The filmmaker of “Innocence of Muslims,” the anti-Mohammad video that sparked the recent protests and deaths around the world, has been arrested by federal authorities for allegedly violating the condition for his probation on a 2010 conviction for bank fraud — violations that could land him in jail for three years. Given the calls for his arrest and even execution by Muslim allies, the arrest raises obvious concerns that the Administration is again defending free speech while quietly moving to punish those who cause religious strife.
From my experience as a criminal defense attorney, the violations described in a case of his kind rarely warrant the 4-month term demanded for Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. In addition, the federal authorities insisted on his being jailed as a flight risk, though it is unclear why that is the case and why he could not be given an electronic bracelet.
Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal found that Nakoula exhibited a “lengthy pattern of deception” and posed “some danger to the community.” I can see the basis for the first conclusion but not the evidence of a danger to the community. My concern is that the response to his film — which is a protected act of free speech — was weighed in the balance of such a decision. Nakoula is accused of eight charges of probation violation including making false statements to authorities about the film. He reportedly admitted that he wrote the film but authorities insist that he did not fully explain his role.
The U.S. Attorney suggested that he might charge Nakoula with making false statements about the film — charges that would seem an obvious act of retaliation by the Administration.
The distrust shown by many free speech advocates, including myself, is that the Administration has a checkered history of claiming to support free speech while supporting the creation of an international blasphemy standard. The federal agents quickly moved against the filmmaker after the controversy. Probation rules are written in a way that make it relatively easy to find violations. The immediate scrutiny left many with the impression that the Obama Administration wanted to show Arab allies that the filmmaker was under arrest while professing a commitment to free speech.
Source: LA Times
Gene H. –
So I guess George Carlin, rest his soul, would have had a seriously hard time navigating the Turley site.
On the other hand, maybe he wouldn’t have. He might have been one of the brighter bulbs in our chandelier.
Ex-pat means ex-patriate status, not ex-patriot.
Did you do 2 years military service? I did.
So you mean all the people who lost emigrants to the USA should shame the ones who left.
As for pretentious. Pot versus kettle.
I express my feelings, opinions, and mostly disclaim facts as I have very few. But I make no false costumes to dignify myself. And I don’t hide behind sock puppets.
And still you are formalistic in your argumentation.
How revealing.
No substance at all. No heat actually. Just faking it. Trolling is a fun game for some. Adjö.
anonymously posted,
You are not having trouble posting. Your last post’s quote contained one of the very few words on the automatic moderation filter. Change one letter and repost. Those words again are: f*ck, b*stard, b*tch, and *sshole.
Idealist707 said:
“Are you pointing at all those rednecks that came over in the 1700s, or the 1800s, or…..?
When did yours and how were their immigration proven in advance?”
Here’s a snippet of the basic law, which you likely already know:
“Immigration deportation is now referred to as “removal”. When immigration laws are broken, or when certain criminal charges are brought against an immigrant, the immigrant faces deportation, or removal. U.S. citizens are generally protected from deportation, although if a naturalized U.S. citizen is found guilty of establishing citizenship through fraudulent means, he or she can be deported and will not be allowed back in the U.S. at any time in the future.”
So, the quick answer is, I’m pointing to anybody who comes here for a “better life” to be accomplished by making mine (and yours) worse. Now, there ain’t much we can do about the criminal rednecks of 250 years ago.
If you have never walked through Ellis Island, I suggest you do it if you can. What struck me about the entire process of immigrant entry was that they were as careful as they knew how to be at the time.
If the religious folks are on target, maybe those redneck characters are already getting their just punishments in the afterlife.
My argument is pretty basic. Why not simply enforce the common sense laws we already have on the books?
Immigration hater? Get real.
What I detest is the idiocy of allowing criminals to invade neighborhoods of citizens-turned victims – and the subsequent, insane decree that the victims then pony up for the criminals’ “rights” through the legal system.
And I suspect the majority of those defending this ingrate’s rights are quarterbacking from an armchair, from the safety of a living room, tucked away in a house, where their next door neighbor isn’t this guy, or anybody like him.
In my work, I find citizen magnanimity is directly proportionate to one’s proximity to danger.
Why would I mind being called a pinhead by an ex-pat who hangs out on a blog all day?
Pretentious folk are a pet peeve of mine. Guess I’m just quirky that way.
I’m having trouble posting. Testing…
I understand your concern. And, frankly, I almost feel like it would have been better if nothing happened to this guy because of the optics of it. On the other hand, are you really suggesting that, if this is just the normal workings of the US justice system, the Obama Administration should have actively intervened with the Probation Office (a part of the judiciary branch, not the executive) to prevent probation revocation proceedings? That seems like it would be just as wrong as intervening to get the guy’s probation revoked. In the end, I think we follow our laws and values and don’t let terrorists distort our decisions. So, we don’t do things to appease them. But, we also don’t avoid doing things simply because we’re afraid it might encourage them.
And, I basically agree with you on the Google thing, although it’s more of a minor irritant to me than a major wrong.
Leaving aside what they should have done, it’s quite apparent that what they did do is have the Attorney General or one of his minions direct an operation to raid this guys house (which they did) and find something upon which they could pin an arrest. And, yes, they “miraculously” found something.
idealist707 — “So what’s your point, pinhead?”
No point, ex-pat. Just messing with a bunch of pseudo deep thinkers busily trying to impress each other.
At least we’ve established that you don’t mind being called a pinhead, and that you justify your attack on idealist707 by claiming that your intent was to mess with someone else. Full circle, indeed.
ID, Just trying to pay it forward as an homage to your assistance when the Lilliputian mafia had me on their hit list. Here’s my take. I think, I don’t know but I surmise, one or two of the more over the top screed folks were put on a short leash. Just my opinion, I could be wrong. And I agree w/ the pathology of the coward being fairly obvious.
By bulldog I was referring to the sockpuppet: Read my Blog.
As to my living in Sweden, explain what that has to do with immigrant hating. I love the ones here. Including the American ones, the Somali one, the Iranians, Kurds, Ghanians, Malinese. Turkish. Assyrian, Ethiopians, Eritreans, Moroccans, Tunisian, Egyptians, Chileanos, Cubans, Brazilians, Colombians, Hungarians, Finns, Iraqis, Gambians, etc.
And I know and discuss with at least one of each.
So what’s your point, pinhead?
nick spinelli
1, September 28, 2012 at 1:51 pm
Freud, You’re being attacked by a coward who made up a lame name so as to have cover. Welcome to the kook fringe here. Most are sane. A few are kooks, pseudo intellectuals, pompous and even a sanctimonious one or two.
—————————————–
nick you forgot ‘judgemental’…don’t forget judgemental!
” 78 Internet Freud
1, September 28, 2012 at 2:23 pm
Interesting. I had assumed by “informant” it was on the political/intelligence side.”
Titles like agent, informant, etc are bureucraticese.
They serve to heighten the importance and give a legitimate purpose which may be completely misdirection to those being “informed”.
In this case one can mean that his arm was twisted so he became a tool waiting for an assignment. Considering his previously proven talents, the use in this case is obvious. To mix metaphors: He waa an Oswald waiting to be thrown in front of a bus.
Not even convinced that he did anything at all himself. He could have been only someone to take the heat, although he did not know it.
“Welcome to America, my little failed immigrant. Let us “help” you. Since that thin ice you are standing on is melting, we suggest you step over here and help us with this little project we have.”
Finding fall guys is easy among the usual suspects.
Full circle and still wrong. Boring.
Internet Freud,
“Internet Freud
1, September 28, 2012 at 2:17 pm
(1) I suspect the film was out there causing some controversy in other places (perhaps Egypt, which has been looking for reasons to be offended), and it was seized upon as cover for Libya.”
If that was in answer to me, then I got better than I gave. Mine, after a 2 hour nap and a late arrival here, was baaarrreely understandable.
Yeah, no.
Internet Freud — “Jeez, I just got it! You were using “bulldog” in reference to yourself. That’s the funniest “threat” I think I’ve ever read. Bulldog, your teeth are made of foam.”
Hooray! Dumb, dumber, dumbest. Easy.
Hooray? I thought he was calling you a bulldog, when you’re really just a little Jack Russell. Delusion, thy home is Swarthmore. I believe that’s the school song.
idealist707 — “You really blew it immigrant hater. Hee hee hee!”
From the guy who resides in Sweden.
(this is almost too easy)
http://www.amazon.com/Snitching-Criminal-Informants-Erosion-American/dp/0814758975
Snitching: Criminal Informants and the Erosion of American Justice by Alexandra Natapoff
Nick Spinelli,
“Freud, You’re being attacked by a coward who made up a lame name so as to have cover.”
You said it first. The style of this particular sock puppet is pretty self-identifying. Never reply to a substantive point. Attack the form of the presentation, etc.
After getting his ass kicked so he had to suck up 5 times before being noticed after his defeat, he prefers now to using sock puppets so he may retreat to his usual persona undamaged, and gleam shining as usual.
My interp Nick S. Just using you as a launch pad.
Warning to Internet Freud. Never lose your heat in front of this bulldog. He gets only worse.
Awaken from your dream, child.
Jeez, I just got it! You were using “bulldog” in reference to yourself. That’s the funniest “threat” I think I’ve ever read. Bulldog, your teeth are made of foam.
I had assumed by “informant” it was on the political/intelligence side. -Internet Freud
Correction: There’s quite a bit of latitude with these folks, as you probably know.
We just don’t know how he might have been used by the FBI, DEA and others.
Internet Freud , mother of swath is not worth spending time on , she is like msnbc , nothing that this president does can be wrong in her view…
He can do wrong?! 🙂