June 08, 2005

Flag Desecration Images From the Religion of Patriots

Images from a video of the jihadis of the Islamic Thinkers Society below. This is the group that, at an earlier protest, had said about 9/11, "Next time we'll get all of New York,"

[UPDATE: You can view the video online here (with thanks to Shawn at Bare Knuckle Politics for uploading it) or you can download the entire video here (a little inconvenient becase of the wait time for free members, but the quality is better).

I had seen this story earlier at Jihad Watch, but didn't see the video until Michelle Malkin linked it. Michelle says "jump", I say "how high?" Also, you might want to follow her e-mail advice. Anyway, after seeing the video I'm disgusted. Since I know some people don't actually click the video links, I went ahead and took some screen shots of the video. If ever there was a clear 'fighting words' defense for assault, here it is.

Rob at Say Anything on the irony of it all (yes, this is true irony since words are being intentionally misused):

You know what I find amazing? The fact that the protesters are shouting about injustices done to Islamic people by the Americans, yet one of them about halfway through the video gets on the microphone and talks about how Islam is going to take over the world.
UPDATE: Thanks to Wunderkraut for pointing to this post by Jay Tea over at Wizbang. He makes a good point about our reaction to flag desecration vs. the childish actions of Muslims over Koran abuse. However, he is way off the mark in the rest of the post. As a loyal follower of the Commissar (who advocates vigorous debate amongst ourselves), I must stand up and point out that my right-wing friend at Wizbang makes a serious logical error.

No freedom or liberty can be understood as anything but ordered and contextual. What this means is that what is thought of as a liberty in one context must be weighed against other liberties, and that sometimes these acts may be even considered criminal. From the Schenck (1919) case, for insance, comes the famous (if not discredited) example that people generally have the liberty to say whatever they wish, but they cannot yell fire in a crowded theater. The context of the theater changes the permissible action of shouting fire.

War also changes the context. We are in a war with jihadi inspired terrorists. In the context of war, embedded in the further context of a community which may have at least some minor percentage of those that are sympathetic to the cause, then advocating for the cause of the enemy ceases to be protected speech. In fact, this is a classic example of of the exception carved out in Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): "Freedoms of speech and press do not permit a State to forbid advocacy of the use of force or of law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action"

I would argue that the word imminent ought to be dropped from the legal rule set up in Brandenburg. If 9/11 has taught us anything it is that terrorist acts may take years of planning. It has also taught us that our freedoms and liberties may be used against us in order to destroy those very liberties.

So, do I want flag desecration to be forbidden? No, of course not. What I do want is for incitement to take up arms against the US to be forbidden when the US is in a shooting war.




At about this point in the video the speaker actually used the word 'loophole' to describe the First Amendment right to desecrate the flag. These Islamists use our freedoms to further their anti-American agenda in exactly the same way the German Bund and the Communist Party USA did.




Here's the WND article that describes the video and rally.

In the video, released by the New York-based Islamic Thinkers Society, one of the Muslims is shown placing a sign on the flag that says, "Oh Muslims! Do you know your enemy? Isn't it obvious?"

The five-minute piece begins with a man speaking in clear English: "Just to show where our loyalty belongs to -- you see this flag here? It's going to go on the floor [sic]. And to us, our loyalty does not belong to this flag, our loyalty belongs to Allah ... ." ...

Another speaker refers to the mandate for "Islam to dominate over all other religions, to dominate the world, even though the non-Muslims may hate it." ...

At one Al-Muhajiroun event at Queensborough Community College sponsored by the MSA and attended by WND, a Muhajiroun speaker working with Yousuf said, "We reject the U.N., reject America, reject all law and order. Don't lobby Congress or protest because we don't recognize Congress! The only relationship you should have with America is to topple it!"

The speaker continued, "The so-called terrorists are the only people who truly fear Allah. ... They are the only worthy causes, and the mighty superpower only fears them."

In a private interview with WND, a Queens based Al-Muhajiroun leader said he would be "absolutely honored" to give up his life in a "martyr operation" against American civilians. The leader warned that "a jihad is coming to America because of the moves of the Bush administration."

Last year, Al-Muhajiroun planned a convention in London titled, "The Choice is in Your Hands: Either You're with the Muslims or with the Infidels," to mark the third anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

In 2003, the group had planned a similar anniversary event called "The Magnificent 19 [Suicide Attackers]," but canceled it at the last minute. /blockquote>

By Rusty Shackleford, Ph.D. at 04:11 PM | Comments |