Posted on 02/05/2006 5:16:46 AM PST by FerdieMurphy
Last week, Muslims marched in the centre of London chanting "Freedom go to Hell!" There could be no more graphic illustration of the paradox at the heart of the cartoon row.
These protesters were exercising - and in many cases abusing - the freedom of protest and freedom of assembly that are foundation stones of British democracy. Yet, even as they exploited these hard-won liberties, they were calling for them to be abolished.
This newspaper would not have published the cartoons of Mohammed at the centre of this controversy, images which we regard as vulgar and fatuously insulting. But - and this is the crucial point - we reserve absolutely our right to make our own decision, free of threat and intimidation. The difficulty is that what started as an issue of editorial judgment has become a question of public order.
The protesters in London with their disgraceful slogans - "Behead those who Insult Islam", "Britain you will pay - 7/7 is on its way" - have made it all but impossible for a genuinely free debate on this issue to take place. All such debate is now being carried out in the shadow of murderous intimidation.
In this wretched affair, no sight has been more wretched than that of Jack Straw last week kowtowing to militant Islam. "There is freedom of speech, we all respect that," the Foreign Secretary said, "but there is not any obligation to insult or to be gratuitously inflammatory." How pathetic that Mr Straw did not find time to condemn the outrageous behaviour of protesters at home and abroad. Where, also, was Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, as Islamic militants called for bloodshed?
The Government's response is especially feeble when compared to Margaret Thatcher's behaviour during the Rushdie Affair. Whatever her private feelings about the author, she and her Cabinet colleagues were resolute in their defence of his rights. Even before the fatwah, she declared that "it is an essential part of our democratic system that people who act within the law should be able to express their opinions freely".
In this controversy, Mr Straw has been put to shame by the German home minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, who robustly defended the freedom of newspapers to make their own decisions. "Why should the German government apologise?" he said. "This is an expression of press freedom." In contrast, the British Government's craven response has sent a terrible signal: those who wish to see free expression curtailed need only light a flame, issue a threat and wave an angry fist.
The bitter irony of the protests is that Britain proved itself after the July 7 bombings to be a tolerant, multi-cultural society. Quite rightly, the citizens of this country drew a sharp distinction between their law-abiding Muslim compatriots and the extremists responsible for the atrocities.
The problem is that militant Islam is not seeking a level playing field - equality before the law, for instance - but special treatment. Muslims expect, as they should, the benefits and protections of British pluralism but, in too many cases, baulk at the duties that are their corollary. One of those duties is to accept that, in a free society, there are occasions when each of us is bound to be offended. "Everyone is in favour of free speech," remarked Churchill. "Hardly a day passes without its being extolled. But some people's idea of it is that they are free to say what they like - but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage." There is no excuse for gratuitous offence, of course. But some Muslims might like to consider how insulting their own views on women's rights, theocracy and Western practices are to many non-Muslims. The offensiveness of these views is no reason to close British mosques or Islamic newspapers.
The abrasions of a modern, multi-faith society are constant and need to be negotiated calmly and diplomatically. The proper boundaries of speech, art and humour are matters for continuous democratic review and consultation. What is completely unacceptable is that this debate should be carried out in a climate of fear.
For let us not delude ourselves: it is violence, or the threat of violence, that has driven the decisions that have been made in the past week. At a time when reasonable dialogue is most needed, the supposed custodians of our democracy are allowing a gun to be held to its head.
Winston Churchill is spinning in his grave.
Read the "Quotation of the Decade?" here:
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=137
Winston Churchill is spinning in his grave.
Read the "Quotation of the Decade?" here:
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=137
Sorry about the double post! It does bear repeating, though.
:^)
That is the date of the London bombings.
Well, it'll start with a little thing called internment camps....
For the moment, it sounds as good as anything I have to offer. I've not settled the question in my own mind--not even close
I wouldn't limit that longing for personal security to Jews. Other than that, thank you for the comment.
My father-in-law (with whom I served in Vietnam) and I have a long running argument. He wants us to declare Victory and come home as absolutely soon as humanly possible. I insist we're never coming home.
The time when coming home is in our national interest is beyond our lifetimes, probably beyond my military son's lifetime, and perhaps even in his children's lifetime.
What will change from time to time is the mix of military force, economic muscle, and cultural re-education. I have no idea how that will be accomplished.
Mindful of the temple money changers, isn't loving our enemies what Jesus taught us to do?
Long before the militant Islamic radical war mongers are defeated, we may need to be spreading a little love around the world of Islam. (Again, mindful of how Jesus dealt with the temple money changers.)
A Republic is a powerful and wonderful thing isn't it?
Yes. Even when it infuriates and perplexes. The trick is not to go the way of the Roman Republic. :-)
In one of my world saving fantasies, terrorists are killed wherever they are found. Their extended families, because they failed to teach moral regard for life to the terrorist, are sent into permanent exile to special penal colonies set up in Antarctica.
ROFLMAO
To which post and poster did you mean to aim this bit of wistful wisdom?
What's needed is enough backbone to make these little babies cry and wet themselves from fear. We don't need their friendship, we need them to be afraid of us.
Frankly, we need to put them in the frame of mind Japan adopted about mid-August 1945.
How would you accomplish this erasure?
In all due respect, I think it is time you volunteered a little more. You read my last comment and, if you know islam, you know it is irreffutable.
You can imagine some of the possible strategies...but now it is time for some of your thoughts.
"Like I stated before, I have no hope for Europe. "
Don't be so sure. They have hopefully awoken.
The Europeans have some great military and warrior tradition.
Will they discover that tradition and realize the threat soon enough?
It won't be a pretty sight however.
Excellent little piece.
I'd point out that Bin Laden IS the Muslim Reformation, Reformation defined in Christianity as a zealous rejection of any authority but sola scriptura, in Islam, the Koran and hadith.
Like what? I am willing to volunteer what I can, but I'm at a loss as to what you want. If you've read some of my posts starting at #86, you will certainly see I have not arrived at the either/or stand-off you seem to have reached.
I asked the question because your previous answer seems to advocate the annihilation of approximately 1.2 billion people, some of whom are Americans and some number of those are people serving in our military forces. That couldn't possibly be true. So, I asked indirectly what you meant, i.e., "how would you accomplish this erasure?"
You read my last comment and, if you know islam, you know it is irreffutable.
I know much more than some and much less than others. Basically, I know what I read.
Here is a repetition of your comment:
Actually, islam has already defined both victory and defeat by its inherent requirement that islam must dominate the world. The world has only two options...accept islam's dominance (and be converted, subjugated or killed) or expose islam for the cult it is and erase it from the world.
Far from being irrefutable, understanding your comment requires elaboration. Maybe you've made it elsewhere. I don't know.
For instance, the liberal movement in Islam does not appear to be the inherent threat you describe. If more fundamental and radical Muslims can be attracted into following it, the liberal movement, or something like it, might become the catalyst for a reconciliation.
Is that good enough for a start, or do you need more volunteering? :-)
I have to get up early in the morning, but you seem like a gentleman...so I'll give it an incoherent try.
If islam is a cult (I believe it is)...I certainly don't want to annihilate those unfortunate souls who have fallen victim to it. To the contrary, I want to liberate them.
If islam can be reformed (there are inherent aspects to it that prevent reformation)...I would vote for that. But I wouldn't sit back and wait for islam to transform itself into a tolerant system. I suggest the non-muslim world must outlaw the violent aspects of islam. Sharia and its practice (to the extent it violates human rights and the finer laws of civilied man) is taboo and punishable by the courts (actually that is the case now but the non-muslim world is stumbling along this path).
Ultimate, what I think must happen is that muslims must be forced to do something that is blasphemy...they must examine islam (remember that the punishment for blasphemy and apostasy is death).
For lack of time, I think islam must be subjected to the rawest forms of freedom...their prophet must be humiliated as is Jesus and the Jewish prophets. The koran must be flushed in a toilet just as is the bible (by muslims). Islam must be dragged into the modern world (and the violence of muslim protest must be endured and battled). If islam or any part of it can stand the light of day (and believe me...it cannot), so much the better.
Islam is an ancient trick of the devil. It is a trap. It must be sprung and its prisoners set free. IMHO. I could go on for days...forgive my rambling incoherence. By the way, Christianity is attacked each and every day by the muslim world and the secular world...and He (Yeshua) is stronger and truer than ever. Let's see if Allah and Mohammed can stand the heat in the kitchen.
Perhaps the authorities should acquiesce to the protesters' request, and shoot them. < / islam>
.Guess so that they have no hope of leading a palace coup to replace him.
British politics is a lot more cut and thrust than American.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.