LETTER FROM ISRAEL

A hearty thanks to Brigitte Gabriel for passing along the following letter sent to her.

My name is [name removed] and I live in Ashdod, Israel.

As you probably know, 11 days ago Israel finally started to take action in Gaza strip in order to defend itself and it's citizens. It must be said that Israel's actions are the response to the violent nature of the actions and threats of Hamas against us.

For 11 days now, my city, along with other cities in the region of southern Israel have been and are being attacked and bombed by Hamas. Together, we are a million people under the threat of being bombed.

What we do today, what I do today, is standing against the missiles of Hamas, a thing which i have never had to do before, so my Israeli fellows that have been suffering from it for years will be able to live in peace. A real peace, and not just a cease-fire for Hamas to take advantage of to get armed. We suffer now so our Israeli brothers can live in peace, AND so missiles won't ever become "routine" in our cities too. What we don't do today, will cost us tomorrow.

As a citizen of a western country (Israel of course), i have been surprised to see the huge hypocrisy shown by the western world during these 11 days. Protests and demonstration against Israel and it's actions all over the world, comparing us to the Nazis and calling us murderers. All that from the people who have ignored the violent nature of Hamas and it's actions and attacks against Israeli CITIZENS for years and years.

That being said, i'd like to thank you and your organization for your support and right view of reality. It's important to me and other Israelis to know that there are sane voices out there too.

And a personal message for Brigitte Gabriel:

I joined your website and organization after listening to your speeches on YouTube. As i know your story, i know u understand that what we are doing today is defending our home. Hamas, just like the radicals in Lebanon, has no tolerance and doesn't want to live in peace with us. Hamas's wish, in the good case, is to throw us to the sea. To take the only place i know as HOME away from me. And neither me nor the Israeli people will stand that kind of wish.

So from the Israeli people and country—thank you.

And now we turn to Hugh Fitzgerald for more penetrating snark—as he challenges the dhimmitude of the Danes in Denmark as well as the French who continue to bow to outrageous Muslim demands:

And, as teachers in France have found, there are subjects that must not be touched. French teachers, who receive their curriculum from the Ministry of Education (for a sample, see what those following that handed-down-from-on-high curriculum, while living abroad, do for the C.N.E.D., which google), find that they cannot discuss World War II or the mass-murder of Jews (it offends Muslims), they cannot teach about the history of France and French kings (it offends Muslims), they cannot teach about anything to do with the Christian religion (it offends Muslims), they cannot teach about world history other than history having to do with Muslims (it offends Muslims), they cannot teach the writings of Voltaire (it offends Muslims, because Voltaire wrote the play "Mahomet, ou l'Impostuer) or Montaigne (half-Jewish, and besides, the spirit of skepticism, of "Que scais-je?" is very much against the spirit of Islam which discourages skepticism, and encourages the habit of mental submission, to Allah of course, for he knows best), of Proust (well, you know), and so many others.

In Denmark, it might take a different turn. I would assume any Danish teacher who dared to try to teach Hans Christian Andersen, and his story "The Little Jewish Girl," would be physically threatened. And indeed, given Andersen's close friendship with the Melchiors, a family of Danish Jews, perhaps Hans Christian Andersen should be removed from the curriculum, in such schools, altoghether.

And please—no mention of the Danish King, and the heroism of the Danish people, in rescuing Jews during World War II. That would make Muslims feel very bad. It would make them feel that they were among the wrong kind of people, people who, from their point of view, behaved so badly during World War II. And we can't have them thinking that, and perhaps taking it out on the symbols of Danish authority, including teachers and principals, or policemen, or firemen, or just Danes walking in the street, can we?

And don't start trying to teach Muslims about Danish principles, including the solicitousness for so-called "free speech." Muslims know exactly what the Danish exercise of "free speech" can lead to—it can lead to cartoons about the Perfect Man, and we can't have that, can we?

Oh, Denmark. And oh, all of Western Europe. You've got to stop it now, while there is still time. You've got to halt, and then diminish, the size of the permanent menace. But first, you must understand the ideology of Islam, and why all hopes of changing or modifying it are forlorn, and why you must do what you must not only to protect yourselves physically, but to protect the civilizational legacy that you inherited, and without which, neither you, nor your progeny, nor the entire world—not just the Western world—will be in far far worse condition, than it has ever been before.

Read it all.

SIGNS OF DENMARK WEAKENING

THE JUNE 2 SUICIDE BOMBING outside the Danish embassy in Islamabad, which killed six people, has caused a bout of soul-searching in the land of Kierkegaard and Hamlet. More than ever, Danes are asking what price their country can afford to pay for its increasingly entrenched reputation as a forthright critic of Islam.

It all began with the celebrated 2005 publication of 12 political cartoons cartoons under the rubric "Muhammad's face" in the daily Jyllands-Posten. The images were meant as a bold assertion of free speech, but were seen by many Muslims as blaspheming Muhammad. The cartoons' republication throughout the West barely dimmed the focus of Muslim ire on the small Scandinavian country, magnified by its military presence in Afghanistan and, until last year, in Iraq.

Since then the fallout has come in fits and starts. There were deadly protests at Danish embassies abroad, boycotts and counter-boycotts; earlier this year Denmark expelled two Tunisian nationals for death threats against one of the cartoonists. In recent weeks the anti-immigrant and often openly anti-Muslim Danish People's Party, headed by Pia Kjaersgaard, has spearheaded a campaign against Muslim headscarves. The government, which needs the DPP's support to form a majority in parliament, was maneuvered into a ban on judges wearing religious symbols—a solution to a virtually non-existent problem.

Now that the ultimate terror weapon—a suicide bomber—has been deployed against a Danish target, the DPP is sounding the trumpets and calling for special troops to defend Denmark's diplomatic missions; its foreign policy spokesman, Soren Espersen, compared the country's exposure to that of the U.S. and Israel. But others aren't so sure that Denmark ought to be engaged in a battle this big. "We have moved from being a small insignificant and neutral country without any military importance to being considered an extremely active participant in a more militant western world," says Islam expert Jorgen Baek Simonsen of the University of Copenhagen.

What was in 2005 a general Danish consensus to stand firm is crumbling as the stakes rise. Margrethe Vestager, leader of the opposition Social Liberal Party, said Denmark should look towards "dialogue rather than conflict." Referring to "the government's xenophobic agenda," Holger K. Nielsen of the Socialist People's Party said, "Things have gotten out of control. We must discuss whether we have to constantly get involved in places where we are most hated."

If the Danes' spirited defense of free speech in 2005 was a matter of principle, they now face a sobering balancing act: how to back off without seeming to back down. "The government knows that we are driving on the edge and will have to slow down," says Hans Mouritzen of the Danish Institute of International Studies. "They will deny it in public, but you will see a government beginning to conduct a less activist foreign policy." If so, the Islamabad bombing will have marked a key moment in the ongoing calibration over how loudly any small country can afford to roar.

DENMARK EVACUATES TWO EMBASSIES

THE DANISH FOREIGN MINISTRY announced today that it has evacuated its staff from embassies in Algeria and Afghanistan due to violent threats from the so-called Religion of Peace after newspapers reprinted a cartoon depicting the Muslim prophet Muhammed. Embassy employees have been moved to secret locations in both countries' capitals but continue to work, Foreign Ministry spokesman Erik Laursen said.

The announcement comes after Danish intelligence officials warned of an "aggravated" terror threat against Denmark since newspapers in the country in February of a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad.

The warning specifically singled out North Africa, the Middle East, Pakistan and Afghanistan. The threat "is so concrete that we had to take this decision," Laursen told The Associated Press. "The decision is based on intelligence," he said, declining to elaborate....

It occurs to us here at The Bellicose Augur that if a host government cannot guarantee the security of an embassy in its capital city it should be shut down and its people evacuated until such time as there is a functioning government. Perhaps if all Western governments wised up and took similar action in Islamic countries this strength of conscience might gain their attention. It is an abomination to world peace that Muslim governments continue to coddle the street radicals while pretending to be on the side of law and order.

By the way, check out the riveting cartoonist whose work is posted above and below.

Let's clarify why we believe all communication with Arab supremists falls short, and should be abandoned, as communication perpetually lost in translation. Here are the words of Bassam Tibi, Muslim scholar of jihad:

‘At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. "We have sent you forth to all mankind" (Q. 34:28). If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (da’wa) can be pursued peacefully. If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them. In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya. World peace, the final stage of the da’wa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam…Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur’anic command to spread Islam as a way of peace. The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims. Islamic wars are not hurab (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of “opening” the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad. Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur’an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists. Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da’wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da’wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it."

Wow! The Qu'ran and its loathsome Arabic—dualistic language device in dealing with the tragically dhimmi West that would send shudders down the formidable British spine of George Orwell.

MOST IMPORTANT ARTWORK OF NEW CENTURY

AARHUS, DENMARK - Kurt Westergaard is in hiding from Islamic militants who want him dead. Now, the Danish cartoonist says he's ready to part with the source of his travails, a small ink sketch of the Prophet Muhammad with a bomb in his turban. But first there is the ticklish question of price.

"I would like to think that it has some value," says Mr. Westergaard, the 72-year-old creator of one of the world's most famous cartoons and one that inflamed Muslims world-wide. "It is a symbol of democracy and freedom of expression. I think I should have a little money for this," he says.

The drawing is locked in a bank vault while the cartoonist shuttles between temporary havens the Danish secret police have found for him around this blustery port city. His is by far the best known of 12 Muhammad-related cartoons published in September 2005 by Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. But how do you fix the value of something that auction houses won't touch, that museums won't hang on their walls and that still inspires murderous passions?

Two weeks ago, Danish authorities said they had foiled a plot to kill Mr. Westergaard in his home. Seventeen Danish newspapers, outraged and eager to show solidarity, reprinted his drawing. Muslims again took to the streets. Iran and others demanded an apology. "I always had a feeling this cartoon crisis would not end," says Mr. Westergaard. "Now I know." [...]

Some Muslims here want the bomb-in-a-turban drawing destroyed. Salah Suleiman, an activist in a mosque that helped whip up the fury over it in early 2006, delights in the artist's troubles and says no amount of money can save him from God's wrath: "He is living like a rat.... He is living in hell already."

Ah, the voice of love and piety.

Mr. Westergaard's wife, a retired kindergarten teacher, has also suggested destruction, by selling the cartoon to a wealthy Arab who "can then burn it in the central square in Mecca." Mr. Westergaard says he likes the idea of getting money from an oil sheik but would prefer the cartoon stay intact and in Denmark.

Mr. Westergaard says he never intended his drawing to rile Muslims, only to mock extremists who push a deformed reading of their faith. But while arguments rage over whether his cartoon is intolerably offensive or an emblem of free speech, there's no doubt of the prominence it has achieved. Though shunned by most major U.S. publications, it has been reprinted widely in Europe, plastered across the Internet and put on T-shirts...

Flemming Rose, culture editor of the Danish paper that first ran the cartoon, compares it to a famous photo of Che Guevara in a beret and to Andy Warhol's pop-art portrait of Marilyn Monroe. "It is a great cultural icon of the 21st century," he says.

Mr. Lerche, the auctioneer, says it's "pure guesswork" what Mr. Westergaard's drawing is worth. A less-famed Muhammad cartoon sold for around $2,900 in an Internet auction, but that was in late 2005, before the global uproar. The artist in that case donated the cash, which came from an anonymous buyer, to earthquake relief in Pakistan.

In an event last year at the Reagan Library in California, Mr. Rose, the Danish culture editor, saw the cartoons' market value. He autographed posters featuring his newspaper's original cartoon edition, which sold out in minutes for $1,000 apiece.

Money has played a role on the other side of the barricades, too. When Muslims started burning Danish flags and ransacking Danish property in early 2006, extremists joined in a bidding war to get Mr. Westergaard killed. The bounties they offered ranged from a new car to a million dollars.

The cartoonist continued going to work at his small newspaper office, piled with old papers and empty coffee cups. But last November, the danger became real. Denmark's security service uncovered a group it said had diagrams of Mr. Westergaard's house and apparently planned to slit his throat as he slept.

The service offered to send him and his wife on a Caribbean cruise. He declined. "I'm an old man with a stiff neck. I can't bow my head to anyone," he says. Police offered a guard dog. His wife didn't like the idea....

EUROPEAN SPINE IS CELEBRATED

Newspapers across Europe Wednesday reprinted the controversial cartoon of the Islamic prophet Mohammed that sparked worldwide protests two years ago. These cartoons provoked widespread outrage in the Muslim world two years ago where many innocent lives were lost. The move came one day after Danish authorities arrested three people allegedly plotting a "terror-related assassination" of Kurt Westergaard, the cartoonist behind the drawing.

Berlingske Tidende, was one of the newspapers involved in the republication by newspapers in Denmark. It said: "We are doing this to document what is at stake in this case, and to unambiguously back and support the freedom of speech that we as a newspaper always will defend," in comments reported by The Associated Press.

Newspapers in Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands also republished the drawing Wednesday as part of their coverage of Tuesday's arrests. The image, by Morgenavisen Jullands-Posten cartoonist Westergaard, was one of 12 cartoons about the Islamic mountebank originally published in September 2005. Westergaard's cartoon depicted the seventh century Arab warlord wearing a bomb as a turban with a lit fuse.

The artist himself is quoted as recently saying, "I have turned fear into anger and resentment." Yes, perhaps. And in this case, that's a good thing, a very good thing.

THE MEANING OF MAYOR FREDDIE'S WORDS

So the mayor of Brussels, Freddie Thielemans, refused to issue a permit for a September 11 march on the EU headquarters to protest the continuing Islamization of Europe on the grounds that he could not guarantee the marchers' safety. Only NOW do we know what those simple, hardly difficult to parse, words really meant. Not safety from crazed Muslim youths attacking with sword and swagger shouting Allah Akbar with every step!

No, it turns out he was not talking about the immigrant population, but what he meant was he could not guarantee these mostly indigenous Europeans any safety from the fully loaded stormtroopers he called out against the mere handful of 200 peaceful, middle-aged marchers. The mayor had banned the protest, held on the sixth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the US.

Police arrested two far-right political leaders at a protest against the "Islamisation of Europe". Frank Vanhecke and Filip Dewinter of the Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) party. Vlaams Belang has recently been critical of Muslim immigration to Belgium. Police clashed with some of the 200 demonstrators and dozens more people were reported to have been arrested.

The protest organisers had promised a large turn-out, but the approximately 200 protesters were nearly outnumbered by police and reporters.

All in all, the police and the government in Brussels acted criminally, since they refuse to carry out their basic role of protecting the rule of law and protecting the polity. That they would attack law abiding citizens gathered in a peaceful demonstration to protest a foreign threat indicates that Brussel's secret plan is Islamization. What were these enforcers paid? And by whom?

INTERVIEW WITH ROBERT SPENCER

While I have little truck with Mr. Pat Robertson's whose evangelical and extracurricular follies, in my opinion, are too many and too diverse to list here, I do harbor a certain measure of respect for the person and the scholarly work of Robert Spencer, who has authored several books and operates the Jihad Watch website, a valuable resource to this Bellicose Augur. Here is an interview with Spencer conducted during the February '06 "cartoon rage" then whipping across the globe as the Islam street violently protested the publishing of a set of political cartoons in the major newspaper of Denmark.
Suffice it to say, now that I am beginning to utilize the YouTube phenomenon more regularly as a material resource, other dated but still critically important interviews and videos will find a place in this blog. As a closing comment however, I would like to say that I found it both humorous and frankly inspiring as Robertson, when introducing Spencer's book, stumbled over the title in speaking of "The Politically CORRECT" Guide To Islam.

Frankly, all infidels, and that includes Jews, Christians, hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, pagans, and atheists should get to know what the Islam thinks about Christianity and its views on Islamic eschatology. Whether an accident of history or a carefully scripted response to "those people of the book" by some human or supernatural intelligence, it is a twisted version taken straight from the Bible.

HIRSI ALI SPEAKS AT NATIONAL PRESS CLUB

Read and comprehend, my fellow believers in life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The words of Hirsi Ali at the National Press Club here in Washington:

The first time that I was at a gathering like this one, it was November 2005, at the Krasnapolsky hotel in Amsterdam; not quite like this one, though, because there is only one National Press Club. I was invited to a session on media coverage of Islam, and Submission was shown. Submission is a 10-minute film I made with Theo van Gogh. As many of you know, he was killed for it by a Muslim.

I found myself in the odd position of defending freedom of expression, free press, and the rights of women against Arab-Islamic journalists and commentators. I found it odd because the Western journalists whose conference it was were either quiet, mumbled something about free expression, or approached me after the session and whispered into my ear that I had done a good job. I noticed the embarrassment they felt at defending the very right from which they earn their bread.

I noticed the same sense of uneasiness in early 2006 among Western journalists, academics, politicians, and commentators on how to respond to the cartoons of Muhammad in Denmark. In fact, many seriously defended the assertion that Denmark had to apologize for the cartoons. This attitude was repeated in the fall of last year when the Pope quoted a Byzantine emperor who wrote that the founder of Islam spread his religion by the sword, and the New York Times urged the Pope to apologize.

It is not the end of history. The 21st century began with a battle of ideas, and this battle is about the values of the West versus those of Islam.

Tony Blair, a leader I admire, wrote in the first issue of this year's Foreign Affairs magazine that what we were facing after the 11th of September was a battle of ideas, a battle of values. In his article, Blair began by incisively outlining the most crucial conflict of our time, but then lost the line of his argument in inconsistency when he came to clarifying the parties involved in the war of values. He backpedaled against his argument and declared that the Koran is a great book, ahead of its time and good for women.

Why are Westerners so insecure about everything that is so wonderful about the West: political freedom, free press, freedom of expression, equal rights for women and men, gays and heterosexuals, critical thinking, and the great strength of scrutinizing ideas—and especially faith?

It is not the end of history. The 21st century began with a battle of ideas, and this battle is about the values of the West versus those of Islam. Tony Blair and the Pope should not be embarrassed in saying it, and you should stop self-censoring. Islam and liberal democracy are incompatible; cultures and religions are not equal. And perhaps most important of all, Muslims are not half-wits who can respond only in violence. The Koran is not a great book; it is reactionary and full of misogyny. The Byzantine emperor's analysis of Muhammad was correct: he spread his faith by the sword.

From this perspective journalists like all the rest of us face the unpleasant reality of taking sides or getting lost in the incoherence of the so-called middle ground. The role of journalists serving the West, who understand what this particular battle is about, will be to inform their audiences accordingly.

As I travel from country to country to testify from experience and observation that Islamic dogma creates a cult of death, a cage for women, and a curse against knowledge, I get both support and opposition. Europeans and Americans ask:

But what about the good Muslim living next to me? What about the different schools of thought in Islam? Is there no difference between the Muslims of Indonesia and the ones in Somalia, or the Muslims in Saudi Arabia and those in Turkey? Can we really generalize? What about the women who voluntarily wear the headscarf and the burqa and are happy to relinquish their freedom as their faith requires? If we give Catholics and Protestants and Jews their schools and their universities, isn't it only fair to give Muslims theirs, too? If generations of Jews, Italians, and Irish have assimilated, is it unreasonable to think that Muslims will assimilate too, eventually?" Isn't it more fruitful to engage in debate with your opponent and convince him through dialogue to take back his declaration of war than to attack him? Isn't it obvious that military attacks, such as those in Afghanistan after 9/11 and in Iraq, create more terrorists, and therefore more people who are determined to destroy the West than there would be if we had dialogue with them?

These questions are legitimate and deserve serious answers. Let's make a moral distinction between Islam and Muslims. Muslims are diverse. Some, like Irshad Manji and Tawfiq Hamid, want to reform their faith. Others want to spread their beliefs through persuasion, violence or both. Others are apathetic and do not care much for politics. Others want to leave it and convert to Christianity, like Nonie Darwish, or become atheist, like me.

Islam unreformed, as a set of beliefs, is hostile to everything Western.

In a free society, if Jews, Protestants, and Catholics have their own schools, then Muslims should have theirs, too. But how long should we ignore that in Muslim schools in the West, kids are taught to believe that Jews are pigs and dogs? Or that they should distance themselves from unbelievers and jihad is a virtue? Isn't it odd that everywhere in Europe with large Muslim organizations, demands are made not to teach kids about the Holocaust, while in mosques and Muslim bookshops The Protocols of the Elders of Zion is distributed?

And what about in Muslim lands, where Jews, Catholics, and Protestants cannot have their own schools, or churches, or graveyards? If Muslims can proselytize in Vatican City, why can't Christians proselytize in Mecca? Why do we find this acceptable? If Christians, Jews, and Atheists take to the streets in large numbers to protest against their own elected governments in objection to the war in Iraq, to the war against terror, why don't Muslims march in equally large number against the beheadings of Western aid workers? Why don't Muslims stand up for their own? Why are Jews and Christians and Atheists in the West the ones fighting genocide in Darfur? Why does it pass unnoticed in Muslim lands when Shias kill Sunnis and Sunnis, Shias by the thousands? It doesn't add up, does it? If you ask me, "What is the role of journalism today?" I would urge you to look into these questions.

As a woman in the West I have access to education. I have a job, and I can change jobs as I wish. I can marry the man of my choice, or I can choose not to marry at all. If nature allows it, I can have any number of children I want. I can manipulate nature and freeze my eggs. I can have an abortion. I can own property. I can travel wherever I want. I can read whichever book, newspaper, or magazine I wish. I can watch any movie I want or go to the museum of my choice. I can have an opinion on the moral choices of others and express my opinion, even publish it. And I can change my mind as time goes by. I can establish a political party or join an existing one; I am free to change parties or give up my membership. I can vote. I can choose not to vote. I can stand for election to office or go into business. This is what makes the West so great.

In Muslim lands, except for a very lucky few, women are denied education, have no job, and are forced into marriage with strangers. In the name of Islam, women are denied the right to their bodies; they cannot choose whether to have children or how many to have. They have no rights to abortion, and often they die trying to get one. They cannot own property, trade, or travel without the risk of robbery or rape. Most women (and men) live in state and religious censorship on what to read (if they can read at all) and what films to watch, and they have hardly any museums or art they can enjoy. Of the 57 Muslim nations that are members of the OIC (Organization of the Islamic Conference), only two are democracies. Both are frail and corrupt, and both face the risk of being overtaken by the agents of pure Islam. Turkey has a safety check in the shape of the army and Indonesia none. In none of these countries—except for the usual show-pieces to delude the West—are women allowed to establish their own political parties, play a meaningful role in one, vote, or run for office.

This obsession with subjugating women is one of the things that makes Islam so low. And the agents of Islam—from Riyadh to Tehran, from Islamabad to Cairo—know that any improvement in the lives of women will lead to the demise of Islam and a disappearance of their power. This is why, among other things, they are so desperate to cage in women. This is why they also hate the West.

Please don't be fooled by the few shrill voices—in or out of the veil—that enjoy the status quo and betray their fellow women.

If we do not understand the differences between Islam and the West—why one is so great and the other so low—and we don't fight back and win this battle of ideas in order to preserve our civilization, in my view there is no point to your profession or mine.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a resident fellow at AEI.

A MATTER OF TIME

Question: Actually, I thought this Rushdie Knighthood situation would have grown more legs by now and become as widespread as the Danish Cartoons. Any reason why it hasn't?

Answer: Give them a little more time, it takes a while for them to get worked up into a lather. After the Mohammed cartoons in the Jyllands-Poston in September 2005, it took 2 weeks before an estimated 3,500 Muslims in Denmark conducted a somewhat peaceful protest. In November, several European newspapers re-published the images, triggering more protests. The deluge of foul spirits actually didn't began to ramp up until January of 2006, nearly 3 1/2 months later combining with a boycott of Danish goods. Several countries withdrew their ambassadors to Denmark, and widespread protests, some of them violent, flourished across Muslim lands great and small. The protests continued in February. In Damascus, Syria, both the Norwegian embassy and a building containing the Danish, Dutch, and Chilean embassies were stormed and set on fire by protesters. In Beirut, thousands of people protested on the streets, and the Danish General Consulate was stormed and set on fire. By March of 2006, at least 139 people died primarily during riots stemming from protests.

Thanks, Mackie, I needed that..