�Free world� has holocaust deniers
My View by Will Johnson (www.metro.us)

Fwd Jahed Ahmed

Published on December 29, 2007

 

[Preface: The caricature of Prophet Muhammad by European newspapers created intensified outcry and violent protests by Muslims across the globe, and we were not so surprised since 'the right to express oneself freely'--also granted by UN Declaration of Human Rights-- is an alien concept in the contemporary  Muslim world. Thus we stood by European newspapers to honor & support the 'freedom of press', although not necessarily the double standard demonstrated by the Danish newspaper in question. Having said this, I find it extremely troublesome to accept that a historian (be him howmuchever 'controversial') has been sentenced with 3 years of imprisonment just because he denied, holocaust existed! That happened to British Historian David Irving in Austria. I wonder, how Islamic Blasphemy Law is different than the Austrian law that forbids people to speak freely? Where are our intellectuals/activists who see faults with Islam clearly but fail miserably when it comes to something practiced in the West? It's not a matter of being 'balanced'; it's, rather, about integrity and honesty of the intellect. --Jahed Ahmed]        

 

David Irving, a 67-year-old British historian, was sentenced Monday to three years in an Austrian prison. He was not convicted of murder, assault, robbery, theft, a sexual crime or even harassment. No, David Irving was found guilty of being a fool and opening his mouth to speak foolishness � in 1989. Seventeen years ago, David Irving gave two speeches in Austria in which he was accused of denying the Holocaust. For these two speeches � which apparently did not permanently maim a single living being in the audience or anywhere else � he is facing three years in a prison cell.

 

Whether he believes the Holocaust actually happened or not, he should be free � anywhere in the world � to express his sickening or misguided views. And while I�m not a citizen of Austria � so I really do not have a right to yack about their legal system � I do think cases like this, in countries like Austria, set a very dangerous precedent for Europe and the rest of the so-called �free world.� As effective as these �hate laws� may be in corralling hatemongers and rabble-rousers like Hitler, they also present the very real and significant danger of blotting out genuinely important truth and/or expression.

 

As a self-consciously offensive and intentionally provocative writer myself, I recognize the necessity of offending the majority, toppling icons, questioning authority, challenging values, attacking public figures and stirring trouble. It�s crucial to constantly throw cold water all over the faces of those grown stagnant and complacent. It�s important to constantly upset the scales so that no insidious and hateful ideology or person takes over a docile and dogmatic herd; dogmatic liberals are included in this herd.

 

More than nearly anything, I cherish irreverence. More than irreverence, I cherish unbridled and unconditional freedom of speech. Whether it�s a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad or a book praising Hitler, all speech should be protected. A book praising Hitler should be stomped on, spit on, refuted by scholars and historians, but it should be allowed to circulate freely and the author should be free from any legal consequences. We must remember that Hitler was a censor and that he, too, was severe in suppressing unofficial and unpopular views. By acting as censors, the Austrian officials have been unconsciously mimicking Hitler.

 

What�s most dangerous is that official opinions on what actually constitutes �hate speech� may now become even more arbitrary. Responses and reactions to any creative expression are always subjective by nature and a piece of work made to attack an unjust power may now be labeled as hateful and illegal. Hopefully, no individual even half as evil as Hitler will thoroughly exploit this nonsensical situation.

 

At this point in history � with the Patriot Act and other such oppressive measures � we must be ever more vigilant of not falling into that liberal hypocrisy, into that hypocrisy of trumpeting free speech while condemning and attempting to censor anything and everything that does not suit our taste. It�s important to stand up for even the David Irvings of this world.

 02/22/2006
 

 Jahed Ahmed is a co-moderator at www.mukto-mona.com  and writes from USA. He can be communicated thru :  [email protected]