly poor judgment or an aggressive stance toward Islam. A John Paul 11 would never have made that blunder. To quote a statement that "Show me what Muhammad broughtÉ and there you will find things only evil and inhuman" is not only disrespectful but grossly untrue. Muhammad taught many good and noble things shared by all the world religions. It is unforgivable that someone of the Pope's stature should not have denounced that statement after quoting it.

But the Pope made a more fundamental, though overlooked, misrepresentation in his presentation. He portrayed Islam as opposed to rationality and reason, almost equating it with fideism, when an erudite philosopher like him should know that no world religion puts more emphasis on reason and intellectual search than Islam. The role that Islam has played in building Western civilization and in translating the works of the Greek philosophers, including Plato, is remarkable. Western civilization owes so much to Muslim philosophers that this misrepresentation by the Pope is the far greater transgression in the speech.

It is a fact that Muslims have used the sword to spread their religion but so have the Catholics. The pope had a nerve to be talking like that. The Old Testament, which his church and Christianity accept, have so many proudly recorded reports of Israel's using the sword to capture people's lands and subdue them. It is not only Islam which has a violent history and we must not distort the facts. It is just that the Jews and the Christians have now renounced their violent theocracy and the Muslims; the relative new kid on the block, is having their go at it.

Just as secular society won over the Jews and Christians, so we must fight the Muslims ideologically and legally in bringing them to their senses. We most not cower under their terror and intimidatory tactics. We must attack them and their religion without fear. And we must warn people about the dangers of adopting a religious faith which is totalitarian and disrespectful of people's right to dissent.

Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist. Email him at ianboyne1@yahoo.com