Skip to comments.Has the First Amendment Become a "National Security Threat"? (The last sentence says it all)
Posted on 09/12/2010 7:20:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
"This is a recruitment bonanza for al-Qaeda...
Thats how President Barack Obama, in a national television interview on September 9, described the plans of an American Pastor to hold a September 11th Koran burning event at his church in Florida.
Prior to the Presidents TV interview, the Pastor had already been chastised by some of the highest-ranking officials in the Obama Administration. Attorney General Eric Holder had described the Pastor and his plans as idiotic, while Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had stated that it was all disgraceful.
Yet President Obama apparently believed it was necessary to speak about this himself, and try to stop the Koran burning festivities.
If the disgraceful and idiotic private citizen were to carry out his intended disgraceful and idiotic plans, then you could have serious violence in places like Pakistan or Afghanistan the President stated. This could increase the recruitment of individuals who would be willing to blow themselves up in American cities or European cities," Obama explained, adding that "If he's listening, I hope he understands that what he's proposing to do is completely contrary to our values as Americans. That this country has been built on the notion of freedom and religious tolerance..."
These are strong words from the sitting U.S. President, aimed at one, private citizen. And the fact that the stated intentions of one private citizen would draw criticism from the President and his Administration and would touch-off death threats on American lives is seriously troublesome on multiple levels.
First, lets accurately assess what has been at the epicenter of this controversy in the first place. At the time of this writing (Im composing these words on the afternoon of Friday September 10), it is unclear whether the Florida Pastor will stage a Koran Burning event on September 11th, or not. This is to say that the Pastor has only stated his intentions, and we dont know if he will ever carry them out.
Describe the Pastor and his plans in whatever derogatory and demeaning terms you wish. Stupid. Inflammatory. Insensitive. Intolerant. Misguided. Ill-advised. My observation is that the man seems quite inarticulate, and a bit nutty, and I wish the Obama Administration and the worldwide media industry had not drawn so much attention to him (notice that I am not stating the mans name it makes no sense for me to give this character more attention).
Yet this nutty guy is merely speaking his mind and in America, we regard this as constitutionally protected free speech. For much of our nations history, Americans have possessed an attitude that says I may disagree with what you say, but Ill fight to the death for your right to say it..
But we now seem to have turned a corner on this type of freedom. In this instance, some of the most powerful people in our government determined that if this one private citizen were to exercise his legal right to burn copies of a particular book, such an excursion in human liberty would threaten the security of Americans both domestically, and abroad and thus, this one private citizen should not exercise his legal rights.
A President who was more appreciative of the uniqueness of American liberty, might have taken the opportunity to explain that American freedom is a good thing, and that freedom itself is not a problem. Yet when one lacks the discernment as to how to wisely exercise their freedoms, therein lies a problem. That could have been a true moment of presidential leadership - a teachable moment if you will but that is not how President Obama and his Administration has responded to the rhetoric of our nutty fellow American.
Second, the fact that mere rhetoric can incite death to America demonstrations in Afghanistan and can rise to the level of a national security threat says something about the predominant Muslim culture, and President Obamas assessment of that culture.
In June of 2009, our President delivered a now-famous speech at Cairo University, wherein he stated I've come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world, one based on mutual interest and mutual respect, and one based upon the truth that America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles principles of justice and progress; tolerance and the dignity of all human beings
Those were beautiful words, words that were perhaps meant to inspire. Yet polling conducted by the Brookings Institute two months ago shows that President Obama faces a near 65% disapproval rate in the Middle East, and the Muslim world remains as hostile as ever towards the West.
If indeed Americans and Muslims shared the common principles of tolerance and dignity of all human beings as President Obama has stated, then American lives would not be endangered because of the words of one man in Florida.
Rather than honestly acknowledging the serious problems of Muslim culture, the Obama Administration has instead chosen to define American freedom as a problem.
Tyranny this way cometh.
“Rather than honestly acknowledging the serious problems of Muslim culture, the Obama Administration has instead chosen to define American freedom as a problem.”
It is a problem when you don’t acknowledge individual rights and liberty. This is perfectly logical to the Communist mind.
Who would have “standing” to bring that before a court?
I fine this quite condescending and unnecessary. Whether someone is adept at public speaking or not doesn't make some one nutty.
Why isn’t the City of NY using eminent domain to “confiscate” the property and set up a homeless shelter.
This is collectivism and the evil theory of "Greatest good" gone amok. By saying what's best for the collective is always what's more important, regardless of how small the decision, we have and will continue to lose freedom after freedom.
One Queston. Why have there been more terror attacts under 0 appeasement policy than GWB?
Kaslin this is an EXCELLENT ARTICLE!!!!! THANK YOU for posting it!!!!!
If a movement uses our "rights" to practice a religion which calls for the destruction of the very country and seminal documents that protects their "rights", they will destroy us and implement Islam and Shari'a Law.
This is the perverted view that Islam is the "Religion of Peace" - a peace which will occur, in their minds, only when Islam is the sole accepted religion, and only when Shari'a Law is used on our shores...then there will be peace, under their definition.
When is enough enough?
Every liberty, every freedom comes at a cost. If the cost of our freedom of speech is an increased need to be vigilant and protect ourselves from those who don’t share, and deeply resent, that freedom then so be it. And that includes the President of the United States and any members of legislative or judicial body whose actions make them an enemy of out freedoms.
Only the insecure strive for security.
The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.
John F. Kennedy
If money is your hope for independence you will never have it. The only real security that a man will have in this world is a reserve of knowledge, experience, and ability.
The instant formal government is abolished, society begins to act. A general association takes place, and common interest produces common security.
And to this August list, we add...
We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
Yeah and Bloomberg would go along with this. /s>
The response from multiple “leaders”, especially the “leader of the free world” (how do you lead what seems not to exist) is far “nuttier” than the pastor in Florida.
Of course we have free speech, citizen.
Here’s is your list of approved words and phrases. Feel free to say any of them.
You might not have realized it, but you answered your own question
This was one of the points the pastor was trying to make*. There's a difference in the way the two religions recommend dealing with insults or harm. Christians turn the other cheek. Muslims react violently.
*As heard in his interview with Hannity last week.
Disclaimer: I am not advocating Koran burning, just relating a salient point.
You’re welcome, and I thought it was too.
I know. It is just a comment on the hypocracy. Has anyone heard if these provacateurs have paid their taxes on this property?
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.