Wolf In Sheep's Clothing Condemns Jewish Report

The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) has strongly condemned the editor of the SA Jewish report for refusing to print Ronnie Kasrils’ reply to an opinion article written by Anthony Posner.

The controversy has been covered in the mainstream media with the Mail & Guardian, the Independent Group and 702 Talk Radio all quoting Jane Duncan from the Freedom of Expression Institute.

The M&G reported

Jane Duncan, director of the Freedom of Expression Institute, slammed Sifrin's decision. "The newspaper is engaging in contradictory behaviour by publishing an opinion piece posing questions and then denying the person to whom the questions are being put the right to answer them," Duncan said. The SAJR had the right to editorial independence, but this was qualified by normal editorial ethics, which included "the sacrosanct principle of the right to reply". She added that Sifrin had misrepresented Kasrils's response in his editorial. He said that the minister's comparison of Israelis with Nazis implied that Israel should be destroyed as an "evil entity". Most SAJR readers would regard this as hate speech. Kasrils has responded that he was only comparing "certain comparable measures" of the two states, such as collective punishment. … Duncan disputed the claim that Kasrils's article was "hate speech" as defined by the South African Constitution. To qualify as hate speech, the article would have had to incite people to cause harm.

It seems quite appropriate to contact the Freedom of Expression for their views on this controversy doesn’t it? I had no issues with this. That is, until Posner himself pointed out the fevered anti-Western conspiracy theorist views held by their Executive Director Jane Duncan.

In an article against legislation that would outlaw hate speech, Duncan argues that we should not ban religious hate speech because the political and economic hegemony of US imperialism shapes a reality in which some religions are more equal than others. Islam of course suffers the most due to the inherent bias of Zionist interpretations of Judaism.

Her article reads like an anti-establishment uber-left student rag.

The reality is that in the current international political context, some religions are more equal than others: a reality that is shaped by the political and economic hegemony of US imperialism. US President George Bush was elected back to office by a strong right wing Christian lobby in a particular alliance with powerful Zionist interests. US foreign policy is based on maintaining control over strategic oil supplies and ensuring the hegemony of the dollar, leading to oil wars in countries like Iraq, its propping up of regimes in the Middle East as buffer states, including Israel. This international political environment has led to an inherent bias towards certain religions or theological interpretations of those religions (such as the ascendence of the Zionist interpretation of Judaism), and a denigration of other religious streams as 'other', outside mainstream civilization or as inherently violent, irrational or dangerous. Islam especially has become a target, given the fact that Muslims are present in large numbers on countries where the US is fighting its oil wars. The asendence of the right in Europe has also created fertile ground for Islamophobia, which in turn was the context that gave rise to the Danish cartoons. (Ed- We agree that some religions are more equal than others.)

Given these nakedly revealed biases, should the mainstream media be relying on Jane Duncan as an impartial observer to cast judgement on Sifrin’s refusal to publish the Kasrils reply?

Update
The Sunday Papers just wouldn't be the same without the obligatory letter from Kasrils.

Comments

[gersh]

I don;t know the answer to this. But I think there may be some interesting hypocracies lying if 1 compared Duncan's comments in the M&G to her comments when the Mohammed cartoon fiasco was being conducted.

[ANTHONY POSNER]

Diane,
Geoff Sifrin was interviewed by Maariv on Sunday about this story.
Perhaps you can let us know if it has appeared in the paper.

I totally agree

[the Hebrew prophet]

Why doesn,t Jane Duncan visit the former East Berlin
and do dome interviews now that freedom of speech is allowed,maybe she will get a better picture of what constitutes hate speech and freedom of speech?