Well, look who the Boston Globe decided to give an entire half page of its op-ed section to: none other than Tariq Ramadan (for the last reference of Ramadan in the Globe's pages, see: Two words missing). What a slick fellow he is. All those words to discuss Mohammed cartoons and say almost nothing and present almost no solution. You could read the entire thing and not get exactly what the heck he's suggesting -- merely an equivalency between those who excercise their freedoms and those who are offended by them.

And this is an almost mathematically middle of the road essay -- one paragraph to understand Muslim sensibilities matched with one to understand the West.

That Ramadan creates a symmetry between extremists who believe they can dictate the speech and expression of everyone, and those who believe in preserving freedom for themselves is bad enough, but then you realize he expends all those words offering no solution. In amongst all that mutual-understanding, the fact is, he believes the West will just have to understand that there are certain things they must not do.

Let's be clear here. There is no middle ground in this. Either you have the freedom to express or you do not. Drawing pictures of prophets (Christ also being a prophet, are Catholic Churches the next targets?) is not the same as shouting fire in a crowded theater. Muslims are human beings with diverse and mutable views, not forces of nature. No "dialogue amongst civilizations" can possibly have any meaning, since no one, NO ONE, speaks for the "West," and someone, somewhere will always have the ability to draw. Ramadan claims he is not for laws and legislation to get what he clearly wants, nor violence either, so where does that leave us? Muslims will have to understand that freedom of expression is as sacred a thing to us as whatever beliefs they themselves hold. That's the immutable bottom line. Clearly, many, many Muslims already understand this, and can accept that printing the images of prophets is something they may not approve of, but cannot force upon others who do not share their beliefs. Why isn't Tariq Ramadan, who is supposed to be a "moderate," putting his voice on their side, amplifying their views, rather than advocating for the position of the most extreme elements? Unless it's because he believes as they do, but simply believes in using different means to achieve his objective.

At the crossroad of Islam, the West