Well, according to this report, that’s exactly what happened when they tried to fan the flames of the GMCC (Great Mohammed Cartoon Controversy):
The organized rallies were intending to show, what was supposed to be, the massive indignation of Iranians over the publication of cartoons depicting the Islamic Prophet Mohammad. But despite all supports from governmental circles and advertisements made by Mosques related to the theocratic regime, which had called for a massive participation, the demonstrators stayed under 400 individuals while the Iranian Capital has over 12 millions of inhabitants.
Now here’s a sobering question.
Will they be showing the cartoons to the Iranian people in order to whip up massive indignation ?
Perhaps we will get an answer to the age old question .. which comes first .. the chicken or the egg ?
If true, this would be indicative of just how lacking in popular support the Mullahs really are.
The article quoted shows that, as always, the media is in the driving seat. The view portrayed by the media is of the muslim street imflamed by a passionate repudiation of the cartoons.
Even in Indonesia with the largest muslim population the protestors could at most get together a few thousand to protest.
In general, for all the mayhem generated in these riots, very few of them have had substantial numbers of people. In almost all the reports there are under 500 people, frequently less than 100. And the London demonstrators all seem to be holding signs written by the same person.
Davod and Otter,
I haven’t followed the details of the “protests” enough to have any idea of how many people participated. If, in fact, there were relatively small numbers of people and yet the torching of embassies was successful, what does that tell us?
I don’t know what it tells us other than that the governments involved are either incapable of controlling, or unwilling to control, relatively small numbers of violent people. Are there examples of western governments being unwilling or unable to prevent the destruction of foreign embassies on their soil?
There is clearly a message here but what exactly it is is not clear. Perhaps the Syrian government is sending a message to the Danes that they can and will strike at Denmark. Perhaps the message is that they cannot prevent it even if they were willing to try. And perhaps it is just flat out ineptitude.
Knucklehead:
I read somewhere that Denmark is about to take its place as chair to some UN body that will have jurisdiction and Iran is looking to put the fear of Allah into Denmark.
Also, “Anton Effendi” at AcrosstheBay speculates that what (minority Alawite-ruled) Syria is trying to develop, both at home and next door in Lebanon is a picture of out-of-control Sunnis who need the Baathist regime’s iron fist to keep them in line.