Innocence of Muslims

What a Soft Line on Free Speech Gets: Egypt Wants to Arrest Folks Behind Muhammad Video

Threatening to kill those who offend kind of feeds into the movie's narrative

|

Not a scene from the movie

Jesse Walker warned last week that government condemnation of expressions of free speech has a tendency to fan the flames of the indignant rather than quell them. Today, the riots in Cairo blamed on the Innocence of Muslims film have resulted in Egypt putting out arrest warrants against the people they believe are responsible. For the film, that is. Courtesy of the Associated Press:

The prosecutor's office said in a statement that the accused, which includes the film's alleged producer, face charges of harming national unity, insulting and publicly attacking Islam and spreading false information. The office said they could face the death penalty, if convicted. No date for the trial has been set.

Among those charged is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, an Egyptian Copt living in southern California and believed to be behind the film. Florida-based Pastor Terry Jones, who has said he was contacted by the filmmaker to promote the video, as well as Morris Sadek, a conservative Coptic Christian in the U.S. who pushed the video on his website, are also among those charged.

According to the Associated Press, Egypt sees the trial as "symbolic" because they doubt any of the defendants will be coming to their country anytime soon. The actual point of the threatening a handful of Americans with death over some stupid video is to get the indignant protesters to shut the hell up and go back home.

The prosecutor's decision to take legal [action] appears aimed at absorbing at least some of the public anger over the amateur film, which portrays the Prophet Muhammad as a fraud, womanizer and buffoon.

The announcement is fresh, so the story lacks any response from the Obama administration as yet.  Given that American officials can barely utter a defense of free speech without condemning the movie, we shouldn't expect much. As it is, we have former government officials trying to argue that the movie doesn't merit free speech protection for the truly absurd reason that it will incite the people it's criticizing to violence. (I pointed out last week that arguments like this also reduce the entirety of Muslim society to a bunch of irrational savages. Is that really the argument the left wants to present here?)

NEXT: 43 Percent of Florida Students Use School Choice

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. face charges of harming national unity

    “What a great idea for a crime.”

    –Nancy Pelosi

    1. Where in the Constitution does it say you can punish people for harming national unity?

      1. Commerce Clause, General Welfare, Necessary and Proper, take your pick.

      2. Green| 9.18.12 @ 1:57PM |#

        Where in the Constitution does it say you can punish people for harming national unity?

        Its right next to the “Fuck You, That’s Why” clause

      3. “Where in the Constitution does it say you can punish people for harming national unity?”

        I left my copy of the Egyptian Constitution in my other coat

      4. what is this Constitution you speak of?

      5. Are you all serious? I set it up and everything!

        Are you serious?

        1. because fuck you, that’s why?

    2. “Crime? We don’t even need to call it a crime. We’ll just call it a security risk, hold them indefinitely and never charge them with shit! The NDAA is back, baby. Laws are for suckers.”

      -Barack H. Obama

  2. Obviously, Team Obama should extradite Nakoula Basseley Nakoula to Egypt.

    Or deport him for his parole violoations. Or whatever excuse works to calm the tender sensibilities of Mohammadans regarding their Prophet.

    1. Don’t even joke about it. Seriously, at this point I could see the government doing that. How low we’ve sunk as a country.

      1. I would not be even a little bit shocked if they actually did that. Outraged, yes. Shocked, not at all.

        1. And we can televise the trial and execution.

          1. Um, I think you meant “trial” and execution.

            1. first, sentence; then trial.

              1. Obviously. If you don’t know the sentence how can you know how the trial should go?

      2. I can see myself voting for Mitt Romney if that happens. I won’t be happy about it, but there are some fucking lines that mean you need to just fucking go, and whichever asshole will make that happen will do.

        Though, if the Administration does sink that low, I sort of hope some American extremist will save me from that terrible decision. If you know what I mean.

    2. well he is a brown felon w one-of-those-names. let him reap the reward his fellows browns decide.

    3. Let’s not go all Duck Soup and get wound up about something that hasn’t happened yet.

    4. “Or deport him for his parole violoations.”

      I think he’s an American citizen

      1. Hell, we can kill American citizens without trial, why can’t we deport them?

        Wasn’t there just a story about somebody whose home country refused to take them back, and ICE just said “Whatevs, we’ll deport you to wherever?”

      2. So we could only drone kill him.

  3. I would predict a general Administration low key muttering about free speech, heavily qualified with apologies, excuse making for riots and killings, prefaced with condemnation of the speech itself.

    In short, we’re more fuxXored.

  4. The announcement is fresh, so the story lacks any response from the Obama administration as yet.

    Who will ask them? If it ain’t Jake Tapper or someone from Fox, perhaps – who would? And it isn’t like O! is going to come out and take questions – he’ll send the clown car out and we can watch the various spokesclowns come spilling out and honking horns, tweaking large rubber noses and blaming Romney. O! is too busy on Letterman, or partying with Jay-Z. Presidentin’ is hard.

  5. The actual point of the threatening a handful of Americans with death over some stupid video is to get the indignant protesters to shut the hell up and go back home.

    Because nothing calms a murderous mob like joining their ranks.

    1. needs moar booze

      1. So hateful of the Muslim faith, orrin. Really, you should be embarrassed.

        1. But…the Crusades!!

    2. On to Frankenstein Castle, villagers! OK men, pass out those torches.

  6. (I pointed out last week that arguments like this also reduce the entirety of Muslim society to a bunch of irrational savages. Is that really the argument the left wants to present here?)

    Absolutely. The Left have always held up the “White Man’s Burden” as a standard of foreign policy. They have always been xenophobic and racist. This is also why they screech about China, as they truly believe it a place full of inscrutable Dr. Fu Manchus who want nothing more than to addict our virtuous White women with opium and sell them into sexual slavery.

    1. The “imminence” argument about the video making the rounds just shows how incredibly racist and patronizing the left is when it comes to these issues — they are quite literally arguing that Muslims/Arabs have no impulse control on certain topics and that it is therefore the legal responsibility of the speaker when violence happens. It is not dissimilar to an argument regarding the legal responsibility of a farmer or a pet owner vis a vis their animals.

      This is a viewpoint that even the most deranged of open racists would scoff at.

      1. It’s very close to the old mandingo sterotype. Those oversexed black men with their huge schlongs just can’t control themselves, donchaknow?

        1. and how they justify racial preferences. deep down they are saying blacks can’t meet white standards, so… change the standards.

          it’s paternalistic and racist

          1. “They tryin’ to tell us, deep down, we all wants to be white!!”

            “Well isn’ that true?”

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMCki0Z_AlA

    2. that’s it! im sending you my dry cleaning bill after exhaling coffee n snot on my shirt. its a chinese place natch

      1. I figured all the smart Chinese people would have left Cleveland by now.

  7. These Egyptian show trial charges are old hat. For years, on every Passover, Egypt has attempted to sue Israel in international court for losses occurred when the ancient Hebrews supposedly looted Egypt during the Exodus.

    1. I thought that was a 4th century BC event, not modern.

      1. Who are they going to believe, you or the World’s premier Egyptologist?

  8. Another week, another obamanation.

    Every week I believe that I couldn’t possibly think less of POTUS and the very next week, he proves me wrong again.

  9. film have resulted in Egypt putting out arrest warrants against the people they believe are responsible. For the film, that is.

    It’s Springtime for Arabs, not Springtime for Infidels… just so we’re clear on that.

    1. Winter for Poland and France!

  10. The United States sees fit to criminalize what citizens of other countries do at websites hosted in other countries.

    If we don’t think citizens of other countries have the right to set up sports betting websites if it’s legal to do so under their own country’s law, why should Egypt care if what Nakoula did is legal under US law?

    If we have universal jurisdiction, so do they.

    That being said, if they decide to Eichmann these guys and bring them to Cairo for trial, glass the place. From Sudan to the Med.

    1. Good point. I’d like to see what happens to Nakoula (and anyone standing in his vicinity) if Egypt got ahold of a Flying Killer Robot.

    2. The United States sees fit to criminalize what citizens of other countries do at websites hosted in other countries.

      This of course deserves RCz Lore:

      You today, me tomorrow.

      1. Or was it them today, him tomorrow… or me last night, you in the morning…

      2. Technically, its Me today, you tomorrow.

        I think its originally from Solzhenitsyn, from the perspective of a gulag inmate.

        Since we generally apply it to people who hold power, it might work better the other way around.

        1. I thought it was a variation on the famous Pastor Niemoller quote.

          1. Could be. The Iron Laws come to me as revelations during ecstatic, drug-fueled orgies. Its not like I look them up or anything.

        2. Let’s see what order the crocodile eats them in, shall we?

    3. And what if the feds deport them to Egypt? Nuke Washington?

      Well, it would solve a lot of problems.

    4. If we don’t think citizens of other countries have the right to set up sports betting websites if it’s legal to do so under their own country’s law, why should Egypt care if what Nakoula did is legal under US law?

      People should have the right to set up sports betting websites, since voluntary betting amoungst adults is a victimless act. If the US is keeping anyone in prison for merely setting up a sports betting website legally in their own country, those prisoners should be pardoned and released.

      Of course I highly doubt that the US will consider executing anyone for sports betting, so there’s that.

  11. The announcement is fresh, so the story lacks any response from the Obama administration as yet

    Oh I can’t wait for that.

    1. I pointed out last week that arguments like this also reduce the entirety of Muslim society to a bunch of irrational savages.

      Yep, I pointed out that LIberals have all but come out and said, “These people are fucking nuts, so we need special speech rules in case we provoke them!”

  12. Is that really the argument the left wants to present here?

    I’ll go with “yes”.

    see also: race-obsessed response to any criticism of our current president.

  13. We should send some drones. As witnesses.

  14. Since we already bombed Libya, can we bomb Egypt now? its not like we’ve got anything to lose. Plus, maybe they’ll shut the fuck up about the stupid movie.

    1. nah, it would take too long for obama to get congressional approval!

      i keed i keed

  15. Among those charged is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, an Egyptian Copt living in southern California and believed to be behind the film. Florida-based Pastor Terry Jones, who has said he was contacted by the filmmaker to promote the video, as well as Morris Sadek, a conservative Coptic Christian in the U.S. who pushed the video on his website, are also among those charged.

    Once a guilty verdict has been reached by an Egyptian court, these people may legitimately be hunted down and killed on American soil, right? Fair’s fair.

    1. Retarded equivalence is retarded.

      1. It doesn’t matter if you think it’s retarded cyto. It matters what they think. That’s what happens when you give governments this kind of power. Somehow, you can see this on domestic policy, but are utterly incapable of doing so on foreign policy

        1. I judge government actions in terms of protecting rights, not using psycobabble to justify bullshit equivalences.

          …but are utterly incapable of doing so on foreign policy

          This line is tired and shitty. I have criticized US FP lots. And if you think toppling a dictator is the moral or practical equivalent of interfering in free markets, then you have no intellectual foundation. Or intellect.

          1. I have criticized US FP lots.

            For not being bloodthirsty enough, usually.

            I think Calidissident’s reasoning is as follows: the competency and moral foundation of an Egyptian court is roughly equivalent to the decision making process surrounding which mud hut in Central and Southwest Asia the U.S. should send a Hellfire through. Accordingly, if the Egyptian court finds this guy guilty, and he won’t surrender to their jurisdiction, they’ve just as much right (but not the ability!) to try and snuff him on U.S. soil as we do with whichever enemy of the realm in Yemen, Pakistan, etc.. deserves death this week.

            Naturally I disagree, because we wear the white hats. And San Dimas Football, something, something.

          2. Because our foreign policy is just toppling dictators? And what’s the point if thousands of people have to die for it? The only time you criticize US FP is when they’re not interfering enough. You say you’re for protecting rights, and yet you have no problem with the president unilaterally deciding to kill someone with no oversight, accountability, or due process

    2. Once a guilty verdict has been reached by an Egyptian court, these people may legitimately be hunted down and killed on American soil, right? Fair’s fair.

      How have you reached such an absurd conclusion? Would you care to spell out your reasoning?

  16. The announcement is fresh, so the story lacks any response from the Obama administration as yet.

    We anxiously await the U.S. Embassy to Egypt’s next tweet.

    1. With Google Earth maps to the defendants’ homes, best known photos of them and another apology for good measure.

      1. and H1 (skilled) visa’s
        obviously you and blind justice never dated…wait, ur not one of those DADT’s are you?

        1. You continue to exhibit stroke symptoms – please seek medical help. That, or go text-seek somewhere relevant.

  17. Correct Presidential response: “Fuck off Egpyt. Deal with the criminals in your country actually rioting.”

    1. So insensitive. Better to sacrifice an American or two.

  18. As it is, we have former government officials trying to argue that the movie doesn’t merit free speech protection for the truly absurd reason that it will incite the people it’s criticizing to violence.

    It is really important to emphasize that our rights do not exist for the government’s convenience.

  19. “which portrays the Prophet Muhammad as a fraud, womanizer and buffoon.”

    Ya know, The Life of Abdul would be pretty sweet…

    1. Or “Corpus Mohammedi,” a play where Mo’ and his pals wax enthusiastic about the joys of anal sex.

  20. “The announcement is fresh, so the story lacks any response from the Obama administration as yet.”

    That’s what was written about the Chicago teachers’ kerfuffle a week or so ago.

  21. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..93315.html

    HuffPo commenters are generally in favor of sending him over. Astonishing how cleanly TEAM BLUE and TEAM RED have pulled 180’s on PATRIOTISM in the past 3 years.

    Sedition during wartime is a capital offense in this country, I’m sure a US prosecutor could get a conviction against the named conspirators.

    Shoopy doopy doop boop
    72 Fans Become a fan
    49 minutes ago ( 1:14 PM)
    In the spirit of cooperation the USA should respect Egypts wish and extradite Mr. Jones. It would be good for America and the rule of law.

    1. All it takes for the fascistic authoritarian statist in any TEAM member to come out is that their guy be in charge. Then it’s FULL RETARD time.

    2. …It’s fucking sedition now?

      1. I guess Barack really was a secret Muslim.

        1. Has he ever kept a secret?

          1. He’s doing a fine job of keeping all records of his life before politics pretty secret.

    3. What

      the

      fuck

      ?

    4. Ladies and gentlemen…to all of you screaming about free speech in a forum that moderates and controls all posts, is laughable!

      Furthermore, as a young anti-Vietnam war protester in the 1970’s, I learned firsthand how truly “unfree” our speech really is. Just for marching, I earned myself a note on the police records. We are “free” as long as we conform. Any talk of anti-Semitism is immediately silenced, why not silence this creep?

      F#%^ Terry Jones! That is one speech I prefer not to be “free”.

      Cognitive dissonance reigns supreme!

      1. ok, at least i am a little relieved. i thought you were quoting some fucktard in our thread. then, i realized it’s huffpo nonsense

        it says a lot about liberals, when a post that is probably middle of the road there (see above), is possibly too extremely stupid for reason.com

        i mean, i’ve seen some stupid here, but THAT is just an entire level up.

    5. In the spirit of cooperation the USA should respect Egypts wish and extradite Mr. Jones. It would be good for America and the rule of law.

      For them it’s not about patriotism, but ridding the United States of one more wingnut religionist.

    6. holy hholy FFFUCCINIG SHITE

    7. That is sickeningly idiotic, even for HuffPo.

  22. It would be good for America and the rule of law.

    I’m not sure how much more help the rule of law will be able to withstand.

  23. And while I’m on my daily slog through the swamp of HuffPo…

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…..89018.html

    Self righteous hipster twit wants everyone to travel “authentic” (IOW, exactly like he does), condemns anyone who travels in “luxury,” completely ignores economic impact of luxury travel vs. “authentic” travel, manages to shove his head further up his own ass than previously thought humanly possible. The killer:

    I don’t have anything against rich people or the fact that some expect more exclusive treatment because of their money. I would like to be richer myself! But if you are unable to detach yourself from your wealth, your comfort and your entitlement for even a few days, then please just stay at home.

    1. …”But if you are unable to detach yourself from your wealth, your comfort and your entitlement for even a few days, then please just stay at home.”

      That spells ‘vacation’ to me! Hey, how about several days of starving to add to the authenticity?

      1. I always go for the raging diarrhea package upgrade. It’s well worth the money.

        1. Scruffy Nerfherder| 9.18.12 @ 2:17PM |#

          I always go for the raging diarrhea package upgrade. It’s well worth the money.

          Sniff. I think little of your pathetic attempts at experiencing *real* travel. Your self induced diarrhea is a typical bourgeois attempt at superficially attempting to relate to an outside culture.

          What any *genuine* person does is spend 5 years in a Turkish prison for trying to smuggle hashish, and live out your days between beatings and getting raped by guards.

          It’s the *only* way to experience the essence of a place

      2. You don’t get it, man. The point is to expand your horizons, learn something about the world. Like Jesse Eisenberg did in that yurt with wifi.

    2. Sorry, gotta agree with him there.

      When abroad, few things are more obnoxious then the “tourist”, ignorant of the culture, language, and history of the places they visit, yet expecting everyone and everything to kiss their ass three times and spit.

      1. It is possible to travel in comfort without being a dick you know.

        1. If you RTFA, you’d see his argument is a bit more nuanced than that.

          Yes, if you want a spa vacation in a tropical place, then go ahead. But remember it is a completely isolated bubble created by the hospitality and tourism industry.

          Just don’t claim you’re a “traveler”.

          1. if you are unable to detach yourself from your wealth, your comfort and your entitlement for even a few days, then please just stay at home.

            Yep, totally nuanced.

            1. Just asking, have you ever traveled in the 3rd World?

              1. Yes I have traveled in the third world and no, I did not take luxury packages simply because it’s out of my budget, or out of the budget of the company that was sending me there.

                I do agree there is value in seeing how the rest of the world lives, however I do not think this article serves any purpose other than to express the author’s moral superiority. Otherwise, he would be exhorting people to travel his way because it is worthwhile and educational, instead of crapping on the way that they choose to spend their extra dollars, which do have a net positive effect on the local economy where they spend them.

                1. I do agree there is value in seeing how the rest of the world lives, however I do not think this article serves any purpose other than to express the author’s moral superiority.

                  *shrugs* Just not getting that feel from it.

                  I have a feeling that if this essay were published on brietbart.com as opposed to the HuffPo, Hammer would be praising it and railing on the self-absorbed, clueless Lefties who think luxury travel is a substitute for actual experience of another culture.

                  Jus’ sayin’

                  1. Yeah, I’m totally just a right wing shill. Never criticize anything but liberals.

              2. Probably more than you and Robert Schrader combined. And almost everywhere I go, I meed these arrogant, sanctimonious cunts who don’t want to “exploit” people by letting them engage in commerce.

                1. Probably more than you and Robert Schrader combined.

                  I’ll take you up on that bet. And no, your time in the Infantry rapin’ gook women and killin’ hadjis (whatever generation you’re from) doesn’t count.

              3. Just asking, have you ever traveled in the 3rd World?

                Fuck, man, I live in Texas.

                Seriously, though, yes I have travelled in the third world. And wherever I go, whatever I do, I will pay for whatever accomodations I think I can afford, and see absolutely no reason to attach any moral significance to either going luxe or going “authentic”.

                1. R C Dean| 9.18.12 @ 3:07PM |#

                  Seriously, though, yes I have travelled in the third world

                  I am unfamiliar with current methods of interplanetary travel. What was the name of this tertiary planet you visited?

                  Or were you simply inappropriately using the hackneyed anachronism for, “Non-aligned with Western or Soviet Powers” in a typically condescending American manner, suggesting that the places visited are “well, kinda shitty and poor, which makes them cooler than like, places with nice toilets”?

                  I am still hoping out for the inter-dimensional/space travel, however.

                2. (p.s. I now realize nerfherder was being quoted)

                  Snark deflection!

            2. Damn you and your crafty fingers

          2. I’m not detecting much nuance

            But if you are unable to detach yourself from your wealth, your comfort and your entitlement for even a few days, then please just stay at home.

            1. There isn’t any. The guy’s a prick.

              1. I didn’t have any interaction with the local populace except for my busboy and the massuse, how dare you not call me tourist and not a real traveler.

                Boo-hoo-hoo!

                And what do you mean the reggae they play at Club Med is fake?!?

                1. And you accuse me of beating on straw men? But even your straw men are pathetic. Are the masseuse and the busboy not locals? Why should they not be allowed to earn money?

                  1. Why should they not be allowed to earn money?

                    Did I say they shouldn’t?

                    Again, tourist is not equal to traveler.

                2. If you travel you are a traveller.

                  1. But HM is a metaphysical “Traveler!” He is wise and empathetic and open minded! As long as the third world has the decency to stay properly impoverished so that he can continue to go there for two weeks a year and feel wise and empathetic and open minded!

                    1. Yep, that’s exactly what I said. You’re not putting words in my mouth at all.

                      When you said you ‘traveled’ in the 3rd World, I’m guess you mean that you’re an immigrant, because English is clearly not your first language. Otherwise, you’d understand what I’m arguing and wouldn’t be posting diatribes against the fictional Heroic Mulatto in your head.

                    2. You haven’t “said” anything beyond “I agree with the original article.” So that’s what I’m forced to argue with. Every other post you’ve made has just been straw man after straw man, or some idiotic “I have more credibility because you probably haven’t even been to the 3rd world” nonsense.

                    3. The Hammer| 9.18.12 @ 2:53PM |#

                      But HM is a metaphysical “Traveler!”

                      Because what’s the fun of leaving home if you can’t be all morally superior about it to everyone else for the rest of your life?

                      “Yes, I backpacked in India. Which gives me the right to mock you and your yearly trips to Chamonix as something pathetic and contemptable”

        2. It is apparently not possible to travel “authentically” without being a dick.

          1. It really isn’t. Travelers are the ultimate in “I did it more authentically than you” one-upmanship doucherisms.

            1. Kai su, teknon?

              I didn’t think you’d join the Yokeltarian anti-intellectualist 2-Minute Hate feeding frenzy.

              Whatever. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I’ll leave you all to it.

              1. Anti-intellectualist? So now you’re making up words to try to be condescendingly dismissive? Get over yourself, you arrogant twit.

              2. Whatever. Everyone is entitled to their opinion

                Except the fucking tourists

        3. I will agree with this point. I have lived in Japan twice, once near Tokyo and once in the boondocks, and both times I had an appreciation for what was around me. But I’m not fucking Japanese either; a 6’3″ blonde male could not be further from being Japanese. I didn’t expect the people to bow and worship me, but I also didn’t expect to just blend in with the bunch of them, so I took what I could get, made some friends, and experienced the culture when given the opportunity. All while drinking those dang Japs under the table!

          1. I have lived in Japan twice

            Ahh, reincarnation! Buddha not happy.

            a 6’3″ blonde male could not be further from being Japanese

            ummm. *black*?

            I was always under the impression there were only 2 classes of people according to the Japanese anyway:

            – The Japanese: descendants of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu, the most holy and pure race ever to exist…

            and

            – Filthy Gaijin, barbarian devils~!

            I didn’t expect the people to bow and worship me

            …. oh…. well, whatever floats your boat. Frankly, you’re missing out.

            All while drinking those dang Japs under the table!

            (cough)…. er…. dude, i’m not sure that’s something worth bragging about. Oooh, did you also beat them 1-1 in hoops?

            For some reason, most countries I’ve visited, people manage to drink me under the table. Maybe its because I’m Irish, and I’m more comfortable under the table. I don’t even remember why was in the Ukraine in the first place.

        4. Scruffy Nerfherder| 9.18.12 @ 2:17PM |#

          It is possible to travel in comfort without being a dick you know

          This is why i prefer the Palinquin as mode of travel. You get to interact closely with the locals every day. Both the ones that carry your litter and respond to lashes of the cane, as well as the starving ones you occasionally toss scraps too.

      2. Yeah, those obnoxious tourists, spending their money locally and allowing people to trade goods and services to accumulate some measure of wealth and escape poverty! Fuck those people, they ruin my “authentic” experience and destroy the poverty I’ve come so far to “appreciate!”

        You’re the same manner of self-absorbed dipshit as the author.

        1. Are you going to go all Tyson on that straw man, next, and bit its ear off?

          1. Are you going to address any of the points, or just make bullshit accusations?

            1. When you make a point, I’ll address it.

              For now, you’re just barking at your own reflection.

              Now, go back an re-read what I wrote and when you actually understand my line of argumentation, I’ll be more than happy to engage you in lively debate and discussion.

              1. You don’t have a line of argumentation. You agreed with But if you are unable to detach yourself from your wealth, your comfort and your entitlement for even a few days, then please just stay at home. So your ‘line of argumentation’ is that no one should be allowed to travel in luxury, from which we can infer that no one should be allowed to offer luxury travel, and everyone who is impoverished should just stay impoverished because it’s “authentic.”

                  1. When did Tony start posting as Heroic Mulatto?

    3. Funny, I’ve run across this attitude from lift operators in CO. The irony is lost on them.

    4. F#$%ing hipster douche – He can ride in the back of a C-130 and live in a tent and eat MREs if he wants to be real “authentic” and travel SW Asia … as for me, I’m looking for a pleasant destination, with a good hotel and a decent choice of cool things to look at, good places to eat and quality alcoholic beverage establishments.

      1. Five bucks says this guy also talks about how Americans are overworked, don’t get enough vacation time and don’t travel overseas enough.

    5. Wait, why does he ask them to stay at home? His whole point is that they don’t go out and live “real” like he does. They’re not interrupting him, and unlike him with his “real,” dirty experiences, they’re probably making some people’s lives better. So a luxury traveler pays rice farmers to create the illusion that he’s farming; at least they’re getting some of his money.

      1. Because he wants to appreciate and respect all the poverty he encounters, and if other people let them make money, they might cease to be impoverished. And then he’d have to find another way to feel superior.

        1. Keep the natives in their grass huts and squalor, because otherwise you might as well have gone to Iowa.

  24. Let’s be clear though, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula is an asshole. (And what is up with Copts and their repeating names?)

    Not only is he a identity thief who put a bunch of people through the hell of getting their social security numbers and credit scores clean, he is a fucking coward. He hid behind an alias and fed into every anti-Semitic stereotype when he claimed the film was produced by an “Israeli Jew” and funded by “100 Jewish donors”. He couldn’t care less if Israel got attacked or if Jews worldwide experienced violence because of his cowardice. I’d have much more respect for the guy if he had the balls to own up to producing the film and standing behind the depictions in it, (which are all sourced from authentic Hadith, the Sunnah, and the Quran, by the way).

    1. Irrelevant to the current issue. Heroic speech by sterling, flawless individuals rarely needs the protection of the first amendment.

      1. Oh, I agree. Freedom of speech covers everyone. That’s why it’s even more important to fight for Nakoula.

        However, the fact remains that he’s a slimy dude.

        1. yes. he’s ultimately, a fucking thief. people were all up in arms because he was getting investigated for possibly violating his probation. whatEVER. if he violated, he should be treated like any other violator but i will absolutely defend his right, a very important right, the right to ridicule the religious (and even the atheist and agnostic. SP has managed to do all 3 quite well)

          when i was going through de(f)ective training, i was commenting on how often our crime victims in some of these cases were complete scumbags.

          the response: “we don’t choose our victims”. how true

          the non-official response? : “we refer to those as misdemeanor homicides” :l

          1. if he violated, he should be treated like any other violator

            Does suspicion of parole violation usually involve (a) a call or visit from the parole officer or (b) several squad cars full of uniformed officers, a media entourage, and a trip downtown?

            1. no, but … and i know this may shock you… suspiction of probation (note: it’s probation not parole) is not often tied to international ramifications.

              this case is, frankly not like the others.

              rational or not, we tend to see a fair amount of grandstanding, posturing, etc. in such incidents

              my grandfather, way back in the day had an incident involving a member of the russian consulate, possible defection, the whole nine yards. HE was the one on the scene who made the decision to “breach” so to speak, but as he tells the story, there was a shitstorm of brass, etc. after the fact and all sorts of public hoopla, grandstanding etc.

              if the probation office is anything like a police dept, shit like this inevitably becomes a press grandstanding shitstorm

              needless to say, i took my grandfather’s warning about cop-o-crat grandstanding to heart. and fortunately, *i* haven’t had any “international incidents” like he did.

              1. but just to clarify, *he* did the right thing, and did what cops are supposed to do, help people, even if means creating international waves and risking firing and diplomatic extreme actions

        2. Yep. As soon as restrictions are placed on that asshole’s speech, restrictions on ours are not far behind.

          1. Has Pastor Jones violated *his* probation? No, but he’s still charged with a capital crime.

            1. Not a response to Spoonman specifically but to the probation subthread.

          2. bullshit

            this has nothing to do with the CONTENT of his speech. it’s an INTERNET usage restriction which is common in cases like wire fraud and other “online crimes”

            he can say whatever the fuck he wants. if he wants to use an internet access device, then he needs to get it cleared, unless it is directly work related.

            trying to turn it into a 1st amendment issue is patently absurd.

  25. Where in the Constitution does it say you can punish people for harming national unity?

    It’s in Woodrow Wilson’s signing statement.

      1. Yeah, fuck that shit about free speech for dissenters. //Oliver Wendall Holmes

        1. Oh, YES, oh, JESUS, oh, BABY… *Masturbates to photograph of Lenin*.
          /Oliver Wendall Holmes.

          1. Leave me out of that…

            Omniscience is WAY overrated.

  26. The huge outbreak of government oathbreakers of late needs to be nipped in the bud with trials for treason and summary executions.

    In particular, oathbreaker Martin Dempsey, Joint Chiefs of Staff has already crossed that line, and Secretary Clinton is skirting it mightily close.

    1. I am glad I retired – now I can hiss, spit and extend both middle fingers whenever I hear “Martin Dempsey” spoken aloud.

      1. Do you abhor the way the Army’s been fucking up its uniforms recently as furiously as I do?

        1. Yeah, pick one and settle the f down, Big Army.

        2. Res Publica Americana| 9.18.12 @ 2:37PM |#

          Do you abhor the way the Army’s been fucking up its uniforms recently as furiously as I do?

          ARPAT IS A CRIME

          1. And NAVPAT MAKES ARPAT LOOK SLIGHTLY LESS RETARDED

            MARPAT IS FINE BECAUSE YOU’LL BE DEAD BEFORE YOU GET A CHANCE TO CONTEMPLATE HOW FUGLY IS REALLY IS

      2. I’m actually stealing this line of thought from my retired PO brother who considered it his fondest duty (never had the chance to act upon) as a submariner with a couple of nukes in his care to shoot oathbreakers of the officer stature who would ask of him an illegal order.

        Watching Crimson Tide beside him as he pointed out all the flaws was something of a living Hell.

        1. I wonder what’ll he’ll think of the new show Last Resort. It looks pretty awesome: a nuclear submarine goes rogue and threatns to nuke Washington DC after the government tries to sink them when they refuse to carry out an illegal order. They then reach an island and declare it an independent state.

          1. The show is about the renegade crew of a United States Navy Ohio-class ballistic missile submarine, the fictional USS Colorado (SSBN-753), that defies an order to launch nuclear missiles towards Pakistan, a decision that costs the commanding officer his job when he refuses to follow out the orders without an explanation or official confirmation. When his second in command also questions the same orders, the vessel is fired upon without warning and the crew are left for dead. Realizing that they have been declared enemies of their own country, they set up camp on the fictional island of Sainte Marina, and declare themselves a sovereign nation with nuclear capability. At the same time, the crew must find a way to prove their innocence and find out who set them up so that they can return home to America.”

            There’s more opportunity in this show for liberty-leaning plots, characters, and positions than there is opportunity for sex at a swingers’ club. I just hope the production team lean that way themselves and use that opportunity.

            1. I wonder how they’re going to fit “Thank God for Obamacare” into that?

              1. Just cast Sean Penn as a high-ranking officer, and the rest will sort itself out.

                ///Wrists.

            2. needz moar Jack Bauer.

            3. You’ve got a boomer stuffed with nukes, and you’re puzzling over how to prove your innocence?

              Howsabout “We’ve got a boomer stuffed with nukes here, and we’re pretty pissed. I suggest you release any and all records related to our current deployment on a public website before noon tomorrow.”

              1. I’m not sure how the show would be any longer than 30 minutes, or however long it’d take the U.S. to mushroom cloud their island, and the surrounding 10,000 square miles of ocean in which it might be hiding, into oblivion.

                The thought of a rogue SSBN is an interesting problem, particularly if they’ve already been given their orders to attack, and presumably any necessary codes to arm their warheads.

                Or they could just reboot Moon is a Harsh Mistress, and examine any issues or debates that way.

                1. A rogue SSBN wouldn’t need codes – just time.

                  1. I was wondering if the SSBN needed an additional set of codes from the mainland in order to unlock the warheads? Sans codes, I don’t think you’re getting past the PALs on modern ICBMs. I mean, you could fire them, I think, or at least launch them out the sub, but I don’t think you could get the warheads to work. If all of the codes are on the sub, then yeah, they’ve nothing but time.

                    Not that I’ve ever served on a submarine.

                    1. It’s been a while but I’m 90% sure everything you need to shoot hot weapons is on board.

            4. There’s …opportunity in this show for liberty-leaning plots…

              Erm.

              It lost me at “passed on the opportunity to Nuke Pakistan”

              I mean, come on. Couldn’t they have glassed Karachi…. THEN gone AWOL? No Fun.

            5. “a decision that costs the commanding officer his job when he refuses to follow out the orders without an explanation or official confirmation. ”

              I haven’t watched the pilot yet, but a launch order comes with “official confirmation” or it isn’t acted upon.

      3. I’m clueless here. What did he do?

  27. You know, if we were living in more moral times, a decision by the federal government to extradite Nakoula would be met not only with outrage, but open rebellion also. Let’s hope the administration decides not to comply, because if it does, nobody will give a fuck, and that fact will be out there for all to see.

    1. If Obama were president in 1803, we would have sent more tribute to the Barbary pirates with a formal apology for not respecting the Islamic faith’s mandate that non-Islamic nations pay tribute to the caliphate.

      1. Wait . . . our foreign ‘aid’ to Egypt isn’t a dhimmi now that the Muslim Brotherhood is in charge?

      2. If Obama somehow became President in 1803, like with the help of an Assassin’s Creed-style Piece of Eden, or some such shit, he’d be dragged out into the street, into a court, tried and convicted of treason, and executed for being a slavemaking degenerate.

        Welcome to 2012.

      3. If Obama were president in 1803, Jefferson would have been accused of nepotism.

        Wakka, wakka, wakka!

  28. Going golfing today for the first time in two years. What’s more likely: me holing out on every par 3 or Letterman going anywhere close to asking Obama about the Arab riots on his show tonight?

    1. “Now Mr. President, I know you’ve been doing an uncriticizably wonderful job and everyone who questions you is a racist, but…..”

      I’m going with you holing out.

    2. What’s more likely?

      ————————–

      Bhutan nukes New York.

  29. As unsatisfactory as Obama’s response to all this has been (in regards to articulating a defense of free speech), there is virtually no chance that he will actually seek to extradite Nakoula to Egypt. I don’t know how many commenters here are really, seriously worried about that; but it could be that some people have come to believe their own anti-Obama propaganda in its most alarmist form.

    It would be clearly illegal and unconstitutional to extradite Nakoula, and even if the federal government tried they would lose in court. There is no reason to think Obama agrees philosophically with imposing criminal penalties (including possible execution) on people just for ridiculing Islam. And he certainly doesn’t stand to gain politically from a frivolous extradition proceeding.

    So I doubt there will be attempts to extradite this guy anytime soon.

    1. It would be clearly illegal and unconstitutional to extradite Nakoula, and even if the federal government tried they would lose in court.

      How cute. You’ve never heard of NDAA.

      1. I’m aware of the NDAA and the ongoing litigation over it.

        While the government’s attempts to arrogate such an expansive power to detain people indefinitely without trial is troubling; it is still apples and oranges to compare that to this.

        The NDAA case turns on the issue of a government’s wartime power to detain captured enemy militants and operatives until the end of hostilities. Due to the nature of the enemy, there is some gray area about how the government should determine who fits into that category of people who may be so detained. I think the Obama administration (like Bush before him) has adopted an interpretation that makes the government’s power to hold people too broad. But at least there is an underlying legitimate government function here, in the sense that the government has a right to combat jihadist enemies and hold captured enemy combatants.

        By contrast, there is no gray area on anything when it comes to censoring speech on grounds that it is offensive. Such censorship is clearly prohibited by the constitution and is not even related to any legitimate government function.

        Also, from Obama’s point of view, attempting to extradite Nakoula would likely cause a bigger domestic public relations problem than the NDAA thing.

    2. “It would be clearly illegal and unconstitutional to extradite Nakoula, and even if the federal government tried they would lose in court.”

      “It could be read as a tax…”

  30. The prosecutor’s decision to take legal [action] appears aimed at absorbing at least some of the public anger over the amateur film, which portrays the Prophet Muhammad as a fraud, womanizer and buffoon.

    It also portrays him as gay, and his buddies are all cool with that. Sounds like a message of tolerance to me.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.