Does the State have a duty to regulate speech?? How do they do it?

[leroy]

Check this out when ya get the time: http://hotair.com/ar...tion-violation/

Is it just me; or does anyone else think there could just possibly be a link between the (IN) Justice Department's actions here and the recent calls by those staunch defenders of free speech in the muslum community and in the middle east (...think the prez. of Egypt here...) regarding "....watchin your tongue in regards to any derrogatory comments or opinions RE: "....The Prophet of Islam....".. Amadinejahd (...or whatever his name is....), the grand iatola (...whoever he is....) and these other ancient ones have to be laughin their collective posteriors off over this political shilling by the nobamaites for favor with these barbarians; all at the expense of the First Amendment.

While ya are in a reading mood; read this account of what Cordell Hull (....a real democrat and fellow tennesseean....) had to say about free speech in a similar situation: http://www.redstate....ut-free-speech/ .

The above issue alone are reason enough for anyone, regardless of party affiliation, race, creed, color, or sexual orientation to vote this bunch of statist clowns out. I doubt the ole boy that's about to get his bail revolked would be havin it revolked if he hadnt stirred up this "free speech" hornets nest.

This move by the (IN) Justice Department is high handed use of political power and the resources of the state to "punish" those the state wishes to punish; and to send a message to"....watch your tongue...". These clowns are, in fact, seeking to muzzle free speech to curry favor with a bunch of ancient barbarians.

The real loosers in this deal are those of us who actually believe in the principles on which this country wus founded. Remember, there is an election in novermber; vote early and often.

Whaddya think?

curious leroy the infidel

Edited September 28, 2012 by leroy

[UncleJak]

I believe people have a right to say what they want to say. If someone chooses to listen to is up to them. No regulation needed. I also agree with freedom of religion and think anyone can worship whatever they want to. I personally wouldn't make fun of anothers religion, but free speech is free speech. Seems to me like people get butt-hurt (hurt feelings) too easily anymore.

[DaveTN]

None of our founding Fathers believed that the Constitution was a tool to protect criminals.

He violated his parole by using a computer and using a fake name. He is a criminal and they are sending him back to prison. Freedom of speech is still alive and well.

Edited September 28, 2012 by DaveTN

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It's an extension of the fraudulent actions of our President. He has been apologizing for anything and everything that

may have a negative slant towards anything Islamic. It seems the two separate actions by this individual are being

used together and then further threatening the use of free speech by anyone however veiled it may be. It is no doubt

that our free speech is being challenged directly by this administration.

Look at how Obama praises this religion and encourages Sharia Law up to the point, but not quite, of implementation.

Using one thing to revoke bail and shut this man up behind bars, for a completely different reason is the same as

saying free speech is a thing of the past, to me.

Every one of them should be run off, starting with this election and continuing until they are all gone.

Or did I misunderstand it?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

None of our founding Fathers believed that the Constitution was a tool to protect criminals.

He violated his parole by using a computer and using a fake name. He is a criminal and they are sending him back to prison. Freedom of speech is still alive and well.

You're right, Dave, but it is being tested with this.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think the last war will be one directly against Islam. Without that theo-political construct challenging everything

not necessarily Christianity, but all of civilization on this planet, it is the final battle that will tear this world apart.

The Israelis seem to be the ones who know this better than the rest of the world. We sure seem to be in denial

about it over here.

That ought to stir some stuff up.

[Jonnin]

My job gets me the occasional bit of insight.

This week, I was handed a piece of paper that told me all about the book "no **** day" -- the recent book that has some "info" in it.

Now, the book is out. It is published and read and the info is, restricted or not, now in the public domain. Can't be undone.

But this lovely memo tells me that I cannot discuss the book (and I am not, I am discussing the memo that tells me not to discuss the book...) nor highlight / mark in it.

Basically the govt is telling me that I cannot express my opinions about information that is published and public domain.

I am not sure how I feel about that, but my opinion is that this is a restriction of free speech and a crappy job of closing a barn door with no cows left inside. (I would NOT say that being asked to keep something that is NOT already public info secret is a violation, instead, that is a trust and necessary for a functional country).

This on the tails of Obama being very, very wishy washy on freedom of speech in his UN butt kissing event, where he put far more blame on the movie maker than a bunch of terrorists who are killing and looting and rioting over.... a verbal insult. He almost condones the reaction to the verbal offense as acceptable, not quite, but all but. They have arrested the guy (supposedly the right one?) on some unrelated offense but he will be made to pay for the movie, because he dared to express his inflamatory opinion.

Not too happy with Obama and his goons this week. Of course, that is most weeks that he is not on vacation, so at least 1/2 the time..

and by the way, the link up there..... the plight of the Jews was not known in detail at that time for him to HAVE sympathy. We knew they were being persecuted and that many had fled to the USA already, but the extent of the things going on was unknown here, just dark rumor at that point. Hard to lay blame on the guy for that, though the link seems to want to do so.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Jonnin

[leroy]

None of our founding Fathers believed that the Constitution was a tool to protect criminals.

He violated his parole by using a computer and using a fake name. He is a criminal and they are sending him back to prison. Freedom of speech is still alive and well.

I will buy part of what you are sayin with a few caviats. I believe that the original intent of the Constitution was, indeed, to protect "criminals". All the signers of the Declaration of Independence were, in fact criminals under British Crown law. Many of those original signers also signed the Constitution. If ya use the logic that the Constitution is not a "tool to protect criminals"; all the state has to do to shut people up is to delcare them criminals. The legal record is full of cases where the federal court ruled that "constitutional rights" of convicted fellons were violated. Some of the rulings have been pretty heinous.

As to the issue of "....freedom of speech".... I do, in fact, believe that "freedom of speech" in pretty much alive and well outside the confines of the presently constituted executive branch of government. The courts have been doin a good job lately in this respect. The reason they are is, i think, due to all the opportunities they are gettin to rule on it due to the use of the (IN) Justice Department and other arms of government to try to muzzle free speech. The executive branch of government has long muzzled free speech rights to civilian employees and uniformed service members as a condition of employment. Take a look at Jonnin's post above.

As to the "convicted criminal/violation of parole thing"; I aint excusing any of this guy's criminal actions. All that bein said; i do not believe the actions of the (IN) Justice Department in this particular case are anything other than a case of opportunistic political shilling in a pathetic attempt to buy some credibility with our enemies in the "ancient" world, and nothing else. It's opportunism for imagined diplomatic gain and the use of state power against a citizen for no other than a political reason; all draped in a detail of a "parole violation" made up by some procecutor and agreed to by a judge. It's usin the law as a tool to spank an individual to score political points with people who hate us to begin with.

The point of this discussion aint this guy's previous felonious actions, and it aint whether he violated any conditions of his parole. The point is that the government is using a detail to score political points with our enemies and threaten anyone else who might think about doing somethin similar (...think Terry Jones the Koran burner here along with anyone else who publically questions the tennants or fathers of islam (...or anything else that happens to not be politically correct to the presently constituted regieme at the moment...)....).

Their message to any potential dissidents to the "party line" is that ...."ya better be squeaky clean; "....cause we're goinna give you the ole anal exam and spank ya if we can"..; using any means necessary to do so. That is the message that is being sent to you, me, and anyone else the state doesnt happen to agree with. It is simply shilling to the "ancient ones" who like this "no freedom of speech" stuff by the presently constituted executive branch of government while trampling on the First Amendment. Look at the words of Cordell Hull (...a democrat serving a democrat president....) to the German government and weigh them against the (IN) Justice department's actions in this particular case and the Nobama speech to the UN the other day. Its like an alternate universe. Hull didn't like the jews; but he told the German Consulate that the "differences were irreconclable:

...It is well known that the free exercise of religion, the freedom of speech and of the press, and the right of peaceable assembly, are not only guaranteed to our citizens by the Constitution of the United States, but are beliefs deep-seated in the political consciousness of the American people…It appears, therefore, that the points of view of the two Governments, with respect to the issues of free speech and assembly, are irreconcilable, and that any discussion of this difference could not improve relations which the United States Government desires to preserve on as friendly a basis as the common interest of the two peoples demands....

Compare Hull's actions to Hillary's and nobama's the other day.

The nobamaites could care less about mine or your rights or the Constitution. It's all about the opportunity to shill in a pathetic attempt to put a bit of a lid on what's goin on in the muslum lands; not due to any "important legal issues" this guy may have ignored and have been convicted of. Dont be drug off into the bushes by the argument that justice is being done here. This is just another case of injustice perpetrated by a bunch of opportunists under the cover of law.

leroy

Edited September 28, 2012 by leroy

[Garufa]

If you're not a reader of Imprimis you might find this interesting....https://www.hillsdal...r=2012&month=02

It's a great read regarding free speech and religion, especially Islam. Somewhat germane to the topic and I believe where this country is going.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Garufa

[DaveTN]

It's opportunism for imagined diplomatic gain and the use of state power against a citizen for no other than a political reason; all draped in a detail of a "parole violation" made up by some procecutor and agreed to by a judge. It's usin the law as a tool to spank an individual to score political points with people who hate us to begin with.

The point of this discussion aint this guy's previous felonious actions, and it aint whether he violated any conditions of his parole. The point is that the government is using a detail to score political points with our enemies and threaten anyone else who might think about doing somethin similar

Nonsense. He’s a criminal that violated his parole. The government hasn’t done anything that would scare a non-criminal into not making a film like this. Although I hope that seeing innocent Americans murdered because of what this criminal did would stop them.

This is a Parole violation; nothing more, nothing less, they happen every day.

[quietguy]

Compare Hull's actions to Hillary's and nobama's the other day.

While I agree to a point, but you have put the comments in the overall context of history. Remember that they were a reaction to comments made by a New York mayor, in who's grand tradition mayor Bloomberg now operates.

[strickj]

Look at how Obama praises this religion and encourages Sharia Law up to the point, but not quite, of implementation.

Link? [other than world nut daily, that is]

[quietguy]

Nonsense. He’s a criminal that violated his parole. The government hasn’t done anything that would scare a non-criminal into not making a film like this. Although I hope that seeing innocent Americans murdered because of what this criminal did would stop them.

This is a Parole violation; nothing more, nothing less, they happen every day.

I agree with you, but also understand how it smells like censorship.

I agree that the guy brought himself into the spotlight and is accountable for his actions, but but he did it by making a movie. If we were dealing with rational people, the reaction would have been no worse than the release of the Passion of the Christ. If anything, I believe that this has uncovered just how unstable the Muslim population is.

To blame this guy for the loss of human life is no different that blaming a gun for the actions of its wielder.

Edited September 29, 2012 by quietguy

[Guest Wildogre]

My job gets me the occasional bit of insight.

This week, I was handed a piece of paper that told me all about the book "no **** day" -- the recent book that has some "info" in it.

Now, the book is out. It is published and read and the info is, restricted or not, now in the public domain. Can't be undone.

But this lovely memo tells me that I cannot discuss the book (and I am not, I am discussing the memo that tells me not to discuss the book...) nor highlight / mark in it.

Basically the govt is telling me that I cannot express my opinions about information that is published and public domain.

I am not sure how I feel about that, but my opinion is that this is a restriction of free speech and a crappy job of closing a barn door with no cows left inside. (I would NOT say that being asked to keep something that is NOT already public info secret is a violation, instead, that is a trust and necessary for a functional country).

I am under the same type of order but for a book that was published almost 20 years ago. The problem with discussing books like this is if someone knows where you work anything you say about the book is now accepted as confirmed. That is the issue.

The most important secrets in the Intelligence field are known as "sources and methods" how the information is collected. This is often more important than the actual information. From what I understand, from outside reading, this book does include that information. That is why the "gag order" was put out.

There is a Doctor in jail in Pakistan right now who I am sure wishes someone did keep keep quiet.

[Oh Shoot]

...This is a Parole violation; nothing more, nothing less, they happen every day.

Let's see, Nakoula gets 10 or 15 cops and press alerted to cover a perp walk just to be interviewed by FBI.

Yep, that's how all all parole violators are handled, nothing political going on here.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Link? [other than world nut daily, that is]

Dig up all the news articles you want over the last three or so years, no, you might have to dig up deeper.

I'm sorry strickj, I wouldn't be able to satisfy you. Peruse youtube on Obama and you should be able to see some.

I think one was posted on TGO a while back, also.

Otherwise, are you calling me something?

Edited September 29, 2012 by 6.8 AR

[Guest 6.8 AR]

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY

I think this one was on here(TGO), a little earlier.

I'll keep digging, although I will need to go to bed, sometime tonight, and I'll have plenty time tomorrow

to see if World Net Daily can help out, also. By the way, what's wrong with World Net Daily? Or, did I spell it wrong?

[strickj]

6.8;

He stated that he has Muslims in his family and has "experienced" it it in three countries. I see nothing to support claims that he's encouraging or implementing Sharia law.

I may not have a problem with Muslims but not even I would accept Sharia law (or any other religious law). It goes without saying that if that were the case, I would be the first to scream unconstitutional as I do with other religious based laws.

World nut daily is full of conspiracy theories and has a Christian and Conservative bias. Of course they're gonna say stuffs to cater those those with a fear of O's Muzzy evils.

And no, I am not calling you anything.

Edited September 29, 2012 by strickj

[strickj]

Let's see, Nakoula gets 10 or 15 cops and press alerted to cover a perp walk just to be interviewed by FBI.

Yep, that's how all all parole violators are handled, nothing political going on here.

- OS

He violated his parole.

The media attention is because of his movie.

The extra force of police is because of the attention he's getting over the film.

You see the same step-up in force anytime a perp is surrounded by paparazzi or groups of people.

Seems simple enough to me

Edited September 29, 2012 by strickj

[DaveTN]

Let's see, Nakoula gets 10 or 15 cops and press alerted to cover a perp walk just to be interviewed by FBI.

Yep, that's how all all parole violators are handled, nothing political going on here.

- OS

I still don’t get it? If you were on parole and specifically banned from using a computer or using a fake name because that’s how you stole money from innocent citizens and was sent to prison for it, and your Parole Officer walked in your house on an in-home check and found you making a movie on a computer using a fake name; he would probably violate you and we would never hear anything about it unless we knew you personally or you posted it here before they sent you off to prison.

Yet because this dirt bag criminal violated the conditions of his parole, and made national news doing it which result in the death of Americans overseas; he is somehow a victim of politics and is having his rights violated? Man… I can’t make that leap and I don’t see how anyone else can either.

[Oh Shoot]

.....yet because this dirt bag criminal violated the conditions of his parole, and made national news doing it which result in the death of Americans overseas; he is somehow a victim of politics and is having his rights violated? Man… I can’t make that leap and I don’t see how anyone else can either.

I didn't claim his rights had been necessarily violated, or certainly that he's not guilty of parole violation, only that the way it was handled has been 100% politically motivated.

The debacle to which I refer, the man wasn't even under arrest. He was called in for a 30 minute discussion, and was released after it. Hell, it could have been done by phone. The whole thing was done for the press coverage, and only for the press coverage, in an attempt to assuage Muslim sentiment abroad, a decision made on the highest level.

You know, that same level that wouldn't prosecute the Black Panther whose voter interference was on tape for all the world to see. The same one that sues individual states for attempting to enforce the immigration policies that the US Justice Dept. won't. The same one that sues states for attempting to ensure there's no voter fraud, etc ad nauseam. Meaning BHO told Holder to do it, and do it in the way it would best get maximum press coverage.

- OS

Edited September 29, 2012 by OhShoot

[Guest 6.8 AR]

6.8;

He stated that he has Muslims in his family and has "experienced" it it in three countries. I see nothing to support claims that he's encouraging or implementing Sharia law.

I may not have a problem with Muslims but not even I would accept Sharia law (or any other religious law). It goes without saying that if that were the case, I would be the first to scream unconstitutional as I do with other religious based laws.

World nut daily is full of conspiracy theories and has a Christian and Conservative bias. Of course they're gonna say stuffs to cater those those with a fear of O's Muzzy evils.

And no, I am not calling you anything.

I'm glad to hear that. Starting to have concerns. Thank you.

That was the only one I saw last night before my eyes fell shut, but there have been instances since day one and before then

of his support for Sharia Law, not from WND, but from many sources. I'll find some and post them, okay, friend?

But that one or two slip ups in his interviews about his faith says a lot by themselves. Even giving him the benefit of the doubt

and allowing that he could have been over prepared for multiple speaking engegements, it is at the very least, suspicious.

He has a long record of his little mistakes, like when the mic was left open talking to Russian President Medvedev(?) and

other speaking engagements without the teleprompter, yep, so I will always tend to be suspicious and not write this man off

as just being dumb.

I'll admit, a lot of things he has said and done could be accidental and be totally meaningless, but I doubt it. And that's

purely my opinion, strickj, but I know many others agree and it isn't tinfoil. I have been paying attention to almost every time

he gets media coverage and I don't rely on media comments, just his actions. Been saying since before the 08 election

to watch what his left hand is doing when he uses his right hand. He is slime.

We don't agree about WND and Infowars I think because we have different types of BS detectors. I try to look at all of them

with a lot of suspicion because all the media sites are as polarized as the general public is.The ones you like are the same

way. HuffPo rarely, but occasionally get it right. Salon.com even can.

Don't kill the messenger for everything because of some garbage, just some of the messages.

As far as what kind of religious beliefs he has, I don't care because he plays both ends against each other. He's been doing

that for a long time with Netanyahu.

[leroy]

Check this out. Interesting read: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/27/feds-arrest-mohammed-filmmaker-on-probation-violation/

Interestin musings here:

.....Update: According to TMZ, the guy’s probation report is sealed. Question for criminal defense attorneys: Is there any way to force it to be unsealed, or is that at the discretion of one or both of the parties? There’s a public interest at this point, I think, in knowing why they’re sending him back to prison. Did he commit a serious crime that we don’t know about, or are they using a technicality to punish him for blasphemy?......

leroy