Posted on 02/22/2006 12:59:47 PM PST by Thunder90
A wide range of panelists assembled Tuesday to discuss the wisdom and ethics of the decision to reprint a controversial cartoon in The Badger Herald last week.
The cartoon, which depicted the Islamic prophet Muhammad with a bomb in his turban, accompanied an 800-word editorial advocating the “sacred right” of freedom of speech.
The cartoon’s original Sept. 2005 publication in a Danish newspaper continues to spur a heated reaction — sometimes violent — from Muslims worldwide.
“I believe a newspaper, when possible, should give people the information they need to conduct intelligent, well-informed debate,” Mac VerStandig, editor in chief of The Badger Herald, said at Tuesday’s forum.
While none in attendance questioned the Herald’s right to print the cartoon, several panelists — including University of Wisconsin history professor emeritus Kemal Karpat — argued the newspaper abused that right.
“Here is the danger of freedom when it is in the hands of people who are not sufficiently understanding of the world in which they live,” Karpat said. “Such freedoms can be abused when people have the means to utilize them to express their own personal preferences, likes and dislikes.”
But VerStandig insisted the Editorial Board’s decision to print the cartoon was based on its newsworthiness, rather than any religious or political statement the Herald itself wished to convey. Specifically, he said, the decision came after University of Illinois Chancellor Richard Herman reprimanded the college newspaper there for reprinting six of the original Danish cartoons, bringing the issue from an international focus to a regional one.
“I believe in the libertarian principles that say that we gave you all the information, you can each draw your own intelligent conclusions about what’s going on in the news, what’s going on in Illinois and what’s going on throughout the world,” VerStandig said. “We printed this cartoon to help give you that information. We printed this cartoon because other people weren’t.”
Suri Kempe, the MultiCultural Student Coalition’s representative on the panel, said the Herald made an editorial decision to endorse the anti-Islamic speech the cartoon represented.
Implied in the protection of freedom of speech, Kempe argued, is that the defender of speech — The Badger Herald, in this case — is protecting speech that it believes in.
“I mean, what is the point of publishing something just for the sake of publishing it?” Kempe said. “By reprinting this picture, The Badger Herald — as an institution — claims the right to clearly express that it believes … [that Muhammad] is a terrorist, and that by extension it’s calling all Muslims terrorists.”
VerStandig, however, continued to defend the ethics behind the newspaper’s decision, referencing the accompanying editorial.
“The editorial we wrote alongside this cartoon … made absolutely clear that we think it is a repugnant and disgusting cartoon and that we don’t endorse the ideology that comes with it,” he said. Following the formal panel discussion, VerStandig entertained questions from an audience largely critical of the newspaper’s stance.
UW Chancellor John Wiley attended the discussion, and in his introduction to the event he promised all attendees would leave with memories and increased understanding the likes of which would not be encountered in any ordinary classroom experience.
“This is really in many ways what a university is all about,” Wiley said. “This kind of debate about real issues that are on us at the moment — not things that are considered in a theoretical context in a classroom — things that are actually happening and affecting people’s lives.”
Did anyone there bother to say it was a friggin CARTOON?
Did anyone there bother to say they FEARED death threats?
Did anyone there bother to say if you make exceptions for 1, you have to make exceptions for ALL and that would shut down FREE PRESS.
Idiots
Click below for more, and more accurate, information on this subject -- at the end of the article.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "Which, Being Believed, Was, Whether It Was or Not"
So what?
Can't have freedom in the hands of people eh Kemal?
They destroyed art over the centuries for depicting anyone.
I am surprised they ever accepted television.
They destroyed the twin towers because they thought it an idol.
But, they bow several times a day to their idol, Mecca.
And, they are offended by some scribbles they claim are blasphemous
when Mohammed is the mother of all blasphemers for denying the
divinity of Christ...
"Implied in the protection of freedom of speech, Kempe argued, is that the defender of speech — The Badger Herald, in this case — is protecting speech that it believes in."
What!!!!!!!!!!!! This clown got into college?
Kemal Karpat? BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAA I wouldn't take this joker seriously just from the sound of his name!
What hypocrites.
Was Kempe born this stupid, or did he require special training to atrophy his brain to the point where he was a suitable representative for the "MultiCultural Student Coalition"?
By this idiotic "reasoning", anyone who supports freedom of religion must simultaneously believe in atheism, Buddhism, Christianity, ..., Satanism, Wiccanism, and Zoroastrianism.
And this.......THIS ONE CARTOON, MAKES YOU THINK YOU'VE FINALLY GONE TOO FAR!
I need an aspirin....
It is not an anti muslim cartoon. It is an anti-Islamonazi cartoon and yes there is a difference.
Islamonazis are jihadists willing to kill men women and children (by suicide attack if necessary) to push their supremacist ideology of Islam on the rest of the world. Under Islamic law (not just koranic law but wahabi government) muslims are supreme. Jews and Christians hold a lower legal status in society. Atheists, Hindus, and Buddhists are at the bottom of society. The only "co-existence" is under their dominance (they'll tolerate you while it is necessary). There is no freedom of religion in that mindset. There is no tolerance among them for muslims who convert away from Islam.
Bowing to their "international" laws of blasphemy is bowing to their supremacy. Not going to happen. While depictions of Mohammed are not explicitly prohibited, you can bet that portrayals of Mohammed (even those that do not defame him) by infidels ARE prohibited. Such is the double standard.
Certainly wish all of the peaceful muslims around the world were this vocal in speaking out against the "not really real muslim" terrorists. If they aren't muslims then they defame Islam by killing in the name of Islam.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=fakephotos
Specifically the Mirror's POSED hoax photos and also the porn site photos published by an Egyptian paper and Boston Globe.
"You have the right to free speech, that's if you're not dumb enough to actually try it!" - Know Your Rights (Combat Rock) The Clash.
They've run MORE prison abuse photos of the same soldiers who have already ready been convicted. What's more they are circulating these images in the midst of global "cartoon" riots (holy wars).
If one labels Mohammed a child rapist, does that mean we are labelling all muslims child rapists?
That's as far as I needed to read. These people are dangerous--very dangerous, and they're in our midst.
Buddhist Statues in Ancient Buddhist Complex Destroyed (Published: 03/13/2001)
If ANYONE thinks this war is over our involvement in the Middle East or because of Israel's borders, they are mistaken.
This was the world we were in during the months leading UP to the 9-11 attacks.
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.