Sam Harris

In recent threads, due to the wearisome fog of mainstream coverage, contributors expressed the desire for Sam to weigh in on the “Innocence of Muslims” debacle, and, well, with his latest blog post “On the Freedom to Offend an Imaginary God” he obviously has.  Once again, he cuts through the echo chamber’s numbing haze with the refreshing tactical precision we’ve all come to expect.

Contributors to The New York Times and NPR spoke of the need to find a balance between free speech and freedom of religion—as though the latter could possibly be infringed by a YouTube video. As predictable as Muslim bullying has become, the moral confusion of secular liberals appears to be part of the same clockwork.

I rely on public radio for my daily news, and over the past week or so, I’ve had to shake my head in silent frustration more often than I can remember.  One NPR commentator after another missed the point completely, ridiculed Romney for what probably amounts to the first and last time he will ever be guilty of expressing a rational viewpoint, and praised Obama and Clinton for placating psychos.

Were these people in a coma for the past decade while Dennett, Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, et al applied electrodes to our fibrillating, post-9/11 wits?  Why is a coherent perspective harder to come by than ice water in Hell?

I think Harris’s previous paragraph sums it up nicely:

These maneuvers attest to one of two psychological and diplomatic realities: Either our government [and secular liberals] [are] unwilling to address the problem at hand, or the problem is so vast and terrifying that we have decided to placate the barbarians at the gate.

And the sad part is that he’s probably going to be accused of islamophobia or racism again..

Sooooo, whats the answer. How do we respond effectively to terrorsim of this sort…......

1.) Nuke Em!

2.) Drone Strike on leaders

3.) Strongly condemn them with rhetoric.

4.) Make a better, “full length” movie on the idiocy of Islam. (and Christianity while we are at it)

5.) Trade Embargo

6.) Public statement from our elected leaders that we support the movie.

7.) Send a free copy of “Letter To A Christian Nation” to all registered fundamentalist.

8.) ALL THE ABOVE

Seriously, if you were Obama, what course of action would you take?

JamesEvans - 20 September 2012 08:11 PM

the “Innocence of Muslims” debacle

It irritates me that we ever refer to the movie at all.  Just like the teddy bear and the cartoon, the thing about which the child throws its fit is not the issue. 

JamesEvans - 20 September 2012 08:11 PM

ridiculed Romney for what probably amounts to the first and last time he will ever be guilty of expressing a rational viewpoint,

Let’s not be too hasty about accusing Romney of expressing a rational view point.  His haste to paint the Obama administration as the cause of this and all other woes may have had the resonance of rationality, but it lacks the substance.

TheCoolinator - 23 September 2012 02:24 AM

JamesEvans - 20 September 2012 08:11 PM

the “Innocence of Muslims” debacle

It irritates me that we ever refer to the movie at all.  Just like the teddy bear and the cartoon, the thing about which the child throws its fit is not the issue. 

JamesEvans - 20 September 2012 08:11 PM

ridiculed Romney for what probably amounts to the first and last time he will ever be guilty of expressing a rational viewpoint,

Let’s not be too hasty about accusing Romney of expressing a rational view point.  His haste to paint the Obama administration as the cause of this and all other woes may have had the resonance of rationality, but it lacks the substance.

Neither the queen nor the worker bees make decisions.
No single termite decides when to migrate.
The citizens of a country are very much like the neurons in a brain and the President is very much like the illusory ego.
No individual can be held responsible in any societal activity.
Trying to determine the amount of rational thought being used in any society is futile when free will is factored out.

Sooooo, whats the answer. How do we respond effectively to terrorsim of this sort…......Seriously, if you were Obama, what course of action would you take?

Good question, GG, but I think we may have to admit predicting and preventing “this sort” of violence is damn near impossible, because, well, its “sort” keeps changing.  Did anyone know RPGs would be fired at a consulate?  Could anyone have seen this coming?  Possibly, but the security theater at airports comes to mind.  Each time we screen for a recent tactic, a new one appears that we didn’t expect.  And, even if we are gifted with near supernatural foresight, how do we act on it in a meaningful manner?  Can you actually take insuperable measures against well-armed flash mobs (premeditated or impromptu)?  And what new assault will they dream up after your impressive preparations thwart them?

I’m not suggesting we give up!  Maybe the only answer to your question is to remain as agile as possible with intensive human intelligence operations (an effort we unfortunately have all but abandoned) while stiffening our resolve, especially during times of security vacuum/regime change.  Stiff upper lip, dig in, head up, stay the course, and all those corny yet fitting cliches   Arguably, the promotion of free speech and secular liberty is America’s greatest global legacy.  If those ideals remain our objectives (sure, they can get perverted as they did in Vietnam and Iraq…valid but different discussion), we retain the moral high ground, and we have to defend it as best we can despite the unpredictable costs.  Sam said it best:

Questions of [what offenses Islam suffered] are obscene. Here is where the line must be drawn and defended without apology: We are free to burn the Qur’an or any other book, and to criticize Muhammad or any other human being. Let no one forget it.