45.6 F
New York
Friday, March 29, 2024

Lawmaker Demands Punishment For Professor Who Defended Killing Blasphemers

Related Articles

-Advertisement-

Must read

Siddique told the Inquirer he had no regrets for directing a prior anti-Semitic diatribe at Geller, calling her and others who share her beliefs dirty Jewish Zionist White Supremacists thugs in a May 30 Facebook post.

A Pennsylvania state senator wants Lincoln University to discipline a tenured English professor who defended killing those who blaspheme the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.

The professor, Kaukab Siddique, also made numerous statements in an online newsletter and on Facebook rationalizing the actions of the Islamic State, Hamas and al-Qaida.

Sen. Anthony Williams wrote a letter Aug. 17 to Lincoln University’s president after seeing comments by Siddique in the Aug. 10 Philadelphia Inquirer and in other national publications.

Siddique has a long record of statements rationalizing and defending terrorist actions and has written repeatedly about the Islamic prohibition against insulting the faith, including images of Islam’s prophet Muhammad.

“Almost all Islamic scholars agree that one who insults, abuses or ridicules the Prophet, pbuh (peace be upon him), should be killed,” Siddique wrote after January’s massacre at the offices of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo killed 12 people.

He also claimed that “Abuse of the Prophet, pbuh, is a form of cultural genocide” and described making cartoons of Muhammad as “acts of war against Islam.” Siddique further stated that “[a]cts of war are always countered by those Muslims who have the ability and will do it.”

The Muslim world would never “accept the abuse of the Prophet, pbuh, in the name of freedom of expression,” Siddique wrote.

Lincoln University has disassociated itself from Siddique’s inflammatory rhetoric – he also has questioned the Holocaust and made anti-gay statements – but says the “bedrock principle” of academic freedom limits further action against the tenured English professor.

In his letter, Williams challenged the university’s position.

“Academic freedom is certainly important, but so is academic integrity,” Williams wrote. “Allowing a member of your faculty to continue spreading hateful, vile lies in the public arena is irresponsible; to protect him from any form of discipline for such actions is unconscionable.”

In an interview, Williams told the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT) that Siddique’s defense of terrorists violates the requirements for him to keep his tenure and warned they threaten Lincoln University’s integrity and that of its students.

“Free speech does not mean that you can walk into a crowded theater and cry fire,” Williams said. “Dr. Siddique has crossed that line several times.”

The most recent example involved Siddique’s claim to The Philadelphia Inquirer that free-speech advocate Pamela Geller’s “Draw Muhammad” contest was tantamount to killing Muslims. Geller told the IPT that she felt Siddique’s comment equaled incitement for Muslims to kill her.

Williams previously expressed concern over Siddique’s anti-Semitic rhetoric and Holocaust denial. In 2010, he and State Sen. Daylin Leach wrote to then-Lincoln University President Ivory Nelson, inquiring whether Siddique’s sentiments were reflected in his classroom teaching. Leach described Siddique’s comments as “blatant hate speech.” Lincoln kept Siddique on its payroll despite that controversy citing academic freedom.

A university spokesman declined to comment when contacted by the IPT, but pointed to a statement on its website.

“At Lincoln University, we acknowledge Dr. Siddique’s right to free speech,” the statement said. “Academic freedom is a bedrock principle for institutions of higher education. However, the university does recognize why many have reacted negatively to his comments. Lincoln University does not condone bigotry in any form and does not hold the opinions of Dr. Siddique. We are committed to providing a learning environment that is inclusive and welcoming to all.”

Williams is scheduled to meet with Lincoln University President Richard Green later this week.

Siddique told the Inquirer he had no regrets for directing a prior anti-Semitic diatribe at Geller, calling her and others who share her beliefs “dirty Jewish Zionist White Supremacists thugs” in a May 30 Facebook post.

Siddique rebutted Williams’ accusations against him on Facebook on Wednesday, saying that the senator did not know anything about him or his relationship with his students. He made no effort to confront the facts contained in Williams’ letter and deflected his criticism.

“The Senator thinks I should be dismissed because I stand against his views and those of the supporters of Israel. I would remind him that this is not Israel. I am a citizen of the United States and we still have First Amendment rights,” Siddique wrote. “Our students are struggling against the situation in American cities. We have police brutality in many cities. I stand with my students in all these issues.”

Siddique Accuses Pamela Geller of All But Killing Muslims

Siddique’s views about the Charlie Hebdo attack raise questions about what he meant in his Philadelphia Inquirer interview. He claimed that Geller’s “Draw Muhammad” contest in May amounted to “cultural genocide” and that that it was tantamount to killing Muslims.

“She did the worst, other than killing us,” Siddique told the Inquirer.

Two gunmen agreed and tried to storm the cartoon contest and kill Geller and as many people inside as possible. They were shot dead by law enforcement officers before they were able to get inside the building.

To Geller, already the subject of death threats from the Islamic State (ISIS) and others, Siddique’s comments that she had done “the worst, other than killing us” had a clear meaning.

“This is certainly incitement,” Geller told the IPT in an email. “Kaukab Siddique must know that [the ISIS threat] exists. And he is telling Muslims that what I have done in standing for free speech is tantamount to genocide. He is in effect pleading with jihadis to kill me. And this is just fine with the American academic establishment today.”

In Facebook comments on May 4, Siddique described the Muhammad cartoon contest as an “act of war on Islam” and a form of “blasphemy.”

“Saying that insulting the prophet, pbuh (peace be upon him), is freedom of speech is kufr (blasphemous),” Siddique wrote. “Try insulting the Jews.”

A 2006 Canadian intelligence report found that perception that Islam is under attack from the West is the single most important factor in radicalizing Muslims.

To Siddique, the notion of a western war on Islam is not a point of view, but a fact. Cartoons depicting the prophet are weapons in that war, which is why al-Qaida and others urge jihadists to attack. “This is what the West needs to understand,” he wrotein January. “The Muslim world will NEVER accept abuse of the Prophet, pbuh, in the name of freedom of expression.”

Taken collectively, Siddique’s seeming endorsement of attacks on people who caricature Muhammad, in the eyes of an ISIS sympathizer, reinforces the terror group’s narrative that Islam is under attack and its repeated calls to kill any enemy of Islam. ISIS laid out a penal code in its manual for lone jihadis called “How to Survive In the West.”

“Allah is asking us; why don’t you fight a people who broke their covenant of peace (with the Muslims) first, then reviled our religion (by promoting insulting pictures of Prophet Muhammad) and started (Arabic: bada’*) the attack against you first?” a passage in the manual said.

Siddique likely would deny having violent intent against Geller; he has said that Muslims should be “non-violent” when denouncing Muhammad cartoons. But he never condemned the failed May 3 terror attack in Garland, Texas.

But his comment that Geller “did the worst, other than killing us” in organizing the Garland contest could encourage an ISIS sympathizer to kill her, said Ahmed Subhy Mansour, a Muslim scholar opposed to jihadism.

“I think what she said has nothing to do with the Muslim life here in the entire West,” Mansour said. “But what he says about her may endanger her life.”

(IPT)

balance of natureDonate

Latest article

- Advertisement -