Top Menu

Glenn Greenwald: Terrorism and Civil Liberties Speech (Video)

Glenn Greenwald

Another excellent piece from Glenn Greenwald, candidate for anti-Loon of the year.

Terrorism and civil liberties speech

by Glenn Greenwald (Salon.com)

I’m traveling today and therefore likely unable to post, but last night I spoke at the University of Wisconsin on “Civil Liberties and Terrorism in the Age of Obama.” An article on the event from the Badger Herald is here. The speech — which focused on the meaning (or lack thereof) of the terms “civil liberties” and “terrorism” — was roughly 50 minutes long and can be seen in the video below. There was also an hour-long question-and-answer session that followed which was quite good, and although the video of the Q-and-A portion appears to be not yet available, it will be posted here once it is. Note that I will also be on MSNBC with Dylan Ratigan at roughly 4:00 p.m. today, and on Morning Joe tomorrow morning:

UPDATE:  I neglected to mention that tomorrow from 11:oo am-12:15 p.m., I’ll be at NYU Law School for this event on Terrorism and the First Amendment.  The all-day event is free, open to the public, and features some excellent speakers and panels.

As for last night’s speech at the University of Wisconsin, the 50-minute Q-and-A session that followed my speech is below, and was driven by uniformly excellent questions (and some dissents):

, , , , , , , , ,

  • Mosizzle

    “Now JB i wont even ask you the $1000 question of “what if they were Muslim?” because we all here know what happened and will happened if they were.

    If who were Muslim?

    The art exhibit?”

    No, Jihadbob, we’re talking about the Orthodox Christians that are complaining about their religion being desecrated. Why don’t you fly down there and explain to them that Christianity is a “religion of peace” and that they are misunderstanding their religion and that they should respect Western values….

  • Mosizzle

    Let me clarify everything:

    Robert Spencer and others are whining about the OIC’s attempt to make insulting religious figures illegal. The points I made show that this kind of attitude that “Muslims are taking away our freedoms” don’t make sense considering that other groups have pressured governments to limit freedom of speech anyway. Therefore, when “Defenders of the West” talk about the importance of their freedom of speech after the next Muhammad controversy, it can pointed out to them that they have already compromised their freedom of speech to other groups and thus Muslims are not demanding “special treatment” but “equal treatment”.

    “and as for you JihadBob, I bet you’re grinning from ear to ear. This is why you post here, so that people like Mosizzle can make comments like this which can use later in your game of victimhood, fake death threats and similar nonsense.”

    He did start this. But he has yet to respond to what I have written above. It was intended for him to stop him from moaning about Muslims taking away his rights.

    “But they didn’t make Holocaust denial illegal without a fight and activism from Jews.”

    So are we. Muslims want blasphemy against Islam and all other religions outlawed to prevent unnecessary conflict. But when we do, it is considered to be an attack against Western values. Can you see why I am sensing a little hypocrisy? I still don’t understand why my comments offended you.

    By the way, I do not support the drawing of Holocaust cartoons in the same way I do not support drawing offensive pictures of the Prophet Muhammad, Jesus, Moses etc.

  • Beautiful Muslim Doll

    Mosizzle

    “You basically say that because Holocaust Denial is against the law, it’s wrong but because insulting religious figures is not against the law, it’s okay to do so.”

    I didn’t say it’s OK, and I wasn’t voicing objections to OBJECTING to them. I objected to your comparing them to something that is against the law.

    ” I’m just saying that they should make insulting religious figures illegal in the same way that they have done for Holocaust denial.
    I’m not saying that they are equal.”

    But they didn’t make Holocaust denial illegal without a fight and activism from Jews.

    ” Since they make exceptions to freedom of speech for Royal Families, Celebrities and Jews, it wouldn’t hurt them to do so for Muslims.”

    Those are centuries old rules, and the libel and slander apply to all not just celebrities.

    “I don’t see what the problem is. All I want is people to stop making fun of the Prophet Muhammad when they are fully aware that doing so will anger many Muslims. I think I’ve made my point quite clear about the double standards in Europe.”

    If you cannot see that cheering on people who advocated breaking the law is a problem, then that’s supporting the law of the jungle, where anything goes. There are many ways to make a point without breaking the law.

    “I think I’ve made my point quite clear about the double standards in Europe.”

    No you did not, Christian and Jewish leaders in Europe condemned Kurt and Rushdie, for hurting religious sensiblities. They had to stand by and watch when the likes of Rushdie was knighted when he has also insulted Christianity. and you actually proved the opposite. Your example of the Queen proved that a head of a Christian church has to respect the law even if her religion (which she is head of) is attacked.

    and as for you JihadBob, I bet you’re grinning from ear to ear. This is why you post here, so that people like Mosizzle can make comments like this which can use later in your game of victimhood, fake death threats and similar nonsense.

  • JihadBob

    Now JB i wont even ask you the $1000 question of “what if they were Muslim?” because we all here know what happened and will happened if they were.

    If who were Muslim?

    The art exhibit?

    I don’t think such an exhibit in most Muslim lands would have taken place in the first place, but if it did, the ever present unruly mob would have taken care of any blasphemous views.

    The ‘moderate’ Muslim nations would have imprisoned the artist for life. And it really goes to show you what little you’re working with if you want to compare Russia to most Muslim nations. Why not compare Russia to an ex-Soviet nation with a Muslim majority populous?

  • Rob

    That’s Eastern Orthodox Christians. They really don’t count for JihadBob

  • JD

    this guy crucified him self in the middle of the street and carved ” I am not the son of god” on his back and offended Orthodox Church community “St. Nikola who said “People have the right of having there beliefs protected from being insulted”

    Now JB i wont even ask you the $1000 question of “what if they were Muslim?” because we all here know what happened and will happened if they were.

  • JD

    On September 8th, 2010 Russian artist Oleg Mavromati, currently living in Bulgaria and the US, was refused renewal of his Russian passport by the Consulate of the Russian Federation in Sofia, on the grounds that Mavromati has been avoiding trial in the Russian Federation for the performance he made in 2000. If he returns to Russia he will be put on trial and faces 3-5 years of prison.

    Mavromati was prosecuted for “Do Not Believe Your Eyes” under article 282 of the Criminal Code of Russian Federation with “inciting religious hatred and offending the feelings of religious believers.”
    A legal complaint from the chairman of the local Orthodox Church community “St. Nikola” against Mavromati

  • JD

    Russia artists fined for offending Orthodox faithful

    Two artists were found guilty of extremism and ordered to pay large fines by a Moscow court on Monday for an exhibition that wounded Russian Orthodox sensibilities in juxtaposing religious icons with pornography.

    Rights group Amnesty International said the verdict was shameful and “another blow to freedom of expression in Russia.”

    A Moscow court cleared leading art curators Yuri Samodurov and Andrei Yerofeyev of a maximum jail sentence of three years for their 2007 Forbidden Art exhibit, which mixed religious icons with sexual and pop-culture images.

    But it levied fines of 200,000 roubles ($6,477) and 150,000 roubles, respectively, to be paid to the state.

    Leading cultural figures had appealed to President Dmitry Medvedev to drop the charges, saying it heralded a new era of censorship.

    “This shows that the state supports the ultra-nationalist Orthodox factions that attack Russian culture,” Yerofeyev, a prominent intellectual who once curated Moscow’s state-run Tretyakov Gallery, told Reuters.

    “I am certain that this decision comes directly from the prime minister (Vladimir Putin) and the president.”

    Both artists said they would appeal the verdict.

    Among the art on display in the 2007 exhibit were works depicting an Orthodox icon adorned with Mickey Mouse, a Russian general raping a soldier, and a Soviet-era Order of Lenin medal over Christ’s head.

  • Mosizzle

    You basically say that because Holocaust Denial is against the law, it’s wrong but because insulting religious figures is not against the law, it’s okay to do so. I’m just saying that they should make insulting religious figures illegal in the same way that they have done for Holocaust denial. I’m not saying that they are equal. Since they make exceptions to freedom of speech for Royal Families, Celebrities and Jews, it wouldn’t hurt them to do so for Muslims.

  • Mosizzle

    I don’t see what the problem is. All I want is people to stop making fun of the Prophet Muhammad when they are fully aware that doing so will anger many Muslims. I think I’ve made my point quite clear about the double standards in Europe.

    “Fabricating a lie against a celebrity ( which happen to be a lie) is libel and slander. That is why they sue and have grounds to do so. If the truth is something they don’t like to be published, tough, they won’t win. they only win if they’re lied against.”

    Have you seen the 12 Danish Cartoons? I think they are all slander. None of it is true, so the followers of Muhammad have the right to politely ask the editors of the Newspapers to not publish the cartoons and apologise for publishing them.

  • Beautiful Muslim Doll

    “I did not say that we should have a right to Holocaust denial, I believe that Holocaust denial should be illegal, but at the same time, so should blasphemy that could cause serious problems.”

    I don’t understand the link between the two.

    Holocaust Denial is comparitive to the denial of other genocides.

    Blasphemy against the Prophet should be compared to blasphemy against other religious figures.

    Fabricating a lie against a celebrity ( which happen to be a lie) is libel and slander. That is why they sue and have grounds to do so. If the truth is something they don’t like to be published, tough, they won’t win. they only win if they’re lied against.

  • Beautiful Muslim Doll

    Mosizzle, can you prove that double standard exists in Europe? Nothing you said above proves that,

    I look forward to some examples.

  • Beautiful Muslim Doll

    Mosizzle

    “What about the cartoonists who should the Spanish royal family engaged in intercourse? They were fined 3000 euros. ”

    Insulting the Queen is a crime in the UK, and i think that is Europe wide. It’s the law.

    “Or what about the countless celebrities that sue for hundreds of thousands of pounds when a magazine publishes untrue allegations against them?”

    More irrationality? Are you saying lying about celebrities should be OK because they are celebrities?

    The implication in your posts was that Kurt and the Queen were honoured for insulting Muslims. Had Kurt or Rushdi broke the law, they would not have been honoured,

    Simply put, insulting religious figures is not a crime. Nor can the Kurts and Rushdies be prevented from doing that in a society that permits insulting it’s own religious leaders.

    One has to boggle at a mind that accuses the Queen of honouring a man for insulting Muslims when he insulted her own religion.

Powered by Loon Watchers