The Middle East- Limiting Civil Liberties

Threat to Civil Liberties

          The 9/11 plotters committed themselves to a complex and expensive plot designed to intentionally inflame and provoke US popular sentiment. Likewise, the video which sparked the current round of Mideast violence also reflected an elaborate and complex plot also intended to inflame the popular Arab populace. Readers might be astonished how much effort and how many intentional choices went into producing this inflammatory and provocative product.

          Because it is legal to produce such materials, there is national dialogue about limiting such expressions of free speech. I do not advocate limiting free speech. However, I do advocate the wise and socially responsible expression of free speech. Ultimately, production of intentionally provocative and inflammatory material becomes a moral and ethical issue rather than a legal one. Just because you can do something, should you do it?

          I would make two points. The first is acknowledging the reality of the world stage. When an inflammatory and provocative political or religious product surfaces, it spark looting, pillaging, and general destructive mayhem throughout the Arab world. This is guaranteed. This is the reality of the situation. It is not the reality of our situation. This is an important distinction.

          Intentional production of such provocative materials is an ethical issue rather than a legal issue simply because we don't have arson, murders and riots in US streets when the next offensive cartoon rolls out. If we did, it is likely we would limit civil liberties and free speech. If posting a particular video caused inner-city riots within our own country, we would classify such videos as hate speech and make them a federal crime.

          Intentional production of provocative products is hate speech. It’s just not illegal. These products are produced with the intentional foreknowledge and anticipation of generating mayhem and violence. Should such products remain legal to produce?

          The second point is that our enemies, religious and political extremists within the Arab world, scour Western media for ammunition to support their narratives. It is the goal of our enemies to generate more hate, fear, and mistrust of the “other”, i.e. the West.

          Self-righteous producers who intentionally produce provocative materials become unwitting or witting allies of our extremist enemies. In one view, they become fools or traitors. These Americans put lives, property, national interests, and the welfare of American troops in jeopardy. While we can produce such products, should we be able to? Should these be legal to produce?

          These are very complex questions. Limiting civil liberties is a very complex issue. There are many cogent points to be made concerning many aspects of the issue. I do not advocate any particular course other than social responsibility. However, I think the two points raised above should be considered in any evaluation of limiting civil liberties.