Who Defends Our Right to Free Speech?

[Dave70968]

Seriously? Who comes up with such guidelines for a parolee? Seems broad. Was he an internet crime boss or something?

"Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Leigh Williams said Nakoula set up fraudulent bank accounts using stolen identities and Social Security numbers, then checks from those accounts would be deposited into other bogus accounts from which Nakoula would withdraw money at ATM machines."
http://www.mercurynews.com/celebrities/ci_21523103/anti-islam-filmmaker-hiding-after-protests

 

[MyMonkey]

"Assistant U.S. Attorney Jennifer Leigh Williams said Nakoula set up fraudulent bank accounts using stolen identities and Social Security numbers, then checks from those accounts would be deposited into other bogus accounts from which Nakoula would withdraw money at ATM machines."
http://www.mercurynews.com/celebrities/ci_21523103/anti-islam-filmmaker-hiding-after-protests

There yah go. Internet Crime boss! LOL Seems that agreeing to not use computers these days would wind up very difficult to comply with. When I drive I do so. Use the phone, push the button to cross the street etc etc. Seems a slippery slope to me.

 

[caojyn]

(maybe a stretch) so in a sense these deaths could be linked to him violating a court order

 

[Hobbes]

(maybe a stretch) so in a sense these deaths could be linked to him violating a court order

Not the deaths. Those were opportunistic attacks by individuals not clearly identified yet.
The riots in dozens of cities are derived directly from his actions, in spite of what others would have us believe. JMO

 

[caojyn]

Not the deaths. Those were opportunistic attacks by individuals not clearly identified yet.
The riots in dozens of cities are derived directly from his actions, in spite of what others would have us believe. JMO

right, I was intentionally over simplifying it, very interested to see how this plays out

 

[Dale00]

I believe the filmmaker is a Copt from Egypt. The Coptic Christians have been severely persecuted by radical Muslims there, so revenge is a likely motive.

But motives and thought crimes are thin ice. The criminals are the ones rioting.

 

[Lurker66]

A person who does not believe in right and wrong will have a difficult time finding support from most people on this board. Someone else might pipe up that murder is not real and so our concern over our murdered diplomats is wrong. These sorts of discussions are best conducted on a philosophy board. I don't see their value here.

What does have merit, in my opinion, is the question of how we should react when people riot over a statement or a film or a cartoon. Some here have condemned the filmmaker and urge some sort of restraint of free speech to prevent violence. Others have argued that we should not restrict free speech because of the threat of violence. I do not see how we as a nation can tip toe around the sensitivities of others without damaging our free speech rights in the long run. Appeasement will lead to greater demands for restrictions on our freedoms.
.

Ive discussed these issues on philosophy boards too, they usually go nowhere. I actually value the thoughts and opinions of the guys n gals on OSA. This is the most unique forum Ive ever seen. For Okies, by Okies, okie thoughts, Okie humor and sometimes Okie ignorance.

Im of the opinion that the rights we enjoy, both in our state and across our nation, cannot be realistically applied across the world. We do not have to appease the world, neither should we expect the world to bend to our rights.

Our rights, esp free speech, 2A, religion ect, will erode everytime some nut makes a movie that inflames, or a shooter go on a spree or a sect protests at a funeral. We should expect an outcry, we should debate and try to prevent such extremist actions.

Now ive got a birthday to celebrate.

 

[twoguns?]

I cant believe that people are still argue about this film inciting riots...any more than Flip Wilson sayin...."the devil made me do it".
Tail wags dog...continue on.....

 

[Glocktogo]

By your logic Osama Bin Laden bears no responsibility for most of the acts of terror he inspired.

Active co-conspirator to commit violence, so it's completely different.

No but inciting to riot is punishable by law, first amendment or not.

Which this doesn't rise to that standard. He produced an awful video. Let's say the intent of the video was to enrage Muslims. He didn't encourage Muslims to riot, he merely provided the materials. The Imams were the ones who told the followers to riot. The filmmaker didn't tell one single person to go riot at embassies or consulates, the local religious leaders did.

Seriously? Who comes up with such guidelines for a parolee? Seems broad. Was he an internet crime boss or something?

As a parolee, he is not a free man. It would be different if his sentence were completed.

 

[Hobbes]

Active co-conspirator to commit violence, so it's completely different.

No, it's not completely different.

We know that on several occasions OBL merely preached about the transgressions of westerners and the result was violence perpetrated by third parties influenced by his statements.
That's one of the reasons his later video releases were never broadcast by the "lamestream" media at the request of the US government.

Which this doesn't rise to that standard. He produced an awful video. Let's say the intent of the video was to enrage Muslims. He didn't encourage Muslims to riot, he merely provided the materials. The Imams were the ones who told the followers to riot. The filmmaker didn't tell one single person to go riot at embassies or consulates, the local religious leaders did.

He knew what the result would be and he provoked it deliberately for his own purpose.