\
To the Editor:
In his critique of the refusal by a U.S.-based Internet service provider to automatically provide an outlet for a film by Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders that has been described as demonizing the Muslim religion, U.S. Representative Peter Hoekstra eloquently describes the vital importance of safeguarding our country's foundational right to freedom of expression ("Islam and Free Speech," March 26). However, he completely ignores the actual reason given by the service provider, and wrongly suggests that the decision resulted from being "bullied" by the threat of a violent reaction from "radical jihadists."
While Mr. Wilders has an absolute right to express his views in any medium he chooses, likewise, the private company he contracted with to provide the platform to disseminate those views has a right to place conditions on what views it is willing to permit its facilities to be used for distribution.
The essential rights guaranteed under our Constitution have always been accompanied by basic societal obligations and responsibilities. Mr. Wilders' hate-filled rhetoric about Islam is well-known and there is no reason to simply ignore that fact. The Internet service provider acted responsibly by asking to review the planned content prior to its appearance on its site to determine whether the content violates the provider's policy. Their Acceptable Use Policy prohibits "material that is obscene, defamatory, libelous, unlawful, harassing, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, constitutes an illegal threat, violates export control laws, hate propaganda, fraudulent material or fraudulent activity, invasive of privacy or publicity rights, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable material of any kind or nature." When Mr. Wilders entered into a contract for the Internet services, he agreed to this policy.
Just because the medium is the Internet, we are not required to toss aside basic societal norms of human conduct and suspend the use of thoughtful judgment in evaluating whether we want to be associated with a particular expression that crosses the boundaries of acceptable behavior.
Sincerely,Anti-Defamation League
http://www.adl.org/media_watch/newspapers/20080327-WSJ+Letter+.htm
Well you guys voted for Obama because he promissed change, here is part of it. Here is what your chocolate messiah thinks about the bill of rights. Enjoy it dumbasses.
ReplyDelete