Infinite MonkeysPaul Belien of The Brussells Journal, which has taken the lead in reporting on the Muhammad Cartoon Controversy, leads off it's "Defense of a Scoundrel" story yesterday about the suspension of London mayor "Red Ken" Livinstone for comparing a Jewish journalist to a Nazi death camp guard with a great quote from the other H.L.:
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”
Yep, Red Ken truly is a lowly bottom feeding scoundrel and an embarassment to free societies.
The question, however, is whether making offensive remarks is sufficient reason for an unelected body of judges to suspend a democratically elected official. To accept this is to accept as legitimate that not the people rule, but the judiciary.
It goes beyond merely a tyranny of judges, doesn't it? As odious as Red Ken and his comments are (and typically are), his suspension undermines the "free expression" moral high ground that the West had during the Cartoon Crisis. Can the West continue to claim that ground when we suspend politicians, fire editors, and jail idiots over their words? I wonder.
‘Red Ken’ may be a scoundrel and a hypocrite. Nevertheless, the only people allowed to punish the Mayor by removing him from office for comparing a journalist to “a German war criminal” and “a concentration camp guard” are the London voters, not the three judges of a case tribunal.
Ironic, isn't it? Red Ken joined in the Muslim protests against the publishing of the Muhammed cartoons and now gets spanked for his excercise of free speech.
Hat tip to the Angry Englishman at The Corner.
Posted by JamesPh. at February 26, 2006 04:37 PM