“A Crowded Theater”

3 Share 2 Tweet 0

Send this article by email

What is your name?

Please indicate below the emails to which you want to send this article: "A Crowded Theater"

Enter one email per line. No more than 5 emails.

Send

Close

republishing.eu – religious conflicts

On September 11, 2012, terrorists attacked the U S Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. They killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other American Foreign Service diplomats. Ambassador Stevens was a true friend to the Libyan people and to the emerging democracy in Libya. When he died at in an emergency medical facility in Benghazi, Libya, the Libyan medical personnel broke into tears. They knew who he was and they knew what they had lost.

Ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans who died with him were victims of religious intolerance and fanaticism that stretches from the safe haven of the United States into the crowded theater of Islamic majority nations in Northern Africa and the Middle East. These four brave citizens need not be extolled in death beyond what they were in life: good and decent men who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw tyranny and tried to end it, saw hope and tried to sustain it. We can neither properly cherish their memories nor honor their sacrifice if we now betray the ideals by which they lived or abandon the cause for which they died. Though the way ahead may be perilous and the risks may be steep, we will be judged in the end by the faith that we keep.

thecyclemsnbc – crowded theater

The actions that took their lives and the actions that provoked or gave a pretext for the violence were cruel and cowardly actions. These nefarious deeds are the responsiblity of the rioters and the paramilitary attackers, but they are also the responsibility of an iniquitous trinity of provocateurs in America, terrorists in the Islamic world, and demagogues in America and Muslim majority countries. The provocateurs try to incite the citizens of Muslim majority nations to do counter-productive, cruel, cowardly acts to foster anti-Islamic feelings or retaliatory disdain, or to provide cover for aggression against Muslims and Islamic nations. The terrorists unwittingly or knowingly collude with these American resident miscreants and enlist ordinary Muslims in acts of wanton violence and gross injustice. Demagogues in America and Muslim majority nations rush to exploit the disruptions and instability for short-term, partisan political gain. In combination, the evil deeds of these three sets of fiendish fanatics and calculating schemers serve themselves only and inflict harm on all people of goodwill regardless or color, creed, nationality, gender, socioeconomic status or level of maturation. The three sets of bad actors are not necessarily in any explicit conspiracy, but their evil intent and harmful conduct blend to form lethally toxic geopolitical consequences.

Whether provocateur, terrorist, or demagogue anyone who communicates in whatever form, in whatever language, through whatever means incendiary, defamatory, words or images in the teeming and turbulent lands of Northern Africa and the Middle East, is in effect falsely crying fire in a crowded theater. As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said in an opinion in the case Schenck v. United States, 249 US 47 (1919), – “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” This Supreme Court case first that explored the limits of First Amendment protection of free speech. In short, there is no absolute right of free speech because there are always real circumstances in which unregulated expression can create or aggravate dangerous situations. The Schenck decision went on to assert: “Words which, ordinarily and in many places, would be within the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment may become subject to prohibition when of such a nature and used in such circumstances as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils which Congress has a right to prevent. The character of every act depends upon the circumstances in which it is done.” In Bradenburg v. Ohio, 395 US 444 (1969), the Court held a person could not be punished for using offensive or inflammatory language, but only for inciting “imminent lawless action,” with “lawlessness” being a likely outcome of the speech. In the current context, the scurrilous fourteen minute YouTube video is not subject to proscription because of its foul depiction of Mohammed, but it is subject to censure due to its known and intended effect of “inciting lawless action.” Superficial defenses of “Free Speech” by people who should know better notwithstanding, the producers and distributors of the “Innocence of Muslims” are culpable and should be identified and prosecuted.

Responsible political leaders and responsible citizens of the United States and Islamic countries must effectively counter the nefarious ploys of the provocateurs, terrorists and demagogues and/or their opportunistic political facilitators and sycophants. In order to do this, several themes and tactics are required. First, both responsible leaders and responsible citizens must not panic and they must not imbue the actions of misguided rioters with more sinister and far-reaching implications than are warranted. Second, the millions of non-violent citizens of Islamic countries and tolerant citizens of America must must not be tarred with broad brushes due to the manipulative efforts of the provocateurs, demagogues and terrorists or the rampaging of those they have duped. Third, in the United States, responsible leaders and citizens must keep their courage and maintain focus on American principles, purposes and prevailing interests in peaceful, constructive relations with Islamic nations and the millions of Muslims throughout the world. Fourth, in Islamic nations responsible leaders and citizens must make a good faith effort to distinguish between the calculated strategies of American provocateurs and demagogues seeking to foment a crusade against Islam for their own dominionist ends and the considered actions of the American government and the true intentions of the majority of Americans. Finally between America and the Islamic world, candor, cooperation, courtesy, mutual respect and good faith diplomatic efforts to identify and resolve genuine issues are the beneficial qualities conduct and the proper courses of action.

Page 1 of 3 | Next page