Sunday, September 16, 2012

Freedom of speech divided

They say a week is a long time in politics, and it seems this week has been one of those. Two very different strands of the freedom of speech versus censorship paradigm emerged. On the one hand there is the video produced by Egyptian Coptic and convicted fraudster Nakoula Basseley Nakoula and directed by Hollywood porn film maker Alan Roberts at a cost of a quarter million dollar as yet another attempt to insult Muslims through denigrating the prophet Muhammad. Leaving aside the fact that the Muslim response has hardly been any more mature than when I published David Pidcock's Satanic Voices Ancient and Modern - A Surfeit of Blashphemy Including the Rushdie Report in 1992 as well as the likelihood that much of the violence has been engineered for ulterior motives which have nothing at all to do with Islam as elaborated in the more recent book Surrendering Islam - The Subversion of Muslim Politics Throughout History Until the Present Day  I co-authored with Muslim historian David Livingstone, the general response in the media has been that whilst the film is despicable, Muslims should moderate their response in the interest of freedom of speech. Google, for example, refused to take the trailer for the video off YouTube, describing it as merely an expression of a different opinion.

On the other hand there is the publication of semi-nude photos of Kate Middleton following the earlier publication of nude photos of prince Harry, both in countries who do not regard the British Royal Family as anything more than celebrities. Here the media response took a totally different tune calling for censorship and self-censorship. Of course, the British media also milked the interest in those celebrities being denigrated as much as possible, endlessly discussing the story whilst not, however, publishing the pictures themselves. The Belfast Telegraph, for example, published the front page of Closer, the French magazine originally running the photos, with the offensive pictures blacked out; most other papers did something similar. With the exception of the Sun, which published the incriminating photos of Harry, the other British tabloid papers also published the photos with key areas blurred or covered up. Had the pictures been of some lesser celebrity or a foreign, non-American, non-European dignitary, they would not have shown the same level of constraint even if the photos were taken under similar circumstances.

When contrasting the two, the uneasiness of the demand for freedom of speech as a universal human right becomes apparent. Just like democracy, which is deemed essential as long as the people make the right choices, but overthrown when they want to assert their rights against Anglo-American interests, freedom of speech is a two-edged sword: Western demagogues demand the right to insult, yet want to prevent being insulted. Now why, one ought to ask, should the yet uncrowned children of the monarch of a small island in the North Atlantic Ocean still living off its long gone history be afforded more respect than the prophet revered by a billion contemporaries on our planet? Why can you ridicule and smear Muslims unashamedly yet not voice even the mildest form of criticism of Israeli Jews? Why is the questioning of historic facts relating to the Holocaust narrative outlawed in many European countries, whilst the 20 million victims of Stalin are hardly ever mentioned and the genocide of indigenous Muslim populations continues barely noticed in one part of the world after another, Burma being the latest scene of unspeakable massacres?

The issue goes deeper than mere hypocrisy, however: it demonstrates the bankruptcy of the so-called universal declaration of human rights, which has become just another politically loaded term in the arsenal of cultural domination pursued by former imperial Western powers. Firstly note, that those rights are not universal, but the declaration is, everybody is meant to sign up to the declaration, but not everybody may be entitled to claim those rights. Those human rights postulate to protect the "life, liberty and security of person" of everyone (article 3) as well as against "attacks upon his honour and reputation" (article 12; the "his" in this article would nowadays be considered as sexist by the very same people waving the declaration in everybody's face), but in practice, some rights are "more equal than others". Man-made laws are subject to the realities of power constellations where "might is right".

In Islamic jurisprudence, there has always been the concept of the "rights of God", long before Magna Charta, bestowing upon all humans, whom God has honoured or dignified (Qur'an 17:70), an inviolable right to life, property and dignity. When Muslims demonstrate, therefore, against their prophet and religion being vilified, they are essentially defending and exercising their God-given human rights. They would also defend the right to privacy for a married couple like William and Kate, whereas in the case of Harry they would use the photos as evidence in a prosecution for fornication rather than publish them for the base gratification of tabloid readers. But since in Western media phraseology all Muslims have become subhuman and latent terrorists, we mustn't really let them speak. Let's ridicule their religion and be outraged at their response and let their protests be another proof of their inability to govern themselves, which is why we must continue to interfere and take their land and resources off them. Sure, we don't really want to profit from invading other people's countries, but somebody has to foot the bill for "keeping the peace".

7 Comments:

At 26 September 2012 12:59, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Salaams Dr Sahib Mustaqim Bleher

I am angered and furious by the following text:

Muslim response has hardly been any more mature than when I published
Muslims should moderate their response in the interest of freedom of speech.

How dare they lecture me when it is their TERRORISM that kills my family/friend/people RAPES my Ummah/People
Destroys my Ummah
Leaves millions disbled

I have known nothing different from the day I was born to present.
You say a “mature response”! Believe me it is difficult when you have family members blown to pieces and you just pick up a piece of flesh to bury and you do not even know if it your family’s or the person who was standing next to your family. Pray tell me how would you react if it was your mother/father/brother/sister/son/daughter/friend/loved one who was bombed by US drones/raped/tortured/shot than urinated on…………….. the supreme war crimes that US/UK/UN is carrying out in your Ummah?

Lets look to the so called mature/moderate response – options I have
Protest to my “government”
Protest to those “WHO CLAIM TO REPRESENT ME - OIC, ARAB LEAGUE, NEWSPAPERS in my Ummah…….

and for those in the west in states which allow their residents access to their MP/EMP
to protest to their local MP/EMP
protest to their gov
etc

2 million people marched against the Irak war – WE the ones being lectured to be mature/moderate the victims of their majesty’s terrorism in our lands where there and this is the result- from Stop the war

2) Anniversary conference - date for your diary

To mark the 10th anniversary of the major 2 million strong demo against the Iraq war, which took place on 15 February 2003 we are holding a conference in London which will discuss the aftermath of the war and the threats of war in the present and future. It will be in Friends House, London on Saturday 9th February 2013. A wide range of prominent speakers have already been booked. Brochures and more details to follow soon.

Irak is in chaos, destroyed, looted, a hotbed of sectarianism - OCCUPIED
Pakistan
Libya
Syria – 130+ barbaric insane corrupt evil vile states stop the US/naTo CRUSADER TERRORISM in Syria
And here is the cherry on the bloody damned tart – the CUSTODIAN OF THE MOST SACRED SITE IN ISLAM IS THE MAIN SUPPORTER OF THIS TERRORISM

What kind of moderate/matured response do you think these zionised mafiosi insane barbarians scumbag thugs criminals deserve?
When you have a 14 year old girl gang raped by these thugs and the fake African lecturing Muslims at united notorious farcical show says
Wednesday, July 05, 2006
American soldiers, keeping the streets of Iraq safe
http://mojavas.blogspot.com/2006/07/american-soldiers-keeping-streets-of.htm
Caption: Pfc. Steven Green, B Co. 1-502 prepares to blast a lock off the gate of an abandoned home during a search of homes in Mullah Fayed on Dec. 2.

The photo accompanies an article entitled Coalition forces keep streets of Iraq safe, from the propaganda service of the U.S. Army.

Wait a minute--Steven Green...doesn't that name ring a bell? Oh yeah, here it is:

Federal prosecutors accused a former U.S. soldier of raping and murdering a young woman in Iraq, gunning down her family and burning all the bodies in an apparent cover-up.

they like the Pakistani government will hand over THIER women for a fistful of worthless $

SO WHY WOULD THE US SAY ANYTHING WHEN THE US IS THE MAIN THUG/SCUM/GOON
Or have your son tortured almost ALL the bones broken by harry porter porno squadies
I would like to see matured/moderate response!
I am no fan of the erroneous Machiavellian works but in the Principe he is right: it is a grave mistake in a barbaric environment to show “cultured, intelligent” response (or words to that effect)

I agree with you regarding the revolting hypocrisy: for harry porter porno show the shit rag found porno squadies but for kate’s nipple the rags were not able to get female squadie nipple show and Oh that not on mate. (pls do not censor this allow me some satisfaction )

 
At 26 September 2012 13:01, Anonymous Anonymous said...

So here is my matured response:
I charge the US/UK/naTo/UN/Israhell/Saudi+gcc states+Turkey+Pakistan+bbcnndefghi….el liezeera for SUPREME CRIMES & TERRORISM

Find me a lawyer and a court.

 
At 26 September 2012 13:09, Blogger Mustaqim said...

I said MATURE, not MODERATE, you will not find me use the latter term as it is intended to divide Muslims into those who are within and those who are without the acceptable fold as defined by Western demagogues.
Now a MATURE response would be to talk and deal with exactly those issues you mentioned instead of killing fellow Muslims in demonstrations against a video or cartoons. Those videos/cartoons are produced exactly in order to divert attention from those real issues, hence we no longer talk about the outrage of Palestine, Iraq, Libya, Burma, but only about some idiotic racist video or cartoon depicting some imagined person in a turban who looks nothing like our prophet, peace be with him, anyway.

 
At 26 September 2012 13:13, Blogger Mustaqim said...

When I mentioned the word "moderate" in this post I quoted it as a demand in the mainstream media I disapprove of. See my post http://flyingimam.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/europes-stunning-arrogance.html

 
At 27 September 2012 09:12, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thank you Sir, I appreciate your reply and I do know that you have NOT said "moderate".
I apologise for putting it in the same context - passione + anger over riding and I do offer my sincere apologies.
I have very high regard + respect for you and while we will not agree on everything I WANT YOU ON OUR SIDE (just so you understand how much we care + appreciate what you do)

I agree that the crass kitschy porno production is for just for naTo crusader vile ideology.

I am not saying that killing Muslims is the way (I am not afraid of anything but very minute of the day I am afraid to listen/read/watch news because I wonder how many babies/children Muslims killed)
Talk to whom?
I phoned/emailed/faxed those who call themselves Presidents of mosques/Islamic Culture - the eu has given this label to mosque!etc globally but I will give you a brief of my experience of eu before the UK terrorism in Iraq:
UK
I made numerous LONG distance calls to ask them what actions they were taking to stop the insanity barbaric attack on Irak.

They were more interested in who I was, were I was calling from than this extremely important urgent issue. I admit that I do not tolerate "idiots" lightly but remained patient not calm .

"Oh you know what it is like"
NO, I do not know. What I do not know that they will butcher BABIES/CHILDREN a price worth paying US carnage. What are you doing?

what can we do?

make an appointment to see your MP and inform him that WE ARE VERY ANGRY: THIS IS TERRORISM and disagree and will not accept it!

When we are with the MP he says yes you are right and when returns to parliament he VOTES FOR WAR.

Well get him removed, organise protest etc, do whatever you have to do to stop this atrocious SUPREME CRIME.
----------------------------------
ITALY
I called the Centro Culturale Islamico di Italia,
Centro Culturale Islamico di Italia, Rome, 00197, Italy - Islamic Centers...
presidente della moschea:Dott.Abdallah Radwan Take the Metro from Rome Termini to Flaminio (Train to Battistini) then change at Flamino - take train to Campo Sportivi. Mosque is above and next to station. General Information
islamicfinder.org/getitWorld.php?id=38269

For the crass erroneous translation of Farsi - which the mosques knows VERY WELL
the mosques sent representatives to the Iranian embassy to protest
when I asked if I have some articles pasted on the Mosque notice board/organise protest/have possibility to inform women on breat feeding/let the individuals studying Islam use the library,......
I was told NO. If you insist we will even stop the Friday prayers.

by the way the same mosque organized a false welcome the Imam from Washington meeting where Muslim male/female 17+ age were invited
and guess who was with the so called Imam of Washington
cia - they photographed +took details of those present - 2005!

US had started their road to Iran/destruction of Syria vile ideology - TERRORISM
Of the record: one administrator informed"THE HOST GOVERNMENT REFUSES US TO HAVE ANY ACTIVITY OTHER THAN PRAYER"

I have written to EU commissioners/that hideous woman with the title "Special"/Vatikan/Church of England/other states - Asians/African/Europeans/ and I have even forced myself with immense difficulty to write to EU propagandists (lie news)

Has even one of them shown any interest in DIALOGUE/PEACE?
NO!
The church of England said
"Oh don't worry the war will be over in 2 weeks and than they will start rebuilding"!

SO WHO CAN I TALK TO?

By the way both of know TOO well that the protests in Ummah are not against this 3rd rate erstern filth but AGAINST THE INTERFERENCE BY THE WEST AND THEIR ATROCIOUS INSANITY

I haven't hurt a fly but do not let me near blair/killary/albright/obomba/cameron/hollande/merkel....naTo goons because I think tearing their limbs while they alive and kicking is the minimum they deserve

I WANT TO STOP THE SLAUGHTER

Do you think anyone has bothered or cares about dialogue

 
At 27 September 2012 09:42, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This expresses what WE FEEL

http://www.forumpalestina.org/news/2012/Settembre12/20-09-12SabraChatilaCamp.htm

 
At 2 October 2012 12:51, Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is not the 1st time the french hypocrisy raises its ugly virulent rabid racists terrorist head
French author cleared of race hate bbc 2002 (I understand your disgust –bbc but force yourself)
Judge for yourself
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article32614.htm
comments
Kratoklastes • 11 hours ago
"And when a French magazine published cartoons poking fun at Mohammed, the country’s prime minister insisted that French laws protecting free speech extend to caricatures."

And in 2008 when the French authorities were informed of a blog post by an Australian living in France about how a free society ought to permit ALL research regardless of how misguided... the Australian was hauled into the gendarmerie and made to answer questions for 2 hours. Then his passport mysteriously disappeared, he was put into a concentration camp for two weeks, and sent back to Australia.

How do I know? I was the guy answering the questions.

Anybody who uses the French government as an example of supposed defence of free speech is an idiot or a bullscheisen-artist. Possibly both, I suppose.

The posts about which I was questioned are these two: http://176.34.62.106/?p=988 and http://176.34.62.106/?p=1068 ... yes, they use inflammatory language (deliberately so).

Also - again, on the Frog's bockmist 'freedom of expression' fakery: you can be fined 25,000 euro for WHISTLING during the French national anthem (or for whistling the anthem itself).

One other post referred to Sarkozy as a grotesque, corrupt, hook-nosed dwarf (or words to that effect)... which would have resulted in a charge of insulting the 'glory of the national symbols of the Republic" or some other such childish primitive nonsense, except that the gendarmes could not help laughing at it... but the big question was whether by using the term 'hook-nosed' I meant "Jew". My reply: "If I wanted to say Jew I would say Jew. Look at the guy - half his bodyweight is nose."

Hilarity ensued.

Darryl • 12 hours ago
Despite underlying principal, this article is glossing over the most important fact that anti Muslim cartoon and expressions are organized and encouraged by same people who have started a war with Muslim's principals and beliefs long time ago and enjoys the support of Western governments. It is the Zionism which attempts to degrade the Muslims, then steal the land and water resources in Palestine.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home