If you're new here, you may want to get regular updates via如果你是新這裡，你可能想通過定期更新 RSS feed RSS提要 . 。 Thank you for visiting!感謝您訪問！

Cartoons are doing what so many couldn?t: Unifying Muslims across the globe.卡通人物在做什麼這麼多無法離開？噸：在全球範圍內統一的穆斯林。

On the other hand, a growing number of brave freedom-fighters, led by journalists, are standing up to ?reaffirm the principle of free expression.?另一方面，越來越多的勇敢的自由戰士，帶領記者，都站起來呢？重申言論自由的原則。？ And non-Muslims are wondering why this unified outrage is a no-show when it comes to seemingly more important issues such as beheadings, honour killings, and suicide bombings.和非穆斯林都奇怪，為什麼這個統一的暴行是沒有出現，當談到似乎更重要的問題，如砍頭，名譽殺人和自殺爆炸事件。

As a Muslim journalist, that puts me in a tough spot, doesn?t it?作為一個穆斯林記者，這使我在一個艱難的位置，沒有按？噸呢？

Well, not really.嗯，不是真的。

Let?s get the facts straight.讓？太棒了事實清楚。 What exactly is the issue?究竟是什麼問題呢？

The Danish paper Jyllands-Posten printed a total of 12 cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad last September, one showing him wearing a headdress shaped like a bomb with the kalimah inscribed on it, while another had him saying that paradise is running short of virgins for suicide bombers.丹麥文日德蘭郵報印共12對先知穆罕默德的漫畫去年9月，一個顯示他戴著頭巾形狀像一個炸彈與kalimah上它，而另一人說，他的天堂緊迫處女自殺轟炸機。 A Norwegian publication reprinted the caricatures in January and publications in at least four other countries jumped on the bandwagon in the last couple of days to express their support for the principle of free expression.一個挪威重印出版的漫畫在1月和出版物至少在4個國家招募了在過去一兩日，以表示他們支持言論自由的原則。

Muslim outrage has spurred protests, kidnapping and death threats, boycotts of Danish products, and diplomatic spats.穆斯林的憤怒，引發抗議活動，綁架和死亡威脅，抵制丹麥產品，和外交糾紛。 Danish dairy firm Arla Foods has announced 125 layoffs as a result of the boycott; national leaders have jumped into the foray, and even UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan has issued a statement in an attempt to cool the growing crisis.丹麥奶製品公司阿拉食品公司宣布裁員 125名作為結果的抵制，國家領導人已經跳進進軍，甚至聯合國秘書長安南發表聲明，試圖冷卻日益加劇的危機。 Editors have been sacked in what?s seen to be an attack on editorial independence.編輯已被解僱的是什麼？去看過成為攻擊的編輯獨立性。

Media reports are quick to point out that Islamic traditions ban depictions of the Prophet.媒體報導很快指出，伊斯蘭傳統禁止描繪先知的。 Thus, the understanding is that the outrage has been caused by the seemingly blatant disregard for this ?Islamic taboo?因此，理解是，憤怒是由於看似公然無視呢？伊斯蘭禁忌？ by the publications in question, which is why Reporters Without Borders and other journalists and non-journalists alike are resisting, if not fighting, this wave of rage.在出版物中的問題，這就是為什麼記者無國界組織和其他記者和非記者們都很抗拒，如果不打仗，這一波的憤怒。

I?m pretty sure many outraged Muslims will also point to that as the source of their outrage.我？米敢肯定許多憤怒的穆斯林也將指向，由於他們的憤怒之源。

But I ask: Would Muslims express an equal amount of outrage had the Prophet been shown in a positive light based on his teachings, perhaps instructing a would-be terrorist not to kill innocents?但我要問：請問一個穆斯林表達憤怒了等量的先知被證明在一個積極的眼光看待他的教義的基礎上，也許指示一個潛在的恐怖分子不殺無辜？

Probably not.大概沒有。 Yes, there might have been some disappointment over the depiction of the Prophet, but it wouldn?t be anywhere near what we?re seeing now.是的，可能有一些失望，在描繪的先知，但它也不願意？噸附近的任何地方，我們什麼？重新看到了。

Thus, the main issue here isn?t the depiction of the Prophet, but rather, the depiction of the Prophet in an incorrect and dishonest manner.因此，這裡的主要問題不是很？噸的先知的描繪，而是在描寫的先知在一個不正確的和不誠實的方式。

As a journalist, I truly value our freedom of expression and as my colleagues on this message board know, I attempt to stand by that principle whenever possible.作為一名記者，我非常珍視我們的自由，言論和我的同事們在此留言板上知道，我試圖堅持這一原則盡可能。

We all know that the right to free speech is an integral element of a democratic society.我們都知道，言論自由的權利是一個不可分割的元素一個民主的社會。 Those of us living in democratic societies enjoy that right on a daily basis.我們這些生活在民主社會中享有的權利，每天的基礎。

However, no right is absolute.然而，沒有權利是絕對的。 There are always limitations and exceptions.總有一些限制和例外。

I can express myself by screaming, for as long as I wish, but not to the detriment of my neighbours.我可以表達自己的尖叫，只要我願意，但不損害我的鄰居。 Similarly, I can publish whatever I want, as long as I don?t tarnish anyone?s reputation by spreading lies or promote hatred against anyone.同樣，我可以發布任何我想要的，只要我不？噸損害任何人嗎？的聲譽，散佈謊言，促進對任何人的仇恨。

I can even publicly express damaging, unflattering comments about someone, as long as they?re in the public interest and I don?t do it with malice.我什至可以公開表達破壞，直言不諱的評論對某人，只要他們？重新在公眾利益和我不？噸做的惡意。

The cartoons of the Prophet , especially the one with his headdress shaped like a bomb, can be given three general interpretations in today?s context:這些漫畫的先知，特別是他的頭飾之一，形狀像一個炸彈，可以得到3個一般的解釋在今天？情景下：

a) He was a terrorist. 1）他是一個恐怖分子。
b) He supported terrorism. b）他支持恐怖主義。
c)三） Islam伊斯蘭教 is a religion of terrorism, since he symbolizes the religion是宗教的恐怖主義，因為他象徵著宗教

Anyone who is familiar with the life and the teachings of the Prophet knows that he was not a terrorist.任何人誰是熟悉的生活和教誨的先知知道，他不是恐怖分子。 There is no such thing as a terrorist Prophet and if there was, it would mean he and his followers would live to terrorize others, which we know is certainly not the case.沒有這樣的事情是恐怖先知，如果有，這將意味著他和他的追隨者將活到恐嚇別人，我們知道肯定不是這樣的。

Yes, he did lead and fight in battles.是的，他領導和戰鬥在戰鬥。 But since when did fighting wars become terrorism?但由於在什麼時候打仗成為恐怖主義？ If that?s the case, any leader that takes his nation to war should be considered a terrorist.如果？選情況下，任何國家的領導人，把他的戰爭應該被視為恐怖分子。

As for the second interpretation, once again, anyone who is familiar with the teachings of the Prophet knows that he did not support terrorism.至於第二種解釋，再一次，誰是熟悉的先知的教誨，他不知道支持恐怖主義。 He forbade the killing of innocents and even ordered his followers not to kill他禁止殺害無辜者，甚至命令他的追隨者不殺
birds and other living creatures unnecessarily.鳥類和其他生物不必要的。 And even though the Makkans had terrorized him and his followers, he did not retort with the same when he conquered而即使Makkans了恐嚇他和他的追隨者，他沒有反駁，他以同樣的征服 Makkah麥加 later on, nor did he let any of the followers terrorize anyone either, even as victors.後來，他也沒有讓任何人或恐嚇的追隨者，甚至成為勝利者。

As for the last possible interpretation, once again, if anyone studies the teachings of Allah and the Prophet Mohammad in their entirety, they will know that Islam is not a religion of terrorism.至於最後一個可能的解釋，再次，如果有人研究教義真主和先知穆罕默德的全部內容，他們會知道，伊斯蘭教是不是宗教的恐怖主義。 It?s just not true.它？不是真的。 Yes,是的，
there are groups and individuals who attempt to justify acts of terrorism through Islam, but that does not mean that Islam is a religion of terrorism.有一些團體和個人誰企圖通過恐怖主義行為辯解伊斯蘭教，但這並不意味著，伊斯蘭教是一種宗教的恐怖主義。 If it was a religion of terrorism, Muslims throughout如果它是一個宗教的恐怖主義，整個穆斯林 history歷史 would have been terrorists, which just isn?t the case.會被恐怖分子，這只是沒有微軟這樣的。

Therefore, we can conclude that if the cartoons are interpreted as a) and b), they are slanderous and libelous, or if they?re interpreted as c), they promote hate by branding all followers of Islam as terrorists, and since no因此，我們可以得出結論，如果這些漫畫被解釋為 a）和b），它們是誹謗和中傷，或者如果他們？重新解釋為 C），他們的品牌推廣恨所有伊斯蘭教信徒為恐怖分子，因為沒有
one likes terrorists, people will naturally be led to hate Muslims.人喜歡恐怖分子，人們自然會導致仇恨穆斯林。

This issue is not about Muslims hating freedom of expression.這個問題是不是穆斯林憎恨言論自由。 Rather, it is about the abuse of the freedom to spread hate and fuel stereotypes.相反，它是關於濫用自由散佈仇恨和燃料的成見。

There is no doubt that the cartoons were originally published with malice and spite, to spread stereotypes and provoke a group that has already been victimized as a whole for the actions of a few.毫無疑問，這些漫畫最早出版的惡意和儘管如此，傳播刻板印象，挑起一組已經受害作為一個整體的行動少數。

But that?s not the only reason for the outrage.但是，那可真不是唯一的理由是憤怒。

The level of love and sentimental attachment many Muslims have for and with Mohammad is unparalleled, and may in fact be very difficult to comprehend for non-Muslims.該級別的愛和眷戀有許多穆斯林和穆罕默德是空前的，而且實際上可能很難理解非穆斯林。

Think of your dead parents or grandparents that you loved dearly.想想你的父母或祖父母死了，你愛付出沉重代價。 If someone were to slander them publicly and make a mockery of them, how would you feel?如果有人誹謗他們，並作出公開嘲笑他們，你會感覺如何？ Would you not react angrily and defend them?你會不會生氣和維護他們的反應？

You probably would, except the chances of anyone paying attention may be slim, since you would be alone, or perhaps have the support of a dozen or two people.你可能會，除了重視人的機會可能是微乎其微，因為你將被孤立，或者有支持12個或兩個人。

For Muslims, their beloved prophet has been slandered and mocked.對於穆斯林，他們心愛的先知已經污衊和嘲笑。 He is not here to defend himself, so his followers have taken on the task, out of their love and devotion to him.他不在這裡為自己辯護，所以他的追隨者已經採取的任務，從他們的愛和奉獻給他。 What we see now is the result of compounded anger, which isn?t always expressed in the wisest manner, especially when emotions are running high.我們現在看到的結果是加劇憤怒，沒有微軟一直表示最明智的方式，尤其是當情緒高漲。

The issue of incorrect attribution is an important one.這個問題不正確的歸屬是一個重要的問題。 If Osama bin Laden was the subject of the cartoons, hardly anyone would complain.如果烏薩馬本拉丹是主題的漫畫，幾乎沒有人會抱怨。 Thus, it must be understood that Muslims are not attacking freedom of expression.因此，必須理解，不攻擊穆斯林言論自由。 Rather, they are reacting to hateful, mean-spirited distortions.相反，他們的反應都可惡，卑鄙的扭曲。

As for the question about why Muslims are so sensitive about cartoons while they don?t speak out against other seemingly important issues, the fact is that these cartoons of the Prophet have struck a common, emotional nerve across the Muslim world, while unfortunately, there is no unanimous agreement on the other issues, with which some Muslims obviously do not have a problem since they take part in or support those actions, such as beheadings, honour killings and suicide bombings.至於這個問題為什麼這麼敏感的穆斯林漫畫而他們不要？噸大聲疾呼反對其他看似重要的問題，事實是，這些漫畫的先知已取得共同的，情感神經在整個穆斯林世界，而不幸的是，有沒有一致同意的其他問題，其中一些穆斯林顯然沒有問題，因為他們參與或支持這些行動，如砍頭，名譽殺人和自殺爆炸事件。 It doesn?t make it right, but that?s the reason behind the muted or disjointed response.它doesn？噸使其權利，但在第58背後的原因，靜音或脫節的反應。

Some have complained about the boycotts in response to the cartoons.有些人抱怨的抵制響應漫畫。 What?s wrong with Muslims exercising their freedom of choice?什麼？不對勁與穆斯林行使其自由選擇呢？ Boycotting is a common tactic for expressing displeasure, even if it doesn't directly affect those at the root of the displeasure.抵制是一種常見的手法來表達不滿，即使不直接影響那些在根的不滿。

In fact, in 2004, a group of Americans residing across the border from the Canadian town of Nelson, British Columbia threatened to boycott the town if it went ahead with the construction of a monument to US Vietnam War draft dodgers.事實上，在2004年，一群美國人居住在加拿大的邊境城鎮納爾遜，不列顛哥倫比亞省威脅要抵制鎮如果一意孤行建造一個美國越戰紀念碑道奇隊草案。 The construction of the monument was a form of expression, yet the town was threatened with severe economic repercussions if it had gone ahead with the construction of the monument.建造紀念碑的是表現形式，但該鎮的威脅，嚴重的經濟後果，如果去了未來，隨著建設的豐碑。 It didn?t.本輪？噸

Publishing and protesting are both forms of expression, and they must both be exercised within reasonable limits.出版和抗議都是形式的表現，他們必須同時合理的限度內行使。

Muslims deserve an apology.值得一穆斯林道歉。 And they seriously need to learn how to contain their emotions and express their displeasure using non-violent means.他們認真地需要學習如何控制自己的情緒，表達自己的不滿用非暴力手段。 But as long as the incorrect analysis of the issue as a ?freedom of expression vs. Islamic stigma?但只要不正確的分析問題，一？言論自由主場迎戰伊斯蘭恥辱？ battle remains, I'm afraid the vicious cycle of publications and protests, and more protests and more publications, will continue.戰鬥的話，我很害怕陷入惡性循環的出版物和抗議，更多的抗議和多的出版物，將繼續進行。

Taken from 摘自 sunniforum.com sunniforum.com , published with permission. ，出版許可。