Fight for free speech

Editorial

The question has arisen more than once: Why hasn't the Jewish Independent reprinted the Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that have sparked protests and violent incidents around the world? The short answer is, Why would we?

The months-old cartoons are not news; even the weeks-old reaction to them is not news. However, the ramifications of the cartoons' publication are still being felt and they have an impact on Jews around the world. As well, two Canadian journals with Jewish connections – Calgary's Jewish Free Press and that city's Western Standard – recently republished the cartoons. For these reasons, the Independent's cover story is on this topic; yet still, the article does not contain the offending images. Anyone who is interested in them can find them readily on the Internet.

Of the newspapers that have opted to run the cartoons, the main stated reason for doing so has been that free speech is a key value in "our" society and it must be protected (apparently, at all costs). The quotes around "our" are intentional: they emphasize the prevalent notion that the reaction to the Mohammed images has been so extreme and incomprehensible to westerners that the clash of civilizations – the "Western world" versus the "Muslim world" – has begun.

We at the Independent certainly do not condone the protesters' violent expressions of anger over the cartoons – and we recently ran an editorial on that subject. We also condemn any attempts by anyone to limit the freedom of the press and will stand up for our right to print whatever material we deem important to the Jewish community in British Columbia. In all honesty, we even may have chosen to print an original cartoon with a similar message to the Danish ones, which was the decrying of homicide bombers and their ostensibly spiritual motives. However, we would not have selected one that depicted Mohammed negatively. Likewise, if we wished to comment on an issue such as the national Conservative party's alleged Christian right leanings, we would not select a cartoon that portrayed Jesus distastefully.

To some people, it may seem hypocritical that we would defend someone else's right to run such cartoons – which we do – while at the same time not running them ourselves. It is not fear of reprisal that keeps us from publishing potentially offensive religious-based material and we have done so inadvertently; a recent Chanukah "humor" article based on the stereotypical differences between Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews being an example. In general, we try to operate by guidelines we consider appropriate for a Jewish newspaper; keeping in mind the admonitions against loshon horah (gossip) and the mission of the Jewish people to be a light unto the nations.

It is true that some in the "Muslim world" regularly produce and disseminate disgusting, anti-Semitic cartoons, writings, TV shows and other material. We don't believe this fact gives us the right to "stick it to 'them'" by printing our own derogatory material. We self-censor all the time at the Independent in an effort not only to conform to Canada's laws, but to not overly offend our readers. To print the Danish cartoons with the justification that we will not be censored would be hypocritical; applying a different set of rules simply because the community in question is not our own.

If there were any educational value to be gained from publishing the cartoons, we would do it. We have reprinted anti-Semitic comments from the likes of the late Doug Collins in order to inform the community of a potential threat. It would be ironic, to say the least, if anyone who disagreed with our publishing of Collins's statements is now disappointed that we won't publish the Danish cartoons.

The Jewish Free Press ostensibly tried to give context to the controversy by showing the cartoons in question, as well as examples where Prophet Mohammed had been depicted in art without mass uprisings and some of the anti-Semitic cartoons that have been published in the Muslim press. Unfortunately, the manner in which the editorial content was written belied any notion of educational intent. For example, below the headline of "First, they came for the cartoonists ..." is a warning for readers who are easily offended "or afraid of freedom of speech, [to] put this paper away. Watch television or go shopping."

The rhetoric from the Western Standard has been no less antagonistic and, frankly, childish. Fear-mongering and exaggeration may sell more newspapers, but it doesn't enlighten readers and it doesn't improve a distressing situation.

Is our future freedom at risk because we chose not to publish the Danish cartoons? Hardly. We are not afraid to discuss such issues openly. We will fight bitterly for the many liberties we are privileged to have in Canada, one of which is the freedom to print more or less what we choose. Extremists who try to scare us into not printing certain material will be as unsuccessful as those who try to scare us into printing that same material.

^TOP