by Raymond Ibrahim<\/p>\n
PJ Media<\/em><\/p>\n Which is more likely to elicit an irate Muslim response: 1) public cartoons of the Muslim prophet Muhammad, or 2) public proclamations that Muhammad was a bisexual, sometime transvestite and necrophile, who enjoyed sucking on the tongues of children, commanded a woman to \u201cbreastfeed\u201d an adult man, and advised believers to drink his urine for salutary health?<\/p>\n Based on the recent\u00a0South Park<\/em>\u00a0fiasco \u2014 where an animated episode depicting Muhammad in a bear suit sparked outrage among various Muslim groups, culminating with the usual\u00a0death threats<\/a>\u00a0[1] \u2014 the answer is clear: cartoons, once again, have proven to be the Muslim world\u2019s premiere provocateur. Indeed, just yesterday, during a university lecture, Swedish artist\u00a0Lars Vilks<\/a>\u00a0[2], whose life is in jeopardy due to his depiction of Muhammad as a dog, was violently\u00a0assaulted<\/a>\u00a0[3] to undulations of \u201cAllahu Akbar!\u201d (Islam\u2019s primordial war cry).<\/p>\n Yet how can cartoons rouse Muslim ire more than public assertions that Muhammad was a bisexual, a transvestite, a necrofile, et al? First, context:<\/p>\n The evangelical Arabic satellite station,\u00a0Al-Haya<\/a><\/em>\u00a0[4] (Life TV), regularly takes the Muslim prophet to task, especially on two weekly programs:\u00a0Hiwar al-Haq<\/em>\u00a0(Truth Talk), hosted by Coptic priest\u00a0Fr. Zakaria Botros<\/a>[5], and\u00a0Su\u2019al Jari\u2019<\/em>\u00a0(Daring Question), hosted by ex-Muslim\u00a0Rashid<\/a>\u00a0[6]. Both shows revolve around asking uncomfortable questions about Islam and its founder in an effort to prompt Muslims to reconsider the legitimacy of their faith. (It is on these shows that the aforementioned, unflattering assertions of Muhammad originate; see\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0[7] and\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0[8] for English summaries.)<\/p>\n These broadcasts are viewed by millions of Arabic-speaking Muslims around the world. That the satellite station strikes a Muslim nerve is evinced by the fact that it is formally banned in several Muslim nations, including Saudi Arabia, and is regularly condemned by Islam\u2019s demagogues on mainstream Arabic media, including\u00a0Al Jazeera<\/em>.<\/p>\n When the programs first began airing, they certainly caused uproar in the Muslim world. Then, Muslims regularly called in cursing the hosts, promising them death and destruction (both here and in the hereafter). Al-Qaeda reportedly put a\u00a0$60 million bounty on Fr. Zakaria\u2019s head<\/a>\u00a0[9]; and the priest is on\u00a0CAIR\u2019s radar<\/a>[10]. (See the father explain his mission in this\u00a0rare English interview<\/a>\u00a0[11].)<\/p>\n Far from being cowed by the daily death threats, however,\u00a0Life TV<\/em>\u00a0and its unrepentant hosts have responded by upping the ante and providing even more anecdotes discrediting Muhammad. Rashid recently examined the theological implications of\u00a0Muhammad\u2019s hatred for the gecko lizard<\/a>\u00a0[12], which the prophet accused of being \u201can infidel and enemy of the believers.\u201d Muslims who kill it in the first strike receive 100 \u201cheavenly-points,\u201d whereas those who kill it in two strikes receive only 70. More graphically, Fr. Zakaria\u00a0recently\u00a0examined<\/a>\u00a0[13] canonical hadiths (authenticated Muslim accounts) that record Islam\u2019s first believers eating Muhammad\u2019s feces, marinating food in his sweat, drinking the water he gargled and spit out, and smearing his phlegm all over their faces \u2014 all to his approval.<\/p>\n Needless to say,\u00a0Life TV<\/em>\u2019s hosts \u2014 especially the flamboyant Fr. Zakaria \u2014 are hated by Muslims around the world. But to the careful observer, the outrage appears to be subsiding, ostensibly replaced by apathy \u2014 that is, the default strategy when threats and displays of indignation fail. Most callers are now Muslim converts to Christianity, who encourage and thank Fr. Zakaria and Rashid (often in tears). Conversely, the diminishing angry callers usually spew a barrage of insults, culminating with a \u201cmay-you-burn-in-hell,\u201d and quickly \u2014 almost as if ashamed of their childish behavior \u2014 hang up.<\/p>\n Now, back to our original observation: how can\u00a0Life TV<\/em>\u00a0get away with outlandish weekly disparagements concerning Muhammad, whereas Western cartoons spark widespread outrage? Considering that millions more Muslims watch\u00a0Life TV<\/em>\u00a0than have ever heard of\u00a0South Park<\/em>\u00a0makes the question doubly puzzling.<\/p>\n The answer is simple: the\u00a0South Park<\/em>\u00a0incident is less a reflection of Muslim anger and more of Western appeasement. By constantly buckling in to the slightest Muslim displeasure \u2014 whether by\u00a0altering films<\/a>[14],\u00a0removing museum art<\/a>\u00a0[15], or\u00a0canceling book launches<\/a>\u00a0[16] \u2014 the West has perpetuated a vicious cycle wherein Muslim sensitivities are ever heightened and outraged at the slightest slight, and Western freedoms of expression are correspondingly diminished and trampled upon. What\u2019s worse, such self-imposed censorship falls right into the hands of homegrown Islamists\u00a0actively working\u00a0<\/a>[17]to subvert Western civilization from within.<\/p>\n Conversely, by holding fast to onetime Western principles of free speech and open dialogue,\u00a0Life TV<\/em>\u00a0has conditioned its Muslim viewers to accept that exposure and criticism of their prophet is here to stay. As Fr. Zakaria often points out, every religious figure is open to criticism: so why should Muhammad be sacrosanct? (Indeed,\u00a0Comedy Central<\/em>, which was quick to acquiesce to Muslim demands to\u00a0censor\u00a0South Park<\/em><\/a>\u00a0[18], is \u201cbrave\u201d enough to run an entire\u00a0cartoon series mocking Jesus<\/a>\u00a0[19].)<\/p>\n