Islam and Free Speech

By -

   Muslims are using British libel laws to limit what is said about Islam, terrorists and the people in Saudi Arabia.   In England, a person sued for libel has the burden of proving what is written is true, rather than the reverse as is true in the U.S.  
Marc Steyn has been sued in Canada by Muslims in a "Human Rights" court that has so far granted 100% of the petitions filed.   The book that he is sued for "America Alone" pointed out that Muslim populations are growing faster than non-Muslims, and that if the trend continues, Muslims will be a majority in the near future. 

In America, such lawsuits would be forbidden by the First Amendment. In Britain and Canada, this is not true.  As a consequence of such lawsuits, all American major publishers have refused to publish a book on the Muslim Brotherhood, for fear of such "libel" and "human rights" lawsuits.  So much for free speech in America. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Anger Management

By -
Image
   Isn't it interesting that Religion and Politics are taboo topics in polite company?  These are very important to many people, but discussing them only seems to provoke anger in most people.  The exception seems to be that people of similar opinions can discuss with one another how much they hate, desipise, and laugh at those of different beliefs.   Apparently, religions and politics are not subjects that most people desire to consider in a calm, cool, rational manner.  Rather, for most people, religion and politics are emotional topics.  They are the subject of Faith.  People have faith in their religion.  More surprisingly, (at least to me) they have Faith in their politics.  Faith and Reason are like oil and water; they do not mix.   I am not restricting my comments to stupid people or any particular party.  My observation seems true to me of very intelligent members of various parties (although there does seems to be a tendency to judge members of parties to which you do not
Read more

Victory in Fallujah

By -
_____________________ by Ralph Peters New York Post November 11, 2004 -- IN the Second Battle of Fallujah, military operations are ahead of schedule. Our casualties have been blessedly light. The terrorists who haven't fled are being killed by the hundreds. Our troops will soon achieve their goal of eliminating Iraq's key safe haven for terrorists. Our Marines and soldiers have carried the ball inside the 10-yard line. The media's response? Move the goalposts. The legions of pundits ("Will talk for food") now suggest that a win in Fallujah will be meaningless because we failed to kill or capture the terrorist leadership, because some of the thugs ran away and because Fallujah won't resemble Darien, Conn., by next Sunday. On Tuesday, as our troops handily pierced the defenses terrorists had spent months erecting, The New York Times carried two front-page stories implying that our forces were facing possible defeat. The Times' military analysis
Read more

War on Terror

By -
Image
by Bob Clasen Currently, the Administration is trying to wage a War on Terror. But Terror is not an entity. It is a method of warfare, like automatic weapons, or aircraft. One cannot wage war against a technique or technology. I suggest that what is needed is not more soldiers to be sent to Iraq, but greater clarity of thought. Who, exactly, is our enemy? It would appear that one of America's enemies is Fundamentalist Islam. Why is Fundamentalist Islam our enemy? Because Fundamentalist Islam defines unbelievers as infidel and urges its members to wage war against them. This is the doctrine of jihad. The problem is not with extremisist who hijacked a peaceful religion. The problem is the doctrine of Jihad, or Holy War is found throughout the Koran. This doctrine can be re-interpreted by modern liberal types as a psychological warfare against one's own sins, but that is not how many people throughout history have interpreted it. Anyone who is given to literal interpret
Read more