The West's doctrines of religious tolerance now being used to chill free speech

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,427
15,880
146
"The West’s own doctrines of religious tolerance and anti-racism are now being used to chill free speech."

Very informative editorial on how the Arab/Muslim world is using hate speech laws to stiffle critics. Eerily similar to Scientology, IMO.

How to Keep the USA From Becoming the United States of Arabia
By Phyllis Chesler

Published August 16, 2010
| FoxNews.com
On August 9, the SPEECH Act became the law of our land. This Act protects American authors from having foreign libel judgments against them enforced in America—especially when they have criticized Islam or documented the funding sources for jihadic terrorism.

The Act was a bipartisan Senate accomplishment, but one driven by the fearless and determined Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, the Director of the American Center for Democracy. Ehrenfeld is the force (and the name) behind “Rachel’s Law” which became law in 2008 in New York State and in six other states.

This Act is an important first step in the West’s battle against “lawfare.” At stake is nothing less than the American and Western right to speak freely and truthfully on any subject, including religion, culture, and war. If we are kept uninformed about Islam and jihad, we will not be able to understand our options or defend ourselves. It is as simple as that.

We are used to free speech. If we are offended by what someone has written, we say so; we do not usually sue or kill the offender. Freedom of speech and a free press do not exist in the Islamic world where political and religious censorship is the norm. Muslims know that if they criticize their leaders, they—and their families--will be jailed, tortured, and possibly murdered.

This barbaric value system is headed our way. Actually, it’s been here for some time. Both Muslim civil rights organizations and their politically correct “anti-racist” western speech codes and commissions routinely launch—or threaten to launch--costly lawsuits as a way of intimidating and silencing Islam’s critics.

The West’s own doctrines of religious tolerance and anti-racism are now being used to chill free speech.

While many Muslims are supersensitive to criticism about Islam, they do not hesitate to persecute, subordinate, murder and exile infidels, and destroy their shrines and houses of worship.

As Orwell said, not all pigs are equal.

In 1988, the London-based author, Salman Rushdie, published a novel which Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini found offensive. In 1989, Khomeini issued a death warrant and Rushie went into police-protected hiding for a decade.

In 2002, the Italian journalist, Oriana Fallaci, was sued in Switzerland for “racist writing” by the Islamic Center. In 2005, Fallaci was sued in Italy and France for writing which was considered “racist and offensive to Islam.” In 2006, while dying of cancer, Fallaci secretly returned to Italy in order to die at home.

After 9/11, more Westerners began to study terrorism, (looking into its nature, who funds terrorist activities and more), and to scrutinize the Islamic mistreatment of Muslim women, dissidents, homosexuals, infidels—and each other. Westerners investigated mosque activities. Like Rushdie and Fallaci, many were condemned as “racists” and “Islamophobes,” threatened, and sued.

In 2004, Dutch artist Theo van Gogh and Dutch parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali, made a film about Islam and women. That same year, Van Gogh was murdered by Mohammed Bouyeri, (for insulting Islam), and Hirsi Ali went into hiding with police protection, which she still requires.

In 2005, Dr. Ehrenfeld was sued in London for having named specific terrorist financiers, including a Saudi billionaire sheikh who sued her. She chose not to defend herself in England, (a notorious center for “libel tourism”), but instead, fought for the rights of American authors, publishers, and media to remain “judgement proof” in America.

In 2005, Lars Vilks penned the infamous “Danish” cartoons. In 2006, global, choregraphed Muslim riots ensued, people died, newspapers boycotted the cartoons.

Since 2007, Vilks has lived with police protection.

Publishers and authors began self-censoring, changing or backing out of contracts in order to avoid expensive lawsuits. Or worse.

In 2006, Palgrave-Macmillan reneged on its promise to publish "Quran: A Reformist Translation."

In 2007, the Cambridge University Press published "Alms for Jihad" but then immediately pulled books off the shelves to avoid a libel action lawsuit filed by the same sheikh who had sued Ehrenfeld.

In 2007, Canadian author Mark Steyn and his magazine, MacLeans, were summoned before the Canadian Human Rights Commission on charges that Steyn had “subjected Canadian-Muslims to hatred and contempt” and for “being flagrantly Islamophobic.”

Eventually, the Commission condemned Steyn but dismissed the charges for jurisdictional reasons. However, legal costs still had to be paid.

In 2008, Random House reneged on its contract to publish "The Jewel of Medina," a novel about Mohammed’s wife Aisha—and all because a single professor suggested via e-mail that the book “might lead to violence.”

Also, in 2008, Dutch politician, Geert Wilders, made a documentary, "Fitna," (translation: Strife), about Islam and anti-Western terrorism. Although Wilders’ just won a great electoral victory, he is currently facing government charges as a “racist” and purveyor of “hate speech.”

In 2009, ironically, Yale University Press published a book about the Danish cartoon controversy—but omitted the cartoons themselves without telling the author.

In 2010, the American author, Bruce Bawer and his Norwegian colleagues were accused of “racism” and “Islamophobia” by Norwegian leftists and Islamists; in June, 2010, the Norwegian government de-funded their excellent online website Human Rights Service which published work about Islam and women’s rights.

Finally, in June, 2010, the Public Prosecutor for Copenhagen charged the International Free Press Society and its president, Lars Hedegaard, with “racism.” Hedegaard dared to critique certain Muslim practices.

It is urgent that the West revamp our understanding of “hate speech” and “racism.” If we fail to do so, we will lose our right to free speech, and will, sooner rather than later, become the United States of Arabia.
 

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
Aug 20, 2000
20,577
432
126
What was informative about that? It didn't say anything that wasn't already plainly obvious.

If you want scary, read up on the Canadian Human Rights Commission free speech controversy. We throw around terms like "Orwellian" all the time to the extent that it feels cheapened. The CHRC, on the other hand, are the real deal. I will vote for practically any party who pledges to disband them.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Very scary. The bad guys are using our own system against us, much like an insidious virus does. It's time the silly liberals realize they are getting used.
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
Is this more anti muslim propaganda by those who run the media? Divide and Conquer.
 

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Funny thing is people are already starting to notice. The French ban on conservative Muslim headgear being one of the more prominent examples. In the meantime, Islam isn't spreading at all. It's a religion that has yet to go through any sort of enlightenment, and thus any government or organization based on Islam is doomed to crumble back into the Medieval times that spawned it. The West is also becoming more secularized every day, and less willing to accept religious interference in general, let alone more radical religious interference.

Honestly, I'm less concerned about Islam than the West's response to it. Going back to the French example and others like it, it seems that the cultural lines are being drawn and are becoming more distinct every day. Another example is the outrage over illegal immigration here in the states. Sooner or later it'll be the age old us-and-them complex that leads to some sort of conflict, and if it does get violent on the national scale... yeah Islam is pretty much screwed in it's current form.

Even Omar Nasiri (pseudonym) hinted at this in his "Inside the Jihad" where he pointed out that the quintessential weapon of Islamic extremists (AK-47) is Russian. They can't even fight wars without first acquiring weapons from their enemies.

Bottom line: If it comes down to a contest between the West and Islam, the West may not have the balls to curb-stomp Islam as it easily could, but Islam is only able to subvert the west on a scale of a child begging his/her parents for a new toy.
 
Last edited:

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,427
15,880
146
Amazing. Islam uses the very same tactics Scientologists use (lawsuits to stifle free speech) and yet the left STILL defends them and finds away to shoot the messenger.

Simply amazing.

There is such a thing as cutting one's nose off to spite one's face... and when it comes to Islam, the American left is the epitome of that very saying.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
70,212
5,792
126
The UN is Confiscating American Guns starting tomorrow and the FEMA Camps will be taking those who resist where Death Panels will decide their fate and you're worried about this?
 

Infohawk

Lifer
Jan 12, 2002
17,844
1
0
I'm not so sure about this article but one thing is clear: Muslims want everyone tolerate them but don't want to tolerate anyone else.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
The UN is Confiscating American Guns starting tomorrow and the FEMA Camps will be taking those who resist where Death Panels will decide their fate and you're worried about this?

Crap you beat me to the fema camp reference...




Im gonna paint my face blue and scream freedom!!!


The tactics you describe are used by every single private and corporate interest ever seen. Scientology..check..Mormons...check.....big corporations...check....NRA...check.....cub scouts...check....the national associating of librarians....check....

yes free speech is important....yes someone is going to exploit the fear of someone taking away your right to be afraid...yes some legislator will throw up a softball covered in red meat to state an obvious position....
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
349
126
I'm not so sure about this article but one thing is clear: Muslims want everyone tolerate them but don't want to tolerate anyone else.

Uh, would you care to back this up for Muslims in America?

Overseas, I think there are reasons to say that happens.

I don't see it as something that's part of Islam, but part of what some groups do.

Some decide to make religious governments that discriminate. We didn't.

By the way, there are some American Christians who view the US as a Christian nation and support the laws discriminating against other religions.
 

PeshakJang

Platinum Member
Mar 17, 2010
2,276
0
0
By the way, there are some American Christians who view the US as a Christian nation and support the laws discriminating against other religions.

So why aren't the liberals bending over backwards to appease the Christians too?
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,595
4,666
136
Quote:
Originally Posted by Infohawk
I'm not so sure about this article but one thing is clear: Muslims want everyone tolerate them but don't want to tolerate anyone else.

Uh, would you care to back this up for Muslims in America?

Yes the insensitivity of them wanting to build a mosque near the site of the WTC slaughter and they want us to be tolerant while they don't show any sympathy towards the families of the victims of 9/11.

Yes, I know they have the right to do so.
No, I am not against Muslims in general just the extremist that like to chop up women etc...
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
This lady is good. Phyllis manages to work several tricks into one piece.
I often see people use the words *the west* when they have to write something bad about the US. She's using it as America and the West vs Middle thing. Thus giving her readers a more secure feeling while at the same time managing to get her fear factor in there.
Like yllus mentioned there is the Orwellian mention.
A nice long list of *facts* that really is a few facts and some *half-truths*

So why aren't the liberals bending over backwards to appease the Christians too?

Aren't most liberals Christians?

I hope Phyllis doesn't sue anybody speaking out against her article
 

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
I've always been worried that there will be Federal Hate Crime legislation.

Y'know, if we ever have a one world government, we won't have anything remotely resembling the 1st Amendment.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Seems Amused has joined Rascal Nation as all his threads seem to be based on Faux Noise articles.
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,427
15,880
146
This lady is good. Phyllis manages to work several tricks into one piece.
I often see people use the words *the west* when they have to write something bad about the US. She's using it as America and the West vs Middle thing. Thus giving her readers a more secure feeling while at the same time managing to get her fear factor in there.
Like yllus mentioned there is the Orwellian mention.
A nice long list of *facts* that really is a few facts and some *half-truths*



Aren't most liberals Christians?

I hope Phyllis doesn't sue anybody speaking out against her article

Okay, anything to back that up? Or is poisoning the wells your only trick?
 

Amused

Elite Member
Apr 14, 2001
56,427
15,880
146
Yeah the title of that article is typical Wingnut Fear Mongering.

Oh really?

We haven't toyed with hate speech laws ourselves? The Scientologists haven't used the US and foreign tort system to destroy their enemies in much the same way as the Muslims are starting to now?

The title may be alarmist and I don't agree with it, but the bulk of the article is what matters. Why not try to be a little deeper instead of reacting only to the title? Note I did NOT use the article title for my thread title?
 

techwanabe

Diamond Member
May 24, 2000
3,145
0
0
By the way, there are some American Christians who view the US as a Christian nation and support the laws discriminating against other religions.

Perhaps some do, but its more accurate to point out that the US was started by deists who founded the nation on Judeo-Christian principles and at that time going forward, Christianity was the dominant religeon of the early founding fathers and early imigrants. In the past 20 years or so, there has been a large growth in other religions - in particular islam in the US, the UK and Canada.