Much has been written about the recent furor caused by the publication of the offensive caricatures of Prophet Mohammad.
Giving them the benefit of the doubt, the Danish newspaper, Jyllands-Posten , which first published the cartoons may be forgiven for being ignorant and insensitive, but the rest of the newspapers which chose to republish the cartoons in the name of upholding the freedom of expression and as a show of solidarity with Jyllands-Posten can only be considered as arrogant, foolhardy and intentionally stoking the fire of hatred.
Our nation has its own fair share of controversy when the Sarawak Tribune which reprinted the cartoons suspended one of its editors and later had its publishing licence rescinded altogether ( The axe falls on Sarawak Tribune ).
While I agree reproducing the cartoons shows a lapse of judgement on the part of Sarawak Tribune , is the punishment proportional to the crime? Wouldn't the suspension of the editors who approved of the cartoons and a fine be sufficient warning against future infraction? Why suspend the newspaper entirely? What has all the other workers done to deserve this harsh treatment? The livelihood of tens or maybe hundreds of people who have no say of the editorial policy are affected just because they are unfortunate enough to be associated with the editors who made a poor judgement. Where is the sense of proportionality and compassion?
Speaking of proportionality, the ensuing outrage led to riots across the globe and the torching of Danish and Norwegian consulates in Syria and Lebanon. By all means, protest, demonstrate, even boycott Danish goods, but resorting to violence only reinforces the stereotype of Muslims that they are overly sensitive, insecure and prone to violence.
While they are most eager to point the finger at others, Muslims have also been responsible for some of the most egregious acts against other religions. Just a few years ago, the Taliban destroyed a thousand-year-old Buddhist artifact despite pleas from around the world. How is that for insult? Did we witness violent response from Buddhists around the globe?
A little closer to home, local authorities demolished a church at Kuala Masai which took the Orang Asli three months and RM40,000 to build. The church was demolished in two hours, one week before Christmas ( Three months to build, two hours to destroy ). How is that for sensitivity?
Just last month, another municipal council demolished a reclining Buddha statue and the adjacent temple at Jasin. The owner was given notice to dismantle the statue but no one save an Indonesian worker hired by the owner dare to undertake the job. The authority deemed the work to be too slow and proceeded to do the job themselves without first informing the owner. How is that for sensitivity? How would Muslims feel if the Thai government demolished a mosque?
In both cases, the local authorities gave the reason that the church and the statue had not been vetted and approved. The question is, why tear them down instead of giving them permit after they have been erected? Is wanting a place of worship so unreasonable? Should the entire state government be sacked because of one insensitive act by a local authority? Contrast the action of our local governments with that of Hobart, Tasmania ( Catch-22 for non-Muslim places of worship ).
To Jyllands-Posten and their supporters, their reason for publishing the caricatures of Prophet Mohammad is in defence of free speech. When it comes to insulting another's sensibility, people can always find the perfect justification to shield themselves from criticism or taking the responsibility for causing unrest. It is easier to point the fingers at others than to reflect on our own faults. There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around.
