Comments on: Censorship at Index on Censorship

By: Stuart H.

Stuart H. — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 14:34:58 +0000

Sorry, but this is hardly suprising. IOC have a pretty poor record anyway when it comes to covering the ‘censorship’ of any views other than those expressed by upmarket intellectuals.
I know of a number of cases that have been reported to them concerning, say, work from the comic book and avant-pulp fiction boom after punk, writings by prisoners, pieces appearing in small independent mags in the 1980′s and 1990′s – not a jot of interest, not even the courtesy of a reply to the informants.
I’d go further than Shaun. It’s not just the lack of backbone when it comes to state or religious censorship, it’s the total inability to recognise that anyone outside of an Oxbridge mutual backslapping society writes, or has a worthwhile opinion on anything, when, if anything, the opposite might be the case.

By: Angela_K

Angela_K — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 09:41:39 +0000

I seem to remember that it was Winston Churchill who said something about feeding a crocodile in the hope that it wouldn’t eat him too.

Appeasement never works.

By: Shaun Hollingworth

Shaun Hollingworth — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:21:03 +0000

It would have been better for them not to cover this story AT ALL rather than their censoring the cartoons. Doing that at least, would not have damaged their reputation as we probably would not have known about it in the first place.

However their position as an anti-censorship mag has now become untenable in my opinion. Indeed personally I didn’t rate it before, and stopped subscribing years ago. As a force against state and religious censorship, I thought it was completely and utterely ineffective.

Sites like this one, and the Melon Farmers seem to me, to have more influence than IOC and its witterings.

By: Stonyground

Stonyground — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:23:29 +0000

There are those of us who wish to see a separation between religion and politics and thus a level playing field between all citizens, completely disregarding what religion, if any, they hold. We now know how to acheive our aims. Simply kill people at random and threaten to continue to do so until all powers, secular and sacred capitulate before us. Judging by their recent, craven behaviour this shouldn’t take very long.

Count me out though, I’m afraid that killing people at random is completely out of order as far as my infidel belief system is concerned. So I will just have to rely upon other secularists who think that killing people at random is ok, I’m sure that there must be lots of them out there.

By: Derek Pasquill

Derek Pasquill — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:44:17 +0000

The credibility of the IoC is badly damaged. The Board, with the exception of Kenan Malik of course, should resign now.

By: Stuart

Stuart — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:33:53 +0000

Disgusting, cowardly and pathetic…

By: Ophelia Benson

Ophelia Benson — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 01:32:17 +0000

Kenan Malik is the best. So is Monitor. Index on Censorship is pathetic.

By: Sherry Jones

Sherry Jones — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:48:30 +0000

Kudos to you for publishing the offending cartoons! I should have listed you as a “hero,” too on my blog post lamenting the dwindling number of them. If you’re interested, you can find it at http://authorsherryjones.com/blogs/

Sherry Jones
author, “The Jewel of Medina” and “The Sword of Medina”

By: Shatterface

Shatterface — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:41:13 +0000

Malik, as usual, has responded with consistancy and integrity. I’m shocked by the rest.

‘Internalising the Fatwah’ is spot-on.