Hundal - media philosopher
by Scoop Shachtman, 4 October 2007
I await Nick Griffin’s op-ed at Pickled Politics with interest.
If Sunny Hundal hasn’t already emailed the BNP to arrange this event, I have to wonder why he is so keen to censor the BNP?
(Via Normblog).
Thursday 4 October 2007 at 21:49
Scoop and Norm are racists for disagreeing with me and proving what a fucking moron I is.
Thursday 4 October 2007 at 23:23
“I is” what? People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones, you bunch of censorious twats would have wiped out that last comment if you didn’t know who posted it… no?
Friday 5 October 2007 at 2:48
Wow, I didn’t realise illiteracy was such a big problem in the blogosphere too. Otherwise you would have read:
Oh, and I’m assuming you already know I don’t hide behind pseudonyms to speak my mind even if it helps fascists.
Just say what you really want to - ‘oh look, another brown anti-semite’ - without beating around the bush.
Friday 5 October 2007 at 3:54
Just say what you really want to - ‘oh look, another brown anti-semite’ - without beating around the bush.
This kerfuffle is about Jews? That never occurred to me. Those damn Zionists hide under every bed, don’t they.
Friday 5 October 2007 at 6:40
Sunny,
Please explain why a University is different from your blog.
Friday 5 October 2007 at 7:11
No, not a Brown anti-Semite, more of a Cameron anti-Semite.
Friday 5 October 2007 at 8:54
Sunny - instead of these convoluted and unconvincing arguments about context, media power and all that crap, why don’t you just admit that Norm and Scoop have a point? You’ve simply failed to distinguish rights and obligations. It’s a common enough mistake. Why not resolve not to do it again instead of making these frankly rather silly, and shifting, arguments? Apart from anything else, these arguments can’t serve as a secure foundation on which to defend free speech - a right you insist is ‘absolute’. The reason they can’t serve this function is because they don’t make any sense.
Friday 5 October 2007 at 9:39
Just say what you really want to - ‘oh look, another brown anti-semite’
Shurely “what I really want you to”?
Friday 5 October 2007 at 9:55
Please explain why a University is different from your blog.
At a university you might hope to find a few people with at least half a brain.
Friday 5 October 2007 at 13:10
Shuggy: Sunny - instead of these convoluted and unconvincing arguments about context, media power and all that crap,
So, in other words, you’re opposed to the BBC ever inviting the BNP and Islamists etc for an interview?
Friday 5 October 2007 at 13:41
you are wasting your breath lads, he just doesn’t get it
Friday 5 October 2007 at 14:27
Sunny - you’re confusing the issue even more than you have already. Why would I be opposed to that? It’s obviously in the interests of investigative journalism. But that’s quite a different thing from giving them a platform from which they can preach their views without contradiction. I’d certainly oppose that. Wouldn’t you?
Friday 5 October 2007 at 17:05
More from Sunny:
“Another update: To clarify to Norm, I was talking about declining an invite to MA after it had been issued… not issuing one to just anyone.”
And the original, contentious remark:
“To be fair, religious minorities aren’t the only ones who misunderstand free speech and expression… [I recall] Norm Geras saying Columbia University should never have invited President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently.”
Nowhere did Norm claim that Columbia should be forced to withdraw I’madinnerjacket. Are you now arguing that criticism of who an institution chooses to give a platform to is an attack on free speech, unless that criticism precedes the invite?
Could you try explaining again why Norm misunderstands free speech?
Much simpler would be to just retract your original remarks.
Saturday 6 October 2007 at 9:59
Shuggy: Why would I be opposed to that? It’s obviously in the interests of investigative journalism.
I wouldn’t call inviting Griffin on to Today or other such programmes where he can make unsubstantiated claims and get away with it as ‘investigative journalism’. Would you also ban their party political broadcasts?
Saturday 6 October 2007 at 15:33
Stop changing the subject, Sunny. I’m sure we can all find contexts in which we find it appropriate or inappropriate for either the BNP or Ahmadinejad to be given a hearing. It’s a fairly crass attempt to create a diversion.
You publicly criticised Norm for saying that Ahmadinejad should never have been invited to speak at Columbia, arguing that he doesn’t understand free speech. Having had the preposterous logical conclusions of your argument pointed out to you, rather than admitting your error, you now claim that you were arguing against Ahmadinejad being disinvited.
But you never argued that and couldn’t have been arguing that. Norm’s article that you originally linked to, specifically endorses Columbia’s right to invite whoever it chooses, and makes no call for Ahmadinejad’s disinvitation. It’s a criticism of their choice of speaker, no more - no less.
So when you claim you were “talking about declining an invite to MA after it had been issued”, you either didn’t read Norm’s article, didn’t understand it, or you’re lying to save face. I’d go with the latter option, but I’m certailny open to the other two.