|Jewish conservative asks why local NAACP is trying to abridge his free speech rights
|By: Dave Weinbaum
|Posted: Friday, October 30, 2009 10:04 pm
This column is in answer to the linked NAACP objection to my column(s.) Below are the column in question and the letter. Please read both before perusing my response.
First, I want to thank the NAACP for providing me with column fodder as this can be problematic on a weekly basis.
My initial reaction to this communiqué and that of my liberal-leaning friend, webmaster and former editor of the Rolla Daily News, Martin Schwartz, was: “You (Weinbaum) made an opinion in the op-ed section of the RDN. They (NAACP) disagreed with it. So the NAACP wants to stop this and other opinions like it from being published in the paper.” In other words, until Weinbaum conforms to NAACP opinion, he and people of like mind should have their First Amendment rights terminated.
“You can’t make a weak man stronger by making a strong man weak.” — Abraham Lincoln
Allow me to get specific:
• “We refuse to accept the assertion that every adherent of Islam is a Fascist or a terrorist.”
Please point out where I said anything remotely resembling your comment above ... ever. Do the words “slander” and “libel” mean anything to you?
Let’s talk about the term “Islamofacist.”
According to the Encarta Dictionary, Fascism involves “any movement, ideology, or attitude that favors dictatorial government, centralized control of private enterprise, repression of all opposition, and extreme nationalism.”
Do you have another phrase that would accurately describe a group of Muslims who have vowed to murder any American, Christian or Jewish man woman or child under command of a Fatwa written and signed by Osama bin Laden on Feb. 23, 1998? How about this? Muslims who are outraged that many would practice a religion other than Islam and are Hell-bent on murdering every last one of the infidels wherever they find them?
Sorry, I think I’ll stick with Islamofacists.
The above defines some Muslims but not all, and certainly not the majority.
Your analyses of my comments are wrong and defamatory.
• “Mr. Weinbaum (and other Americans, for that matter) should understand how African-Americans feel after centuries of mistreatment that includes slavery, rape, discrimination, murder, and intimidation, among other things.”
I do understand. That was the main point of the article.
We can agree that two major horrors were historically undeniable: Slavery of blacks and the Holocaust. For those who don’t know, the latter was the intentional (your words) “...mistreatment that includes slavery, rape, discrimination, murder, and intimidation...” The Nazis tried and came pretty close to murdering every Jewish man, woman and child in the late 1930s and early 1940s, something to which Muslim leaders at the time gave enthusiastic thumbs up.
What I and many others question is Obama’s willingness to sit and talk with a man who denies the latter despite overwhelming proof from Nazi records. Also, Ahmadinejad has said Israel should or would be “wiped off the map,” while Iran is producing nuclear bombs. This should be cause for alarm for every American, including the membership of the NAACP.
I’m merely pointing out how the president might feel if the falsely elected leader of Iran called slavery a hoax.
While it’s obvious the author(s) of the NAACP’s missive either don’t get the satire and irony of the article, or are in complete denial of it, it’s equally clear that it has nothing to do with race. The column is a hypothetical argument about Obama’s stated policy. He gives credence, credibility and clock for Iran to produce the very means by which Ahmadinejad can fulfill his Jew-murdering vision, the destruction of Israel.
My article asks what Barack would do if Ahmadinejad denied slavery ever existed. Would Obama still be on board to sit and talk to this lunatic or would he draw the line in the sand if the Iranian leader lied about what is near and dear to a major portion of Americans, including me? Would the NAACP go along with this if Ahmadinejad threatened to wipe Nigeria or Uganda off the map? I would certainly be outraged, wouldn’t you?
• “Mr. Weinbaum also implied that President Obama uses the legacy of slavery as a tool to manipulate people.”
That is accurate, but in my opinion, it’s been true of the Democratic Party for the last 50 years.
• “As a nonpartisan organization, we (the NAACP) would never oppose Mr. Weinbaum's right to express his political views.
However, given the multitude of issues that our nation faces, this is no time for acts or statements that only serve to turn Americans against each other...
The Rolla Daily News should have never posted or printed Mr. Weinbaum's article online.”
So, only YOU GET TO OPINE?
In a matter of two sentences the NAACP reverses itself on whether I should be allowed to air my “political views” because “...this is no time for acts or statements that only serve to turn Americans against each other.” I take this as an egregious attack on my First Amendment rights and clear hypocrisy of the highest order. It also abridges the right of my audience to listen to all sides so they can make informed decisions on their beliefs.
NAACP, while you have a right to disagree with my column and label it as you like, you have no right to suppress my First Amendment rights or those of the people who read and comment on my columns.
I urge you to stop this racial-victim-PC attack crap.
Wasn’t that President Obama’s message in what was supposed to be a post-racial America?
(Dave Weinbaum is a regular contributor of one-liners and commentaries to many regional and national publications and web sites, including the Reader's Digest, National Enquirer and Forbes and is a regular pundit for the www.jewishworldreview.com. Readers can reach Dave at email@example.com or his website, www.daveweinbaum.com. Listen to the Dave Weinbaum Radio Talk show on KTTR 99.7 FM and 1490 AM on Friday mornings starting at 9:05.)
Click here to follow Pulaski County Daily News on Twitter
Click here to follow Pulaski County Daily News on Facebook
Click here to comment for local opinion