Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking
But those that protested about returning soldiers were allowed to do so. Then there were the protests about the Danish cartoons of Mohammed with the placards they were carrying. The Police were escorting them and so could have taken immediate action, but didn't.
Came across this link as to why the cartoons were created in the first place.
Quote:
|
According to Flemming Rose, editor of Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten which published the cartoons, “I commissioned the cartoons in response to several incidents of self-censorship in Europe caused by widening fears and feelings of intimidation in dealing with issues related to Islam. ...a Danish children’s writer had trouble finding an illustrator for a book about the life of Muhammad. Three people turned down the job for fear of consequences.” There was thus a serious issue to address, namely a growing fear that anything that might simply be perceived as critical of Islam could not be created.
|
Quote:
|
The original cartoons were published on September 30, 2005. Other European newspapers republished them in 2006 — also not for the purpose of provoking and insulting, but because, like the Jyllands-Posten, they believed that freedom of expression was under assault from extremists using violence and intimidation. They were showing solidarity with the Danish press by taking equal responsibility for the publication rather than engaging in self-defeating self-censorship. They believed they had a right to publish material critical of Islam, Muslims, and Muslim figures like Muhammad even if some find it offensive.
|
|
Don't you think those quotes contradict each other? The first says that Jyllands-Posten published the cartoons to deliberately offend (or in their words
criticise) and the second says that it didn't. Which one is true? At the time I seem to remember that they tried make people believe they had no idea that the pictures would cause offense, kind of blows that excuse out of the water really, doesn't it? We don't have an automatic right to publish things that are offensive, even though they are only offensive to some people. I am pretty sure we are not allowed to publish child pornography, even though some do not find it offensive.