Desicritics Comments on Sacred Dogmas Of Free Society

Comment by Halo

Sun, 25 Nov 2007 06:53:09 EST

Comment by Bill

Fri, 23 Nov 2007 04:25:45 EST

phantom firework [URL=phantom-firework.betail.cn]phantom firework[/URL] whiskey lullaby [URL=whiskey-lullaby.betail.cn]whiskey lullaby[/URL] rheumatologists [URL=rheumatologists.betail.cn]rheumatologists[/URL] magnet mosquito [URL=magnet-mosquito.betail.cn]magnet mosquito[/URL] lil troy [URL=lil-troy.betail.cn]lil troy[/URL] megan rochell [URL=megan-rochell.betail.cn]megan rochell[/URL] oliveira raica [URL=oliveira-raica.betail.cn]oliveira raica[/URL] tracee [URL=tracee.betail.cn]tracee[/URL] kate beckinsale nude [URL=kate-beckinsale-nude.betail.cn]kate beckinsale nude[/URL] island tybee [URL=island-tybee.betail.cn]island tybee[/URL]

Comment by Ayu

Mon, 6 Feb 2006 07:53:30 EST

Finally somebody sees it the way I do. Thank you! Insensitive cartoons, I say. Of course, violence is not the best thing to deal with it, but such an action may happen when there are so many people involved. I live in Hungary where tabloids also published the cartoons, and the president even said on this matter: "It is essential to stand up for freedom of speech. This freedom entails responsibility, but no basic rights must be curtailed in the name of responsibility, even when fighting terrorism." Here media publishes articles freely about "barbar community"--the Muslims, that is--in the name of freedom if speech. We can simply ignore and refuse to read it, but what would we do when it is said right on our face? Is it still freedom of speech? Is there no limit at all?

Comment by Subhan Ahsan

Sat, 4 Feb 2006 03:46:41 EST

@Kush #2 - Thanks for highlighting the differences in the 2 symbols. Both symbols are referred by the same name (Swastika) and are very much identicals. But the fact is many Governments (in Europe especially) won't promote its usage on ground that it would hurt certain community. This unwritten policy is also very much followed by mainstream news agencies. So why not this care for cultural/religious sensitivity be taken for other communities? Yes Government shouldn't enforce censorship. But if an event has generated lots of publicity and which could possibly create volience, isn't its Government's responsibility to take actions to resolve the matter?

Comment by Subhan Ahsan

Sat, 4 Feb 2006 03:35:55 EST

@RealityCynic - Thats exactly the double standards taken by the mainstream Media which Muslims are facing today. If some Imam makes hatred statements, its not free speech and the whole Muslim community is held responsible for it and is expected to denounce it. But anything published by Media agencies is defended in the name of Liberty. The statements that you are citing will definitely be true and you would surely agree with me that its only reactionary to an unacceptable act. Infact if you have seen some demonstrations it would show the amount of hatred this incident has generated. And this reaction will not be a lone case but it is seen and felt in countries farof like mine. But for Editors all these reactions worldwide are okay, they only care about their Sales and Popularity, and reprinting the stuffs would surely help this. Thats exactly my article, by giving example of Indian Riots, tries to highlight. The irresponsible Press only fuels a problem further.

Comment by Kush Tandon

Sat, 4 Feb 2006 00:47:25 EST

"In Germany, one would face penalty to showcase Nazi Swastika symbols. Even though it is a kind of common good-luck symbol for many in my country India." Yes, and No. It is not that simple. It is the context in which they are used. There are Neo-Nazi parties in Germany as well as USA. ACLU has defended Neo-Nazi and KKK for free speech. A British royal using the symbol was only criticized for being "insensitive" - that is pretty much it. I fully understand and respect a Muslim getting deeply offended by the cartoons. One way will be to file defamation/ libel cases in the court of law - but let us not force governments to enforce censorship. The Hindu swastika and Nazi's symbol have no relationship. They are inverted/ mirror image of each other[Please look carefully]. Hitler found his Swastika from Austrian Nationalist parties that loved to fantasize and he just took it as his own.

Comment by RealityCynic

Sat, 4 Feb 2006 00:18:17 EST

You say, "If a Driver can't be irresponsible for his driving, how can Journalists, Novelists and Publishers get away from their hatred-inticing acts which have potential to play havoc?" An Imam proclaims, "We will not accept less than severing the heads of those responsible," one preacher at the al-Omari mosque here told worshippers during Friday prayers, according to wire service reports. Other demonstrators called for severing the hands of the cartoonists who drew the pictures, unflattering to Muhammad and to Islam." Is he not inciting violence. Why aren't Muslims protesting and throwing him out if he is not representative of the community?