Ending America: The Slaughter of Free Speech, Congress to "explore the need to limit some forms of freedom of speech"
".....be free to speak—evil ideas are dangerous only by default of men advocating better ideas." Ayn Rand
The very idea that our legislators would restrict free speech and impose the sharia (blasphemy laws) as a response to inhuman barbarity is an act of sedition and treason. When did we ever shred America's golden, historic principles in submission to bloody savage totalitarianism? If America really understood what was happening here and was not psy-oped by an enemedia, they would take to the streets with pitchforks and torches. And I would be front and center. This cannot, and I mean must not, be allowed to happen.
Have we lost our civilizational self-esteem? Do we not know who and what we are, and what made us the greatest civilization in the history of man?
Pam Geller, Atlas Shrugs
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label free speech. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Friday, January 21, 2011
What's the Crime?
What is this man's actual crime? We know what this crime is under Islamic law (sharia), "do not insult Islam," but what is the crime in the West? We are not subject to imperatives within the Islamic faith.
Qur'an burning is a stupid idea, of course, but is protected under the laws of free speech. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books. If free men are to be free and not live under Islamic law (sharia), then this man can do this if he wants, and his freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.
"The principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?"
"Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press -- of newspapers, books, magazines, radio, movies, and other forms of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible." Ayn Rand.
If this is unlwful, what next? Anything and everything that insults Islam? Then no one will be able to leave their homes eventually, except the truly pious Muslims. That is the eventuality. That is the road we are on. That was the reality for non-Muslims living under Muslim rule for over a millennium. Just look at countries currently living under Islamic law. This is a very slippery slop.
Atlas Shrugs
Qur'an burning is a stupid idea, of course, but is protected under the laws of free speech. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books. If free men are to be free and not live under Islamic law (sharia), then this man can do this if he wants, and his freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.
"The principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?"
"Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press -- of newspapers, books, magazines, radio, movies, and other forms of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible." Ayn Rand.
If this is unlwful, what next? Anything and everything that insults Islam? Then no one will be able to leave their homes eventually, except the truly pious Muslims. That is the eventuality. That is the road we are on. That was the reality for non-Muslims living under Muslim rule for over a millennium. Just look at countries currently living under Islamic law. This is a very slippery slop.
Atlas Shrugs
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Impeachable - BJ Tells It Like It Is
From BJ:
I appreciate everything you do in the name of Freedom and Liberty.
The first set of Documents WikiLeaks released earlier this year, I didn't make it my duty to read them (because I read everything). I am in my 60's, well informed -know American History, world history, understand how governments work, and I know that if this Government worked the way the US Constitution intended, we would be in good shape. However, I digress. I didn't read the first set of WL's. I remember thinking at the time, why the US Government, which would mean the WH, USSD, NSA, US Justice Department, and it GWOS the WH, refused to do anything.
Now, we have the 2nd set of Wikileaks (involving literally hundreds of thousands of documents), which this Government has known was coming for some time now. I DID read most of these documents this time, and I can tell you this one thing and that is his: Mr. Julian Assange (along with some 22-year-old Private in the US Army) did not do this alone. I realize that computer hackers are good at what they do: Mr. Assange DID NOT get his hands on literally 100's of thousands of Documents from the U S State Department, etc., without someone in upper levels of Government (with Obama's WH), and Holder's Justice Department, turning a blind eye and a deaf ear. It simply cannot be done. You will not see any serious investigations by Holder's (traitor to his core) I consider Obama, as well as Holder guilty of Treason of the highest order. Of course, I consider B. Hussein Mohamed Obama to be America's number one enemy.
Basically, this would have NEVER happened under a Reagan Administration.
We all know that Obama's goal is to fundamentally change America, and bring it to its knees. We also know that George Soros' number one goal is to destroy our Republic. If I am not mistaken Mr. Soros is a member of The Open Society Organization as is Mr. Assange. I believe the WikiLeaks (parts 1 and 2) were orchestrated by GS. How would Julian Assange manage to release all these Top Secret Documents, which basically spills the beans on what America thinks about everyone of our enemies and our Allies wiout the help of someone with very deep pockets, if you get my drift. How does Assange stay alive, where does he get his money. Who pays for his lawyer. Some guy from Australia, aided by a private in the USARMY does this. Simply cannot be none. Obama (with GS's help) allowed this to happen.
Think about this: TSA - I have seen pictures of people at the Airports, whose 4th Amendment rights are being seriously violated. WTP are being conditioned to accept the strong arm of the Government. DHS is already taking their Gestapo to Buses, Trains, Boats - next thing you will have intra-state check points, then interstate check points. Its coming. Then, this past week-end, the WH ordered DHS via ICE to simply go in and SEIZE 75 domain sites, without any warrants, nothing. The people who owned these Domains had no clue they had violated any laws. The FEDS just went in and S h u t T h e m D o w n!!!!!! Because they could. Last time I checked, ICE was supposed to help enforce illegal immigration. The excuse DHS used was Copy Right Infringement, but if that was the case, that comes under the Department of Justice.
We all know that Obama wants control of the Internet. He wants the Kill Switch. He definitely sees the Alternative Media as his enemy. He basically controls TV News, National newspapers, etc. I definitely believe that Obama has been and continues to be well aware of WikiLeaks. He is the enemy within. He basically is in the process (moving at a lightening pace) of putting the boot to WTP throat. The hammer is coming down. Control of the Internet would be a dream come true for BHO.
In closing, I called Senators J. Cornyn was well as Sessions, Coburn, Hatch, etc. pertaining to Voting For Censor of the Internet, and with one exception none of these people had heard of the FEDS seizing 75 Domain addresses this week-end.
Take care, and may God continue to bless you and your family. May God bless our Country.
Posted by Atlas Shrugs
I appreciate everything you do in the name of Freedom and Liberty.
The first set of Documents WikiLeaks released earlier this year, I didn't make it my duty to read them (because I read everything). I am in my 60's, well informed -know American History, world history, understand how governments work, and I know that if this Government worked the way the US Constitution intended, we would be in good shape. However, I digress. I didn't read the first set of WL's. I remember thinking at the time, why the US Government, which would mean the WH, USSD, NSA, US Justice Department, and it GWOS the WH, refused to do anything.
Now, we have the 2nd set of Wikileaks (involving literally hundreds of thousands of documents), which this Government has known was coming for some time now. I DID read most of these documents this time, and I can tell you this one thing and that is his: Mr. Julian Assange (along with some 22-year-old Private in the US Army) did not do this alone. I realize that computer hackers are good at what they do: Mr. Assange DID NOT get his hands on literally 100's of thousands of Documents from the U S State Department, etc., without someone in upper levels of Government (with Obama's WH), and Holder's Justice Department, turning a blind eye and a deaf ear. It simply cannot be done. You will not see any serious investigations by Holder's (traitor to his core) I consider Obama, as well as Holder guilty of Treason of the highest order. Of course, I consider B. Hussein Mohamed Obama to be America's number one enemy.
Basically, this would have NEVER happened under a Reagan Administration.
We all know that Obama's goal is to fundamentally change America, and bring it to its knees. We also know that George Soros' number one goal is to destroy our Republic. If I am not mistaken Mr. Soros is a member of The Open Society Organization as is Mr. Assange. I believe the WikiLeaks (parts 1 and 2) were orchestrated by GS. How would Julian Assange manage to release all these Top Secret Documents, which basically spills the beans on what America thinks about everyone of our enemies and our Allies wiout the help of someone with very deep pockets, if you get my drift. How does Assange stay alive, where does he get his money. Who pays for his lawyer. Some guy from Australia, aided by a private in the USARMY does this. Simply cannot be none. Obama (with GS's help) allowed this to happen.
Think about this: TSA - I have seen pictures of people at the Airports, whose 4th Amendment rights are being seriously violated. WTP are being conditioned to accept the strong arm of the Government. DHS is already taking their Gestapo to Buses, Trains, Boats - next thing you will have intra-state check points, then interstate check points. Its coming. Then, this past week-end, the WH ordered DHS via ICE to simply go in and SEIZE 75 domain sites, without any warrants, nothing. The people who owned these Domains had no clue they had violated any laws. The FEDS just went in and S h u t T h e m D o w n!!!!!! Because they could. Last time I checked, ICE was supposed to help enforce illegal immigration. The excuse DHS used was Copy Right Infringement, but if that was the case, that comes under the Department of Justice.
We all know that Obama wants control of the Internet. He wants the Kill Switch. He definitely sees the Alternative Media as his enemy. He basically controls TV News, National newspapers, etc. I definitely believe that Obama has been and continues to be well aware of WikiLeaks. He is the enemy within. He basically is in the process (moving at a lightening pace) of putting the boot to WTP throat. The hammer is coming down. Control of the Internet would be a dream come true for BHO.
In closing, I called Senators J. Cornyn was well as Sessions, Coburn, Hatch, etc. pertaining to Voting For Censor of the Internet, and with one exception none of these people had heard of the FEDS seizing 75 Domain addresses this week-end.
Take care, and may God continue to bless you and your family. May God bless our Country.
Posted by Atlas Shrugs
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Litigation Jihad
Robert Spencer, Human Events
Islamic supremacists are at war with freedom of speech in the West: The 57-government Organization of the Islamic Conference has been campaigning for years now at the United Nations to compel Western states to criminalize “religious hatred”—that is, honest discussions of how Islamic jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence and to recruit peaceful Muslims to their cause. One little-noted weapon in this war is the courtroom: using libel and defamation laws as weapons to cow critics and intimidate them into silence. My courageous and indefatigable colleague Pamela Geller is the latest target.
Muslim foes of the freedom of speech have used this weapon frequently over the years. The Hamas-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has sued many, and has threatened legal action against many more. In 2006 CAIR dropped a $1.35 million libel suit against Andrew Whitehead of Anti-CAIR, who had called CAIR a “terrorist front organization,” after Whitehead’s lawyers asked probing questions about the group during the discovery process.
In another notable case, billionaire Saudi Khalid bin Mahfouz sued writer Rachel Ehrenfeld in libel-friendly Britain for writing in her book Funding Evil that he was involved in funding Hamas and al-Qaeda. Bin Mahfouz denied that he had knowingly given money to either. This case became the foundation for new laws protecting American writers from libel rulings in other countries.
Now Ohio lawyer Omar Tarazi has filed a $10-million defamation lawsuit against Geller for elements of her reporting on the case of Rifqa Bary, the teenage girl who kicked off a year-long custody battle when she fled from her home in fear for her life after her Muslim father discovered her conversion to Christianity. (The battle ended when Rifqa turned eighteen and was free to live on her own as a Christian.)
[...]
“Rifqa Bary,” says Geller, “was a rebuke to all of the lies of Islamic supremacist narrative,” since she brought to national attention the Islamic death penalty for apostates, which Islamic apologists in the West routinely deny even exists. The Rifqa Bary affair, Geller explains, was a test case: Would Islamic supremacists be able to manipulate the American legal system to compel someone wishing to leave Islam to return to it, or would her freedom of conscience be upheld?
When Rifqa turned eighteen without having been forced back into her parents’ home, CAIR and its allied forces suffered a major setback. “Her victory,” said Geller, “is a stunning defeat for them and they will take it out on anyone who helped her.”
Islamic supremacists are at war with freedom of speech in the West: The 57-government Organization of the Islamic Conference has been campaigning for years now at the United Nations to compel Western states to criminalize “religious hatred”—that is, honest discussions of how Islamic jihadists use Islamic texts and teachings to justify violence and to recruit peaceful Muslims to their cause. One little-noted weapon in this war is the courtroom: using libel and defamation laws as weapons to cow critics and intimidate them into silence. My courageous and indefatigable colleague Pamela Geller is the latest target.
Muslim foes of the freedom of speech have used this weapon frequently over the years. The Hamas-linked Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) has sued many, and has threatened legal action against many more. In 2006 CAIR dropped a $1.35 million libel suit against Andrew Whitehead of Anti-CAIR, who had called CAIR a “terrorist front organization,” after Whitehead’s lawyers asked probing questions about the group during the discovery process.
In another notable case, billionaire Saudi Khalid bin Mahfouz sued writer Rachel Ehrenfeld in libel-friendly Britain for writing in her book Funding Evil that he was involved in funding Hamas and al-Qaeda. Bin Mahfouz denied that he had knowingly given money to either. This case became the foundation for new laws protecting American writers from libel rulings in other countries.
Now Ohio lawyer Omar Tarazi has filed a $10-million defamation lawsuit against Geller for elements of her reporting on the case of Rifqa Bary, the teenage girl who kicked off a year-long custody battle when she fled from her home in fear for her life after her Muslim father discovered her conversion to Christianity. (The battle ended when Rifqa turned eighteen and was free to live on her own as a Christian.)
[...]
“Rifqa Bary,” says Geller, “was a rebuke to all of the lies of Islamic supremacist narrative,” since she brought to national attention the Islamic death penalty for apostates, which Islamic apologists in the West routinely deny even exists. The Rifqa Bary affair, Geller explains, was a test case: Would Islamic supremacists be able to manipulate the American legal system to compel someone wishing to leave Islam to return to it, or would her freedom of conscience be upheld?
When Rifqa turned eighteen without having been forced back into her parents’ home, CAIR and its allied forces suffered a major setback. “Her victory,” said Geller, “is a stunning defeat for them and they will take it out on anyone who helped her.”
Friday, November 12, 2010
Twitter Trial
After this week’s ‘Twitter trial’, in which a court upheld a man’s criminal conviction for joking about ‘blowing the airport sky high’ in a tweet, this email will remain a resolutely joke-free zone. I would hate to be in a position where some ill-informed judge could describe an ironic aside in this missive as ‘menacing in its content and obviously so’ before dishing out a £1,000 fine. At a time when the War on Terror is taken deadly seriously and free speech is regarded as dispensable, we can rest assured that we live in a free country. Like I said, no irony here, m’lud.
Rob Lyons @spiked
Rob Lyons @spiked
Palestinian Faces Prison for Facebook Comments
Obama just sent these cavemen nother 150 million dollars was cutting off Israel's oxygen. Appalling.This Palestinaian blogger needs by bus ad.
Palestinian held for Facebook criticism of Islam Y Net News
[...]
The case of the unlikely apostate, a shy barber from the West Bank town of Qalqilya, is highlighting the limits of tolerance in the Western-backed Palestinian Authority – and illustrating a new trend by authorities in the Arab world to mine social media for evidence.
Residents of Qalqilya say they had no idea that Walid Husayin – the 26-year-old son of a Muslim scholar – was leading a double life.
Now, Husayin faces a potential life prison sentence on heresy charges for "insulting the divine essence." Many in this conservative Muslim town say he should be killed for renouncing Islam, and even family members say he should remain behind bars for life.
"He should be burned to death," said Abdul-Latif Dahoud, a 35-year-old Qalqilya resident. The execution should take place in public "to be an example to others," he added.
[...]
His Facebook groups elicited hundreds of angry comments, detailed death threats and the formation of more than a dozen Facebook groups against him, including once called "Fight the blasphemer who said 'I am God.'"
Husayin is the first to be arrested in the West Bank for his religious views, said Tayseer Tamimi, the former chief Islamic judge in the area.
The Western-backed Palestinian Authority is among the more religiously liberal Arab governments in the region. It is dominated by secular elites and has frequently cracked down on hardline Muslims and activists connected to its conservative Islamic rival, Hamas.
[...]
Caught by café owner
Husayin used a fake name on his English and Arabic-language blogs and Facebook pages. After his mother discovered articles on atheism on his computer, she canceled his Internet connection in hopes that he would change his mind.
Instead, he began going to an Internet cafe – a move that turned out to be a costly mistake. The owner, Ahmed Abu-Asal, said the blogger aroused suspicion by spending up to seven hours a day in a corner booth. After several months, a cafe worker supplied captured snapshots of his Facebook pages to Palestinian intelligence officials.
Officials monitored him for several weeks and then arrested him on October 31 as he sat in the cafe, said Abu-Asal.
Husayin's family has been devastated by the arrest. On a recent day, his father stood sadly in the family barber shop, cluttered with colorful towels and posters of men in outdated haircuts. He requested that a reporter not write about his son to avoid being publicly shamed.
Two cousins attributed the writings to depression, saying Husayin was desperate to find better work. Requesting anonymity because of the shame the incident, they said Husayin's mother wants him to remain in prison for life – both to restore the family's honor and to protect him from vigilantes.
Hamas 'stalks' Facebook pages
Gaza's Hamas rulers stalk Facebook pages of suspected dissenters, said Palestinian rights activist Mustafa Ibrahim. He said Internet cafe owners are forced to monitor customers' online activity, and alert intelligence officials if they see anything critical of the militant group or that violates Hamas' stern interpretation of Islam.
Both governments also create fake Facebook profiles to befriend and monitor known dissidents, activists said. Such "stalking" on Facebook and other social media sites has become increasingly common in the Arab world. In Lebanon, four people were arrested over the summer and accused of slandering President Michel Suleiman on Facebook. All have been released on bail.
In neighboring Syria, Facebook is blocked altogether. And in Egypt, a blogger was charged with atheism in 2007 after intelligence officials monitored his posts.
[...]
He could face a life sentence if he's found guilty, depending on how harshly the judge thinks he attacked Islam and how widely his views were broadcast, said Islamic scholar Tamimi.
Even so, a small minority has questioned whether the government went too far.
Zainab Rashid, a liberal Palestinian commentator, wrote in an online opinion piece that Husayin has made an important point: "that criticizing religious texts for their (intellectual) weakness can only be combatted by ... oppression, prison and execution."
He sounds like our "liberals."
Atlas Shrugs
Monday, October 25, 2010
The Escalation of the War Against Free Speech
The war against free speech is raging all over the West. Wilders is still on trial. Juan Williams was fired. There is a 10-million-dollar lawsuit against me. And in Austria, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, who spoke at our FDI event at CPAC in February 2010, is also facing trial for telling the truth. Get the details here -- and stand with Elisabeth and all freedom fighters.
Atlas Shrugs
Atlas Shrugs
Friday, October 22, 2010
London: Free Speech Death Watch Report
Free Speech Death Watch Alert: "BREAKING: Conference facility caves to pressure from Islamic groups, bans Mark Steyn from speaking," by Andrew Lawton at Strictly Right, October 21:
Strictly Right sent out a press release earlier today to Canadian media with some rather startling news about the upcoming Mark Steyn speech in London, Ontario that we're putting together. Mark Steyn will be speaking on November 1st in a speech entitled "Head for the Hills: Why everything in your world is doomed." Apparently, London-area Muslims didn't like that idea too much.
Due to capacity constraints at the University of Western Ontario, the original venue for the event, we had booked the London Convention Centre (LCC,) London's premiere conference facility. On Tuesday, I received a phone call from the LCC telling us that our venue had been pulled, and that Mark Steyn would not be permitted to speak there. The reason offered by the LCC was that they had received pressure from local Islamic groups, and they didn't want to alienate their Muslim clients. It's interesting to note that the LCC is owned by the City of London, and is therefore a government operation.
It's interesting that a government-run business decided that freedom of speech was no longer a concept to be upheld, and even more interesting is the fact that the Muslim community in London is applying pressure to a company to not entertain a speaker when only a day earlier they made a statement to the press saying that they didn't care about Steyn speaking and wouldn't do anything to counter it, (except "charity work.")...
Strictly Right sent out a press release earlier today to Canadian media with some rather startling news about the upcoming Mark Steyn speech in London, Ontario that we're putting together. Mark Steyn will be speaking on November 1st in a speech entitled "Head for the Hills: Why everything in your world is doomed." Apparently, London-area Muslims didn't like that idea too much.
Due to capacity constraints at the University of Western Ontario, the original venue for the event, we had booked the London Convention Centre (LCC,) London's premiere conference facility. On Tuesday, I received a phone call from the LCC telling us that our venue had been pulled, and that Mark Steyn would not be permitted to speak there. The reason offered by the LCC was that they had received pressure from local Islamic groups, and they didn't want to alienate their Muslim clients. It's interesting to note that the LCC is owned by the City of London, and is therefore a government operation.
It's interesting that a government-run business decided that freedom of speech was no longer a concept to be upheld, and even more interesting is the fact that the Muslim community in London is applying pressure to a company to not entertain a speaker when only a day earlier they made a statement to the press saying that they didn't care about Steyn speaking and wouldn't do anything to counter it, (except "charity work.")...
Monday, October 18, 2010
Islamic Supremacism at Work in Universities
It mimics that same leftist (national socialism)/Islamic (Mufti al-Husseini) alliance of the Nazis. It's the same template.
And while this particular story is in the UK, it is here in the US too. Doubt me? Check out any lecture given by Robert Spencer, myself, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish (when not canceled due to Muslim pressure) at an American university. Or better yet, hold a rally in support of Israel, if you dare. I have been covering the anti-America, anti-Israel, pro-jihad rallies for years, and I have always benn morbidly amused by "Queers for Palestine" or "breasts not bombs": these tools would be slaughtered, stoned, or publicly hanged under Islamic law.
The Islamic/leftist machine gestates, percolates, propagates, and recruits at college universities nationwide. They are moving into K-12 via by rewriting history in our public school textbooks. Defenders of freedom and patriots are fighting back. We need much more of that. Teach your children well. We will need every single individual to fight this onslaught.
Atlas Shrugs
And while this particular story is in the UK, it is here in the US too. Doubt me? Check out any lecture given by Robert Spencer, myself, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish (when not canceled due to Muslim pressure) at an American university. Or better yet, hold a rally in support of Israel, if you dare. I have been covering the anti-America, anti-Israel, pro-jihad rallies for years, and I have always benn morbidly amused by "Queers for Palestine" or "breasts not bombs": these tools would be slaughtered, stoned, or publicly hanged under Islamic law.
The Islamic/leftist machine gestates, percolates, propagates, and recruits at college universities nationwide. They are moving into K-12 via by rewriting history in our public school textbooks. Defenders of freedom and patriots are fighting back. We need much more of that. Teach your children well. We will need every single individual to fight this onslaught.
Atlas Shrugs
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Wilders Not Guilty!
The first hurdle has been won in the heresy trial of Geert Wilders. Islamic supremacists have failed in their relentless attack on free men. It is a good day for freedom lovers the world over.
On Friday, the court will decide if Wilders will be found guilty of incitement charges. Incitement by whom? It is the infidel, the kuffar and the moderates who are being slaughtered by Muslim fundamentalists, not the other way around.
Wilders spoke the truth about Islam. And there were no riots or murders, etc., by non-Muslims, unlike the blood spilled when devout Muslims are "offended." These silly charges cannot stand.
Prosecutors in the trial of anti-Islam Freedom Party (PVV) leader Geert Wilders say he should be acquitted of group defamation. Radio Netherlands
The populist Dutch MP is standing trial for defamation of Muslims as a group because of his comparison of the Qur’an to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. He is also charged with inciting hatred and discrimination.
Public prosecutors Birgit van Roessel and Paul Velleman now say his comments on the Qur’an referred to Islam and its holy book, and not to Muslim people.
In explaining their call for acquittal on the defamation charges, the prosecutors also explained that statements contained in the MP’s film, Fitna, referred to Islam as a religion and not to its followers. Even though the statements could hurt the feelings of Muslims, that was not the same as defamation of the group.
On Friday, the prosecutors will either press for Mr Wilders to be found guilty on the incitement charges or for him to be acquitted. If they call for a guilty verdict, they will also put forward what they consider an appropriate sentence.
Friday, October 8, 2010
Wilders and Free Speech on Trial in Holland
Pamela Geller, Big Journalism
In what can only to be described as a throwback to the seventh century, Dutch Parliamentarian and anti-jihad warrior Geert Wilders was back in court Monday on specious “hate speech” charges filed by a corrupt, criminal dhimmi court in the Netherlands.
How dare they subjugate their Western values to Islamic supremacism in this dangerous farce?
wilders
Wilders has explained what’s at really on trial in Holland in his case: “I am standing trial,” he said, “because of my opinions on Islam … and because the Dutch establishment – most of them non-Muslims – wants to silence me. I have been dragged to court because in my country freedom can no longer be fully enjoyed. In Europe the national state, and increasingly the EU, prescribes how citizens – including democratically elected politicians such as myself – should think and what we are allowed to say.”
For a moment it looked as if the Dutch might come to their senses and stop harassing this warrior for freedom. On Monday, just as his heresy trial resumed, Wilders said, “I am on trial, but on trial with me is the freedom of expression of many Dutch citizens. I can assure you, I will continue proclaiming it.” Then, according to the notoriously leftist and morally bankrupt Guardian, he “asserted his right to remain silent for the rest of the trial, prompting a comment from the presiding judge, Jan Moors, which was challenged by Wilders’s lawyer.”
Moors said, according to the Guardian, that Wilders “was known for making bold statements but avoiding discussions,” and concluded by saying: “It appears you’re doing so again.”
Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moszkowicz then asked that the proceedings be halted and Moors removed. But on Tuesday a special panel refused to remove Moors, and the trial resumed again.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Wilders Watch: FITNA on Trial
The free world holds its breath as Geert Wilders stands before a corrupt Dutch court and ....dares with his silence to refuse to sanction their enforcement of the sharia (Islamic law) and subversion of the blood and toil of centuries of progress. Free speech, free men -- essential freedom hangs in the balance. The leftist liars can package this horror in any shade of ribbon they want. It is what it is: the west on trial.
Here is the film that set this particular evil in motion. When I first viewed it, I was stunned by its shocking simplicity. If you haven't viewed it or seen it recently, stop and watch it. And you'll understand the terrible fight we are losing in the war of ideas.
Understand the premise here: Muslims were offended, so one man who spoke the truth may go to jail.
Here is the film that set this particular evil in motion. When I first viewed it, I was stunned by its shocking simplicity. If you haven't viewed it or seen it recently, stop and watch it. And you'll understand the terrible fight we are losing in the war of ideas.
Understand the premise here: Muslims were offended, so one man who spoke the truth may go to jail.
Friday, September 10, 2010
The President's War on Free Speech
Back in May of 2009, the US military burned stacks of bibles in Afghanistan, why weren't we having this conversation then? No one threatened violence against them. Obama did not stand against the bible burning.
In another striking blow to American non-Muslims and freedom of speech, President Obama came out against the qu'ran burning in Florida. A stupid idea, of course but protected under the laws of free speech. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books. If Americans are free and not under Sharia, then the church can do this if it wants, and their freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.
Obama is wrong to say this will threaten American troops. This is based on the false assumption that they are fighting us because we are doing things they don't like. Actually they are fighting us because of imperatives within the Islamic faith. They will never like us unless we convert to Islam or submit to Islamic rule. If we stop doing things they dislike, where will we draw the line? How far will Sharia advance in the U.S., with Americans afraid to stop its advance for fear of offending Muslims and stirring them up to violence? The Muslim Students Association is already pushing for halal cafeterias, segregated dorms, segregated gym facilities on campus. This is incompatible with American freedom. We have to draw the line.
"The principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?"
"Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press -- of newspapers, books, magazines, radio, movies, and other forms of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible." Ayn Rand
Obama's position on free speech is inconsistent with this support for the Ground Zero mega mosque using the blanket of "freedom of religion" (though no one was suggesting it not built on religious grounds.) Where is the blanket of free speech?
Obama: "If he's listening, I hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans," Obama said. "That this country has been built on the notion of freedom and religious tolerance."
And freedom of speech. "Tolerance" is no where in the first amendment.
Back in October 2009, when the Obama administration actually co-sponsored (with Egypt, itself not a bastion of free inquiry and free expression) an anti-free speech resolution at the United Nations. Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council, the resolution calls on states to condemn and criminalize “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.” What could be wrong with that? Everything. There is, after all, the First Amendment, which preserves Americans’ right to free speech and freedom of the press. “Incitement” and “hatred” are in the eye of the beholder – or more precisely, in the eye of those who make such determinations. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as “hate speech.” The Founding Fathers knew that the freedom of speech was an essential safeguard against tyranny: the ability to dissent, freely and publicly and without fear of imprisonment or other reprisal, is a cornerstone of any genuine republic.
If some ideas cannot be heard and are proscribed from above, the ones in control are tyrants, however benevolent they may be. Now no less distinguished a personage than the president of the United States has given his imprimatur to this tyranny. The resolution also condemns “negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups,” which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism – for that, not actual negative stereotyping or hateful language, is always the focus of complaints by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and allied groups. They never say anything when people like Osama bin Laden and Khaled Sheikh Mohammed issue detailed Koranic expositions justifying violence and hatred; but when people like Geert Wilders and others report about such expositions, that’s “negative stereotyping.”
Eugene Volokh explained why even the First Amendment may not be able to stand up against Obama’s assault on free speech. “If the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech,” he explains, “presumably we are taking the view that all countries – including the U.S. – should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we’re implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.” Volokh added that in order to be consistent, “the Administration would presumably have to take what steps it can to ensure that supposed ‘hate speech’ that incites hostility will indeed be punished. It would presumably be committed to filing amicus briefs supporting changes in First Amendment law to allow such punishment, and in principle perhaps the appointment of Justices who would endorse such changes (or even the proposal of express constitutional amendments that would work such changes).” In 2008 the Secretary General of the OIC chief Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu issued a warning: “We sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed” regarding free speech about Islam and terrorism. And he reported success: “The official West and its public opinion are all now well-aware of the sensitivities of these issues. They have also started to look seriously into the question of freedom of expression from the perspective of its inherent responsibility, which should not be overlooked.” No American president had ever taken more seriously his “responsibility” to restrict the freedom of speech and bow to Muslim demands than Barack Hussein Obama. When he said during his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech that “peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely,” the irony was blistering. And he worked to erode American sovereignty in other ways as well.
More in my book: The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America
Over at MSNBC
President Barack Obama said in an interview Thursday that the Quran-burning plan by a Florida pastor was "destructive" and a "recruitment bonanza for al-Qaida."
Speaking on ABC's "Good Morning America" in an interview broadcast Thursday, Obama warned that Rev. Terry Jones' plan would endanger U.S. troops and could lead to serious violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The president called it a "stunt" and exhorted Jones to "listen to those better angels" and call off the protest this weekend.
"If he's listening, I hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans," Obama said. "That this country has been built on the notion of freedom and religious tolerance."
The president also said Jones' plan, if carried out, could serve as an incentive for terrorist-minded individuals "to blow themselves up" to kill others.
"And as a very practical matter, as commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, I just want him to understand that this stunt that he is talking about pulling could greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform," the president said.
Rings hollow. Our rules of engagement greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform.
Pamela Geller
In another striking blow to American non-Muslims and freedom of speech, President Obama came out against the qu'ran burning in Florida. A stupid idea, of course but protected under the laws of free speech. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books. If Americans are free and not under Sharia, then the church can do this if it wants, and their freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.
Obama is wrong to say this will threaten American troops. This is based on the false assumption that they are fighting us because we are doing things they don't like. Actually they are fighting us because of imperatives within the Islamic faith. They will never like us unless we convert to Islam or submit to Islamic rule. If we stop doing things they dislike, where will we draw the line? How far will Sharia advance in the U.S., with Americans afraid to stop its advance for fear of offending Muslims and stirring them up to violence? The Muslim Students Association is already pushing for halal cafeterias, segregated dorms, segregated gym facilities on campus. This is incompatible with American freedom. We have to draw the line.
"The principle of free speech is not concerned with the content of a man's speech and does not protect only the expression of good ideas, but all ideas. If it were otherwise, who would determine which ideas are good and where forbidden? The government?"
"Once a country accepts censorship of the press and of speech, then nothing can be won without violence. Therefore, so long as you have free speech, protect it. This is the life-and-death issue in this country: do not give up the freedom of the press -- of newspapers, books, magazines, radio, movies, and other forms of presenting ideas. So long as that's free, a peaceful intellectual turn is possible." Ayn Rand
Obama's position on free speech is inconsistent with this support for the Ground Zero mega mosque using the blanket of "freedom of religion" (though no one was suggesting it not built on religious grounds.) Where is the blanket of free speech?
Obama: "If he's listening, I hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans," Obama said. "That this country has been built on the notion of freedom and religious tolerance."
And freedom of speech. "Tolerance" is no where in the first amendment.
Back in October 2009, when the Obama administration actually co-sponsored (with Egypt, itself not a bastion of free inquiry and free expression) an anti-free speech resolution at the United Nations. Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council, the resolution calls on states to condemn and criminalize “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.” What could be wrong with that? Everything. There is, after all, the First Amendment, which preserves Americans’ right to free speech and freedom of the press. “Incitement” and “hatred” are in the eye of the beholder – or more precisely, in the eye of those who make such determinations. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as “hate speech.” The Founding Fathers knew that the freedom of speech was an essential safeguard against tyranny: the ability to dissent, freely and publicly and without fear of imprisonment or other reprisal, is a cornerstone of any genuine republic.
If some ideas cannot be heard and are proscribed from above, the ones in control are tyrants, however benevolent they may be. Now no less distinguished a personage than the president of the United States has given his imprimatur to this tyranny. The resolution also condemns “negative stereotyping of religions and racial groups,” which is of course an oblique reference to accurate reporting about the jihad doctrine and Islamic supremacism – for that, not actual negative stereotyping or hateful language, is always the focus of complaints by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and allied groups. They never say anything when people like Osama bin Laden and Khaled Sheikh Mohammed issue detailed Koranic expositions justifying violence and hatred; but when people like Geert Wilders and others report about such expositions, that’s “negative stereotyping.”
Eugene Volokh explained why even the First Amendment may not be able to stand up against Obama’s assault on free speech. “If the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech,” he explains, “presumably we are taking the view that all countries – including the U.S. – should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we’re implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.” Volokh added that in order to be consistent, “the Administration would presumably have to take what steps it can to ensure that supposed ‘hate speech’ that incites hostility will indeed be punished. It would presumably be committed to filing amicus briefs supporting changes in First Amendment law to allow such punishment, and in principle perhaps the appointment of Justices who would endorse such changes (or even the proposal of express constitutional amendments that would work such changes).” In 2008 the Secretary General of the OIC chief Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu issued a warning: “We sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed” regarding free speech about Islam and terrorism. And he reported success: “The official West and its public opinion are all now well-aware of the sensitivities of these issues. They have also started to look seriously into the question of freedom of expression from the perspective of its inherent responsibility, which should not be overlooked.” No American president had ever taken more seriously his “responsibility” to restrict the freedom of speech and bow to Muslim demands than Barack Hussein Obama. When he said during his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech that “peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely,” the irony was blistering. And he worked to erode American sovereignty in other ways as well.
More in my book: The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America
Over at MSNBC
President Barack Obama said in an interview Thursday that the Quran-burning plan by a Florida pastor was "destructive" and a "recruitment bonanza for al-Qaida."
Speaking on ABC's "Good Morning America" in an interview broadcast Thursday, Obama warned that Rev. Terry Jones' plan would endanger U.S. troops and could lead to serious violence in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The president called it a "stunt" and exhorted Jones to "listen to those better angels" and call off the protest this weekend.
"If he's listening, I hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans," Obama said. "That this country has been built on the notion of freedom and religious tolerance."
The president also said Jones' plan, if carried out, could serve as an incentive for terrorist-minded individuals "to blow themselves up" to kill others.
"And as a very practical matter, as commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the United States, I just want him to understand that this stunt that he is talking about pulling could greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform," the president said.
Rings hollow. Our rules of engagement greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform.
Pamela Geller
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Koran Burning in Florida
My position on the Koran burning in Florida by a whacko church aligned with the vile anti-military, anti-semitic Westboro Church that defiles the funerals of our honored fallen soldiers:
1. This church's plan to burn the Qur'an does a grave disservice to the cause of spreading awareness about Islamic teachings and the threat that Sharia poses to our way of life.
2. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books.
3. If Americans are free and not under Sharia, then the church can do this if it wants, and their freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.
4. If they were burning a Bible, no one would be threatening violence against them.
5. Petraeus is wrong to say this will threaten American troops. This is based on the assumption that they are fighting us because we are doing things they don't like. Actually they are fighting us because of imperatives within the Islamic faith. They will never like us unless we convert to Islam or submit to Islamic rule. If we stop doing things they dislike, where will we draw the line? How far will Sharia advance in the U.S., with Americans afraid to stop its advance for fear of offending Muslims and stirring them up to violence? The Muslim Students Association is already pushing for halal cafeterias, segregated dorms, segregated gym facilities on campus. This is incompatible with American freedom. We have to draw the line.
1. This church's plan to burn the Qur'an does a grave disservice to the cause of spreading awareness about Islamic teachings and the threat that Sharia poses to our way of life.
2. The burning of books is wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books.
3. If Americans are free and not under Sharia, then the church can do this if it wants, and their freedom and rights should be protected. Islamic supremacists should not be allowed a victory for their violent intimidation -- if these people want to burn a book, they're free to do so.
4. If they were burning a Bible, no one would be threatening violence against them.
5. Petraeus is wrong to say this will threaten American troops. This is based on the assumption that they are fighting us because we are doing things they don't like. Actually they are fighting us because of imperatives within the Islamic faith. They will never like us unless we convert to Islam or submit to Islamic rule. If we stop doing things they dislike, where will we draw the line? How far will Sharia advance in the U.S., with Americans afraid to stop its advance for fear of offending Muslims and stirring them up to violence? The Muslim Students Association is already pushing for halal cafeterias, segregated dorms, segregated gym facilities on campus. This is incompatible with American freedom. We have to draw the line.
Monday, September 6, 2010
Indonesian Reaction to Qur'an Burning
More love from the religion of peace and tolerance. Sorry, fellas, here in America we have free speech. Nobody said boo when Piss Christ was an art exhibit or Comedy Central had Jesus snorting coke or when the steady stream of Jew hating cartoons and TV shows in the Muslim world came out, so the prophet moe and his followers are going to have to grow up.
Muslims must learn to get along with others and live side by side with their fellow man. :)
The 911 quran burning in Florida is a dumb idea. I don't support such acts. Book burnings are always a bad idea. But Muslims have nothing to fear from those Christians. It is insensitive for that church to burn the quran, but it is still a free country, is it not? Islamic supremacists can't whine about "insensitivity" while planning to erect a 15-story mega mosque on Ground Zero. Meanwhile, Muslims across the world are going nuts of the book burning, "death to America."
Indonesians protest U.S. church's plan to burn Quran
Jakarta, Indonesia - Thousands of Indonesians gathered Sunday outside the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta to protest a Florida church's plan to burn copies of the Quran.
The Dove World Outreach Center in Gainsville, Florida, plans to mark the ninth anniversary of the September 11 attacks by burning copies of the Muslim holy text. The center describes itself as a "New Testament church based on the Bible." It made headlines last year when it distributed a T-shirt that said, "Islam is the devil."
Protesters in Jakarta carried signs saying, "Jihad to protect Koran" and "You burn qu'ran you burn in hell." The protesters included members of the hard-line Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir Indonesia and the pluralism care movement, a multi-faith group.
And then there is this:
Afghans chant "death to America," claim Obama behind Florida Qur'an-burning Jihadwatch
Once again: This church's plan to burn the Qur'an on September 11 is stupid; I disapprove of it and of many other things about the pastor, the church, and the church's approach to the jihad threat. I don't support the burning of books; it's tactically stupid, as it will make the mainstream media portray the church as a bunch of Nazis, and it's wrong in principle: the antidote to bad speech is not censorship or book-burning, but more speech. Open discussion. Give-and-take. And the truth will out. There is no justification for burning books.
Marisol's comments here are apposite: "'International Burn a Koran Day' does a grave disservice to the cause of spreading awareness about Islamic teachings and the threat that Sharia poses to our way of life. It is a gift to Islamic groups who would so dearly love to portray all of us who criticize and question Islamic teachings (and triumphalist mosques) as frothing reactionaries."
If Americans are free and not under Sharia, then the church can do this if it wants, and their freedom and rights should be protected.
Blaming Obama for this is conspiracy paranoia at its finest.
"Afghans protest US church's plans to burn Quran," by Rahim Faiez for AP, September 6:
KABUL, Afghanistan -- Hundreds of Afghans railed against the United States and called for President Barack Obama's death at a rally in the capital Monday to denounce an American church's plans to burn the Islamic holy book on 9/11.
The crowd in Kabul, numbering as many as 500, chanted "Long live Islam" and "Death to America" as they listened to fiery speeches from members of parliament, provincial council deputies, and Islamic clerics who criticized the U.S. and demanded the withdrawal of foreign troops from the country. Some threw rocks when a U.S. military convoy passed, but speakers shouted at them to stop and told police to arrest anyone who disobeyed.
The Gainesville, Florida-based Dove World Outreach Center announced plans to burn copies of the Quran on church grounds to mark the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, but has been denied a permit to set a bonfire. The church, which made headlines last year after distributing T-shirts that said "Islam is of the Devil," has vowed to proceed with the burning.
"We know this is not just the decision of a church. It is the decision of the president and the entire United States," said Abdul Shakoor, an 18-year-old high school student who said he joined the protest after hearing neighborhood gossip about the Quran burning.
The U.S. Embassy in Kabul issued a statement condemning Dove World Outreach Center's plans, saying Washington was "deeply concerned about deliberate attempts to offend members of religious or ethnic groups."
Protesters, who gathered in front of western Kabul's Milad ul-Nabi mosque, raised placards and flags emblazoned with slogans calling for the death of Obama, while police looked on. They also held up a cardboard effigy of Dove World Outreach Center's pastor Terry Jones....
Pamela Geller, Atlas Shrugs
Sunday, July 18, 2010
English Defense League betrayed by Brit Police
The horror of what the EDL encountered yesterday was no accident.
Here is another account from an attendee (or attempted attendee) at the EDL protest in Dudley yesterday. It bodes most ill if the police are working in tandem with the Islamic supremacists. This was not just sabotaging the demo, but deliberately putting good folks in harms way. This is the the stuff of a police state, an Islamic police state.
I removed the profanity................. (hat tip Roberta)
We were on the Bolton coach and we got caught up with the locals we had some on our coach. I was sat next to cutter and some of the ones on our coach were wankers, we kicked them off after half a mile and they gathered up with their own local groups. The police provided three coaches for the locals and took them straight to the demo. They came back for the rest and filled them again with all locals who they took to the demo. About two hundred went on foot and marched in.
The real EDL had about three coaches and three mini buses that had been separated from the rest of the EDL coaches and we were run around Dudley at about 10 mile an hour and taken everywhere but the demo. I got off the coach and told the senior officer the truth. I said .......if you think we are going to be [jerked] around like this you have no chance. He told us they would take us straight to the demo now. He did take us to the demo but the wanker took us to the wrong one he took us to the UAF [the fascist group of Muslims and leftists-Atlas] demo site.
Three coaches emptied in a flash as they tried to turn the coaches around. We got back to the roundabout and they tried to take us back to the Harrier pub saying it was a quick way round. Our driver pulled over and let us all off as he said the police are just running you around. We went back to the roundabout and I approached the inspector there and informed him we have women and children in our group and we have picked up a lot more EDL families who had been left roaming the streets by the police.
The police sent us up the dual carriageway saying it was that way we had to go even though he was aware of the muslims ganged up at the top. We got less than 150 yards away from over 50 old bill in riot gear as well as traffic cops when we were attacked by over 200 muslims. The old bill watched it happen and did nothing.
The bastards left us to fight off 200 Muslims with less than ten lads. We were fighting head to head on the grass banking six of us from Bolton against 200 Muslims and we could not back off or they would have bricked the women and children. They left us like this for over half an hour and did nothing. They eventually sent two riot police on to the grass bank to stop it. It was only the arrival of 40 EDL who charged the Muslims that made them back off. And the old bill still did nothing.
The Muslims were still there at 6:00 when the old bill told us we had to go back down the same damn road to get to our coach as they were not letting the coaches in to pick us up. We mobbed up to go down the road and the old bill did nothing. I spoke to a senior officer and told him we had to go down the road to get the coach and it was full of Muslims smashing cars and attacking people and he said its not our problem you should not have come. WEST MIDLAND WANKERS I HOPE HE FINDS OUT ONE OF HIS KIDS HAD GONE TO THE DEMONSTRATION. SORRY TURKEY SHOOT. This is not policing, this is nothing more than political destruction of the EDL.. They must have been told to take this stance against us by upper level government because the police have to respond to violence not stand by and watch it happening.
Michael
Previous Atlas coverage here and here.
UPDATE: As Davod pointed out to me back in May: Dhimmi Cameron wasn't kidding or playing politics when he made those disgusting statements about the EDL.
UPDATE: After having read the above reportage from an attendee, watch how the police in the UK handled violent Muslim protests last year:[Previous post on Israel and Beyond]
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Free Speech Against Muslims Prohibited
When SCOTUS permits women in high heels to stomp defenseless little animals on film, it should allow a man to mock Muhammad with cartoons.
"Hearing set for man who posted anti-Islam drawings," by David Unze for the St. Cloud Times, April 23:
A June 1 hearing has been scheduled for the Waite Park man who admitted posting anti-Islam drawings at various locations in St. Cloud.
The hearing is an opportunity for Sidney Allen Elyea to dispute a civil charge that he violated a city ordinance prohibiting posting materials on fixtures. Elyea faces two civil charges that each carry a maximum fine of $250.
Elyea has admitted posting the drawings and said he did so to educate others about Islam. The city charged Elyea through the civil process after county attorneys in Benton and Stearns counties declined to file criminal charges of obscenity or defamation against him, saying that what he posted was protected speech.
So two county attorneys thought that Elyea was exercising his freedom of speech, and yet the city pressed forward with a case anyway. Why is that? Why are Muslims being set up in this country as a protected class that must not be criticized or offended? Who else enjoys such protection? Why, no one, of course. And no one should.
Elyea's attorney has echoed that opinion, adding previously that Elyea was protesting in a nonviolent manner and that the city's ordinance encourages arbitrary enforcement and is void because it's vague.
"Given what our Supreme Court has done to protect the right to free speech, it baffles me that the government has not dismissed this case," Attorney Ryan Garry said Friday. "The city attorney's office should be charging and citing residents for the crimes they commit, not for the opinions they have."...
The drawings that Elyea posted contained explicit depictions of bestiality and sodomy, contained images of the Prophet Muhammad in derogatory positions and contained pictures and words offensive to Muslims in particular.
One set of the drawings was found posted to a telephone pole outside a Somali-owned business in East St. Cloud. Other copies were found in other parts of the city.
So he may be a jerk. He may be a provocateur. He may be a lout. But is it illegal now to be those things, when a certain hypersensitive group is the recipient of the loutish behavior?
"Hearing set for man who posted anti-Islam drawings," by David Unze for the St. Cloud Times, April 23:
A June 1 hearing has been scheduled for the Waite Park man who admitted posting anti-Islam drawings at various locations in St. Cloud.
The hearing is an opportunity for Sidney Allen Elyea to dispute a civil charge that he violated a city ordinance prohibiting posting materials on fixtures. Elyea faces two civil charges that each carry a maximum fine of $250.
Elyea has admitted posting the drawings and said he did so to educate others about Islam. The city charged Elyea through the civil process after county attorneys in Benton and Stearns counties declined to file criminal charges of obscenity or defamation against him, saying that what he posted was protected speech.
So two county attorneys thought that Elyea was exercising his freedom of speech, and yet the city pressed forward with a case anyway. Why is that? Why are Muslims being set up in this country as a protected class that must not be criticized or offended? Who else enjoys such protection? Why, no one, of course. And no one should.
Elyea's attorney has echoed that opinion, adding previously that Elyea was protesting in a nonviolent manner and that the city's ordinance encourages arbitrary enforcement and is void because it's vague.
"Given what our Supreme Court has done to protect the right to free speech, it baffles me that the government has not dismissed this case," Attorney Ryan Garry said Friday. "The city attorney's office should be charging and citing residents for the crimes they commit, not for the opinions they have."...
The drawings that Elyea posted contained explicit depictions of bestiality and sodomy, contained images of the Prophet Muhammad in derogatory positions and contained pictures and words offensive to Muslims in particular.
One set of the drawings was found posted to a telephone pole outside a Somali-owned business in East St. Cloud. Other copies were found in other parts of the city.
So he may be a jerk. He may be a provocateur. He may be a lout. But is it illegal now to be those things, when a certain hypersensitive group is the recipient of the loutish behavior?
Friday, April 23, 2010
Shar'ia Law Conquers Comedy Central
Muhammad and the Danish cartoons
Sharia law enforcement -- self policing. Do not say the word Muhammad. Comedy Central, which is so not funny these days, has banned the word Muahmmad. Is everyone in a coma?
And O'Reilly submitted to Islamic law here. This story is bigger than the Icelandic volcano -- a pillar of this great country has cracked clear through. Which is why the SIOA"free speech" bus victory is such a huge story.
Remember when the Nazis marched in Skokie back in the 70s? And what a big story that was? People were outraged, but free speech was (and is) the holy grail (and rightly so), no matter how despicable the idea.
This is the slipperyist of slopes - right off a cliff and into the stone age.
Atlas Shrugs
SCOTUS has extended free speech to film makers showing women killing puppies by stomping them with high heels.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
China: To Be Human
'China: #Tanzuoren - to be human'
by Oi wan Lam, Global Voices
Chinese activist Tan Zuoren was sentenced to 5 year imprisonment and 3 year deprivation of political rights this morning under the charge of inciting subversion of state power. Tan was involved in the investigation of the relation between bean dregs school buildings and the death of school children in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake by interviewing the parents and compiling a victim list. He was arrested last year and the investigation was stopped accordingly. In his first trial, the evident that the prosecutor presented was mainly about his interviews with overseas media about the earthquake. However, all the proceedings today were linked to June 4th incident. A diary about the June 4th Incident published back in 2007 and email communication with overseas Chinese dissident Wang Dang through his yahoo.cn email were presented as evidences. His verdict was read out in less than 10 minutes. (more from AFP)
Although the news has been harmonized in mainland China, many concerned citizens expressed their anger through twitter. Below is a selected translation of the twitter hastag #tanzouren, and the tweets are arranged according to the time line from 9am - 4pm.
Yahoo.cn sells out Tan Zouren, again?
E-mail providers in China have to follow local regulation even though the charges are purely political prosecution and it is not the first time Yahoo.cn has betrayed their clients in exchange for the China market.
daaitoulaam: No wonder Alibaba said Yahoo US was over the line for supporting Google against Chinese govt. Alibaba's Yahoo.cn sells out #tanzuoren, huh?
ruanji 美国雅虎虽然不直接经营中国雅虎，暂时作为一个投入10亿资金的大股东，也应该受到谴责。 #tanzuoren
ruanji Although yahoo.com does not directly manage yahoo.cn but it is a major stock holder and has invested more than a billion in the business. It should be condemned as well.
secretaryzhang “境外敌对分子王丹利用电子邮件与谭作人主动联系”，谭作人使用的邮箱是雅虎中国 zuoren54@yahoo.com.cn #tanzuoren
secretaryzhang "overseas enemy Wang Dang has contacted Tan Zuoren via email", and Tan's email is yahoo.cn: zuoren54@yahoo.com.cn
Anger
Satantara 眼泪无助，愤怒廉价。愤怒会养出心中的暴力政治。民主政治是没有敌人和仇恨的政治( #tanzuoren 语)。他们自己在颠覆自己，不稀你我动手。不说谎，让更多的人知道事实，真相自有万钧之力，改变终会到来。
Satantara No use shedding tear and it is too easy to be angry. Anger will nourish violence. Democracy should not have enemy nor resentment (#tanzouren's expression). They are subverting themselves, we don't need to do that. We do not lie in order let more people knowing the truth. Truth is the most powerful weapon and change will eventually come.
hkxforce 為何揭露豆腐渣工程會是煽動顛覆國家政權罪？因為這個政權本身就是豆腐渣政權。 #tanzuoren
hkxforce Why the exposure of bean dregs construction becomes inciting subversion of state power? because this very state power is a bean dregs power bloc.
szeyan1220 @28481k @LEMONed 高智晟「失踪」，胡佳3年，刘晓波11年，谭作人5年。起到了多大的威吓作用？唤醒了多少人？我只知道，这是一场持久战，而我无论如何不会认输。历史会审判你们。 #tanzuoren
szeyan1220 @28481k @LEMONed Gao Zhisheng vanished, Hu Jia sentenced to 3 years, Liu Xiaobo 11 years, Tan Zuoren 5 years. How many people it has intimated? How many people it has awakened? This is a long term battle and I will not be defeated. History will be the judge.
Feng2084 呼唤非暴力不合作抗争,從今天起，我厭惡任何與暴政苟合的活動！ #tanzuoren
Feng2084 let's call for non-violent civil disobedient act. I despise any act that gives legitimation to the absolute state.
No justice no peace
noooo0000 颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆..........我就是想颠覆!!!我极想颠覆!!!我必颠覆!!! 一生的梦想--颠覆你!!! #tanzuoren
noooo0000 subversion subversion subversion subversion subversion subversion subversion... I want to subvert!!! I really want to subvert!!! I have to subvert!!! All I am dreaming of is to subvert you!!!
dgatterdam Chinese Government, you imprison your Heros, NO JUSTICE NO PEACE! NO JUSTICE NO PEACE NO JUSTICE NO PEACE #tanzuoren
AlChowh I support any measure to change the status quo,peaceful or violent!!!!#Tanzuoren
sanrencn 我们不能被压制而不反抗，我们不能被淹没，而不呐喊。我们微弱的抗议迟早会壮大起来踏平中共的无道 #Tanzuoren
sanrencn We have to fight back when repressed; we have to scream when drowned. Our small resistance will eventual grow into a strong force that defeat the tyranny of the CCP.
gjlawyer 宣判谭作人之后，这个大地上没有了良知，良知被谭作人带进了牢房；宣判谭作人之后，这个大地上没有了正义，正义是谭作人脚下沉重的铁镣。——恸哭中 via (@cuiweiping) #Tanzuoren
gjlawyer conscience has vanished along with the sentence of Tan Zuoren, Tan brings conscience along with him into the prison; justice has vanished along with the sentence of Tan Zuoren, justice has turned into Tan's heavy foot chain. -- crying out loud via (@cuiweiping)
dante1184 中共正在挑战全中国人的心理极限，追求全人类的无耻之最。畜生不如。去死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！ #tanzuoren
dante1184 The CCP is testing the limit of Chinese's people's tolerance and it is competing for the most shameless being in this world. It is worse than animal. Go to hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Subverting the state with diaries
wglxh They say Tan's diaries may subvert the government. I think they mean the government of, for, and by perverts. #Tanzuoren
mranti A tweet is a mini-diary - if a diary can "subvert" a govt. #Tanzuoren
wdrdog 颠覆国家政权，最高可以判处死刑，你我这些 #Twitter 上的发言，都够这个罪，只要他们这样认为。 我们的小命，就这样和谭作人刘晓波们连在了一起。 #Tanzuoren
wdrdog subverting the state power, the maximum sentence can be life imprisonment. What you and me have said in #Twitter can be charged with subversion if they want. Our lives are connected with Tan Zuoren and Liu Xiaobo.
To be human
Feng2084 #tanzuoren 當一個個公民面對強權貪腐的垭口失言噤聲，对生命的哀鸿接近麻木的時候，是你站了出來，然而他們今天對你的審判，是卑鄙与无耻对良知与正义的审判，也是对我们的审判，在这一个罪恶的国家里，我们都有罪。
Feng2084 when citizens were speechless towards the corrupted power, when they were indifferent towards life, you stood out. They have judged you today, it is a judgment of banality and shamelessness towards conscience and justice, it is also a judgment on everyone of us. In an evil country, we all have sin.
wglxh 所有的老师，都是在以各种方式给孩子们给学生们个说法。今天审判谭作人，是审判所有想给下一代一个说法的人。 #Tanzuoren
wglxh every teacher tries to explain the truth to our children and pupils. Today's judgment on Tan Zuoren is also a judgment towards those who try to deliver the truth to our next generation.
horse 今天检查的是我们“作人”的底限在哪里。一起来“作人”吧。 #Tanzuoren
horse today is a test on the baseline of our "being human", let's "be human". (Translator notes: the pronunciation of Tan Zuoren is similar to "Talk about being human" in English.)
by Oi wan Lam, Global Voices
Chinese activist Tan Zuoren was sentenced to 5 year imprisonment and 3 year deprivation of political rights this morning under the charge of inciting subversion of state power. Tan was involved in the investigation of the relation between bean dregs school buildings and the death of school children in the 2008 Sichuan earthquake by interviewing the parents and compiling a victim list. He was arrested last year and the investigation was stopped accordingly. In his first trial, the evident that the prosecutor presented was mainly about his interviews with overseas media about the earthquake. However, all the proceedings today were linked to June 4th incident. A diary about the June 4th Incident published back in 2007 and email communication with overseas Chinese dissident Wang Dang through his yahoo.cn email were presented as evidences. His verdict was read out in less than 10 minutes. (more from AFP)
Although the news has been harmonized in mainland China, many concerned citizens expressed their anger through twitter. Below is a selected translation of the twitter hastag #tanzouren, and the tweets are arranged according to the time line from 9am - 4pm.
Yahoo.cn sells out Tan Zouren, again?
E-mail providers in China have to follow local regulation even though the charges are purely political prosecution and it is not the first time Yahoo.cn has betrayed their clients in exchange for the China market.
daaitoulaam: No wonder Alibaba said Yahoo US was over the line for supporting Google against Chinese govt. Alibaba's Yahoo.cn sells out #tanzuoren, huh?
ruanji 美国雅虎虽然不直接经营中国雅虎，暂时作为一个投入10亿资金的大股东，也应该受到谴责。 #tanzuoren
ruanji Although yahoo.com does not directly manage yahoo.cn but it is a major stock holder and has invested more than a billion in the business. It should be condemned as well.
secretaryzhang “境外敌对分子王丹利用电子邮件与谭作人主动联系”，谭作人使用的邮箱是雅虎中国 zuoren54@yahoo.com.cn #tanzuoren
secretaryzhang "overseas enemy Wang Dang has contacted Tan Zuoren via email", and Tan's email is yahoo.cn: zuoren54@yahoo.com.cn
Anger
Satantara 眼泪无助，愤怒廉价。愤怒会养出心中的暴力政治。民主政治是没有敌人和仇恨的政治( #tanzuoren 语)。他们自己在颠覆自己，不稀你我动手。不说谎，让更多的人知道事实，真相自有万钧之力，改变终会到来。
Satantara No use shedding tear and it is too easy to be angry. Anger will nourish violence. Democracy should not have enemy nor resentment (#tanzouren's expression). They are subverting themselves, we don't need to do that. We do not lie in order let more people knowing the truth. Truth is the most powerful weapon and change will eventually come.
hkxforce 為何揭露豆腐渣工程會是煽動顛覆國家政權罪？因為這個政權本身就是豆腐渣政權。 #tanzuoren
hkxforce Why the exposure of bean dregs construction becomes inciting subversion of state power? because this very state power is a bean dregs power bloc.
szeyan1220 @28481k @LEMONed 高智晟「失踪」，胡佳3年，刘晓波11年，谭作人5年。起到了多大的威吓作用？唤醒了多少人？我只知道，这是一场持久战，而我无论如何不会认输。历史会审判你们。 #tanzuoren
szeyan1220 @28481k @LEMONed Gao Zhisheng vanished, Hu Jia sentenced to 3 years, Liu Xiaobo 11 years, Tan Zuoren 5 years. How many people it has intimated? How many people it has awakened? This is a long term battle and I will not be defeated. History will be the judge.
Feng2084 呼唤非暴力不合作抗争,從今天起，我厭惡任何與暴政苟合的活動！ #tanzuoren
Feng2084 let's call for non-violent civil disobedient act. I despise any act that gives legitimation to the absolute state.
No justice no peace
noooo0000 颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆颠覆..........我就是想颠覆!!!我极想颠覆!!!我必颠覆!!! 一生的梦想--颠覆你!!! #tanzuoren
noooo0000 subversion subversion subversion subversion subversion subversion subversion... I want to subvert!!! I really want to subvert!!! I have to subvert!!! All I am dreaming of is to subvert you!!!
dgatterdam Chinese Government, you imprison your Heros, NO JUSTICE NO PEACE! NO JUSTICE NO PEACE NO JUSTICE NO PEACE #tanzuoren
AlChowh I support any measure to change the status quo,peaceful or violent!!!!#Tanzuoren
sanrencn 我们不能被压制而不反抗，我们不能被淹没，而不呐喊。我们微弱的抗议迟早会壮大起来踏平中共的无道 #Tanzuoren
sanrencn We have to fight back when repressed; we have to scream when drowned. Our small resistance will eventual grow into a strong force that defeat the tyranny of the CCP.
gjlawyer 宣判谭作人之后，这个大地上没有了良知，良知被谭作人带进了牢房；宣判谭作人之后，这个大地上没有了正义，正义是谭作人脚下沉重的铁镣。——恸哭中 via (@cuiweiping) #Tanzuoren
gjlawyer conscience has vanished along with the sentence of Tan Zuoren, Tan brings conscience along with him into the prison; justice has vanished along with the sentence of Tan Zuoren, justice has turned into Tan's heavy foot chain. -- crying out loud via (@cuiweiping)
dante1184 中共正在挑战全中国人的心理极限，追求全人类的无耻之最。畜生不如。去死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死死！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！ #tanzuoren
dante1184 The CCP is testing the limit of Chinese's people's tolerance and it is competing for the most shameless being in this world. It is worse than animal. Go to hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell hell !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Subverting the state with diaries
wglxh They say Tan's diaries may subvert the government. I think they mean the government of, for, and by perverts. #Tanzuoren
mranti A tweet is a mini-diary - if a diary can "subvert" a govt. #Tanzuoren
wdrdog 颠覆国家政权，最高可以判处死刑，你我这些 #Twitter 上的发言，都够这个罪，只要他们这样认为。 我们的小命，就这样和谭作人刘晓波们连在了一起。 #Tanzuoren
wdrdog subverting the state power, the maximum sentence can be life imprisonment. What you and me have said in #Twitter can be charged with subversion if they want. Our lives are connected with Tan Zuoren and Liu Xiaobo.
To be human
Feng2084 #tanzuoren 當一個個公民面對強權貪腐的垭口失言噤聲，对生命的哀鸿接近麻木的時候，是你站了出來，然而他們今天對你的審判，是卑鄙与无耻对良知与正义的审判，也是对我们的审判，在这一个罪恶的国家里，我们都有罪。
Feng2084 when citizens were speechless towards the corrupted power, when they were indifferent towards life, you stood out. They have judged you today, it is a judgment of banality and shamelessness towards conscience and justice, it is also a judgment on everyone of us. In an evil country, we all have sin.
wglxh 所有的老师，都是在以各种方式给孩子们给学生们个说法。今天审判谭作人，是审判所有想给下一代一个说法的人。 #Tanzuoren
wglxh every teacher tries to explain the truth to our children and pupils. Today's judgment on Tan Zuoren is also a judgment towards those who try to deliver the truth to our next generation.
horse 今天检查的是我们“作人”的底限在哪里。一起来“作人”吧。 #Tanzuoren
horse today is a test on the baseline of our "being human", let's "be human". (Translator notes: the pronunciation of Tan Zuoren is similar to "Talk about being human" in English.)
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Morocco: Where Independent Media is No More
Morocco: Where Independent Media is No More'
by Hisham G, Global Voices Online
There have been mounting attacks on freedom of expression in Morocco lately, targeting journalists as well as bloggers as we consistently have been reporting on Global Voices Online recently. So constant are the attacks, that a reader might find the news coming out form the north African kingdom, a redundant rehash of the same old story. But what happened last week arguably marks a major turning point in the continuous campaign the Moroccan authorities are pursuing to silence independent media.
It took Morocco decades of struggle and the end of the cold war with an ailing dictator who, having lost his geo-strategic clout and sensing his death approaching, finally decided to relinquish power and open up the system in an effort to guaranty a smooth transfer of authority to his son, to see the emergence of a new breed of irreverent journalism. The French language weekly news magazine Le Journal Hebdomadaire, founded in the mid-90s thanks to an unusual alliance of benevolent capital and highly skilled western trained journalists, initiated a long line of privately owned independent newspapers critical of the government and the Moroccan establishment at large. Targeting the Moroccan cosmopolitan elite, "Le Journal Hebdo" rapidly became iconic, embarking on a decade long confrontational quest for factual truths, challenging the most powerful tenants of the local regime, revisiting official history, flirting with the red lines imposed by the government and exploring many t
aboos.
There was a time when Arab dictatorships used to extra-judicially clampdown on dissenting voices in a gross demonstration of authority. The popular rumor would have it that in every house and every street, in every newsroom of every publication government had its eyes and ears ready to report on anyone who wasn't in line with the prescribed official discourse. Today, repression of independent voices goes through a protracted but sophisticated process of harassment by a judiciary system under orders from the executive and boycott from advertisers keen to please the authorities. That's what happened to Le Journal Hebdo, which now faces closure after a commercial court in Casablanca declared the publishing group behind the magazine bankrupt, crippled by a series of libel fines, by taxes and an insurmountable debt - a development which many be interpreted as the final and deadly blow to the publication.
The New York-based media watchdog Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the development and recaps the most recent judicial episode in a chain of condemnations and fines that eventually led to the administrative termination of the publication:
Le Journal Hebdomadaire was dealt a devastating financial blow in 2006 when a Moroccan court ordered that it pay 3 million dirhams (US$354,000) damages in a defamation case [...] Jamaï (director and co-founder of the publication) left the country after the 2006 court decision and a series of government-inspired cases of harassment against the newsmagazine. Harassment of Le Journal Hebdomadaire appeared to ease for a time. But when Jamaï returned to Morocco in 2009 and resumed his critical journalism, he said, the government intensified its efforts to have advertisers boycott Le Journal Hebdomadaire. In September 2009, the Supreme Court upheld the damage award in the [defamation] case.
Issandr El Amrani writing on The Arabist blog says he received a message from Aboubakr Jamaï (Bou Bakr) announcing the official death of Le Journal Hebdomadaire. He writes:
I just received very sad news from Abou Bakr Jamai [Fr], the editor behind one of Morocco's most courageous publications and one that had been a symbol of the opening that began in the mid-1990s under King Hassan II and petered out under the rather aimless reign of his son, Muhammad VI. Bou Bakr wrote:
After all your prediction about the end of Le Journal has been proven on the money. Le Journal Hebdo has been shut down. Yesterday, 5, yes 5, bailiffs showed up armed with a court decision to take over Le Journal Hebdomadaire and the company behind it, Trimedia.. What is still unclear to us is the legal argument that led the judge from the receivership procedure of Mediatrust to act against trimedia. The only link is the title:"Le Journal Hebdomadaire" but the title is owned by the publisher himself not the company. Although we are waiting to get a clearer legal picture, we can already officially announce the death of Le Journal Hebdomaire.
El Amrani also wrote an op-ed about the issue on The Guardian/Observer British newspapers' online blogging platform, Comment Is Free. He mourns Le Journal and warns about a worrying pattern of repression and authoritarianism:
Most of all, Le Journal tried to keep officials honest about the democratisation that they promised in speeches. It relentlessly campaigned for constitutional reform that would shift political power from the palace to parliament. For many of my generation of Moroccans, it provided a political education and an inspiring example of outspokenness.
[...]The most worrying thing is that its closure comes amid other signs of a renewed authoritarianism. The methods originally used against Le Journal have become a commonplace method of disciplining the press. Other critics of the monarchy, for instance in Morocco's vibrant blogosphere, are now dealt with severely. Political reform has hit a standstill, and the regime's human rights record has regressed.
Le Journal's sad demise is now only one of many signals that something is rotten in the kingdom of Morocco.
Blogger Jillian C. York adds to Al Amrani's comment saying:
[T]he closure of Le Journal does not alone indicate Morocco’s slide backwards. The arrests of bloggers Bashir Hazzem, Mohammed Erraji, and Boubaker Al-Yadib, of Facebooker Fouad Mourtada, of countless journalists, should speak for themselves. Yet, Morocco continues to maintain an appearance of moving forward, especially to the United States, which proudly touts Morocco’s Mudawana (or family code) and subsequent other new rights to women as evidence.
This is an issue that cannot, must not be ignored. Morocco, in case I don’t say it enough, is a beautiful place. I spent more than two wonderful years there, and would still happily go back, despite its faults. But in order for Morocco, for any country, to continue down the road of progress, free expression is non-negotiable.
Moroccan online news magazine Hesspress [Ar] deplores the deafening silence and lack of solidarity in face of mounting repression:
إن هذا الصمت المطبق إزاء عمليات تصفية المنابر الإعلامية الوطنية المستقلة، التي تدخل في خانة جرائم القتل التسلسلي، تفرض تلاحما تلقائيا بين المنابر المتبقية لإعمال مبدأ التضامن، كأضعف الإيمان، وبالتالي طمر الخوف والجبن ووضع التوافقات جانبا، لوقف هذا المسلسل الهتشكوكي الذي بات يقض مضجع "صاحبة الجلالة" في عز عنفوانها.
The heavy silence surrounding the liquidation of national independent media outlets, which falls under the category of serial killings, should impose a spontaneous coalition between the remaining platforms in the name of solidarity. This is the least we can do to fight fear and cowardice. We should put our differences aside to stop this Hitchcock-like assault on " Her Majesty" (meaning the Press), who is at her prime.
Many bloggers have been commenting on the development like Anas Alaoui [Fr] who bemoans the loss of a unique news outlet:
J’aimerais tout simplement remercier Le Journal et les personnes y ayant travaillé. Je les remercie pour l’effort engagé dans cette première marocaine quand on a cru à une ouverture, une certaine ouverture tout du moins. Je les remercie pour le courage et le dévouement dans leur tâche d’informer le public. Ils ont été les premiers à briser des tabous. Ils ont été les premiers à dire des choses vraies. Nous pouvons être d’accord ou pas avec les éditos écrits dans ce magazine. Nous pouvons être d’accord ou pas avec les analyses qui y ont été publiées, mais nous ne pouvons nier le fait que le Journal Hebdo a changé la pratique journalistique marocaine. Désormais, il y a un avant Journal Hebdo et un après Journal Hebdo.
I would like to thank Le Journal and the people who worked in it. I thank them for the effort they made to make this Moroccan first. They made us believe in openness; an openness of some sort at least. I thank them for their courage and dedication in their task to inform the public. They were the first to break taboos. They were the first to say true things. We can agree or disagree with the editorial line of the magazine. We can agree or disagree with the analysis that have been published in it, but we can not deny the fact that Le Journal Hebdo has changed the practice of journalism in Morocco. Now there is a before and after Le Journal Hebdo.
The end of Le Journal Hebdomadaire signals a dangerous setback for the state of freedoms in Morocco. It pulls a thorn out of the regime's side but it also sends a strong message to the remaining independent media still struggling to survive in an increasingly repressive environment. This leaves the question about whether the online media and citizen journalism will constitute a breathing space for voices of dissent in countries like Morocco to vent their grievances, convey the truth and hold their governments accountable.
You may view the latest post at
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2010/02/02/morocco-where-independent-media-is-no-more/
by Hisham G, Global Voices Online
There have been mounting attacks on freedom of expression in Morocco lately, targeting journalists as well as bloggers as we consistently have been reporting on Global Voices Online recently. So constant are the attacks, that a reader might find the news coming out form the north African kingdom, a redundant rehash of the same old story. But what happened last week arguably marks a major turning point in the continuous campaign the Moroccan authorities are pursuing to silence independent media.
It took Morocco decades of struggle and the end of the cold war with an ailing dictator who, having lost his geo-strategic clout and sensing his death approaching, finally decided to relinquish power and open up the system in an effort to guaranty a smooth transfer of authority to his son, to see the emergence of a new breed of irreverent journalism. The French language weekly news magazine Le Journal Hebdomadaire, founded in the mid-90s thanks to an unusual alliance of benevolent capital and highly skilled western trained journalists, initiated a long line of privately owned independent newspapers critical of the government and the Moroccan establishment at large. Targeting the Moroccan cosmopolitan elite, "Le Journal Hebdo" rapidly became iconic, embarking on a decade long confrontational quest for factual truths, challenging the most powerful tenants of the local regime, revisiting official history, flirting with the red lines imposed by the government and exploring many t
aboos.
There was a time when Arab dictatorships used to extra-judicially clampdown on dissenting voices in a gross demonstration of authority. The popular rumor would have it that in every house and every street, in every newsroom of every publication government had its eyes and ears ready to report on anyone who wasn't in line with the prescribed official discourse. Today, repression of independent voices goes through a protracted but sophisticated process of harassment by a judiciary system under orders from the executive and boycott from advertisers keen to please the authorities. That's what happened to Le Journal Hebdo, which now faces closure after a commercial court in Casablanca declared the publishing group behind the magazine bankrupt, crippled by a series of libel fines, by taxes and an insurmountable debt - a development which many be interpreted as the final and deadly blow to the publication.
The New York-based media watchdog Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the development and recaps the most recent judicial episode in a chain of condemnations and fines that eventually led to the administrative termination of the publication:
Le Journal Hebdomadaire was dealt a devastating financial blow in 2006 when a Moroccan court ordered that it pay 3 million dirhams (US$354,000) damages in a defamation case [...] Jamaï (director and co-founder of the publication) left the country after the 2006 court decision and a series of government-inspired cases of harassment against the newsmagazine. Harassment of Le Journal Hebdomadaire appeared to ease for a time. But when Jamaï returned to Morocco in 2009 and resumed his critical journalism, he said, the government intensified its efforts to have advertisers boycott Le Journal Hebdomadaire. In September 2009, the Supreme Court upheld the damage award in the [defamation] case.
Issandr El Amrani writing on The Arabist blog says he received a message from Aboubakr Jamaï (Bou Bakr) announcing the official death of Le Journal Hebdomadaire. He writes:
I just received very sad news from Abou Bakr Jamai [Fr], the editor behind one of Morocco's most courageous publications and one that had been a symbol of the opening that began in the mid-1990s under King Hassan II and petered out under the rather aimless reign of his son, Muhammad VI. Bou Bakr wrote:
After all your prediction about the end of Le Journal has been proven on the money. Le Journal Hebdo has been shut down. Yesterday, 5, yes 5, bailiffs showed up armed with a court decision to take over Le Journal Hebdomadaire and the company behind it, Trimedia.. What is still unclear to us is the legal argument that led the judge from the receivership procedure of Mediatrust to act against trimedia. The only link is the title:"Le Journal Hebdomadaire" but the title is owned by the publisher himself not the company. Although we are waiting to get a clearer legal picture, we can already officially announce the death of Le Journal Hebdomaire.
El Amrani also wrote an op-ed about the issue on The Guardian/Observer British newspapers' online blogging platform, Comment Is Free. He mourns Le Journal and warns about a worrying pattern of repression and authoritarianism:
Most of all, Le Journal tried to keep officials honest about the democratisation that they promised in speeches. It relentlessly campaigned for constitutional reform that would shift political power from the palace to parliament. For many of my generation of Moroccans, it provided a political education and an inspiring example of outspokenness.
[...]The most worrying thing is that its closure comes amid other signs of a renewed authoritarianism. The methods originally used against Le Journal have become a commonplace method of disciplining the press. Other critics of the monarchy, for instance in Morocco's vibrant blogosphere, are now dealt with severely. Political reform has hit a standstill, and the regime's human rights record has regressed.
Le Journal's sad demise is now only one of many signals that something is rotten in the kingdom of Morocco.
Blogger Jillian C. York adds to Al Amrani's comment saying:
[T]he closure of Le Journal does not alone indicate Morocco’s slide backwards. The arrests of bloggers Bashir Hazzem, Mohammed Erraji, and Boubaker Al-Yadib, of Facebooker Fouad Mourtada, of countless journalists, should speak for themselves. Yet, Morocco continues to maintain an appearance of moving forward, especially to the United States, which proudly touts Morocco’s Mudawana (or family code) and subsequent other new rights to women as evidence.
This is an issue that cannot, must not be ignored. Morocco, in case I don’t say it enough, is a beautiful place. I spent more than two wonderful years there, and would still happily go back, despite its faults. But in order for Morocco, for any country, to continue down the road of progress, free expression is non-negotiable.
Moroccan online news magazine Hesspress [Ar] deplores the deafening silence and lack of solidarity in face of mounting repression:
إن هذا الصمت المطبق إزاء عمليات تصفية المنابر الإعلامية الوطنية المستقلة، التي تدخل في خانة جرائم القتل التسلسلي، تفرض تلاحما تلقائيا بين المنابر المتبقية لإعمال مبدأ التضامن، كأضعف الإيمان، وبالتالي طمر الخوف والجبن ووضع التوافقات جانبا، لوقف هذا المسلسل الهتشكوكي الذي بات يقض مضجع "صاحبة الجلالة" في عز عنفوانها.
The heavy silence surrounding the liquidation of national independent media outlets, which falls under the category of serial killings, should impose a spontaneous coalition between the remaining platforms in the name of solidarity. This is the least we can do to fight fear and cowardice. We should put our differences aside to stop this Hitchcock-like assault on " Her Majesty" (meaning the Press), who is at her prime.
Many bloggers have been commenting on the development like Anas Alaoui [Fr] who bemoans the loss of a unique news outlet:
J’aimerais tout simplement remercier Le Journal et les personnes y ayant travaillé. Je les remercie pour l’effort engagé dans cette première marocaine quand on a cru à une ouverture, une certaine ouverture tout du moins. Je les remercie pour le courage et le dévouement dans leur tâche d’informer le public. Ils ont été les premiers à briser des tabous. Ils ont été les premiers à dire des choses vraies. Nous pouvons être d’accord ou pas avec les éditos écrits dans ce magazine. Nous pouvons être d’accord ou pas avec les analyses qui y ont été publiées, mais nous ne pouvons nier le fait que le Journal Hebdo a changé la pratique journalistique marocaine. Désormais, il y a un avant Journal Hebdo et un après Journal Hebdo.
I would like to thank Le Journal and the people who worked in it. I thank them for the effort they made to make this Moroccan first. They made us believe in openness; an openness of some sort at least. I thank them for their courage and dedication in their task to inform the public. They were the first to break taboos. They were the first to say true things. We can agree or disagree with the editorial line of the magazine. We can agree or disagree with the analysis that have been published in it, but we can not deny the fact that Le Journal Hebdo has changed the practice of journalism in Morocco. Now there is a before and after Le Journal Hebdo.
The end of Le Journal Hebdomadaire signals a dangerous setback for the state of freedoms in Morocco. It pulls a thorn out of the regime's side but it also sends a strong message to the remaining independent media still struggling to survive in an increasingly repressive environment. This leaves the question about whether the online media and citizen journalism will constitute a breathing space for voices of dissent in countries like Morocco to vent their grievances, convey the truth and hold their governments accountable.
You may view the latest post at
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2010/02/02/morocco-where-independent-media-is-no-more/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
