by Adam Turner
The Blaze
December 31, 2012
In September of 2012, supposedly because of an obscure "anti-Islam"
film named "Innocence of Muslims," the Islamic world erupted with
violent protests towards Westerners for exercising their right to free
speech. Although subsequent information has revealed that most of this
violence was actually instigated beforehand by Islamist radicals, often
for reasons having nothing to do with the scapegoated film, this has not
lessened Western government's extreme sensitivity to free speech in the
West regarding Islam. Just this December, we saw another person
targeted by European nations for his critical speech about Islam.
The target this time is a man named Imran Firasat, who is a former
Muslim from Pakistan who is now a convert to Christianity and resides in
Spain. Mr. Firasat is a well-known critic of his former religion, and
runs a website World without Islam (Mundo sin Islam).
He, in coordination with American Pastor Terry Jones – who seems to be
establishing a brand name for himself as a determined but unrefined
speech opponent of the religion of Islam – has produced a new movie
about the Muslim prophet Muhammad, an hour long cartoon film called "The Innocent Prophet: The Life of Mohammed from a Different Point of View."
Needless to say, this film does not portray Muhammad in a positive
light, basically arguing that Muhammad conspired with his friends to
create his own religion to give him ultimate power over Muslims and the
World.
The Belgian government was the first European state to overreact to the new film. Soon after Mr. Firasat told the Belgian newspaper De Morgen that he decided to make it, ironically because he thought
the Islamist rioting had indeed been caused by "Innocence of Muslims"
and that the Western world needed to respond with more free speech about
Islam, the Belgium government upped its national security threat level
from two to three (meaning "severe") out of a maximum of four. In
response to Belgium's move, Firasat initially said he might postpone
the release of the film so it could be previewed by Belgian authorities
to ensure "there is nothing in this movie which doesn't fall under the
right of freedom of expression and that my movie will not cause any kind
of loss to humanity."
Simultaneously, Spain also moved against Mr. Firasat, taking the more
serious step of going after him personally for his speech. They
initiated two forms of lawfare against him: 1) attacking him on his
Spanish residency grounds; and 2) threatening him with prosecution for
violating Spanish hate speech codes. The former, their threat to remove
him from Spain after seven years, is particularly dangerous for Mr.
Firasat. If he loses his residency, he could be deported to Pakistan,
which would expose him to a blasphemy prosecution and a death penalty
sentence for his speech against Islam. (And even if the Pakistani
government doesn't actually sentence Firasat to death for his blasphemy,
Pakistani mobs are known to take blasphemers out of prison and
personally kill them.) The Spanish government is justifying their action
to revoke
his asylum status on the grounds that he is "threatening national
security with the production of this video." For the latter form of
lawfare, the hate speech prosecution, the Spanish government has brought
Mr. Firasat into court to face
a charge of violating 510 of the Spanish Penal Code, a crime that
punishes incitation to hatred and violence for racial, ideological or
religious reasons. In combination, this double dose of Spanish lawfare
against Imran Firasat was successful – after two hours before a judge in
Madrid, he agreed not to distribute the "offensive" video. However, the
Spanish government won the battle but lost the war, as Pastor Jones
then released the film anyway.
Imran Firasat was somewhat surprised by the aggressive Spanish efforts against him. In an interview, he pointed out
that "I was granted asylum because of my criticisms of Islam. I have
formally asked the Spanish government for the prohibition of Koran in
Spain. I have given thousands of interviews to radio and TV channels. I
wrote articles in newspapers." In other words, Spain knew what they were
getting from Imran Firasat when they allowed him to seek asylum there
seven years ago, so why would they be upset now? Also, he ironically
noted the fact that he has received far more threats from the Spanish
government than from angry Muslims.
Perhaps most disturbing, in another interview, Imran Firasat and his interviewer just blithely assumed
that the United States could, if it so chose, use its judicial system
to go after Firasat and Terry Jones. As of right now, of course, this is
simply not true, thanks to the First Amendment. But, as we know, the
U.S. has taken
legal action against the maker of the "Innocence of Muslims" film,
using his probation violations as a way to punish him, presumably for
his speech. And considering that fact, and the U.S.'s continuing participation in the Istanbul Process, and President Obama's UN Speech declaring
that "(t)he future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of
Islam," Mr. Firasat and his interviewer may be forgiven for their
mistaken assumption.
One day soon, the U.S. may join European nations as a place legally
hostile towards free speech that antagonizes Islamists. That day may
very well be sooner rather than later.
Source URL: http://www.legal-project.org/3729/did-european-governments-overreact-to-a-new-anti
