Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man behind The Innocence of the Muslims, has been officially arrested. His official crime is breaking probation, his unofficial crime is making a movie. Had Nakoula made a movie four years ago denouncing Bush and been picked up afterward for probation violations, then the ACLU and every media outlet would be up in arms declaring that we now live in a police state.
And now after Muslims murdered four Americans and rioted across the world calling for Nakoula's arrest, they got what they wanted and the media will cheer.
Nakoula faces up to three years in federal prison after being arrested Thursday for alleged probation violations. Probation officials have recommended a 24-month term for him. He faces a maximum of three years in prison if found to have violated his parole.
Congratulations America, we are now officially a moderate Muslim country. After all he's only getting two-three years in prison for violating probation making a banned movie. In Morsi's Egypt, a Coptic Christian just got seven years for a similar offense. So for the moment we are more moderate than Egypt. And we should be proud of that. Just imagine if Morsi were running things instead of a cheerful fellow like Barack Hussein.
Magistrate Judge Suzanne H. Segal ordered Nakoula detained, citing a "lengthy pattern of deception" by the man, adding that he poses "some danger to the community."
What danger might we ask does Nakoula pose to the community? His convictions were for fraud. Is he going to spend the time until his trial tricking people into buying the Golden Gate Bridge?
Nakoula's attorney, Steven Seiden, asked that his client be released on $10,000 bond, saying that he was not a flight risk. He also said his client would be in danger at the downtown Metropolitan Detention Center because of what he said was a large Muslim population at the lockup.
Prosecutors told Segal they have been assured that the detention center has protocols to house "inmates of notoriety," and contended that Nakoula would possibly be safer in custody.
No doubt. Safe as houses.
There was a poem that the left revived around the time of the Bush Administration. They meant to use it on behalf of Muslim terrorists, but perhaps we should start using on behalf of those who offend Muslims.
First they came for the Cartoonists, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Cartoonist.
Then they came for the Filmmakers, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Filmmaker.
Then they came for the Writers, and I did not speak out– Because I was not a Writer.
Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------The Nakoula Case has Completely Discredited the ACLU
Posted By Daniel Greenfield On October 6, 2012 @ 5:47 pm In The Point |
Since Nakoula Basseley Nakoula was interrogated, arrested and charged as a show of appeasement to the Muslim world and a warning to those who would exercise their right of free speech to offend Muslims, a number of civil rights groups have spoken out on the subject. The ACLU has not been one of them.
The Electronic Freedom Foundation and the First Amendment Center have made clear public statements on the dangerous and troubling actions of the Obama Administration, but the ACLU has been completely absent in the greatest free speech case of this century.
A search of the ACLU site reveals only one mention of the case and it is a laborious defense of Obama that, to its credit, does argue that the video cannot be censored. That's all.
The ACLU's Ben Wizner has condemned the movie and Nakoula while giving only lip service to the censorship questions raised by Obama's request to Youtube to take down the video and the imprisonment of the Mohammed filmmaker.
"We have first amendment protections for our right of free speech, but they are somewhat hollow rights if not protected by an independent judiciary to call government to account," said Gene Policinski, executive director of the First Amendment Center.
"That's what has to happen here. The judge has to fairly evaluate whether this is a back door way to punish him for expressing an opinion that is unpopular in the country," Policinski said.
"With what little I know of parole system, I know it is overworked, overburdened, and moves so slowly. Yet within weeks or days here this man was being held and prosecuted. It is a high profile case, but that's a warning flag. Why so fast? Why so quick?" asked Policinski.
I certainly don't agree with many of Policinski's positions or those of the First Amendment Center, but in the Nakoula case, the FAC has shown that it honestly does care about freedom of speech and government censorship. The ACLU has shown that it does not. And Policinski's statement on the riots is something that we can all agree on.
In some ways, we all — Americans and those caught up in violence overseas — are paying the price for foreign governments that control speech and religious liberty. Those rigid systems fear dissent and diversity, and teach by example that cabal and conspiracy are behind every public utterance.
Societies used to the give-and-take of public debate are not so easily shocked by a video or cartoon with a contrary view. In nations where religious liberty exists for all, no faith need fear for its survival.
The only long-term solution in the Middle East and elsewhere to the outrage, destruction and death over speech that offends rests in the First Amendment's core provision for more speech, not less.
The First Amendment Center has stepped up to the plate while the ACLU has stepped down.
Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com
URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2012/dgreenfield/the-nakoula-case-has-completely-discredited-the-aclu/