On September 25, 2012, two weeks after the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, President Barack Obama stood before the United Nations General Assembly and said the following:
“The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
I didn’t like this at the time, because I saw it as a capitulation to Islamic terrorists. Less than a month after his own ambassador was murdered, the president of the United States told the whole world: “Hey, free speech is great and everything, but if you hurt the feelings of these guys, you deserve whatever you get.” He lied about the reasons for the Benghazi attack, blaming it on a stupid YouTube video that had nothing to do with it, and then he doubled down in the most shameless way imaginable. He betrayed American ideals because he couldn’t or wouldn’t admit he was wrong.
And it worked. A few weeks later Obama was reelected, which was the only thing he cared about.
But as it turned out, my concerns were unfounded. Obama didn’t strike a blow against liberty that day. He didn’t embolden tyrants and terrorists. Free speech is just fine, everybody!
An Austrian woman who was convicted for insulting the Prophet Mohammed did not have her right to freedom of speech violated, a European court has ruled.
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that courts in Austria, where the woman was found guilty, had balanced the “right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected, and served the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace in Austria”.
The woman, who has been named only as ES, held seminars in 2009 for Austria’s far right Freedom Party in which she made defamatory remarks relating to the Prophet Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha, which is usually misrepresented as being to an underage girl.
In other words: In 2018 Europe, you can’t say that Mohammed was a pedophile or the law will come after you. Punishing you for insulting a man who’s been dead for 1,400 years isn’t a violation of your human rights, because you’ve offended a protected class. You’ve pissed off the wrong people, and now you’ll pay.
Think about this phrase: “The right of others to have their religious feelings protected.” Isn’t that wonderful? You’d better watch what you say, because other people have religious feelings and they have the right to be protected from your harmful words. They have the right to “religious peace,” so you’d better not disturb it by saying something you shouldn’t.
Who decides what’s offensive? Who decides which opinions can’t be expressed publicly? Not you. These matters will be decided for you, and you’d better comply or else.
Remember #JeSuisCharlie? Remember how people expected a stupid hashtag to do any good against monsters who were willing to commit a massacre against some cartoonists who pissed them off? Remember how they all patted themselves on the back? Remember how hollow and infantile it was?
Europe does not stand with Charlie Hebdo and never did. It was a pathetic lie and they all know it. #LEuropeNestPasCharlie.
Well, I have no plans to ever go to Europe again, so here goes:
I think the Prophet Mohammed is a silly goose, and I don’t particularly care for him. He’s a jerk. For all I care, he can go climb a tree.
There. I said it and I’m not sorry. Come and get me, coppers!
When it comes to this issue, I’d refer you to the words of noted constitutional scholar Tracy Lauren Marrow: “Freedom of speech… just watch what you say.”