This is a guest post by Karl Pfeifer, a veteran anti-fascist and journalist based in Vienna.
A joker once suggested holding a conference with the purpose of abolishing all conferences. That witticism notwithstanding, I took up my invitation to attend the conference hosted organized by the International Press Institute and the Center for International Legal Studies entitled, “The War on Words: Terrorism, Media and the Law.” At this gathering of journalists, lawyers and human rights activists at the Vienna Diplomatic Academy, one could learn a lot.
Manfred Nowak, United Nations Special Rapporteur on Torture, who delivered one of the opening statements, directed his whole speech against the policy of the USA. I had the definite feeling that Nowak was advancing a political agenda which had little to do with combating terrorism.
Hamid Mir, Executive Editor, Geo TV, Islamabad, showed us a short sequence of a BBC film of Pakistani soldiers brutally beating inhabitants of the Swat valley. At the session “The Watchdog Role of the Media in the Fight against Terrorism,” Yossi Melman of Haaretz gave a fair report on how the Israeli media is fulfilling this role. Today the Shabak (Israeli Interior Security) employs 40 lawyers and Israeli security has never used waterboarding. Melman asked the audience, “What would you do, if one day before a big terror action like 9/11, a suspected man is caught?”
Probably the best Session was “Shouting Fire in a Crowded Theater: Incitement, Freedom of Expression and Religious Tolerance”. Moderator Joseph Steinfield, a leading Boston lawyer, showed us the new book published by Yale University Press about the famous cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed published in a Danish newspaper, The Cartoons That Shook The World. In the country that is home to the First Amendment, the book was published without the Cartoons. Steinfield asked the panel if the Danish cartoons were an example of “shouting fire in a crowded theater.” The lawyer of the Danish Muslims who protested against the cartoons, Michael Christiani Havemann, and N.S. Mueen, Chair, Public Affairs Committee, Muslim Council of Britain said yes. Then the Moderator asked the more than 100 participants and not one agreed.
A cynical European journalist said to me, probably the best thing would be to change the law and forbid any criticism of Muslims, of Islamists and never use the term “terrorism.”
Indeed, there was a long discussion about the definition of terrorism and the suggestion came - not surprisingly from Ibrahim Helal, Deputy Managing Director, News and Programming, Al Jazeera English - not to use this word. Unfortunately, terrorism will not disappear if we stop using the word. But already, we can anticipate obedience to the wishes of Islamists.

Karl, fascinating, and revealing, glimpse into the making of the Zeitgeist and the news. You mention that the Shabak employs lots of lawyers, but as you probably know, this counts AGAINST the Shabak, because just like the IDF, their employment of legal experts doesn’t reflect a desire to do things according to the law, but to find ways to do things despite the law… Of course, if the Shabak/IDF didn’t employ legal experts, it would desmonstrate their utter contempt for the law…
What is also quite interesting is the resistance of people like the Al Jazeera guy to use the word “terrorism”. After all, without any additional qualifier, this is a neutral term that was also used for the IRA, or the Basques, etc. Moreover, given that Islamist terrorism has claimed so many Muslim victims, it’s a rather revealing “head-in-the-sand” attitude to reject describing it as terrorism just because terrorism is something the West is concerned about.
Petra, I just quoted Yossi Melman and do not know why Shabak employs 40 lawyers. Yossi is the specialist on security of Haaretz.
The conference was fascinating and lasted one and a half day. Probably I’ll write more about subject matter.
I have published in 2006 an essay why I am for the way Austria deals with the denial of Nazi crimes.
“The case of David Irving: “Revisionism” and freedom of expression”
http://www.engageonline.org.uk/journal/index.php?journal_id=10&article_id=40
Dear Petra and dear All,
it would be unjust to limit criticism to Al Jazeera and not mention that the BBC now routinely avoid the appellation ‘terrorist” in favor of ‘gunmen’, ‘insurgents’ or ‘militia’.
But even such descriptions are criticised, probably in the future we’ll hear Hamas described as “charity organisation”.