Elmasry and free speech

Mohamed Elmasry's desire for the elimination of Israel (not to mention the elimination of Israelis) is well-known, so I can't say I was shocked by his glowing review, in The Muslim Observer, of a book calling for a "one-state" solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict. (Wink, wink.)

I was taken aback by his final paragraphs, however:

You’d think that a man as versatile and gifted as Kovel would receive front page coverage in American and Canadian media about his book, which was published in 2007.

But this did not happen in our so-called “free” press and broadcasting networks, because these systems are free only to those who own them and use their power to express their own views. And that is a sad loss for everyone. [emphasis added; via Blazing Cat Fur]

Translation: the owners of newspapers, magazines and TV stations (not to mention websites and blogs, I presume) should not be allowed to determine their content. Indeed, this is the very basis for Elmasry's human-rights complaints against Maclean's - he (and his sock puppets) were allegedly denied the inalienable human right to have the magazine publish their response to Mark Steyn's book excerpt.

Mohamed Elmasry's idea of a "free press" is one in which publishers should be forced to publish content mandated by the state - and/or by enlightened human-rights activists like Mohamed Elmasry. (I bet there's an exception for The Muslim Observer and similar publications, though.)

Here's a tip for Elmasry: if you don't want to be called an "Islamofascist," stop acting like a fascist.

Damian P.

Posted by damian at April 25, 2008 11:12 AM