A briefing by Daniel Huff*

Daniel Huff is director of the Middle East Forum’s Legal Project, which defends the free speech rights of authors and activists commenting on radical Islam and related issues. A graduate of Columbia Law School, he previously served as counsel on the Senate Judiciary Committee to then Ranking Member Arlen Specter, handling a host of national security, civil and criminal matters. On October 28, he addressed the Middle East Forum via conference call on the twin assault Islamists have launched against free speech rights.

(more…)

by Johanna Markind*

If you were arrested for speaking on public streets, where would you turn for help? These days, the answer may depend on what you were saying.

Suppose you were arrested for marching through the streets of Dearborn, Michigan, protesting Israeli policies against Palestinians. Unquestionably, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) would support your rights, even filing suit on your behalf.

Suppose, instead, you were arrested for preaching Christianity on the streets of Dearborn. Would you ask the ACLU for help? Would it help you? Well, maybe.

Consider the four people arrested on June 18, 2010, for proselytizing passersby at Dearborn’s Arab International Festival. Certainly the ACLU agreed that the arrests had violated the missionaries’ constitutional rights. The state ACLU chapter’s legal director told the Michigan Messenger that “the man encouraging others to convert to Christianity was engaged in speech protected by the First Amendment.” But that is all. The organization did not issue any press releases to that effect, address the matter on its website, or reference it in listserv emails.

(more…)

By Barry Rubin

It is true that the passage of the referendum in Turkey with 58 percent of the vote can be seen as a victory for the AKP regime. But that point shouldn’t be exaggerated. The bad feature of the reforms–in terms of consolidating the Islamist government’s power–is to strengthen the regime’s control over the courts and to limit further the autonomy of the Turkish army.

At the same time, though, there were many other provisions that the overwhelming majority of Turks wanted, expanding freedoms and civil liberties, reining in the possibility of military coups which those left of center have opposed in the past. Moreover, it was sold as a step toward Turkish entry into the European Union, still a prime goal though something that’s never going to happen.

(more…)

By Stanley Renshon, CIS.org

The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday on the latest Quinnipiac University national survey on American opinions about various immigration matters. The title of the article, “Immigration issues hurting Obama, poll finds,” reflects the finding that, “By a 60%-to-28% margin, respondents disapproved of the way Obama is handling illegal immigration.” What isn’t clear is whether the president is losing support because he hasn’t been able to sign a “comprehensive immigration bill” allowing the legalization of approximately 11 million illegal immigrants or whether it’s because he’s proved much less than serious about border control, workplace enforcement, and deportation. Probably both.

(more…)

by Daniel Pipes*

Pastor Terry Jones’ plan to burn copies of the Koran at his church in Gainesville, Florida, let it be emphasized, is a distasteful act that fits an ugly tradition. That said, two other points need be noted: Buying books and then burning them is an entirely legal act in the United States. Second, David Petraeus, Robert Gates, Eric Holder, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama pressured Jones to cancel only because they feared Muslim violence against Americans if he proceeded. Indeed, despite Mr. Jones calling off the Koran burning, 5 Afghans and 14 Kashmiris died in protests against his plans.

(more…)

by Phyllis Chesler

Muslim groups have just called for “tolerance.” They “decry bigotry.” The Muslim leaders said: “We stand for the constitutional right of Muslims and Americans of all faiths to build houses of worship anywhere in our nation as allowed by local laws and regulations … Ground Zero belongs to all Americans.”

Technically, these words are both true and stop short of an outright endorsement. However, given the situation, these are also fighting words. Given the groups which attended the meeting and issued this statement, (e.g. Council on American Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, etc.), these are disingenuous words meant to falsely pacify, confuse, and disorient the infidel listener. They are words of “taqiyya.” This approach is but one example of how belligerent Islamists — not peaceful Muslims — use Western laws about tolerance in order to justify an era of anti-infidel intolerance. …Continue reading…

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

In a rare moment of clarity, the BBC published an article explaining why Americans can burn Korans, Bibles, Torahs, or American flags as expressions of free speech. Maybe a few people around the world will read this article and get a better understanding of the values we cherish and make us strong — time better spent than blaming the U.S. for every problem under the sun. Perhaps the “teaming masses” will get a clue as to why millions of immigrants, probably emigrants related to/known to most of these masses in some way (family, friendship, neighbors, etc.), have flocked to our great nation. And if new immigrants to the U.S. don’t understand our values, we’re pretty good at assimilation — or at last resort, there’s always police, riot police, the FBI, or the National Guard. For foreign entities who wish to destroy our cherished values, as in 911, that’s why we have aircraft carriers, Marines, F-16s, and cruise missiles. In other words, if you don’t like Americans’ right to free speech — e.g., the many “progressives” who would suspend free speech when it suits their cowardly agendas — you can just piss off. From the Beeb:

(more…)

WASHINGTON (August 31, 2010) — Every year, 300,000 to 400,000 children are born to illegal immigrants in the United States, each one of them automatically a U.S. citizen despite the illegal status of their parents. This practice of automatic, or birthright, citizenship is not the result of any specific legislation, regulation, executive order, or judicial ruling, and yet has become de facto law of the land.

(more…)

by Raymond Ibrahim*

In a recent article, I argued that the Ground Zero mosque is counterproductive to Islam. The following day, on August 5, the Egyptian newspaper Al Masry Al Youm reported that none other than Al Azhar — one of Sunni Islam’s most authoritative institutions — agrees. My translation of the relevant excerpt follows:

A number of Al Azhar ulema expressed their opposition to building a mosque near [where] the events of September 11 [occurred], convinced that it is “a conspiracy to confirm a clear connection between the strikes of September [11] and Islam.” Dr. ‘Abd al-Mu’ti Bayumi, a member of the Islamic Research Academy [of Al Azhar] told Al Masry Al Youm that he rejects the building of any mosque in this area [Ground Zero], because the “devious mentality” desires to connect these events [of 9/11] with Islam, though he maintains that Islam is innocent of this accusation. Instead, it is a “Zionist conspiracy,” which many are making use of to harm the religion. Likewise, Dr. Amna Nazir, professor of doctrine and philosophy at Al Azhar, expressed her rejection that a mosque be built near the World Trade Center, saying: “Building a mosque on this rubble indicates bad intention — even if we wished to shut our eyes, close our minds, and insist on good will. I hope it is a sincere step, and not a new conspiracy against Islam and Muslims.”

(more…)

One day, President Obama “forcefully” supports the planned Ground Zero mosque, and the next day he backs off, straddling the fence. Well, that’s a definite maybe; he’s a regular push-me-pull-you of politics.

Before:

After skirting the controversy for weeks, President Barack Obama is weighing in forcefully on the mosque near ground zero, saying a nation built on religious freedom must allow it. …

“That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances,” he said. “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakable.” …

After:

… “I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there,” Obama said. “I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That’s what our country is about.” …

(more…)

by Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi*

News that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has come out in opposition to the planned construction of a 13-storey ‘Córdoba House’ or ‘Park51′ mosque, two blocks away from ‘Ground Zero’, should prompt us to ask whether it is truly right to oppose the building of this particular mosque.

To begin with, it should be noted that there is no basis for opposing its construction on legal grounds. That said, a distinction needs to be made between legality and morality. The key question therefore is: would the mosque fulfill the apparent, declared intention of fostering outreach and mutual respect between people of various faiths?

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

Proponents of building a mosque (”community center”) near Ground Zero claim they must be allowed to do so because it would be unconstitutional to deny them that “right.” Literalistic hogwash! Since when was the U.S. Constitution and American law intransigent and unchanging — only when it suits some agenda? The Founders knew that they should create a framework that would adapt within limits, but still adapt. People can and should — if they feel ethically bound — oppose the building of a mosque (”community center”) next to the hallowed ground of the 911 savage attacks. Fights like this happen all the time in the U.S. for various reasons, like over putting Christmas decorations on public land or refusing a church a building permit. Most Americans consider their country founded on Judeo-Christian principles and, “That is why American coins feature these two messages: ‘In G-d we trust’ and ‘Liberty.’” But the attempt — led by an imam linked to Muslim terror — to stamp an Islamist, “We won, ha, ha,” imprimatur on Ground Zero is akin to yelling, “Fire!,” in a crowded theater. We don’t have to allow this mosque. We cannot forget the spirit of the law while only concentrating on its letter, as the great Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. knew.

(more…)

By By Mark Krikorian, CIS.org

It’s no surprise that key parts of the Arizona immigration law were temporarily delayed today by a federal judge. The many lawsuits brought by the opponents of immigration enforcement (including the Obama administration) will now proceed. As Churchill said in a different context, this isn’t the end; it’s not even the beginning of the end. It’s merely the end of the beginning.

(more…)

By Andrew L. Jaffee

So, because of “multiculturalism,” we throw out our most cherished beliefs about human rights — all for the sake of being “sensitive” to immigrants with extremist belief systems? Is it so hard for all Americans to agree that rape is wrong? This is worrisome (below), from Jihad Watch (and what, did this judge skip all his/her ethics classes?):

… And now a New Jersey judge sees no evidence that a Muslim committed sexual assault of his wife — not because he didn’t do it, but because he was acting on his Islamic beliefs: “This court does not feel that, under the circumstances, that this defendant had a criminal desire to or intent to sexually assault or to sexually contact the plaintiff when he did. The court believes that he was operating under his belief that it is, as the husband, his desire to have sex when and whether he wanted to, was something that was consistent with his practices and it was something that was not prohibited.”

Luckily, the appellate court overturned this decision, and a Sharia ruling by an American court has not been allowed to stand. This time. …

(more…)

by Phyllis Chesler

This is, indeed, “the worst of times, the best of times.” Dangerously brazen evil-doers and outrages both surreal and diabolical abound — but so do tireless heroes who have risen up to combat them.

When the history of our time is written, Israel’s Nahum Shahaf, France’s Philippe Karsenty and Nidra Poller, Germany’s Esther Shapira, and America’s Richard Landes, (who collectively exposed the first Big Lie of the Intifada of 2000, that of Mohammed Al-Dura) will be remembered.

As will Pierre Rehov, formerly of Algeria, Israel, and France, who, in films, exposed the second Big Lie: that of the Israeli non-massacre in Jenin — and who also exposed, in films, the really big-but-all-but-forgotten refugee story of the Middle East: that of Jews expelled or forced to flee from Arab and Muslim countries; this film is called The Silent Exodus. … Continue reading…

(more…)