Lee Kuan Yew 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. 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, 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.

This was a common view of Southern leaders. Society had to be monolithic culturally. In the North, the constant immigration from the world over made pluralism much more normative. However, the vast majority of the North opposed slavery and believed that slavery and free labor could not coexist. So the Southern argument on that point was turned on them, and the monolithic views of the South has constantly eroded and become more tolerant and pluralistic and by the 21st century, there were parts of the South that were more tolerant and pluralistic than some parts of the North. Change, reform and liberalism was slow to take hold but it was inexorable.

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.

This is a very important quotation. The reason is that the Secretary General of the UN backed off and did not support the absolute right of freedom of speech and expression. He favored allowing exceptions. 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. One major difference between freedom of speech as interpreted by most countries and the United States is that most other nations do not allow and defend hate speech and material that insults a people or their religion or is blatantly blasphemous. The U. S. however protects anyone who blasphemously attacks anyone or any group for any reason. There are a few other nations that protect free speech absolutely but Germany, the United Kingdom, Israel, and India are considered major examples of democracy and freedom and yet they do not protect free speech absolutely. In most Muslim nations, whatever freedom of speech they might have does not apply to blasphemy where Islam is concerned. In most of the Arab nations, there is rank hypocrisy in that freedom of speech is tolerated and protected if there is a blasphemous attack on any other religion such as Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, or Bhai. This kind of difference on human rights between the U. S. and the UN causes many Americans to oppose the US participation in UN operated courts and projects to protect human rights. Few Americans would favor being a part of an international court system where an American could be convicted of blasphemy for what he had written or said. Essentially, the Secretary General has taken a stand against the United States Constitution and the values of most Americans and many other people of the world like Denmark, or Norway. Offensive and insulting speech is the only kind of speech that needs protection. If speech offends no one, there is no need for its protection.

Fiji is a nation which at the time was beset with ethnic strife and tension. In addition to the religious tension there were Indian immigrants who tended to be economically more successful than the indigenous Fijians. There was an English tradition from the days of being a British Colony and the traditional tribal leaders and chiefs were being disenfranchised by modern democratic structures. The military was not under the control of the civilian government and coups pitted some ethnic groups against others.