Home Viet Nam Human Rights » Analysis-Comment » When national security threaten by “freedom of speech” (Part 2 and end)

When national security threaten by “freedom of speech” (Part 2 and end)

2/2/15

America and the West are also divided because opinion about the limits of free speech after the terrorist attacks. New York Times - one of many Western journalists do not reprint the cartoons of Charlie Hebdo after the massacre occurred. Many New York Times readers got angry that their newspaper is cowardice, lack of solidarity with Charlie Hebdo and freedom of speech. To explain this issue, New York Times issued an article titled “I Am Not Charlie Hebdo” which said that “Freedom of speech but should respect the beliefs of others”. Henri Roussel, 80 years old, the founder of Charlie Hebdo newspaper in 1970, wrote to the deceased editor: “Do I really against you”. Nouvel Obs Magazine also post an article “I know  Roussel’s unfinished work” immediately after the terrorist attacks in Delfeil de Ton pseudonym. It said: "What was the possible thing for him to call all team into the hype of it”. Contents of the paper showed that Mr. Roussel disagreed with Charlie Hebdo magazine when it was turned into an agency of Islamic opposing and Zionism following. On January 7th, Financial Times (UK) said that Charlie Hebdo has long been inclined “ridicule, aggression and provocation” Muslims through the cartoons, Charlie Hebdo is not worth the acclamations protecting freedom of speech for them.
Every ethnic group has their own views of value. With the Muslim, Prophet Mohammed is worth more than ten thousand times human lives. So Charlie Hebdo in their eyes as one of the “spiritual terrorists”. It is the same conceptions of the West about al-Qaeda is a terrorist organization. Muslims currently account for 10% of France's population, but 30% of children under 20 years old in France are Muslim. Birth rate of Muslims in France from four to five, while the French just under 1.5, much fewer than needed ratio to maintain. Whether the prospect of Islamic domination over France as in the book of M.Houellebecq announced recently is right or not? Now, more than 400 French people joined the IS are living or return to their homeland to blend into whether be a threat to national security, standing between the two extremes of Islam fanatics and free-speech fanatics?
After the terrorist attacks, while many people in Western countries down the road to indicate solidarity and support Charlie Hebdo magazine,  many others in Muslim countries like the Philistines, Turkey… took to the streets to protest Charlie Hebdo magazine with messages such as "Freedom of speech is not to offend the gods and great prophet of Allah”. Nasr al-Ansi, a leader of al-Qaeda claimed responsibility on service and considered the offensive into Charlie Hebdo to “avenge for the Prophet”, he also warned France would suffer more “tragedy and terrorist attacks” if governments' colluded with the reason for “press freedom” or “freedom of thought”... Al-Ansi and many extremist groups, Islamic terrorism urged young Muslims to rebel and described the progress of the case as “a turning point in the history of confrontation”. Currently, the security not only in France but also the United States and many Western countries placed in the highest state of alert, the risk of further terrorist attacks could break out in anywhere on this continent like the “timer bomb”... Is that a sign to show that the terrorist attack a newspaper will into a strong conflict between the West and the Muslim world?
Scholars have commented that it can not fight against extremists with radical thinking. No one favor to use violence and terror. This action is worth condemning and bearing the punishment of the law but to take things from many different respects if there is no humane solution, the conflict will explode or would like a smoldering timer bombs.
Tragedy at Charlie Hebdo editorial and security risk raises the question: When does the statement or sarcasm beyond limit have become provocative, even incite hatred as well as those words can be “encouraged” in the name of protecting freedom of speech or not? And today, more and more voices require limits to restrict the actions of those who support and cheer for freedom of speech excessively.







Chia sẻ bài viết ^^
Other post

All comments [ 10 ]


Me Too! 9/2/15 15:22

Vietnam has made recorded great progress in freedom of press and speech, contributing to promoting human rights.

Vietnam Love 9/2/15 15:23

In order to ensure that its communications systems grow on a par with social development, besides regulations in the Constitution and Press Law, the State has made a point to creating favorable conditions for the mass media to perform their function and expanding freedom of speech and press.

Voice of people 9/2/15 15:24

The development of the press has met people’s demand to expand their knowledge, create forums for social organizations and people to discuss and criticize the State’s guidelines, improve democracy, and protect and promote human rights.

Socialist Society 9/2/15 15:37

In most cases, the mass media is a tool to protect social interests and citizen rights and supervise the implementation of law and policies.

For A Peace World 9/2/15 15:38

Many press agencies have engaged in investigating and fighting corruption and criticizing violations of citizen rights and negative social phenomenon.

John Smith 9/2/15 15:39

The mass media has reported to the people discussions on national key issues and reflected their viewpoints.

Gentle Moon 9/2/15 15:40

Freedom of speech and press is an important factor in national stability and development.

LawrenceSamuels 9/2/15 15:41

It’s the direct reflection of a national human rights policy.

Red Star 9/2/15 15:47

The Vietnamese government has fully abided by the International Declaration on Human Rights and the UN Convention on Civil and Political Rights.

yobro yobro 9/2/15 15:49

The Vietnamese government has fully abided by the International Declaration on Human Rights and the UN Convention on Civil and Political Rights.

Your comments