Writing: Innocence of Muslims



Innocence of Muslims

 “We do not stop individual citizens from expressing their views no matter how distasteful they may be:” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. In counterpart for Muslim leaders, the word “freedom of speech,” is the right of a community, whether Muslim, Christian or Jewish, to be free from grave insult to its identity and values. The U.S.-produced film depicting the Prophet Mohammad ( PBWH) as pedophile and the attack in Libya that left four U.S. diplomats dead -- including Ambassador Christopher Stevens opened once again the debate about the consequences of our unconditional commitment to freedom of speech.

Before discussing the legitimacy of freedom of speech in this case, let’s makes it clear since the beginning. The killing of four U.S. diplomats is not legitimate in any way, not even from the perspective of the extremist militants of al Qaida who carried the attack. Under the fixed rules of The Holy Quran it is forbidden to attack people who did not harm you. All acts of self-defense have to be directed against the attacker personally .Even Prophet Muhammad who they claimed to defend had refused to seek revenge from his enemies who tortured and killed his followers once he defeated them. He showed an act of great mercy by forgiving them all. He was sent as a “mercy to all the worlds” according to the words of the Qur’an. So, we should not be duped by the real intention of these terrorists who do not represent the real values of Islam.

Now we can discuss the legitimacy or not of freedom of speech accorded to the controversial movie.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the controversial movie was first posted to YouTube in July by a Californian of Egyptian Coptic origin, a men who openly admitted to be Islam-hater .When the video failed to attract much attention, another Coptic Christian, known for his anti-Islamic activism, sent a link to reporters in the U.S., Egypt and elsewhere on Sept. 6. His email message promoted a Sept. 11 event by anti-Islamic pastor Terry Jones and included a link to the trailer. This act on itself constitutes a clear incitation of violence. The question is how can we tolerate such action in the name of freedom of speech?

Free expression is not absolute. According to Los Angeles Times, in one of the most famous First Amendment cases in U.S. history, Schenck v. United States, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. established that the right to free speech in the United States is not unlimited.

Holmes' test -- that words are not protected if their nature and circumstances create a "clear and present danger" of harm. It’s exactly the case of “Innocence of Muslims," the film whose video trailer indirectly led to the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens among others.

Our founding fathers when they wrote the first amendment, they were thinking on the way to guarantee a free right of expression to all immigrants of this new world. They dreamed of a land free of tyranny and exclusion. I have no doubt on their noble intentions and even if they made mistake by no limiting the freedom of speech shouldn’t we challenge our opponents who are using freedom of speech as excuse to spread hate speech? The first amendment is not a biblical scripture; it may have strong and weak elements.  

Many argue that if a single American insults Islam with one YouTube video; he is not representing 300 million Americans at all. The only man who represents all Americans is the U.S. President. The answer is the Muslim population in the world is over 2.1 billion and those who killed the 4 US diplomats were not more than 6 to 8 terrorists.

My position here is not to justify the unacceptable actions committed by Christian or Islamist extremists on the name of God. The point is to incite the US law makers to make a clear distinction between a simple offensive speech and a speech that incite hate and intolerance. No hate speech is worth a human being life.



  • First Amendment Cyber-Tribune" is hosted by the Casper Star-Tribune. It is an extensive site, describing all aspects of First Amendment rights. It also lists dozens of free-speech web sites and groups. See: http://fact.trib.com/ (Last updated in 2004)
  • First Amendment Center" promotes consensus on matters of religious expression in the schools, and religious liberty in American life. See: http://www.fac.org/
  • TeAchnology is a "web portal for educators." Their U.S. Constitution Teaching Theme page has many hyperlinks to Constitution resources at: http://www.teach-nology.com/ 
  • An Appeal to the Contemporary Muslim Conscience ,mardi,  18 septembre 2012  Tarik Ramadan,www.tarikramadan.com
  • 'We hate America’ By Sarah Lynch, Oren Dorell – Usa TODAY Posted 9/13/2012 12:05:02 AM



  • Cultural Clash Fuels Muslims Angry at Online Video By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK      September 16, 2012.
  • Anti-Muslim movie doesn't meet free-speech test   Article by: Sarah Chayes , Los Angeles Times
  • Prophet Mohammed Movie: What should be done?Written by: Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann, 14-Sep-12© 2010 WorldSecurityNetwork | info@worldsecuritynetwork.com
  • Fareed's Take: Vivid protest images do not tell whole story."Fareed Zakaria GPS" Sunday at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET.
  • What Would Muhammad Do?12 Essential points about the offensive film on the Prophet Muhammad, and the subsequent reactions in Libya & Egypt Omid Safi|Sep 12, 2012/ Religious News Service