for the somali write. we somali has been always free to say what we went to so,please do not use somali name when you write about even. thank you.

san jose ca.

p.s 24 for year in u.s and america somali/amercan muslem.

Somalis know Bashir Goth. He was a puppet and a hardline supporter of the heinous Somali dictator. He used to call the last Somali Dictator a prophet; He used to call the rebels against him, "evil incarnate".

Now he is telling us that he supported the "Rebels against Siad Barre". When it become, norm and popular to blame Siad Barre, he is telling us that he wrote a poem against him! It is like listening a Gestapo propagandist, saying he was against Hitler!

This guy is a moron a hired gun!

If this is the kind of people you are giving a platform, No wonder why your reporting is viewed as biased in the Islamic world!

A simple deduction, if you get Bashir Goth to comment on free press on Islam. Then what about the rest of the group?! Are they like Bashir Goth?

The logic is simple. Islamic extremists are the epitome of evil, but please find someone credible to comment on them!

About the previous writer, you are a one-sided and baised soul, perhaps brimming with flaming clannish anger. Your critiism has no substance. What you wrote is nothing more than a meanless harangue. You seem to know nothing about Bashir. Bashir came from a highly educated family, literary, democratic and scholarly culture. He came from an open -minded culture where people reason, discuss, reflect and debate issues and listen to each other. Moreover, Bashir is somebody who have extensively wrote about a multiplicity of issues ranging from culture, literature, poetry, Islam and a number of other issues. Bashir never shrank to expose the truth and the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, even if it offends powerful people. For you information, Bashir happen to be the son of a well-known Jami-at-Al-Ashar trained (University)academic in Islamic Jurispudence and Exigies, " Honorable Shiekh Omar Goth" (may Allah bless his soul). In conclusion Bashir is also a product of the cities of lights, Mudin Al-Masajid-ancient twin cities of "Sayla-Awdal" and "Adarri-Harar". Those kind of unreasonable and baseless arguments, may be what is wrong with the Somali-speaking culture.

Well said.

It is now a trend to say Muslims are not Human Beings! That is exactly a quote from Bashir Goth's posting. Would the Washington Post allow him to say "In the Jewish world you cease to be a human being." ? Would the Washington Post allow him to say "In the Christian world you cease to be a human being." ?

We have seen this film before, Bashir is trying the Ayan Hersi method of making money by insulting us. This says more about the Washington Post enabling bigotry than Bashir's attempt to claim he is fighting for freedom

People Like Bashir who bad mouth about the culture, counry and religion don't go that far. Muslim religion has given so much freedom that we can use.
Thanks

Wow. I had imagined that it might be like this, but never heard it so vividly. If it is even half like this, the repression is horrible. How cowardly and fearful the people must be who live in these environments. They are missing out on the wonderful world that is around them.

The author of the comments "It is now a trend to say Muslims are not Human Beings! ...fighting for freedom." has confirmed what Goth was talking about. Freedom of speech means the freedom to express your opinion, even if what you say is unpopular. How ironic would it be to censure an article about freedom of speech?! The Washington Post is actually practicing what it preaches, by publishing views regardless of whether they might offend others. It is also important to note that the Washington Post doesn't censure the comments of those who disagree with Goth (even if their comments are ignorant or illogical), because the Post, like all tolerant, intelligent and inquiring individuals, is willing to listen to the opinions of even those they disagree with. Sadly, there seem too few of us in the world willing to do that, and of late, few of them seem to live in the Moslem world.

So why was the Washington Post editorial criticizing Iranian President Ahmedinejad for? Coming Washington Post there are taboos and nothing can be said about certain people while Islam is a free for all! This is the epitome of Hypocracy

Freedom of speech in the U.S. may occasionally be repressed, but we have groups that fight against that...their lives are not threatened, nor are they punished with jail time.

In many Arabic countries, you can be beheaded or shot for unpopular opinions. A very recent example (yesterday) is Safia Ama Jan, who campaigned for equal rights for women in Afghanistan. She was gunned down by two cowards who fled on a motorbike. They could not defeat her words, so they took her life.

This happens every day around the world, not just in Arab states but in many other countries for many different reasons. If nothing else, this should remind Americans that we enjoy a freedom that we sometimes take for granted.

May Ms. Ama Jan and all other who have been killed in the name of equality and justice rest in peace. May their murderers know justice, in this life and the next.

The Washington Post has warns those commenting that " ...... User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site." This is censorship too! Bashir can insult Muslims but the Washington Post will censor any "profanity or personal attacks" against him. There is always censorship. Anti-Semitic comments I am sure would be censored but Anti-Islamic comments are freedom of expression according to the Washington Post. If that is not hypocracy and dishonest then I don't know what is!

What taboos does the Post have?! They have editorials that criticize the Bush administration and articles that depict the Bush-backed Iraqi government negatively. They have published articles that portray all manner of Christian churches in unflattering ways and publish in the "Letter to the Editor" section comments critical of every politician, world leader, religious group and government you can think of. Last spring alone there was an article that portrayed a Jewish sect in New York as being petty and intolerant, and an opinion piece in the editorial section that called the creation of Israel "a historical mistake". What taboos? Pro-pedophilia articles are the only things the Post hasn't published yet.

"If it takes a village to raise a child in Africa, it takes a community to kill a writer, artist and a journalist in the Muslim world."

As 1,300 years of history (and counting) continues to attest: Islam has proven a culturally unsustainable ideology. Its internally violent message induces adherents to destroy other cultures, then consume themselves from within. Hopefully, this global social problem can be solved externally, soon.

Mohamed--

Is Bashir insulting Muslims or is he telling the truth? Or both?

In any part of the world, extremists are those who never want to accept the difference between them and the others. Sad thing is that is often forced so people under their influence is often the similar, but insist that they're not.
To me, as an outsider to both Christian and Islam, the whole thing seems a big waste of time, money and lives. I used to believe that religions are there to help people, support culture like literature and arts, but that does not seem to be true anymore. Ah, just stop arguing already.

Bashir Goth in this article fails to distinguish between the reliogion of Islam and the regimes that have their roots in extremist Islam. He generalizes without basis and certainly provokes adverse reaction. Mr. Goth, as a Turkish muslim I ask you, how do you justify making such a bold generalization in your article, saying "In the Islamic world you cease to be a human being." You should see yourself responsible for contributing to the unfortunate polarization of the Muslim World and the "Others" and creating a dangerous future for all of us. I think you should be using your platform to help prevent this divide, this segregation of the new age.

I think there is a difference between the Islamic world and the Muslim world. Muslims live in America for the freedom and the opportunity.

Mohamed, chill out. This is the United States. People are free to say what they want and you somehow find this threatening. Relax a little.... no one has mistreated you. Just note that your voice has been heard in a free and open society... one that allows and protects you to be critical of others if you chose. But to think that the United States as a civilized culture and the Washington Post or any other form of media that keeps discussion clean and free from smut, slander and intimidation is in somehow "censorship" is to not understand our culture. It is not censorship, it is decency. Jesus did not preach hate... he preached love and tollerance. Our founding fathers understood this and created documents that protect those liberties for everyone. It is the magnet that draws imigrants from all over the world, and in some form has drawn you here to our country... whether it be your love or hate of it.

This is a very interesting, provovative and engaging piece. Look at the boundless freedom of expression here. even the dump, below average ideas are welcomed.We need to have more of such open, high level, intellectual discussions, where people can exchange ideas, listening to everybody, in an increaing leveling plane field called cyperspace. Last week we have seen the outragious outpursts of Yugo Chavez, a Fidal Castro, Chi Gevera wannabe. The great cultures of the world will never understand each other without open discussions and debates. People has to understand that, most of the problems of the Muslim world, eminate from lack freedoms, such as freedom of expression, assembly and freedom of the press. Unless something is done about the reigning for life dictatorships in those countries, the people in those lands will not share to benefits of globalization such as education, economic opportunities and sharing of information.

about the forgoeing writers,
it is obvious, that your critics
are based only a meaningless, misguided,clanish , and counter-productive!

Bashir is an, educated man, and Accomplished journalist.

in his latest article,
he just speaks his own openion
even me; I agree and in some parts
I disagree.

Mohammed, "profanity or personal attacks" refers directly name-calling. You can criticize anyone you want, but using profanity in any form or calling someone a name would get your material removed.

Quit with the victim mentality. The world is not out to attack Islam, despite your apparent determination to believe so. If a person only listens to the loudmouth people that attack their faith/race/gender/whatever and willfully ignore those who embrace differences, as I and the majority of those I know do, you only make your heart more hateful.

I'm a Christian who has read the Koran and Torah from beginning to end, and know that all three of the religions we've talked about in this thread instruct their adherents to forgive and accept forgiveness. Why is that so hard for so many to see? I don't know, but I suspect I'll learn that when I meet God.

"Freedom of speech in the U.S. may occasionally be repressed, but we have groups that fight against that...their lives are not threatened, nor are they punished with jail time."
Not when you are a Muslim. You will then be accused of terrorism. Take the example of Al Arian, Al Timimi, etc...

Islam may have once been a religion...it's now nothing more than a dysfunctional death cult and a malignant cancer on mankind.

It is telling that almost every word posted in disagreement with Goth's article was a personal attack, rather than a challenge to his message.

I am inclined to agree with Infidel. A religion that values killing (Muslim-) women and children standing in line to buy food is by anyone's definition a death cult.

...And it is impossible to ignore the irony of the complaints about the limits of freedom of expression in the US, posted in a forum that would itself be uterly unthinkable in most (all?) Islamic countries.

Bashir, I've read your last argument about Islamic Courts last time here in the post. It's abvoius that you're against them, they're only in control for few months. No one knows how successfull or failure they'll be, for now they seem to establish the most important piece in live "peace" in Mogadishu. Somalia suffer a bloodshed more than 16 years, they restored peace in most areas they control, and you're talking about freedom of speech, ask your self "when do you need a freedom of speech?" We're talking about bloodshed,combat,hostility,warfare,struggle etc. And you're talking about freedom of speech. Stop being hypocrite. What surprised me most is not your hypocrisy but your baised in Islamic teachings; you said " Children are taught that there are two angels sitting on the shoulders of every person entrusted with the task of monitoring every good and bad deed the person does or says". Bashir do you know this is a fact not a story. FYI there's no such a Somali name called "Goth" either it's GOOD or GOD" when some muslims loose self-confidence they changed thier names such as Mo, Lee, David, John etc.

Bashir indeed falls into the same superficial logic that the 'self censorship' of his family, friends, colleagues are 'Islam'. ACCORDING TO REASON AND COMMON SENSE, to represent Islam, a matter should be directly derived from certain texts of Islam. For example, cicumbulating the Kaaba 7 times in austere clothing praising God is from Islam because it is proscribed in the Quran and teachings of Muhammad an evident in verse so and so and hadith #xyz.
Simply saying something is "Islam" doesn't make it so. On the contrary, Muslim nations fail to implement Islam comprehensively, failing to meet the mininal legal requirement of representing Islam according majority of scholars. Everything from a Muslim or Muslim society is not necessarily "Islam".
REASON requires evidence and rational thinking, not just manic accusations.
(Or is every rant of an American preacher the word of Jesus just because he says "Jesus told him so"?)
Whose thinking reasonably?
Where does Bashir connect his family's "censorhip" with Islam? There are verses in the Quran which state a person wronged or oppressed can make his case in public. Many people did that before the prophet Muhammad and crowds of people. They did that day and night regardless of what their family felt. In fact Muslim daughters defied their fathers before Muhammad and his followers in public due to their father's injustices all the time. So what is Mr Goth talking about?

Bashir doesn't strike me as clear thinking.
Yes, there are angels recording one's deeds. But how do they censor?
Doesn't one have a conscience to censor oneself? Is there no self censorship based on one's own morality? Is it that Mr Goth hates his own moral conscience and blames it on Islam?

There is a difference between a person racked by 'the demons in his head' (or mental illness) which urge him to rant on the street corner about the way someone stares at him and the average person. Bashir seems to be bordering on the former.

"Would the Washington Post allow him to say "In the Christian world you cease to be a human being." ?

So, what will the Washington Post do if he does say this--cut off his head?

Please-- for those of you who may not be native speakers of English: a hypocrite is someone who says one thing but does the opposite. For example, a father who does not want his child to smoke, but who sneaks a cigarette when no one is watching. Haji's use of the word hypocrite in regards to Goth is incorrect. It might be illogical or irrational for Goth to want freedom of speech while most Somalians can not live without fear of their lives being snuffed out by violence, but it is not hypocracy.

BTW, just reread Mr Goth's comments again. "Everything is taboo"?
Is everything "taboo" to discuss in Islam, or just in Mr Goth's little world?
And is Mr Goth really reflective of every community of Muslims throughout the world?
Does he really know what happens in Pakistan, Iran, Indonesia, Turkey, etc?
And is every Muslim community really only controlled by Islam and no other force, ie. a king, government, military etc?

They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Muslims today are quite sensitive; and who can blame them? They have been bombarded with insults as well as injury. The media has done more to harm Muslims and Islam than anyone else. So, why shouldn't they be upset? I agree freedom of speach is good and should be defended. However, you must remember that your fist ends where my nose begins. Journalists don't know everything, and when they fill in the blanks with what their gut tells them, poeple will be offended and people will respond. And then the media goes out and says - "look we told you so. These people are inhuman."

It is the desire, the notion that FREEDOM means to free oneself from one's own conscience and morality which suggests hypcricy.

It reminds me of the book the Immoralist where a man erodes every moral boundary inside becoming ill trying to live within a moral society until he finds health and peace through homosexual pedophilia and abandonment of his wife, family, friends, community.

Usama wrote: "It is the desire, the notion that FREEDOM means to free oneself from one's own conscience and morality which suggests hypcricy."

but that would only be hypocrisy if in demanding freedom of speech for yourself, you refuses to allow others to speak.. as in a man on a street corner drowning out everyone else's voice by giving a speech demanding his right to free speech. That is hypocrisy.

Toshiro: "Is Bashir insulting Muslims or is he telling the truth? Or both?" Very clever - obviously they're one and the same.

Bismillah Hir Rehman Nir Rahim

Assalamu 'Alaikum,

Unfortunately a lot of what Bashir Goth has said is true and it's not limited to any single race or cultural group within Islam, but it is within the whole of the ummah. I have faced it myself when having an unpopular opinion which didn't hold with the other members of the community. It's an inconvenient truth.

Wa'Alaikum Assalam,

Anthony

I don't agree with Mr. Goth's exceptionalization of Islam -no where is man less free than where there is poverty, corrupt governments, lack of functioning and representative institutions, etc. Religion is a sidebar, in my opinion. And so wherever we have these deficits we should be willing to go to the mat for people like Mr. Goth, for their right to express their opinion within a framework of thoughtful dialogue (Not useless baiting and counter-attacking.)

"People has to understand that, most of the problems of the Muslim world, eminate from lack freedoms, such as freedom of expression, assembly and freedom of the press..."

Quite so. And those lack of freedoms, in turn, emanate from the ideology, itself. Ever read the Koran? Eighty-five percent about sex--it's the only major world religion where bodily functions continue in the afterlife. The philosphy is based in sexual and other social spitefulness, and spitefulness is what it engenders in every other sphere. Guess that's why they had to set the death penalty for getting out of it...

That's not to say Mr Goth is a homosexual or pedophile or abandoned his family.

Mr Goth's censorship struggle which he says is caused by Islam but provides no proof (and the angelic censorship) reflects an internal struggle which seems to mirror the universal struggle between moral and immoral which all men and women undergo regardless of their families, communities, religions.

Mohamed Hussein wrote, "So why was the Washington Post editorial criticizing Iranian President Ahmedinejad for? Coming Washington Post there are taboos and nothing can be said about certain people while Islam is a free for all! This is the epitome of Hypocracy"

The Washington Post editorial writers are supposed to criticize people and ideas; that is their job. If they don't criticize certain people, it is usually because they agree with them.

I had no idea it was this bad in the muslim world.

Complete societal repression 'an inconvenient truth'? Wow.

Thank you for sharing here Anthony. It's really such a shame.

If such things are true, my recommendation has to be for every orthodox muslim nation to unplug their internet as soon as they can for they won't like what they see out there!!

"-no where is man less free than where there is poverty, corrupt governments, lack of functioning and representative institutions, etc." R in Ohio

Hit the nail on the head right there, R.

Religion is where we point the finger in many of those cases, though, since often the downtrodden have no other source of hope in such ghastly situations. Just look at the Crusades: on both sides, men fought in the name of God/Allah but both Christians and Muslims were under the fist of corrupt theocratic monarchies. There's been little change on either side in modern time, sadly, but I suppose that's human nature...power corrupts those in charge and there will always been the poverty-stricken and lower classes to fight wars for them, be it in the name of God, Allah, Jehovah, or some other excuse.

"(Or is every rant of an American preacher the word of Jesus just because he says "Jesus told him so"?)"

Of course not, but look at the Pope's situation right now. Every time a major figure, especially a "religious" one (be it the Pope, Sadr, Jesse Jackson, etc) opens their mouth, whatever they say is dissected and often taken out of context.

The difference stems from the way we react to it. When Sadr criticizes the West and encourages jihad, the West just ignores it. When the Pope quotes a 14th-century emperor while talking about religious acceptance and open dialogue, he's burned in effigy by those who do not care to understand his intent.

I'm getting off topic here, I know, but it's all about freedom to speak your mind. We should ALL have that freedom, but more important than that, we should all be willing to listen to what others are saying.

Ignore the loudmouths who do nothing but stir up violence and hatred, whatever their religion or cause. Embrace diversity and open dialogue and the world will be a MUCH calmer and safer place.

Damien -- can you refrain from your sidebar digressions?

It's not conducive to a good discussion and you wouldn't want somebody else derailing something you find interesting.

As you said "I'm getting off topic here".

Let the others who have experience talk.

This discussion is about Freedom of the Press and expression in Islam societies, not poverty and not religious studies.

First of all people need to chill out. Being able to hear expressions on both sides of the argument alone shows freedom of speech. I agree that sometimes it's hypocritical to certain groups of people or races. But don't blame the whole system for it.

And this response if for Solange. Mr. Solange you said, "As 1,300 years of history (and counting) continues to attest: Islam has proven a culturally unsustainable ideology. Its internally violent message induces adherents to destroy other cultures, then consume themselves from within. Hopefully, this global social problem can be solved externally, soon."

In response to this I tell you to just look at the Muslim dynasty that ruled in Spain for hundreds of years. Christians, Musilms, and Jews lived side by side in harmony. And I think you know who kicked them out of there...
Look at the Ottoman empire in its earlier period. About 250,000 Jews that feared persecution from the Spaniards fled to Turkey in the Ottoman empire and found safe haven.

As far as sustaining ideology goes, empires may die but certain ideologies don't die. And over 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, having the second largest number of adherents even though it was the last of the three major monotheistic religions to come down, speaks volumes to sustaining an ideology. Islam has not sustained itself only as an ideology but also as a way of life.

Free speech cannot be limited only to those words that do not offend unless you desire to submit your speech to the judgment of those most sensitive and indignant around you. The result is what we have seen- whether the indignation is real or not, some understand that the very claim of offense is a useful tool for quieting others, and permits them to use violence and threats of violence without rebuke. So it is that some blame honest opinions as justification for violence, and so it is that Bashir Goth is told to be 'sensitive' and 'careful' by those who believe nothing of Islam but much of Islam's extremists.

"It is now a trend to say Muslims are not Human Beings! That is exactly a quote from Bashir Goth's posting. Would the Washington Post allow him to say "In the Jewish world you cease to be a human being." ? Would the Washington Post allow him to say "In the Christian world you cease to be a human being." ?

We have seen this film before, Bashir is trying the Ayan Hersi method of making money by insulting us. This says more about the Washington Post enabling bigotry than Bashir's attempt to claim he is fighting for freedom

Posted by: Mohamed Hussein | September 26, 2006 01:04 PM "

As far we know, we're not subjected to our religion in such a way we can't even think for ourselves or have an opinion or get killed beause we "insulted" the religion. The problem is not Islam but the extremists who pervade it.

"As far as sustaining ideology goes, empires may die but certain ideologies don't die. And over 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, having the second largest number of adherents even though it was the last of the three major monotheistic religions to come down, speaks volumes to sustaining an ideology. Islam has not sustained itself only as an ideology but also as a way of life."

Reproducing faster than you kill each other is not the same thing as living in a state of social equilibrium that promotes self-renewal and spiritual growth. Islamic ideology is based in a culture where there were not enough resources to go around; and no notion of agriculture existed. Hence, again, spitefulness and death. It will not endure.

p.s., Solange is a woman's name.

You can't equate anti-semitism and anti-Islam comments. Comments about a race of people and comments about what people happen to believe are two different things. I think and hope the Post would strike anti-Arab comments (which are by the way strictly speaking "anti-semitic") Not that it's even fair to call Bashir's comments "anti-Islamic." One can tear Jerry Falwell, Franklin Graham, or Pat Robertson to bits without being "anti-Christian." (In fact I'd say exposing crooks, liars, thieves, and hate filled fools for what they are, while perhaps not exemplifying Christian love, is a good way to defend the faith) I can even rail against Southern Baptists, Pentecostals, or on the other side of the coin, Anglicans without being anti-Christian. And I can very well blast the embrace of war and greed on the part of conservative churches as un-Christian without being against Christianity. In the same vein one can criticize sects of Islam for their negative characteristics without being anti-Islam. What Bashir is saying is that censorship and violence are not Islamic and attacking those who would claim they are.
As a final note, I'm tired of the way religious people screech and yell at the least criticism. If your religion is worthwhile and good then you can defend it and you should do so. If the whole thing crashes down at the least bit of open criticism, well it's a castle built on sand. People who think what they believe is true, be they Christians, Muslims, etc. should not be afraid of open debate.

Chill out, very well said, but I can't let you use Spain as an example of muslim benevolence without pointing out that islamic armies invaded, conquered and occupied what is now modern day Spain. They were not invited there. I would also not characterize Christians, Muslims and Jews squirming together under the boot heel of the ruling muslim theocracy as harmony. There were certainly a lot of reasons to kick out the ruling class.

Manny -- It's not known to be true that this issue is primarily because of extremists. From what Bashir says, it is a societal thing -- all persons playing their role to make it/allow it to happen.

This is probably fostered by the priests and extremists, but one has to take a look at the role the common people are playing. Much like the Third Reich, societies like this don't exist because of the efforts of a handful of people. We need to hear more words from people like Bashir and Anthony. Muslim societies need exposure and discussion so we can see them for what they are -- warts and all.

Freedom of speech? Tell that to the little old nun that was killed because of what the Pope said. Newsflash...large groups muslims are violent if anyone says anything they dont agree with, in Europe and Asia

Until the Islamic world fixes itself, there is little that the rest of the world can do except defend itself from the incessant onslaught of Islamic violence. We are at war with brutal factions in Islam, because we wish to keep our freedoms and prevent senseless attacks on our citizens. If Islamics would broadly renounce violence and punish those in their midst who promote violent acts, we could all begin a more peaceful coexistence with them. The fact that Islam has a history of not doing this is the reason for the current unending conflict. So, to all those in Islam who want peace, I challenge you to clean your own houses rather than continuing to criticize the rest of us and ignoring or applauding the violent destructions and threats against those who don't agree with your way of life. Promote peace and let God/Allah sort it out in the end. That is all that the non-Islamic world wants from you.

Gretchen -

be careful correcting other peoples' use of words. While others may not have used "hypocrite" correctly, neither did you. Your definition and example of hypocrite were incorrect. The example you gave of a father smoking but telling his daughter not to is one of inconsistency. He would be a hypocrite if he actually believed smoking to be okay. A hypocrite is someone who says or does one thing but **believes** another.

On the violence angle, I don't anyone here can refute the plain fact that violently protesting the linkage of Islam to violence is beyond irony. Islam lacks maturity in its tretament of women, political and intellectual discourse and self-evaluation. However, it is a younger religion than most and hopefully like Christianity will make a course correction for the better. Here's hoping.

"I can even rail against Southern Baptists, Pentecostals, or on the other side of the coin, Anglicans without being anti-Christian."

Rail away sir, just don't saw off their heads. Thats a practice reserved for the cultured, civilized muslims who are incapable of expressing their indignation over perceived insults other than thru murder.

Bashir Goth claims to be the first Somali Blogger. What a lie! There were many Somalis who were bloggers before he saw a computer. Hiiraan.com and many other websites existed and have higher traffic than awdalnews. If the guy can tell white lies like "The first Somali Blogger" he cannot be trusted regarding any religion or culture. In fact in the US if you are caught embellishing your resume you are fired. Goth, Good has no credibility.

Khalif,

People who lie on their resumes are often fired; rarely are they killed.

The point here is that freedom of speech must be respected and violence towards the end of persuasion must be abandoned.

Many of you are missing the point of what Mr. Goth is facing as a journalist in the Muslim world. The "Islamic Extremists" gaining ground in those countries are actually practicing true Islam and moderates aren't. Perhaps healthy dialogue is possible with moderates who agree with freedom of expression, but increasingly their voice is overshadowed by those who follow the true way of Islam and who consider moderates to be apostates. Get used to the censorship under real Islamic law.

Before criticizing Islam we should remember who created some of the problems. Who buys the Saudis' oil, which gives them the money to spread their backward, intolerant and just plain crazy brand of Islam (like Bernard Lewis said picture the KKK taking control of Texas and using that money to spread their version of "Christianity") and who allies themselves with them? The U.S. Who overthrew Mossadeq setting the stage for Khomeni? Well our "friends" in the U.K. led us by the nose on that one, but we supplied the money. Who supported ul-Huq's illegal military dictatorship in Pakistan and his efforts to find Islamic rationalizations for his own brand of facsism (his so called Islamization). Reagan of course. And that damaged civil society there to no end and created problems we're still dealing with. Who trained and armed the men who would later become the Taliban? Reagan again. I'm not saying that all or even most of the Islamic world's problems are America or even the West's doing, but at the very least we have made the problem worse. Eisenhower and maybe even Reagan I can forgive. As nasty as the U.S.S.R. and Mao's China was you can understand keeping their Stalinist poison from spreading as the first priority and only later thinking of what other nasty ideologies you might be spreading or aiding yourself. But if you look at Iraq we continue to make the problem worse and we do not have the excuse of a threat to our existence.

geoff-
I think you hit the nail on the head. A lack of maturity is exactly what is plaguing much of the islamic world. I know I'm going out on a limb here, but I have to say it. A couple months ago my girlfriend and I were watching a program on muslim families in the middle east and the men all behaved like six-year-olds. The women were opressed and forced to act like nursemaids and the men were prone to hissy fits and tantrums. we were shocked. But then, it all makes sense. you can't have a reasoned discussion with someone who, if he doesn't get his way, will simply take his toys and go home.
And the whole twenty-virgins-in-heaven thing, how peurile is that?

I just read all the Comments. So much anger. So much taken out of context. Muslims, you are making Goth's point for him.

There's a fine line here regarding censorship and self-censorship. Freedom of speech, vital to any free society, does not mean freedom to make other people accept what you say. Community members, Islamic or otherwise, should not be forced to endorse or fund or even accept the statements of controversial writers. People should be free to shun those who make unacceptable statements, the way, for example, in this country most people shun those who use racial slurs.

That said, a community should NOT be free to offer violence in return for words. There's a difference between not inviting someone over to the neighborhood barbecue because, for example, that person advocates pedophilia (which should be protected free speech, as long as it does not cross the line into action), and cutting off their head, or beating them, or throwing them into jail. These are impulses I think most people can understand in the face of certain extremely offensive speech, but no free society should give in to those impulses. The cost is too high.

Any society which truly believes in the truth of its principals and values should also believe that those values will stand strong even in the face of contrary ideas.

Any society which brutally represses contrary ideas does not really feel secure in the truth and strength of its own values. That, more than anything else, is a damning condemnation of many of today's repressive governments. Not just the Islamic ones either - Austria recently jailed a historian for denying the holocaust. If the Austrian government believed in the strength of truth and freedom, they would have let that man say what he wanted to say. In a free marketplace of ideas, the truth is bound to be spoken somewhere, by someone. Where governments and societies forcefully silence people, all that gets spoken is a party line - and there's no guarantee, ever, that a party line will be the truth.

In an ideal world, a religious people would be the LEAST likely to repress speech, because they believe in a higher power that will ultimately vindicate the truth. (This doesn't mean they have to LIKE things people say - they just don't try to silence the speakers.) However, sometimes, some religious people are either insecure in their faith or grasping for secular power or both, and they seek to silence those around them.

BTW, Dan, you'll get -yourself- in trouble correcting other people. It's true that a hypocrite is someone who says one thing and believes another. However, Gretchen was still right - a hypocrite is also someone who says one thing and DOES another. Check out dictionary.com or merriam webster online - both free.

There is no salvation for the soul
But to fall in Love.
It has to creep and crawl