Karen Lugo, a constitutional attorney in Orange County, has posted a piece in PJMedia on tonight's appearance by the US Attorney for the E. District of Tennessee, Bill Killian, who is expected to speak about free speech vis-a-vis the topic of Islam in the US.
http://pjmedia.com/blog/federal-contempt-for-free-speech/?singlepage=true
What takes place tonight in Tennessee bears watching. I understand that Pam Geller and Robert Spencer are planning a demonstration at the event.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2013/06/be-there-today-afdi-free-speech-rally-protesting-doj-attempt-to-criminalize-criticism-of-islam.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
The centerpiece of Killian’s clampdown is a controversial piece posted on Facebook by Coffee County Commissioner Barry West. West has explained that the picture of a man aiming a double-barreled shotgun with the caption, “How to wink at a Muslim,” expressed his “prejudice against anyone who’s trying to tear down this country.”
Generally, protected speech by definition cannot be considered violative of anyone's civil rights. However, there is such a thing as threatening violence against a citizen because of their race, religion, national origin, etc. etc. etc. It can also be a federal offense to violate someone's civil rights be attempting to kill them.
It seems obvious that postings in social media are no more, and no less, a matter of federal civil rights jurisdiction than any other speech, or printed matter.
If West is advocating that armed citizens shoot the nearest Muslim at every opportunity, then the U.S. attorney is doing his job. If not, then he's way outside of his jurisdiction.
Characterizing Muslims, categorically, as people trying to tear down this country is despicable, but not actionable. Its the "how to wink" and the rifle that are questionable.
What would you think of a similar posting saying "How to respect the civil rights of a n*****"???
Findalis, nobody is making a move to arrest you. This is reminiscent of the aged crone boasting of her chastity belt. Pointing out anything about Muhammad, whether it is true or false, is protected speech. We were talking about pointing loaded rifles at living Muslims. There is a difference.
Frank Collin could march through Skokie, but if he offered instruction on "how to wink at a Jew" with a loaded weapon, and someone took him up on it, he could be prosecuted for inciting to murder or riot. And you wouldn't be silenced about that either.
Findalis, nobody is making a move to arrest you. This is reminiscent of the aged crone boasting of her chastity belt. Pointing out anything about Muhammad, whether it is true or false, is protected speech. We were talking about pointing loaded rifles at living Muslims. There is a difference.
What starts out innocently will be corrupted. Make no mistake, if Obama gets his way on this, everyone who even farts in the direction of a Muslim will be arrested for a "Hate Crime".
Now you are being so utterly hysterical and irrational that there is no point in debating this further. There is no substance to your argument, just a long, loud... well, you supplied the word yourself.
We uphold the rule of law by being precise about what the law is, says, and means, not by virulent warnings that it doesn't mean anything and never can.
Post a Comment