Here's A Free Speech Shocker
The UN head is against it, except when a person is saying or writing nice things! For a good purpose! (And the UN, the body where the worst human rights violators sit on the Human Rights Council, gets to decide?)
Vincent Carroll writes in the Denver Post:
"Freedoms of expression should be and must be guaranteed and protected," Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said, according to Reuters, in what sounded like a good start in addressing the "Innocence of Muslims" furor. But he quickly revealed he didn't mean it. It turns out that free speech should be protected only when it is "used for common justice, common purpose" -- and of course you know who gets to define those terms.
"When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others' values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way," Ban continued.
"My position is that freedom of expression, while it is a fundamental right and privilege, should not be abused by such people, by such a disgraceful and shameful act."
...It is also yet another reminder to those in the United States, beginning at the top reaches of the administration, who seem reluctant to offer an unqualified defense of free expression, even when it is admittedly offensive. When they blame violence on free speech, they play into the hands of those who don't believe in free speech in the first place.
Again, Christians were pretty, uh, pissed, over the photo of Jesus suspended in urine that was "Piss Christ," but they didn't go murder and sodomize and ambassador over it.