On Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:13:57 -0600, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>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.

That's what the diplomats are for- to take care of such sticky
situations. It's hard to believe that the Danes couldn't have come up
with suitable diplomatic mumbo-jumbo to diffuse the situation or at
least pretend that they have some appreciation for the sensibilities
of other people.

Sue(tm)
Lead me not into temptation... I can find it myself!