On 30 September a Danish newspaper ran 12 cartoons of Prophet Mohamed. Three months later the Arab and Muslim worlds exploded in anger. In a way that's good. Insults against Islam have become increasingly shrill and the political, economic and cultural abuse of Islam is now so pervasive that something has to be done. Muslims have every right to protest when they are treated as a whipping boy. In this sense anger is justified. But there is more to it than that, and we can not ignore the elements of hypocrisy that have informed the outbursts. The countries and groups that feign outrage over the Danish drawings knew about the desecration of the Quran by US soldiers and investigators in Guantanamo and other detention camps. In the US there are countless books, magazines and films that are insulting to Islam. Why are we being so tough on Denmark and yet so soft on the US? Those calling for an economic boycott of a tiny Scandinavian country are not exactly in favour of a boycott of Israeli and US goods. Insults directed at the Prophet Mohamed are not the only thing that should offend Muslims. How about the occupation of Arab and Muslim countries? How about Zionist land grabs in Palestine? How about the Greater Middle East plan and the other imperial dictates to which the region is being subjected? Aren't such actions offensive to all Arabs, Muslims as well as Christians? It's fine to be outraged over insults to Prophet Mohamed and his companions. But shouldn't we also be outraged and insulted when the interests of the followers of Prophet Mohamed are being damaged, flagrantly and on a daily basis? Why are we being so inflexible towards Denmark, even after the newspaper in question, and many others in the country, have apologised for the cartoons which, by the way, most of those protesting have not seen? Wouldn't it be better to reserve this kind of anger for the crimes and massacres being committed by the Israelis and the Americans? Oddly enough, when an Israeli leader said that the Kaaba should be demolished no one said a word. Why is the anger spiralling out of control and demagoguery being encouraged? Is there something specific we're asking for or do we want to protest forever? We put people with no political or religious credentials on television and listen to them point out that the newspaper's apology neglected to follow Prophet Mohamed's name with the customary phrase "God's peace and prayers be upon him". Does it make sense to ask non-Muslims to offer prayers for the prophet of Islam? What next? Are we going to ask the Danes to convert? Anger burst into the open three months after the publication of the offending drawings. This is odd, to say the least. It is reminiscent of the Moharram Bey Church saga in Alexandria, when a church was attacked for staging a play that it later transpired had been performed two years earlier, and then for a single night. Is this a new trend? Are we into retroactive protest now?
