The EU Surrenders: We can and we are ready to self-regulate our right to free expression

[cmartyn 0]

Oh how far we have fallen.... last time we were at war with facist whackos racist cartoons were the order of the day. Seems now we are suposed to be all sensitive when it comes to islamo-facists. Well screw that and screw them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That was unintentional - this danish lot printed racist cartoons! If you want to see anyone in jail it should be the Danish editor and the ###### cartoonists!

Those cartoons were anything but racist. Or has Islam suddenly become a race rather than a religion? And to pre-empt that response, there were not the religous equivalent of racist either. Besides, the newspaper, it's editor and cartoonist broke no law that I am aware of and cannot, should not, will not and must not be prosecuted for printing the cartoons. Based on what, you reckon, should they be tried and jailed?

I made the point that people are selective about where and when freedom of speech applies. In the case of the Newsweek story - it was convenient to ignore the 'free speech' issue IMO because it impugned the actions of US servicemen serving overseas. That story led to rioting, and some deaths. The story was essentially correct, yet the magazine retracted it (an example of press self-regulation). You see similar acts of self-regulation in most daily newspapers - if a story is printed with incorrect details it is recalled and a correction is printed.

The difference here is that this newspaper published a political opinion with the express knowledge that it would be insulting to muslims. Its a fairly right wing newspaper - so I'm sure that this was cannon-fodder to the typical readers of that publication.

I'm not saying they didn't have the right to print what they did, but that they made a bad decision in doing so that has caused widespread rioting, violence and some deaths. It certainly hasn't done a whole lot to reduce our chances of terrorist attack...

So I have wonder does the right to print what you like override individual responsibility for it? Clearly not, or else why would the news media bother to correct anything?

Oh how far we have fallen.... last time we were at war with facist whackos racist cartoons were the order of the day. Seems now we are suposed to be all sensitive when it comes to islamo-facists. Well screw that and screw them.

We don't have to be sensitive to 'islamo-fascists', but we should be sensitive to a culture and religion of 1.5 billion people, many of whom are progressive liberal minded people (as opposed to the fascist whackos you mentioned). Why is it we constantly see fit to lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator of society's worst elements?

Edited February 10, 2006 by Fishdude

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

So I have wonder does the right to print what you like override individual responsibility for it? Clearly not, or else why would the news media bother to correct anything?

There's a big difference between the European media and the US media. Had Bush been facing a European media here, I doubt he'd ever been re-elected. There is more openness in Europe. More confrontation. Less guilt and far fewer apologies. That's my opinion, anyway, having lived on both sides of the Atlantic.

And there is, of course, a big difference between a story being printed and a cartoon. Cartoons, more often than not, express an opinion rather than fact. They're usually provokative in that they exaggerate and quite frequently offensive to one group or another. What else is new?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Oh how far we have fallen.... last time we were at war with facist whackos racist cartoons were the order of the day. Seems now we are suposed to be all sensitive when it comes to islamo-facists. Well screw that and screw them.

We don't have to be sensitive to 'islamo-fascists', but we should be sensitive to a culture and religion of 1.5 billion people, many of whom are progressive liberal minded people (as opposed to the fascist whackos you mentioned). Why is it we constantly see fit to lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator of society's worst elements?

But it's not the liberal-minded people of that group that cause all the ruckus. There's actually a debate forming within the peaceful majority portion of the Muslim population that something needs to be done about the 'islamo-fascists' in their midst that hi-jack their religion and make the religion, as junglee put it in an excellent post, the laughing stock of the planet. It caused some scholars to come out and encourage an open debate within the Muslim community on how to deal with the fanatics. In Denmark even, the moderate Muslims are starting to stand by their country - Denmark. This opens the right-wing party there up to them as they realize that not all Muslims in Denmark (not even anywhere near a majority) hate their host and/or home country but do actually identify with it. There is new communication developing there that was previously thought impossible. CAIR has condemned Iran's desire to hold a cartoon contest degrading the Holocaust. They came out with an unmistakable statement acknowledging the Holocaust for the atrocity it was and denounced any attempt to ridicule or degrade it.

Yet for some reason, it is the 'islamo-fascist' elements that you are looking to appease by muzzling our press. Since when do we "negotiate" with or "give in" to terrorising, murderous mobs?

I say let's capitalize on the good that can come from this and is already starting to come from this.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So I have wonder does the right to print what you like override individual responsibility for it? Clearly not, or else why would the news media bother to correct anything?

There's a big difference between the European media and the US media. Had Bush been facing a European media here, I doubt he'd ever been re-elected. There is more openness in Europe. More confrontation. Less guilt and far fewer apologies. That's my opinion, anyway, having lived on both sides of the Atlantic.

And there is, of course, a big difference between a story being printed and a cartoon. Cartoons, more often than not, express an opinion rather than fact. They're usually provokative in that they exaggerate and quite frequently offensive to one group or another. What else is new?

Yes you are right about the differences between the US and EU media. Bush would have gotten crucified if they had put him in front of an experienced interviewer, or a panel comprised of random members of the public. I also find that political debate is a lot more sophisticated in Europe - politicians simply cannot get away with spouting soundbites and party-political talking points. This is why Tony Blair for example (for all his faults) is a far far better debater and public speaker than anyone in the entire Bush administration.

To go back to that other point - we do have defamation and libel laws, so while you can print whatever you like - you can still be held to account.

Tom Cruise famously sued a UK newspaper a few years back for printing allegations that he was gay. And yet all the paper had done is reproduce the story that had been going around in the US media for months. You can also be put in jail if you publish anything about a current court case - if that case is active and the judge has filed a gag order (in case the trial is prejudiced by it).

So clearly journalists and editors clearly do have some responsibility over how they exercise their freedom of speech. While you do have to defend the right to express oneself freely, I don't think its necessarily always as straightforward as it appears.

Oh how far we have fallen.... last time we were at war with facist whackos racist cartoons were the order of the day. Seems now we are suposed to be all sensitive when it comes to islamo-facists. Well screw that and screw them.

We don't have to be sensitive to 'islamo-fascists', but we should be sensitive to a culture and religion of 1.5 billion people, many of whom are progressive liberal minded people (as opposed to the fascist whackos you mentioned). Why is it we constantly see fit to lower ourselves to the lowest common denominator of society's worst elements?

But it's not the liberal-minded people of that group that cause all the ruckus. There's actually a debate forming within the peaceful majority portion of the Muslim population that something needs to be done about the 'islamo-fascists' in their midst that hi-jack their religion and make the religion, as junglee put it in an excellent post, the laughing stock of the planet. It caused some scholars to come out and encourage an open debate within the Muslim community on how to deal with the fanatics. In Denmark even, the moderate Muslims are starting to stand by their country - Denmark. This opens the right-wing party there up to them as they realize that not all Muslims in Denmark (not even anywhere near a majority) hate their host and/or home country but do actually identify with it. There is new communication developing there that was previously thought impossible. CAIR has condemned Iran's desire to hold a cartoon contest degrading the Holocaust. They came out with an unmistakable statement acknowledging the Holocaust for the atrocity it was and denounced any attempt to ridicule or degrade it.

Yet for some reason, it is the 'islamo-fascist' elements that you are looking to appease by muzzling our press. Since when do we "negotiate" with or "give in" to terrorising, murderous mobs?

I say let's capitalize on the good that can come from this and is already starting to come from this.

I'm not saying we should appease the extremists or muzzle the press - just exercise a degree of good journalistic judgement and sensitivity (as is exercised already by all reputable news agencies).

As I said, this will insult more than just the extremists. Moderates in the Middle East who have (culturally at least) more in common with the extremists than with the west will not see anything from this that will change their view of us. There does need to be a debat in the muslim world, but these cartoons are far from the best catalyst for it.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

... but these cartoons are far from the best catalyst for it.

And they are also far from the catastrophe that some would make them out to be.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

... but these cartoons are far from the best catalyst for it.

And they are also far from the catastrophe that some would make them out to be.

Well its certainly added a lot of fuel to the extremists bonfire.

Tonight's BBC2's Newsnight programme is leading with an examination of the prevalence of anti-semitism in Arab media, including examples of how the 'blood libel' against the Jews continues to be propagated. It reports that the Danish cartoons are being used by the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who has announced he is organising a 'holocaust denial' conference. As if that is any surprise...

Presenter Kirsty Wark also interviews Prince Hassan of Jordan, who has established an interfaith council which attempts to increase understanding between Jews and Muslims.

The programme is available for 24 hours after broadcast on the BBC web site Newsnight

And in other news:

Anti-cartoon protests go online