Showing posts with label liberty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liberty. Show all posts
Friday, September 21, 2012
TOWNHALL.COM: What's wrong with the following Associated Press headline? "Charlie Hebdo cartoon spurs French gov't to order embassies, schools to close."
Cartoons of Muhammad in the satirical French weekly Charlie Hebdo didn't send France into lockdown. Their publication this week was a simple exercise in free speech on Islam, which Muslims in France and everywhere else in the world oppose as a violation of Islamic law (Shariah). It is Islamic rage over the fact that Islamic law is not dominant everywhere, all the time -- Muslims' signal weapon against a timid West -- that drove French authorities to take security precautions, not the publication of cartoons.
What's wrong with the following headline? "Cinemaniac: Feds question loon who set Muslim world on fire." Again, this headline in the New York Post leaves the actual pyromaniacs out of the picture, instead demonizing an individual who made a film about Muhammad -- his lawful right. Muslims set "the world" (American embassies) on fire in one more fit of jihad to punish a violation of Islamic law. Like other cycles of Islamic rage before it -- whether the pretext is a Miss World pageant in Nigeria or cartoons in a Danish newspaper -- this one, too, will temporarily abate, ready to flare up next time the point must be driven home: Criticism of Islam and its prophet is verboten.
This is no media flap. This is war. Islam is attempting to dominate the West by attacking the basis of the West -- freedom of speech. Our leaders won't tell us that because too many of them have already surrendered. They deplore the violence against our people and our sovereign territory, yes, but their priority is not to defend free speech but to see that Islamic speech codes are enforced. They have already decided to discard liberty for Shariah. The U.S. government and the Islamic bloc known as the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) couldn't be more in sync on this vital issue.
How to get around the First Amendment? Through "some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said last year. She was speaking about the so-called Istanbul Process, the international effort she and the OIC are spearheading to see Islamic anti-"blasphemy" laws enforced around the world. » | Diana West | Friday, September 21, 2012
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
THE GUARDIAN: Instead of the leftovers of a repressive regime, Tunisians deserve a genuinely democratic unity governmentmanage to catch us by surprise. In Tunisia last week, the brutal 23-year rule of Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali ended in one fell swoop, surprising even the protesters who had braved bullets, tear gas and water cannons and yet had hardly dared to hope that their dreams of freedom would be so swiftly answered.
As news of Ben Ali's departure reached the streets, the young protesters who had driven this movement for change looked around them and glimpsed another Tunisia, one free from the only president they had ever known.
This cataclysmic shift is nothing short of a second independence for the country, long under the boot of the hegemonic Constitutional Democratic Rally party (RCD).
But, only a few days after those dizzying heights, it seems that while the dictator has fallen, the dictatorship remains. Tunisians felt a dreaded sense of déjà vu as they switched on their televisions to be greeted by the same familiar faces, engaged in a sickening game of musical chairs. Mohamed Ghannouchi, their not-so-new prime minister, was Ben Ali's right-hand man. He was, in the words of a US official, "indispensable" to Ben Ali and, ever the loyalist, he recently revealed that he is still in touch with the deposed dictator.
Indeed, continuity appears to be the dish of the day for the RCD. While throwing some measly crumbs to the official opposition parties – which had been handpicked by Ben Ali – it has shamelessly clung on to every significant ministry, including the interior ministry, which is responsible for organising elections. Continue reading and comment >>> Intissar Kherigi | Wednesday, January 19, 2011
SPIEGEL ONLINE INTERNATIONAL: With the dictatorship gone, Tunisians can finally say what they think. Many are optimistic that, after decades of living under an autocratic cleptocracy, the future is bright. But the new government in Tunis has gotten off to a rocky start.
"All of this is owed to the grace of God," reads the epigram over the front gate of the Villa Adel Trabelsis in Tunis. The gate's doors are gone, having been ripped off by plunderers. Other furnishings -- including beds, curtains, light switches, bathroom tiles and banisters -- are likewise missing. They took it all. What they couldn't carry away was set on fire.
Last week, this was the home of the brother-in-law of Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali, Tunisia's toppled dictator. The second floor of the house now looks like a soot-covered cave. A wall-mounted cupboard is now nothing more than a pile of embers. One enraged Tunisian used a piece of the charcoal as an impromptu writing instrument, crossing out the word "God" on the portal and replacing it with "the people" in soot lettering: "All of this is owed to the grace of the people."
Driving along the coastal street running through Tunis' upscale al-Masra suburb is a feast for the eyes. White villas are surrounded by lush gardens. Doors and window grills are painted in Mediterranean blue. This week, for a change, al-Masra is not swarming with foreign tourists; they were evacuated because of the revolt launched against Ben Ali's regime in recent weeks. Those who can be seen rummaging around and within the fire-gutted villas are all Tunisians. They have come to see with their own eyes what a kleptocracy looks like.
Until just a few days ago, Tunisians could only speak in whispers about the untold riches acquired by the large extended Trabelsi family of Ben Ali's second wife. Now many want to take a look at the greed that ultimately cost Ben Ali his 23-year rule. Still, they show a preference for wit over hatred when inspecting the ruins. One man, upon seeing a package of Xanax anti-depressants, quips: "The Trabelsis really should have taken these along to Saudi Arabia. They could really use them now." >>> Ulrike Putz in Tunis | Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Thursday, July 01, 2010
THE TELEGRAPH: Members of the public will be given the right to nominate unpopular laws they want scrapped, Nick Clegg has announced the Your Freedom initiative intended to begin a shift of power away from the state to the people.
In an article for The Daily Telegraph, the Deputy Prime Minister says that “people, not policy-makers” are the best judges of which “unnecessary laws” should be repealed.
Your Freedom: suggest the laws you want repealed
The “radically different” approach is part of the Coalition’s attempt to redress the balance between the citizen and the state, Mr Clegg argues. He says it is not for Government to tell people “how to live their lives” and that civil liberties should be restored and laws stifling businesses abandoned.
As part of Mr Clegg’s initiative, Telegraph.co.uk is providing a Your Freedom link to the Cabinet Office website where people can put forward their suggestions for which laws should be targeted.
In his article, Mr Clegg says: “Today we are taking an unprecedented step. Based on the belief that it is people, not policy-makers, who know best, we are asking the people of Britain to tell us how you want to see your freedom restored.
“We are calling for your ideas on how to protect our hard-won liberties and repeal unnecessary laws. And we want to know how best to scale back excessive regulation that denies businesses the space to innovate.
“We’re hoping for virtual mailbags full of suggestions. Every single one will be read, with the best put to Parliament. >>> Andrew Porter, Political Editor | Thursday, July 01, 2010
Your Freedom
THE TELEGRAPH: Your Freedom: Nick Clegg calls on public to help repeal bad laws: Nick Clegg has announced the Your Freedom initiative intended to give members of the public the right to nominate unpopular laws they want scrapped. >>>
THE TELEGRAPH: The state has crept further and further into people’s homes and their private lives under the cover of pretending to act in our best interest. That needs to change, says Nick Clegg.
During their 13 years in power, the Labour Government developed a dangerous reflex. Faced with whatever problem, legislation increasingly became the standard response. Something needs fixing? Let’s pass a new law.
And so, over the last decade, thousands of new rules and regulations have amassed on the statute book. And it is our liberty that has paid the price. Under the cover of pretending to act in our best interest, the state has crept further and further into people’s homes and their private lives. That intrusion is disempowering. It needs to change.
The Coalition Government is determined to restore great British freedoms. Major steps have been taken already. ID cards have been halted. Plans are underway to restrict the storage of innocent people’s DNA. Schools will no longer be able to take children’s fingerprints without their parents consent.
But we need to do more. The culture of state snooping has become so ingrained that we must tackle it with renewed vigour. And, especially in these difficult times, entrepreneurs and businesses need our help. We must ensure we are not tying them up in restrictive red tape. Freedom is back in fashion >>> Nick Clegg, Deputy Prime Minister | Thursday, July 01, 2010
Have your say >>>
Monday, May 31, 2010
LOS ANGELES TIMES: The U.S. still possesses unprecedented power projection capabilities, and just as important, it is armed with the goodwill of countless countries that know the U.S. offers protection from bullies.
Much nonsense has been written in recent years about the prospects of American decline and the inevitable rise of China. But it was not a declining power that I saw in recent weeks as I jetted from the Middle East to the Far East through two of America's pivotal geographic commands — Central Command and Pacific Command.
The very fact that the entire world is divided up into American military commands is significant. There is no French, Indian or Brazilian equivalent — not yet even a Chinese counterpart. It is simply assumed without much comment that American soldiers will be central players in the affairs of the entire world. It is also taken for granted that a vast network of American bases will stretch from Germany to Japan — more than 700 in all, depending on how you count. They constitute a virtual American empire of Wal-Mart-style PXs, fast-food restaurants, golf courses and gyms.
There is an especially large American presence in the Middle East, one of the world's most crisis-prone regions. For all the anti-Americanism in the Arab world, almost all the states bordering what they call the Arabian Gulf support substantial American bases. These governments are worried about the looming Iranian threat and know that only the United States can offer them protection. They are happy to deal with China, but it would never occur to a single sultan or sheik that the People's Liberation Army will protect them from Iranian intimidation.
In the Far East, a similar dynamic prevails. All of China's neighbors happily trade with it, but all are wary of the Middle Kingdom's pretensions to regional hegemony. Even Vietnam, a country that handed America its worst military defeat ever, is eager to establish close ties with Washington as a counter to Beijing. Read on and comment >>> Max Boot*, Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times | Monday, May 31, 2010
*Max Boot is the Jeane J. Kirkpatrick senior fellow for national security studies at the Council on Foreign Relations and a contributing editor to Opinion.
Monday, March 22, 2010
THE TELEGRAPH: In the second extract from his new book, Philip Johnston says we must restore traditional British common sense.
When I was growing up, there were two common phrases that you hardly ever hear today. One was: "It's a free country." The other was: "There should be a law against it." They tended to be uttered by people older than my parents who had been born not long after the First World War and may well have fought in the Second.
These phrases captured the essence of Britishness and why those wars were fought. We were, or imagined ourselves to be, "a free country" in a way that most European countries were not and had never been. That notion of being free defined us. We were not people subject to arbitrary state power and we both knew it and could say it. Perhaps this first phrase was used ironically at times; but when I heard it as a young boy it had a sense of certainty and permanence about it. What are we? A free country.
The second phrase also says much about the sort of country we were, and are no longer. There were, obviously, lots of laws but they were less restrictive of individual activity. They set parameters within which the "free" bit could be exercised and were governed by common law precedents handed down over the centuries. We had liberty; we did not have licence.
Yet there were clearly things of which many people, especially older ones, disapproved and that they sometimes wished could be legislated away, such as the looser morals that were on show in the 1960s. You could imagine an old codger leering at a girl in her thigh-high mini-skirt in 1963 (when sexual intercourse began, according to the poet Philip Larkin) and saying: "There should be a law against it." And if the girl had overheard, she would have replied: "It's a free country, grandad. Mind your own business."
However, neither of these phrases applies today. We are no longer a free country, not in the way previous generations would have understood the phrase; and as for the demand for laws, there almost certainly already is a law against it. >>> Philip Johnston | Sunday, March 21, 2010
'Bad Laws' by Philip Johnston (Constable) is out on Thursday and is available for £8.99 plus 99p postage and packing from Telegraph Books. Please call 0844 871 1514 or go to books.telegraph.co.uk
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
THE TELEGRAPH: Three Google executives were convicted on Wednesday of violating privacy laws by allowing disturbing footage of a disabled Italian boy being bullied to be posted on the internet.
The ruling was the first of its kind in history and was condemned by critics as "the biggest threat to internet freedom we have seen".
The trial centred on footage posted on Google Videos, of a teenager suffering from Down's syndrome and who was being bullied by four other boys, at a Turin school.
The footage was posted in September 2006 and became the most viewed where it remained for two months before finally being removed.
Prosecutors in Milan brought the case after being contacted by the charity Viva Down and argued that the boys privacy had been violated and that Google should have removed the footage quicker than it eventually did.
In the footage the boy was seen cowering as he was punched and kicked before one of the youths attacking him made a mocking call to the Viva Down charity.
The three executives found guilty by judge Oscar Magi were David Carl Drummond, former Google Italy and now senior vice president, George De Los Reyes, a retired financial executive and privacy director Peter Fleischer.
The three were found guilty of violating privacy laws and given six month suspended sentences, while they were cleared of defamation. A fourth executive Arvind Desikan, an executive with Google video Europe was cleared. >>> Nick Pisa in Rome | Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
MY ESSAY ON THIS TOPIC:
Islam: The Enemy of Democracy and Freedom >>> Mark Alexander | Friday, April 20, 2007
Thursday, January 21, 2010
BRUSSELS JOURNAL: In the summer of 2008, as many readers know, I traveled to six European countries to interview politicians dedicated to breaking, halting and/or reversing the Islamization of their countries (here is a collection of some of the writings inspired by the trip).
One of those politicians was Geert Wilders, then the little-known (outside of the Netherlands) leader of a very small party, PVV, the Party for Freedom. Only a year and a half later, Wilders is the most famous Dutchman in the world, and his party rivals the current ruling party in popularity. Wilders is also now on trial for his political life and liberty – hardly a coincidence.
But Wilders is not the only politician in Europe fighting Islamization. In my travels, I learned there were other countries where extremely courageous men and some notable women had entered the democratic arena to defend Western liberties against the onslaught of sharia (Islamic law), and with electoral success. In interviewing such politicians, I was much impressed with their political and, in these times of jihad violence, physical courage. Sadly, it remains the case that no US politicians speak with either the candor or understanding of the Islamic threat besetting the West that at least some of their European counterparts do.
With Wilders' trial begining today, I contacted three of the politicians I interviewed on my trip and asked them for their thoughts today. They have obliged – and in English, which is worth noting. In alphabetical order, they are Filip Dewinter, leader of the Vlaams Belang party in Belgium, Oskar Freysinger, a member of Swiss parliament for the Swiss People's Party (lately in the news for the recent victorious Swiss referendum banning minaret construction in Switzerland), and Morten Messershmidt, a member of European Parliament for the Danish People's Party. >>> Diana West | Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
WELT ONLINE: Mehr als die Hälfte der Weltbevölkerung muss auf freie Lebensbedingungen verzichten. Die Organisation Freedom House zählt weltweit nur 89 Staaten, in denen die Menschen frei sind – Tendenz sinkend. Selbst in Europa rügt die "Weltpolizei" mit Hauptsitz in Washington mehrere Länder.
Freedom House, die namhafte Forschungseinrichtung mit Hauptsitz in Washington D.C., beklagt eine „weltweite Erosion der Freiheit“. Weniger als die Hälfte der Weltbevölkerung lebt unter Bedingungen, die man als „frei“ bezeichnen kann, heißt es im Jahresbericht 2010 der Organisation. Im vierten Jahr in Folge überwiege der Rückgang bürgerlicher Freiheiten den Fortschritt demokratischer Grundrechte – die längste Periode kontinuierlicher Freiheitseinbußen in der fast 40 Jahre langen Geschichte der Bestandsaufnahme.
In 40 Staaten registrierte Freedom House eine Verschlechterung der Lage, vor allem in Afrika, Lateinamerika, im Nahen- und Mittleren Osten sowie in den Staaten der ehemaligen Sowjetunion. Der Iran, Russland, Venezuela und Vietnam – ohnehin schon in der untersten Kategorie geführt – hätten ihre Repressionen noch einmal angezogen. Bahrain, Jordanien, Marokko, Kenia und Kirgistan haben ihre zuletzt positiven Tendenzen nicht mehr halten können und wurden gegenüber dem Report von 2009 heruntergestuft. >>> Von Dietrich Alexander | Dienstag, 12. Januar 2010
FREEDOM HOUSE: On January 12, Freedom House released its findings from the latest edition of Freedom in the World, the annual survey of global political rights and civil liberties. According to the survey’s findings, 2009 marked the fourth consecutive year in which global freedom suffered a decline—the longest consecutive period of setbacks for freedom in the nearly 40-year history of the report. >>> Release of Findings, Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Monday, January 11, 2010
AUSTRALIAN ISLAMIST MONITOR – Objectives: Islam in its current form, as preached, taught and propagated by the mainstream Muslim elites, is incompatible with the existing political system in Australia. This is because Islam in this form is not just a religion but an entire political system, and regulatory force, controlling every aspect of the life of its followers and requiring them to actively secure for Islam the dominant, privileged position.
This is not confined to religious dominance, but most importantly it aims to replace our Australian political system and democratic principles with Islamic ones. Moreover, Muslims living in Australia are instructed by their religious leaders that Islamic law (Sharia) has primacy over Australian law. This process has already begun. There is considerable evidence that (here and elsewhere) Muslim leaders use covert means to achieve their goals by subverting existing democratic processes and procedures. Misleading information is given to our political leaders, the community and religious leaders about Islam's final intent. The involvement of other countries with financial and political support poses an additional threat to our nation.
We at AIM believe that this form of Islam (called Islamism) has become a serious threat to the viability of Australia as a Western Democracy, to our egalitarian values, and our freedom. Furthermore we believe that if this process is not stopped now, Australia will become yet another part of the world suffering chronic violence, intolerance (discrimination against non-Muslims which has its basis in the Qur'an) and declining legal and intellectual freedom. On behalf of Australians who cherish their freedom and democracy, we reject Islamism and Shariah in any form.
We urgently call on truly moderate Muslims to reform Islam, so that it becomes a true, personal religion, not an ideology, and can take its place alongside the peaceful religions which make up our multifaith community. Click over and discover a great site! >>>
Australian Islamist Monitor – Homepage >>>
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
THE TELEGRAPH – BLOG – Nile Gardiner: It’s bad enough that President Obama could not be bothered to attend the celebrations marking the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. But Hillary Clinton’s refusal to even acknowledge the role played by Ronald Reagan in the Wall’s demise as well as the downfall of Communism was highly insulting towards one of the greatest figures of our time, and reeked of petty and partisan mean-spiritedness.
The Secretary of State’s remarks yesterday in Berlin completely erased from history the huge contribution played not only by President Reagan but also by the United States in confronting the Soviet Empire. In her speech she applauded half of Europe, but could not bring herself to thank those Americans who bravely served their country and in many cases laid down their lives in defeating Communism, under Reagan’s leadership. >>> Nile Gardiner | Tuesday, November 10, 2009
THE TELEGRAPH – BLOG – Toby Harnden: Not enough about him? Barack Obama skips Berlin Wall ceremonies >>> Toby Harnden | Monday, November 09, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
TIMES ONLINE: In August 1989 as communism collapsed, Britain was a beacon to the new regimes. Today we are squandering our liberty
I’ve spent much of the past 20 years living in or reporting on the former communist countries of Eastern Europe. Nowadays, with Budapest, Prague and Warsaw two hours away by budget airline, it’s hard to imagine that before 1989, half a continent was imprisoned behind landmines and barbed wire, its citizens terrorised by secret police, intentionally ground down by the endless, intrusive demands of the one-party state.
I saw those borders torn down, democracies arise and the basic freedoms that we take for granted — speech, movement and public protest — enthusiastically embraced.
Twenty years ago today the world witnessed the power of the crowd. Hungary’s reformist communist Government permitted the pan-European picnic near the city of Sopron, on the border with Austria, as a symbol of its commitment to a united Europe. The border was to be opened so that about 100 dignitaries and officially approved picnickers could cross freely back and forth. But Hungary was crowded with thousands of East Germans desperate to escape to the West. Many camped near the site of the picnic, waiting for the crucial moment. When the border was opened at three o’clock they surged forward. The guards did not open fire. They stepped back and allowed the East Germans to break through.
This, not the opening of the Berlin Wall in November, was the tipping point. August 19, 1989, accelerated a chain of events that brought down communism and the Soviet Union itself. Such is the power of the crowd.
After 1989 Big Brother was no longer welcome in Budapest, Prague or Warsaw — he moved to London to be ever more warmly embraced by successive Labour administrations. The birthplace of political liberties, the home of the Magna Carta, is now one of the most intrusive democracies in the world. Labour governments have introduced surveillance and monitoring systems of which the communists could only dream. Of course, Britain is not a real police state. But it is certainly sliding further into authoritarianism. >>> Adam LeBor | Saturday, August 22, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
REZA PAHLAVI (رضا پهلوی):It seems somewhat unlikely that a resident of Potomac will be the next ruler of Iran. But Reza Pahlavi, son of the shah and the country's former crown prince, is not ruling out anything.
As Tehran's streets fill with death-to-the-dictator chants, Pahlavi went to the National Press Club yesterday and, in front of 17 television cameras, said he would serve if elected.
"My sole objective is to help my compatriots reach freedom," Pahlavi said. But if and when that happens, he went on, "I'd like to be able to be in my country one day, come behind such a podium, talk to my people and every other candidate . . . let the people decide."
Whatever the Iranian demonstrators are seeking, there is little evidence from their Twitter feeds that they are seeking the restoration of the monarchy -- and Pahlavi, who was a teenager getting flight training in Texas during the Islamic revolution, was shrewd enough not to propose it. "This is not about restitution of an institution," he said. But should a democratic Iran "choose to have me play a more prominent role," he added, "let that be their choice."
That will be for another day. Yesterday, the 48-year-old son of a dictator was merely voicing his hopes that what his countrymen have begun over the last 10 days will become a revolution. "However, I often don't use the word 'revolution,' because I think revolution has a very negative connotation in everybody's collective memory."
Particularly Pahlavi's. His family had lived a life of great extravagance until Ayatollah Khomenei deposed the shah in 1979, a year after Jimmy Carter hailed the monarch as "an island of stability." Even yesterday, the former crown prince was defensive about those days. "They had orders not to hit -- fire on people," he said of his father's troops, who, whatever their orders, managed to kill thousands.
The Pahlavi family's love of the ballot box also is somewhat recent; his father, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, was installed in a CIA coup in 1953 in place of Iran's democratically elected government. But the younger Pahlavi spoke yesterday of the good old days of his father's rein. Before he came out to speak, somebody fiddled with the Iranian flag behind him to reveal the pre-revolution lion symbol. Pahlavi talked about how, under his father, Iran would have had nuclear fuel and reactors by 1983. "The regime is responsible for us having lost that right, and only them," he said.
Still, there could be no doubting the former crown prince's passion. As he spoke of Iran's "cry for freedom and democracy," he was himself, within minutes, crying for his beloved country. "No one -- no one -- will benefit from closing his or her eyes to knives and cables cutting into faces of mouths, of our young and old," he said, and then, choking up, he took a sip of water. "Or from bullets piercing our beloved Neda," he went on, before a sob escaped his mouth at the mention of the girl shot in the protests. Some in the audience applauded to buy him time as he took out a handkerchief to wipe his face. Finally, gripping the lectern determinedly, he vowed that "a movement was born" that "will not rest until it achieves unfettered democracy and human rights in Iran."
The exiled prince accused Iran's supreme ruler of "an ugly moment of disrespect for both God and man," and he spoke, perhaps a bit prematurely, of "this sinking Titanic that the regime is." The Revolutionary Guard Corps, he claimed, is becoming sympathetic to the demonstrators. "This is well beyond elections now," the optimistic exile said. "The moment of truth has arrived in Iran." >>> Dana Milbank, Washington Post | Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)