They would not publish it because the general sentiment is the same. US and UK are treading very carefully around the issue because it involves freedom of the press. If they publish something like that, their own relations with Denmark are affected. They do not want to get involved in this saga. The Press is never completely free of politics.
Also if this was a fact , why wouldn't a Muslim Scholar/ Lawyer from Denmark who knows the law well bring this up as an issue and ask the Goverment to have the Cartoonist arrested on these grounds ???????
They did so from the beginning, when the cartoons were first published in Sept 2005. They sent letters and protested initially, but the paper never apologized until January 2006!
.T no offense , this simply isn't a logical explanation .😛
I can't take a word of just any News agency for such facts . I mean its known that in the Arab World there is no freedom of speach , let alone Press . So its expected to not just be biased but un-reliable .
They are quoting the Danish Legal Code and Case Law which applied to Jesus' caricatures. How is that unreliable?
I agree that the Arab Press (i.e. Saudi Arabia) is not as free as that of the West, but the freedom of the press has increased quite a bit in the Arab world. I know because I have been reading Arab News for quite a long time now. Some articles which were not being allowed earlier are now published freely and I myself was surprised at reading them.
Nor do i trust any information from Wikepedia as its open to any one who wants to create a page , and edit information.
I dont trust it completely either, but I do check the sources (they are cited) and they seemed valid to me.
No offense ya .
None taken 😊
__________________________________________________________ _
As for some of those European News papers that re- printed those Cartoons again , obviously did not do so in the best interest and were wrong to do so .
Correct.
But this thread is about looking for solutions to the issue !!
Exactly, and I simply gave a solution according to my opinion.
Exactly. The law is a very grey area and it all depends on a judge's/jury's interpretation of the facts. Where one court passes one judgement, another court overrules it. So it is very dynamic.
If the Danish Supreme Court gives the ruling - that it was not offensive, I will accept it.
As for the validity of the sources: I personally believe they are valid and not made up. It just depends on which law is given more weightage by a judge.
Anyway, this is just my opinion. 😊