"What's at stake is western civilization" (#91; Topic F)

During last Saturday's TV interview, Italian's Reform Minister showed off a T-shirt he was wearing that caricatured prophet Muhammad. Yesterday, he resigned, claiming that he had not intended "to offend the Muslim religion;" he took the opportunity to warn that "What's at stake is western civilization." Upon reading, I ask myself: Exactly what western civilization is at stake? Was he bemoaning that Libya is no longer an Italian colony? (There were demonstrations in Libya against the offensive cartoons [#73], resulting in deaths.) Was he sympathizing with his fellow EU members for no longer being able to engage in slave trade? (#81) Or perhaps for their being deprived of income from another lucrative trade as colonial powers: peddling opium to China and other countries? (#45) Or was the west's inability to marshal troops to mount another "crusade" at issue? Or, perhaps, for west's being summarily removed from China, back in 1707, for ramming Christianity through China's throats even to the extent of disallowing her citizens to revere their deceased parents? Big deals all. Shall we see to it that the west reestablish the colonies? Revitalize the slave trade? Or perhaps rekindle the opium trade is the way to go? Perhaps the demonstrations -- isn't this a good reason for another crusade? How could Christianity rule without China being subdued?
Posted at 1:29 pm, Sunday, February 19, 2006