Category Archives: Freedom Of Speech
From MM: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Supported by Barack Hussein Obama, and advanced by Hillary Clinton when she was Secretary of State, in its quest to criminalize speech that’s critical of all Islam-related topics, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) endorsed the formation of a new Advisory Media Committee to address ‘Islamophobia.’
Frontpage Magazine This past September, the OIC held “The First International Conference on Islamophobia: Law & Media.” The conference endorsed numerous recommendations which arose from prior workshops on Islamophobia from media, legal and political perspectives. A main conclusion was the consensus to institutionalize the conference and create an Advisory Media Committee to meet under the newly established OIC Media Forum based in Istanbul Turkey.
Supposedly, the purpose of the conference was to support an OIC campaign to “correct the image of Islam and Muslims in Europe and North America.” By this, it means to whitewash the intolerant, violent and discriminatory aspects of Islam and Islamists. The OIC has launched a campaign to provide disinformation to the public, delinking all Islam from these undesirable traits and attacks all who insist on these truths, as bigots, racists and Islamophobes.
The OIC is a 57 member organization consisting of Muslim countries whose long term goal is the worldwide implementation of Sharia law and seemingly the ultimate establishment of a Caliphate. Its members tend to vote together as a block in the UN, so it is extremely powerful, despite the fact that few people have heard of it.
Its present goal is the international criminalization of all speech that “defames” Islam, which the OIC defines as anything that sheds a negative light on Islam or Muslims, even when it’s true.
Its target is the West and one of its tactics is to accuse those who criticize Islam or its various interpretations as “Islamophobic.” It is attempting to pass the equivalent of Islamic blasphemy codes in the West, using accusations of bigotry to silence anyone who speaks the truth about Islamic terrorism or Islamic persecution of religious minorities. The OIC uses international bodies such as the UN and international “consensus building” as a platform to achieve its goals. Certainly, if the OIC straightforwardly informed America and Europe of its aspirations to silence speech, it would gain no strides.
Therefore, it uses bureaucratic, unaccountable entities such as the UN as a means to make inroads, using watered down language and words that sound palatable to the West in order to deceive the public about its underlying goals.
Unfortunately, the OIC has been fairly successful in passing UN resolutions that if implemented, would have the effect of stifling speech that “defames religions.” Of course, the OIC is only concerned with the defamation of Islam. Indeed, OIC countries all have some sort of Islamic blasphemy laws which prohibit such defamation. To be certain, these laws are regularly used to criminally punish those who speak critically of Islam. These laws are also used to justify persecution of religious minorities. For example, in many OIC countries, openly practicing a version of Islam not sanctioned by the government can land one in jail for blasphemy. The OIC has no reciprocity in refraining from “defamation” of Judaism, Christianity, or other religions.
After the US realized that the UN resolution to Combat Defamation of Religions had a potentially disastrous impact on free expression, the US State Department asked the OIC to draft an alternative resolution that would address “Islamophobia” concerns and still retain free speech. The OIC produced Resolution 16/18 to Combat Intolerance Based on Religion or Belief. Initially, the State Department interpreted this resolution to protect religious minorities of all stripes from discrimination and violence, while still retaining freedom of speech.
The OIC, however, has made it clear that it clings to its goal to protect Islam from so-called defamation. Indeed, it has manipulated the language in resolution to do just that.
Rizwan Saeed Sheikh, spokesman for the OIC Secretary General has explained that the OIC’s goal is to make “denigration of religions” a crime. Somehow, over time, the State Department appears to have adopted the OIC’s view that the West is Islamophobic and that Islam is a religion of peace which should never be associated with terrorism. Toward this end, the Obama Administration has completely purged all its counterterrorism training programs from any mention of Islamic terrorism. Only “right-wing extremists” persist in using the term, and of course are “Islamophobes” for doing so.
The OIC’s claims that it seeks to protect all religions and religious symbols from defamation are patently false and are contrary to the actions of the OIC countries which discriminate against infidels. In Saudi Arabia, Jews are denied citizenship; in Iran, Baha’is are denied equal employment opportunities; in Pakistan, Ahmadiyya Muslims are jailed for openly practicing their faith, and there’s a genocide against Coptic Christians in Egypt. Many OIC countries also prohibit the building or repair of churches and synagogues as well as public worship by minority religions.
The September meeting constituted the third Istanbul Conference: international meetings designed to implement Resolution 16/18 in support of the OIC’s agenda to combat “Islamophobia” in the West.
If the OIC really wanted to combat Islamophobia, it would persuade terrorists to refrain from violence; it would condemn the genocide of Coptic Christians in Egypt and it would spare little girls from forced marriages in OIC countries. The OIC has the power to stop the denigration of Jewish, Christian, Zorastrian and Baha’i religious symbols in the OIC countries. It can pressure IC member states to implement domestic policies that will honor and respect minority religions in the Middle East and elsewhere. Do this, and “Islamophobia” in the West will dissipate.
Instead, the OIC requests that the media censor their reports about Islamic terrorism, Islamic persecution of religious minorities and human rights violations committed in the name of Islam, as an interim step toward the criminalization of such speech. All of this will only serve to increase, not decrease “Islamophobia.”
The clash of civilizations widens.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Like I was saying earlier about a congealing hard tyranny… Within 24 hours of posting on Facebook about America degenerating into a police state, 33-year-old Blaine Cooper was called in by the Prescott Valley, AZ police for an interview with the FBI:
He complied with the request for an interview, which lasted 45 minutes with federal agents present. He was released after apparently being determined to not be a threat.
“They had every Facebook post I had ever made in a huge file, along with all my wife’s information, and parent’s information,” Cooper told policestateusa.com.
Cooper said that he was told that without “defusing the situation” by complying with the interview, his house might have been raided.
It was thoughtful of the authorities not to send in a SWAT team straight off.
It should be pointed out that answering questions from federal agents is an extremely risky idea, especially without the presence of a lawyer. Supreme Court case BROGAN v. UNITED STATES affirmed that it is a federal crime to tell any lie, or misrepresent any fact, to a federal agent. Even an innocent person with good intentions could commit a federal crime by misspeaking during an interview.
At least they proved Cooper’s point for him.
This is what got him in trouble. Careful what you type. Your tax dollar may be paying people to read it.
On a tip from Wiggins.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
Diane Marxist Feinstein: Absolute Power and Absolutely Corrupt. And Absolutely a Dangerous Enemy of the Constitution.
By LUCA GATTONI-CELLI on 8.16.13
No politician should be allowed to decide who is a “real journalist.”
Senator Dianne Feinstein has had a busy year. She kicked off 2013 by leading the charge against “assault weapons,” analogous to Nerf guns with extra plastic glued on. When the California Democrat’s gun control amendment decisively failed, she turned to defending extra-judicial targeted killing of American citizens with drone aircraft. Then Edward Snowden pushed intelligence officials into the spotlight without their usual kabuki stage makeup.
Right on cue, the self-styled “chairman” of the intelligence committee threw herself into tireless apologetics. The NSA’s indiscriminate collection of telephone metadata is of dubious utility and faces dubious oversight from the hamstrung Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. Yet Feinstein, a senior member of the judiciary committee as well, insists the agency does nothing illegal. They have nothing to hide, so please stop asking what they are hiding. Now, after taking shots at the Second, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, she has set her sights on the First. When it comes to the Bill of Rights, never say Di.
A notable act of White House damage control this spring was the championing of a journalist shield law President Obama previously opposed. It would purportedly strengthen American press freedom, protecting journalists from being forced to disclose confidential sources by subpoena or court order. A common thread running through the Obama’s scandals is suppression of dissent. The current administration brags about prosecuting six leakers under the 1917 Espionage Act, twice as many as all previous administrations combined. Adams, Wilson, FDR, and Nixon had their own methods, to be sure, but President Obama’s crackdown puts him in such company.
Incredibly, the last few weeks have seen debate over whether reporting on the NSA is treason. How easily we forget the First Amendment’s unique robustness. When the Guardian acquired the Wikileaks documents, its editors contacted the New York Times to circumvent draconian British press regulations. In late June those same editors told Charlie Rose the U.S. government had raised no specific national security concerns about its NSA disclosures. Someone is lying, and of the two sides, the government has a much worse track record.
Feinstein would only protect the anonymous sources of what she would call “real journalists,” those being paid by an “established news organization.” The law would still have had direct bearing on the James Rosen case, and that of homophonic New York Times reporter James Risen. But Feinstein would exclude bloggers, an entirely arbitrary, meritless distinction. Until very recently,FiveThirtyEight was “just a blog” and Nate Silver was “just a blogger.” Glenn Greenwald is a lawyer by training who took up blogging almost as a hobby, but built himself into a Guardiancolumnist and now one of the paper’s stars, responsible for building its international brand.
As Feinstein would tell it, a few years ago Silver and Greenwald were not “real journalists.” Were they not just as talented? Their platforms were smaller, but were their professional goals and seriousness fundamentally different? Greenwald’s NSA reporting is the archetypical example. Edward Snowden sought him out after following his work. The enigmatic hacker also initially approached the august Washington Post and filmmaker Laura Poitras, who no longer feels comfortable entering the United States after facing rough treatment at the border numerous times.
Snowden is an anomaly, notably for expressing a willingness to forfeit his future as a free man. In the wake of the AP phone scandal, it was widely reported that government sources were clamming up. To be clear, the protection of confidential sources is not a settled issue. This specific debate is about whether anyonewho disseminates information from a confidential source should be protected under the First Amendment from revealing that source. People holding power have no qualms about covering up their misdeeds. Almost a dozen scandals in the past few months bear that out. So did the Church Commission that scrutinized government abuses in the wake of Watergate. It would be a grave error to allow political leaders to decide who is a journalist and what journalism is.
After seeing the depths of government abuses, commission chairman Senator Frank Church warned that an unfettered surveillance state would allow complete subversion of American democracy:
That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide. [An autocrat] could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back.
Flash forward from 1975 to 2013 and Edward Snowden professes the same fear if nothing changes:
A new leader will be elected, they’ll flip the switch, say that because of the crisis, because of the dangers that we face in the world — some new and unpredicted threat — we need more authority, we need more power. And there will be nothing the people can do at that point to oppose it and it will be turnkey tyranny.
I generally avoid open-air polemics because I love reporting, believe it is crucially important, and do not want to alienate potential sources or readers. However, Dianne Feinstein poses an existential threat to my vocation, finding facts that tell stories. About a month ago I was approached by a former federal employee alleging unsecure data practices at a government agency. This was just after Snowden came forward, and my contact was utterly terrified of losing her anonymity and being imprisoned. I do not have the resources to independently verify her claims, but am still coaxing her to take the story to an outlet with the knowledge and resources to see it through. I worry how she will react to this debate.
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is no platitude. I have seen it with my own eyes, heard with my own ears intelligence officials lie in congressional hearings, sometimes to complicit lawmakers. Dianne Feinstein tops that list in the Senate. Her disparagement of the First Amendment is difficult to fathom. If she gets her wish, we will all be worse off for it, necessarily less certain about the future of liberty.
From The American Spectator: http://spectator.org/archives/2013/08/16/sen-feinstein-threatens-press
“Liberals have targeted this man for personal destruction to create a climate of fear.” – GOP Rep. Steve Stockman
WASHINGTON — Congressman Steve Stockman Wednesday invited the rodeo clowns who performed at the Missouri State Fair, and were banned or ordered into “sensitivity training” when one clown mocked President Barack Obama, to perform at a rodeo in Texas’ 36th District.
Fair officials did not reveal the clown’s identity.
“Liberals want to bronco bust dissent. But Texans value speech, even if its speech they don’t agree with,” said Stockman, “From Molly Ivins to Louie Gohmert and every opinion between Texans value free and open political speech. I’m sure any rodeo in Texas would be proud to have performers.”
“Disagreeing with speech is one thing. Banning it and ordering citizens into reeducation classes for mocking a liberal leader is another,” said Stockman. “Liberals have targeted this man for personal destruction to create a climate of fear.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Fresh off the presses, my column today at WND:
DEFENDING THE WEST Veritas Odium Parit (Truth begets hate) Exclusive: Pamela Geller exposes ‘irrefutable denial of reality of jihad threat’
We have now gotten to the irreconcilable point in the contemporary public discourse (or lack thereof) of irrefutable denial of the reality of the jihad threat. This denial persists no matter what. Newscasters (both local and national) spout a language of the absurd denying all connection of jihad with – jihad.
The Fort Hood jihadi, Nidal Malik Hasan, describes himself as a mujahid (holy warrior) in the cause of Islam, but we are told that his act of war (and he uses that word – war) has nothing to do with Islam. The Boston Marathon jihad bombers repeatedly explain that their bombing was an attack designed to “defend Islam,” but we are told that it had more to do with a right-wing conspiracy or the desperation of two dejected youth, immigrants who had trouble making American friends.
From Atlas Shrugs:
Mark Steyn speaks to cowardice, government coercion to submit and the will (or lack thereof) to fight for our most basic fundamental freedoms.
The Choices We Make Mark Steyn, NRO
Anti-Islamization campaigner Pamela Geller is pushing back hard against the local police’s attempt to nix her Toronto speech earlier this year. She’ll be testifying before the Independent Police Review Director tomorrow. Meanwhile, Mendel Kaplan, the squishy rabbi who got bullied by the coppers into canceling Miss Geller’s appearance at his synagogue, has been giving his version of events:
Asked whether he ever felt intimidated or threatened, he said, “There was a very clear choice laid out to me. The police said, ‘we don’t believe this agrees with [our] values, so either you have to give up your chaplaincy or you can have this speech.’
“I did something that I didn’t necessarily want to do because I had to do it.”
Ontario in the 21st century: a land where cops bully rabbis. Kaplan had already been on the receiving end of York Regional Police’s thuggish Diversity Commissar, Inspector Ricky Veerappan, whose “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Bureau” had conducted a five-month investigation into one of the rabbi’s sermons. (Under the perversions of common law that now prevail everywhere from the Diversity Bureau to the IRS, the process is the punishment.) So Kaplan well understood that Veerappan’s threat was real. Nevertheless, as Laura Rosen Cohen writes:
He should have told the YRP Diversity Stasi to shove it . . .
It is not true that he “had” to cave to them.
He had a choice.
We always have choices.
Jews above all people should know that. Rabbi Kaplan:
He added, “It was a wise decision not to host her because it was not something worth losing my chaplaincy over.”
Wrong. It’s not something worth keeping such a chaplaincy over. It profit a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world . . . but for a York, Ontario, Diversity Bureau chaplaincy?
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
The subjugation of a free people
– their conversion from citizens to subjects — requires that the State assume unchallenged authority over three things: communications, education, and weaponry. The latter two are now firmly in the State’s hands; only the first remains largely unfettered. — Liberty’s Torch: From Citizen To Subject
From American Digest: http://americandigest.org/
Pic found at 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/
Tommy Robinson Has Committed No “Real” Crimes – Britain is Collapsing and Won’t Protect Her Own Citizens
The Blog of The Re-Enlightenment has published an excellent article entitled “Middle England must listen to Tommy Robinson” about the EDL and the necessity for the English middle class to wake up to the dangers of Islamic supremacism.
One of the difficulties in building a broad-based British political movement to resist Islamization is the reluctance (or should I say obstinacy?) of middle-class Britons to have anything to do with a phenomenon that is spearheaded by the working class.
We can only hope that this article is a bellwether of things to come. The author is a self-described “privately educated, second generation immigrant, middle class lawyer who lives in a big house with a small mortgage”.
Below are some excerpts from a much longer piece:
I wrote a post last week called “Time to be honest about the English Defence League”, in which I expressed some frank views about the EDL and its leader Tommy Robinson, and since then I’ve been regretting it. Not because I was too honest but because I wasn’t honest enough.
I’ve spent quite a bit of time thinking about everything more carefully and I’ve watched a number of clips of Robinson on YouTube. In short I’ve been completely blown away by his bravery, his commitment, his intelligence and his integrity. I really think it’s about time everyone started taking him seriously for what he is, which is a political activist of the highest calibre.
There are dozens of things on the internet but these are the ones I watched. I really hope you commit some of your time to watching them (the second one is audio only). If you don’t then I can’t see how you can dismiss Robinson so lightly.
- Speech at the European Parliament, Brussels
- Radio clash with George Galloway
- Interview after the murder of Lee Rigby
- Assaulted with Kevin Carroll of the EDL, and then arrested
- BBC3 Free Speech
- Piece to camera in the lounge
Robinson is completely committed to defeating Islamism. We all know he has a dodgy past but that’s nothing unique amongst the general population and it’s certainly nothing unique amongst political activists. His past doesn’t disqualify him from speaking out against Islamism and it doesn’t make his opinions any less valid.
We forget that taking part in an institutional system of rules-based theft is no disqualification to sitting in either of our legislative chambers, or that being violent in a Houses of Parliament bar (twice) merely makes an elected public official an eccentric character, or that committing criminal damage as an undergraduate at Oxford University provided you’re wearing a nice suit and you’ve had the finest education money can buy, and smoking cannabis at Eton College, is no disqualification to becoming prime minister of the United Kingdom. Yet criminal convictions are an automatic bar to disapproving of ruthless, totalitarian ideologies.
Robinson’s real crimes are not actual crimes, though. I can’t stand class-based victim narratives but even I have to conclude Robinson has committed the ultimate crime of being a working class white lad and expecting to have an opinion on Islamism, which will be the defining issue of the century people reading this blog post will die in. I dismissed Robinson because of his background and because of the EDL’s image. I should have known better than to be such a snob.
From Gates of Vienna: http://gatesofvienna.net/
Liberalism has reached the point in formerly great Britain where authorities will literally throw you in jail for preaching the gospel:
Tony Miano, a retired deputy sheriff and former chaplain with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Dept., was charged with “using homophobic speech that could cause people anxiety, distress, alarm or insult.”
Miano had been preaching on a London street corner during the Wimbledon Tennis Championships with a ministry group called Sports Fan Outreach International.
He was preaching about immoral living – and cited homosexuality as an example of lifestyle choices that are contrary to biblical teaching.
That constitutes a thought crime.
“I talked about women addicted to romance novels, men addicted to pornography, people with lustful thoughts, heterosexual fornication and homosexuality,” Miano told Fox News. “When I mentioned that the Bible was clear that homosexuality is a sin, a lady walked by and she glared at me and hurled the f-bomb.”
Miano said the woman came back a short time later and began to videotape his sidewalk sermon. Then, she called the police.
Probably believing himself to be in a free, Western country, Miano was aghast.
“I did not speak solely about homosexuality as a form of sexual immorality but also about any kind of sex outside marriage between one man and one woman, as well as lustful thoughts,” he said. “All of these are considered mainstream Christian positions and have been taught and believed by Christians for thousands of years.”
What Miano doesn’t realize is that thousands of years of history are irrelevant. All that matters is what our moonbat rulers demand we believe and allow us to say at this particular moment in time. Homosexuality isn’t a sin; acknowledging that it is a sin is a sin.
This is what happens when we let liberals bully us with their proscriptions and when we play by their authoritarian rules. Even professed conservatives now join the fascists by demanding that people lose their jobs for the crime of saying something a homosexual would deem to be irreverent.
If we had dug in the moment the first liberal tried to tell us what we can say, our own culture and heritage would not now be on the verge of becoming illegal.
Miano was dragged off to jail, fingerprinted, and interrogated. They took a sample of his DNA, presumably to aid in his capture should he again engage in preaching scripture.
“It was very distressing to be arrested and interrogated for openly expressing my deeply held Christian beliefs,” he said. …
Miano spent about seven hours in jail before he was released without explanation and without an apology.
You don’t need to be a prophet to see our immediate future:
“I believe that’s what our government is going to eventually do here,” he said. “I believe homosexuals or others who are sensitive to their point of view will be visiting churches to listen to what preachers say from the pulpit. And I believe that pastors will be arrested in their pulpits for teaching what the Bible says about homosexuality and other sins.”
The Supremes’ twisted rulings on homosexual “marriage” have made this nightmare scenario all but inevitable.
On tips from Troy, Clingtomyguns, and Wilberforce.
Thanks Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
Found at 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/
Editor’s Note: Just to throw in my two cents. I like Melanie Phillips. She is on the right page in regards to islam. I have read her books and her last book, “The World Turned Upside Down” is excellent. However, I agree with Jamie Glazov’s statement – “There are talkers and there are doers” – and it is easy to sit in a safe, comfortable place and critique the actions of those in the thick of the street battles. I don’t know much about Melanie other than what I read but I do know quite a bit about Robert and Pamela by their respective blogs and talking with Pamela throught emails. This much I know without a doubt: Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are DOERS. They are not just talking the talk – they are walking the walk. They are walking where the rubber meets the road – literally – out in the streets. Subject to ridicule, hate, being spit on, cursed at, constantly bombarded by death threats – this shit done got real for these two champions of truth. So before ANYONE accuses Pamela Geller or Robert, falsely, in any way, first walk the streets and feel the heat of battle and hatred from the angry muslim mobs – then come back and we can talk. Until then, anyone not willing to do what they do, needs to shut the hell up. And that is my say, ZTW
Jamie Glazov over at Front Page Magazine weighs in on what is essentially a meaningless kerfuffle. Talk, talk, talk.Melanie Phillips’ appalling criticism of our joint actions with the EDL is that of an observer, a diagnostician. She is not an activist, and so her opinions on these matters are just so much prattle. There are talkers and there are doers …..
Jamie Glazov’s expresses righteous indignation:
“Regarding Melanie Phillips’ Friendly Fire at Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller. . . .Phillips has hit two freedom fighters when the chips are down. The strategy and tactics of battle that she is distancing herself from and that she sees as lowbrow is precisely the mentality that has helped spawn the UK’s surrender to Sharia and Jihad — and is, in turn, precisely why Lee Rigby was recently murdered — and why Muhammad al-Arifi, Abu Qatada and Anjem Choudary are welcome in the UK and why Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are not. This is the time when all of us must say unequivocally: “We are Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller.”
And Dr. Andrew Bostom wrote:
Morally Obtuse Melanie Phillips, Redux: “A Turban for a Durban?,” Re-Visited
Blogs by Pamela Geller  and Robert Spencer  have brought to my attention Melanie Phillips’ “commentary” on the UK Home Office rulings banning both of the courageous US writers and activists from attending a planned Woolwich commemoration ceremony by the English Defense League (EDL) for drummer, Lee Rigby brutally slain in an act of jihad butchery .Ms. Phillips rejects “the approach taken by either Geller or Spencer,” to what she terms, “the problem of Islamic extremism” because they dare to associate with a group, the EDL, and mysterious “others,” Phillips further insists, “which at best do not deal with the thuggish elements in their ranks and at worst are truly racist or xenophobic.”
Never mind that Phillips provides not one iota of proof for her allegations against the EDL (she simply regurgitates agitprop calumnies), let alone the unnamed “others.” What I found striking—indeed, as my Yogi, Yogi Berra, might put it, “déjà vu all over again”—is that the morally obtuse Ms. Phillips has apparently learned and remembered nothing from her dangerously uninformed, preferentialsupport  of so-called “Muslim reformer” Ed Husain, in reality, a traditionalist Islamic Jew-hating bigot, over the intellectual honest and intrepid Somali Muslim freethinker Ayaan Hiris Ali, circa November, 2007.
Sadly apropos, almost 6-years later, here is what I wrote about Ms. Phillips’ distressingly ignorant “conclusions” following a November, 2007 debate she witnessed between Mr. Husain and Ms. Ali:
Friday, November 23, 2007 “A Turban for a Durban?” 
Melanie Phillips attended  what she termed a “riveting” debate between the much ballyhooed former Hizbut Tahrir enthusiast Ed Husain and the Somali secularist and former Dutch Parliamentarian Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Two years ago I discussed at some length  Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s lucid argumentation and moral and physical courage. She remains the same noble, eloquent, and committed person.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
This Bitch Refused Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer Entry into Britain…Because They Speak the Truth About Evil islam
Posted on | June 27, 2013
Meet the hideous creature who banned Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer from England: British Home Secretary Theresa May, a disgrace to her office, to her nation and to every British citizen who ever lived. On June 25, this deplorable stain on the reputation of a once honorable people “personally directed that [Geller] should be excluded from the United Kingdom” because it is believed that Geller would “foment or justify terrorist violence . . . provoke others to terrorist acts . . . foster hatred,” etc. Robert Spencer writes of the ban:
We had planned to lay a wreath at a memorial to British soldier Lee Rigby, who was beheaded by Islamic jihadists on a Woolwich street on May 22. But it is not conducive to the public good in Britain to oppose jihad violence and Islamic supremacism.
British schoolgirls are being systematically gang-raped by Muslims and British soldiers are being hacked to death in the street by Muslims and yet this despicable gutless appeaser, Theresa May, thinks the way to solve the problem is to ban critics of Islam?
Neville Chamberlain was a heroic statesman by comparison.
Robert Stacy McCain@rsmccain
Way to go, English cowards: You’re besieged by Islamic radicals and so … BLAME THE JEW! http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/banned-in-britian-uk-caves-to-jihad.html … @pamelageller
Robert Stacy McCain@rsmccain
1940: RAF battles Luftwaffe to save England from totalitarian evil. 2013: England surrrenders to totalitarian evil. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/06/banned-in-britian-uk-caves-to-jihad.html …
UPDATE: Years ago, there was a BBC mini-series about the RAF pilots who saved England in the darkest hours of the Blitz.
A squadron of Spitfires would take off, lose perhaps one-third or one-half their number in the desperate dogfights with the Nazis and, when the surviving pilots made it back to base, the question would be asked, “How was it up there today?”
“Piece of cake.”
What heroic nobility! That’s the old British stiff-upper-lip stoicism, the jaunty indifference to danger: “Piece of cake.”
Damn, to see England go under in dishonor like this . .
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
Once again the hyper-obsessed stalker and Goebbels groupie, Nathan Lean, is lying, defaming and smearing — this time in a local Tennessee newspaper. We held a wildly successful free speech demo in Manchester, Tennessee to oppose sharia measures proposed by US attorney Bill Killian. The DoJ has vowed to criminalize postings on social media that offend Muslims. Thousands joined us to firmly and unequivocally state that that is never going to happen. Not on our watch.
On June 4 in Manchester, Tennessee, Bill Killian, U.S. Attorney of the Eastern District of Tennessee, FBI Special Agent Kenneth Moore, and Zak Mohyuddin of the American Muslim Advisory Council hosted an event called “Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society” in the town of Manchester, Tennessee. My American Freedom Defense Initiative colleague Pamela Geller and I called for a protest of what was clearly an event designed to intimidate Americans into being afraid to criticize the elements of Islam that give rise to violence and supremacism, and nearly 2,000 protesters assembled at the Manchester Convention Center to register their disapproval of this latest Obama Administration attempt to silence criticism of jihad and Islamic supremacism.
The Killian/Moore/Mohyuddin event, predictably, was all about hate crimes, hate speech, and how Tennesseans needed to be more inclusive and welcoming of the increasing numbers of Muslims in their midst. Mohyuddin, Killian and Moore all spoke with extraordinary condescension to the crowd, as if it were taken for granted that their only reason for being suspicious of Muslims was the color of their skin (Killian said exactly that) and cultural differences. The audience, however, was having none of it, and frequently shouted responses to the various (and numerous) disingenuous and manipulative assertions coming from the speakers. That gave the mainstream media their take on the event; their reporting on the event uniformly portrayed the pro-free speech protesters as a gang of racist, bigoted thugs, shouting down the valiant paladins of tolerance. They completely ignored the genuine concern that people have about jihad and Islamic supremacist activity, and the fact that Muslim groups (aided and abetted by Barack Obama) use claims of “hate” and “bigotry” to shut down honest discussion of how jihadists use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and supremacism.
Anyway, when the Big Lie is going around, free speech foe Nathan Lean is never far away. Lean, aka “Garibaldi,” the creepy Travis Bickle of jihad enablers, is a stalker who has threatened me repeatedly, repeats what he knows to be falsehoods about my record, and has called on hackers to destroy this site. He repeated his usual tissue of libel and defamation in the Manchester Times. Pamela Geller responded immediately, and finally today the Manchester Times printed our piece setting the record straight:
“Manchester protesters stood for free speech,” by Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller in the Manchester Times, June 19:
The piece “Anti-Muslim hate comes to Coffee County” was a wildly inaccurate and defamatory mischaracterization of the free speech protest on June 4. Nathan Lean, who was not present, relied on negative press reports to paint a lurid picture of a mob of thugs where in reality there was a large number of patriots determined to resist the erosion of the freedom of speech.We were there to protest the intended criminalization of free speech – which was the unmistakable intent of the event hosted by U.S. Attorney Bill Killian and FBI special agent Kenneth Moore. The propaganda campaign by the media and Islamic supremacist groups to obscure this only brings it out more vividly. To portray our protest as against “Muslim outreach” is absurd: there are Muslim outreach events all over the country on a regular basis. We’ve never protested any of them. This one had nothing to do with genuine Muslim outreach and everything to do with aiding in the imposition in the U.S. of Islam’s blasphemy laws forbidding criticism of Islam.
The protesters turned out in such unexpectedly high numbers because they knew that truthful and accurate exploration of Islam’s violent teachings has been deemed “inflammatory” by both Muslim groups and the Obama regime — and that leaves us unable to examine the motives and goals of jihad terrorists, or to defend ourselves adequately against them. That’s why everyone was so upset with Killian and Moore – but Lean appears intent on obscuring that fact with offensive charges against us.
Lean says that the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) classifies our groups AFDI and SIOA as “hate groups.” Yet the SPLC tars as “hate groups” many conservative groups that simply disagree with its hard-Left political stance, while not classifying any jihad groups as hate groups, despite their rhetoric calling for the murder of Americans. And we’re appealing the rejection of our trademark application for Stop Islamization of America – it’s ironic that while large numbers of valiant secularist Turks and Egyptians are resisting the Islamization of their countries, that Lean would smear an attempt to preserve American freedoms from subversion by provisions of Islamic law that even many Muslims reject as oppressive.
Stooping even lower in his defamation, Lean claims that we inspired the Norwegian terrorist Anders Breivik. In reality, Breivik cited not only us but many people, including Barack Obama, John F. Kennedy, and Thomas Jefferson. Nor was Breivik really an opponent of jihad terror: he wrote about he wanted to aid Hamas and ally with jihad groups. Breivik also explained that his real inspiration for his violence was not us, but the Islamic jihad terror group al-Qaeda, about which Nathan Lean has never written a critical word.
Lean also claims falsely that we “regularly” team up with the English Defense League; in reality, we have done so twice – but we do not reject the association. Contrary to libelous claims by Lean and other rivals of the foes of jihad terror, the EDL is not “a street gang of British skinheads” or neo-Nazis. The EDL was formed to defend British soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, who were being physically attacked by Muslim mobs. It rejects all racism and violence; the only violence at its rallies comes from Leftists and Islamic supremacists bent on silencing the group and brutalizing its members. Just last week, six jihadists were imprisoned for a plot to commit mass murder at an EDL rally.
Lean’s worst libel is when he likens us to Osama bin Laden. Equating a mass murderer with law-abiding Americans who have never advocated hatred or violence of any kind, and who have dedicated themselves to resisting the hate and bloodlust that led to those murders in the first place, is unconscionable.
Lean further claims that we must have found Bill Killian’s statement that “if someone makes threats of violence, that is not protected speech and they will be prosecuted” a “tough pill to swallow.” However, he does not provide even one example of our supposed “threats of violence,” because we’ve never made any.
Nathan Lean owes an apology to the patriots who turned out to defend free speech in Manchester. The freedom of speech is our foremost bulwark against tyranny; they deserve full and wholehearted support, not smears.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
DEFENDING THE WESTCriminal journalism
Exclusive: Pamela Geller blasts ‘libelous’ media coverage of effort to defend free speech
The war against freedom is being waged in every corner of our nation – in every newsroom and in every mainstream media outlet. One particularly vicious battle in this war has been the coverage of our free speech demonstration in Manchester, Tenn., on June 4, which has been nothing short of criminal and libelous.
Every headline on every mainstream media story that covered the event libeled the patriots who stood for freedom of speech, claiming that we were there to protest a “Muslim outreach” event. In reality, at no time and nowhere have we ever protested a Muslim outreach event, and they go on every day in every government agency. Muslim outreach has become the raison d’être for many a government agency under the Obama regime.
We don’t protest them even though we know about them, and we know what failures they are. That was made painfully clear in a recent explosive exchange between Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, and FBI head Robert Mueller. Gohmert asked Mueller if the FBI had monitored the terror mosque in Boston that had been attended by Boston Marathon jihad bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. Gohmert wanted to know if the terror mosque where the jihad bombers received spiritual guidance had been monitored after warnings that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was a dangerous jihadist came from not one but two foreign governments. Mueller’s answer was no, the mosque hadn’t been monitored, but FBI agents had engaged in outreach there – which to me was the money quote of the entire session, proving yet again that Muslim outreach is a deceptive distraction to advance taqiyya and disarm law enforcement and the body politic. Outreach equals submission.
American law enforcement is making nice with these Islamic supremacist organizations, appeasing them and accommodating themwhile ignoring the fact that they are the hatcheries for jihadists in America. So no, in Manchester, Tenn., on June 4 we weren’t protesting a Muslim outreach event. We were protesting the Justice Department’s and FBI’s determination to criminalize free speech, including postings that are offensive to Islam on social media – the most effective (and only) means for us to get our message out. Yet not only was this fact not the headline of any story about our free speech rally – it wasn’t even mentioned in any of the stories. They didn’t bury the lede, they refused to recover the body. Instead, every one portrayed the patriots who showed up to defend free speech as thugs bent on disrupting a Muslim outreach event. That is the massive media machine of smear, destruction and libel in action.
One particularly galling example was when PBS,the venerable brothel of Islamic propaganda, framed our free speech protest as another manifestation of “tensions between Muslims and many Christians in Tennessee.” The report quoted Ibrahim Hooper of the Hamas-tied Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR – without noting his Hamas ties, of course – and claimed that the Department of Justice event was an attempt to stop discrimination against Muslims, without ever mentioning how “hate speech” charges have been used to silence legitimate investigations of how jihadists use Islamic teachings to justify violence. NRP did not have one voice of freedom in defense of our demo. AFDI called the rally they were talking about, yet there wasn’t anyone from AFDI on the show. Of course not. Criminal “journalism.”
And if you think this is purely an American phenomenon, you’re wrong. Last week also, the BBC held what was essential a Stalinist show trial of Tommy Robinson of the English Defence League, or EDL. Outnumbered but not outgunned, Robinson was the only voice of reason in a kafka-esque BBC condescension circus of dhimmitude.Robert Spencer said of the BBC’s treatment of Robinson: “The audience is completely stacked against him, he is berated, vilified, smeared and accused – and no one ever bothers to answer his repeated question, ‘What exactly have I said here that is racist?’” Meanwhile, the BBC shows respect and deference to Islamic supremacists and jihadists – one of whom, Abu Nusaybah, was arrested for jihad terror activity literally right after he finished his interview with the BBC.
There is more. GO. Read it all.
Roy Costner IV drew hearty applause from other students but no doubt enraged moonbat educrats when he interrupted his own valedictorian speech to recite the Lord’s Prayer. Looks like the authorities are on their toes now, resolved not to permit any more sudden outbreaks of liberty:
A North Texas high school silenced its Valedictorian’s microphone during his speech, prompting questions over his free speech rights.
Students attending the Joshua High School graduation say Remington Reimer’s microphone was cut off, right when he began to talk about the Constitution.
The educrats explain themselves:
“Student speakers were told that if their speeches deviated from the prior-reviewed material, the microphone would be turned off, regardless of content. When one student’s speech deviated from the prior-reviewed speech, the microphone was turned off, pursuant to District policy and procedure.”
Those who don’t want to live in the kind of country this is turning into are running out of time to do something about it.
On tips from Dr. 9 and Stormfax.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
Don’t miss my latest at WND:
DEFENDING THE WEST Obama’s ministry of propaganda Exclusive: Pamela Geller shares ‘great American moment’ media ignored
My American Freedom Defense Initiative, or AFDI, colleague Robert Spencer and I flew to Tennessee Tuesday to join throngs of patriots and freedom lovers, all happy warriors who had converged in Manchester, Tenn., to oppose the latest Obama administration salvo against the freedom of speech – a seminar led by an Obama-appointed U.S. attorney on how civil rights laws could and should be used to shut down speech deemed “inflammatory” against Muslims (a label that has been used before to shut down truthful speech about jihad and Islamic supremacism).
This was a fight for the very soul of America in a very small town: Manchester, Tenn., a town no bigger than 10,000 people. (Almost 2,000 people were there.) This was the perhaps unlikely venue for a seminar led by a U.S. attorney and an FBI special agent on how “inflammatory” speech against Muslims violated civil rights laws. Nowhere was it ever explained how there could be honest examination of Islam’s teachings of jihad that wouldn’t be “inflammatory” – and that was just the point.
Numerous speakers addressed the roaring crowd before the anti-free speech seminar began, including Spencer and me and other freedom fighters. Then when the Muslim pandering event began, there were close to 800 people filling the small room to way beyond capacity. The lines were three deep along the wall, with folks spilling out into the hallways.
What was really beautiful was that when the event started, more than 600 people couldn’t even get in, but they stayed outside and held a freedom rally. They weren’t missing much – unless they were in the mood to be admonished and hectored as xenophobes, bigots and racists by an Islamic supremacist spokesman and two Obama officials who steadfastly refused to address the elephant in the room: the reality of jihad terror and Islamic supremacism, no matter how many times the boisterous crowd called them on their nonsense.
U.S. Attorney Bill Killian gave a PowerPoint presentation on hate crimes and hate speech. From beginning to end, it was full of condescension, smears, charges that the crowd was racist and thinly veiled threats that truthful speech about Islam could be prosecuted. Never once did he address the fact that people aren’t concerned about Muslims because of racism and xenophobia, but because of the reality of jihad terror and the uniform denial and obfuscation, and victimhood posturing that follows from Muslim communities after every jihad attack.
Killian even stooped so low as to claim a sharp rise in “religiously motivated hate crimes,” without ever informing the crowd that he was lumping in anti-Semitic hate crimes (which are at worldwide record levels, largely due to Islamic anti-Semitism) with anti-Muslim hate crimes. FBI special agent Kenneth Moore was little better. Both echoed the Islamic supremacist speaker’s opening remarks, all about how the people of Tennessee had to learn to be welcoming of people who were different.
The media coverage of our free-speech rally and the anti-free-speech event was typically deceptive and mendacious. One would think that the industry that has the most to lose from restrictions on free speech would fight the fascism. But you would be wrong. These tools are so in the bag for the Obama regime that the knaves are attacking the patriots (and there are many of us) who are standing between freedom and tyranny.
The headline of every news story should have been “Obama’s Department of Justice seeks to criminalize free speech.” Instead, the headlines spun the Muslim victimhood myth narrative: Muslim outreach program disrupted by racist-islamophobic-anti-Muslim-bigots. Nothing on the constitutional putsch. They didn’t bury the lede; they never recovered the body.
USA Today’s headline was “Tenn. Muslim group’s forum disrupted by protesters.” UPI went with “Protesters, hecklers disrupt Muslim forum in Tennessee.” And WBIR-TV’s headline was “Protesters disrupt Tenn. Muslim group’s meeting.” Nowhere in the coverage did the media deign to mention why folks were there. People came to protest Killian’s vow to criminalize criticism of Islam on social media. Folks were boisterous, and well they should be. Does anyone think we should go quietly into the night? The Department of Justice and FBI, taking their orders from Islamic supremacist groups, said the meeting would be an open forum. It was even titled “Public Discourse.” But they changed the rules. Instead of an open forum, they said no questions. Instead, we were told to write questions on index cards. Yeah, uh huh. And, of course, at the end of hours of condescension and accusations of racism, they only read two questions.
Yes, people called them on it. Yes, people grimaced and moaned when Holder’s name was mentioned. He is second only to Obama in greatest threats to our freedoms.
I was there. It was a great American moment. Americans aren’t going to sit quietly while our freedom of speech is taken away, and are never, ever, going to submit and stop telling the truth about the jihad that threatens us all. We are an army.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
Found at Mad Medic:http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Dept of Justice Trying to Criminalize any Speech Against islam in The United States. People…Are You Still Asleep?
The media coverage on the Tennessee free speech rally is typically deceptive and mendacious. One would think that the industry that has the most to lose from restrictions on free speech would fight the fascism. But you would be wrong. These tools are so in the bag for for the Obama regime that the knaves are attacking the patriots (and there are many of us) standing between freedom and tyranny.
The headline of every news story should have been “Obama’s Department of Justice seeks to criminalize free speech.” Instead, the headline spins the Muslim victimhood myth narrative: Muslim outreach program disrupted by racist-islamophobic-anti-Muslim-bigots. Nothing on the constitutional putsch. They didn’t bury the lede, they never recovered the body.
USA Today headline: Tenn. Muslim group’s forum disrupted by protesters UPI headline: Protesters, hecklers disrupt Muslim forum in Tennessee WBIR TV headline: Protesters disrupt Tenn. Muslim group’s meetingNowhere in the coverage of Tuesday’s event in Manchester did the media deign to mention why folks were there. People came to protest US attorney Bill Killian’s vow to criminalize criticism of Islam on social media. Folks were boisterous, and well they should be. Does anyone think we should go quietly into the night? The DoJ and FBI, taking their orders from Islamic supremacist groups, said the meeting would be an open forum. It was even entitled “Public Discourse.” But they changed the rules. Instead of an open forum, they said no questions. Instead, we were told to write questions on index cards. Yeah, uh huh. And, of course, at the end of hours of condescension and accusations of racism, they only read two questions.
Yes, people called them on it. Yes, people grimaced and moaned when Holder’s name was mentioned. He is second only to Obama in greatest threats to our freedoms. I was there, and I will tell you that the two minutes snippets do not represent the evening. It was a great American moment.
All of my coverage, including photos and reportage, is here.
But not everyone has signed on to the new fascism. Cliff Kincaid has a great piece over at the World Tribune:
Special to WorldTribune.com
By Cliff Kincaid
Reacting to reports that the Obama Department of Justice may prosecute those who write and post articles offensive to Muslims, Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative has vowed, “We will fight you on this every step of the way. We will drag your dhimmi asses all the way to the Supreme Court. This is Sharia enforcement, and we are not going to stand for it.”
The term “dhimmi” refers to submission to or enforcement of Islamic law, also called Sharia.
Geller, who also co-founded Stop Islamization of Nations (SION) with Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch, has endorsed a rally for free speech on June 4 in Manchester, Tennessee, to protest anti-free speech comments by Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee.
Killian has generated outrage by vowing to use federal civil rights laws to punish those making critical comments about Islam.
In a story on the controversy, Politico quotes Floyd Abrams, one of the country’s most respected First Amendment attorneys, as saying about Killian: “He’s just wrong. The government may, indeed, play a useful and entirely constitutional role in urging people not to engage in speech that amounts to religious discrimination. But it may not, under the First Amendment, prevent or punish speech even if it may be viewed as hostile to a religion. And what it most clearly may not do is to stifle political or social debate, however rambunctious or offensive some may think it is.”
A local paper reports that Killian and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Knoxville, Tennessee, Division, are speaking at a public event and “will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media.”
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
From American Digest
“I am not here as a serf or vassal. I am not begging my lords for mercy. I’m a born free American woman, wife, mother and citizen. And I’m telling my government that you’ve forgotten your place. It’s not your responsibility to look out for my well-being, and to monitor my speech. It’s not your right to assert an agenda. Your post, the post that you occupy, exists to preserve American liberty. You’ve sworn to perform that duty. And you have faltered.” — Becky Gerritson of the Wetumpka Tea Party, testifying today before the House Ways and Means Committee about abuse by the IRS.
Howso’ great their clamour, whatsoe’er their claim, Suffer not the old King under any name!
Here is naught unproven—here is naught to learn. It is written what shall fall if the King return.
He shall mark our goings, question whence we came, Set his guards about us, as in Freedom’s name.
He shall take a tribute, toll of all our ware; He shall change our gold for arms—arms we may not bear.
He shall break his judges if they cross his word; He shall rule above the Law calling on the Lord.
He shall peep and mutter; and the night shall bring Watchers ‘neath our window, lest we mock the King—
Hate and all division; hosts of hurrying spies; Money poured in secret, carrion breeding flies.
Strangers of his counsel, hirelings of his pay, These shall deal our Justice: sell—deny—delay.
From American Digest
In Your Face, Leftists! High School Valedictorian Ignores Atheistic Edict, Adds Lord’s Prayer To Speech (Video)
Roy Costner IV, a former public school student from South Carolina, stunned the audience at his high school graduation last weekend when he ripped up his previously-approved valedictorian speech, going on, instead, to speak about God – and then deliver the Lord’s prayer.
The act, which drew loud applause, was taken in opposition to the School District of Pickens County’s decision to axe prayers from graduation events, Christian News reports. Officials said that they had recently received complaints from atheist activists and church-state separatists, leading to the removal of invocations from all school events.
But that didn’t stop Costner.
The Liberty High School ceremony is already making its way into national headlines, as the valedictorian’s actions and the subsequent cheers this past Saturday were caught on video.
As he spoke, Costner went from merely mentioning “the Lord” to jumping right into the well-known prayer.
“Those that we look up to, they have helped carve and mold us into the young adults that we are today. I’m so glad that both of my parents led me to the Lord at a young age,” he said. “And I think most of you will understand when I say -”
And that’s when he commenced the popular invocation.
“Our Father, who art in Heaven, hallowed be Thy name,” Costner continued. “Thy Kingdom come…”
. Throughout the entirety of the prayer, cheers and clapping raged. The school district, which, as stated, was already facing scrutiny over graduation prayers earlier this year, has no plans to punish the former student for his actions (after all, he’s no longer under their authority, so what retribution could he receive?).
Some in attendance praised the speech as bold, while it’s likely that atheist activists and other church-state separatists will be less-than-contented by the inclusion of prayer.
“I think it took a lot of courage to do that,” one attendee said of Costner’s decision. “People were [supportive] that he stood up for what he believed in.”
Students, according to the district, must have their speeches approved before delivering them at graduation. While Costner began speaking from his secular script, he eventually deviated and invoked his faith.
From The Daley Gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/#
The U.S. Dept. of Justice Now Wants “Civil Rights” to Trump “Freedom of Speech” on The Internet? What???
Gross irresponsibility and the left-wing hyper-politicization of the Justice Department has engulfed it in a storm of scandal that Eric Holder is unlikely to survive despite Obama’s continued support. Still it presses forward with its Hopey Changey agenda, now with plans to impose sharia on the Internet:
In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.
It is now a violation of “civil rights” to exercise constitutional rights. The time is coming to choose between them.
Our rulers have a special meeting with Muslims entitled “Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society” planned for tomorrow:
Special speakers for the event will be Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBI’s Knoxville Division. …
Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims on social media. …
Killian said the presentation will also focus on Muslim culture and how, that although terrorist acts have been committed by some in the faith, they are no different from those in other religions.
The public will be reminded yet again that Timothy McVeigh wasn’t a Muslim, therefore we can ignore the well over 20,000 lethal Islamic terror attacks that have taken place since 9/11.
Obama has made it clear from the beginning whose side he is on in the great conflict between Islam and Western Civilization that has been going on for centuries. Just as his thuggish, Chicago politics approach has trickled down through the IRS, his support for Islam saturates the top levels of the federal bureaucracy.
But soon we might not be allowed to talk about it, lest Muslim colonists regard the topic to be inflammatory and therefore a violation of their civil rights.
On tips from G. Fox, Ben S, Jolly Rodger, Tchhht!!!, Gunny Sarge, Sammy, and Steve A.
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
Conservative Bloggers Not Allowed to Criticize islam…But mooslims Are Allowed to Spew Their Garbage Unimpended? WTF?
Obama wants to jail people like me who criticize Islam online, but Muslims in prison for threatening non-Muslims online are allowed to post extremist rhetoric on the internet from jail
American Islamist militants jailed for threatening violence over the Internet are still posting political writings – while serving time in federal prison. Jesse Curtis Morton, a convert to Islam who writes under the name Younus Abdullah Muhammed (photo above), is serving a prison term of more than 11 years in a Pennsylvania federal prison after pleading guilty in 2012 to conspiring to solicit murder, make threatening communications, and use the Internet to instill others in fear.
Business Insider Under free-speech guarantees in the U.S. Constitution, federal authorities cannot impose blanket bans on such postings by convicts, although email access is limited for prisoners, and messages inciting violence are prohibited.
Morton, from Brooklyn, New York, and previously a student at Columbia University, was jailed for threatening the writers, Matt Stone and Trey Parker, of the satirical television show “South Park” for their depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in a bear outfit. One of their online threats to the South Park creators included a photo of Dutch filmmaker, Theo Van Gogh, who was stabbed to death in the street by a Muslim, who thought his film, ‘Submission’ about oppression of Muslim women, was insulting to Islam.
Morton wrote in his latest essay that U.S. use of lethal drones against al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Yemen had encouraged homegrown Islamist extremism. “The drone assassination of Anwar Awlaki in Yemen, an Islamic preacher with tens of thousands of ardent Western followers, has yet to be avenged but his popularity has only risen after death,” Morton wrote, referring to the American Muslim preacher killed in a 2011 U.S. drone strike in Yemen.
Another American militant, Zachary Chesser, who was found guilty of conspiring with Morton to encourage attacks via the Internet on the creators of “South Park,” has also posted material while in prison. His postings appear on another website www.aseerun.org and mainly air personal grievances, along with some political material.
Chesser is serving a 25-year prison sentence in Marion, Illinois, for the “South Park” case and for attempting to join the Somali militant group al Shabaab. Morton and Chesser were involved in running the now defunct website RevolutionMuslim.blogspot.com.
That was linked to a U.S. affiliate of banned British group Al Muhajiroun, whose followers have included a man arrested for the brutal killing of a British soldier in London last week.
Since federal prisoners are allowed to transmit closely vetted email messages via special channels only to a small list of approved recipients, it is possible that messages and essays by prisoners such Morton and Chesser first went to some of those recipients, who then arranged for posting on the Internet.
Officials said they did not know precisely how Morton and Chesser arranged for the posting of their messages. (Probably they did it via Yousef Khattab, aka Joseph Cohen, an orthodox Jew who converted to Islam, and was a founder of Revolution Muslim. Most of his postings and Youtube videos focused on his virulent hatred of Jews and the State of Israel – photo below)
“Their communications with the outside are limited to approved contacts only and subject to careful monitoring and review to ensure that they do not facilitate criminal activity or pose a threat to the public or the correctional facility,” said Dean Boyd, a Justice Department spokesman.
“While we may disagree with some opinions expressed by inmates in their limited communications to approved contacts outside prison, we may not prosecute individuals for speech protected under the First Amendment,” Boyd said.
U.S. law enforcement sources said authorities would likely move quickly against Morton if Internet materials posted while he is in prison directly encouraged violence. A senior U.S. law enforcement official said Morton’s current website was still important among U.S. militants, although Morton had toned down his writings.
Older material still accessible on the site includes communiques from Afghanistan‘s Taliban group, videos promoting the views of Abdullah al Faisal, a Jamaican imam who was jailed by British authorities in 2003 for soliciting the murder of Jews and Hindus, and exhortations including, “No peace with the Jews!”
“It is surprising and ironic that two individuals, whose extensive online activity influenced and inspired a wide network of would-be jihadists, are still able to reach those audiences from prison,” said Oren Siegel, director of the Center on Extremism at the Anti-Defamation League.
The jihadists from Revolution Muslim also known as the Islamic Thinkers Society desecrated an American flag in streets of Manhattan a few years ago.
From Bare Naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
How is this any different than Islamic law in, say, Turkey (Obama’s favorite and most trusted ally)? In October, 43-year-old Fazil Say went on trial in Turkey for “denigrating” Islam for a series of tweets earlier that year. In one of his messages he had retweeted a verse from a poem by Omar Khayyám, in which the 11th-century Persian poet attacks pious hypocrisy. This is the same thing.
If the DoJ pursued the vicious, offensive, racist, antisemitic tweets directed at me (and others) by Muslims and leftists, they would be pursuing little else. But they wouldn’t and they shouldn’t.
Note to the Justice Department — we will fight you on this every step of the way. We will drag your dhimmi asses all the way to the Supreme Court. This is sharia enforcement, and we are not going to stand for it.
“DOJ: Social Media Posts Trashing Muslims May Violate Civil Rights” Judicial Watch, May 30, 2013 (thanks to Jane)
In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.
The move comes a few years after the administration became the first in history to dispatch a U.S. Attorney General to personally reassure Muslims that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is dedicated to protecting them. In the unprecedented event, Attorney General Eric Holder assured a San Francisco-based organization (Muslim Advocates) that urges members not to cooperate in federal terrorism investigations that the “us versus them” environment created by the U.S. government, law enforcement agents and fellow citizens is unacceptable and inconsistent with what America is all about.
“Muslims and Arab Americans have helped build and strengthen our nation,” Holder said after expressing that he is “grateful” to have Muslims as a partner in promoting tolerance, ensuring public safety and protecting civil rights. He also vowed to strengthen “crucial dialogue” between Muslim and Arab-American communities and law enforcement.
Evidently that was a precursor of sorts for an upcoming Tennessee event (“Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society”) that will feature the region’s top DOJ official, who serves as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and an FBI representative. The goal is to increase awareness and understanding that American Muslims are not the terrorists some have made them out to be in social media and other circles, according to a local newspaper report. The June 4 powwow is sponsored by the American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee.
The area’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Killian, will address a topic that most Americans are likely unfamiliar with, even those well versed on the Constitution; that federal civil rights laws can actually be violated by those who post inflammatory documents aimed at Muslims on social media. “This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,”Killian says in the local news story. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”