Ban Ki-moon Quotes

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out and Danish boycotts ensued because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews. Although France had a large Muslim minority, reaction of French Muslims was much more mild than that of Middle Eastern Arabs where the governments either encouraged the rioters or refused to take action to deter them from sacking Danish property.

See {611575}

In September of 2005 a Rose’s newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews. Apologies were demanded from Rose.

There is relatively little freedom of speech in Egypt and most Islamic countries where the traditional Sharia laws prohibiting blasphemy and the tradition of not publicly embarrassing the Caliph or the Sultan, combine to protect the modern Islamic state from criticism. Turkey, Tunisia and a few other Islamic states are exceptions. Under this Egyptian law anyone could be jailed for bringing “shame” to national and Islamic values. On September 6, 1981, the Egyptian Director of Public Health, Dr. Nawal El Saadawi was actually arrested and jailed for three months for saying that women were ill treated in Egypt and the rest of the Arab world. See {586710} for the kinds of statements for which Egypt would jail leading citizens.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews. Islamic country newspapers however, when it comes to what is perceived as material insulting to Islam, as typified by this editorial, feel that their religion should never be insulted despite the fact that Saudi Arabian media constantly insult Christianity and Judaism. Their justification of this gross double standard is that Islam is the “true” religion.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews.

In 2005 an Egyptian writer, Usama Anwar Ukasha, criticized one of the Prophet’s companion’s role for causing dissention and divisiveness in Islamic history. Some called for his legal punishment for slandering a holy figure (see {588714}) and a law case was brought to force him to divorce his wife—so that she would not be “contaminated by his heretical thoughts. Al-Bana argued for freedom of thought and speech on such subjects. His view was particularly important since he was the brother of Hassan Al-Bana, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, a powerful fundamentalist organization. Note that Al-Bana’s call for intellectual freedom does not go so far as to say that it should be legal to criticize The Prophet Muhammad and it illustrates how far even modern Islam has to go to meet reasonable standards of freedom of thought and speech.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim fatal riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, in January of 2006 many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim nations started a boycott against Denmark. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews. Westerners came to the support of Denmark. The United States which usually supports freedom of the press made this veiled criticism of the Danish Newspaper.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out and Danish boycotts ensued because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews.

In September of 2005 a Danish Newspaper published some political cartoons showing the hypocrisy of some Muslims who use Islam to justify murder of innocents and terrorism. Months later, many in the Middle East protested vehemently and Muslim riots broke out because the Prophet Muhammad's visage was depicted against Islamic tradition. Many Muslim leaders claimed that insulting religion was an “abuse” of freedom of speech including those from nations which regularly publish material that is virulent against Christians and Jews. That was particularly true of Egypt which commonly insulted Christianity and Judaism and the government always claimed that they could not interfere with private publications and broadcasts because Egypt had freedom of speech and the press.

Danish fundamentalist Muslim Groups were demonstrating, protesting, and threatening Danes who wrote or published cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed. Other Europeans who had committed what Muslims thought to be blasphemy had been attacked and even murdered by Muslim fundamentalists. Led by Nasim Rahnama, some Danish Muslims, braved attack and possible death, and produced a petition of Muslims defending the right of freedom of publication. See {59932} & {59919}.

The 1st Amendment is almost absolute in its protection of speech. However, ironically the Untied States has much less internecine conflict with minorities better off than the nations where hate speech is illegal and criminal.

Part of the right to freedom of speech is the right to criticize, disparage or insult. However, there are some people in the world who do not believe in freedom of speech or expression and not only believe that certain types of expression are blasphemous and sinful, but some believe that it is their religious duty to kill the blasphemer. In this case a film was made that was not only intellectually an attack on Islam but it was done in such a manner that most orthodox Muslims were insulted and offended that their Prophet and religion were both insulted in a blasphemous manner. It was a film that was very much in poor taste, insensitive and gross. In the Islamic world, some extremists use incidents that they call blasphemy to whip up large crowds who riot, destroy and in many cases kill innocent people who have nothing to do with the alleged blasphemy except that their employer might be a company in the same nation as the blasphemer. These fanatics also hold governments responsible for blasphemy if they do not violate their own laws and constitutions and interfere with their citizens right to freedom of speech and expression. For people like Bollinger, this raises a terribly difficult situation and as he points out in this quotations free speech can have serous repercussions almost anywhere in the world. Others observe that every time we even discuss the potential repercussions, the enemies of freedom of expression win, and have a chilling effect on the rest of the world. They urge ignoring the consequences and avoid rewarding the enemies of freedom by giving them an influence on our freedoms and practices.