in solidarity with a free press - glenn greenwald

Hellsangel wrote:PS: No one ever censored the bard for his caricature of Shylock that people associate with the Jews to this day.

This is just empty posturing on false equivalence when Libbies want to feel like they are on the higher moral ground.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:PS: No one ever censored the bard for his caricature of Shylock that people associate with the Jews to this day.

This is just empty posturing on false equivalence when Libbies want to feel like they are on the higher moral ground.

come on you and i both know what the reality of even mild criticism of jews and israel in this country is. you may not be physically harmed, but you'll be excommunicated from polite society, you could very well suffer all kinds of career blows, and be hurt in a thousand other different ways.  

Hellsangel wrote:
Oh and the strongest criticism of Israel comes from the Libby Academic world and everyone seems to be doing fine there.

bw wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:
Oh and the strongest criticism of Israel comes from the Libby Academic world and everyone seems to be doing fine there.

oh, really?    

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/sep/09/professor-israel-criticism-twitter-university-illinois

Steven Salaita, a university professor whose appointment at the University of Illinois was withdrawn last month after he was critical of Israel on Twitter, spoke publicly for the first time on Tuesday, saying he should be reinstated on the grounds of academic freedom.

this article is not about gunning down people but the selective freedom of speech.

The notion that somebody deserves to have their life and career ruined for tweeting an offensive comment or bad joke is an out-of-proportion response, driven by righteous indignation. The answer to a tasteless comment or cartoon is discourse, not destruction, but too often, we sanction professional immolation as a fitting consequence of objectionable speech. It’s a snowball effect, because nobody wants to defend sometime who is being accused of bigotry, lest they be labeled a bigot themselves.

Goldman was mocking women, Sacco was mocking AIDS (or so we thought at the time), Sony’s film was mocking Kim Jung Un, Charlie Hebdo was mocking Muhammed– which of these you find most offensive depends on who you are. If we defend one of them as free speech, we must defend them all.

If all of us standing up for Charlie Hedbo are truly committed to the freedom of speech–and we all should be– we need to stop demanding professional punishment whenever somebody says something idiotically sexist, racist, or classist. Embarrassing comments, in most cases, should not cost people their jobs or livelihoods. We should disagree with people, but not aim to destroy their lives.

bw wrote:

Hellsangel wrote:
Oh and the strongest criticism of Israel comes from the Libby Academic world and everyone seems to be doing fine there.

oh, really?    

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/sep/09/professor-israel-criticism-twitter-university-illinois

Steven Salaita, a university professor whose appointment at the University of Illinois was withdrawn last month after he was critical of Israel on Twitter, spoke publicly for the first time on Tuesday, saying he should be reinstated on the grounds of academic freedom.

this article is not about gunning down people but the selective freedom of speech.

Well, then, what about the double standards? This is a refrain we hear all the time with satirical weeklies like Charlie Hebdo. And not without cause. Under French law, the magazine could run cartoons mocking Islam, but it could not run cartoons mocking the Holocaust. In fact, in 2009, Charlie Hebdo fired Maurice Sinet (known as Siné), one of its most famous cartoonists, because of a column in which he suggested that Nicolas Sarkozy’s son would “go a long way in life” after marrying a Jewish heiress. But murdering cartoonists will not put a stop to double standards. Instead of tolerating less speech, we must ask for more speech.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Well, then, what about the double standards? This is a refrain we hear all the time with satirical weeklies like Charlie Hebdo. And not without cause. Under French law, the magazine could run cartoons mocking Islam, but it could not run cartoons mocking the Holocaust. In fact, in 2009, Charlie Hebdo fired Maurice Sinet (known as Siné), one of its most famous cartoonists, because of a column in which he suggested that Nicolas Sarkozy’s son would “go a long way in life” after marrying a Jewish heiress. But murdering cartoonists will not put a stop to double standards. Instead of tolerating less speech, we must ask for more speech.

http://www.thenation.com/article/194593/why-we-must-resist-simple-explanations-charlie-hebdo-massacre#