Do you not defend freedom of speech if:
1. You are legitimately afraid for you or your family’s life?
2. You have an increasingly large minority of Muslims in your own country and it has become a political calculation? A numbers game with the Muslim World, and you legitimately fear social unrest…or attacks upon your country or its citizens?
3. You find Westergaard’s cartoons to be designed to provoke, and in poor taste and due to political calculations, you throw him out of the mainstream and onto the politically populist right in your mind? Do you feel guilt at not being able to integrate Muslims better and thus back your way into problems like this?
4. You find the EU human rights charter a clunky, sufficiently abstract bureaucratic representation of an idea not particularly close to your heart? or your national pride?…or are your tired of Americans projecting their beliefs onto you?
I hope that going forward there will likely be greater understanding and diplomacy between the West and the Muslim world…but I don’t think this is the best way forward…appeasing the violent and extreme, sacrificing your own freedoms out of fear.
See Also: If you thought the cartoons were bad, more on the Fitna movie here. Libertarians stand firm on this issue: Repost-A Canadian Libertarian Making Noise: Ezra Levant
Via The A & L Daily-Interview With Christopher Caldwell At Spiegel Online
Ayan Hirsi Ali is a Muslim immigrant to Europe, who seems quite populist and anti-Islam…is this a potential track for immigrants if they are integrated better?: Ayan Hirsi Ali At The CSM: ‘Swiss Ban On Minarets Was A Vote For Tolerance And Inclusion’
