Hee hee, I sometimes forget the non-American audience isn't entirely familiar with American culture.
Norman Rockwell was a famous painter during the WWII era. The painting I posted, "Freedom of Speech", is from his "Four Freedoms" collection intended to remind Americans of the values for which we were fighting -- and motivate them to buy war bonds. The importance of "Freedom of Speech" isn't the bonds but the speech.
So... a pointlessly emotive poster for this topic?
Piglet is banned in certain British government offices. Link:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article102182.ece
If they want to, "certain British government offices" can internally ban whatever they like. That doesn't mean they're forcing anything on anyone. If we're allowed to cite single internal examples and apply them to the whole country...
We're not going to let that happen here. Matt Stone and Trey Parker were censored by Comedy Central, but that is a private company. Our government has so far not capitulated. Furthermore it would be political suicide for any leader who suggested it.
Uh... our government didn't "capitulate". One council just went a bit far in the name of sensitivity.
The fact that mainstream Muslims give the provably bogus "biological weapons in Iraq" excuse to attack us is all I need to understand the "cycle of violence". They're attacking us for "crimes" they invented out of whole cloth -- but the "root cause" is obvious: we allow people like Salman Rushdie to live, to speak, and we protect people like him from people like them.
Author Salman Rushdie, who back before any of the so-called "crimes" and "human rights violations" we allegedly committed after the Cold War was threatened with death for criticizing Muhammad in a book he wrote called The Satanic Verses.
Looking at that provocation from the Muslim perspective, a critical facility for understanding the conflict I do agree, we dared to defy their Fatwah, and for that their God demands we must be punished.
Jesus Christ, have you ever even
met a Muslim? They're not all these crazed militants you imagine.
Salman Rushdie's fatwa was issued by the Iranian government, not by Islam as a whole.
So be it -- both of us have our values we're willing to fight for and they're mutually exclusive. Enough are willing to kill and die for their cause that we must be. Drones, missiles, troops, alliances to nations with compatible values, whatever it takes, freedom of speech is worth it. The lives of millions are not worth the banning of a single book, not worth the life of a single cartoonist, not worth censoring a single frame of South Park.
I like the idea that, somehow, by bombing farmers in Afghanistan, we're "protecting free speech".
But there is hope: the Strong Horse Theory predicts that if we fight hard enough long enough Muslim society will reform and adopt our ways. On the other hand, should that theory prove to be in error an aggressive policy eventually solves the problem anyway by eliminating all those who are causing it.
Strong Horse Theory fails then. Simple as that. Eliminating a billion innocent people is an even more retarded idea.
I mean... argh. How can you even begin to justify any Middle Eastern war in the name of free speech?