Johanna, it sounds like in your posts you don’t think it very likely the intelligence agencies of Iran or Saudi might be behind something like this. If I am reading you correctly, I’m curious why you have that view?
While I’m not one for too many conspiracy theories, I wouldn’t put this in that category. Instead I would put this in the category of “all in a days work” w.r.t. the intelligence field.
Yes, I do. And then I remember Castro. And the various attempted assassinations.
…
Yes, I do. They have to be at least that clever. Oh, god, we’re all doomed.
One need not even invoke shadowey conspiricy theories to be curious about who is fanning it and why. Individual powers need not have instructed those Danish imans to come over for a power or powers to see that this would be a great thing to make into a big friggin deal right now. Pouring gasoline onto a lit match near paper doesn’t require having arranged for the match or for the paper to have been there, just the recognition that this building burnig down would be a good thing for me right now.
Step one is then to identify whose percieved interests this unnatural conflagration serves. That doesn’t prove that they poured gas, or that they alone poured the gas, but it gives a list of suspects.
I think it very well could be Iranian or Saudi intel behind it. Or, for that matter, Mossad or CIA or KGB or the Illuminati…
I agree this isn’t random cussedness; someone has been at work to stir things up. I doubt enough evidence has been turned up to finger any of the suspects yet. I just pulled up a chair and popped some popcorn to watch. Sometimes these mysteries are eventually solved (like the Iran-Contra dealings) and sometimes they aren’t. My skepticism goes to 11 when the Middle East is involved. I think it would be interesting to know, but jumping to conclusions is inadvisable. There are likely to be smoke screens.
Why isn’t random cussedness at work? If fundamentalists can work themselves up enough to fly planes into buildings and blow themselves up on trains in the name of their view of their religion I really don’t think we need to get into conspiracy theories.
With a billion or so Muslims around I’m not at all surprised if a few thousand of them are angry enough to burn embassies. You only have to read something like the BBC ‘have your say’ site to see that Muslims all over the world are genuinely angry.
Bush and Rice are just taking another chance to put Syria and Iran in the public crosshairs. Note how their great friends the Saudi’s aren’t in the frame as far as they are concerned. Or Pakistan.
It’s not really a conspiracy, more like propaganda. Direct attention away from a horrible event (in this case, nuclear stuff and/or extreme deaths at Mecca) using a trumped up scapegoat? It’s been done before… even here.
I think this is the key point:
That combined with other valid points (depictions of Mohammad are present even in Islamic holy states/sites and that lampooning Islam has happened before - see South Park - without such a violent outcry), gives credence to the idea that this is all merely cover for distracting and intimidating the international community. Isn’t there a specific name for this type of propoganda?
I’m assuming that Rutten’s fact is correct, since I’ve seen it reported on other sites and/or blogs. However, I haven’t seen the paper myself…
I just learned the other day that what set things in motion was a December meeting of Rabitat al-‘Alam al-Islami (the Islamic World League, which is a sort of Islamintern founded by Saudi Arabia that reminds me of the old Cominterns founded to spread world Communism). That meeting pushed the cartoon issue; it seems this is where at least one phase of the campaign was orchestrated.
Because of the obviously faked inflammatory cartoons that didn’t come from Denmark. Who was behind that? is the question. I don’t know who, but clearly somebody is opportunistically trying to stir up some shit. In internet parlance: a troll.
What leads people to think that these cartoons are of the Prophet Mohammed in the first place?
I’ve looked at the cartoons and I see several caricatures of Middle Eastern men, but I don’t recall seeing anything that says something to the effect that “this is a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed”.
Where are the clues in the cartoons that tell people this is the Prophet Mohammed?
If their religion forbids graven images, especially images of the Prophet Mohammed, how can anybody know what the Prophet Mohammed looked like in the first place?
Detailed verbal descriptions have been preserved. Memorizing them was considered an act of piety. During the Ottoman period, some Muslims used calligraphy of these texts, called hilye-i nebevî in Ottoman Turkish, to replace pictorial portraiture with verbal portraiture.
The shit-stirring danish based mullahs who spent 4 months trying to stir things up.