NationStates Jolt Archive


Europe--Never ceasing to amaze

Korrithor
09-02-2006, 21:11
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060209/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_eu_dc

LONDON (Reuters) - The European Union may try to draw up a media code of conduct to avoid a repeat of the furor caused by the publication across Europe of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad, an EU commissioner said on Thursday.

In an interview with Britain's Daily Telegraph, EU Justice and Security Commissioner Franco Frattini said the charter would encourage the media to show "prudence" when covering religion.

"The press will give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression," he told the newspaper. "We can and we are ready to self-regulate that right." ...

Does this even require a derisive comment?
Tactical Grace
09-02-2006, 21:15
It will never pass, and they know it. They suggest it in the full knowledge that no-one will schedule any time to debate it. It's just a way of sending out a message. Like promising to review healthcare funding, knowing you're not going to do anything about it. But it sounds good to a certain group you want on side.
Myrmidonisia
09-02-2006, 21:15
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060209/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_eu_dc



Does this even require a derisive comment?
No, but why should that stop us?

I'd say the Islamists are on their way to victory in Europe. Long live the jihad!
Kroisistan
09-02-2006, 21:15
No, it doesn't need a derisve comment. Sometimes we do need to exercise Free Speech with some caution, especially when people get killed if you don't use caution.

Besides, this is just a suggestion anyhow. Nothing you pointed out shows that Europe will make satirizing Islam a crime, just that it will encourage prudence. Nothing wrong with that.
Myrmidonisia
09-02-2006, 21:20
No, it doesn't need a derisve comment. Sometimes we do need to exercise Free Speech with some caution, especially when people get killed if you don't use caution.

Besides, this is just a suggestion anyhow. Nothing you pointed out shows that Europe will make satirizing Islam a crime, just that it will encourage prudence. Nothing wrong with that.
We have 'Hate' crimes here in the U.S. That's where a particularly nasty crime like murder or assault is made even more nasty by what the criminal was thinking. It's not a big leap to consider the thoughts themselves to be criminal, is it?
Righteous Munchee-Love
09-02-2006, 21:21
I, for one, am greatly amashed by folding-in of official Europe.
But then again, freedom of speech never was much liked by those holding power, so it might just as well be that said people push their agenda, using the 'backward muslims' as a scapegoat.

"Scheiss auf Muslime und scheiss auch auf Christen,
denn alle Religionen sind Brutst├Ątten von Faschisten."
Kamsaki
09-02-2006, 21:24
Appeasement didn't stop the War.

Oops, I forgot. I'm not supposed to mention the war. Sorry. Erm... Oh, I know.

*DOUBLETHINK POWA*

Yes, this is a double-plus ungood thing. But nothing like events that have happened before. Nope. Not... at...

Ahh, crap.

*Taken by the thought police*
Jacques Derrida
09-02-2006, 21:24
Does this even require a derisive comment?

Yes. Spineless fucking quislings. The good people of the EU should rise up and ostracize these poltroons. Preferably to the middle east.

The battle for freedom of expresion has been long fought, and only just hard won. And these imbecilic fucks are now prepared to throw it all away because they are worried about upsetting a few atavistic pyschopathic troglodytes.

And shame on the ethically crippled, morally bankrupt, mental defectives that call themselves leftists in the west for supporting this. Once again we see that all those prinicipled stands of the last four decades were no more than empty rhetoric spawned by an underlying pyschotic hatred of western liberal values and ideals. I hope when the islamists are in charge, you all get your fitting sharia punishments.
Cabra West
09-02-2006, 21:26
...proposed voluntary code would urge the media to respect all religious sensibilities but would not offer privileged status to any one faith.

The code would be drawn up by the
European Commission, the EU executive body, and European media outlets, he said. It would not have legal status.

What's all the fuss about? Suggesting caution to journalists is going to restrict freedom of speech?
Besides, even setting up those suggestions are a mere suggestion so far...
The Charr
09-02-2006, 21:26
'Amaze'? You're kidding me, right?

Alright people, hands up who didn't see this coming?

Quite frankly, I would have been very, very surprised if this hadn't happened. The EU won't be happy until every living being within its borders are robotic Care Bears. I don't know why they don't just replace our brains with microchips and get it over with now. Freedom of speech? Democracy? Laws that make sense? A powerful economy? These concepts have no place in the modern world!
The Squeaky Rat
09-02-2006, 21:30
Quite frankly, I would have been very, very surprised if this hadn't happened. The EU won't be happy until every living being within its borders are robotic Care Bears. I don't know why they don't just replace our brains with microchips and get it over with now. Freedom of speech? Democracy? Laws that make sense? A powerful economy? These concepts have no place in the modern world!

Unfortunately true :( I wish we didn't follow where the States lead.. but we do :(
Nekone
09-02-2006, 21:30
What's all the fuss about? Suggesting caution to journalists is going to restrict freedom of speech?
Besides, even setting up those suggestions are a mere suggestion so far...
I think the problem is that it's the Governments suggesting Caution. thus it's too close to it becomeing Government sponsored censorship.
Tactical Grace
09-02-2006, 21:32
*Points and laughs at all the Americans falling over themselves to believe something an EU guy said* :D
Cabra West
09-02-2006, 21:35
I think the problem is that it's the Governments suggesting Caution. thus it's too close to it becomeing Government sponsored censorship.

The EU is not a state yet, therefore the comission is not per se government. A suggestion by a comission can safely be ignored, I would say.
What I would like to know is, where is the difference to the 100 days of period of grace given to a new US president? Where is the difference to the restrictions put in place in the UK regarding reports on the royal family?
Jacques Derrida
09-02-2006, 21:44
The EU is not a state yet, therefore the comission is not per se government. A suggestion by a comission can safely be ignored, I would say.
What I would like to know is, where is the difference to the 100 days of period of grace given to a new US president? Where is the difference to the restrictions put in place in the UK regarding reports on the royal family?

The factortame cases would indicate otherwise.

There is no "100 days grace" given a US president, as Clinton discovered.

What reporting restrictions put in place about the royal family? Are you talking about D-notices, because that's voluntary scheme. And anyway, the last I heard they haven't been used for the royal family since the abdication crisis.
The Half-Hidden
09-02-2006, 23:33
No, but why should that stop us?

I'd say the Islamists are on their way to victory in Europe. Long live the jihad!
It sounds as if you want them to win. Quit being so defeatist.

A media code of conduct, even in the unlikely event of it actually being drawn up and passing, does not constitute anything more than a declaration. It certainly would not be law.

And shame on the ethically crippled, morally bankrupt, mental defectives that call themselves leftists in the west for supporting this.
I agree that there are many leftists who jump too quickly to defend Muslim fundamentalists (especially considering that fundies disagree with leftists on almost every issue) but I am a leftist who strongly opposes Muslim fundamentalism and supports free speech. Most leftists I have encountered in this debacle have come down on the side of the Danes. So it's not really that bad at all.
Myrmidonisia
09-02-2006, 23:47
It sounds as if you want them to win. Quit being so defeatist.

The Europeans have always preferred appeasement to confrontation. It's never worked.

A code of conduct that imposes censorship of speech is just a voluntary surrender of a right. The governments are more than anxious to take away rights and we shouldn't hasten that.
Europa Maxima
09-02-2006, 23:51
Yes. Spineless fucking quislings. The good people of the EU should rise up and ostracize these poltroons. Preferably to the middle east.

The battle for freedom of expresion has been long fought, and only just hard won. And these imbecilic fucks are now prepared to throw it all away because they are worried about upsetting a few atavistic pyschopathic troglodytes.

And shame on the ethically crippled, morally bankrupt, mental defectives that call themselves leftists in the west for supporting this. Once again we see that all those prinicipled stands of the last four decades were no more than empty rhetoric spawned by an underlying pyschotic hatred of western liberal values and ideals. I hope when the islamists are in charge, you all get your fitting sharia punishments.
Agreed. I hope this piece of legislation is torn apart. The EU can sometimes be extremely idiotic. That said, if all nations choose to ignore this charter, it may end up being nothing but a useless piece of toilet paper. The EU is turning itself into a pathetic PC officer.
Jacques Derrida
09-02-2006, 23:58
I agree that there are many leftists who jump too quickly to defend Muslim fundamentalists (especially considering that fundies disagree with leftists on almost every issue) but I am a leftist who strongly opposes Muslim fundamentalism and supports free speech. Most leftists I have encountered in this debacle have come down on the side of the Danes. So it's not really that bad at all.

Absolutely. That's why I said so-called. There are plenty of people who have the integrity and honesty to stand up for core principles such as this, regardless of the politics, and I respect them greatly for it.

It's the ones who pick and choose principles as needed to further their own goals - whatever they may be - that sicken me.
Terror Incognitia
09-02-2006, 23:59
Viewed charitably, this is an attempt to pour oil on troubled waters, by a figure with some right to speak for 'Europe'.

Viewed less charitably, it's an attempt by the EU to get themselves involved in the issue. And once they're involved, you can't get them out of it.

May just be woolly thinking by an ex-Second rate national politician packed off to Brussels like putting an animal out to pasture....

*Revealing too much of view of current EU administration and structure. Censored.*
Anarchic Christians
10-02-2006, 00:00
The Europeans have always preferred appeasement to confrontation. It's never worked.

Ah, so our well-known negotiations prior to the Crusades were a... Oh yeah there weren't any. or pretty much any other war barring WW2. Ad, if you didn't notice, Britain was utterly unready for war at the time. A year later, we were ready. If Attlee hadn't bought that time you, all of you arrogant pissants who didn't pay attention in history would be kotowing the the Nazis because they would be controlling the whole of Europe and had nukes and the ability to deliver them.
Europa Maxima
10-02-2006, 00:01
Ah, so our well-known negotiations prior to the Crusades were a... Oh yeah there weren't any. or pretty much any other war barring WW2. Ad, if you didn't notice, Britain was utterly unready for war at the time. A year later, we were ready. If Attlee hadn't bought that time you, all of you arrogant pissants who didn't pay attention in history would be kotowing the the Nazis because they would be controlling the whole of Europe and had nukes and the ability to deliver them.
Furthermore, I'd advise all Americans to read the Plot Against America and realise how close they were to appeasing themselves.
Athaulphia
10-02-2006, 00:11
Maybe the U.S. want to tell E.U. about free speech? The country that censored Rolling Stones in recent Superbowl? :eek: The country that bans photos of dead soldiers in Iraq? The country that kicked up a amazing (and ridiculous) fuss when Janet Jackson showed a breast? :gundge: Imagine how an hypothetical cover with i.e. a picture of Jesus with erect penis will hit the 'liberal' Bush's supporters...