The inalienable individual rights we enjoy as Americans are justly cherished by most across the political spectrum. These rights, such as of speech and religion, are common values that unite and distinguish Western civilization. However, there is a dangerous current of multiculturalism that threatens to overwhelm our civil liberties and Americans must be wary of, and reject, any political or judicial leaders who advocate subordinating American law to international law.
Let's start in Canada, where 2 provinces are steamrolling over traditional Western rights of freedom of expression. In the province of Alberta, the "human rights commission" is "investigating" Ezra Levant, former publisher of the Western Standard, for that magazine's publication of the Mohammed cartoons. The thin-skinned Islamists in Canada, who have no tolerance for anyone not following a Wahabi lifestyle, promptly filed a grievance against Levant for "hate speech." Anyone who believes in freedom of the press must read Levant's opening remarks:
My name is Ezra Levant. Before this government interrogation begins, I will make a statement. When the Western Standard magazine printed the Danish cartoons of Mohammed two years ago, I was the publisher. It was the proudest moment of my public life. I would do it again today. In fact, I did do it again today...Beyond Alberta, the British Columbia, Ontario and Canada "human rights commissions" are contemplating charges against Mark Steyn for his writings that expose radical Islam. The NY Post has an editorial covering this case.I believe that this commission has no proper authority over me...
The commission has no legal authority to act as censor. It is not in their statutory authority...
For a government bureaucrat to call any publisher or anyone else to an interrogation to be quizzed about his political or religious expression is a violation of 800 years of common law, a Universal Declaration of Rights, a Bill of Rights and a Charter of Rights. This commission is applying Saudi values, not Canadian values. ..
I have no faith in this farcical commission. But I do have faith in the justice and good sense of my fellow Albertans and Canadians. I believe that the better they understand this case, the more shocked they will be. I am here under your compulsion to answer the commission’s questions. But it is not I who am on trial: it is the freedom of all Canadians.
Now, let's go from Canada to the Netherlands, where the multiculturalists defend to the death the right of Muslims not to be offended, Theo van Gogh's death that is. Now, some right-wing politicians are airing a documentary about the Koran's textual foundation for the Islamic terrorism plaguing the world, and some left-wing politicians are not happy...with the documentary as opposed to the violence.
The Dutch government is bracing itself for violent protests following the scheduled broadcast this week of a provocative anti-Muslim film by a radical right-wing politician who has threatened to broadcast images of the Koran being torn up and otherwise desecrated.Funny how nobody every worried about violent riots and suicide bombers when "The Last Temptation of Christ" came out or in reaction to the countless anti-Semitic TV shows that infect Arab nations.Cabinet ministers and officials, fearing a repetition of the crisis sparked by the publication of cartoons of Muhammad in a Danish newspaper two years ago, have held a series of crisis meetings and ordered counter-terrorist services to draw up security plans. Dutch nationals overseas have been asked to register with their embassies and local mayors in the Netherlands have been put on standby.
Geert Wilders, one of nine members of the extremist VVD (Freedom) party in the 150-seat Dutch lower house, has promised that his film will be broadcast - on television or on the internet - whatever the pressure may be. It will, he claims, reveal the Koran as 'source of inspiration for intolerance, murder and terror'.
Dutch diplomats are already trying to pre-empt international reaction. 'It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,' said Maxime Verhagen, the Foreign Minister, who was in Madrid to attend the Alliance of Civilisations, an international forum aimed at reducing tensions between the Islamic world and the West. In Amsterdam, Rotterdam and other towns with large Muslim populations, imams say they have needed to 'calm down' growing anger in their communities.
So what do Canada and the Netherlands have to do with America? Well, when Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer advocates using international law, not solely the United States Constitution, to decide cases, we ought to be concerned. When many politicians (mostly Democrats, but also John McCain) urge America to sign onto the International Criminal Court, we ought to be worried.
Americans should demand that all presidential candidates clearly explain their position on the issue of the relative roles of American and international law, and on the types of judges they would appoint in this regard. Nothing is more important than our Constitutional rights, and no politician should ever be elected who would enable non-Americans to impose Canadian- and Dutch-style multicultural limits on our freedoms, much less erode our rights to freedom of speech (as McCain has done with Russ Feingold) directly.
Great article, Jon. The American people in general have their heads in the sand when it comes to our freedoms, many seemingly willing to chuck them away judging from the star treatment the Dems and McCain get. Yet, they bleat away with the mention of wire-tapping. I guess the MSM is to blame. My hope as we get deeper into the primaries, the true Conservative voice will be heard and McCain will get kicked to the curb.
Posted by: Andrew at January 21, 2008 04:40 PM
Freedom of speech is the most important right that we have. First we cannot upset Muslims, then what next? Can Republicans ask to stop having our feelings hurt. Let us tell the media to be fair and they will have a heart attack. The Constitution is what it is, let us respect it
Posted by: The Young Reaganite at January 22, 2008 02:15 PM
Wow, that is shocking. I cannot believe how people will just give up their rights to a government entity.
I find it sickening that we are currently in a fight to maintain our rights of Political (McCain-Feingold) and Religious speech.
The very foundations of our government are being attacked, and we need to unite against anyone, or any group, that would seek to limit these "Inalienable Rights."
Posted by: TP at January 30, 2008 08:30 PM
I feel that you guys have been incredibly naive for over a year. Ron Paul is your man and you just don't see it because you're blinded by fear of terrorism. (And by the way, Ron Paul is the only one with the answer to defeating terrorism against us)
All they (islamic terrorists) have is motivation to kill us, and someone in charge better understand WHY they do it. All the official research including the official 9/11 commission report and many top CIA advisers all point to the motivation of them attacking us from Bill Clinton, etc. bombing Iraq for 10 years and for the empire we've created overseas. As for Israel, if they are actually threatened, we can assist them as a sovereign ally, but maybe we should stop sending guns and aid to Israel AND guns and aid to the people ATTACKING Israel!
Killing all the terrorists works alright as long as you aren't creating more terrorists in doing it. Official estimates are now that Al Quaeda is back to pre-9/11 levels or greater, and is has all to do with foreign policy. I mean put it in perspective, and this isn't a fact but it gets the idea across: for every terrorist we kill over there 9 more pop up around in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Its like playing whack a mole but every time you whack a mole 5 new holes appear with moles jumping out. You can't win that way.
Please research and pray. I beg you for our country's future. You know how important this is, it is worth your time.
Posted by: megastealer ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.gopbloggers.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at January 31, 2008 11:45 PM
someone in charge better understand WHY they do it.
They do it because we are not muslims, nor are under muslim rule. This is based on the Koran, which instructs muslims to offer non-muslims to convert, offer non-muslims second-class status under muslim rule (dhimmitude), or fight and kill the non-muslims.
Muslim terrorists started attacking Americans before we did anything in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, or anywhere else. In fact, muslim terrorists started attacking Americans before Israel even existed. Those terrorists, known as Barbary Pirates, attacked American ships and enslaved their sailors as early as the 1780s. When ambassadors John Adams and Thomas Jefferson asked a muslim envoy, who represented Algiers (a terrorist-harboring Barbary state) why the pirates attacked American ships, he gave the Koran-based answer I have stated above.
the empire we've created overseas
Really? Those muslims must really be [bleep]ed off about our continued possession of Guam, part of Samoa, Wake Island, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. You'd think that they'd ease up on us a little bit now that we've relinquished control of the Phillipines, the Panama Canal Zone, the Marshall Islands, Palau and the Federated States of Micronesia.
for every terrorist we kill over there 9 more pop up around in Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Afghanistan.
So if we stop killing them, they'll stop popping up? Doesn't sound likely, considering that we killed very few terrorists during the Clinton years, yet Al Qaeda grew by leaps and bounds. If today's Al Qaeda is now at "pre-9/11 levels", how did they get to that level in the first place?
maybe we should stop sending guns and aid to Israel AND guns and aid to the people ATTACKING Israel!
Agreed. We should stop sending anything to the people attacking Israel.
Posted by: Bigfoot at February 1, 2008 10:44 AM
The answer to America's problem is to DRAFT Newt Gingrich to run for the Presidency.
Also, the idiot that suggests Ron Paul had best breathe...He has held his breath long enough and it is showing!
Posted by: Lee S Gliddon Jr at February 1, 2008 08:17 PM
"Doesn't sound likely, considering that we killed very few terrorists during the Clinton years, yet Al Qaeda grew by leaps and bounds."
Clinton launched missiles off our navy vessels at targets in Iraq for 10 years, put on cowardly sanctions which at best kill civilians and stop them from receiving medical supplies, etc.
We'd be in a lot more trouble than you could imagine if Muslims were after us because we're not Muslims. Sure, as Christians, we believe the world would be better off if everyone were Christians, and so do Muslims. There are a lot of Muslims around, and if thats how normal Muslims truly felt about their holy book then you had better be watching your back.
However only the radical elements of Islam who are enraged over other issues such as American presence and Clinton and democrat interventionism since 1953 when we overthrew an elected government in Iran for oil interests are the ones taking it to that extreme.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Imagine the United States as Iran, and Russia and China being superpowers while the U.S. barely has a respectable army, air force, and a navy of a few speedboats.
Russia and China feel that for some reason or another America is too dangerous to have nuclear weapons. Russia and china have already invaded Canada and Mexico with joint forces and obliterated them because they were "trying to acquire" these weapons as well. They park their navies blockading our ports on the pacific coast, Atlantic coast, and the Gulf of Mexico. They threaten to impose sanctions on our economy and ultimately invade and overthrow our government if we don't give up our nuclear power, including all nuclear weapons and shut down all nuclear facilities. How would you react to this?
The motivation for them to radicalize comes from a flawed foreign policy designed to protect oil and does a horrendous job at doing it.
And lets not forget Ron Paul was the only person talking about attacking specifically the radical elements who attacked us using Mark and Reprisal. He also voted to go into Afganistan to take Osama Bin Laden, where we let the Pakistanis (well known Osama Bin Laden sympathizers) go in to capture him and fail.
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or Al Quaeda. There are factions of Islam just as their are factions of Christianity, but the factions are much less tolerant of each other. At its core, Al Quaeda is a much different faction from any of the 3 in Iraq, and the only thing bringing Al Quaeda to Iraq is a hatred of our occupation.
If Al Quaeda really wanted Iraq they would just stop blowing things up, we would leave, and then they could spring up and take Iraq for themselves. Ever heard of sleeper cells?
But thats not whats happening is it. Using reverse logic, we could say that if Al Quaeda really wanted us to stay there, they would keep blowing things up as best they could. Why would they want us there? Well, there is a conspiracy that we are trying to take over the Muslim world.
And the figures are now Al Quaeda being stronger than before 9/11. Why would they want us to leave?
I typed this up rather quickly because I'm busy tonight, so I'm sorry if there are some spelling or grammatical errors.
Keep fighting for freedom and America!
Posted by: megastealer at February 2, 2008 09:17 PM
I also forgot to mention that the Marks of Reprisal were the constitutional method to deal with pirates and other entities attacking the United States who belonged to no nation, such as those Barbary Pirates you talked about.
Posted by: megastealer at February 2, 2008 09:21 PM
Kill all the Muhamadins.
Knights Templar
Posted by: Bob at February 8, 2008 09:53 PM
All I can say is Amen.
Posted by: Chris at February 12, 2008 10:57 PM
To get a real grip on the Bin Laden/alQaida topic I would suggest listening to what Michael Scheuer has to say. As founder of the CIA's Bin Laden Unit he is considered a leading authority on the subject. His new book "Marching Toward Hell" should serve to rectify any lingering doubts as to the policy changes we so desperately need to implement. "Only Ron Paul understood what was going on." was his response to the question "Which of the presidential candidates gets it?" on the O'Reilly show.
The conservatives I hear who are NOT supporting Dr. Paul cite foreign policy as their excuse. The propaganda machine has convinced them that our current folly is somehow in our best interest. As Dr. Paul suggested to Rudolph Giuliani, perhaps they should read up and educate themselves on the topic before making rash statements and decisions.
The most pertinent question on this post is still - when WILL we all come to realize that Ron Paul is our man? As long as it is in time to get him nominated we can still win the White House.
Posted by: Robert Taft at February 17, 2008 12:38 AM
