Islam

Justice Department to Hold Seminar Warning Against the Legal 'Consequences' of Anti-Muslim Speech

|

Consequences. |||

Via Instapundit and Judicial Watch comes this troubling article in Tennessee's The Tullahoma News about an upcoming conference entitled "Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society," in which Kenneth Moore, special agent in charge of the FBI's Knoxville Division, and Bill Killian, U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, will warn citizens about the criminal dangers of Facebooking hate speech. Excerpt:

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.

"This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion," Killian told The News Monday. "This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are." […]

Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

"That's what everybody needs to understand," he said.

Killian said slide show presentations will be made.

I sincerely hope they make that Power Point public, since I'm unaware of any federal civil rights prosecutions for "inflammatory" Facebook postings, and want to keep up to speed with the Obama administration's increasingly brazen encroachment on free expression.

Reason on free speech and Islam here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Bachmann Rival Drops Out of Race After She Announces Exit

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. It has been a while since law school. But as I remember civil rights violations in the criminal context apply to government officials or a private person obstructing someone from exercising a civil right, like say a Black Panther in Philadelphia keeping white people from voting. But I cannot recall a single civil rights law that makes it a crime for people to say mean things on the internet.

    1. It’s the inevitable landing place if we keep criminalizing “hate” and harassment.

      That said, it’s flagrantly illegal. It’s illegal even to suggest it, because that statement can chill speech. I expect his resignation on my desk in the morning.

      1. It is. They have to know that this is totally at odds with the law. But they say it anyway because they don’t care. The idea is to put the idea out figuring a good number of people will believe it and thus stop speaking.

        1. That’s why officials who say they’re going to do something blatantly illegal should lose their jobs. Period. No exceptions.

          1. But they DO lose their jobs! Look at those IRS people!

            Of course, they immediately got a new, better job at a higher salary with no loss of pension, but that’s just a technicality.

        2. “The idea is to put the idea out figuring a good number of people will believe it and thus stop speaking.”

          Well not me, buster. And Kenneth Moore and Bill Killian need to come clean regarding the rumors swirling around that Kenneth Moore and Bill Killian are tag-team fuckers of sheep.

          BTW, Fuck Mohummad.

          1. [BTW, Fuck Mohummad.]

            Pussy. Show me some stones. Utter such in E. Dearborn whilst adorned with a sandwich board emblazened with your TRUE name, address, place of employment, children’s names, etc.

        3. Show me the faith you’re not allowed to mock or disparage in any conceivable way, and I’ll show you your Official State Religion.

          1. ^^THIS^^

      2. I’m onboard if by resignation you mean erotic photo spread. All that authoritarian posturing chills my speech, if you know what I mean.

        1. Resignation for me, disturbing materials for Dweebston.

    2. All that needs be done is start changing the behavior of the citizenry……

      PS:Bill Killian…..CHRISTFAG you STASI enforcer!

  2. Hasn’t SCOTUS ruled that you can burn a cross on a lawn if you’re the Klan? How is that less intimidating than posting something bigoted on Facebook or Twitter?

    1. You don’t know the power of the Internet!

      1. Or you can burn a cross on a lawn but don’t you dare post a picture of it on Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram!

    2. They seriously ruled that you can burn a cross on someone else’s lawn? I’m asking because I don’t know.

      1. On your lawn. They didn’t make trespassing to burn crosses legal.

    3. Just don’t tear up a copy of the Koran. They’ll put you in prison for that shit.

  3. Once again, the Obama administration displays how mind-numbingly incompetent and delusional they are.

    They aren’t Brittaing government, they are Pierceing it. 😀

    1. They’re the worst.

      1. You don’t get to say that.

      2. You are just saying that to fit in!

  4. What consquences might those be? Posters of inflammatory content will be targeted extra hard for their parole violations?

    1. And IRS audits.

      1. Chief Inquisitor Holder will be going into greater detail, re: all of this, during an intimate little “off-the-record” confab with select monsignori of the press later this week.

      2. And FBI conspiracy investigations.

      3. And OSHA inspections.

    2. Dweebston| 5.31.13 @ 2:08PM |#
      “What consquences might those be?”

      Well, if you do a movie, it could lead to people being killed in diplomatic enclosures!
      That’s what Obozo claims.

  5. Slandering people anonymously is what the internet is for. That and porn.

    1. And cat photos.

      1. We’ll just say pussy. That covers both.

        1. *boom, tish*
          I’ll be sure to tip my waitress.

        2. Problem with that shedding pussy?

          1. You are so evil. I’m going to self medicate to get that guy’s voice out of my head.

  6. inflammatory documents targeted at Muslims

    However, if your local Iman is preaching ‘May Allah rain death upon the Jews’ at prayer the evening, carry on. Business as usual.

    1. ‘this’ for ‘the’ and ‘i’ for ‘I’. Jeez.

  7. Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

    How in dog’s name is that possible? Maybe if I’m posting a house for rent with “no Jews, no blacks, no Muslims, no WOW players.”

    But otherwise, it’s just words, and they ain’t violations.

  8. Headline from 2014:

    ” Secretary Blames Embassy Attack on ‘Hateful and Disgusting’ Facebook Page. Kentucky Man Arrested”

    1. Straight out of last week in Britain when some people twitted their outrage after the beheading on the streets of London at Muslim cultural conditioning poisoning minds and all Brits having to bear the consequence in less than polite terms got them arrested.

  9. Sure this is bad, but it’s just an intrinsic aspect of government. As libertarians, we shouldn’t be seeking retribution but rather passively contemplating on the aspects of government which lead to such abuse. Heaven knows we shouldn’t look to get this poor guy fired!

    /Suderman

    1. Silly Trouser – Federal employees can’t be fired!!

  10. I’m curiouse what incentivizes rank-and-file bureaucrats to stick their necks out on obviously controversial projects like this. Is it career saavy? Were these jokers assigned to a panel called “hate speech and the Anglicizing of American speech laws”?

    1. Or maybe a belated effort to jump onboard the Innocence of the Muslims scapegoating for some blatant mission creep? What drives this mentality?

      1. Maybe Kenneth Moore is angling for Apple’s Chief Diversity Officer position, to be created shortly after the next round of Congressional inquisitions.

  11. Killian said Internet postings that violate civil rights are subject to federal jurisdiction.

    Mohammedans are expressly forbidden from reading this comment

  12. Get with the program, people! Free speech is only for people who have the correct thoughts.

  13. Recently in my area the association of animal wardens sent out press releases reminding people in X county that state law requires dog owners to buy a dog license every year, and that they would be doing “compliance checks” in the county.

    http://www.pennlive.com/midsta…..anvas.html

    Nobody had any idea how they would do a “compliance check” without a warrant, and they didn’t want to explain. It was all about using governmental threats to force compliance.

    1. Bureaucrats are a weird bunch and have social dysfunctions that are unique to their kind. Can you imagine anyone but a government employee setting his suicide up to look like the action of an anti-government militia? One of them did just that.

      1. Do you have a link to this?

        1. It was Bill Sparkman census taker back in 2009. His death was hailed as Tea Party violence and even after the fact that he had offed himself was revealed, the usual suspects were out touting this as the result of Tea Party people being mean to precious federal employees.

          Unless Killa had some other weasel in mind.

    2. They’ll just go to homes where people didn’t renew their dog license, and if the dog isn’t already dead they’ll shoot it.

  14. ” White House Blames Embassy Attack on ‘Insipid Cat Video’. Internet Service Shutdown Under FCC Extraordinary Authority.”

  15. Tennessee? The home of the anti-mosque building legislation and anti-Sharia law initiatives.

    I remember when Flava Cain supported the no-mosque laws there (the “Constitutional Conservative” he is).

    1. The only consolation here is that soon trolling will be a Federal crime.

      1. How do you justify a no-mosque law? I always wanted to ask a proponent that.

        1. Who the fuck is “Flava Cain” shreeky?

          1. That’s shriKKKe speak for some Negro what don’t know his place.

          2. Herman ‘Flava’ Cain. Comedian and GOP POTUS candidate.

            1. Herman Cain, luminary of the Republican establishment, the man who supported Americans in their fight to exclude mosques from their communities, whatever that means. Obviously an icon for libertarians.

            2. Shouldn’t you be back in moms basement drinking grape juice and playing “Stock Market Tycoon?

        2. I don’t propone that. ANd fuck McCain.

        3. What law? Wasn’t it a county that tried to block a mosque that was later forced to allow it by a court? So the whole state should burn?

          1. Just because only a few people tried to make that into a law, and lost, doesn’t mean that everyone in Tennessee isn’t a racist asshole. How else do you expect Shrike to build his strawman army?

            1. I rather like Tennessee. And Tennesseans. Not that they don’t have their own issues–like the rest of the country.

            2. My point was that a leading candidate of the GOP POTUS primaries supported a blatantly anti-Constitutional law.

              1. Sun rises, sun sets. Both wings of your beloved Party embrace base-pandering causes in defiance of the tattered paper Constitution they swore to uphold.

              2. You really are a dense moron, aren’t you? I’m going to spell it out s l o w l y for you so maybe you’ll understand this time.

                T H I S.
                I S.
                N O T.
                A.
                G O P.
                B L O G.

                Got it yet?

                1. Oh. I thought we were the Popular Front.

                  1. SPLITTER!!!

                  2. I think libertarians are the Unpopular Front. 🙁

              3. “My point was that a leading candidate of the GOP POTUS primaries supported a blatantly anti-Constitutional law.”

                HEY YOU STUPID CUNT, THIS IS NOT A REPUBLICAN WEBSITE. HOW CAN ANYONE BE THIS FUCKING STUPID YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT?

    2. Fuck off cockpuppet!

  16. I say a citizen’s arrest should be made upon this government official.

  17. Oh come on now, folks. The Swedes are being all PC and extra nicey with the Muslims, and see how well that is working out? The Muslims only burned 50 cars in the streets yesterday. If they hadn’t made saying mean things about the Muslims, a hate crime, it could have been 60 cars!

    1. The Swedes are fucking clueless here, no doubt.

      But what do you suggest they do?

      1. Tell their pussy cops to stop standing off to the side and, you know, protect some shit rather than cowering in fear of thrown rocks?

        For starters.

        If the state is going to actively step aside while the rights of their citizens are being blatantly violated, what is the fucking point of the state?

        Buck up, or GTFO.

        1. If I were a Swede who owned a car, and the cops were just standing around while some yahoos tried to set it on fire, I’d obtain any kind of weapon I could and retaliate. If the state won’t do their job, the people should.

          -jcr

          1. In Sweden that “weapon” might be a broom. Good luck with that.

            1. I’m sure a molotov cocktail is just as effective against a vandal as it is against a car.

              -jcr

      2. crackdown on lawbreakers? To paraphrase what someone else said, show me the religion that is allowed to run roughshod over your laws, and that’s your state religion.

        1. The American left preference is always, always to side with society’s predators, rather than their chosen prey.

          http://twitchy.com/2013/05/31/…..t-rapists/

      3. Shoot them.

        1. If the citizenry were well armed, the cops wouldn’t have to do shit. If I ever see anyone throwing a molotov at my car or people trying to tip it over, they’re getting a hollow point to the midsection. One or two down oughta spread the word quickly to steer clear of that particular property.

    2. Paying big, big dividends in Australia, as well.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_gang_rapes

      1. In Limeytardia, as well. But don’t worry, the British youth and the ‘Libertarian’ mayor of London are going to fix all of that (snickers uncontrollably).

  18. Anti-Muslim speech is crime because we’re supposed to be tolerant of other religions and cultures.

    Anti-Christian speech is just tolerant people speaking out against those intolerant religious nuts who hate gays and abortion.

    Wait a sec…

    1. And cling to their guns. Muslims don’t cling to their… oh wait.

      1. Some cling to their bombs until they are pried from the charred dead fingers.

        1. The = their

        2. I think by that point, the bombs have already been vaporized or scattered over a radius of several hundred feet.

      2. Got Bitter Clingers in every shitty religion.

        1. Keep your inability to wipe your ass properly to yourself. That’s just gross.

      3. *cough*Nidal Hassaan*cough*

    2. You have to ask yourself, ‘why is the protective exceptionalism of the FBI aimed at Muslims?’

      It is a justification for expanding and flexing their power. ‘Protecting’ unpopular minorities has long been the potpourri that the FBI uses to dust its bullshit of foul odor.

      1. Or, maybe they’re reading the Chief Executive as a Muslim himself, from the evidence at hand?

  19. Having had some experience being misquoted in newspapers, it is possible the “Tullahoma News” reporter put down what he/she thought was said. Maybe the local LP chapter should ask the newspaper if that
    quote is verbatim, and then arrange to be present at the seminar and
    see if the seminar leaders stand by their allegations. At which point a stink can be made and calls made for their firing (which, of course, won’t happen). The LP needs to be out in front on such issues and make some news.

  20. Rogue agents, no doubt. No approval from above, no doubt. They will be disciplined, no doubt.

  21. Is the “social tolerance” that that TEH YUTES support?

  22. It’s not just muslims. The FBI is also doing outreach to the gay (etc) community. A few weeks ago I got an email from the local gay community center with the monthly event calendar. One of the events was a presentation by FBI agents on hate speech. I deleted the email message, but wish I’d have saved it now.

    1. It’d probably be an interesting talk to go to. You’d probably need prophylactic sedation before sitting through something like that though.

    2. The event has already occurred, I believe. I considered going to it, but it seemed like a bad idea since I don’t have access to prescription grade sedatives.

      1. Just voice your dissent to their meddling. There will be plenty of sedatives at the re-education camp.

  23. You have a right not to be killed, robbed, raped, or beaten. You have no right to be loved, and if you have enough political power to compel feigned lvoe you probably don’t need it anyway.

  24. 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.

    “The following inflammatory documents are explicitly not targeted at Muslims; they are targeted at people who hate Muslims.”

    Better?

  25. Hello, this is Killian. Give me the Justice Department, Entertainment Division.

  26. 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.

    More like: “Killian and Moore will provide input on how civil rights can be violated by those who post inflammatory documents targeted at anything that is not the most glowing descriptions Muslims on social media.”

  27. There are no legal consequences for “anti-Muslim” speech in the USA. There are, however, massive illegal and unconstitutional consequences, as the poor guy in the picture above found out.

    -jcr

  28. “Damn it! We’re the only ones allowed to target Muslims!” –U.S. military drone pilots

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.