Aye, the slate article rubs me as bullshit and I get really uncomfortable reading liberal justifications for the out of this world response by some members of the muslim faith to the printing of these cartoons, no matter what you think the "real issue" is.

I like to think of ways to make stuff better, and then talk about those things. I like to point out when certain courses of action are unlikely to make stuff better, and in fact only likely to make it worse. I don't believe anything needs a justfication, and so I never attempt to provide one.

That makes me a nice nutcase.

Except that the Middle East has oil. So we (and they) HAVE to maintain some sort of relationship, however tenuous. And there's the whole Israel thing.

If it weren't for oil and Israel, the Islamic states wouldn't care about our impious cartoons, and we wouldn't care about their anti-free-speech attitude.

I think the best thing to do would be stop driving cars tomorrow. Reduced demand for gas would largely eliminate our need to coddle Saudi Arabia, and there'd be fewer dead rabbits on Aurora.

There are a few more important stories out there today, in addition to those you mentioned, dealing with "Cartoon Clarity".

First, this whole business of Islam prohibiting depictions of the profit may acutally be a farce. Read:
Bonfire of the Pieties: Islam prohibits neither images of Muhammad nor jokes about religion,By Amir Taherri in the WSJ Opinion Journal.

Second, Sec. of State Rice issued a statement saying that certain opportunists in the Middle East are responsible for stirring up the angry sentiments of Muslims over these cartoons.

A similar link has been uncovered regarding Syria's involvement in Iraq.

And we all remember the firestorm over the alleged "flushing of the Koran"...

True, the cartoons may be provacative. But the real provacateurs of the rioting seem to be governments and organizations allied agains the West (short list: Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, Baathists, and remnants of the Taliban). Who'd a thunk?

For more on exposing the controversy visit this site.

"Confidential to George W. Bush: Ann Landers advised presidents, and now that I own her desk, I'm gonna start: So Saudi money may have financed the 9-11 attacks. Can we go ahead and invade Saudi Arabia now and get it over with, please? If we're serious about halting the spread of Islamo-fascism, I think we should fight the problem at its source—or sources, plural, I should say. America's dependence on oil enriches the Saudis, who turn around and spend the money—our money!—promoting fanatical hatred of the United States all over the world. Here's a thought, Mr. President: Let's shitcan the tax cuts for the super-wealthy and invest the money in alternative fuels, wind and solar power, and the development of affordable electric cars. This won't stop Islamo-fascism, of course. We're still going to have to fight these bastards; unlike some of my lefty pals, I'm all for fighting the bastards. But I don't think it makes much sense to fight Islamo-fascism and finance it at the same time."