Not long ago I was contacted by a representative of the Ayn Rand Institute and invited to be part of a panel discussion, "Free Speech and the Danish Cartoons," which was to be held at NYU. Unfortunately I was unable to take part, but the panel will include Andrew Bostom, editor of The Legacy of Jihad. And it looks as if they will have a lot to talk about, because NYU is not letting them display the cartoons as they discuss them.
"NYU Surrenders to the Heckler’s Veto in Mohammed Cartoon Dispute," a press release from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education:
NEW YORK, March 29, 2006—In violation of its own policies, New York University (NYU) is refusing to allow a student group to show the Danish cartoons of Mohammed at a public event tonight. Even though the purpose of the event is to show and discuss the cartoons, an administrator has suddenly ordered the students either not to display them or to exclude 150 off-campus guests from attending. The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is urging NYU’s president to reverse course and stand up for freedom of speech.“NYU’s actions are inexcusable,” declared FIRE President Greg Lukianoff, who is slated to speak at the event. “The very purpose of this event is to discuss the cartoons that are at the center of a global controversy. To say that students cannot show them if they wish to engage anyone outside the NYU community is both chilling and absurd. The fact that expression might provoke a strong reaction is a reason to protect it, not an excuse to punish it.”
Earlier this month, the NYU Objectivist Club decided to hold a panel discussion entitled “Free Speech and the Danish Cartoons,” at which the cartoons will be displayed. Similar events, sponsored by the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI), have taken place on several other campuses. Like previous NYU Objectivist Club events, the discussion was to be open to the public.
However, on Monday afternoon, NYU Director of Student Activities Robert Butler sent an e-mail requesting a meeting with the leaders of the Objectivist Club the next day. He also informed them that NYU would now “require that this event be open only to members of the NYU community.” Butler cited “the campus climate and controversy surrounding the cartoons,” ordering the students to inform the “non-NYU people” who had already registered that they “should not plan on attending.” He concluded, “This is not negotiable.”
Following the meeting, Butler sent another e-mail clarifying that the students have two choices: they must either not display the cartoons, or not allow anyone from off campus to attend the event. Approximately 150 off-campus guests are currently registered to attend.
“This is a classic case of the heckler’s veto,” noted FIRE’s Lukianoff. “NYU is shamelessly clamping down on an event purely out of fear that people who disagree with the viewpoints expressed may disrupt it. These immoral, last-minute restrictions must be lifted.”
FIRE was informed of NYU’s actions just yesterday. Hours later, Lukianoff called NYU President John Sexton to remind him that NYU’s own policies recognize student groups’ right to open events to the public and proclaim that “the use of physical force or other disruptive means to obstruct and restrain speakers” is “destructive of the pursuit of inquiry and learning in a free and democratic society.” FIRE has not yet received a response.
NYU’s actions notwithstanding, Lukianoff still plans to speak at the event, which will take place at 7 p.m. tonight in the Eisner and Lubin Auditorium of NYU’s Kimmel Center.
FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation’s colleges and universities. FIRE’s efforts to preserve freedom of expression on college campuses across the country during the cartoon controversy can be viewed at thefire.org/cartoons.
CONTACT:
Greg Lukianoff, President, FIRE: 215-717-3473; greg_lukianoff@thefire.org
Yaron Brook, President, ARI: 408-206-7756; ybrook@aynrand.org
John Sexton, President, NYU: 212-998-2345; john.sexton@nyu.edu
Robert Butler, Director of Student Activities, NYU: 212-998-4718; bob.butler@nyu.edu
This is nauseating. I can't quite believe what I am reading.
Does this mean they've won?
"Does this mean they've won?"
Apparently
What else would you expect from a liberal bureaucrat?
This is a tough issue. Why? Because freedom of speech and respect for the beliefs of others must be balanced. You should be free to speak, but if you are influential ( such as television station or newspaper ) you need to balance that with responsibility for the effects of your speech.
A common example of this is the person who screams "Fire!" in a crowded movie theatre. What if the audience runs out of the theatre, and someone gets injured? What if there was no fire? What if the audience sues the theatre or asks for their money back after this incident? Was the person who screamed 'wrong'? Is he responsible for damages? Should he perhaps not have screamed 'fire', even though free speech allows him to?
Difficult questions. In my opinion, do not make fun of anyone's religion in a public forum. You can discuss it as in an adult, professional matter, but that would be the extent.
Frankly it is not suprising in the first place that the famous Mohammed cartoons came out in the first place. They represented a form of a payback for all the anti-Jewish and anit-Christian political cartoons produced in a number Arab/Muslim countries. The cartoons have served as a " backlash ".
Fortezza-
You are so right... take me for example - my religion is cannibalism. I believe it is the my sacred duty to eat the babies of non-cannibals.
You have no right to make fun of my religion by making cartoons about people eating babies. I am very hurt by this. I am so hurt I will eat your babies.
I know the above sounds stupid but not as stupid as your 'fire' analogy. Funny how everyone uses the 'fire in a movie theatre' analogy about the cartoon insanity. That moslems go totally bonkers at the drop of a hat is the point.
As a matter of fact this is 'racist' to use this analogy. You are characterizing Moslems as 'excitable and unreasoning'. Excitable!! Unreasonable!! Is THAT how you see us! You racist pig! (This is beginning to seem like a Groucho routine).
This is not a tough issue. Nor is it hard to say.
F R E E D O M OF S P E E C H
The only ones who disagree are the ones who've never had it, don't know it, or are embarrassed by the truth being told by it.
You that disagree, do not own us. We are not your children. And if you want to live in this country, realize that we have freedoms and the bottom line is.....deal with it.
If I were at NYU, here's what I'd do...
First, run off several hundred copies of the cartoons and simply pass them out to anyone that shows up. That way they're not being officially displayed by anybody buit everyone present still gets to see them.
When NYU officials asked us to leave (as I'm sure they would) we'd go out side and put them on parked cars.
Fight censorship with more free speech!
You know. We need to remind ourselves how we all felt on 9/11 instead of slumping into apathy. The spirit of Mohammed is not sleeping and it will stay awake and feed until it drowns us all in blood.
PJ