Dreamstime Images

Mike Siegel: Violent Rhetoric is Not Free Speech

Two published reports demonstrate the danger created by violent speech directed at targeted groups

Mike Siegel
May 15, 2017 - 10:38 am
Categories: 

Two published reports demonstrate the danger created by violent speech directed at targeted groups.

First is the case of Professor Tommy Curry. He is an African-American professor at Texas A&M University where he teaches Radical Black Philosophies and Social and Political Philosophy. He teaches 2 courses for 9 months and earns $86274 per year.

Curry says that black people need to speak publicly about the murder of white people He has done a You Tube interview in which he says that the murder of white people may be necessary for what he calls “black liberation.” He goes on to say that white people need to be in such fear that they believe “death could come for them at any moment.”

Curry has published two books that students must purchase for his class. One is The Philosophical Treatise of William H Ferris at a retail cost of $125 and The Man-Not at $99.50.

It is worth noting that, at present, the data tells us that most interracial murders between black and white people are extremely one-sided with most cases being blacks killing whites.

On talk programs I host, African-American spokespeople who are moderate say Curry needs to be prosecuted for advocating violence in the form of murder. The First Amendment does not protect speech that has an imminent likelihood of causing violence and this certainly fits in that category.

The President of Texas A&M responded to this reprehensible message from his Professor by not even mentioning his name. There will be no action against Curry by the Administration for this violent rhetoric.

Of course, what would be the result if I, as a Professor of Communication, taught at Texas A&M and said whites need to kill blacks to protect their safety? How long would I be a Professor at Texas A&M and how long would it take for me to be prosecuted for advocating murder? Probably less time than it takes me to write this commentary.

The other case comes to us from Denmark. Imam Mundhir Abdallah preaches in Norrebro, a suburb of Copenhagen. His inflammatory and violent rhetoric takes place at the Masjid Al-Faruq Mosque. Media in Denmark have earlier linked this mosque to radical Islam. True to form in the Scandinavian countries and throughout Europe, this rhetoric advocating murder is not dealt with and continues.

This Imam calls for the murder of Jews. Again, Abdallah has a You Tube message that begins, “Judgment day will not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them.” The Middle East Media Research Institute supplied the translation of the Arabic message by Abdallah on You Tube.

Now, the Jewish community in Denmark, led by Dan Rosenberg Rasmussen, has urged police to open an investigation for incitement to racial hatred.

The fear in the Jewish community in Denmark as expressed by Rasmussen, is “that weak and easily-influenced persons could interpret this kind of preaching as an appeal to visit acts of violence or terror on Jews.”

In fact, Omar al-Hussein who was behind a series of shootings in Copenhagen in 2015, resulting in two murders, had visited the mosque the day before going on the rampage.

Denmark is finally acting to stop this rhetoric. The nation has published a list of six foreigners accused of preaching hatred, five Muslim preachers and one Evangelical, banning them for two years.

Will Texas A&M and the State of Texas, as well as our Department of Homeland Security have the courage and moral strength to protect the American people from Tommy Curry and ban his vitriolic and advocacy of murder speech in this country? He is not expressing free speech. Be assured it is violent, murderous and unprotected speech. That kind of advocacy of violence cannot stand. If it is allowed, be assured also that some weak-minded extremist will carry out the words of Tommy Curry in deed and then the blood of the victims will be on the hands of Texas A&M University Administration and the police agencies who would have done nothing to stop this charade pretending to be protected under the First Amendment.

Tags: 
Comments ()