Ursula Owen, head of Index on Censorship, has now aplogised for its appalling remarks on the murder of Theo van Gogh (see post below). However, as the Telegraph reported, the author of these comments Rohan Jayasekera, the magazine's associate editor has not lost his job. And Ms Owen's apology did not really get to the heart of the matter. She said:

'"There has been a lot of criticism and some support," she said. "I am sorry that it has outraged people. I don't think the tone is right and I do not agree with it. It would not have got in the magazine because it would have been edited before. This is not something I would have written myself. We have had people who write for us saying they disapprove of that piece but no one has said they are never going to write for us again." Miss Owen said that just because she had printed the piece did not mean that she endorsed the views in it."I do not agree with everything the magazine prints," she said. "We recently published a piece saying there was not a link between HIV and Aids. I don't agree with that view but I think it is important that it should be aired." '

Well, that's all very well but surely rather misses the point. It wasn't that these remarks were offensive, or that the 'tone' wasn't right. It was that a body which campaigns for freedom of speech effectively blamed a murder victim for his own killing on the grounds that he had caused offence. Such a position, taken by no less a figure than Index's associate editor, demonstrates the utter moral bankruptcy and indeed abject betrayal of Index's ostensible position, because it sided with those who would commit murder in order to suppress expression that offends them.

Ms Owen's apology simply does not acknowledge this. Unlike Peter Tatchell, the gay activist (with whose position I often deeply disagree) who nevertheless on this issue -- despite saying this was a one-off and out of character for Index -- makes a wider and very important point:

'"I found it to be a tragic betrayal of the magazine's traditional support for libertarian values. In this current epoch of post-modernism and live-and-let-live multiculturalism, moral relativism is gaining ground. This article was one more instance of this relativism. Liberal humanitarian values are under threat. Much of this threat comes not from the far Right, but from the Left's moral equivocation and compromises." '

Yup, Peter gets it.

Posted by melanie at December 21, 2004