2008 Woodie Awards
Vote Absentee
Illini Media
WPGU
buzz
Illio
TechnographPoint/Counterpoint
Hate speech unworthy/ Where is the line drawn?
By Jon Bambenek and Matt Simmons
Posted: 8/30/05 Section: Opinions
Hate speech unworthy
If I stood in front of the Union and proclaimed racial epithets, I would be fired and expelled from this University before my voice echoed back from Foellinger Auditorium. We already have "speech" laws against death threats, for instance, that no one seriously challenges - this is no different. It's ironic, at best, that the defense against radical hate speech comes from the side of the political spectrum that brought you speech codes.
Foreign nationals who are here by permission should not be entitled to use the United States as a base to spread terrorism. If you are here on an educational visa, do your homework. If you are here on a work visa, get to work. If you want to spread terror, go to Baghdad. The United States Marines will deal with you. We give visas with specific terms, and when people violate those terms, they get sent home.
Such a law would not lead to any slippery slope on free speech because the difference between expressing an opinion and calling for murder isn't difficult to discern. There's a fundamental difference between saying the Iraq War is unjust and that Americans' lives have no value. In fact, the beneficiaries would also be the Muslim community, most of who are unfairly likened to these violent and radical preachers. No one is suggesting that we start deporting anti-war protesters.
What we are learning from Able Danger, a military intelligence unit, is what happens when we find the advocates and supporters of terrorism and do nothing. Things like Sept. 11 happen. There are tactical benefits of observation, but a time to act does come. Two thousand nine hundred and eighty-six lives, according to Wikipedia, were lost on Sept. 11 because of the Clinton Administration's wall of separation. We owe it to their families not to fall prey to inaction again.
John Bambenek
Where is the line drawn?
Giving the government the power to deport foreign nationals for expressing views that foment, justify, or glorify terrorist violence is not in the interest of the American people. We would not be able to tell if this would be a one-time occurrence, or if it would lead to more infringements on free speech. Knowing what we know, could we trust President Bush and Congress to preserve our right to protest and dissent? I know I could not.
If I stood in front of the Union and proclaimed racial epithets, I would be fired and expelled from this University before my voice echoed back from Foellinger Auditorium. We already have "speech" laws against death threats, for instance, that no one seriously challenges - this is no different. It's ironic, at best, that the defense against radical hate speech comes from the side of the political spectrum that brought you speech codes.
Foreign nationals who are here by permission should not be entitled to use the United States as a base to spread terrorism. If you are here on an educational visa, do your homework. If you are here on a work visa, get to work. If you want to spread terror, go to Baghdad. The United States Marines will deal with you. We give visas with specific terms, and when people violate those terms, they get sent home.
Such a law would not lead to any slippery slope on free speech because the difference between expressing an opinion and calling for murder isn't difficult to discern. There's a fundamental difference between saying the Iraq War is unjust and that Americans' lives have no value. In fact, the beneficiaries would also be the Muslim community, most of who are unfairly likened to these violent and radical preachers. No one is suggesting that we start deporting anti-war protesters.
What we are learning from Able Danger, a military intelligence unit, is what happens when we find the advocates and supporters of terrorism and do nothing. Things like Sept. 11 happen. There are tactical benefits of observation, but a time to act does come. Two thousand nine hundred and eighty-six lives, according to Wikipedia, were lost on Sept. 11 because of the Clinton Administration's wall of separation. We owe it to their families not to fall prey to inaction again.
John Bambenek
Where is the line drawn?
Giving the government the power to deport foreign nationals for expressing views that foment, justify, or glorify terrorist violence is not in the interest of the American people. We would not be able to tell if this would be a one-time occurrence, or if it would lead to more infringements on free speech. Knowing what we know, could we trust President Bush and Congress to preserve our right to protest and dissent? I know I could not.
The Daily Illini encourages on-topic discussion through article commenting on its articles and blogs. It is our policy not to delete any comments based upon political or ideological point of view. However, we reserve the right to remove comments that are abusive, off-topic or use excessive foul language.
The posting of copyrighted material, including any and all content for which you are not the author, is illegal under Federal intellectual property laws. Such activity will not be tolerated. Comments containing copyrighted material will be removed, and continued violation of copyright law is grounds for being banned completely from commenting on DailyIllini.com.
If you feel any post meets these conditions or merits review, please e-mail our editors at meonline@dailyillini.com.