tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3060534295892170518.post1451887056798064493..comments2024-02-06T18:46:04.220+10:00Comments on Real World Libertarian: FairnessJim Fryarhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15780237902858889143noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3060534295892170518.post-64746003327539364852007-05-09T19:54:00.000+10:002007-05-09T19:54:00.000+10:00Thanks BenThe reason I wrote the post was out of c...Thanks Ben<BR/>The reason I wrote the post was out of concern at the types of reporting I see. Some of it is fair, some of it is exaggerated, some is just wrong, some is sensationalised, and some is inflammatory.<BR/><BR/>I was reading a post on another site, which gave eight examples of “Muslims offended by”, which on follow-up resulted in; 1 was an action by the Chinese government, 4 were ridiculous complaints by Muslims, 2 others were the same but were opposed by clerics, 1 was the sort of thing that you mentioned, a passport photo rejected in England, by the post office. It was of a child with bare shoulders, which the mother was told, “could offend Muslims”, however the passport office maintains that this is not in their guidelines, and the official was wrong.<BR/><BR/>My main beef is that there appears to be reluctance in the media to report the Muslim aspect of crime, which seems to be a form of voluntary censorship. Eric Dondero has detailed this phenomenon several times on Libertarian Republican. My post on the BBC below is I feel another example, but it has more of a political element to it.<BR/><BR/>My post below on Multiculturalism is on my analysis, partly ridiculous complaints by Muslims, partly lefty bias in doing the survey, partly government waste, and partly poor reporting. The headline was ”ANZAC DAY MAY OFFEND MUSLIMS”, where I feel that given the content it should have been lower key.<BR/><BR/>The headline for a lot of people is the sets the “colour” of the story.<BR/><BR/>The sample was very small, only part of that was Muslim, an Islamic cleric disagreed with it, I mean it probably deserved reporting but didn’t deserve the prominence.<BR/><BR/>My position is;<BR/>1. I am seriously concerned by radical Islam,<BR/>2. I am concerned by inflammatory reporting (mostly on the internet),<BR/>3. I am concerned by “voluntary censorship”, - We need the facts.<BR/>4. I am concerned by the “we mustn’t offend them attitude.<BR/><BR/>We have to have a balance, the radical elements need to be confronted, our culture should be defended against bigots, but we must do this in such a way as to avoid driving a wedge between ourselves, and the peaceful elements. To do this we must have accurate information, we must extend goodwill toward moderate Islam, and we must reciprocate when they offer it to us.Jim Fryarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15780237902858889143noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3060534295892170518.post-72497030697488964562007-05-09T10:22:00.000+10:002007-05-09T10:22:00.000+10:00Jim do you have any examples of lefties intervenin...Jim do you have any examples of lefties intervening in such a fashion? This is something I would be very keen to oppose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3060534295892170518.post-70923476350869095732007-05-07T04:12:00.000+10:002007-05-07T04:12:00.000+10:00It concerns me that if the first group are correct...<I>It concerns me that if the first group are correct, then in the context of the group, the zealots have the “moral high ground” and ultimately the moderates must submit to them.</I><BR/><BR/>The same thing could be said about the Christian right in the USA who would like to impose their fundamentalism on society. Fortunately our culture is so secular that they don't have a chance but unfortunately most Muslim nations do not have a secular culture. Still, there's some hope - look at Turkey.Jouberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04970872086435575755noreply@blogger.com