Clarity

So a Danish newspaper solicits cartoons about Islam and publishes 12 cartoons in October and then solicits opinions about it all. Then muslim radicals trying to stir up trouble add three cartoons because the original 12 just are not sufficiently offensive. In February (let's see... October, November, December, January, February.. yeah, how's that for spontaneity?), this erupts into a boycott and flag burning of conveniently available Danish flags (quick, where can you get a Danish flag in a hurry?), protests with signs in English (not Danish, or any local language), and eventually the burning of embassies. And this is supposedly about images that damage Islam? Isn't the reaction providing more of those than a Danish newspaper could imagine?

The image that stands out for me in all this is not the turban-bomb cartoon. That doesn't even register. After all the nutcases in the middle east blowing themselves and others up, it's hard to argue that that isn't a fair representation of the nuts, their supporters, and those who let it all slide. The image that stands out for me is not a cartoon. It is a photograph.

This one:


REUTERS/Luke MacGregor