Cartoons are supposed to be funny . . .

Let’s get a few things straight from the beginning:

1. I am white, Western European by origin with American blood, a baptised but non-practising Christian, I live in an Islamic country in the Middle East and I am a degree educated individual with a fairly open mind and a hunger for understanding. I also have many Muslim friends and colleagues (as well as Jews, Druze, Christians and Hindus . . .)

2. Violence is generally the worst way of solving a problem and should only ever be a last resort.

3. Freedom of speech is to be encouraged, not stifled

4. Self-regulation is better than legislation as long as societies and individuals can be trusted to behave responsibly, with respect and equanimity.


Now we have that out of the way, let’s look at the most bizarre, worrying and badly judged situation to happen in recent memory – the cartoon caricatures of the Prophet Mohammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

While no thinking person, Muslim or otherwise, can fail to commend the notion of freedom of speech, it is equally important to recognise that all freedoms come with responsibility.

The decision to produce a cartoon featuring the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) in itself has to be questioned in terms of how responsible or otherwise such an act is. The decision to publish such an item in a mass media outlet is beyond consideration. It was just plain wrong and wholly irresponsible. Full stop. Period.

Respecting someone’s religious beliefs does not make us subservient to that religion – it just marks us out as being reasonable and tolerant. We would not serve pork to a Jew, we would not serve beef to a Hindu so why would we print offensive cartoons featuring a caricature of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)?

This is a fundamental element of Islamic faith. In the same way the Christian tradition forbids idolatry and the Jewish faith refrains from naming God. This is a well-known fact of Islam and should be respected. To not only represent the Prophet (PBUH) in these execrable cartoons (which in itself is an insult to Muslims) but to ridicule the Prophet (PBUH) and attempt to suggest that he is connected to terrorism is puerile, grossly inflammatory and utterly mindless.

When I lived in Greece, shortly before the Athens Olympics there was an art exhibition in the capital city as part of the Cultural Olympics. One of the exhibits was a representation of Jesus Christ performing an unnatural sexual act.

Now how many of you self righteous Christian Right Freedom of Speech supporters feel that that is an appropriate image for public display and that religious Christians would not find this offensive? Ah, I thought so. . .

You see I am not concerned whether Christ performing a sex act is art, or that a newspaper has the freedom to publish a cartoon. My concern is that people in positions of authority or influence need to behave responsibly and not test the limits of their freedoms endlessly. Freedom requires faith – if you continue to test its boundaries, you will begin to find that limits start to be imposed and freedoms start to be denied.

The publishers and editors of Jyllands Postern in Denmark made a great mistake and committed a huge error of judgement when they published the now infamous cartoons. In short, they behaved irresponsibly.

If they had apologised unreservedly for their error of judgement in a timely fashion, had pledged never to repeat such a pointless and offensive act, then this may have avoided the subsequent onslaught of problems and political crises that have evolved from this incident.

Instead they tried to defend their position by claiming they “never meant to insult or offend anyone” – come on guys, think about it! This is just not credible. It is a little like pointing a gun at someone, pulling the trigger, watching the blood start to flow and then saying you didn’t mean the shot to wound or injure.

Moreover, they resorted to hiding behind freedom of speech instead of admitting they acted irresponsibly.

This combination of publishing the cartoons, failing to apologise appropriately and in a timely fashion and then hiding behind freedom of speech as an excuse were enough to ignite a very strong response from Islam . . .

Now, let’s take a look at the other side of the coin . . .

I believe that Muslims are right to be offended, just as the Orthodox Christians of Greece were offended by images of Christ performing unnatural sexual acts. I also believe that the Muslims are right to suggest that this was a deliberate blow against Islam – the other assumption is that the editors of the paper concerned are educationally sub normal retards who genuinely had no idea that this would cause offence . . .

I also believe that Islam was entitled to ask for an unconditional apology from the papers that printed these cartoons.

I think that when these requests were met with half-hearted responses, that Islamic countries were entitled to boycott Danish products in protest. Peaceful boycotting of products is an entirely appropriate way to make a point.

However, the violent protests, the burning of flags and embassies and destruction of all things Western which have occurred in places like Pakistan, Syria and Lebanon, have no place in modern political diplomacy and dialogue.

The right to peacefully negotiate and discuss the issues behind the publishing of the cartoons was unfortunately given up when radical elements of Islam took to violent protest and wilful destruction of all things Danish and indeed other countries from the West.

The right to the upper hand in terms of political dialogue between Islam and the West was also given up at the same moment, as was the opportunity to use this incident to build understanding and peace between Islam and the West.

Instead, the West, which began this whole issue firmly in the wrong, is starting to be vindicated. Not in terms the legitimacy of the publishing of the cartoons, but in terms of the idea that Islam is reactionary, militant and prone to violence. An accusation which is to the greatest part false as anyone who lives in most Islamic countries will testify, but which appears to be true under the spotlight of the western media which are highly selective in their focus, and heavily under the influence of the Christian right and the pro-Israeli Jewish lobby.

Now some parts of Islam are requesting that Europe and the UN institute legislation and codes for respecting religion. This is not the answer. If someone does not possess enough decency, tolerance and sense then enforced legislation is not the solution. Education, information and open mindedness would make a far better option.

What a shame!

What a shame for the millions of Muslims whose right to worship in their chosen fashion and under their own codes was so offended by the West, but their right to reply was thwarted and undermined by those self same people who they consider their brothers.

What a shame for the West with its hideously self righteous assumption that it can criticise, insult and denigrate whomsoever it chooses without fear of retribution because it conceitedly and arrogantly believes that civilised society can only exist in the secular, materialist and right wing countries in Europe and the United States. What a shame that being educated, challenged, informed or open minded is discarded in favour of being bigoted, prejudiced and narrow-minded.

What a shame for world diplomacy. A shame that in the 21st century we continue to reduce ourselves to baiting others and responding in violence.

What a shame that in a post 9/11 era instead of taking the opportunity to extend the hand of peace, we taunt and bully, instead of extending our ears to learn and understand, we put on the mufflers of deaf ignorance and prejudice.

But maybe there is more to this than meets the eye? Maybe this is a diversion for more sinister affairs? With Hamas now legitimately in power in Palestine, after the democratic election process so forcefully demanded by the US (and which suited the US at the time as it favoured their chosen party Fatah), with Syria on the brink of major diplomatic crisis following the Hariri assassination one year ago, (and which many still believe had the hand of the US or the Israeli’s behind it), the on-going turmoil in Lebanon (see above) and of course the nuclear “threat” from fundamentalist Tehran, there is a lot at stake in the Middle East at the moment.

The traditional approach of the US in terms of maintaining the power of the West (which it leads) is to ensure a lack of stability in key areas in the world. Deliberately generating conflict in the Middle East, deliberately stimulating a global divide between Muslims and non-Muslims, would create the kind of tension in global affairs which would be of benefit to the US and Western interests – as long as they could secure oil supplies in the meantime (cf. Iraq).

If the oil crisis on the 1970s and 80s is anything to go by, then the US and its partners ought to have been stockpiling oil reserves over the last couple of years despite the high prices of oil – betting that the market will one day be worse and the reserves will be the fall back to ride out the storm.

If there is no conflict in the Middle to focus attentions on, then the world will have to consider the real threat – that China will become the global superpower and the US and its predominantly Western allies will have to learn to march to their tune . . .

Perhaps I am being cynical, but then unfortunately today’s world doesn’t exactly encourage one to be anything other than cynical especially when it comes to politics.

Since the issue of the cartoons broke out I have travelled to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is also reacting very badly to the issue. I felt safe and was happy to be with Muslim clients and colleagues, just as I am in the UAE and around the rest of the Gulf.

You see my Muslim friends and colleagues are my friends and my colleagues – I don’t distinguish them by their religion. We work, laugh and joke together, break bread together and talk about the world and its problems. I would never insult their Prophet (PBUH) or their background just as they would never insult my religion or my culture. Because we respect each other, because we are friends, and most of all because we have taken the time and made the effort to find out a little more about each other than stereotypes and prejudice would ordinarily allow.

And by the way, cartoons are supposed to be funny.

Bad Moustaches … New Laws Required

I am sitting in the First Class Lounge of Riyadh airport in Saudi Arabia - struggling through the first 30 minutes of a three and a half hour delay to my flight back to Dubai. (I should point out at this stage that the area in which I am sitting is very badly named as it is certainly not first class and very far from the comfortable notions that the word “lounge” usually conjures up . . .indeed “Deodorant Testing and CNN Endurance Zone” may be a more appropriate naming strategy).

Having lived in Greece and now living in the Middle East, facial hair – and in particular moustaches – are nothing new to me. Indeed this symbol of masculinity is something I am completely used to, although I have not succumbed to growing my own - with the exception of a brief spell at university when I convinced myself that leaving my facial hair to grow would instantly transform me into a Robert De Niro / Al Pacino look-alike and give me the kind of unkempt, brutal appeal that I was missing.

The fact that I have since never entertained the idea of growing anything again may be somehow connected to the fact that the result of this ludicrous notion was a rather pathetic, fluffy red half beard that could only be excused on a student living in Scotland in the late 80s . . .

Although it is not for me, I have never had an issue with the principle of facial hair – indeed I have often admired a good moustache or beard when grown and managed well.

However, there are limits – and a brief scan of the room here in Riyadh airport has afforded me some pretty clear indications of where those limits are. You see, sitting around me now are some criminal examples of inappropriate facial hair growth which in the world of which I will be ruler in the future, would be punishable with lengthy imprisonment or just a simple beating.

BMS – or Bad Moustache Syndrome – afflicts many people and from all backgrounds. Examples range from the straightforward “Comedy Moustache” which appears to have been grown for a bet or another humorous purpose (but 9 times out of 10 sadly ends up being a serious effort) to the plain pathetic “Teutonic Weed” so beloved of German students backpacking around the world in unpleasantly tight leather trousers and rucksacks (not that there are many of these in my Riyadh Airport enclosure…).

But there are other varieties which can move you to tears or laughter instantly depending on your mood. Let me share a small selection with you:

1. Adolf Lipper – why, oh why, despite being some 50 years after the fall of Nazi Germany, does anyone think that a Hitler Moustache is EVER going to be fashionable or appealing?

2. Five O’Clock Shadow ‘Tache – here we are working on the principal that the full five o’clock shadow (or just plain unshaven for two days) look that was popularized in the 1980’s by such stunning examples of masculinity as George Michael, would look somehow better if confined to just the top lip. Is this a kind of new millennium post modernist ironic attempt at minimalism or is it just atrocious facial hair . . . Hint: It looks crap and like you can’t grow a real moustache – so shave it off. Now.

3. The Four Inch Crumb Collector – yup, this is one of those preposterously large moustaches which would appear to have no other reason to exist other than to collect small items of food – presumably with the idea of consuming them later on. These moustaches are often worn completely out of proportion with the rest of the face or indeed the owner and as a result look especially bad.

4. The Old Lady – as you may have guessed, these are the moustaches which are seen on women, usually old women. I don’t think I need to devote any further time to this variety as its lack of appeal is self evident.

5. The YOY – no not Year on Year, but Why Oh Why . . . you must have seen them. Perfectly pleasant looking gentlemen with a nice, youthful, fresh-faced look – who then go and trash it completely with a really bad ‘tache. There is just no explanation for this other than sustained drug abuse, mental imbalance or a bizarre religious conviction.

And the list could go on . . .

Bad moustaches are worse than bad body odour. I mean, bad body odour is something which you suffer from at a distance of up to say two feet from the person who stinks – but a bad ‘tache can hit you at up to 100 feet away or more. Not good, and I think society would be better if rid of these facially irresponsible offenders.

My proposal would involve a corporate social responsibility campaign sponsored by Gillette. Free donations of razors and mirrors to those who need them, and lessons on how to “shave it off” would be made available by the giant of the shaving world.

But this would not be enough. There should also be a deterrent to ensure that this kind of offense is avoided in the first place.

‘Tache Tax is one option. Bad Moustaches would be taxed by the authorities and the proceeds donated to the needy and those in ‘tache shock (the witnessing of extreme Bad Moustache Syndrome which leaves victims traumatized for many years). This ‘Tache Tax could be accompanied by an equal incentive programme which would encourage the growth of responsible, non-offensive facial hair – donations and grants to those few who get it right.

Some money from ‘tache tax could also be channeled into research into BMS. Entire medical and psychiatric units would be able to get to the bottom of this phenomenon and provide the world with a solution which may involve therapy or perhaps genetic modification – depending on the severity of the individual problem.

There will, however, always be a few who get away. These persistent offenders will not be changed by therapy or charity. They need a Short Sharp Shave and some time in jail – with enforced shaving every day. Repeat offenders failing to shape up could be forced to have their upper lip hair removed by laser and then have a “nice” moustache tattooed onto their top lip in replacement . . .

In terms of the rest of my policies for "My World", they go as follows:

Along with Bad Moustaches, I will also be banning Comedy / Novelty Mobile Phone Ringtones, CNN Presenters (with one or two exceptions), the French, Children on Planes and in Supermarkets, drivers of small Toyotas, Traffic Wherever I am Driving, several American Presidents, Plastic Cheese, New Labour, “Marketing Speak”, cinema Hot Dogs, Women who ask if they “look fat in this”, Crown Green Bowling, 14 year old Management Consultants who earn 14 times as much as me, Bulgarian toilets, Czech “cuisine”, queues and Riyadh airport.

The death penalty will be a possibility for all of the above offences and absolutely mandatory for all people who fart on planes.