New NATO Chief apologizes for Mohammed Cartoons
He didn't come out and say "I'm sorry" as Michelle Malkin points out. But he may has well have given the tone of his remarks:
Former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Monday he would pay close attention to religious sensibilities in his new role as NATO chief in comments aimed at allaying Muslim concerns at his appointment.
Turkey had threatened to veto Rasmussen’s appointment over his handling of a 2006 crisis triggered by cartoons of Islam’s Prophet Mohammad in a Danish newspaper. His comments fell short of the outright apology which Turkish officials had hoped for.
“I respect Islam as one of the world’s major religions as well as its religious symbols,” Rasmussen said during a panel discussion at an Istanbul conference aimed at building bridges between the Muslim world and the West…
…”I was deeply distressed that the cartoons were seen by many Muslims as an attempt by Denmark to mark and insult or behave disrespectively toward Islam or the Prophet Mohammad. Nothing could be further from my mind,” Rasmussen said…
…”During my tenure as the secretary general of NATO I will pay close attention to the religious and cultural sensibilities of the different communities that populate our increasingly pluralistic and globalized world,” Rasmussen said.
At the expense of western values regarding freedom of speech, of course. And there's the rub. There literally is no western leader now who will stand up and unequivocally defend westerns traditions and values against those whose grievance mongering threatens their very foundation.
Michael van der Galien sums it up:
Rasmussen should have stuck to his guns. He has nothing to apologize nor to ’sympathize’ for. The cartoons were printed by a newspaper, not by his government. It is sad that many felt insulted by them, but it is even sadder that mobs in Indonesia and Arab countries took the streets, boycotted Danish products, and attacked its embassies.
It was not an open, outright apology, but it is hard if not impossible to interpret it differently than a political one.
An apology for a non-offense according to our traditions and values is what should matter. While it is always good to respect the sensibilities of others it is never alright to sacrifice your principles in the face of intimidation.
And that's exactly what Rasmussen did.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The NYT Prefers its Own Conspiracy Theories
- Would the FDA Pass Its Own Audit?
- War By Other Means: Demographics
- The Trump Administration’s Support for the Israel-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Can Benefit America
- This U.S. Under Trump is Strengthening Critical Minerals Sovereignty
- Upheaval and Pushback
- Why Do Democrats Hate Women and Girls?
- There is No Politics Without an Enemy
- On the Importance of President Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’
- Let a Robot Do It
Blog Posts
- Nina 'Scary Poppins' Jankowicz's ex-NGO partner makes clear 'bankrupting Tesla' is his most important accomplishment
- America’s federal court judges: a self-anointed priesthood.
- Yvette Clarke: Don’t fire the bureaucrats, they’re the efficiency experts!
- Big Balls to the rescue: DOGE saves a terabyte of data destroyed by USIP employees
- As Trump’s EPA tries to recover ‘green’ slush fund dollars, Native communities face energy blackouts
- In Britain, ‘transphobic toddlers’ are the new menace
- One outrage after another: Europe is lost
- Judicial misconduct allegations shake legal system
- Look at all the benefits of socialism!
- French right-wing leader Le Pen banned from running for office
- The case for Alberta as the 51st US state
- Putting tariffs into perspective
- Iran’s nuclear countdown: Can Trump hold the line?
- Putin in the crosshairs
- I'm looking through you -- where did you go?