Skip to comments.The Legacy of Multiculturalism
Posted on 01/26/2008 4:35:35 PM PST by DogByte6RER
The Legacy of Multiculturalism
by Bridget Geegan Blanton
In a manner as openly deceitful as the ACLU, ....
.... Islamic extremist front groups are abusing the court system as they deride the true meaning of the first amendment, and drag it through the dirt with petty grievance lawsuits that scarcely conceal their primary intent, which is to suppress free speech.
These groups cloak themselves with a smokescreen of multiculturalism and lash out virulently against the slightest criticism with legal blowback designed to deflect scrutiny from the inner workings of their organizations. This legal ploy is being played out in every free society across the globe. Their intentions are accomplished by using the very freedom that defines the West, against the West, in order to promote or perhaps validate a radicalized version of Islam.
In late 2007, The United Nations General Assembly passed a defamation of religions motion that had been promoted by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). The U.S., Canada and several European nations voted against the lengthy resolution. Although the motion appears to refer to all religions, Islam is the only religion actually mentioned in the text of the resolution.
The motion focuses primarily on the negative projection of Islam in the media yet fails to address the persecution of non-Muslim minorities in Islamic countries. Essentially, it recommends a weakened right to freedom of expression regarding anything that might be construed by the thought police as insulting to Islam.
It is crucial to note that absent from the motion is any reference to the fact that human rights atrocities such as kidnappings, beheadings, suicide bombings, honor killings, terror and murder are committed in the name of radicalized Islamic teachings. According to this flawed motion, the very act of pointing out such a critical oversight is nothing less than Islamophobic in nature. This resolution paints radicalized Islamic factions as victims rather than the aggressors that they have shown themselves to be.
The passage of this motion establishes a dangerous precedent for the future of free speech especially considering the rising power of a world court. The defamation of religions motion is nothing more than an overt suppression of criticism for radicalized Islamic teachings.
Steven Emerson addresses the true nature of the problem in his book, 'American Jihad'. Emerson wrote: Our freedoms of speech, assembly, and religion are among our most cherished rights, and the Bill of Rights, where these freedoms are enshrined in the First Amendment to the Constitution, is one of the documents that makes America a beacon to the world. What we must understand, however, is that these same freedoms are especially attractive to religious terrorists. We cannot stop anyone from preaching violence short of the clear and present danger standard, because we punish deeds, not words. We cannot stop groups from gathering to share their political views, even if one of those views is that the U.S. must be destroyed.
While Islamic extremist front groups seek to silence criticism via legal maneuvers they exploit the freedom of speech inherent in an open society. In late 2007, a warrant for arrest was issued by the Bedfordshire police, for Paul Ray, a 31-year old English blogger who writes under the name of Lionheart at his blog: (lionheartuk.blogspot.com) Ray is being sought for suspicion of stirring up racial hatred after writing about what was happening on the streets of his town, Luton where the July 7th suicide bombers all resided. The attack was planned in Luton and it was from the Luton train station that the suicide bombers left on their evil mission.
Not once does Ray, a Christian, promote violence against Muslims anywhere on his blog; instead, he described the dire conditions he has witnessed first hand, as a result of the proliferation of extremist Islamist teachings being preached in Britains radicalized mosques. Ray viewed this proliferation as a threat to Britain and wrote about it on his blog. Rays cautionary writings have been validated when you consider the official warnings as noted in major UK newspapers, to the British general public about the no go areas, where radicalized Pakistani Muslims reside. Due to threats on his life, Ray remains at an undisclosed location outside of the UK.
This assault on free speech is a direct result of appeasement by the Socialist Left. It is happening in the UK, in Canada and the U.S. It is but one of the concessions that Socialists will make to stay in power. Sound familiar? The ACLU has all but paved the way for the path of appeasement in the U.S. Devoted multiculturalists view the world through tunnel vision allowing just about anything that will help to implement their agenda and strengthen the voting bloc that keeps them in power.
Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are among a list of Democrats that have expressed their solidarity with the Muslim American Society (MAS). (source:investigativeproject.com) MAS is on the record as stating that their long-term goal is the implementation of Sharia Law. MAS is an Islamic extremist front group masquerading as a civil rights organization, whose motto is: God is our objective, the Quran is our Constitution, the Prophet is our leader, jihad is our way, and death for the sake of God is the highest of our aspirations. (source: investigativeproject.com).
It will be interesting to watch our Socialist Senators try to wrangle out of their solidarity with MAS once word gets out about their appeasement to this voting bloc. Its going to be very difficult for the Senators to state that they knew nothing about the MAS motto. They know, they knew and they appeased all for the sake of power.
While the candidates of appeasement are working hard to stay as far away from their true stance on the issues as humanly possible, ol Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) is hard at work trying to clamp down on freedom of speech. The letter to Rush Limbaugh that Reid wasted time over, on the Senate floor, blew up in his face, so hes attempting to issue another Soviet-style mandate from his seat of centralized power.
This time Reid is going after the bloggers; he has a bill in the Senate (Section 220 of S. 1, the lobbying reform bill) that will require any blog that reaches more than 500 people and discusses politics to register with the FEC as a lobbyist. This is nothing less than an overt attempt to suppress any form of free speech that criticizes Socialists like Reid, Clinton and Obama, and their dream of a Socialist America. Worst of all, it works hand in hand with the long-term plans of Islamic extremist front groups.
One wonders if Reid is envious of the Soviet-style iron rule employed by the President of Belarus, Alexander Lukashenko. Recently, Lukashenko ordered the shut-down of the 'Zhuda' newspaper following the conviction and sentencing of its editor, Alexander Sdvizhkov, to 3 years in prison on the charge of "inciting racial hatred" after publishing the cartoon caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed. These were the same cartoons that were first published in 05 by the Danish newspaper 'Jylland Posten' that touched off worldwide riots. Sdvizhkov is appealing the decision and has found support throughout the world hailing his decision to exercise freedom of the press.
Just to the north of us, up in Canada, Ezra Levant was recently summoned to appear in front of the Human Rights Commission (HRC) after a complaint was filed by Syed Soharwardy. Levant and Soharwardy first crossed paths on a talk radio show. They were debating the same Mohammed cartoons and whether or not the act of publishing them was an exercise of free speech. Levant skewered Soharwardy in the debate which prompted Soharwardy to march down to the Police Station and demand Levants arrest on the charge that he, Soharwardy had been offended. The police had to explain to Soharwardy that things werent done that way in Canada.
Concurrent with the on-air debate, Levant published the cartoons in his now defunct magazine, 'The Western Standard'. Soharwardy went on to file a complaint against Levant with the HRC on the grounds that publishing the cartoons had offended him. Levant is quoted as saying: My freedom to publish a cartoon that some radical Muslim iman doesnt like, well thats the free west for ya. (ezralevant.com)
Back in the United States weve got a contentious legal battle brewing out on the Left coast. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has described itself as a Muslim civil rights organization, but its turning out that they are so much more than that. Most recently, the federal government named CAIR as an unindicted co-conspirator in an alleged scheme to funnel $12 million to the terrorist group Hamas. This is only one of their public relation problems.
Radio talk show host, Michael Savage has brought a lawsuit, amended recently to include RICO charges, (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) against CAIR for the mis-use of audio clips from his show in an attempt to foster a boycott against the program. (prosites-prs.homestead.com) In addition, Savage has charged CAIR with an ongoing attempt to silence opponents of violent terror through economic blackmail. Savage went on to call the organization a political vehicle of international terrorism. (source: worldnetdaily.com)
Michael Savages response to CAIRs dishonesty, deceit and Taliban-like intolerance for opposition is courageous and patriotic in a society that has become frighteningly immune to ACLU-instigated injustice. We still have a choice whether or not well accept appeasement as sheepishly as the Socialist Democrats hope we will; or we can stand up to those who would wrest our God given freedoms away from us and fight back with everything weve got. I choose the latter. What lies down the road if Reid is successful? Lukashenko-style media shut downs?
If we allow propagandists who are politically correct at the cost of logic, to implement their suppression of free speech agenda with the help of activist judges and stealth legislation, we will find ourselves fined, censored or imprisoned over the right to speak out against injustice. As it stands, the liberal left thought police have conferred the honor of 'artistic expression' upon hand-chosen, politically correct thinkers, who throw animal dung at a picture of the Virgin Mary. Watch your back, however, if you dare to offend by publishing a cartoon or an opinion that suggests a correlation between global terror and radicalized Islam. The kangaroo courts of appeasement and their Sharia Law adherent-complainants will be coming for you with Harry Reid, his fellow Socialist Senators and the ACLU leading the way.
If the basis of ending free speech is that someone is offended, then the liberal multiculturalists need to be silent for offending the majority.
I've been reading a book lately about the Comanche Indians of the early American Southwest. Apparently they thought nothing of robbing, raping, taking slaves and impaling infants.
Should we have cherished that "culture"?
Ah, yes. What about scalping?
There is a bumper sticker describing the end result of leftist policy.
It quotes a Frenchman during that country’s revolution.
The sticker states:
“The revolution eats its own children.”
According to at east some historians, scalping was introduced -- or at least encouraged -- by the European colonists who used Indians as proxies. They paid bounties per, ahem, head of enemy killed, and wanted proof.
They might have introduced the practice, might have spread it to tribes that didn't practice it before, might have simply encouraged it, or possibly none of the above.
I accept that this theory might be revisionist PC BS, and I will accept any reputable reference that debunks it. There is at least some seeming support for the theory in the fact that the practice is called "counting coup," and "coup" is derived from the French verb couper, meaning "to strike."
Don't get me wrong. There is plenty of evidence that the myth of the American Indians being peaceful, barefoot innocents in tune with the land is a crock of shinola. They had brutal wars, committed what we today would considered atrocities, and over-hunted and deforested land before moving on to despoil another patch of land.
There is even conclusive, scientific proof that at least in some times and some places, they practiced cannibalism. I won't belabor it, but I can elaborate if anyone's interested. My only issue here is the narrow and specific issue of scalping.
Multiculturalism is the bastard child of communism; so don’t be surprised at the results.
I disagree. Preaching the destruction of the US, IMHO is not protected speech.
Islam itself is incompatible with our traditions and Constitution. CAIR should be shut down, assets frozen, and leaders closely investigated for any violations of law. Should any imam preach violence from his mosque, the mosque should likewise be closed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.