Posted on 09/09/2010 8:34:48 AM PDT by kristinn
U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley this week equated an obscure Florida pastor and his congregants who plan to burn copies of the Koran on Saturday with the Muslim terrorists who killed thousands of Americans on September 11, 2001.
“[T]here are a balance of interests here. But this, in our view, has the potential to inflame public opinion around the world in a way that will jeopardize American lives and American interests. It does not represent our core values as Americans. We hope it does not happen. We hope that between now and Saturday, there’ll be a range of voices across America that make clear to this community that this is not the way for us to commemorate 9/11. In fact, it is consistent with the radicals and bigot -- with those bigots who attacked us on 9/11,” Crowley said in his briefing on Tuesday. (h/t Kristinn)
Charming.
Whether you believe people have the right to burn the Koran or not, the issue of the threat to American lives reflected in Crowley’s remarks requires greater scrutiny.
Since 2005, every Muslim country -- including our coalition partners -- through the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has signed off on a “10-Year Programme of Action” (10-Year Plan) that, among other things, seeks to define slander according to Islamic Sharia law -- making Islamic “slander” a serious crime in every jurisdiction in the world, including the United States.
Through “hate speech” legislation, the notion of Islamic “slander” has already taken hold in Europe. Once such instance is the case of Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders who is currently on trial for hate speech. He was denied expert witness testimony to assert the truth of claims he made about Islam.
The Dutch court instead stipulated to the truth-of-all-the-facts-of-the-matter when the court stated, in language that aligns with Islamic notions of “slander,” that: “It is irrelevant whether Wilders’ witnesses might prove Wilders’ observations [about Islam] to be correct, what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal.”
It doesn’t matter what’s true; the court says speaking truth in regard to Islam is illegal in the Netherlands because it may incite violence.
In 2009 the U.N. Human Rights Council passed a resolution (without a vote), submitted by the Obama administration, which would subordinate U.S. free speech rights to U.N. oversight standards. These standards mirror the OIC’s 10-Year Plan objectives.
Imposing the Islamic notion of “slander” in the Western world through hate speech legislation is very real. And very dangerous.
Four months after the publication of the infamous Danish cartoons of Muhammad, imams began a worldwide disinformation campaign (some creating three of the most objectionable cartoons themselves) for the purpose of inciting violence.
The threat that Muslims will self-radicalize and kill is at the very heart of the OIC campaign to squelch free speech regarding Islam when issues such as the proposed Koran burning are manipulated for that purpose. Western cultural “elites” are targeted to deem the free speech inappropriate thereby facilitating a cultural dilution of our commitment to free speech principles over time.
In the Koran burning iteration of the information campaign, there appears to be a coordinated media message including tie-ins to the Ground Zero mosque, Christian clergy condemning the pastor’s activities as “unchristian” to satisfy Muslim sensitivities, the State Department comparing the pastor to the 9/11 terrorists (an American citizen exercising his protected free speech rights inside America, mind you), and the U.S. Army Commanding General in Afghanistan injecting himself into Constitutional free speech issues by allocating blame for future acts of Islamic-based terrorism to Americans.
All we have to do is keep them happy and the jihadis will remain “moderate”? Sounds like an organized crime protection racket.
Coordinated OIC information attacks are designed to elicit submission to the OIC standard in just this way.
The subordination of First Amendment rights to Islamic law under threat of lethal jihadi attacks should be understood to be a declaration of hostility by those making the demands.
This is not just about a small town church preacher.
The preacher’s plan to burn Korans hit the radar screen of most Americans because they heard about the Muslim threat of concerted retaliatory violence. How is it that these groups around the Muslim world were protesting this small-town rural American preacher at the same time on the same issue? Seem a bit too coordinated? Contrived?
A staged protest of Afghanis pressured General Petraeus to comment on the planned actions of a private citizen inside the United States. Is the General saying it becomes more difficult to defeat the enemy if the enemy gets mad at us?
Was this a coordinated informational attack like the manufactured cartoon crisis, making clear to the world the objecting Muslims retain the right to kill the Florida preacher if he does not stand down?
I think so.
OIC “slander” campaigns are calibrated against issues like the preacher’s Koran burning protest or the cartoons of Muhammad. And they will always be about getting elites in the West to support Islamic standards of “free speech” against their own interests.
What a cowardly attitude. I guess we should just all bend over and be good dhimmis and do nothing to offend our masters.
Militarily, I say use this as an opportunity to smoke them out, then take them out.
Burning the koran is the American backlash against the ground zero—desecrate and spit on the graves of nearly 3000 americans—mosque
So not only am I going to enjoy the koran burning, I am going to join in. I’ve bought a cheap koran and I am going to burn it myself, tape it and pout it on youtube. Why?
Read the tagline
***************************
Appeasement will be the death of us and our country.
Saudi Arabia Desecrates Hundreds of Bibles Annually (Saudi Institute Friday, 20 May 2005 by Zachary Liben)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1410190/posts
Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 10:07:42 AM by paltz
Washington DC - The Saudi government burns and desecrates hundreds of bibles its security forces confiscate after raids on Christian expatriates worshiping privately or at border crossings.
As a matter of official policy, the government either incinerates or dumps bibles, crosses and other Christian paraphernalia.
Hundreds of Christian worshipers are arrested every year by Saudi police in raids on their private gatherings. Bibles, crosses and printed materials are confiscated and later burnt or dumped into trash. Bibles and other Christian paraphernalia found with travelers into the country are confiscated and destroyed.
Although considered as holy in Islam and mentioned in the Koran dozens of times, the Bible is banned in Saudi Arabia, and is confiscated and destroyed by government officials.
The subordination of First Amendment rights to Islamic law under threat of lethal jihadi attacks should be understood to be a declaration of hostility by those making the demands.
Because they choose to. There are millions of Muslims, that do not, right?
Beat it with your shoe.
The Koran orders it. Pure and simple
So, it orders it. That obviously doesn’t mean that much, as there are millions of Muslims all over the world, that are not participating in terrorist acts, or killing infidels.
So we argree, only honest Muslims follow their holy book, the rest lack the courage to “man up” and follow the Koran.
That’s pretty much the way I see it. Just the crazy, radical Muslims follow the book literally. I don’t think it’s a matter of ‘manning up’, so much as it is they just don’t agree with it, and God made them different than the crazy ones. Most people generally follow in the religion/beliefs of their parents/countrymen.
LOL
good point
mark
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.