More Attacks on Free Speech

Yesterday I posted about the fiasco of Lionheart’s arrest in England…England of course being a bastion of rabid political correctness and disgraceful dhimmitude.

Today the issue is closer to home.  In Philadelpha, the cradle of our free Republic and our Constitution.  This is another example of an overbearing government entity stifling legitimate free speech, and as I said, should be a cause of serious concern to everyone.

Christian activist to be arraigned today for refusing to honor ‘free speech zone’

Allie Martin
OneNewsNow.com
January 9, 2008
The director of Christian activist group Repent America will be arraigned today in a Philadelphia courtroom on charges of unlawful preaching.

Michael Marcavage had been preaching to people on a public sidewalk outside the Liberty Bell Center this past October when he was arrested by officers from the National Park Service. The arrest came after he refused to move to a so-called “free-speech zone” across the street from the building housing the Liberty Bell.

The incident occurred during Repent America‘s annual pro-life evangelism tour, and according to Marcavage, he was just exercising his constitutional right to free speech.

“It’s a very dangerous case and another example of how our nation is headed down this path of destruction when people are not free to speak,” he cautions. “Then we find ourselves in a society in which we’re no longer enjoying the liberties God has bestowed upon our nation.” And it is ironic, he adds, that his right to free speech was challenged in Philadelphia, the birthplace of American freedom.

The chief ranger at the site told Marcavage that due to policy changes, freedom of religion and speech are prohibited anywhere on the public park grounds without a permit, and only then if in the free-speech zone.

What the hell is a “free-speech zone”?  Where, exactly, does the Constitution allow for selective application?  I thought the only “permit” needed for Constitutional protection was U.S. citizenship.

These are dangerous times for many, many reasons.

Stop the Memorial Blogburst

Blogburst blockbuster: Professor who white-washed the Crescent of Embrace was Paul Murdoch’s classmate at UCLA

An excerpt from the Park Service investigation into the Flight 93 memorial identifies one of their consultants as a scholar from MIT who “wishes to remain anonymous.” Another document identifies this person as a religious scholar or a professor of Islamic architecture. MIT does not have a religion department, and they only have one professor of Islamic architecture: Professor Nassar Rabbat, who has confirmed that he is the Park Service consultant.

A check of Rabbat’s background shows that he was a classmate of Paul Murdoch, both getting masters degrees in architecture from UCLA in 1984 and both doing their masters work on Middle Easter subjects. Murdoch wrote a “masters project” titled: “A museum for Haifa, Israel.” Rabbat did a masters thesis titled: “House-form, climactic response and lifestyle: a study of the 17-19th century courthouse houses in Cairo and Damascus.”

This connection between Murdoch and Rabbat raises the possibility that Murdoch himself orchestrated the Park Service investigation into warnings about his own design. Rabbat denies knowing Murdoch, but given the blatant dishonesty of what he told the Park Service, that denial cannot be trusted.

Rabbat lied about something that every practicing Muslim knows

Rabbat’s first “major talking point” (from the Memorial Project’s White Paper, towards the bottom) is a blatantly dishonest excuse for why the Park Service should not be concerned about the almost exact Mecca orientation of the Crescent of Embrace. A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a mihrab and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. Rabbat assures the Park Service that because the Mecca orientation of the Crescent of Embrace is inexact, it can’t be seen as a mihrab:

Mihrab orientation is either correct or not. It cannot be off by some degrees.

Absolutely false, and Rabbat certainly knows it. This goes to the most basic principle of mosque design: that all mosques are expressions of Muhammad’s prototype.