September 15, 2012

"By sending — literally — brownshirted enforcers to engage in — literally — a midnight knock at the door of a man for the non-crime..."

"... of embarrassing the President of the United States and his administration, President Obama violated that oath. You can try to pretty this up (It’s just about possible probation violations! Sure.), or make excuses or draw distinctions, but that’s what’s happened. It is a betrayal of his duties as President, and a disgrace."

Instapundit demands the resignation of Barack Obama. (He also quotes a portion of what I said in this post earlier today.)

I read that right after reading this piece in The New Yorker, by Andrew Marantz, analyzing the movie "The Innocence of Muslims."
The video is crude, both aesthetically and ideologically.... Some have compared its director... to Theo van Gogh, the Dutch provocateur who was murdered in retaliation for a short film he made. Van Gogh’s film was bad in many ways, but at least it strove for political and artistic merit....
You see where that's going. A commenter there — Gudmundsdottir — said it well:
I love the continued focus on this idiot as if he has ANYTHING to answer to. He is an American citizen, therefore he has the right to say much worse about "the prophet" Muhammad, "the son of god" Jesus Christ and any other "god" or "prohpet" that he wants to. The American media, predictably, is acting as if this man has something to answer for (or answer to). Good video or not, effective video or not, offensive video or not, untruthful video or not, this man has NOTHING to answer for. Anyone who claims otherwise is an enemy of America, because they are an enemy of the First Amendment (which is what makes America America). This man may have to face civil action from the actors or other participants in the film, but that is a side matter. The film in and of itself is not anything he owes anyone an explanation for.
This is similar to what we were talking about in my 8:55 a.m. post "The Invisible Man." Mark O said:
How is this not an assault on the First Amendment? Who cares how bad the movie was? Do any but the obsessed believe the movie is the reason for the killing? If it is, then so what? Our response should be to champion our freedom, not pander to the mob.
And I said:
If bad movies aren't protected:

1. The vast majority of movies are not protected.

2. The legal authorities will have to distinguish good from bad.
Imagine if you had to make a good movie or a well-written book to have the freedom to disseminate it. What power the critics would have! They could be expert witnesses at our blasphemy trials.

"90% of everything is crud," said Theodore Sturgeon. It's Sturgeon's Law... to which I humbly offer the Althouse Corollary:

If there's a crud exception to freedom, we are only 10% free.

404 comments:

1 – 200 of 404   Newer›   Newest»
Unknown said...

The legal authorities will have to distinguish good from bad.

That's been on display throughout human history -

How well has it worked out?

Anyone know of anywhere?

Anyone?




Anyone . . . .

Bob Ellison said...

Drudge has removed the film-maker item. Interesting.

Also, check out Intrade's lifetime chart on Obama's relection. Volume is up, way up, in recent days. So is his re-election estimate, at more than 66%.

I smell something.

Mike said...

Except that this man *has* committed a crime. Specifically, he has violated the conditions of his supervised release and in a pretty serious way (using an alias, doing a film for profit, fraud if the actors are correct that their words were dubbed over). His previous conviction was for using an alias to defraud people. Now he has ... used an alias and defrauded people. Why should he *not* be arrested?

PatCA said...

Are we going to arrest Joe Biden now for his "Osama is dead and GM is alive" slogan?

Are we going to quash the Obama campaign ad...movie "Zero Dark Thirty" or question the filmmakers and the WH aides who dared to help them?

This is a day I am thankful for the alternative media. Yours and Insty's takes on this debacle are brilliant and, sadly, rare.

Unknown said...

Why should he *not* be arrested?

But he wasn't "arrested".

Sigh - so much potential intellect wasted on display . . . .

campy said...

So where will Insty land after Tennessee fires his ass?

PatCA said...

Mike, he was not treated the same as any other parole violator. If all violators were all "interviewed" or arrested L.A. would be emptied out. Only the man Egypt demanded action on was singled out.

Smilin' Jack said...

Instapundit demands the resignation of Barack Obama.

Second the motion. FWIW.

Brent said...

Sadly, there is not a Democrat in the country who wouldn't welcome the censorship and police state tactics under an Obama presidency.

So, the next time someone accuses Democrats of being unpatriotic - look at this post and ask yourself where the outrage from such people is.

Where are the crybabies that claimed Bush "shredded the Constitution" now? - though they could never name one right they had less at the end of Bush's Presidentcy than when it started.



This is happening in America - I never thought I'd see the day. Democrats - you have ruined this country in 4 short years.

But get ready - if Obama were to sneak through again, someday, they will come for you, and a lot sooner than you think.

edutcher said...

If Insta wants to put up a petition, I'll sign it.

The photo isn't as bad as the one of the jack-booted thugs come to drag Elian Gonzalez back to Castro's Cuba (tell me again what a "Centrist" Willie was) while the issue was still in litigation, but it will do.

Bob Ellison said...

Also, check out Intrade's lifetime chart on Obama's relection. Volume is up, way up, in recent days. So is his re-election estimate, at more than 66%.

I smell something.


Why do you think some phony folksy made a big deal of pointing it out. Why does shiloh dredge up a lot of polls that are easily debunked?

Apparently, Axelrod has decreed there was a "bounce" after the convention and that the march of Dictator Zero to re-coronation is now irresistable.

This is the Full Court Alinsky to reverse the Enthusiasm Gap that is so much on the Romster's side.

There are plenty of deep-pocketed idiots who love our Little Zero who can afford to gin up Intrade.

There are also, no doubt, a lot of guys who've been picking the wrong horse for 20 years.

Mike said...

"Mike, he was not treated the same as any other parole violator. If all violators were all "interviewed" or arrested L.A. would be emptied out. Only the man Egypt demanded action on was singled out."

This isn't a parole violation where he turned left on a right light or something. This is violating a conditional release by, basically, doing the same things than landed him in prison. You can read popehat's take from a guy with 18 years experience in the court system. I can't think anyone would ignore such a blatant violation.

He might not have come to the attention of the authorities without this. But now that they now he violated his release, are they supposed to turn a blind eye?

rhhardin said...

A midnight knock is the totalitarian tradition, showing a curious respect.

Only recently have SWAT teams done away with even that.

rubymudpuppy said...

Mike... Go fuck a goat, goatfucker.

Clyde said...

I found the comments at the LA Times article interesting. All of the foreign Muslims commenting said that Nakoula should be punished for his "crime." They don't understand about our First Amendment rights, no matter how much other commenters tried to explain it to them. The concept is completely outside of their frame of reference. Since it would be a crime where they live, they feel it should be a crime everywhere (note "feel", not "think", since thinking is not involved). Regrettably, the Censor-In-Chief seems to feel similarly.

David said...

Mike?

Six cops at his door?

At midnight?

Press tipped off?

At the request of the Federal government?

They they say he was coming in "voluntarily?" He wasn't "arrested," they say. Just a little chat which he really wanted to have.

And by the way the photos of the car make it look a lot like he was in handcuffs. Voluntarily, of course.

damikesc said...

doing a film for profit

Evidence of the "for profit" part is where?

This is fascist bullshit here. You're DEFENDING that, Mike.

Mark O said...

Thanks for the mention.

David said...

Clyde, I think they do understand our first amendment.

They also think there is a higher law, one that they can enforce in our country through violence and intimidation. Or intimidate us into enforcing.

Brian Wohlgemuth said...

When the Middle East went nuts over the Satanic Verses, we as a society stood up and said that speech, no matter how vulgar or controversial is protected and a cornerstone of our free society.

Now, a crappy movie comes out and while the guy sounds like a pretty crappy person, we immediately pick him up and our governments rush to apologize for his actions.

Voltaire is probably shaking his head...

rubymudpuppy said...

That comment made by Mynx is a moron.

Mynx doesn't know what the hell racist is.

Patrick said...

Nice to see the left is not falling in line with the President's failure to uphold the 1st Amendment, among others.

Oh...really? They're buying this?

Rick said...

Our country's foundation, as seen by many, has been demolished by Obama, his followers, and the corrupt media. Obama's actions and words this week demonstrate that he will do anything to be reelected: No constitutional right needs to be honored; no lie is too big. We also have a teasing glimpse of what our once-great country will be like if Obama is reelected.

rubymudpuppy said...

Mynx is The New Yorker's commenter.

Brian Wohlgemuth said...

The ironic thing is there are now going to be thousands of cheap stupid movies making fun of Islam in spite of Obama.

Well, if that crappy movie pissed them off...imagine a whole YouTube section dedicated to blasphemy.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

Hereby, with my honor, I coin "delving" the most important concept.

It is the new.

Ignorance is Bliss said...

What power the critics would have! They could be expert witnesses at our blasphemy trials.

I don't see the problem. I'm sure the critics would be just as professional as the fact-checkers have been during this campaign season. /sarc.

virgil xenophon said...

Remember when Tom DeLay first used the term "jack-booted thugs" to describe the bureaucratic overreach/depredations of the EPA? And how he was considered "over-the-top" and "beyond-the-pale" for doing so by all the "right-thinking people" in the chattering classes? And practically made into a non-person/neanderthal by same?

As Kate @smalldeadanimals would say: "And Tom DeLay is the Crazy One!"

rhhardin said...

Word for the day Die Braunhemden the brownshirts

Baron Zemo said...

Obama is an evil man.

Baron Zemo said...

Obama is an evil man.

virgil xenophon said...

I'm 68. If I were, say, 20 yrs younger, I'd say it might be time to give thought in my day-dreams to re-locating the Duck Blind across the street from 1600 Penn Ave.

Ignorance is Bliss said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Synova said...

"He might not have come to the attention of the authorities without this. But now that they now he violated his release, are they supposed to turn a blind eye?"

Yes, probably. Or at least kept it very very on the down-low.

Because what else might bring any of us to the attention of the authorities? What if we have unpopular opinions or yell out "The King is a Fink!" at a rally? Will we get investigated, since we've been brought to the attention of the King? Perhaps we'll end up with our business shut down because someone claims we imported legal wood improperly, or maybe we'll get audited by the IRS.

Keep your head down, son, keep your head down.

I don't have any outstanding child support payments and no unpaid traffic fines and I don't own a business, so I'm probably pretty safe, though I suppose someone could make trouble for me at school if they tried.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

"If I had excess saliva I would spit it upon you!

I never thought, yelled, or influenced such."

That, to start, begins the "Nearer, My God" Buckley conversation needed.. and always expanding throughout God's green Earth.

phx said...

Rush Limbaugh...Breitbart...Drudge...Instapundit. Not really.

ricpic said...

To stand against Islam is to have a death sentence on ones head. That is why our entire ruling class, both sides of the aisle, is dhimmi. That's why they'll do anything rather than turn and stand up to Islam.

There have been nearly 20,000 jihad attacks since 9/11. Surprised? Why shouldn't you be given the willful denial of what Islam is - Islam is jihad - in the West.

That's what Cairo and Benghazi and our murdered ambassador were, jihad attacks. And it will never end and there is no accommodation to Islam. Until that is internalized and acted upon there will be nothing but more jihad and more dhimmi in our future.

The Crack Emcee said...

PatCA,

This is a day I am thankful for the alternative media. Yours and Insty's takes on this debacle are brilliant and, sadly, rare.

Christ, Ann, you should hold a tit next to the computer (and get Glenn to post his dick) so some of these people can suck on it.

This isn't "brilliant" - it's America 101. What's "rare" is how little the rest of you stand up for it. Tell me:

Is this film "bigotry"? Shouldn't that come first around here?

And are the (completely unproven) calls by Insty and Ann of bigotry for accurate criticisms of Romney and Mormonism part of the American tradition? Is protecting potential American candidates from criticism part of the American tradition?

You guys are so focused on Obama you've lost your collective minds. You'll say anything and do anything, throw anyone under the bus, twist and turn and squish and squirm, but your goal is set in stone:

Sell your fucking souls.

Even in doing the right thing, all you expose is how many of the wrong things you've been up to,...

aritai said...

Hmm. A Coptic made a low budget film, in English? Wonder what grievance they might have given how well they are treated in (all but one of) the middle east countries? Interesting watching the MSM (and Justice Department) turn on a persecuted minority. Wonder who they’ll target next?

Since there’s no chance any of the rioters watched the movie and understood english, someone had to translate it – or why bother translating – just make up your own audio track. Perhaps an AQ affiliate? Or like the cartoons perhaps one of their psyops folks said “why don’t we improve on the meme and use it to make the great satan jump?” “See what happens when we poke here? They roll over and beg. Great fun and all we have to do is publish some blasphemous pictures and words. The immam says it’s ok, the ends justify any means.”

Even more interesting is maybe 1 in 100 of those folks have internet access – when connectivity even at a cyber cafe costs more than a week’s food. Where just downloading pictures over the satellite internet modem that services the typical cafe is painful – video is out of the question. So who are these “community organizers?” How are they inciting the crowds? Could they say anything and be believed? Why are they chanting “we are all Osamas?” Could it be they blame us (esp. given Mr. O takes personal credit) for ending UBL? And that’s the grievance motivating those at these “protests?” That happen to be held on the anniversary of UBL’s greatest triumph?

A pity we don’t have a real press putting lives on the line to get the answers. Or at least doing what they do best – compromising U.S. and other nations’ intelligence collection efforts to get to and publish ground truth. Oh right – since it doesn’t support the meme it’s an even a more tightly held secret than by a government. Yesterday it was JFK’s corruption (buying elections) not just his womanizing (ditto Mr. Clinton and China interference in U.S. elections – with the women being a convenient, perhaps purposeful, distraction), today it’s turning a blind eye to the obvious.

Baron Zemo said...

"Is this film "bigotry"? Shouldn't that come first around here?"

No.

Freedom comes first.

In America you are free to be a bigot.

Otherwise you couldn't post your diatribes against funny underpants.

Matthew Sablan said...

Remember when offensive speech made the country stronger because it showed how true we could be to our values?

Yeah. I liked 2000-2008 a lot.

virgil xenophon said...

Actually, Egypt's Morsi has more intellectual honesty--is more forthright and upfront--has the courage of his convictions--than Obama when he stated that "The Prophet is a Red Line nobody can touch" and urged Obama to enforce Sharia Law in the US., i.e., essentially publicly admitting the absolute basic incompatibility of Islam with Western culture, confirming, essentially, Professor Samuel Huntington's view/thesis in his work "Clash of Civilizations."

But then Morsi didn't really have to say that--we already knew that...at least those of us over the age of 12 and with an IQ marginally into double digits..

aritai said...

I suspect some of the AQ are having quite a giggle at our expense.

Consider: A Coptic made a low budget film, in English? Wonder what grievance they might have given how well they are treated in (all but one of) the middle east countries? Interesting watching the MSM (and Justice Department) turn on a persecuted minority. Wonder who they’ll target next? And even in Ann's comments we see some who think bigotry and blasphemy are criminal offenses.

Since there’s no chance any of the rioters watched the movie and understood english, someone had to translate it – or why bother translating – just make up your own audio track. Perhaps an AQ affiliate? Or like the cartoons perhaps one of their psyops folks said “why don’t we improve on the meme and use it to make the great satan jump?” “See what happens when we poke here? They roll over and beg. Great fun and all we have to do is publish some blasphemous pictures and words. The immam says it’s ok, the ends justify any means.”

Even more interesting is maybe 1 in 100 of those folks have internet access – when connectivity even at a cyber cafe costs more than a week’s food. Where just downloading pictures over the satellite internet modem that services the typical cafe is painful – video is out of the question. So who are these “community organizers?” How are they inciting the crowds? Could they say anything and be believed? Why are they chanting “we are all Osamas?” Could it be they blame us (esp. given Mr. O takes personal credit) for ending UBL? And that’s the grievance motivating those at these “protests?” That happen to be held on the anniversary of UBL’s greatest triumph?

A pity we don’t have a real press putting lives on the line to get the answers. Or at least doing what they do best – compromising U.S. and other nations’ intelligence collection efforts to get to and publish ground truth. Oh right – since it doesn’t support the meme it’s an even a more tightly held secret than by a government. Yesterday it was JFK’s corruption (buying elections) not just his womanizing (ditto Mr. Clinton and China interference in U.S. elections – with the women being a convenient, perhaps purposeful, distraction), today it’s turning a blind eye to the obvious.

Mr. O's senior staff should resign if he will not. Brownshirts indeed. Shades of Mr. Nixon firing his AG.

roesch/voltaire said...

It does seem the film maker is a special case; he had violated his probation, although some speculate he may be an informer given how he slipped out of the meth bust, and has called attention to himself with this film. HIs visit and quesioning reminds me of the day when the cops would gather many of us at four in the morning, myself included, who protested the Vietnam war-- our offense unpaid parking ticket or some other small crime.That said he has a right to make his soft-core porn, or poorly constructed "political" film in our culture. I also believe the response in the Middle East is misplaced and displaced; I never see the protest against the persecution of Sufis, or the murder committed in Shia shrines for example, but then the West is agreed upon evil force. But how to you stand up against that, how many wars do you want to start with one billion folks spread through how many countries?

aritai said...

(please delete earlier dups, some browser - or fool at the keyboard - bug created them)

4cf6abb8-4e32-11e0-a716-000bcdcb471e said...

How do you people suck the dick of Jesus Fucking Christ when you have your heads so far up his bleeding asshole?

Tyrone Slothrop said...

rhhardin said...

Word for the day Die Braunhemden the brownshirts



Let's call them what they really are. Die Sturmabteilung-- storm troopers.

NotquiteunBuckley said...

I have never understood the extent of my mental issues, and now I am even more scared.

Why didn't Bette Davis say this?

Patrick said...

But how to you stand up against that, how many wars do you want to start with one billion folks spread through how many countries?

I'd just be happy if the President would stand up for the 1st Amendment. Let's not pretend this "film maker" has a right to insult or embarrass the President. He did, and was brought in. I know you don't honestly believe he was brought in for any other reason. And let's not forget that the DOJ also opened an investigation.

This is Obama ignoring the first amendment. Crickets from the left. Actually, your comment was about the most animated one from the left, so good on you.

Chef Mojo said...

I swear, I get sick of everyone who goes on about this "crappy little film," or "crappy little filmmaker."

Because I'm trying to find that part of the 1st Amendment that goes on about "quality of expression?"

Someone want to help me out here?

If the quality of expression of one's rights were relevant, just about every moron using a marker and poster board at a protest march should be tossed in the slammer.

The quality of one's expression in irrelevant.

Shouting Thomas said...

I disagree that the video is entirely crud. There's something oddly appealing about the crudeness of it.

It's funny.

Almost Ali said...

It's time to repeat myself, because resignation is certainly not the answer, only an excuse to write stuff.

_______________________________

9/14: At this point I think it's important to reiterate the importance of impeaching President Obama before he's run out of office by the voters.

But to do this, I would also hope that the reasons to reiterate have finally dawned on the resident constitutional scholar, or any other wandering constitutional scholar [see: Glenn Reynolds] who might deign to explain the legal implications.

Preferably before the world implodes from the pandemic of ignorance.-- http://althouse.blogspot.com/2012/09/at-lily-pad-cafe.html?showComment=1347653656290#c7163985501692136411

Synova said...

"But how to you stand up against that, how many wars do you want to start with one billion folks spread through how many countries?"

I suppose that's what the President's job is, to figure that out.

The rest of us, though, the rest of us can be that Army of Davids and do our small bits to stick it in the eye of darkness.

Cedarford said...

Stats have it that 45% of prison parolees are returned to prison for parole violations.
In California, they form 34% of new jail admissions.
Most go back in for repeating the very sort of crime that landed them in jail in the 1st place.

Instapundit and others (many here) have their heads up their asses.
This criminal jerk is no more a 1st Amendment martyr than Julian Assange or Bradley Manning are.

Sure, the Islamists are itching for any excuse...but America is faring about as bad as the WWI Germans did in handing the enemy propaganda weapon after weapon.

The Germans were just clumsy and stupid and had nothing close to the propaganda skills of the Brits and French. And their idiots were right at the top in official capacities green-lighting nun executions, Belgian atrocities, backing the Austro-Hungarians slaughtering villagers in the Balkans, the Zimmerman wires.

America is cursed with a mass media that is sure to spotlight the stupidest people doing stupid things outside official American gov't control. Typically resulting in hundreds to thousands of casualties each time we gift the enemy with some choice propaganda they can use against us.

(See Abu Ghraib, the Freedom Loving Free Press amping waterboarding of 3 mass murdering ISlamoids into something like the Death Camps of WWII. )

AprilApple said...

Obama's message to radical Islamists: "you win".

Tyrone Slothrop said...

roesch/voltaire said...

But how to you stand up against that, how many wars do you want to start with one billion folks spread through how many countries?



When the war comes, we won't be the ones who started it, and we will be fighting for the life of our culture. I still believe that the ummah will regret starting this war, and there won't be a billion of them any more, or ever again.

AprilApple said...

more from insty:
“Just after midnight Saturday morning, authorities descended on the Cerritos home of the man believed to be the filmmaker behind the anti-Muslim movie that has sparked protests and rioting in the Muslim world.”

When taking office, the President does not swear to create jobs. He does not swear to “grow the economy.” He does not swear to institute “fairness.” The only oath the President takes is this one:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

Sammy said...

Let's be clear about this ....THE AMERICAN PRESS..... can't say that Obama's polices have been failures, they can't say he was a sleep at the switch , both by not being more active and engaged in the outcome of the Arab Spring, he supported eliminating Gadffi and Mubarak, then was M.I.A... And because all the CIA does is use drones to spy and kill, they have no human intelligence, so why would they know that Al Qeada re engaged in all these countries, would use 911 and a year after the death of Bin Laden to incite the Isamic world especially in nations that are weak and in transition and that killing an American Amassador would embolden them.

In Cario, they spray paintied on the American Embassy and chanted " Obama there are a million Osama's" , doesn't seem they were to inflamed about a Utube video.

the press can't go after Obama or Hillary for not securing the protection of our diplomats and the Ambassador in a nation reaming with Al Qeada, on the anniversary of 911 after the democrats did a whole convention bragging about killing Bin Laden.

First they went after Romney, to make sure he doesn't benefit in the polls from the failures of the Obama adminstration, now they have joined the Obama admin. in going after this poor person for a silly utube video, to deflect the public from asking why after almost 4 years of the " foreign policy President " .... Ah Obama was going to run as that ... after all the conciliatory gestures , snubbing Israel , placing blame on America for the grievances Muslims felt and leading from behind, is the United States more hated today in Isamic world then when the evil George Bush was President


Bob said...

Now we're really missing Christopher Hitchens, and Andrew Breitbart, also. I'd also like to know Salman Rushdie's take on this. Rushdie would be conflicted between his love of Obama and the fatwa that was put upon him for a very similar "offense."

madAsHell said...

...but he professed the constitution at the University of Chicago!!

All kidding aside, he's just a race-baiting hustler.

virgil xenophon said...

@AprilApple
Yes, the basic legitimacy of a government is no small matter...might be time to review that Obama stolen Connecticut SS# thingee he uses once more...I'm SURE he has a good explanation..

William said...

In a recent issue of the New Yorker, Salman Rushdie wrote about his experience as the first fatwa victim. Rushdie took pains to explain how his book wasn't really, truly anti-Islamic and that it was all a big misunderstanding. Everyone wants to live forever and I don't blame him for that. However, I can't help but think that this filmmaker demonstrated a great deal more courage and honesty than Rushdie.....Why shouldn't Rushdie be openly and contemptuously anti-Muslim? They had thousands of people screaming for his head and a revered leader who put a price on that head. I would think these activities deserve a tad more vituperation than that which he offered against Margaret Thatcher.....Rushdie's work apparently has some ascetic merit, and this fimmaker has none. The Muslims do no discriminate on the basis of ascetic merit, and neither should we.

Synova said...

Mike, earlier, asked if the possible parole violations or whatever should be ignored, then. I gave part of an answer why. Someone wrote to Reynolds and gave a better answer why.

"UPDATE: Reader J.M. Hanes writes: “(...) Could any visual more effectively reinforce the Arab street’s belief that the U.S. government can, in fact, punish blasphemers if it so chooses?

THAT is why, if it seemed necessary not to overlook possible parole violations that it should have been done on the down-low. But no one from the government, NO ONE, should have even been looking for this guy. But they did, and... luckily?.. he seems to have something that he can be "got" for.

How can our government NOW claim that it doesn't have the power to punish the blasphemous if it chooses? It just proved differently to the whole world.

Should the parole violations be ignored? Anyone with at *least* the common sense and feeling for consequences as J. M. Hanes, and there are any number of people in our government, including the PRESIDENT, where that is their JOB, would have known not to look in the first place.

Synova said...

Not ascetic, aesthetic.

The spell checker got you.

phx said...

How can our government NOW claim that it doesn't have the power to punish the blasphemous if it chooses? It just proved differently to the whole world.

Synova, I personally think they're going to believe what they want to believe anyway, regardless of what we do. It's very difficult to walk around keeping the kids gloves on for fear. I'm trusting Obama to choose where to draw the line for now, and IMO I think he's doing an okay job. Maybe better.

ALH said...

This is what 75% of voters in our country see for headlines (courtesy of NBC , but pick any random msm outlet):

"Feds quiz anti-Islam filmmaker"

"Chicago teachers union rallies to wrap up labor deal"


Yes , the Feds are just like Alex F'in Trebek and teachers unions are the lovable comeback kids! Everything is great, hakuna matada.

phx said...

We have to walk a line between both being ourselves and who we are, and explaining who we are out of respect for others and their opinions.

It should be obvious I don't mean respect for others who have an implacable hate or merely wish us ill.

Christopher said...

phx,

Obama's admin. just prompted local law enforcement to take a man in for questioning for having the temerity to make a film critical of Islam.

Where exactly is this line you're supposedly fine with?

wef said...

How old is this crack person?

yashu said...

I personally think they're going to believe what they want to believe anyway, regardless of what we do. It's very difficult to walk around keeping the kids gloves on for fear. I'm trusting Obama to choose where to draw the line for now, and IMO I think he's doing an okay job.

W T F. You don't see the glaring contradiction between part 1 and 2 of your statement?

The government is displaying for all the world to see its (apparent) power to constrain, in some way, a private citizen responsible for.. that. In order to appease the violence. I mean, seriously, did you watch that video? That's nothing compared to any given episode of South Park!

This is nothing less than negotiating with terrorists. Worse, because we're negotiating with the effing First Amendment. It's unconscionable.

Lem said...

I know this is very difficult... strike that... If it was difficult Obama wouldn't try it...

Imagine Bush was still president... and there was a midnight knock at the door.

Chef Mojo said...

@phx:

We have to walk a line between both being ourselves and who we are, and explaining who we are out of respect for others and their opinions.

Bullshit. Show me where that distinction is in the 1st Amendment.

Seriously. I'll wait for what is surely a masterful explanation.

And you're wrong about Obama. He's doing it wrong on so many levels here it bogles the mind.

Synova said...

"Synova, I personally think they're going to believe what they want to believe anyway, regardless of what we do. It's very difficult to walk around keeping the kids gloves on for fear. I'm trusting Obama to choose where to draw the line for now, and IMO I think he's doing an okay job. Maybe better."

It's true that a great many of us have been trying to point out from before Obama was even elected that Islamic extremists aren't going to LIKE us, no matter what they do.

But that doesn't mean, since they're going to think what they think no matter what we do, that Obama should let anyone know who is paying attention that the US will jump when they say jump and we can arrest someone they want arrested and we will treat Islam differently than false religions like Christianity or Judaism.

And it doesn't mean that he ought to be most worried about placating those that can not be placated while entirely failing to defend, at home, the rights guaranteed by our Constitution.

phx said...

Obama's admin. just prompted local law enforcement to take a man in for questioning for having the temerity to make a film critical of Islam.

Truthfully I don't know the details of this, I'm not following it that closely (I'm pretty much like millions and millions of Americans that way I think). But the guy sounds pretty shady. I have no idea how much "Obama's admin." is actually behind this beyond the head of the FBI. It sounds likely it was his call, but if there are other details I'm not aware of, I'll allow myself to be corrected and scorned.
This doesn't alarm me right now, I don't feel like my rights are threatened by Obama so much as by crazy people in the ME.

AprilApple said...

"The Movie" isn't the culprit anyway. "The Movie" is the Obama administration's scapegoat.

AL-Qaeda said the deadly attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya was in revenge for the killing of the network's number two Sheikh Abu Yahya al-Libi, SITE Intelligence Group reported.

phx said...

I mean, seriously, did you watch that video?

No, I didn't see the video. If you want to ignore me or insult me because of that, feel free. I won't dispute it.

I'm gonna take your statement "this is nothing less than negotiating with terrorists" as just ridiculous hyperbole, so I don't necessarily have to get all excited that you may be right. The chances of that, just based on the way you express yourself, seem real remote to me.

Synova said...

That's okay, phx. I'm sure you'll be careful not to do anything "shady" or express unpopular opinions to publicly.

Heck, I use a pseudonym, too.

phx said...

Seriously. I'll wait for what is surely a masterful explanation.

Okay I'm getting that ready for you, hang tight.

EMD said...

If Evelyn Beatrice Hall were alive she'd call her office.

Maguro said...

Synova, I personally think they're going to believe what they want to believe anyway, regardless of what we do. It's very difficult to walk around keeping the kids gloves on for fear. I'm trusting Obama to choose where to draw the line for now, and IMO I think he's doing an okay job. Maybe better.

Ah, so you are OK with Obama deciding what speech is permissible on a case by case basis, presumably because he's such a brilliant, thoughtful philosopher-king.

But what happens if the next guy isn't so awesome? Does the First Amendment automatically go back into effect then?

yashu said...

This doesn't alarm me right now, I don't feel like my rights are threatened by Obama so much as by crazy people in the ME.

You are willfully ignoring the obvious connection between the Obama admin's actions and their effects/ consequences/ implications among the "crazy people in the ME." And the effects/ consequences/ implications/ power of those "crazy people" upon the actions of the Obama admin.

Chef Mojo said...

@ phx

But the guy sounds pretty shady.

Yeah? So was Robert Mapplethorpe. What's your point? what does that have to do with anything being discussed here? Seriously: What the fuck does that have to do with the 1st Amendment?

phx said...

That's okay, phx. I'm sure you'll be careful not to do anything "shady" or express unpopular opinions to publicly.


Synova, I feel just like Bob Dylan: any moment I'm expecting all hell to break loose.

phx said...

You are willfully ignoring the obvious connection between the Obama admin's actions and their effects/ consequences/ implications among the "crazy people in the ME."

Yeah, I'm not so certain about the connections you make, and how they seem so obvious to you. You're the one who says Obama's negotiating with the terrorists.

Shouting Thomas said...

More often than not, the people who explode through the lies meant to deceive us are rather objectionable people.

Lem said...

I just hope when the congress amends the first amendment they make clear if making a "bad movie" will lead to a penalty or a tax...

I believe it would be very traumatic to put the country through that kind of nail biting cliffhanger again...
For months we didn't know how Obamacare would turn out.

I just dont want to go through that again.

phx said...

@Chef Mojo I'm still working on my response to you, hang on.

yashu said...

If you want to ignore me or insult me because of that, feel free.

Huh? You're strawmanning and shadowboxing someone who's like, right in front of you directly addressing you right now?

Mark said...

Apologist: This isn't a parole violation where he turned left on a right light or something. This is violating a conditional release by, basically, doing the same things than landed him in prison.

Nor was this how really serious parole violations are normally handled. This was a photo op with a message.

If the guy hadn't been on parole some other pretext would have been cooked up.

Welcome to Obama's America.

AprilApple said...

PHX please re-read this. Or, perhaps, read it for the first time. Let it sink in.

"I love the continued focus on this idiot as if he has ANYTHING to answer to. He is an American citizen, therefore he has the right to say much worse about "the prophet" Muhammad, "the son of god" Jesus Christ and any other "god" or "prohpet" that he wants to. The American media, predictably, is acting as if this man has something to answer for (or answer to). Good video or not, effective video or not, offensive video or not, untruthful video or not, this man has NOTHING to answer for. Anyone who claims otherwise is an enemy of America, because they are an enemy of the First Amendment (which is what makes America America). This man may have to face civil action from the actors or other participants in the film, but that is a side matter. The film in and of itself is not anything he owes anyone an explanation for."

phx said...

@yashu I'm just being up front about it. I'm not saying I can't be wrong.

BTW, everybody's opinions on that matter were worthless to me, I didn't mean just yours. I meant to have an opinion at that very moment was fine, but all opinions of anyone at Althouse about what was going on at the embassies in Libya or the situation in Egypt was hopelessly uninformed, based on incomplete and raw reporting.

Harold said...

Apologize to Mohammed at http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.ca/2012/09/the-apologize-to-mohammed-contest.html

Suggetion- enter as anonymous, unless you like being visited in teh middle of the night by reprersentatives of the state who just want to chat with you....

phx said...

AprilApple: I never read that before, I don't know who said that. It sounds okay to me. Sounds like the guy has a couple of things to answer for.

AprilApple said...

Mark said...
Nor was this how really serious parole violations are normally handled. This was a photo op with a message.

If the guy hadn't been on parole some other pretext would have been cooked up.


This was a photo op with a message. Period.

Ralph L said...

Aritai, you can delete your own posts by clicking on the little trash can next to them on the blogger commenting page.

I suppose the muslims will think our government left him off easy on bank fraud so he could make his movie.

EMD said...

Does the film have anything to do with the parole violation?

If so, the film was posted originally in June. That was the time to question him.

yashu said...

phx, I believe you're a reasonable person largely engaged in good faith political argument (in contrast to others on this blog).

But IMO you're pro-Obama partisanship has blinded you to the grave implications (re freedom of speech) of what's going on right now.

The Crack Emcee said...

Wow, it's amazing:

Instapundit does a post and here it is - and I just checked Hot Air and there it is, too! Isn't that amazing?

But do a post where you nail Instapundit - have him dead-to-rights and in as real a way as your own breath - and neither Althouse or Hot Air notices!

It's amazing I tell you:

That I'm the one accused of running a cult,...

AprilApple said...

PHX - Re-read ANN's Entire POST above. Maybe the context will help you understand the seriousness of what is going on.

"But the guy sounds pretty shady" - really? really? That's all you can surmise? Wow. You are the MSM's target audience.

b96bd1c8-ffa3-11e1-9d3a-000bcdca4d7a said...

First of all, Mike, there is ZERO evidence of any parole violation. Lying to actors and not telling them your real name is NOT a crime of any kind and not a probation violation.

The Federal Government brought this man in because they didn't like his film.

Your defense of this is very sad. Freedom is a sacred and incredibly valuable. You are the type of person who is cheered while Jews were rounded up by the Nazis because the Nazis said they violated the law.

You need to take a good hard look at yourself. You are an agent of Tyranny and as such, much more despicable than a guy who lied to some actors to get them to make the film that he wanted to make. (this happens all the time and is not a crime in a free society)

Mark B said...

MLK the day before he was assassinated in Memphis, to America, "be true to what you said on paper." It was in his "I have been to the mountain top" speech. He talked about "basic first amendment priviledges [sic]." I think this is a stab in the heart to the modern left, and should be shouted from the mountain tops. MLK had some leftish views himself, but here, and it was at the center of his appeal, he identifies with the founders in a way that damns Obama's failure to support and defend the constitution. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oehry1JC9Rk&feature=share

phx said...

Suggetion- enter as anonymous, unless you like being visited in teh middle of the night by reprersentatives of the state who just want to chat with you....

Yeah, you know they (representatives of the state) did a similar thing to me once. They pounded on our door at like three in the morning, real ferocious pounding. Didn't announce who they were. It was the cops. They found a car of mine (that I sold) abandoned on a city street. They kept us (three of us were there) tied up (not literally) for hours.

Shit from bad cops happens sometimes. Maybe the movie maker guy is black. That would explain a lot I suppose. "Making an inflammatory movie while being black."

You guys get real carried away in your nightmare scenarios sometimes. I'm convinced it's because in some cases you want your nightmare fantasies to be true.

I don't think most Americans want to join those of you who are like that.

A. Shmendrik said...

I have to admit that I liked "Mr. Saturday Night". I was the one.

phx said...

But IMO you're pro-Obama partisanship has blinded you to the grave implications (re freedom of speech) of what's going on right now.

I can respect that argument. I'm not threatened by that.

EMD said...

You guys get real carried away in your nightmare scenarios sometimes. I'm convinced it's because in some cases you want your nightmare fantasies to be true.

A swing and a miss!





shiloh said...

Ten Steps To Close Down an Open Society

er 2001 to 2009 under Cheney/Bush


1 Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy

2 Create a gulag

3 Develop a thug caste

4 Set up an internal surveillance system

5 Harass citizens' groups

6 Engage in arbitrary detention and release

7 Target key individuals

8 Control the press

9 Dissent equals treason

hmm, you're either w/us or against us!

10 Suspend the rule of law

>

So Althouse, were you just as vocal about liberty and freedom during the Bush 43 years? Rhetorical

>

btw, Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus and is considered the #1 president of all-time by historians.

>

One would think Althouse is trying to rile up her flock to take immediate action to defend the U.S. Constitution, except her con brigade are all shut-ins who never get off their couch!

What's that smell coming from con political sites and the Romney campaign ?!?

Desperation!

I yield back the balance of my time to that con crowd pleaser, Althouse ...

phx said...

A swing and a miss!

So you say.

yashu said...

Yeah, you know they (representatives of the state) did a similar thing to me once.

Was your case intentionally broadcast as an example and message for all the world (in the midst of an international crisis) to see and react to?

jelink said...

Just wait until outraged Muslim fanatics start holding up placards saying, "Send us the head of Obama supporter and anti-Muslim Bill Maher".

We'll see what Holder does then.

Free clue: Nothing.

p.s. to fascist campy: Reynolds has tenure, AND he has the First Amendment protection YOU would deny him. Frack you!

phx said...

Was your case intentionally broadcast as an example and message for all the world (in the midst of an international crisis) to see and react to?

I suppose that was some sort of collusion between Obama, the FBI, the lame stream media, and probably the terrorists themselves.

Tough break for the guy. How the hell will he ever get out of this one?

Keep me posted. Especially if there's an internet defense fund. Like for that bullied bus monitor. The two of them can retire together on the sympathies of all us internets people.

Michael said...

Shiloh. Naomi Wolf? Hahaha. Lol lol lol har lol. Nuf said harhahahahaha lol. Gitmo. Har. Lol.

Lem said...

When everything appears lost, go back to the beginning...

Blame Bush.

jr565 said...

Crack wrote:
Is this film "bigotry"? Shouldn't that come first around here?

And are the (completely unproven) calls by Insty and Ann of bigotry for accurate criticisms of Romney and Mormonism part of the American tradition? Is protecting potential American candidates from criticism part of the American tradition?

I never said you should protect Romney from all criticism. I said you should criticize him for what he's not not because you have a warped view of Mormonism. And yes your characterization of Mormonism is bigoted. doesn't mean you don't get some details right, but it's a warped hatred that has twisted you Crack.
Amd again, his film could very well be bigotry, that doesn't mean he can't make it. Noone has denied YOU the right to spew endless amounts of Mormon bigotry.
THe issue is even if what the filmmaker say is bigootry and even if what you say is bigotry (IT IS ALL PROOF NEEDED IS IN YOUR ENDLESS POSTS BIGOT)the govt shouldnt step in and deny you the right to speak because they don't want to rile up crazy lunatics who threaten to kill you for saying so.

What should have been articulated is, we recognize that the film may be bigoted but we have the right to freedom of expression so even if we disagree with the sentiment we can't allow you to use it as an excuse to shut people up. THere is absolutley no justification for anyone to attack our embassies, based on the rantings of a crazy person.

JSF said...

When will Shiloh remember that President Obama and his DOJ arrested this man for making an Anti-islamic film?

It was Obama's DOJ that knocked on the door at midnight.

C'mon Siloh, show that you are a human being for once and tell me you are angry what President Obama has just done.

If not, STFU. It's not 2000 - 08 anymore.

JSF said...

When will Shiloh remember that President Obama and his DOJ arrested this man for making an Anti-islamic film?

It was Obama's DOJ that knocked on the door at midnight.

C'mon Siloh, show that you are a human being for once and tell me you are angry what President Obama has just done.

If not, STFU. It's not 2000 - 08 anymore.

phx said...

I really give a shit what happens to this guy who apparently endangered the lives of his actors that he probably paid minimum wage to. You know what, whatever he did I have a hard time working up a "I give a shit" utterance.

If you guys want to go put on a t-shirt though, or get your ass out there for Romney your guy, I'll shake your hand.

Dante said...

Crack Sez:

Is this film "bigotry"? Shouldn't that come first around here?

I'm not following. Private citizens bashing you for, what appears in their minds to be, bigotry, as opposed to the United States Government undermining Freedom of Speech?

Frankly, I would think the excess of PCism by "bringing in the guy for questioning" would have you up in arms over the cultishness of the Obamao.

I think you have some really good points (I think you mentioned Ann Romney was selling some of those health medicines, AKA snake oil), and I agree. But somehow selling supplements that don't do any damage isn't as bad on the cultishness scale as what Obama is doing to trashing the first amendment at the alter of multiculturalism and PCism.

yashu said...

OMFG, phx, are you that disingenuous? It's not about sympathizing with this particular guy, who for all I know might be a real sleazebag. So? It's not about him (though it *is* about him as an individual American citizen exercising his right to free speech); it's about what his example (and the Obama admin's actions with respect to him, taking and broadcasting him to the world as an example) signifies and portends for any guy, you, me, anyone, all of us.

Lem said...

Thought experiment...

If you had to be either of these two men... you could not wiggle out of it... you have to pick one.

Who would you rather be?

Child killer Zimmerman?

or

Horrendous movie maker... whatever his name is..!?!

jr565 said...

Shiloh, your list is quaint at all, but really if Bush and co. implemented such a police state and controlled the press so well, why was there SOOOOOOO MUCH speaking truth to power. Every day, every allegation. And no lefty was locked up for speaking that truth to power. All the detaining was based on supposed involvement in terorrism.
All the Michael Moore's and hollywood types still were able to speak their minds and are stil here now under the Obama adminstration going along with the charade and not speaking truth to power anymore.
In other words, shiloh, is there anyone on this board as full of crap as you?

Allen Edwards said...

phx said:
AprilApple: I never read that before, I don't know who said that.

Really, phx? You NEVER read that before? It's part of the post Ann wrote to which you are responding.

Schmuck.

jr565 said...

Dante wrote:
But somehow selling supplements that don't do any damage isn't as bad on the cultishness scale as what Obama is doing to trashing the first amendment at the alter of multiculturalism and PCism.

YOu'll quickly realize that with Crack, there is no cultishness scale. It starts and ends at 10.

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

Clearly it's time for the Rs to (again) impeach the D POTUS.

Please, please hurry! Don't wait until Monday, the Rs in the House must start impeachment now!!1!11!!!!

Also, Romney must go on record as "pro-bho-impeachment." If he is not on-board he is a a 100% collaborator in this crime against America--you're w/ us, or you're against us.

JSF said...

@jr565,

Siloh is not a human being. he is willing to sacrifice lives, such as Our Ambassadors Overseas and our First Amendment Rights to have Democrats win.

He is not a human being, but a Brownshirt.

deborah said...

"But do a post where you nail Instapundit - have him dead-to-rights and in as real a way as your own breath - and neither Althouse or Hot Air notices!"

Freedom of association, just like MSM and Journolisters. You are an outlier and not part of their groove. It's called life, and their is no law that journalism has to be fair and balanced.

shiloh said...

Wall Street Journal ~ was interviewed by federal probation officers at a Los Angeles sheriff's station but wasn't arrested or detained, authorities said early Saturday.

take care, blessings

JSF said...

Run away! Run away Shiloh!

JSF said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
phx said...

Calm down yashu, my opinion doesn't make a lick of difference to anyone in the world. Certainly not anybody who can influence anybody else...don't have a coronary over any of my worthless opinions.

it's about what his example (and the Obama admin's actions with respect to him, taking and broadcasting him to the world as an example) signifies and portends for any guy, you, me, anyone, all of us.

I'm only responsible for what it signifies to me, and right now it doesn't signify anything much, certainly it doesn't say to me "Obama's negotiating with terrorists" as it does for you.

Unless you want to walk that one back? Be all right with me. I'll respect it.


pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

Is Althouse pro-impeachment?

If not, she is a trader to America.

Likewise for every single con who is commenting here.

"You're w/ us, or you're against us."

phx said...

Really, phx? You NEVER read that before? It's part of the post Ann wrote to which you are responding.

Schmuck.


I could just as easily say you're the schmuck...for reading what Althouse says.

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

or traitor

Lem said...

Its depends on what the definition of arrest is... If it means there is no arrest, that was a completely true statement.

phx said...

it's about what his example signifies and portends for any guy, you, me, anyone, all of us.

That's metaphysically absurd. How can I know what you hear, man?
- Firesign Theatre

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

Impeach BHO NOW!!

Michael said...

Shiloh. Lol. Har. Buh bye. Lol. Nuf said.

Lem said...

Its a question of who do you believe?

The LA Times... or my lying eyes.

yashu said...

Unless you want to walk that one back?

Actually, I don't.

Islamic "protesters" have stormed embassies and murdered Americans on the pretext-- at least according to the Obama admin's tweets, this was the pretext-- of a little obscure youtube video, no more outrageous than any given episode of South Park.

The official Obama admin response involved forcefully denouncing that video (as disgusting and reprehensible), and singling out the individual responsible as identifiable and locatable. And demonstrating to the world (who largely have a dim confused notion of the First Amendment) that the American government has at least the power to detain that individual. (And to request Google to take the video down.)

That sounds like "negotiating" to me.

PatCA said...

No, the issue is not bigotry, Crack. No one approves of the content of this movie, just of his right to make it without fear of being killed or arrested because of his threat to a certain politician's re-election.

And Mike, his parole violations were discovered after the DOJ investigated him. It's not like he was awol. In fact, there's talk he's an informant. He got a lesser sentence for cooperating with the FBI!

The radicals have announced they killed the ambassador for revenge, not over a movie. The crowds are shouting "Obama, We are Osama" all over the world.

Let's see if the prez and VP stop the "Osama is Dead and GM is Alive" slogan, and then we will know what they really believe.

shiloh said...

Damn Althouse, a good portion of your flock truly are trained seals!

pbAndjFellowRepublican said...

Romney all Rs and all cons commenting here MUST agree w/ the InstaHouse POV.

"You're w/ us, or you're against us."

Lem said...

Has anybody noticed what appears to be a hanging noose in that arrest picture?

Surreal.

JSF said...

Shiloh,

Wake up! It's not 2000 - 08 anymore!

When are you going to hold President Obama to the same standard you held Bush? NEVER!

You are a great Brownshirt.

yashu said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Shouting Thomas said...

I agree with the content of the movie. It's quite funny, even if it is very clumsy and poorly made.

The intent is in no way different than Monty Python's intent in making The Life of Brian.

yashu said...

As far as I can tell, as usual, all the Althouse "cons" are speaking and arguing as individuals, to individuals.

As usual, it's the usual suspects who evade direct argument, don't engage the substance of the issue at hand, and instead toss off ad hom insulting generalizations about "con lemmings" etc.

The Crack Emcee said...

shiloh,

Damn Althouse, a good portion of your flock truly are trained seals!

Now you stop that:

Like Mormons and Islamists, there's a HUGE DIFFERENCE between trained seals and lapdogs!

Hey, guys, did I tell HIM or what?

yashu said...

F U, Crack.

shiloh said...

"Hey, guys, did I tell HIM or what?"

Crack lol ¿QuĂ© pasa?

Lem said...

I agree with the content of the movie.

I cant find it..

Could you send me a link via my email?

Dont use the blog... dont want to blaspheme against Shiloh;)

AllieOop said...

Oy, I think we have consensus between Crack and Shiloh, we do live in strange times.

I'm with PB&J, impeach Obama! Now!

Crappy movie guy is a hero to the right! Freedom of his speech is worth the 6 dead bodies, at the embassies and Camp Leatherneck!! Never mind that he may be in on a plot to incite the Islamic nuts? Nah, he's a fucking hero. Right.

Shouting Thomas said...

The 13 minute trailer is easily located by searching YouTube for Mohammed video.

It's funny. The characters never quite set foot on the ground because they're quite clumsily filmed against a blue screen so that backgrounds can be artificially inserted behind them.

I laughed my ass off over the video, and I think that the attack is just about precisely what Islam deserves.

Sammy said...

Forget the free-speech arguments. In this case, as Secretary Clinton and General Dempsey well know, the film has even less to do with anything than did the Danish cartoons or the schoolteacher’s teddy bear or any of the other innumerable grievances of Islam. The 400-strong assault force in Benghazi showed up with RPGs and mortars: That’s not a spontaneous movie protest; that’s an act of war, and better planned and executed than the dying superpower’s response to it. Secretary Clinton and General Dempsey are, to put it mildly, misleading the American people when they suggest otherwise.

One can understand why they might do this, given the fiasco in Libya. The men who organized this attack knew the ambassador would be at the consulate in Benghazi rather than at the embassy in Tripoli. How did that happen? They knew when he had been moved from the consulate to a “safe house,” and switched their attentions accordingly. How did that happen? The United States government lost track of its ambassador for ten hours. How did that happen? Perhaps, when they’ve investigated Mitt Romney’s press release for another three or four weeks, the court eunuchs of the American media might like to look into some of these fascinating questions, instead of leaving the only interesting reporting on an American story to the foreign press.

Sammy said...


For whatever reason, Secretary Clinton chose to double down on misleading the American people. “Libyans carried Chris’s body to the hospital,” said Mrs. Clinton. That’s one way of putting it. The photographs at the Arab TV network al-Mayadeen show Chris Stevens’s body being dragged through the streets, while the locals take souvenir photographs on their cell phones. A man in a red striped shirt photographs the dead-eyed ambassador from above; another immediately behind his head moves the splayed arm and holds his cell-phone camera an inch from the ambassador’s nose. Some years ago, I had occasion to assist in moving the body of a dead man: We did not stop to take photographs en route. Even allowing for cultural differences, this looks less like “carrying Chris’s body to the hospital” and more like barbarians gleefully feasting on the spoils of savagery.

Shouting Thomas said...

Allie, I'm going to tell you as quietly and soberly as I can that this is the most horrifying assault on the rights of an citizen by a president in my lifetime.

If this is allowed to stand, that is if Obama succeeds in forcing this man to take down this video, then he will have enforced an anti-blasphemy law for Islam in the U.S.

Allie, you are much too smart to fail to see the danger in this.

Sammy said...

"When taking office, the President does not swear to create jobs. He does not swear to “grow the economy.” He does not swear to institute “fairness.” The only oath the President takes is this one:


" I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States".




Frogwatch said...

It is happening, our govt turning against the concepts on which it was founded. With Chris Matthews saying that it is racist to run against Obama and so-called "hate speech" being effectively illegal, any criticism of Obama will be interpreted as hate speech and be illegal.
They truly are suppressing freedom of speech. We can assume the worst about the coming election.

Sheridan said...

Many of the commenters here seem to have directed their ire about the current situation against phx. People are arguing with him seemingly with the hope that they will either convert him to their point of view or at least convince him to accept some parts of their arguments. But phx has been consistent.

For myself, I believe him when he says:

"I'm only responsible for what it signifies to me, and right now it doesn't signify anything much, certainly it doesn't say to me "Obama's negotiating with terrorists" as it does for you."

In fact, I would argue that phx represents a majority opinion especially of those voters who actively support Obama.

What I really want to know is if the majority of "independent" voters also think the same as phx.

Shouting Thomas said...

Allie, this is an issue that transcends partisanship.

JSF said...

I'm still waiting for Shiloh to declare this "Midnight Knock" as bad as anything the Bush Admin (2000 - 08, where Shiloh has not left) did.

Here's a hint: Shiloh can't because he wants to be one of the Democrat's Brownshirt enforcing Thoughtcrime.

Frogwatch said...

It is happening, our govt turning against the concepts on which it was founded. With Chris Matthews saying that it is racist to run against Obama and so-called "hate speech" being effectively illegal, any criticism of Obama will be interpreted as hate speech and be illegal.
They truly are suppressing freedom of speech. We can assume the worst about the coming election.

Shouting Thomas said...

Frogwatch, I have to agree with you.

The continuing attempts to define all disagreement with Obama as racism is becoming increasingly dangerous.

I will not vote for a candidate who is immune from criticism. If Obama is immune from criticism because he is black, then he shouldn't be president.

yashu said...

Freedom of his speech is worth the 6 dead bodies, at the embassies and Camp Leatherneck!!

Completely clueless. Sigh.

The Crack Emcee said...

Dante,

I'm not following. Private citizens bashing you for, what appears in their minds to be, bigotry, as opposed to the United States Government undermining Freedom of Speech?

Why - without evidence - should "what appears in their minds" be valid? Oh yeah - because they're a clique with a massive readership pushing a party line who - without evidence - make it so.

And why is that? Because the rest of these situational patriots don't give a damn about all this crazy "America" stuff unless they smell Obama's blood.

They're as crooked as a university claiming to be "fair" to conservative thought - hey, it's not illegal, right?



Frankly, I would think the excess of PCism by "bringing in the guy for questioning" would have you up in arms over the cultishness of the Obamao.

I'm bothered by ALL of it - and see them ALL as guilty. These guys just want to look at the other guy - I've been saying look in the mirror:

They've behaved no better and have the government they deserve.



I think you have some really good points (I think you mentioned Ann Romney was selling some of those health medicines, AKA snake oil), and I agree. But somehow selling supplements that don't do any damage isn't as bad on the cultishness scale as what Obama is doing to trashing the first amendment at the alter of multiculturalism and PCism.


Like I said, it's all the same:

If you're trying to get me to choose whose con game I like most, you're shit outta luck with me,…

Shouting Thomas said...

Yes, Allie, that scalawag video maker's freedom of speech is precisely what those people died to protect.

phx said...

The continuing attempts to define all disagreement with Obama as racism is becoming increasingly dangerous.

Whao. That's strawman's pretty much going to get up and walk and talk on its own.

Maguro said...

Crappy movie guy is a hero to the right! Freedom of his speech is worth the 6 dead bodies, at the embassies and Camp Leatherneck!! Never mind that he may be in on a plot to incite the Islamic nuts? Nah, he's a fucking hero. Right

Uh, those people were not killed by a crappy movie. The crappy movie is just an excuse to do what they were planning to do anyway. And if the crappy movie had never been made, they would've found some other reason to do what they did.

Shouting Thomas said...

Which part of that is a strawman?

AllieOop said...

Oh so sorry Yashu, did I smear your hero, bad movie guy? His free speech and the blood of innocents is watering the Tree of Liberty, huh?

Firehand said...

My standard line: " 'Freedom of speech', if it means anything, has to include people you don't like and ideas you don't agree with; if you exclude them you don't actually believe in freedom of speech, you just like to use the phrase because it makes you feel virtuous."

And one of the highest duties of any elected official is to protect that ideal. I'm so effing pissed at this, it's hard to type.(well, that and the homebrew I just had; between them, the outrage, it is strong)

Shouting Thomas said...

Yes, Allie, you are correct.

In the U.S., we honor and protect the free speech rights of people you don't approve of.

Yes, the sacrifice of those killed in Libya is meant to protect the free speech rights of the man you don't like.

Shouting Thomas said...

This is a transparent attempt by the Obama administration to intimidate the filmmaker into pulling the video from YouTube.

And, the threat is back up with a threat to his life... the threat to expose him to retaliation from the jihadis.

Get a grip on what this is about, Allie.

The Crack Emcee said...

PatCA,

No, the issue is not bigotry, Crack. No one approves of the content of this movie, just of his right to make it without fear of being killed or arrested because of his threat to a certain politician's re-election.

Bullshit. First, the "threat to a certain politician's re-election" was pulled out of Glenn Reynolds' ass - where's the evidence to back it up? There is none, but you guys are already making parrot noises, like it's a fact.

I seriously have a hard time figuring out if you guys are manipulated or stupid - and, whichever it is, if you like it - when you're so easily led to such evidence-less conclusions.

phx said...

Which part of that is a strawman?

The part I didn't quote, about how how those who define Obama as immune have somehow actually made Obama immune.

I will not vote for a candidate who is immune from criticism. If Obama is immune from criticism because he is black, then he shouldn't be president.

Lem said...

His free speech... His free speech..

What Allie is saying is that it is for her to decide who has free speech and who doesn't.

Tremendous power the One has given her.

Shouting Thomas said...

The left is deflecting all criticism of Obama as somehow caused by racism.

I am not invoking a strawman.

yashu said...

I said some of what I want to say about Crack in the Obama/ beer thread, because I don't want to derail this one.

And Allie, if you can't tell the difference between championing an individual's, any individual's, that individual's right to free speech vs. championing that particular individual as a "hero"; and you feel happy to make fun of our concern for the principle of free speech (and a federal government threatening free speech in reaction to terrorism), as if we're indifferent to "the blood of innocents watering the Tree of Liberty," I feel sorry for you.

I'd be more enraged, but I honestly think you're clueless.

You daughter, god bless her, knows what she's fighting for, I hope.

TMLutas said...

Here's a few things I'm a bit curious about that are minor but, so far as I can tell, uncovered.

1. Does the state of California really have that much money floating around to pay cops overtime to do this sort of activity outside of normal office hours?
2. These were county cops, yes? Why has nobody looked into Lee Baca? At least dig up his testimony from Peter King's Homeland Security hearings on muslim radicalization.
3. Why Is Gov. Brown getting a pass? It's his state.
4. The man is a Coptic christian. This is a very old Church. They have a fairly longstanding presence in the US. Why isn't anybody talking to them?
5. The film crew has been found and interviewed. I don't know of anybody saying specifically that they saw this fellow using a computer (and thus violating his parole). It's perfectly possible to just give direction to hired talent. Did he?
6. Did the man's parole officer give permission for the use of the stage name Sam Bacile in a film production? It's not like there is something uncommon about using a different name in the movies and nothing prison worthy for parole violation if it is cleared by the parole officer.
7. Who is the guy's parole officer and has he recently (i.e. post ME attack) been changed?

It's possible I missed the answers to all this because I haven't been following the story closely enough but I haven't noticed any of these questions even asked, much less answered.

Unknown said...

Wow, you guys make me nostalgiac! To think, you were all outraged in the same way back when you were defending the Ground Zero Mosque builders.

Oh, my bad. I forgot. You defend only the freedom of Christians. Silly me.

AllieOop said...

Do you Althouse commenters not recognize the possibility that this guy was engaging in a much bigger, more sinister plot to incite some sort of holy war? You are screaming about his freedom of speech, he is yelling " fire", people have been trampled and are now dead. Oh poor bad movie guy, taken in for questions by the brownshirts.

Unknown said...

@TMLutas "Does the state of California really have that much money floating around to pay cops overtime to do this sort of activity outside of normal office hours?"

Ha! Cops have "office hours"? Where do you live? Mayberry, 1963? And yet, I bet Andy and Barney would still respond at any hour of the day ...



yashu said...

Heh, I suspected "Unknown" (who last night pretended to be a conservative but now attacks them as "you guys") was a moby.

Shouting Thomas said...

So, Allie, do you realize that you are suggesting that we should surrender to the jihadis and agree that free speech should be limited by anti-blasphemy laws?

I understand and share you fear of violence from the jihadis.

Do you really think that they will be satisfied if we surrender this most sacred of our rights to them?

I think it will only embolden them.

And, I'm not screaming.

Chip S. said...

AllieOop said...
Oh so sorry Yashu, did I smear your hero, bad movie guy? His free speech and the blood of innocents is watering the Tree of Liberty, huh?

Of all the wretched comments you have ever posted here, Oopsie, this one is unsurpassed in both its idiocy and its repugnance.

The administration of this disgusting poseur of a president was caught utterly by surprise on Sept. 11, despite numerous intel warnings (missed, no doubt, b/c this fucking incompetent skipped his briefing). Rather than dealing with the consequences of his own utter fecklessness, our POS POTUS has--with the full complicity of his propaganda ministry in the MSM--shifted the blame to a fucking private US citizen. This is an outrage.

If you could bother yourself to learn anything at all about the assorted embassy attacks you would know how ridiculous it is to think they have resulted from spontaneous anger over some previously-obscure YouTube video. Or do you think the Arab Street is customarily filled with goatherders packing RPGs?

Anyone who treats this issue as simply another occasion to trill his or her standard stupid talking points is either obtuse or depraved.

Anyone who contemplates voting for this swinish demagogue either does not understand or does not value our constitutional democracy.

Shouting Thomas said...

The U.S. constitutional freedom of speech is not limited, Allie, by your fears that the video maker might have been trying to incite war.

Mark said...

Crappy movie guy is a hero to the right! Freedom of his speech is worth the 6 dead bodies, at the embassies and Camp Leatherneck!! Never mind that he may be in on a plot to incite the Islamic nuts? Nah, he's a fucking hero. Right.

Allie, grow up. Your hero needs to fire whomever decided to send a message with a photo-op midnight frogmarch of somebody who put something on the internet. It really doesn't matter what the content was, of either the video or the frogmarched's character.

First they came for the bad videographers....

Maguro said...

Do you Althouse commenters not recognize the possibility that this guy was engaging in a much bigger, more sinister plot to incite some sort of holy war?

Not sure how much you follow the news, but Muslims have been rioting and killing people over this or that "offense to Islam" for quite a while now. You really are going to need quite a rigorous anti-blasphemy program to keep these folks happy. Is this what you are advocating?

AllieOop said...

Yashu, since YOU brought up my daughter, yes my daughter was five minutes down the road from the attack on Camp Leatherneck, where two Marines were killed and scores injured.

She watched as helicopters fired tracers along the fence perimeter, where the insurgent Taliban were entering the Camp. She sat in her "can" with her roommate, with fully loaded weapons while the Camp was on lockdown, n case an insurgent wasn't caught and killed and got into the living quarters of the troops. Then she had to be escorted to work, to see the dead and injured.

Get your heads out of your collective hate for Obama and realize that this guy and what he was doing , may be much bigger than some dumb movie. BUT no the brownshirts and the Fuhrer Obama, mustn't appear to be violating his free speech rights, by asking him questions.

You folks need a reality check.

garage mahal said...

Anyone who treats this issue as simply another occasion to trill his or her standard stupid talking points is either obtuse or depraved.

Which you just did, carrying on hysterically like an emotional basketcase.

Shouting Thomas said...

Yes, Allie. Maguro is entirely correct.

Once we grant the jihadis the right to enforce anti-blasphemy laws, their demands will only increase.

yashu said...

Allie, whatever this guy's reasons for making that movie might be, sinister though they might be, are separate from the question of what the government is justified to do in response.

I could paint a real dark, ugly picture of the motivation behind plenty of left-wing (or right-wing) speech. Speech that could be interpreted as inciting bloody violent revolution. Any given Occupy rally would provide examples.

Doesn't make a difference. Certainly, that speech should be counteracted and denounced with other speech. But for the government to suppress it in response to terroristic action (i.e. the murder of innocents)? That is not just unjustifiable, but noxious.

Chip S. said...

You never surprise, yet you never fail to disappoint.

The Crack Emcee said...

I'm watching the video now and, as far as I'm concerned, we should turn whole networks over to him:

Crappy video guy's a comedy genius!









Chip S. said...

Clearly, I was addressing mahal and not yashu.

Sandi Denio said...

Obviously he cannot return home.

CBS Clip.

Shouting Thomas said...

I don't hate Obama, Allie.

Prior to this incident, I have said repeatedly that I won't object to his re-election if Republicans hold Congress.

God bless your daughter. One of the most important parts of the sacrifice of her service is to protect the free speech rights of this scalawag video maker.

Shouting Thomas said...

Yes, Crack, you are right.

The film is inadvertently hilarious.

Nathan Alexander said...

@phx,
"Obama's negotiating with terrorists"

Communication does not have to be with words. Negotiation doesn't have to be picking up a phone and discussing demands.

Protests are done for a reason: to show you are upset about something. You want someone to watch, and reconsider their actions, and change what they are doing.

The protests in both Cairo and Libya included forcible invasion of sovereign US territory. That has since spread to other embassies.

The attacks in Cairo had protestors saying "we are all Osama".

The attack in Libya included a deliberate and planned assassination of the Ambassador and those with him. Probably a horrific murder.

These are events worthwhile to go to war over.

President Obama's response is not war.

His response was to make a statement. The statement was an attempt to assuage, to tell angry Islamists that we understand the reason they are upset, but attempted to explain that our freedoms include the right to speak.

How is that not negotiation? He talked to the world, hoping to get angry, protesting Islamists calmed down.

Then after the statement was delivered, the Justice Dept identified the individual, including a description of where he lives, I think? Then he was confronted by law enforcement officials after midnight, at his home, and brought to the police station. And since the press was tipped off, the picture of him being surrounded by police making an apparent perp walk...seems to be giving in to the Islamic world's demand to enforce blasphemy laws against this man, in effect, doing the terrorists' bidding.

How is this not a form of negotiation?

Live free or die.

I don't see how you can think President Obama is doing even an okay job of it.

Americans are dead because he didn't listen to threat briefings, didn't lead on a threatening security situation, and/or didn't have the judgment to put the right people in place.
That's a horrible, horrible job of being the top leader for people that put their trust in him to keep them safe as they risked their lives for the US best interests.

He betrayed them.

And our standing in the ME is worse than it has been since 1979.

That isn't even close to an 'okay' job, unless you hope for something other than the US' best interests.

wildswan said...

I've read that this movie (or this trailer)was shown on a Salafist channel on Egyptian TV with subtitles translating it. And that's what set people off. So it wasn't YouTube that created the problem - it was Egyptian TV where nothing is shown that isn't calculated. This whole thing was a piece of propaganda to justify murdering the ambassador. So why aren't Obama and Clinton talking about how the Egyptians set this whole thing up, allowed it? How this is how the Moslem Brotherhood acts? stoking hatred. I think Obama just doesn't know - the President of the United States hasn't been learning background stuff by intelligence briefings with experts. He is golfing and fundraising and vacationing and hanging with celebrities.

He deserves to be impeached but in the situation that actually exists the best thing to do for the country is vote him out of office. Don't get despondent because people don't want to see Obama as he is. Always remember this: the same people that supported Neville Chamberlain's Munich sellout supported Winston Churchill a year later and stood up to the Blitz.

deborah said...

I understand he was not arrested, but asked to come to the station. How is this a violation of his rights?

Does anyone know if his privacy was breached in finding out where he lived and who had made the film? That is, was the info readily available? Was he already in danger of being assassinated?

Lem said...

.. he is yelling "fire"

Ellie.. those exceptions "yelling fire in a crowded theater" and defamation and so forth... are very very narrow.. certainly do not cover movie making.

What you call "fire" is what any good satire like South Park and countless others is made of.

BTW.. this idea that its ok to suppress somebody's inconvenient speech not only destroys free speech as we know it... it also destroys any notions of equality.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 404   Newer› Newest»