Dave Smith > wrote in
:

> It wasn't Denmark that did it. It was the decision of the editors
> of one newspaper in Denmark. The Danish government would not act
> because it is a matter of freedom of speech.

However it may appear, when a diplomatic request is made, it is rarely
made to a newspaper. It usually goes to the government. The
government CAN speak in the name of its citiens, or at least that is
usually the case. Couching this as a freedom of speech issue does not
obviate the fact that it was the Danish government who was asked
diplomatically and refused. A diplomatic solution usually prevents
outbreaks of this sort...usually.

> It should be noted that the issue had
> been resolved to the satisfaction of Danish Moslems when the
> newspaper printed an apology a week ago. Newspapers in other
> countries ran the cartoons.

And the publisher of France-Soir fired the editor who published them.
At this point, it was no longer freedom of speech, it was hate
literature.

> Then there are the stories about some imams having been
> responsible for altering or making new and more offensive cartoons
> for distribution.

I suspect not. Probably a CNN canular. I doubt imams would risk being
found in breach of the law forbidding representation of living
creatures simply to get rise out of the crowd. That does not seem
plausible.

--

"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why
the poor have no food, they call me a communist."

Dom Helder Camara