Youtube video

When Florida pastor Terry Jones decided to โ€œsend a messageโ€ to Muslims by burning a Koran last week, it incited outrage and violence throughout the Arab world. American leaders rightly responded by condemning the senseless and dangerous act. Yet in the end, and despite the pastorโ€™s obvious and irresponsible recklessness, Jones used his free speech and political leaders used theirs. Such is the nature of free expression in a free society.

But one politicianโ€™s condemnation of Jones contained a suggested remedy far more dangerous to American freedom than burning the Koran. Said Sen. Lindsey Graham on CBSโ€™ Face the Nation:

Yeah, I wish we could find some way to hold people accountable. Free speech is a great idea, but weโ€™re in a war. During World War II you had limits on what you could say if it would inspire the enemy.

Certainly the Founding Fathers considered free speech more than just a mere โ€œgreat ideaโ€ but one of the bedrock principles of our republic, even enshrining it in the first amendment to our Constitution. That Graham would be willing to capitulate to radical Islamists by curtailing this precious freedom is particularly astounding when you consider that the Senator consistently and adamantly opposes curtailing the one policy that unquestionably โ€œinspires the enemyโ€ more than any other. In fact, when it comes to looking out for Americaโ€™s proper defense and actual securityโ€”Lindsey Graham is arguably the most ass-backward politician alive today.

While, almost amusingly, Sen. Graham doesnโ€™t deny that destroying a Koran incites Muslim hatred, he does deny that the destruction to persons and property necessary in any warโ€”via the United States militaryโ€”does any such thing. For all the talk of radical Islamists simply hating us for our โ€œfreedoms,โ€ a narrative Graham has repeated countless times, few who tout this line can explain why, historically, the US had virtually no fear of Islamic terrorists until we began heavily intervening in the Arab world. Was Islam perhaps more enlightened or modern in the 1940โ€™s, 50โ€™s and 60โ€™s than it is today? Or has our foreign policy in the Middle East changed drastically since that time?

No less an authority than the former head of the CIAโ€™s Bin Laden unit Michael Scheuer notes: โ€œOn no other foreign policy issue since the Cold Warโ€™s end has the truth been so easy to establish on the basis of hard facts but so hard for Americans to see โ€ฆ that Muslim hatred is motivated by U.S. interventionism more than any other factor.โ€

But politicians like Graham not only refuse to see how our current foreign policy actually endangers us more than it protects usโ€”he and his pro-war ilk constantly promote more of it. When Iraqi government officials began saying they wanted the US out of their country as soon as possible, 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain declared that America might remain in that country for โ€œ100 yearsโ€ if necessary, with an approving Graham by his side. When Afghanistanโ€™s government began asking for the US to withdraw as soon as possible, Graham said America might need to remain in that country in perpetuity. Now that President Obama has started a third Middle Eastern war in Libya, most Republicans either oppose or are highly skeptical of this military action. Not Graham. Even reports that the Libyan rebels might be working with Al-Qaeda donโ€™t seem to faze the Senator one bit in his support for Obamaโ€™s new war.

Still, for Graham, support for a hyper-interventionist foreign policyโ€”even if it means indirectly helping Al-Qaeda per the Libyan rebelsโ€”is non-negotiable. What is negotiable are Americansโ€™ historic and constitutional freedoms. James Madison once wrote that โ€œNo nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warโ€ and itโ€™s no coincidence that Graham has little problem with diminishing freedom in the name of perpetual war.

But Graham has always had an authoritarian streak. Remember that in addition to his recent suggestion that we might need to limit free speech, Graham has also been one of the most vocal champions of anti-constitutional measures like โ€œREAL ID,โ€ in which the federal government could keep better tabs on American citizens. Of course Graham was also a strong proponent of the horribly misnamed Patriot Act, which gives the federal government the power to treat Americans as something less than citizens. Destroying Korans is unquestionably stupid. So is destroying the Constitution.

Read the entire column


Help keep the City Paper free.
No paywalls.
No subscription cost.
Free delivery at 800 locations.

Help support independent journalism by donating today.

[empowerlocal_ad sponsoredarticles]