From (who else?) Larry Flynt interviewed by Steve I. Weiss of the Canonist blog. Here are some excerpts but you’ll want to read it all …
What do you think of the situation of the Danish cartoons?
Flynt: “Freedom of speech is only important if you’re gonna offend someone; if you’re not gonna offend someone, you don’t need free speech.”
What do you think of the media’s response to the situation?
Flynt: “They’re so wimp-kneed, you know, there’s no point in even discussing the media.”
PJ Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that PJ Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. Please note that comments are reviewed by the editorial staff and may not be posted immediately. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pjmedia.com.
Thanks for linking that. I would’ve never imagined Flynt capable of anything nearly that lucid and principled. I’m shocked but in a pleasant way.
Well Cap’n Hate,
Larry Flynt has fought for free speech for a long time. He was shot because what he had to say wasn’t appreciated. Why should it be surprising he has little appreciation for those who would allow themselves to be silenced by whatever deity’s morality police happen to have their knickers in a knot?
“Why should it be surprising he has little appreciation for those who would allow themselves to be silenced by whatever deity’s morality police happen to have their knickers in a knot?”
That’s not what’s so surprising; it’s more that he’s engaged in a campaign that doesn’t narrowly benefit himself.
Colby Cosh
http://colbycosh.com/
A short note to newspapermen everywhere
Having massive amounts of capital located in vulnerable public places, it is understandable that most of you should be reluctant to publish those controversial Danish cartoons.
Without wishing to overdramatize or display disrespect, I’d say the price for not doing so is simple and even fairly modest. From now on your employees, editors, and theoreticians have to shut their traps, forever, about how your “resources” for reporting and disseminating information are superior to those of distributed individuals. People will remember that when the chips were down, those mighty “resources” were hostages to protest, boycott, and vandalism. Face it: you’ve been left looking just like the idiot Hummer owner who boasts of his ability to go anywhere–but who cannot leave paved roads out of fear for his paint job.
==
Jim Treacher
http://jimtreacher.com/
Dear Whole Entire News Industry,
Please watch in horror as your ratings and circulation numbers continue to plummet, and don’t forget to throw some more blame at the bloggers who keep picking up your goddamn slack.
Signed,
G. O’F***yourself
==
Me
The WH should have told the press (about the Cheny shooting) just becuse it was inevitable. But to hear the newsies howl now because “the people have a right to know” etc. is bloody rich.
The biggest story of the entire month… globally…. is a bunch of cartoons that 95% of that press WILL NOT SHOW US. Presumably, we have “no right to know” what the focus of this enormous world-shaking story is.
It is all so clear. As long as it is a US administration, US soldiers, corporate baddies, or (let’s be fair) virually anyone ELSE in the gunsights, all for the truth. The INSTANT it is the press people themselves who are forced to directly and personally face the ramifications of what they print or broadcast……..
Well, we all see the answer, as clear as day, don’t we?
One could call it craven, pusillanimous, weaselly.
But the oft-used, but recently well under-used, basic term will do.
Cowards.
Freedom of speech protects the free exchange of ideas; Flynt doesn’t have any real ideas, all he knows how to do is offend. A pornographer like Flynt is a First Amendment liability, not a hero. Those who gratuitously offend are tolerated because the value of free speech and free expression exceeds its liabilities.
If only McClellen had the guts to say, so, your employer’s going to show the Mohammed cartoons then?
Actually, he did ask the question and I think Flynt kind-of weasled out: