Europe’s double standards [Archives:2006/931/Community]
Imran Khan
[email protected]
On February 20th , 2006 an Austrian court sentenced British historian David Irving to three years in prison for denying the Holocaust. He made that denial during 1989 in two speeches in Austria. Though he changed his views, the court was not convinced. The judge said in quote, “The court did not consider the defendant to have genuinely changed his mind.” Mr. Irving, 67 years old, was arrested in November of 2005 when he arrived in Austria… This decision clearly shows that in Europe there are limitations to expressing anything and freedom to express does not mean to say anything anyone wants.
But why are there double standards in Europe? All of Europe was quick to jump to the conclusion against blasphemous cartoons of Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him) -that it was not wrong. Millions of Muslims around the world considered it an insult to their religion and are still protesting it. Mr. Anders Fogh Rasmussen, the Danish prime minister has refused again and again to apologize for the publication of the cartoons of Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him), insisting that the government has no control over the media and freedom of expression is fundamental in Denmark. To show solidarity in the name of freedom of expression, many European newspapers including Austrian papers also published those caricatures. Will the Danish Prime Minister and those newspapers show the same courage by criticizing the Austrian court verdict? After all it is also a case of freedom of speech. Mr. David Irving may be wrong to deny the Holocaust, but according to Europe's standards of fundamental free press, why has he been pleading guilty for saying something? On the other hand, does it mean one must be aware in Europe about not saying anything against the Holocaust because you can punished, but on the other hand you can say anything against any religion in the name of free press?
Some people say this issue has nothing do with freedom of speech, and everything to do with history. If someone is trying to change history, then it is a crime and must be punished as Mr. Irving is now experiencing. Well then let us analyze this issue and compare it with the cartoon row against Prophet Mohammad (Peace be upon him). He is a historical figure and Prophet of Islam. He was not a cruel person and he never ordered the killing of innocent people. If someone tries to link wrong things with him, is it not an action to change history or realities?
Islam was not born in recent days; it is a religion which is more than 1,400 years old. So if the Holocaust was a historical event, then every prophet is also a part of history and made history. If denial of history is a crime, it must be associated with all historical events.
To avoid confrontation with other religions, Europe must have the standards to judge freedom of expression and where the limit ends. If in Europe, freedom of expression has boundaries, then it must not only be used in the case of the Holocaust. The widening gap between Islam and Europe could be filled with equality and justice. I am sure things are not so bad that we can say that we are on the verge of a clash of civilizations.
——
[archive-e:931-v:14-y:2006-d:2006-03-23-p:community]
