A Muslim threat to free speech in the US?

 "On April 14 Comedy Central broadcast the 200th episode of “South Park,” a cartoon that Trey Parker and Matt Stonehave produced for that channel since 1997. In honor of the occasion, Mr. Parker and Mr. Stone populated the episode with nearly all the famous people their show has lampooned in its history, including celebrities like Tom Cruise and Barbra Streisand, as well as major religious figures, like Moses, Jesus and Buddha.

Cognizant that Islam forbids the depiction of its holiest prophet, Mr. Stone and Mr. Parker showed their “South Park” characters agonizing over how to bring Muhammad to their fictional Colorado town. At first the character said to be Muhammad is confined to a U-Haul trailer, and is heard speaking but is not shown. Later in the episode the character is let out of the trailer, dressed in a bear costume.

The next day the “South Park” episode was criticized by the group Revolution Muslim in a post at its Web site,revolutionmuslim.com. The post, written by a member named Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, said the episode “outright insulted” the prophet, adding: “We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid, and they will probably wind up like Theo van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.”

Mr. van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker and a critic of religions including Islam, was killed by an Islamic militant in Amsterdam in 2004 after he made a film that discussed the abuse of Muslim women in some Islamic societies."  NY Times

----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am not a Muslim, but I have been a student of the religion and the civilization influenced by it for many years.  I often lecture on these subjects.  I lecture from the point of view of a respectful but skeptical outsider.  I would expect a Muslim lecturer to take the same approach to speaking of Christianity or any other religion.  Prince Hassan of Jordan's excellent book, "Christianity in the Arab World" would be a good example.

Having said that, I, nevertheless, think that "Revolution Muslim's" posting of Talhah al-Amrikee's statement is a thinly disguised death threat intended to intimidate free speech.  The sub-text here is that some speech should be freer than other speech and that speech with regard to Islam should not be free at all, but, rather, should be limited by the opinion of Muslims as to what Islam really is and its applicability to all people.

I think "South Park" is  sophomoric and vulgar.  John Stewart and Colbrt are true political satirists.  Stewart's show is gradually divesting itself of some of the gross thematic material and language of the past.  I have not heard him cry out "NAMBLA" for a while.  Colbert is a formidable adversary for anyone who wants to debate.  The only time I have seen him flustered was the occasion when Jane Fonda sashayed to his side of the table, sat in his lap and nibbled on his ear.

In short, "South Park" is a "dog's breakfast," but in a secular, religion neutral society that believes that speech must be free if people are to be free, threats like this should be taken seriously by prosecutors and police.  If this kind of thing is tolerated, how long will it be before some zealot stands up in an audience to threaten me for describing Islam as I understand it?

"Crying fire in a crowded theater" is outside the limits of free speech but this is not that.  pl

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/23/arts/television/23park.html

Comments

[Brien J Miller]

I could not agree more, and by such threats do these practitioners of Islam denigrate not only themselves, but cast even darker shadows across the otherwise rich belief which they claim to hold so dearly.

[jr786]

I am a Muslim, and always find reactions like al Ameriki’s (spare me) curious. In America, I would just shrug, ask G-d’s protection and make it a point to have nothing to do with anyone who is disrespectful just for the sake of being so.

I’m quite happy living in a conservative Muslim country, circumscribed with tradition and, to most Western people’s eyes, hidebound conceits on personal and public decorum. Believe me, it isn’t just Muhammad who is respected. That’s here. But who on earth can possibly expect respect from unbelievers? Who would even want it, considering that any such respect would be hollow in the extreme? The Prophet said that the best amongst us were those with the best manners. In this case it would be wise to remember that the most courteous answer to fools is silence, wa Allahu Ahlam.

[Arun]

Is it within the bounds of acceptability to say that Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee faces a long stay in a Guantanamo-like place? "This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them." ????

[Patrick Lang]

Arun

No. IMO a prolonged stay in a state or federal prison is the more likely thing and more advisable. You want to make this political. it is not except in the sense that it threatens free speech in the US. pl

[Patrick Lang]

jr786

What you do in your country is your business. pl

[N.Z.]

Not one being has the right to claim that his understanding of any religion is the truth, Muslims or not .

Questioning the Holocaust, not denying is considered a punishable act, almost a crime .

The prophet Muhammad is a venerated figure in the Muslim tradition, depicting him or any prophet, steers unwanted feelings .

But threatening to kill someone for an act is unacceptable and I fully agree with Colonel L. that it should be neither ignored nor left without punishment .

[Arun]

Col. Lang:

Al-Amrikee probably thinks that his religion is limited by our ideas of freedom of speech, and our ideas of the limits of religion in the public sphere. Ultimately resolving this difference is a political issue.

-Arun

[frank durkee]

If we don't respond without supporting free speech strongly, we;re simply paying a form of Danegeld to buy them off. This only brings more pressure. the Col. is correct: find them indict them try them and if guilty put them away.

[b]

"Al-Amrikee" - Doesn't that mean so he is from the states?

http://revolutionmuslim.com/ is registered through a company in Florida. The server is hosted with an Internet provider in Houston.

Send in the FBI, get the "Al-Amrikee" IP address, track him down and give him a good talk. That shouldn't be hard to do.

On "free speech":

How much is such a warning, not a direct thread mind you, not itself free speech?

What about the free speech rights of Anwar al-Awlaki, an American preacher who the current American president wants to kill for what he says without a trial and outside of all legal means?

Haven't seen much free speech protectors speaking out against that...

[William R. Cumming]

Great post! Is there an open source available that would allow non-Arabic speakers to have some insights at to that culture and its current themes? For example are there not over 50 sects in the world of Islam with some more threatening than others? And which ones appear to be growing in importance and influence in the Islamic world and the non-Islamic world? Do we know how many fully fluent Arabists are citizens of the US and available to the US government for its various purposes? What exactly is the status of US Black Muslims within the Islamic World?

[ww]

I agree, but do not hold CC's decision to alter the offending material against them, either.

SP's political speech is in the context of profit motive. CC does have some obligation to protect its employees, most of whom have nothing to do with SP, from what is recognized as a real threat of danger.

[ked]

I think SP presents a sophisticated pov that its raunch masks as much as it magnifies. About 1 in 5 shows are as good as light entertainment on TV gets these days (faint praise, perhaps) - it is an acquired taste (if at all) along w/ Rocky & Bullwinkle and Futurama.

The incapacity to ignore outsider's blasphemy reveals as much truth about a faith than anything else.

[Phil Giraldi]

This kind of thing gets very tricky. We have the First Amendment which guarantees our right to free speech but there is also an increasing trend towards hate crime legislation which makes it illegal to say certain things. I would throw all hate legislation out the window and go back to the old standard whereby you actually had to DO something to be charged with a crime. As for our Muslim friend, he has to adjust to our norms if he wants to live in our country. That includes being able to make fun of Mohammed (or the Pope). If he does not like that he can get out. There are a lot of other places where he can live.

I am a strong supporter of the French government's banning of burqas and full veils. I bought my wife a burqa when I was in Afghanistan. She wore it once to work. The cowed, politically correct office staff did not even comment on it. Pretty scary.

[Patrick Lang]

WRC

This subject is the study of a lifetime. There are no single books that are adequate unless you want accept xomeone's special pleading. "50 sects?" What a joke! There are potentially as many views of Islam as there are Muslms. Remember, this is a religion if laymen, no hierarchy and no priests, only scholars and mystics. OK. Bring it on about the Shia Howza. pl

[Nancy K]

Phil, to often if you wait until a terrorist, Islamic or home grown, commits an act, you have waited too long.
As for your wife wearing a burqa and not being noticed, I think it in poor taste to make fun of other's customs and religion. Maybe the people in her office were not cowed but were polite.

[Patrick Lang]

b

IMO a death threat like this is not protected speech.

"Amrikee" might mean that, or anything else that struck someone's fancy.

You and several other peple here insist that you do not accept the difference between domestic police and justice functions and combat operations in a foreign war.

In fact, if Awlaqi returned to the US and surrendered himself to probably be tried for "substantial support of terrorism" then the civil restrictions on violence against him would apply

Since he took himself abroad and evidently has participated in making war against the US he is a legitimate military target. His cirizenship is utterly irrelevant. pl

[Patrick Lang]

Arun

That political point was settled long,long ago in the US. It is so much a settled principle that anyone who acts against it will be the target of the full force of the civil law. People who do not accept that principle should leave the country becasue they will inevitably suffer a bed end. pl

[Patrick Lang]

NZ

Our view is that everyone has the right to claim unique truth for this beliefs. What they do not have is the right to impose it on others.

It is not illegal to deny the truth of the Shoa in the US. It is merely stupid. pl

[Patrick Lang]

jr786

Since you did not comment on freedom of speech, instead merely writing on tolerance for what you might see as bad speech, I assume that you do not favor free speech unless you like the speech. pl

[optimax]

Ked,
Equating South Park with Rocky and Bullwinkle is blasphemy. May you be attacked by moose and squirrels.
If SP dropped the bathroom humor they'd have something more of us could stomach.

[Cloned Poster]

Go trawl all the neocon arguments for war in Iraq.

They have been hit by cruise missiles and inter-necine bombs that kills, not make ppl upset by words.

[Russ Wagenfeld]

Hi Pat,
I agree that "South Park" is sophomoric and vulgar. However,it might be the only political satire that a typical 15 year old would "get" and find entertaining enough to watch. The "South Park" show on the Prius (dubbed Pius on the show) was on the mark. Older teens seem to genuinely appreciate Stewart and Colbert which are often the only news programs they watch.
Russ

[Arun]

Col Lang,

The political point is settled only as far as the demographics is settled.

-Arun

[mo]

So some guy from some unknown group makes a statement of warning of a threat and this is suddenly a Muslim threat to free speech?

Is American belief and faith in such a tenet so easily threatened?

If not, treat this for what it is, the ramblings of person who has crossed legal lines within a jurisdiction he has chosen to live in and let the authorities deal with him as they would a Christian who threatens the life of a pro-abortionist.

Why turn it into a Muslim threat until you have evidence that the majority of Muslim living in the US agree with him?

[Patrick Lang]

mo

You don't get it. This is A Muslim threat to free speech in the US, not THE Muslim threat to free speech in America. I agree. The authorities should hunt this man down and punish him for making a death threat in opposition to SP's freedom of speech. pl