US edition UK edition

Via Allahpundit, you can watch British columnist Melanie Phillips’ interview on Fox News, on which the interviewer calls her statements “provocative” and even Allahpundit can’t quite grapple with a discussion on the need to curtail certain freedoms.

However, both European and UK legislation do not express or bestow such freedoms upon us as absolute and irreversible rights. Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the European Convention of Human Rights read as follows:

Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

But this is subject to the following possible curtailments as rights carry “duties and responsibilities”:

The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

If people think the indoctrination of the young to become suicide bombers stems just from those expressing their “opinions” (foreign policy and poverty are dealt with here), then those people have clearly not gone through Jihadi finishing school.
Bookmark or Feed

SubscribeBlinklistBloglinesBlogmarksDiggdel.icio.usFacebookFurlMa.gnoliaNewsVineRedditStumbleUponTechnorati
Tags: film, history