786
MARCH FOR FREE EXPRESSION BELIEVE IN THE RIGHT TO MISREPRESENT OTHERS.
The organisers of the March for Free Expression, haven't answered any of our questions (see below), however they have shown that they belive in the right to misrepresent our campaign.
On their blog (http://marchforfreeexpression.blogspot.com/) they say the following about us:
Global Civility place their own campaign in perspective by including an article on their site headed:
The Obligation to believe in the Prophet, obey Him and follow His Sunnah
the implication clearly being we are campaigning to force people to obey and believe in the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Of course we'd love for everyone to embrace the powerful realities of the two proclamations of faith- there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). However Allah, glorified and exalted is he, has made it clear in the Qur'aan 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion, for the right way is clearly from the wrong way. Whoever therefore rejects the forces of evil and believes in God, he has taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way, for God is All Hearing and Knowing". The purpose of the article was clearly to illustrate for non-Muslims the deep importance of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to Muslims at every moment of their lives.
They then go on to say:
In their statement they demand restrictions on speech that would effectively prohibit any and all discussion of religion, unless it is flattering. They also demand that copyright of the Danish cartoons be handed over to "Muslims" and that Jyllands-Posten perform a monthly penance (there's a distinctly sadistic undertone to these demands for ever more baroque forms of apology and self-abasement).
I'm not sure how they believe that our asking for changes to the PCC code which is a voluntary and self-regulating code for the press will effectively prohibit any and all discussion of religion unless it's flattering. We've said the same thing in all our public statements and written articles that we're asking for civility, that we stop hurling abuse at us. If people want to be critical about Islam or what to debate it with us that's fine, but a civilised debate does not involve the need to abuse your opponant. Those who resort to abuse and insult to win their arguments are those who are devoid of true intellectual arguments and evidence. We want to civilise our debates and discussions to facilitate understanding, instead of this name calling that everyone is engaging in now.
It is however clear that, that is what the March for Free Expression wants to defend: the name calling and the petty abuse, so they can keep on attacking Muslims. Despite their vocal denials:
This campaign is not specifically directed at Islam and that fact that they feel under examination by us just reflects their own view of their own beliefs.There has been a pattern of attempts to restrict freedom of speech and expression from a number of religions and from secular sources as well. In some ways, the secular threats to our freedoms are the most sinister, something the volubility of Mr Siddiqi and his associates can blind us to. Orwell understood the value, to an authoritarian regime, of a perpetual state of emergency and a "War Against Terror" provides exactly that.
It is interesting that despite their claims that they are against the War against Terror and the ani-terrorism laws, not one of their posts to date have dealt with these issues, whilst many have attacked Muslims, their beliefs and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), also their posters all seem to include the Danish flag. Why could that be I wonder......
MARCH FOR FREE EXPRESSION BELIEVE IN THE RIGHT TO MISREPRESENT OTHERS.
The organisers of the March for Free Expression, haven't answered any of our questions (see below), however they have shown that they belive in the right to misrepresent our campaign.
On their blog (http://marchforfreeexpression.blogspot.com/) they say the following about us:
Global Civility place their own campaign in perspective by including an article on their site headed:
The Obligation to believe in the Prophet, obey Him and follow His Sunnah
the implication clearly being we are campaigning to force people to obey and believe in the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Of course we'd love for everyone to embrace the powerful realities of the two proclamations of faith- there is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). However Allah, glorified and exalted is he, has made it clear in the Qur'aan 2:256 "There is no compulsion in religion, for the right way is clearly from the wrong way. Whoever therefore rejects the forces of evil and believes in God, he has taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way, for God is All Hearing and Knowing". The purpose of the article was clearly to illustrate for non-Muslims the deep importance of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) to Muslims at every moment of their lives.
They then go on to say:
In their statement they demand restrictions on speech that would effectively prohibit any and all discussion of religion, unless it is flattering. They also demand that copyright of the Danish cartoons be handed over to "Muslims" and that Jyllands-Posten perform a monthly penance (there's a distinctly sadistic undertone to these demands for ever more baroque forms of apology and self-abasement).
I'm not sure how they believe that our asking for changes to the PCC code which is a voluntary and self-regulating code for the press will effectively prohibit any and all discussion of religion unless it's flattering. We've said the same thing in all our public statements and written articles that we're asking for civility, that we stop hurling abuse at us. If people want to be critical about Islam or what to debate it with us that's fine, but a civilised debate does not involve the need to abuse your opponant. Those who resort to abuse and insult to win their arguments are those who are devoid of true intellectual arguments and evidence. We want to civilise our debates and discussions to facilitate understanding, instead of this name calling that everyone is engaging in now.
It is however clear that, that is what the March for Free Expression wants to defend: the name calling and the petty abuse, so they can keep on attacking Muslims. Despite their vocal denials:
This campaign is not specifically directed at Islam and that fact that they feel under examination by us just reflects their own view of their own beliefs.There has been a pattern of attempts to restrict freedom of speech and expression from a number of religions and from secular sources as well. In some ways, the secular threats to our freedoms are the most sinister, something the volubility of Mr Siddiqi and his associates can blind us to. Orwell understood the value, to an authoritarian regime, of a perpetual state of emergency and a "War Against Terror" provides exactly that.
It is interesting that despite their claims that they are against the War against Terror and the ani-terrorism laws, not one of their posts to date have dealt with these issues, whilst many have attacked Muslims, their beliefs and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), also their posters all seem to include the Danish flag. Why could that be I wonder......
posted by Ismaeel at
10:18 PM
