...Middle-Eastern views on free speech align pretty strongly with those of a major American media outlet.
Amid violence, terrorism and murder in Egypt, Libya and now, apparently, Yemen, over what we are being told is because of some amateur film production of the life of Mohammed, justice must be served.
What sort of justice? Here's Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi to explain:
Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi asked the Egyptian embassy in Washington to take legal action in the United States against makers of a film attacking the Muslim Prophet Mohammad, the official state news agency said on Wednesday.
Mursi had requested the mission take "all legal measures", the MENA agency said, without giving further details on what that might involve.
Protesters who demonstrated outside the U.S. embassy in Cairo on Tuesday had demanded action by the president.
And perhaps, not so oddly enough, talking heads at MSNBC tend to endorse this message:
MIKE BARNICLE: Given this supposed minister’s role in last year’s riots in Afghanistan, where people died, and given his apparent or his alleged role in this film, where, not yet nailed down, but at least one American, perhaps the American ambassador is dead, it might be time for the Department of Justice to start viewing his role as an accessory before or after the fact.
DONNY DEUTSCH: I was thinking the same thing, yeah.
We've never heard of this Mike Barnicle cat and Donny Deutsch only in passing but we can, from that clip alone, confirm they are idiots and as not fit as members, allegedly, of the 4th estate to hold their jobs any longer.
Their current employment absolutely depends on a commitment to free speech to a degree for which they don't seem to have the stomach (we might add that it's being called into question whether or not, Terry Jones, the pastor in Florida, had anything at all to do with this film. Similar to the George Zimmerman fiasco down there, it's lynch first, ask questions later now days).
Perhaps Barnicle and Deutsch should get their own boots on the ground over there and as representatives of the American media show some solidarity with the mobs in expressing their highly selective interpretation of free speech. I'm sure it would be appreciated.
That members of this nation's media can so casually toss around ideas like this based upon no logical evidence (it was 9-11, for chrissakes... it's what they do over there, film or not) should be cause for alarm.
The 1st amendment was established precisely to protect unpopular opinions and speech. If we all shared the delicate sensibilities of these two gentlemen at MSNBC then we would not need a 1st amendment. But we do.
We fought a war for the right to speak out, inform, agitate and, yes, offend. How it is that this is lost on the professional practitioners of this right is completely lost on us.