Posted on 03/15/2002 3:02:56 AM PST by ml/nj
"Some religions suck more than others, though, and one of them is Islam. It's not Muslims that I dislike -- I just dislike their faith."
Wow, Joe Fisher is a columnist for The South End, the student newspaper at Wayne State University in Detroit, and this quote is from his Feb. 26 column, "Islam Sucks," which I read in utter disbelief. Although I disagreed with everything Fisher said, I was most amazed that he chose to write such an outlandish piece.
Fisher's column was perceived as a symbol of hate by dozens of readers who wrote infuriated letters to the editor as well as by many who probably didn't write letters. Of course, when I read some of these letters, I saw hate just as strong from Muslim readers.
Ray Dabaja, a member of the Wayne State University community, wrote:
"Nor would Fisher imagine how it would sound to accuse Judaism when the Zionist criminals committed all their crimes in Lebanon and in Palestine today. It was not Sept. 11 that created this hate but it was that day that gave the chance to those creatures to spit all their poisons."
One might expect the cycle of hate to be perpetuated in letters written in response to Fisher's poorly written column. This vicious cycle is accentuated by Fisher's insincerity.
Two days after the column was published, Fisher submitted a public apology in which he referred to a past column he'd written about boycotting ... "Arab-owned stations because the profits may be used to fund terrorism."
Yet again, his views appear racist and absurd, despite his going on to say:
"Islam sucks" is not an example of what freedom of the press should mean. Fisher said his article was an intentional exaggeration, construed to show people they take religion too seriously."I didn't mean the things I wrote in the way that I twisted them. I wrote it to see if some people would react as poorly as expected."
But he should have made his point more clear to readers, rather than writing a column to enrage readers by shocking them into attention. For this reason, The South End erred in publishing Fisher's article.
If Fisher had truly believed that "Islam sucks," then his views -- regardless of how despicable we may find them -- should be published. Any journalist who is willing to express his views to the world in a professional and educational way is doing his job.
If The South End stands as a paper, which will publish its columnists' work regardless of the basic theme, then I applaud it. But I am angered by Fisher's ignorance, his unfounded display of prejudice and his disgusting misuse of the free press.
Ted Rall, a Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist, published early last week a cartoon, "Terror Widows," which some national newspapers ran. The New York Times, however, withdrew the cartoon from its website after receiving numerous complaints from readers and Sept. 11 widows.
Many people found the cartoon offensive, because it showed widows overcome with greed, thinking more about money than the deaths of their husbands.
One skit features a news anchor asking a widow: "So, when your husband called you from the 104th floor, he knew he was going to die?"
She responds: "Oh yes, he was on fire! By the way, Larry, that's a bitchin' tie!"
Many readers may agree that some of the wives of the Sept. 11 victims have shown shameful greed over the terrorist funds, which are being distributed.
Others may agree that another skit, which potentially misrepresents Daniel Pearl's wife as a greedy woman, was wrongfully defamatory.
But Rall is a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist, and I am saddened by the New York Times' decision to withdraw the cartoon, merely because the paper disagreed with its content or feared further backlash from readers -- backlash which could injure the paper's reputation.
Student-run college newspapers may feel they have less to lose than national papers, but any publication which fails to print a cartoon or a column -- because it disagrees with the content or because it fears negative reader response -- is wrong.
My support for freedom of the press, however, does not apply to Fisher, because he crossed the line between constructive criticism and disrespect.
In his column, he later says:
"Fortunately, we have a secular public school system in America that can deprogram the children of Muslim immigrants and help them adopt more productive values.""Islam Sucks" was not a piece, which focused on the true opinion of a writer but was only the exaggerated hate of a college student who wanted attention.
The South End makes a respectable journalistic decision every time it publishes the authentic ideas of its columnist, but it exercised poor judgment in appointing Joe Fisher to the board of writers.
Copyright © 2002 by The Cornell Daily Sun, Inc.
All rights reserved.
Your Josh Plotnick thinks it is "outlandish" to say "Islam Sucks." I say it is irresponsible not to say it.So far as I can tell my letter has not been published (yet?).Islam is pure and simple a military organization that advocates subduing and/or killing infidels. In a country which doesn't tolerate a religion that advocates polygamy, surely we do not need to tolerate those who advocate killing Christians, Jews, and others. It doesn't just advocate killing, Islam practices it. Wander around the globe to Indonesia, the Sudan, India, Lebanon, Israel, and ... lower Manhattan; and open your eyes.
Read their own =Quran=. Read Ibn Warraq's =Why I am not a Muslim.= Read Bat Ye'or's =Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam= or her =The Dhimmi=.
Look at the way the Muslims treat women - their own women! Watch the Muslims pronounce death sentences on people who write books. Does anything else Mr. Plotnick thinks a religion issue "fatwas"?
Please! You folks may dwell in ivory towers up in Ithaca, but this is not Never land.
ML/NJ
While I agree that he has a right to say whatever he wants, this statement shows the basic stupidity of our college population. He makes no attempt to separate the person from the religion. It is as if he said, "It's not Catholics I dislike -- I just dislike their faith" or "It's not Jews I dislike -- I just think that their faith sucks." Obviously he doesn't realize that he is contradicting himself.
O you people of the book [Christians]! Believe in what we have now sent down, fulfilling that which is with you, before we destroy some of your leaders and turn them on their backs or curse them as we cursed the people of the Sabbath [Jews]. (From the "peaceful" Muslim Koran, 4:47)
Here's the crux of this idiot's aurguement-it's ok for a pulitzer prize winner to offend, but not joe blow college newspaper writer.
Does freedom of the press include "islam sucks"? You're f!@#in' a right is does.
As noted on another thread, there is a prevalent mindset at Cornell and the rest of Ithaca wherein the left considers any criticism of leftist ideas (ie, cartoonist Rall's) to be censorship, while at the same time calling for the eradication of conservative, or politically incorrect, speech.
Yes, of course it does, just as it includes my right to ignore illiterate uninformed writers who chose to write about something they obviously know very little about.
It also includes my right to recognize from your comments that you are as uninformed as the person you comment about. You appear to have about the same mentality as the person who blames the gun for someone's harm, the pencil for misspelled words, and the religion for someone's actions. Someday you may discover the clues, God willing, that so far have eluded you.
Why shouldn't the press be free to disrespect?
Oh, Grate One.
Teach Me.
ML/NJ
My support for freedom of the press, however, does not apply to Fisher, because he crossed the line between constructive criticism and disrespect.
So Rall's patently offensive and disresprectful cartoon is really just constructive criticism? Why, because he has a Pulitzer Prize? Sheeeshh.
"My support for freedom of the press, however, does not apply to Fisher, because he crossed the line between constructive criticism and disrespect."
Fortunately, I do not need the authors "support for freedom of the press," I've got the following support:
Missouri Constitution
Bill of Rights
Section 8
"Section 8. That no law shall be passed impairing the freedom of speech, no matter by what means communicated: that every person shall be free to say, write or publish, or otherwise communicate whatever he will on any subject,..."
U.S. Constitution
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;"
Rights are inalienable, absolute, and categorical.
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.