Bin Laden Wants My Blood
Osama bin Laden has been celebrating the birthday of the prophet Mohammed by calling on Muslims to kill people like me, cartoonists and other “blasphemers” who have dared to publish and republish cartoons of a man who lived 1,400 years ago.
Actually, this is nothing new. Bin Laden addressed the cartoon issue two years ago, in a little-noticed speech, when he called the cartoons of Mohammed the worst possible attack on Islam.
“The response will be what you see and not what you hear and let our mothers bereave us if we do not make victorious our messenger of God,” said the voice from the cave in yesterday’s message.
“You went overboard in your unbelief and freed yourselves of the etiquettes of dispute and fighting and went to the extent of publishing these insulting drawings. This is the greatest tragedy and the reckoning for it will be more severe,” it added.
The man from the cave said that the republishing of Kurt Westergaard’s cartoon depicting Muhammed with a bomb in his turban was part of a crusade against Islam. And, according to bin Laden, Pope Benedict XVI is playing a key role in this confrontation, even though the Pope has denounced the publication and republication of the famous cartoon.
Interestingly, bin Laden didn’t mention the upcoming film about the Koran by Dutch politician Geert Wilders, which has been the subject of much debate in the Muslim world. So I am not sure if this is actually a new tape. But whether it’s a new or an old recording, jihadists around the world will be inspired by it and try to act in the spirit of the message.
Danish police have been on alert since February 13, when 17 newspapers in Denmark republished Mr. Westergaard’s cartoon as an act of solidarity following the arrest of three Muslims for allegedly plotting to kill the 72-year old cartoonist. Since the arrests, Mr. Westergaard has been living in a safe house, and he expects this situation to continue for the rest of his life. Bin Laden’s message, though, hasn’t led the police to change their evaluation of the threat level inside Denmark’s borders. However, Danish products and businesses are being boycotted around the Muslim world, and Egypt has just refused to play the Danish national handball team.
The latest message from bin Laden isn’t the first to address the cartoons. In a 50-minute speech released on audio cassette back in April 2006, bin Laden attacked Arab governments for their inappropriate response to the publication of the cartoons. Obviously, he would have preferred more killings and torchings of embassies. Bin Laden made clear that he saw the blasphemous Danish cartoons as a worse attack on Islam than the invasions in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also explicitly called for retaliation.
“Indeed, this is our Prophet’s law regarding anyone who mocks him, and belittles Islam and scorns it… They should be killed… Take an example from Muhammed ibn Maslama [who assassinated the poet Ka'b ibn Al-Asharaf]. It is intolerable and outrageous that the heretics are among us, scorning our religion and our Prophet. Therefore you must fear Allah and do His will. Do not consult anyone about the killing of these heretics. Be secretive in carrying out that which is required of you. So much for the apostate heretics.”
Explaining his call for the killing of heretics and blasphemers, bin Laden cited the example of Mohammed himself who is supposed to be a role model for every Muslim. The prophet ordered the killing of Ka’b ibn Al-Ashraf because he had written critical poems about Mohammed.
The latest message from bin Laden has been analyzed by Walid Phares:
The message is heavily targeting Europe, while using the “cartoon Jihad” as a motive. Bin Laden, and the war room behind him are concerned about the rise of tough national leaders on the continent: Sarcozy, Merkel, Brown and a possible reemergence of Berlusconi’s Party. In many spots in Europe, citizens are rejecting the Jihadi intimidations and becoming vocal about it. France is going to Chad, Germany has ships in the Eastern Mediterranean and Spain is arresting more Salafists. But the traditional apologists towards the Islamist agenda in Europe, remains strong. Al Qaeda wants to use the apologists against the “resistance.” What better than threatening to strike at Europe’s peace if its liberal values are not altered? In essence this is Bin Laden’s message:
Change your laws on liberties and freedom of expression or else. “If there is no check on the freedom of your words then let your hearts be open to the freedom of our hearts.”
But a thorough investigation of the origination of this argument leads not to al Qaeda’s traditional rhetoric — the group isn’t very concerned with the change of laws in infidel lands — but to demands that have been made by “long-range” Jihadists on European Governments. A simple check of archives shows that it wasn’t Bin laden or Zawahiri who have asked Europe to enact laws against “insult to religion” but more “mainstream” Islamist forces and intellectuals. Among them the Muslim Brotherhoods, the Union of Islamic Clerics (also influenced by the Brotherhoods and headed by Sheikh Yusuf al Qardawi the spiritual mentor of al Jazeera), a number of European based academics and the bulk of Wahhabi radical clerics. This revealing reality if anything shows one of the two trends: Either al Qaeda is using the argumentation of political Islamists to provoke a mass clash against Europe or is it that the “political Jihadists” are now able to influence the war discourse of al Qaeda. In both cases, it deserves a closer analysis.
According to Mr. Phares and commentators on Al Jazeera, bin Laden’s message was aimed at Europeans and the Euro-Jihadis.
It was threatening Governments to retreat from the confrontation on the one hand and unleashing the pools of indoctrinated Jihadis across the continent to “engage” in violence. The near future will tell us if the trigger will be successful or not.
What should the response of Europe be? More cartoons or less cartoons? What kind of civilization are we, after all, if we refrain from mocking and ridiculing bin Laden and his followers?
Flemming Rose is the culture editor for Jyllands-Posten in Copenhagen. He also blogs at PajamasXpress’ Northern Light.
I’m not sure our response should be “more cartoons”, any more than one’s response to inadvertently offending a co-worker, say, would be to ramp up the level of offensiveness.
Better to say that we will continue to go about our business from day to day, and mock, satirise or otherwise comment on any aspect of anyone’s faith that we consider worthy of such attention.
I don’t think we should go out of our way to do so; merely reserve the right to do it when we choose, regardless of the blood-curdling threats levelled against us.
Shorter bin Laden: Ouch!
If you are in a boxing match and your opponent yells “ouch” when you hit him in a perfectly legal manner, do you stop to be more fair and allow him to beat you, or do you zero in on his weakness and punch him there repeatedly until you beat him?
The cartoons remain an excellent nonviolent way of asserting western values in western nations.
If Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, atheists, and everyone else can endure criticism, the same can be expected of Muslims. Islamic ‘winning through intimidation’ practices cannot be tolerated. Muslims will not desist until it is made unequivocally clear to these hypersensitive Muslims that they will lose this game are playing. And they will lose this juvenile (but deadly) game they’ve foisted upon us.
If Muslims disagree, they can hit the road. Yes – it is as simple as that. There is no special treatment to be found here.
Keep up the good work.
“Indeed, this is our Prophet’s law regarding anyone who mocks him, and belittles Islam and scorns it… They should be killed…”
Allah is supposed to be all knowing and would know in advance of anyone being critical of Islam, why does he not carry out the death sentence, it would be easy for him surely?
There is no Allah, he is a false deity, therefore men have to carry out the death sentence passed down from this idiot who uses a false deity to gain power, people who believe in Islam are brain challenged.
Just my opinion and I have every right to say it.
The original Jyllands Posten cartoons were well done. And funny.
But continuing those kinds of statements feeds into and gives an excuse for (the very tiresome) outrage that radical Islamists seem to thrive on.
What Osama & friends hate the most is to be ignored. For their rants and their killing agenda to be seen for what they are, insane.
What we need is more cartoons showing the Prophet mocking Osama.
Drive him nuts: be hard to call a jihad on those cartoons.
Osama is spouting his final dose of bile, as he has been effectively neutered. He is unable to exercise effective command and control as he did before 9/11, and he has become a frustrated old fanatic. His only hope now is to convince someone, anyone, to do something significant on his behalf. Otherwise, his slide into irrelevance will continue.
Yes, Wolf Pangloss, but we’re not boxing all Muslims; just the ones who insist on stepping into the ring and challenging us to fight.
That we are expected to punch people in a boxing ring does not entitle us to punch people in the street. It doesn’t even entitle us to step out of the ring and punch his supporters.
I’m in favour of a tougher line against the Chinese, for example, but that doesn’t mean that Chinese people are therefore suspect. That’s not just absurdly reductionist; it’s just pointless racism.
I repeat: publish what you wish, absolutely. Our freedom of speech is not negotiable and we must not allow it to be trampled by fundamentalist thugs. But if your answer is wall-to-wall MoToons until every Muslim out there wants to kill you, you’re simply a fool.
What we need is more cartoons showing the Prophet mocking Osama.
Oh gosh, what an excellent idea
I’ve already got some good captions in mind for some of the depictions here
Also an essay is linked which supposedly gives a little better history of Mohammed Depiction standards than the current distortions among radical Islamists.
OBL -what a putz!
The problem with what you’re saying, Mr Eugenides, is that you’re accepting the Muslim idea, radical or otherwise, that the Motoons are the equivalent of punching ordinary Muslims in the street. It’s that idea that must be fought. You’ve lost half the battle once you accept that premise.
Also you say we shouldn’t go out of our way to offend and that we should just go about our day-to-day business. But of course there are plenty of Westerners whose day-to-day business is to go out of their way to offend people. They’re applauded or derided based on who they’re offending this week. But should they take a hands-off approach to Mohammed? Absolutely not!
I’m reminded of the chapter in Freakonomics about how the KKK was pretty much demolished as a major American force by being ridiculed on the Superman radio show.
Ever since the cartoons came out, I have wished that I was talented that way. If ever there were a religion that deserves to be mocked mercilessly, it is Islam. It is the antithesis of everything that free men believe in. It is because of religions like Islam that we need freedom of religion. We also need to send Muslims a strong message that while they are here in the USA, coercion will not be tolerated.
Christianity can be mocked with impunity and only its hardest-line supporters urge “more restraint”; never do we hear “it was an unintentional offense, but now that we know we offended, we should back off” as a response. Judaism – wellnow, Judaism has been a punchline of rude jokes for hundred of years, and ditto: few calls for restraint, no heed paid to those. Why should Islam be treated differently?
Oh yes: because those who take the most offense, rather than just making placards and protesting vociferously, tend to behead people. We should reward this behavior?
THIS is why we need to keep the cartoons coming: because to back off on them sends exactly the wrong message to the most offended. How we manage the middling-offended – that’s tricky. But cultural assimilation to the extent that Western civil liberties remain the unchallenged should be absolutely non-negotiable.
Muslims should lighten up. At least they’re not seeing an “artistic” display of the Koran in a jar of urine or portraits of the prophet Muhammad painted in fecal matter.
Muslims need some tough love when it comes to living in the west and coexisting with it. Desensitivation and zero tolerance are required. Sensitivity is not a suicide pact.
“What should the response of Europe be? More cartoons or less cartoons? What kind of civilization are we, after all, if we refrain from mocking and ridiculing bin Laden and his followers?”
More cartoons, more films, more books. More people asking more questions and taking Islam to task and yes, even more ridicule.
No one “church” of spiritual thought should ever have power over the right to freedom of speech, which basically is the right and freedom to question.
Had Christianity not gone through Enlightenment, Europe would still be burning witches and heretics at the stake and the Pope would be at the head of European government. How really different are the Jihadis from the Christian Crusaders?
Of course they will not move towards modernity without the self-realization that exposing Islam for what it is will show. Cartoons help. But it has to be done. It is virutally the last deadly virus of our ancient barbaric past. Islam and its followers are in need of a big enlightenment what-for.
‘The Devil, that proud spirit, cannot bear to be mocked’.
The substantial identity between Nazi-fascism and Bin Laden’s terrorist Islamism is evident. More: Mohammed’s Koran could be considered as ante prima of Hitler’s Mein Kampf. In fact, it is nothing more than a delirium tremens of fight against the all unfaithful ones of the world, of the founder of this “religion” that knows neither love nor mercy, but only hatred and revenge. In this point Islam and Nazi-fascism agree perfectly. Even more significant is the coincidence, not to say the harmony, between Islamism, leftist radicalism and neo-Nazism. This is logical: with the assistance of the Islamic terrorists the heirs of the European radicalism hope (after many frustrated attempts) finally to destroy our democratic civilization, by the way, the only one in our dark time, to deserve this name.
I read the whole topic and the point that I’ve found it, and the only reason you’ve given here is ‘freedom’, sometime people misunderstood or can not distinguish between freedom of talk and freedom of insolting other people.
if we talk about freedom is fine, but if talk a bout insolting other people, then there should be a solution for it
Seems to me that OBL doesn’t grasp himself between the Rock and the Hard Place… For if, by his words’ command, one single hair of a European head is harmed by anyone in the name of his prophet, the act VALIDATES the cartoon. Perhaps if his PR folks outlined a policy to show us the other side of the Muslim faith (be there one?), that would destroy the cartoon! Rock on, Freedom.
What is so laughable about this infantile and narcissistic zealot cult is that they continue to expose their weakness. If they are offended by a cartoon, just think if we dropped a few bunker busters on Mecca.
Hear Hear!
I have PIGMAN, in all his pigskinned leather glory, showing OBL what he thinks of his latest rant.
if we talk about freedom is fine, but if talk a bout insulting other people, then there should be a solution for it.
I’ve always marveled that the inimitable truth of Allah (as communicated through the Angel Gabriel and eventually winding up as the Koran) could possibly be subject to “insult”.
Or could need any kind of defense from mere mortals.
Especially from mortals who seem to think “insult” to the Koran is a more significant crime than slaughtering their own women and children.
I don’t understand the worry about what the Muslims will do.
Haven’t we been informed, ad nauseum, that Islam is a religion of peace and how the majority of Muslims do not hate us or wish us harm.
So why should we tip toe around Muslims? We don’t worry when we insult Christian snakehandlers do we?
Pope Benedict just farted in Sammy’s general direction. Viva Papa!
If Osama thinks the cartoons are bad, wait until my inflatable Mohammed hits the market. Followed shorty after by Allah-on-a-rope for those really holy showers, and the plastic dashboard Allah (GPS optional). I’m trying to work out the tech for an Allah weathervane. No matter which way the wind blows, it points to Mecca. That will need a robust marketing campaign.
cry havoc…
Boy that righteous blowhard sure loves the sound of his own voice. I kind of wish there was one united western voice to call him out for the multitude of contradictions in his numerous rants rather than the silence that always makes it seem like we’re cowering in fear of his threats.
For starters, how come such western inventions as the computer, the internet, modern video production techniques, cel phones, cars, planes and weapons are okay for him and his followers to use in so-called defense of Islam? If you really reject the west, shouldn’t these things also be rejected along with Coke and Hollywood movies?
And why doesn’t anyone (Muslims included) ever really condemn him and his followers for the killing of innocent Muslim women and children in violent strikes as sloppy and random as public suicide explosions?
And while I’m at it, didn’t Mohammed Atta and some of his uptight cohorts spend one of their last nights before 9/11 in a Florida strip club? Not exactly in line with the so called beliefs he died claiming to defend is it?
Sometimes I wonder how he can even be so sure of himself with the many inconsistencies in his rhetoric. But then again, he’s got to be pretty polarized in his views by now, and that can lead to a lot of self delusion and righteousness.
In closing, to anyone who ever doodled the time away with cartoons in the margins of their school notebooks…HAIL, the power of the cartoon!!
It seems strange to argue that people should not be killed for speaking their minds. It is strange because this is an established point that does not need to be argued. But some are making this argument in response to terrorist threats.
The argument is not with terrorists themselves, though, because terrorists are presumably beyond the reach of ideological debate. So what is its purpose? And, perhaps more importantly, what are its consequences?
These are questions that a critically thinking public should have asked when European newspapers rallied around ‘free speech’ and began republishing caricatures of the prophet Muhammad in 2006, incensing the Muslim world. But instead, a misguided debate about ‘free speech’ and ‘religious sensitivity’ emerged and continues today.
A key element of this argument is presenting ‘freedom’ or ‘free speech’ as in danger. These values, being perhaps the most central to Western society and even the individual’s identity, elicit strong emotions in Westerners. They may be similar to the emotions that Muslims experience when the central symbol of Islamic society and identity was attacked by Western media and society at large. This comparison may help Westerners to consider the reactions of Muslims more calmly.
In both cases, it became difficult to think things through rationally. A threat to such basic elements of identity elicit fear. This should be recognized as dangerous. In the volatile circumstances that breed terrorism, war and social tension, it is precisely at junctures such as those faced in 2006 as well as today that we must be most careful.
Recently, Flemming Rose, the Danish editor who is behind the publications of caricatures of Muhammad that caused an uproar in 2006, responded to a tape recording of Osama Bin Laden, the man who is supposedly behind the 9/11 attacks and whose name is synonymous with “terrorism.” They are voices engaging one another on fiercely antagonistic ideological grounds in a time when their words have real consequence.
There is one point that they appear to agree on. Each seems convinced that the best way to address the tension between Islam and the West is through head-on confrontation.
Mr. Rose presents himself as if he is speaking for the West and challenging the ideology of “terrorism” or “radical Islam” or something. But I wish he would stop.