Response to Guardian article

My letter to The Guardian in response to this article

Mr Dworkin

Your article contradicts itself. One one hand, you tell us that it was right for "The British Media" (funny, but I was led to believe they were a group of newspapers committed to some sort of rivalry when persuing the truth) to not publish the cartoons because "Reprinting would very likely have meant more people killed and more property destroyed..."

Really? So the destruction would have been the responsibility of the newspapers, and not the actual people setting the fires, turning over the cars and such?

I'm not Muslim. I don't choose to be offended by the sight of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban. Were I in a Muslim country, I'd certain respect the customs of that country. If I were a woman I'd certainly be covering myself up in public, as is the custom in Saudi Arabia, for example.

But The UK isn't Saudi Arabia. It's Britain, and we have our own customs. One of these is the freedom of expression. And that means freedom of expression in our media.

At ALL costs.

Your article is implying that freedom of speech isn't something that's worth dying for. On the contrary - it's something that many people - incuding members of my own family - were prepared to die for in World War Two.

When Islam, and Muslims, allow me - an "infidel" into Mecca, then I might be a little less reluctant to give up my own customs in my own country.

And before we start shouting "racism", let's not forget that Islam is only a belief system - not a race. Any belief system is perfectly open to criticism and should be at all times, and in whatever way is needed.

Personally, I'm very tired of treading on eggshells for someone's belief system. I've never expected anyone to tread on eggshells for mine - that'w precisely what free speech is about.

To paraphrace Pater Neimoller: "At first they came for the cartoonists..."

Jack Lee