In response to this 'insult', members of Birmingham's large Sikh community stormed the theatre on Saturday night, setting off fire alarms, causing thousands of pounds worth of damage backstage, and injuring five police officers.
Having forced the closure of the play through the threat of further violence, Sikh leaders felt the time was right to lecture the British public on matters of tolerance and free speech:
"A spokesman for the Sikh community in Birmingham, Councillor Chaman Lal, predicted there would have been larger protests had the play's run continued.
He said: 'The theatre has made the right decision in response to a peaceful protest. 'There are no winners or losers - common sense has prevailed.'"
The suggestion that there are, in fact, winners -- The Sikh thugs who used violence to stifle free speech -- and losers -- the playwright, the actors, the theatre, the audiences and anyone who values freedom of expression -- is clearly not a concept Chaman feels like grasping. Nor, apparently, does he know how to differentiate between a 'peaceful protest' and a riot. Twit.
Another turbaned zealot, Mohan Singh, from the Guru Nanak Gurdwara in south Birmingham, was on hand to add his own, peculiar, interpretation of free speech:
"'Free speech can go so far. Maybe 5,000 people would have seen this play over the run,' he said.
'Are you going to upset 600,000 thousands Sikhs in Britain and maybe 20 million outside the UK for that?'"
Yes, yes, yes. The idea that free speech should be index-linked to the relative popularity of the viewpoint expressed isn't exactly news to us. But really, Mohan, you'll have to wait a few more months for your friends in the Labour Party to enshrine this vile principle in law.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete