Free speech in Obama’s America.
[Update a while later]
More thoughts from Allahpundit:
According to TMZ, the guy’s probation report is sealed. Question for criminal defense attorneys: Is there any way to force it to be unsealed, or is that at the discretion of one or both of the parties? There’s a public interest at this point, I think, in knowing why they’re sending him back to prison. Did he commit a serious crime that we don’t know about, or are they using a technicality to punish him for blasphemy?
I think we can make a good guess.
No, jailed by a Federal judge for is being held for violating the terms of probation related to a 2010 bank fraud conviction.. That probation order included not using an alias and not using the Internet. What you’re telling me is that if somebody does something you like, it’s okay to violate probation. A federal magistrate disagrees.
Riddle me this – why was it okay to hold US citizen Jose Padilla, who had not violated probation, but not hold Nakoula, who has?
He’s in jail for the movie. The parole violation is just the excuse they came up with.
Maybe it looks like a conspiracy from inside a tin foil hat, but there are other, more likely interpretations of events. For example, the terms of his probation specified that he not use the internet, full stop, because he’s a convicted fraudster. Then his role in the making and publishing of the film is made public, and the police question him and determine that he’s lying to them.
I thought you guys were supposed to be the law and order types?
Dave,
Yes. A convicted Felon loses many of the rights of citizenship because they are a felon, especially when they are on probation. For example Felons are no longer allowed to own guns, they are not allowed to vote, not allowed to take the Fifth Amendment when questioned and there is a lower standard of search and seizure applied to felons. All are based on a long series of court cases and federal law over the last 200+ years.
Also it may not be just for computer use. His crime was financial fraud and he indicated in one of the interviews the film was paid for by money from “his relatives” in Eygpt. There are strict laws governing international transfer of funds. Were they part of his probation? Were they violated? Did the money actually come from his relatives or from somewhere else? Was there financial fraud involved in misrepresenting the film to its actors? There are many questions here.
Again, this is something the right is going off on without knowing what is going on. Who knows, maybe he was the front, or the dupe, of some terrorist group. In which case the safest place may for him would be in prison, especially if he talked. I will wait for more information to emerge before forming an opinion.
Chris, I agree with your characterization of Nakoula’s arrest, because there is no evidence to the contrary.
I don’t see any obvious connection to Jose Padilla. I just reviewed the long chain of court decisions regarding Padilla, and therein lies the answer to your question, to the extent that there is one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/José_Padilla_(prisoner)
This is off-topic, but I was surprised to learn that Padilla was forcibly administered LSD. The types of torture (or quasi-torture, or near-torture) that he was subjected to by the government is bizarre. See also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012 I think it is funny that Obama can be criticized as being an evil leftist who uses Commie/Nazi tactics, and at the same time can be criticized for being way to the Left of Bush, and at the same time be criticized for being not very different from Bush regarding denying civil liberties to fight terrorism.
It probably can be combined into a coherent world view, but it is still funny.
The obvious connection is that Rand thinks Padilla’s arrest and indefinite detention as an “enemy combatant” based on the President’s say-so was okay.
I do?
I don’t recall you leading any “free Padilla” marches.
Illogic noted.
Actually, as bob linked, the Federal Courts found that it was okay. But then Padilla was actually linked to a conspiracy to making a radiological bomb and later convicted for that crime. Padilla actually is a terrorist, he’s admitted to being one, and found guilty of being one. So Gerrib, why are you recruiting people to lead “free Padilla” marches? I also haven’t recalled you leading any marches against the NDAA, as bob has noted was signed by Obama. So by your illogic, do you condone Obama’s actions in executing Americans without trial?
Terrorist’s veto being applied to book and movie posters in the NYC subway as well now.
It smells like the regime is being pushed by unfolding circumstances in the mideast to impose policies they would prefer to unviel after the election, when “they have more flexibility”.
Why should the judge, a Bush appointee, do Obama’s bidding?
Bush nominated a lot of dud judges (e.g., Harriett Miers). But I don’t necessarily blame the judge. Once a probationer was brought before him, he probably didn’t have a lot of discretion. The issue is prosecutorial discretion.
Judges have broad discretion in these case. Mr Alias-of-theweek’s problem isn’t the blasphemy, it’s being a serial liar and swindler the judge understandably doesn’t trust to show up when required.
The point remains that if he hadn’t made the movie, he’d almost certainly not be in jail. And unfortunately, it provides an appearance of buckling under to Islamist criticism and demands that he be punished.
If he hadn’t made the movie, his use of the Internet and creation of aliases might not have been detected, but it’s the violation of conditions of parole that led to this.
Many violate parole, and nothing happens to them. He made a movie (or at least a movie trailer) to which the regime objected.
So because we don’t catch all parole violators, we can’t ever punish the ones we do catch?
The only reason you or anybody else even heard of this guy is because he made a movie that made him infamous.
The only reason you or anybody else even heard of this guy is because he made a movie that made him infamous.
Exactly. And it sends a bad message to the enemy.
Rand,
So President Obama should over ride the judge’s decision? Isn’t that overstepping his executive powers? Unless of course he just pardons him for his original crime as a reward for making the movie…
So President Obama should over ride the judge’s decision?
No. Obama should never have gotten involved in the first place, including apologizing for it. But now the damage is done.
Rand,
I see. An American Ambassador is killed and President Obama should have kept his mouth shut and not get involved.
Of course he should have done his job. His job was to keep our ambassadors safe. The film had nothing to do with the ambassador being killed.
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Rand,
No, that seems to be your job 🙂
Obama should have kept his mouth shut and not get involved.
Obama should have provided Marines to protect the Ambassador on 9/10, when he became aware of the threat. Not on 9/12 when the Ambassador was already dead. That action would have been far more beneficial than blaming a movie maker in Hollywood. Alas, Obama was busy fundraising in Las Vegas, so he had important things to do while the Ambassador was under attack. Things like sleeping.
But wasn’t reducing the size of the military by outsourcing jobs like this to the private sector a policy from the Bush Administration? So why blame President Obama, other than of course he is President Obama, for continuing the cost cutting that President Bush started.
Also you need to check you timeline…
LOL, “The Republican!” Matula blames Bush for not having Marine guards protecting the Libyan Ambassador in 2012, because supposedly that role in the US military has been outsourced since, when? Well at least since 2008, right Matula? I guess that’s why the US Embassy in Egypt doesn’t have Marine guards either. Oh wait…
Rand deserves better trolls.
Likewise, if the producers hadn’t made Springtime for Hitler, they wouldn’t have gone to jail.
Leland,
You do know the Ambassador was killed at the Consulate and not at the Embassy? You do know the difference between a Consulate and an Embassy? If not then maybe you should research it a bit before posting.
Here, Matula, heal yourself:
The primary mission of the Marine Security Guard (MSG) is to provide internal security at designated U.S. diplomatic and consular facilities in order to prevent the compromise of classified material vital to the national security of the United States.
What did I write again? Let me scroll up, copy, and repeat it again: Obama should have provided Marines to protect the Ambassador on 9/10, when he became aware of the threat. Not on 9/12 when the Ambassador was already dead.
I stand by my statements and laugh at your stupidity.
Leland,
I guess you don’t understand the meaning of the word Designated. Also it notes their job is to protect classified material, not individuals. Guess you are so busy laughing at others you don’t even read what you cut and paste.
Good thing no information was lost during the raid, oh wait.
I’ll save you the reply.
Broad discretion in these cases.
Not to anyone who actually follows what’s been happening.
The unfortunate consequences of this is that the Administration will probably let the Islamic countries think that he was arrested [i]for[/i] making the movie, or not actively disabuse them of the notion, so that during future episodes they’ll believe the US could jail blasphemers if we chose to.
Yep.
Exactly.
“Your comment was a bit too short. Please go back and try again.” What?
I’m having a hard time believing that a similar parole violator that made himself equally notorious with an offensive but completely secular viral YouTube video would have been treated more leniently.
Do you believe that no one in the administration called the LA Sheriff’s office and suggested that they look into the matter? Do you believe that this would have happened had the video been offensive to Christians?
Irrelevant. If the administration did nothing, the incident would still have been impossible for the probation officer to ignore.
Obama never said the guy violated parole. What Obama said is “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” This is inline with the Obama Administration’s support of international laws against blasphemy. So, go ahead and point out the guy is not going to jail for making a video critical of Islam but for violating his parole for check fraud. That’s you making the claim. The Administration is saying something else and has been consistent on this issue since 2009.
So you are intimately familiar with the caseload of probation officers…?
I’m intimately familiar with a lawyer. She says that his treatment is pretty much what you’d expect for a purely secular repeat offender with the same level of lies and fraud.
That’s separate issue.
As to your second question: which Christians? Some are offended if Muslims want to build a mosque, or something like one, closer to the WTC than they’d like. Others don’t care. Should we avoid offending the first group? If so, why?
What was it, a month ago? Mayor of Chicago says Chik-Fil-A doesn’t share Chicago’s value, because its founder believes in the traditional concept of Christian marriage (dog whistle to homosexuals that he’s against gay marriage). The same day, the same Mayor meets with Louis Farrahkan of the Nation of Islam, a guy who is far more clear on his position about gays and gay marriage.
All embassies should be protected at all times. 9-11 is just a date where a bit more alertness is a good idea. Embassies are national soil. A breach is an act of war. It is always an act of war. How we respond depends on the circumstance.
The host country has an obligation to protect the perimeter. Our CiC has the responsibility to protect everything within the perimeter; first our secrets and second our staff. Acts of war should have repercussions on the host country. If their response is not up to par, we pull our embassy.
This is not controversial. The current admin is just too stupid or ideology bent to understand this. Our media doesn’t understand this. That may be the biggest tragedy.