Musings Of An Indie Writer| « | “Unitary Executive” |
»
|
|
Saturday, February 04, 2006
Freedom Of Speech
If you have not yet done so, please read this earlier post before proceeding onward here. It's indispensable foundation material for what will follow.
After a number of confused and confusing emissions from Foggy Bottom, the State Department has settled on its "official" position in the Jyllands-Posten cartoon affair. Though improved over the previous statements, it still does the Department little credit.
Mind you, this particular organ of the federal government has granted innumerable favors and measures of conciliation and forbearance to Islamic regimes that practice totalitarian oppressions upon their subjects. There is no Islamic state whose denizens possess freedom of speech. Even in those that pay lip service to freedom of religion, in practice such freedom does not exist; Islamic forces routinely savage and terrorize non-Muslims with impuinty...and often with the covert collaboration of official power. Yet our State Department shows such nations excessive respect; more respect, in some cases, than it grants to nations whose soldiers have fought alongside ours in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Denmark is one such nation. Though small, it's as plucky as countries come. Its people have a rich history of which they can be justly proud. Included in that history is that, when the Nazis occupied Denmark during World War II and demanded that Danish Jews wear the identifying yellow star that marked them for persecution, King Christiaan defied the edict, saying that as all Danes were alike in his eyes, he would wear the star for all of them -- and he did, to the very end of the occupation.
Today, Muslims worldwide -- adherents to the most barbaric creed to pass itself off as a religion since the days of infant sacrifice -- are attempting to terrorize Denmark into groveling before them, by a combination of means: economic boycott, sustained public demonstrations, and some outright violence against Danes and Danish consulates. If there were ever a time for Washington to speak with a single strong and uncompromising voice in defense of freedom, and in support of a valiant and valuable ally, now is it. Instead, Foggy Bottom's leadoff had to be this:
"We find them offensive," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said of the cartoons. "While we share the offense that Muslims have taken at these images, we at the same time vigorously defend the right of individuals to express points of view."
This is contemptible in the extreme. First, the State Department exists, not to express anyone's opinions about the suitability of journalism, art, or entertainment, but to express and implement the official foreign policy of the United States, as set out by Acts of Congress and proclamations by the president. Second, your Curmudgeon has no doubt that there are many State Department employees who don't find the cartoons offensive; who gave Sean McCormack the privilege of subsuming their opinions in his own? Third, how appropriate was it for a bureaucrat to emit such a statement, however couched, rather than the Secretary of State or the president himself?
All the nations of Europe are being sorely tried by the Muslims they've foolishly let into their domains. Not one is without strife from these violent, intemperate barbarians. Unless the Europeans stiffen up properly and show a firm hand to these not terribly covert subverters of liberty and civilization, soon the Old World will no longer be to any degree free; it will merely be old.
But with equivocal statements like those of Sean McCormack issuing from Washington, suggesting that the Danes really ought to censor themselves in the future as a security measure, how likely are the Europeans to bare their swords before the Islamic threat? How likely are they to drop to their knees, as the most vocal elements of their intelligentsia have been clamoring for them to do?
The United States is a highly significant nation in many ways, but most significant in international and symbolic terms for this: we represent uncompromising principles of liberty and justice. We'll go to war to uphold and maintain them; indeed, we've gone to war several times to bring them to others. The other free and semi-free nations of the world point to us as their icon, the land where the ideals to which they've pledged themselves were born and are best defended. The impact of equivocation from the State Department, or any bastion of high federal officialdom, on something as fundamental as freedom of speech could be internationally disastrous.
Dear President Bush:
Please issue a definitive statement of absolute, unconditional support for Denmark as soon as possible. And kindly instruct those striped-pants clowns at State to keep their traps shut until they can say something worthy of an ordinary, freedom-loving American.
Yours most sincerely,
Francis W. Porretto
Curmudgeon Emeritus of Eternity Road.
Comments
Amen. I deliberately bought some Havarti yesterday to contribute in my miniscule way; the leaders of the non-Islamic nations can do much more simply with their words in public.
I had hoped that when Rice was appointed Secretary of State that she might swing an axe to clear out some deadwood, but alas this does not seem to have happened (yet?).
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/04/2006 at 10:59 AMHavarti-Whoo Hoo! Yeah, sign me up for some of that too. I like those cookies as well.
Posted by og on 02/04/2006 at 11:29 AMSeconded. That address, BTW, is .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address). Write early and often.
M
Posted by Mark Alger on 02/04/2006 at 12:06 PMFirst thank you for the support.
Today our government and opposition both said that Denmark should stand firm on our freedom to speak our minds and Denmark would not be intimidated by threats.
Sure hope we can stand our ground without the US and UK.We danes know/hope that we can count on US and Uk if things gets to “hot” in Denmark or at least on the brave people in the US and UK.
Never give in—never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.
Sir Winston Churchill,Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on 02/04/2006 at 07:35 PMActually, I think McCormack should have said ‘we understand why they offend Muslims’ rather than ‘we find them offensive’ - since I doubt he finds them offensive either (aside from the three that were added by the theocrats who went out to stir things up - those would offend most people).
However, “we at the same time vigorously defend the right of individuals to express points of view.” is something I vigorously agree with.
As in the old “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
Wagener, the US is not abandoning you, if I read that last part right. And I’m pretty sure I did.
(And the people of the US are certainly not abandoning you. I say this as I’m opening a Tuborg Gold. And I’ve, for some odd reason, discovered a liking for havarti cheese, too.)
Posted by Kathy K on 02/04/2006 at 07:56 PMI’m quite disappointed in the Secretary of State for signing off on the State Department Memo, assuming that she did.
Posted by Juliette on 02/04/2006 at 10:32 PMMy wife and I have decided that next week is our “Danish Delights!” week. We are going to buy as much in the way of Danish products as we can and work them into our menu.
I guess we support our allies far more than the asshats at Foggy Bottom, eh?
Posted by MrSpkr on 02/04/2006 at 10:42 PMThanks for your comments. FYI, we got a Mohammed Cartoons Blogburst going.
Posted by ELC on 02/05/2006 at 10:53 AM*Standing Ovation*
Posted by Claire on 02/05/2006 at 11:11 AMExcellent post.
Posted by Fausta on 02/05/2006 at 05:08 PMExpecting the State Department to act in an undiplomatic way is to forget that they are - diplomats! Yet, the tone of their remarks leave much to be desired. What the US government is caving in to is not muslim sensivity, but to the threat of violence. They never make a sound when these same media outlets show antisemitic, or unwholesaome antiamerican cartoons that many of US find offensive. When Americans have finally had enough, and burn down the temples of the enemy, the terms of the debate will change. And, make no mistake: there will be another 9/11, there will be mosques burned down, and then we shall see what the future holds. As long as many fail to apprehend that we are at war, we shall continue to see this mealymouthed response to muslim extortion.
Posted by Michael Gersh on 02/05/2006 at 05:46 PMFirst, I’ve never heard of any of these governments going out of their way to suppress anti-Christian or, Allah forbid, antiJewish cartoons in their newspapers, and I hardly see why we should cater to their sensitivities when they dont give a damn about ours. Second, this is just typical diplomatic gobbledygook, the instinctive rush to the middle ground that is drilled into foreign service officers as soon as they are hired. Are these cartoons offensive to Muslims? Yes they are, and so what? Denmark is not a Muslim nation and they are as entitled to their opinion of the prophet as anyone else. This search for some mythological middle ground is not going to help the US; these people will still hate us no matter what side we take, so why not take the side that we really believe in, the side of free expression, and leave the mushmouthed pap to the people trying to apply for the position of head dhimmi?
Posted by akaky on 02/05/2006 at 06:48 PMI’m given to understand that Condi has started processes in motion that should in time lead to a more loyal crew at the ship of the State Department, but 1) those things take time and 2) I heard long before that, that there are some weirdo rules at State that prevent the SecState from just saying, “You! You’re not on our side, you’re fired!”
Posted by Dave on 02/06/2006 at 12:16 PMRight on point Dave. Seems like the State Department seems to take the “official” position of political correctness while behind close doors, they may think otherwise. All in all, this is just another example of “religious people gone bad” (notice I just said religious people not the religion). My uncle has been a Muslim for over 30 years here in the States. He saw the cartoon and laughed it off as satire. But he’s black and an American so other “angles” guide him also. I’m going to stick to my guns and say this is an Arab Muslim issue more than a general Muslim issue.
Posted by T-Steel on 02/07/2006 at 09:26 AM
Comment Form
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.
