World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist
Search, personalize, or simply browse. Follow the world around you from gist and context to insights.
Who we are | Our Credo | Ways of using Lyrarc | FAQ | Send Feedback | First Letter From the Editor
Sign up. It's free and easy to use
Create an account
to personalize your feed of articles and topics.
All Topics Article
Film That Stoked Mideast Violence Has Murky Parentage
Keywords:
The origins of the crude anti-Islamic video, a 14 minute trailer, produced in S. California by Steve Klein, a Vietnam war veteran whose son was severely wounded in Iraq. He is an insurance salesman from Hemet, near Los Angeles. It was translated into Arabic and reposted twice on YouTube to Muslim viewers. Klein is known for anti-Muslim actions. It shows Egptian security forces watching as homes of Coptic Christians were burned, and then goes to cartoonish scenes showing the Prophet Muhammad as a child of uncertain parentage, a womanizer, child molester and so on. It raises many questions about how stuff that is incendiary or induces hate and violence or other material is kept off sites such as YouTube which use new technology for which there is no proper oversight representing the public interest.
U.S., Germany, Russia, Brazil and the anti-Islamic video on the Prophet Muhammad in Sept. 2012
09/12/2012
Google's You Tube service provided the access to what would have been an obscure and crude video. This raises several questions- would a crude video of this type on the Buddha or Krishna be given similar access on the basis of the First Amendment and what would be the response in S. Korea, Japan, and India? Would it then be withdrawn. Is an election candidate for local government in Brazil entitled to protection because of Brazil's election laws? This was decided in favor of the election candidate after Brazilian courts ordered the arrest of the head of the Google affiliate in Brazil and Google then reversed its stand and removed it from You Tube. Are there unwritten laws and is the Prophet entitled to the same protection under unwritten laws that govern most of daily human behaviour in America and Europe? Does the First Amendment protect everything that new technology providers such as Google do, or do unwritten laws and good common sense prevail until new laws can be written for use of new technology, if such laws are needed that protect First Amendment rights without infringing on other rights.
Grouped Articles
Fareed Zakaria: Let’s be honest, Islam has a problem right now - The Washington Post
Washington Post 10/10/2014
Proud to Offend, Charlie Hebdo Carries Torch of Political Provocation
New York Times 01/07/2015
‘Dangerous Moment’ for Europe, as Fear and Resentment Grow
New York Times 01/07/2015
Inside the U.S. Antitrust Probe of Google
Wall Street Journal 03/20/2015
Take Google to Court, Staff Report Urged F.T.C.
New York Times 03/19/2015
Wall Street Journal 09/17/2012
We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.
Support Lyrarc from as small as $1
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us