Juridisk halshogging

It is fear of those expen­sive and entang­ling suits, and the risk of invi­ting demon­stra­tions and even vio­lence, that have silen­ced most cri­tics of Islam.

“And who are these?” said the Queen, poin­ting to the three gar­de­ners who were lying round the rose-tree; for, you see, as they were lying on their faces, and the pat­tern on their backs was the same as the rest of the pack, she could not tell whether they were gar­de­ners, or sol­di­ers, or cour­ti­ers, or three of her own children.

“How should I know!” said Alice, sur­prised at her own courage. “It’s no busi­ness of mine.”

The Queen tur­ned crim­son with fury, and, after gla­ring at her for a moment like a wild beast, began scream­ing, “Off with her head! Off with —”

“Non­sense!” said Alice, very loudly and deci­dedly, and the Queen was silent.

Lewis Car­roll, for all his ima­gi­na­tion, could not have ima­gined that he would make some rele­vant points in Alice in Won­der­land about speak­ing up against those who would silence criticisms.

Your free­dom of speech, in Ame­rica and abroad, is undergo­ing the same kind of treat­ment that air­line pas­sen­gers now undergo at the lite­ral hands of the Trans­por­ta­tion Security Admi­ni­stra­tion (TSA). If not­hing dan­gerous or con­tro­ver­sial or offen­sive is found on your per­son, you may go about your busi­ness and board your flight. But if you com­plain, or give the TSA emp­loyee a dirty look, you will be sub­jected to spec­ial gro­ping, feel-ups, and molesta­tion just to show you who is boss. You may be orde­red to wait in a glass cage as punish­ment until some­one is ready to sub­ject you to more invasive molesta­tion. If you assault a legally sanc­tio­ned gro­per in reta­lia­tion, you will be assai­led by air­port police, regard­less of your gen­der, arrested, hand­cuffed, gag­ged, and jai­led. You should have known that speak­ing, or free­dom of speech, like fly­ing, is a “pri­vi­lege.” That is what you have been told.

The paral­lels are appro­priate. Your free­dom of speech is held hos­tage until you sub­mit to cen­sor­ship. Obviously a con­tra­dic­tion, but one not gras­ped or rec­og­nized by the govern­ment, our courts, or civil rights advo­ca­tes. Power does not need to rec­og­nize rea­son. The Bill of Rights to the con­trary notwith­stan­ding, the govern­ment and judi­cial stance on free­dom of expres­sion is that it is a per­mis­sion gran­ted by govern­ment, by society, by “God,” by any­thing but the right to pro­tect yours­elf from ini­tia­ted force. Frown at a TSA cip­her, and that will be seen as offen­sive and hostile. Frown at Islam, and that will be inter­preted as offen­sive, hurt­ful, bigoted, or hostile.

Cri­ti­cize com­mu­nism in a com­mu­nist coun­try, and you will be jai­led and sent­en­ced to slave labor. Cri­ti­cize Nazism in Nazi Ger­many, and you will be impri­so­ned and sent to a con­cen­tra­tion camp. Cri­ti­cize fascism in Putin’s Rus­sia, and you will die by a bul­let in an ele­va­tor, in your car, in a pub­lic park. Cri­ti­cize Islam in Bri­tain in any form, and you will be sub­jected to due process, tried, fined, and jai­led. In Bri­tain, only Mus­lims may indulge in “hate speech” wit­hout penalty or wor­risome legal consequences.

Cri­ti­cize CAIR in the U.S., and you will learn what a ton of bricks feels like when it falls on your head. Like Molly Nor­ris, the makers of “South Park,” like Sal­man Rush­die, you will eit­her have a fatwa issued for your death, or you will be har­assed and/or sued by an orga­niza­tion with ter­ro­rist ties.

Free­dom of expres­sion is being assai­led, not only by our own govern­ment, but by our safely entren­ched enemy, pro­mi­nently led by The Coun­cil on American/Islamic Rela­tions (CAIR) and other Isla­mic “civil rights” orga­niza­tions. This is not news, of course. In Europe, one must be care­ful about what one says about Islam – such as Dutch poli­ti­cian Geert Wil­ders, who is being tried in Amster­dam for “hate speech” – and what one shows – such as the Turkish-German model, Sila Sahin, who posed semi-nude on the cover of the Ger­man edition of Play­boy as a state­ment of her free­dom from Islam.

Sila Sahin dis­car­ded the burqa, and to the delight of anyone who admi­res the female body, some of her other attire, as well. Her family is scan­da­lized. Their “honor” has been besmir­ched. Off with her head. Aaron Proc­tor, a wri­ter for the Phi­ladel­phia edition of Examiner.com, dared to men­tion in a column that CAIR is an unin­dicted party of the Hamas-linked Holy Land Foun­da­tion, Hamas being an FBI-designated ter­ro­rist orga­niza­tion. The Penn­syl­va­nia chap­ter of CAIR, upon read­ing that, shar­pe­ned the blade of its scimi­tar and cal­led its lawyers to prayer. Off with his head.

And when one is cen­so­red, eit­her by a govern­ment or by a ruinous law­s­uit, or when one thinks twice before say­ing any­thing cri­ti­cal about Islam or its adhe­rents, and says not­hing, because the con­se­quen­ces would be too ter­rible, one may as well have been behea­ded. Because once that hap­pens, one’s mind is shack­led, as well. Rende­red use­less. Speech­less. As silent as Sid­ney Carton’s head after the guil­lo­tine has lop­ped it off.

There are ways to fight Isla­mic cen­sor­ship (also known as “law­fare” and “libel tou­rism”) in this coun­try. But the way of the Free­dom From Reli­gion Foun­da­tion is not the right way. This orga­niza­tion filed suit against Pre­si­dent Barack Obama for decla­ring a Natio­nal Day of Prayer because the decree exclu­ded atheists. The court properly dis­mis­sed the suit because “a feeling of alie­na­tion can­not suffice as injury.” No branch of govern­ment, and par­ti­cu­larly not the exe­cutive branch, has any busi­ness estab­lish­ing or pro­mo­ting reli­gion. It is a vio­la­tion of the First Amend­ment. And that is the argu­ment that the FFR should have made cen­tral in its suit. If the suit was a ploy to per­suade the court that Mus­lims were doing exactly what the FFR was doing, suing over “hurt feelings” or “alie­na­tion, and get­ting away with it,” the ruse fai­led. A USA Today article reported:
“If anyone suf­fers injury … that per­son is the pre­si­dent, who is not com­pla­i­ning,” ruled a three-judge panel of the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Cir­cuit Court of Appeals.

“Those who do not agree with a president’s state­ment may speak in oppo­sition to it; they are not entit­led to silence the speech of which they dis­ap­prove,” the court said.

But neit­her the pre­si­dent, nor the Senate, nor the House, nor any govern­ment depart­ment or agency has any Con­sti­tu­tio­nal busi­ness proclai­ming any reli­gious obser­vance, whether or not the obser­vance is volun­tary. Such a procla­ma­tion sets a pre­ce­dent, one to be followed by others. The pre­si­dent is not entit­led to that brand of free speech.

On the other hand, Mus­lims dis­ap­prove of any cri­ti­cism of Islam or Mus­lims in any form – by word or by cari­ca­ture – and have repeatedly sought injunc­tions against anyone speak­ing freely about Islam and Mus­lims. And it is fear of those expen­sive and entang­ling suits, and the risk of invi­ting demon­stra­tions and even vio­lence, that have silen­ced most cri­tics of Islam.

Only the courage­ous will speak their minds and answer “Off with their heads!” with a reaf­fir­ma­tion of their right to say what they think must be said.

Edward Cline

Edward Cline is a nove­list who has writ­ten on the revo­lu­tio­nary war period. He is aut­hor of the Spar­row­hawk series of novels set in Eng­land and Vir­gi­nia in the Revo­lu­tio­nary period, the detec­tive novel First Prize, the sus­pense novel Whis­per the Guns, and of numerous pub­lis­hed artic­les, book reviews and essays.

Off With Their Heads: Isla­mic “Law­fare“
CAPMAG - 24 April 2011