Reading this made me not sure whether to laugh or cry:
Knowing her legal position was unsound, and that traditional forms of law could not constitutionally be used to suppress critical examination of religion, Secretary Clinton further explained the administration’s commitment “to use some old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming, so that people don’t feel that they have the support to do what we abhor.” The government is our servant, not our master — besides enforcing valid laws, it has no business using its coercive power to play social engineer. More to the present point, however, the administration was effectively saying it is perfectly appropriate to employ extra-legal forms of intimidation to suppress speech that “we abhor.”
That is precisely what the Egyptian mob was about to do when the U.S. embassy issued its statement. The Obama administration’s position? The president endorses extortionate “peer pressure” and “shaming,” but condemns constitutionally protected speech. That’s exactly the message the embassy’s statement conveyed.
Our enemy uses old fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming. Stoning people to death for crimes which would not be crimes in the West at all — such as “adultery,” “blasphemy,” or “sodomy”* — incites mobs, and forces weak people (weak meaning you want to go along to get along, or maybe just live) to succumb to peer pressure and join in the shaming.
What I find the most horrifying is that we have a president who is not merely turning a blind eye to the mob, he is joining and encouraging it.
This president is implementing dhimmitude on us without a second thought. He is appeasing Islamists everywhere, pure and simple. So the attacks will intensify and continue for longer than ever. Islamists everywhere now know with certainty that they have Obama on the ropes.
Yesterday, Glenn Reynolds condemned this outrage, and called for the president’s resignation.
Predictably, there are those types who think that the cowardly hauling out, in the wee hours of the morning, of a filmmaker who offended the mob is perfectly OK, and that Glenn is wrong to condemn it:
Nakoula is behind a film that is supposedly the motivation behind rioting in various Muslim countries and is possibly part of the motivation behind actions that lead to the death of several Americans, including the US’ ambassador to Libya. Nakoula plead guilty to a federal crime and is on probation for said crime and may have violated the terms of his probation and is obligated to speak to authorities. The authorities have decided to exercise those rights and talk to Nakoula.
This is problematic how? Surely, given the situation, there are reasons to want to speak to Nakoula to find more out about the film. Such questioning does not violate his right to hold unpopular views nor does it stop him from sharing them. And the only reasons such questioning exists as an option is because Nakoula plead guilty to federal crimes. This is not the authorities dragging someone away simply because he made a controversial film.
Really? Since when are probationers brought in for routine questioning after midnight by an armed squadron? Since when are pictures of such late night raids circulated around the world?
Lynch mobs using “old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming” are horrifying enough. But this was our government doing exactly the same thing, and on behalf of the enemy lynch mob that seeks to destroy it. It makes me ashamed to be a citizen of such a country.
* I left out the serious crime of “apostasy.” Darn!
Anyway, in too many countries, apostasy is punishable by death:
In some countries apostasy from the religion supported by the state is explicitly forbidden. This is largely the case in some states where Islam is the state religion; conversion to Islam is encouraged, conversion from Islam penalised.
- Iran – illegal (death penalty)[7][8][9]
- Egypt – illegal (death penalty)[9]
- Pakistan – illegal (death penalty[9] since 2007)
- United Arab Emirates – illegal (death penalty)[10]
- Somalia – illegal (death penalty)[11]
- Afghanistan – illegal (death penalty, although the U.S. and other coalition members have put pressure that has prevented recent executions[12][13])
- Saudi Arabia – illegal (death penalty, although there have been no recently reported executions)[9][14]
- Sudan – illegal (death penalty, although there have only been recent reports of torture, and not of execution[15] [16])
- Qatar – illegal (death penalty)[17]
- Yemen – illegal (death penalty)[17]
- Sri Lanka – illegal (Prison sentences for 10 year) (Mahinda Rajapakse regime has passed anti religious change Act in the parliament)[17]
- Malaysia – illegal in five of 13 states (fine, imprisonment, and flogging)[18][19]
- Mauritania – illegal (death penalty)[citation needed]
- Syria – possibly illegal (death penalty) although there is evidence to the contrary[20]
- Morocco – illegal to proselytise conversion (15 years jail, flogging)[21]
- Jordan – possibly illegal (fine, jail, child custody loss, marriage annulment) although officials claim otherwise, convictions are recorded for apostasy.[22][23][24]
Nice, eh?
Comments
12 responses to ““old-fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming””
I think you’re right. They seem to be investigating Mr. Nakoula for all the wrong reasons. The representations he made to his actors and donors, and exactly where the money went(at one point he claimed to have raised $5 million)could be investigated as well as his use of aliases, but I don’t think that’s where they are going.
Thanks for the link!
Do you the link to the Clinton quote (your first blockquote)? Thanks
Well, I just googled the first sentence. Here is the link:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/321039/obama-vs-first-amendment-andrew-c-mccarthy?pg=3#
The fact is the pretense of the “questioning” of Nakoula is just B.S. Suppose that all his prior transgressions were the same, the conditions of his probation was the same. Then suppose that instead of the anti-Islam movie he had made a children’s cartoon of butterflies and unicorns.
Sure, of course the same armed squad of cops and federal agents would have hauled him off in the dead of night, with all the reporters and cameramen alerted and brought along to record it.
Yeah, right.
It looks like the President isn’t going to have a full eight years to bring about “1984,” so he’s trying to get as much done in the last few months as possible.
“First, they came for the filmmakers who insulted islam, and I didn’t speak out because I was too ****ing scared they’d come for me.”
Religion of pieces, indeed.
I wonder if she feels the same way about “slut shaming”.
[…] our government’s craven record of appeasement and shocking disregard of the First Amendment, it should surprise no one that […]
Every six months or so, conservatives and “libertarians” need to be reminded of what the 1st Amendment actually says, and every three months of so, Glenn Reynolds needs to be reminded of the actual history of Nazism that goes beyond the brown-ness of their shirts.
Why was the media there?
I don’t know, probably because they had identified him by WEDNESDAY, before anyone in the government had. Personally, I find this to be highly responsible on the part of the media, to in a sort of Michelle Malkin-esque fashion, divulge the identity of some people who would obviously be the recipient of death threats. To Michelle’s credit, she only did that to Santa Cruz liberal students, who are not really people in the first place. But then again, may its justice for a guy who decided to defame Israel with claims of Israeli support and “100 Jewish donors.” The frenzy was there before the police.
http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2012/09/13/media-frenzy-continues-outside-home-of-alleged-anti-muslim-filmmaker/
Why was the FBI there? Was it to conduct some super Shariah Obama raid? Or was it perhaps to talk to the guy receiving probably a number of death threats now that his identity was revealed?
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/09/innocence-of-muslim-allies-fearful-after-threats-consultant-says.html
Lastly, just to get to you last lie- MIDNIGHT. MIDNIGHT! This was not a raid. He was taken in for a voluntary interview. “Authorities waited until most media had left for the day to take Nakoula in.” . . . “When the man was taken away early Saturday, authorities had to dodge only a lone photographer for The Times and a few lingering reporters.”
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/09/anti-muslim-film-nakoula-basseley-innocence-muslims.html
Donald thanks for stopping by. The link is in the word “this” in the first sentence, and it works. Problem is that since I upgraded to WP, the links are not as visible as they used to be.
This hubbub about this particular video strikes me as odd, because there have been so many — including Koran burnings — which were widely circulated, that this one almost seems randomly singled out.
[…] was military in nature and had been preplanned, and after needlessly harassing (and basically serving up to our enemies) a convenient scapegoat whose silly film did little more than provide the same pretext any Mohammad […]
[…] forum. Maybe I haven’t been blogging as much as I should, but lately I have sounded off about foreign policy (if that is what it is), and so has Dave. I don’t like seeing free speech being […]