Slashdot Mirror
Innocence of Muslims Filmmaker Arrested, Jailed
sycodon writes "Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man behind the film Innocence of Muslims, has been arrested and jailed in Los Angeles for probation violations. The situation is a win-win for the Obama administration, who can now appear to be punishing the man whose film sparked protests and riots around the world, but at the same time simply enforcing the law, as all evidence indeed suggests Nakoula violated the terms of his probation."
Hope they have enough on him to keep him locked up.
Or, actually win-win-win after the election, as we watch the Romneybot continue to self destruct. Every time he opens his mouth and speaks his true feelings, it's another gaffe and pisses off more middle class Americans.
do not care, why is this on slashdot?
What does his apparently violating parole have at all to do with this site?
They should have done this weeks ago. It was clear he violated his probation from the beginning.
It's very important for Muslims across the world to understand that he was NOT arrested and jailed for the CONTENT of that movie, but because he continually provided false aliases to the judge and the police in violation of his probation.
I wonder if the protesters in Egypt will understand this...my guess is probably not.
But this guy? No no no. Lying to a cop is a much bigger offense
Investigators have not yet provided details about how Nakoula allegedly violated probation, but it seems clear that his involvement in the "Innocence of Muslim" production is central to the government's new charge.
Makes sense..
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
The situation is a win-win for the Obama administration, who can now appear to be punishing the man whose film sparked protests and riots around the world.
This is outrageously ridiculous. Why would it be a "win-win" for the Obama administration to appear to be punishing someone for exercising his First Amendment right to free speech?
He's not jailed for the film he's known for, so why are we hearing about it? Is he the new Lindsey Lohan? Are we going to follow him through the courts and rehab?
He should be jailed for spreading hate speech, not accessing Internet while being under probation. Free speech is letting others criticize you, so letting stupids like Nakoula insult more than 1.5 billion people has nothing to do with free speech.
uuhhh no, it doesn't look like President Obama is "punishing" this guy. The dude violated his probation, this has no connection to the film or unrest in the middle east.
Appeasing the Muslim lunatic fringe is not a "win" for anyone. We should not apologize for free speech, no matter who it offends. If anything, authorities should have gone the other direction and NOT arrested him despite his parole transgressions, in light of the political statement it creates.
He wasn't arrested for parole violations. He was arrested for embarrassing the state. The alleged violations are just the excuse they happen to be using. If they didn't have that, we would be hearing some BS about child porn on his computer instead.
It didn't spark riots around the world. At least the ambassador in Libya was killed in a targeted attack by Al Qaeda. The ambassador was worried about his safety for weeks before his death. We know this because CNN reporters walked into the compound and looked around. Security was NOT good at this place.
I'll be so fucking glad when we kick Bush out of office....
Don't forget that.
Forget about free speech. You can't hurt a muslims feelings in the USA.
If Julian Assange had only drawn a cartoon of mohammed with his pants down, he'd have been caught, extradited, and sitting in Guantanamo by now.
American priorities!
ho-hum. yet another example of the guvmint's access to time travel technology.
there's no way this guy had violated his parole in the past until the current hooplah.
It was clear he violated his probation from the beginning.
The beginning of what? What were the terms of his probation? If it's so "clear" why are the terms of his violation sealed from public view?'
It's very important for Muslims across the world to understand that he was NOT arrested and jailed for the CONTENT of that movie
You know who believes that statement? Approximately no-one. Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that had the protestors not claimed that movie was provoking them that he would be in jail, or even in trouble? Lots of other terrible movies are made every day and the producers run free to make more.
He was jailed EXACTLY because of the content of the movie. He is being punished to try and appease the protestors.
You know what other countries are doing by way of thanks? Jailing some guy who ripped up a bible in Egypt. Is this really the road we want to go down?
And the really funny thing is, the howling mobs care not, they continue to protest outside many embassies.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
He's now Commodore Burrito or Angleburt Hinkydink or Mohammed Jolly or Fred Flagstone...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
There goes home of the free and the land of the brave...cryst
Time to have a funeral for the 1st Amendment.
sudo make me a sandwich
They won't stop. They will demand we hand him over so they can slowly behead him and post that on the internet then drag his body though the streets and hang it from some bridge.
I think that's not at all true. I assume the local police don't give a shit about foreign policy. If that's true, who ordered the arrest? Obama? Why would he do that?
What's much more likely is that once media reports of him apparently violating probation, the local PD felt pressure from the people and local government to arrest the guy for said parole violations. Nothing more.
Why does offensive speech deserve to be protected?
I'll tell you why: because it isn't offending YOU.
Only two things can be taken away from this event:
1) killing ambassadors and US citizens by not so crazy Muslim fanatics WORKS and is an effective strategy.
2) If the Constitution cannot protect this guy, it sure as shit won't protect you either.
Obama can't be seen as punishing him for exercising free speech.
Anybody who believes that is going to subsequently demand than anybody who says anything equally inflammatory be equally punished. And if those hypothetical people haven't broken their parole, nothing at all will happen.
It needs to be clear, this guy is being arrested only because he violated the terms of his parole in terms of using an alias or the internet. But it's essentially unrelated to the film and that has to be made clear.
There is simply no way the US government can be seen to be suppressing free speech. The last thing Obama wants to do is use this to his advantage. Because the reality is, that he isn't being punished for free speech -- he's being punished because he's a shady guy who violated his parole.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
1) Look for use of term "teabagger" or other sexual slang instead of reasoned argument.
2) That's it!
P.S. works as well on XBox Live as it does in political stories!
That would make sense...except that the violations at issue occurred during the investigation of whether or not he posted the video, which itself would have violated the terms of his probation.
Its not about violations known in advance and held in reserve and then used as retribution for a "perfectly legal" act, "uppity" or otherwise.
the freedom of speech has always been limited by the exception of speech intended to solely cause harm or public backlash
You mean like Piss Christ?
Oh wait. That seems to be fine. Even though the intent plainly was to generate backlash.
It looks like you have decided it only matters when people who would riot anyway use a movie as a pretext.
This movie was obviously not designed to "cause harm". It was just a bad, bad movie.
I could claim that watching Mortal Kombat: The movie drove me into a howling rage and it would be just as stupid. People need to take responsibility for reactions to media they never even had to watch, which is QUITE unlike the case of yelling fire in a crowded theater which no-one can avoid hearing or being part of the reaction to.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Ohhhh wait. My bad.
Instead of looking civilized, we look weak, as athiest commentator Pat Condell makes clear:
"There was a time when Islam was given the benefit the doubt by many people in the west. Now we think it’s poison and we wish we’d never heard of it, because 20 years of baseless grievance mongering and knee-jerk offense have shown us this religion for what it really is. Now we don’t like it, we don’t trust it, and we are never going to respect it. And we don’t care how Muslims feel about that."
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
Aside from the people who feel this is a free speech issue where Nakoula was really arrested for making the film, no matter what else he did, there are at least two perfectly ligitimate reasons why he can be charged with probation violations:
1. He's been using aliases to do this - that's usually specifically prohibited by the terms of probation. The normal right to use an alias for non-fraudulent purposes does not usually apply while a person is on probation, so if he's got typical restrictions, the state does not have to prove he had some sort of fraudulent intent. They can void his probation automatically, although that doesn't stop them from also bringing charges if they are willing to try and prove the alias did entail fraudulent intent.
2. Reckless endangerment - His actors were placed in danger, and they are much more identifiable than he is as a producer, so their danger is actually greater than his (That may have changed due to all the publicity, but at the time of his actions, it was undeniably true, and that's the timeframe a court would have to consider). If he took steps to protect himself, but did not warn the actors of what sort of risks they were about to take on his behalf, that proves he had knowledge to elevate his actions to a felony level. So even if he trys to claim that his use of aliases was for the legitimate reason of protecting himself from Muslem retaliation, he demonstrates depraved indifference to the consequences of his actions with regard to his innocent employees. He really can't offer evidence to even mitigate the severity of sentencing on the one charge without simultaniously giving the state evidence to use on the other charge. His probation officer does not have to wait until the state decides to charge Nakoula criminally to act, either - he can bring the man in and ask just about any questions he chooses and all those answers become testemony admissible later if there is a court case filed. He can void the man's probation for conduct that doesn't rise to the level of new charges as well.
Who is John Cabal?
The next time you are jailed to appease people in a foreign country I guess I'll not say boo about the matter.
And if you think this "wraps up" the international incident then you are a fool; they are still protesting and want him dead, not arrested.
Kind of funny how when you start to try and appease people they keep wanting more.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
At the court hearing about his parole violation he told the Judge that the original name he used during his criminal prosecution and incarceration wasn't his real name.
Think about that for a minute, he's jailed for fraud and ordered as a condition of probation not to use aliases, only his legal name and he tells the judge evaluating his compliance that the name he used in the previous trial was a fake. It's highly unusual in situations like this for a judge to incarcerate a parolee before the hearing, she threw him in jail because she said the court has no confidence he's not a liar and flight risk.
And might I add, just because you haven't bothered to follow the case that it makes your assertion that no one believes this isn't political asinine. Obama and the state department has almost zero influence over department of federal paroles (it's mostly courts administered). His parole conditions were public nearly a day after the whole thing went public, including links to all the PDFs on popehat.
He was convicted for bank fraud. And then he goes and writes checks to pay for employees using an alias, and his probation conditions make it perfectly clear that the use of any sort of alias violates probation. The guy really stepped in it. This isn't some case of over sleeping and missing a check up with his probation officer.
That pretty much assured we'll be seeing more batshit insane rioting in the future. From the Muslim World's perspective, the following events occured: 1) Guy releases a movie insulting Islam 2) The Middle East explodes into violent rioting, killing hundreds of people 3) We arrest the guy to quell them. So in other words, riot more! The more Americans you kill, embassy you torch and flags you rip up, the more the US will bow to your whim! Positive reinforcement for everybody! I fucking hate this country.
Nobody's apologizing, failfuck
I guess you didn't get the memo the U.S. is doing just that, and paying $70k of your money to do so.
What was that you called people that got things wrong again? Seems like it rather more applies to yourself.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I hope their master plan includes banning all religions.
Absolutely correct. California could be better using their time and effort protecting us from Linsey Lohan and others like her, but they release them after 45 minutes because the jails are too full. But this guy said something (supposedly) unpopular, so the system is going after him with everything they can come up with. This is clearly an effort to appease a supposedly religious group by further eroding basic American freedoms.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
It was clear he violated his probation from the beginning.
The beginning of what? What were the terms of his probation? If it's so "clear" why are the terms of his violation sealed from public view?'
Uh, the violation was made pretty public. You are not allowed to maintain aliases on probation. "Sam Bacile" not only released a video, but he hired actors and produced a video under that name. That's not allowed. In fact, that's not even a good idea when you aren't already a convict. In this case, though, he is a convict and had to follow probation rules to remain free.
One could argue that if you did *not* punish him, then the probation officer could be accused (rightly) of not doing his job. Since his job is to enforce the rules, and the evidence of the wrongdoing is absolutely manifest to all who are looking, he would be remiss in his duties if he left him free. Indeed, some people are wondering why he was allowed to remain free this long, although you could argue that some investigation was needed.
Ok, I can see lying to probation officials...
I can't without knowing what the "lie" was:
Police: "Sir, we're with the police. We want to ask you some questions. Are you awake?"
PB*: "Um, er, I guess so..."
Police: "LIE! You are plainly half asleep. Arrest this man".
PB = Poor Bastard
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I mean, saying something that could be construed as inflammatory and standing behind it is one thing, but saying it then hiding behind the bodies of others to try and avoid the consequences of your expression? I don't think I can rightfully support such an action. "Freedom of Expression" is more than a right, it's a duty, and I for one think this particular chucklehead failed in his duty to stand behind what he said, so I don't think his "speech" really falls under the category of protected. This asshat wouldn't last 2 seconds in Heinlein's "polite society," and for damn good reason - he's a worthless fucking coward.
For contrast, I offer the case of Terry Jones, the asshole pastor who made a big show of burning Korans. Same concept (intentionally pissing off Muslims), but since Rev. Jones actually had the cajones to stand behind his admittedly dickish actions, it's a completely different scenario.
If there truly is power in words (and, subsequently, media), then it's fair to say that with great power comes great responsibility. Maybe it's just me, but if you're too much of a chickenshit to stand up and own the fucked up shit you say to/about others, I think you would be wise to just keep your trap shut.
Also noteworthy - I would expect anyone who violates his parole and evades capture by using multiple false identities to be held without bail as well, regardless of their other, non-parole related actions.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
To the extent it's true that ordinary citizens commit felonies without intent daily, the fact that this guy had something to pin on him is not remarkable. Any of us could be arrested nominally for violating some law when the underlying motivation is to suppress speech the government doesn't like.
-----It was clear he violated his probation from the beginning.
---The beginning of what? What were the terms of his probation? If it's so "clear" why are the terms of his violation sealed from public view?'
From the La Times:
"Nakoula, who was on supervised release from a 2010 conviction for bank fraud, faces eight charges of probation violation, including making false statements to authorities about the film.
When probation officials questioned him about the video, Nakoula allegedly claimed his role was limited to writing the script, and denied ever using the name “Sam Bacile” in connection to the film, Dugdale said.
Dugdale said there is evidence Nakoula’s role in making “Innocence of Muslims” was “much more expansive” than penning the script. Prosecutors said Nakoula could face new criminal charges for lying to federal officials."
------It's very important for Muslims across the world to understand that he was NOT arrested and jailed for the CONTENT of that movie
----You know who believes that statement? Approximately no-one. Are you SERIOUSLY claiming that had the protestors not claimed that movie was provoking them that he would be in jail, or even in trouble? Lots of other terrible movies are made every day and the producers run free to make more.
I believe that statement because it is true. Don't believe me? There is absolutely nothing in the Prosecutors statements about why he was arrested that had anything to do with the CONTENT of that movie. It's because he lied, repeatedly, to officials. This is exactly my point. Some people are so willing to believe conspiracies that they refuse to look at what is so obvious right there before them. Read this article and tell me his arrest had anything to do with the CONTENT of that movie:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/09/nakoula-basseley-nakoula-aliases-innocence-muslims.html
----He was jailed EXACTLY because of the content of the movie. He is being punished to try and appease the protestors.
--You know what other countries are doing by way of thanks? Jailing some guy who ripped up a bible in Egypt. Is this really the road we want to go down?
Did the guy who ripped up the Bible violate the terms of his parole? Do they even have parole there? If not, it was most likely because of blasphemy laws. The fact that the Egyptian authorities are stupid for enforcing blasphemy laws, while our authorities are not stupid for enforcing parole violations, is none of my concern.
I'm going to start off by saying that I'm ignoring the fact he violated probation. I want to take a look at the fact that the Obama administration may be taking a winning feeling from locking a man up for free speech. Everyone has the right to there own belief, it doesn't matter what that is, you can't always act on it but you can least passively believe it. No one, government and police included should be able to take that away from you.
Fundamentally all that happened here was a man made a movie that represented his belief, he never physically acted on his belief, he didn't tell people on his behalf to act on his belief he just visualized it. No matter the out come, it was not his direct doing. A person shouldn't be responsible for what people do because of there expression, so this man should not be held responsible because some extremest freaked out after his movie was released. I'm not saying you can't disagree or you can't be mad over it but as I already stated you shouldn't have the right to act on your belief in all cases.
So basically he never did anything wrong. I don't care where you grew up, what culture you belong to or what your beliefs are, I just don't think that he did anything wrong. He expressed himself and because of that expression a number of extremists acted out. How about we arrest the people who acted out instead of the person who was innocent in all cases. This is why the Obama administration shouldn't take a win, they've now basically shown that if you have belief and explain it you go to jail
Also please pay attention that I'm disregarding the probation violation!
The only killing we have seen was from a terrorist attack on an embassy, not from a protest.
How many "protests" also involve quiet ambushes on secret safe-houses?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
And all those people that say that he should be handled like any other parolee that has lied to his parole officer... all I can say is... This is the REAL WORLD, nothing is ever applied consistently. People who make a big stink and get attention directed towards them tend to get more "special treatment".
Ok I can see the win on enforcing the law regarding the probation violation.
But how does that apply to a win for punishment in regards to the video? No matter what way you look at it, it is attacking free speech and if you try to link the two together, it will become a loss for NoBama.
Denouncing is not apologizing. Go spout your teabagger "facts" somewhere else.
Since we don't know everything about the case usually we take the magistrate at his word when he says there was a "lengthy pattern of deception" and conclude that it has been going on for a long time.
Yes, that's much more likely than previously no one noticing his parole violations because they weren't being put in the spotlight so that even the world's most incompetent parole officer has to notice them.
Your own post was male bovine excrement. California releases people who are true threats to the public all of the time, claiming that the jails are too full and other nonsense. This guy was clearly targeted because of a silly little film he made, no because of anything that he did, and had been doing for several years before the film trailer was posted.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
or lousy dialog, pathetic special effects or poor scene editing. He'd get the death penalty for sure. Can I issue a fatwah against lousy film makers?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
As has been accepted by everyone except the fawning liberal press, the embasy attack and the rioting in general had been planned for months to coincide with the annaversery of 9/11.
This is simply putting this guy under a microsocope and finding something, anything, to jail him with. He is a political prisioner. If not alledged parole violation, it would have been spitting on the sidewalk. You can bet this didn't originate with local authorities.
Meet the new Putin, darker skinned than the old Putin.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
I've seen far too many comparisons in comment threads with Nakoula's anti-Islamic film to the Supreme Court decision in the Schenck v. United States trial. The majority decision by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes read: "The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that Congress has a right to prevent." There is no "clear and present danger" in making a movie depicting Mohammed because there may be extremists in the world who would use it to vent their ever-present hatred of Western freedoms. This slippery slope that would have all free people wary of ever criticising Islam for fear of reprisal and would essentially give extremists the same kind of oppressive power over Western nations as they hold over women in their countries. "Respect our laws or else we'll beat you or kill you." There's an enormous difference between inciting panic in a crowded theater or rioting in an already present and agitated crowd to making a film or exercising your free speech and then having extremist groups use it as an excuse for violence.
First of all, the crime he was originally tried and convicted for was fraud and if I'm not mistaken he had >10 aliases he was using to bilk money. Hence the probationary rule that he not pretend to be anyone else. He did so NUMEROUS times in the filming and posting of this movie.
Secondly, I've been on probation (for a misdemeanor but still had to report etc.). It's no fun and I can tell you that if my PO had found out I was in violation I probably would have had some repercussions. Probably not jail since my case was so minor but this guy stole millions so I think what's occurring is completely legitimate. He could have created the movie and gotten it posted WITHOUT violating his probation yet he defied them anyway.
crickets .....
I believe that you have confused the excuse for him being arrested for the reason that the government started looking for excuses in the first place. The reason that he is arrested is suppression of free speech. The excuse is the things that you mention, which otherwise would have never been acted on by the government (just like they had been ignored for years prior).
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
If you go by what the Washingtonpost has been saying, the Obama administration hasn't been quite as forthcoming on the story. It appears that the attack on the consulate was not spontaneous, and that within the administration, there has been charges of it being a "terrorist" incident. Sure, given previous stories where there was a representation of Mohammed the Arab street has expressed outrage, so the entire story seems plausible at the time, but as more info leaks out, it seems less so.
Most of the media has been giving Obama a pass on the story, nor has Romney latched on either..
Bring back the old version of slashdot.
I can understand that, given the amount of publicity both nationally and worldwide, the government really had little choice but to enforce the probation terms once it came out who the filmmaker really was and that he must have violated the terms to go on YouTube to upload it.
But when is someone going to point out that probation terms like these are absurd on their face? The Internet is a basic part of modern life. Everyone uses it, and even someone who tries to avoid it might well find themselves violating the terms by accident. (For instance, is using a GPS device counted as using the Internet? From a technical standpoint, that's often what is happening.) Probation terms ordering people to stay away from computers might have made some sense back in the days of Kevin Mitnick and Captain Crunch, but they are utter nonsense in 2012. You might as well make a probation term telling someone they can't watch TV or read a newspaper.
For all those who are showing sympathy with "nacoula", well i would what would reaction be, if you are one of the few millions christians living in the middle east, and suddenly your life is in danger just because some idiot want to practice freedom of speech.
Freedom of speech ends when the freedom of others starts and when it does not hurt even the feeling of others (billions of muslims).
What would your reaction be if someone insulted your mom face to face, under the so called "freedom of speech".
It is time to put a limit for all these "manipulated nonsense"
On one hand, they got the guy who broke he law, that's a win. But on the other, it makes it look like he's being jailed for expressing his opinion about something controversial. That's a not a win, that's a loss.
--
Stay tuned for some shock and awe coming right up after this messages!
The contents of the movie drew attention, Then people investigated who made it, and it turned out that he did, under an alias - a violation of his parole. So yes, the arrest happened only because of the contents of his movie, although he wasn't arrested FOR the contents of his movie - they were just the trigger that lead to his parole violation being made known.
Now if only Obama would do something about Uwe Boll.
(9,000 hysterical responses in defense of free speech.)
People: you're not much of a defender of free speech if you don't have a brain.
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Regardless of how you feel, or about the legality in regards to his probation violation or other nefarious purposes.... He a mark man, some radical Islamist is going to kill him eventually unless our government protects him, sad thing though the easiest way to protect him is to put him in Solitary Confinement while he is in jail....would he get bail probably .... would he want it.... best have a safe house. ~ I feel for the guy, the govt wanted a scape goat and found one, instead of punishing the people that actually kill other people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs0xw5hPWVQ&feature=BFa&list=SPF834C7965BEA6BCC it is your freedom...
While I'm strictly for preservation of free speech, I wonder if what this guy did qualifies as inciting a riot? Here is the Montana code (first one to pop up but I assume CA law is similar):
45-8-104. Incitement to riot. (1) A person commits the offense of incitement to riot if the person purposely and knowingly commits an act or engages in conduct that urges other persons to riot. The act or conduct may not include the mere oral or written advocacy of ideas or expression of belief that does not urge the commission of an act of immediate violence.
(2) Except as provided in subsection (3), a person convicted of the offense of incitement to riot shall be fined not to exceed $500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both.
(3) A person who commits the offense of incitement to riot while incarcerated at any state adult correctional facility shall be imprisoned for not less than 1 year or more than 5 years.
Reading this two things stick out: One, it doesn't say the riot has to occur within the jurisdiction where the act occurred, IE a riot in Libya could theoretically be caused by an act in California. Two, and more importantly, the key is "the person purposely and knowingly commits an act or engages in conduct that urges other persons to riot." I have read that at least some of the people (not necessarily this guy) involved with this film WANTED Islamists to riot. I think a fairly direct argument could be made that under a statute like this if they had the intent of causing a riot they could be charged. Additionally if two or more had the intent, bam - criminal conspiracy.
Now as to whether this is right or wrong is a far murkier issue. While I think speech should be protected at all costs, at the same time I don't think someone should get away with what is effectively a criminal act. At the turn of the 20th century Lynch Mobs were fairly common place. And if someone wanted someone dead it was fairly easy to get other people to kill him by creating a sufficiently salacious rumor. In effect I see that is what this guy did. Get other people to do his dirty work for him.
Full disclosure, I am the son of a muslim woman and a catholic father and consider myself to be agnostic.
...regardless of popular opinion based on the liberal media, though grossly exaggerated, the film in question is somewhat accurate. Anyone who doesn't think so I would encourage to read this book and other books in the same series.
He's a felon on parole. There are conditions to that parole. If a felon offered parole doesn't want to agree to the conditions of his release, he is welcome to stay in prison, where he can continue to say whatever he would like.
Being on parole and violating the conditions of your parole in a spectacular manner and NOT expecting to be put back in prison as a result is ridiculously dumb.
For example, one of the conditions of his parole that he not use the internet unsupervised.
If he goes to the library and uses the internet unsupervised, likely no one notices and nothing happens.
If he goes to the library and uses the internet to start a blog claiming Mitt Romney is a polygamist, and it gets picked up by the media, he's going back to prison.
Parolees should not violate parole. Parolees who do not want to go back to prison should definitely not get CAUGHT violating parole.
You don't get a free pass just because you say something extremely objectionable while violating your parole.
paintball
How did they know who made the video? They investigated it. It's not like he used his real name. i.e. the govt doesn't like what's being said, so they investigate the video, which leads them to a guy and they figure out a way to arrest him. There never should have been an investigation in the first place.
In other words, it's legal harassment. Hopefully if there's any provable connection between his arrest and the video, this turns into a multi-million dollar First Amendment lawsuit.
I think the guy's a bigot. But bigots have a right to be bigots in this country whether the political establishment likes it or not.
Liberty in your lifetime
Despite any valid points that may follow, All I see here is "Our President" trying to send the message to the Muslim Population that we are punishing this man and "are sorry" for his Infidel behavior. Thanks the wrong DAMN message! The correct message is: Here in America we treasure freedom and many Americans gave there lives for it. We feel the childish knee-jerk killing and rioting within some of your societies as a result of watching or hearing about something that offends you is evidence of your adolescence. Most Christian by contrast argue by acts of love, we are indeed offended by much in society and see it as an opportunity to pray for and help those individuals and understand there is sin in the world. We don't kill them! This guy has some problems, he needs help, I am glad that the law did its duty. I just wish our President would.
But what are the odds that anyone would have noticed the violation. It's one thing to go against the rules. It's onother to go against the rules and then jump up and down waving a flag to get everyone's attention.
Gosh, you haters really are a bunch of idiots.
Poster says: "He's a scumbag" with no mention of whether its illegal or not.
Idiot arsehile saus "It's not illegal to be a scumbag".
Well so what? It's not illegal to park in your own drive either.
So I point out that this poster is missing any claim that the original poster has said he's a scumbag and this is illegal.
Then YOU, the braindead fuckwit, double down on the stupid and continue to whine about it.
Seems you're OK with free speech as long as it says free speech is the best ever....
Myself It seems like there must not be enough criticism of Muslims if this is how they react.
If Christians reacted this way every time someone dropped a crucifix in a bottle of urine the whole country would be on fire 24/7.
Seems to me the 'artists' out there aren't offending people equally or this type of things would be a non issue.
I'd say it's a lose lose. If he's violating parole, we have to arrest him, but that make the violent criminals* of the Muslim world think their crimes impact the behavior of the US government.
* No, I don't mean all Muslims, just those willing to kill and destroy property because some idiot said something mean about the Profit**.
** I wonder if Jesus and Mohamed are in heaven asking God to make with the lightning bolts every time someone makes fun of them down hear on earth?
Reading through the comments here, it really seems to boil down to two sides.
Those who see a convicted felon, a fraud, a meth dealer, violating his parole and because of his violations of parole being so obvious to pretty much anyone with a brain, the convicted drug dealing fraud being put back in jail.
The other side is the anti-Obama crowd who's new hero is a convicted drug dealing fraud who violated his parole, but because they're anti-Obama, he's the next best thing since sliced bread.
I guess we can see who's actually weak on crime" these days.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
they release them after 45 minutes because the jails are too full
Probably more because they need to be given "special treatment" and segregation from other prisoners who aren't rich and famous, which adds cost.
Maybe if LL was in with gen-pop then she'd clean up her act.
I don't know if this was actually true, but originally there was some reporting that under terms of his probation, he was not allowed to use computers or the Internet for five years without approval from his probation officer. I would have suspected some outrage in ./ over a condition like that.
As I understand it, communicating with folks uploading a video to the internet under an alias is what he's been held on. But what people seem to be concentrating on is the alias part (which seems a bit hippocrtical given the typical number of AC poist made on ./ as well)...
The U.S. government twitching up some unrelated petty allegations to arrest Nakoula "for something" to "show we're doing something" is ten points more down-scale on the corrupt-system index that the "Bring in the usual suspects" made cynical fun of in "Casablanca". The United States has sold its, granted undeserved, reputation for freedom of speech for the satisfaction of a petty snit that made it uncomfortable. It paid with a classic thug-cop muscle technique that isn't even movie-cliche calibre.
The fact is, Nakoula, an Egyptian Coptic Christian, was within his rights to make his loosely Mohammed-story based sleaze-level soft-porn film: The United States, with the tacit, if not overt, support of the rest of the Anti-Muslim nations, had exercised its "free speech" rights in the Middle East in ways that produced results that included the Coptic Christians of Egypt, for being identified Christians, evne though they are considerably different from the Judeo-Christian Christians those stirring Muslim hatred identify themselves to, being attacked where they, but not the "free-speaker" perpetrators of atrocities against Muslims were available. Making a film is a whole lot less aggressive form of "free speech" than dropping bombs and carrying out drone-missile attacks. In fact, it is real free speech. The damagings of the properties and the killings of a few incidental innocents in retaliations is what the U.S. and its allies have repeatedly shrugged off as of no consequence, when the innocents were not their own. Fair play, if the United States was a fair play nation, would require the same shrugging off of damage to innocents. The United States proving itself not a fair player, a liar, and as capable of petty tyranny as any other tyrant state sums up to proving itself hypocrital as well as tyrannical.
Me thinks you misunderstood my entire post. I was not attacking the use of the word illegal in the GP post, nor was I getting into whether the OP actually used the word, which he clearly and literally did not.
I was attacking your definition of free speech, and how it applies to the United States, which was flatly wrong. Finally, I was separately attacking the idiocy of your last statement regarding a lack of Muslim hypocrisy.
It makes sense that you did not get it, as you did not refute a single point that I made, nor do you coherently make any of your own. For example:
The original poster literally called the person a dirtbag in the title of his post, which is synonymous with scumbag. The poster that you responded too was making the--apparently to you--audacious point that simply being a dirtbag is not illegal in-and-of-itself, linking the idea that him being locked up because of making a film that has incited Muslim rage goes against free speech. Then you made a series of misinformed, or downright wrong points.
In summary, you were wrong in your last post on all but one thing: the OP never literally said "illegal." And you're still wrong about everything, except that.
As I ended my last post, continue moving forward with your blinders on.
I don't know how anyone could sit through it. maybe it's more entertaining in Arabic..
If you have ANY loose legal ends that you have not tied up, don't make a public statement that the government doesn't like.
Your 'rights' end at the door.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"Innocence of Muslims" was produced by Islamists.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula is Meth-dealer-Egyptian-Coptic-anti-Muslim-activist-fundamentalist-Christian. Then on the other hand, Eiad Salameh appears to be a Muslim-fundamentalist-Palestinian-scam-artist-terrorist.
We're being duped again (and that includes me as well) by the ill-informed Media.
Walid Shoebat has the drop on these guys on his blog.
As this looks to be a movie designed to enrage "Enemies of the State" yes they did track down the guy that made the movie to see WHY he made the movie. Im not sure that anything "fishy" is happening since they could have arranged for him to
1 be found by US based extremists
2 been "shot while resisting arrest"
since we do have paws on him i say ring up the Libyans and tell them " we have the guy that did that movie you wanna trade him for the guys that killed our ambassador??"
Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
I thought it was for the criminally bad acting and scripting of the movie.
If this was true, most of Hollywood would be arrested, and Michael Bay would be in GitMo solitary.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
No matter how abhorrent the movie, what sparked the violence was the acceptance that violence in the name of Islam is justified.
Currently hooked on AMP
He violated parole moron. Or are you that dense / troll like you can't read anything? This had nothing to do with the video hence a win win, kind of like me putting you in my ignore list.
So much for Freedom of Speech; political showboating is the win-win.
YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
The Obama administration's "internet access violators division" is just doing what it does to every person in the US who, as a term of probation, has been told not to log onto the net. Yep! Yessiree, why every person within the borders of the US who is in violation of some probation term is swiftly picked-up and frog-walked into a police station then dragged before a judge and tossed into a jail cell... particularly if it's some really big violation like "internet access", as opposed to something like "stabbing a dude" or molesting a child...
Ignore the fact that thousands of hardened criminals are being let out of the jails in California due to overcrowding... this guy must go back into a jail cell for logging onto the internet... yeah... right.... How dare you think the Obama administration is trying to appease the masses in the middle-east to calm them down and make the administration's foreign policy look better in the lead-up to the election
When Obama ignored US laws and took over the car companies (stealing them from their share holders, many of whom were middle-class retired people) then replaced the CEOs (with no law giving him the authority) and then, effectively gave majority control of them to the unions (again, in a lawless way), everything was wonderful and his liberal supporters loved him for it... after all, why should a modern messiah be limited by laws? But now he is using his power to jail somebody for making a film against a religion... hmmmmmmm.... that's some precedent.... Some future president now can use the precedent to jail a filmmaker for insulting the Catholic church, or the Mormon church, or the Amish, or pro-life southern Baptists, or some anti-gay church...
Tyranny always looks great and feels exiting when your guy is the one doing it and your agenda is being advanced....
Tyranny sucks when the other guys get in control and use the machines you built to come after you...
Best not to build big systems that enable tyranny, and never to support tyrants no matter which way they are aimed
Human nature is such that those in power will have to prove OTHERWISE that this man was not effectually arrested for a political crime.
but let's not pretend that once he got the attention that it didn't become somebody's job to dig this up.
You have the timeline ass-backwards
There really is "nothing to see" here, there was no star chamber determining his fate, just a parole officer doing his job watching yet another arsehole who thinks laws and morals only apply to others. To me the most offensive part of all this is that he (morally, if not legally) defrauded the young actors. I don't object to him daring his enemies to cut his own head off. However he did set those actors up as a kind of human shield for himself when he dubbed his words into their mouths. Maybe he was just short sighted, or maybe he was secretly hoping one of the more actors would get hounded/killed/maimed by his enemies thus "proving his point" as to how evil they are. I don't know I'm just speculating here, but it wouldn't be "out of character" for the nasty little cult he belongs to.
Parole is a small mercy granted by society, it gives the prisoner a chance to prove to society he has regained some self control over his impulses. It became his parole officers " job to dig this up" the day he was released. In this case the prisoner failed the test in a spectacular fashion, the whole world knows he's been lying and 'defrauding' people, this time with absolutely no regard to his victims personal safety. His parole officer would have to be blind and deaf not to pick up he had broken his conditional freedom. I don't know what US law says about that, but my moral compass says he belongs behind bars. I have the same attitude to a couple of drunks I have been related to for decades, several jail stints ranging from 3mths to 2yrs, without a drop to drink, but they just don't have the self control to last a week on the outside without getting shit-faced to the point where someone they are abusing calls the cops.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Your entire posts proved Muslims are hypocrites.
Otherwise Islam's fatwahs are merely free speech. Imams calling for the destruction of Israel and the Great Satan are just free speech.
Name one Muslim, just ONE, who insists Muslims speaking such, should be send to jail.
Yet how many Muslims call for the death and KILL those who dare use free speech on the subject of Islam?
Oh wait, I forgot, there is one rule for non-muslims and no rules for Muslims am I right?
Muslims can do anything they want and everyone else must bow to them. Typical.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Bedroll finds black people to be abhorrent, he therefor gleefully celebrates when one is beaten to the ground and dragged of in chains for jaywalking or another frivilous offence for which no white person is arrested but for which people Bedroll disagrees with, he expects full and vigorous enforcement.
--- you are not just a bigot, you are a hypocrit. Lady justice is supposed to be blind. ALL are equal for the law, even people you don't like.
Have we learned nothing from Larry Flint?
Defending free speech isn't just about defending the bits you agree with.
For everyone, a simple test:
The cast of Monty Python, makers of Life of Brian, a vicious assault on the Christian fate and a slur against this religions most important figure, have confessed on camera to countless small crimes, such as drunk driving and illegal use of narcotics. Should the entire cast have been put in jail for it just because they made a movie that upset a religion? They are real crimes just on a level (rich white guys taking drugs and making a nuisance, rather then black guys) nobody bothers to enforce much. But then they made a movie some disagreed with, so to jail?
Would you have called such a move a gross miscarriage of justice DESPITE such a case being perfectly sound on pure legal grounds? Yes?
THEN YOUR ARE A BIGOT.
People seem to have forgotten (some by the lame excuse of not having actually been born yet when this happened, kids today, always got an excuse) the huge upset that happened when Life of Brian was first released. I am old enough to have gotten some of it although for myself it was the dutch comedy song "Popie Jopie" that was the big one (taking the mickey out of the pope) which was popular when the pope was supposed to come to Holland a move that caused a huge shift among Catholics but also protestants as it forced the daily reality of dwindling religious influence to be realized. The 8 may movement had made it common practice for Catholics in Holland to ignore official doctrine even among those not part of the movement. The visit forced people to make a clear choice, follow the Pope or tell him to take his doctrine and stay the fuck out of dutch business. This was at a time when the use of condoms for birth control and aids was a very hot topic with repeated jokes/rumors off the pope/priests putting holes into condoms. This might sound silly but remember, official Catholic doctrine is that condoms should NOT be used, a priest therefor has no reason to put holes in them, since his flock won't be using them, that he is, means he knows his flock is using them despite them burning in hell for it. Jokes often reveal a great deal about society.
Anyway, Life of Brian was not banned, its creators not arrested on convenient laws lying about that nobody would normally bother with.
So why are Muslims treated so differently? Why are so many here suddenly defending the arrest of a person for using an alias online? It is not like when Google forces a real name policy, many here agree with that. But a maker of a movie that upsets Muslims, well, clearly he shouldn't be allowed to use an alias online.
The Atlanta had a very apolegtic posts about Free Speech, about how Americans just don't understand free speech. He tried to link this movie with things as denying the holocaust and mein kampf (which are forbidden in most of the world BUT not most Islamic nations). But this movie never calls Muslims less human beings, it just calls one of their religious fantasy figures a dickhead. Just as a life of Brian completely took the piss out of Jesus. Remember that Christians still get upset at the suggestion their muppet might have been married (how something that never existed could have been married I don't know, surely in a work of fiction, whatever the author wrote is the truth in that fictional universe), yet such mockumentaries are shown with some regularity. And nobody dies or goes to jail.
And America protects free speech far further, it allows the KKK, it allows the black p
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
No, he was not allowed to use aliases on probation. Probation conditions are specific to the individual, and linked with the previous offending (fraud in his case).
How is check kiting any different than the Obama stimulus? They are both spending money that doesn't exist. Shouldn't anyone that voted for or signed the stimulus bill be arrested too?
You got it. The followers of the prophet wouldn't be nearly as upset if it was just nonsense that was spouted. They are upset that it was truth that was said. Makes their entire belief system seem a bit silly.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
You have no evidence he even used the Internet. Or do you think that merely financing and directing a movie means he's also cutting his own marketing and uploading it to YouTube?
Where's the probable cause for such an assertion? No. Even probation officers must have probable cause.
You're just an Obama apologist. The First Amendment was shoved under the bus to distract from the ramifications of Obama's incompetence and all you can do is make pathetic excuses for the arrest of a movie director that embarrassed the emperor.
If that's true, who ordered the arrest? Obama? Why would he do that?
No. The Ceaser must be above reproach. Also known as "plausible deniability". But there is 0% chance that state department did not put pressure on the local police (now that states and municipalities get a lot of federal money it's easy to apply pressure).
he local PD felt pressure from the people and local government to arrest the guy for said parole violations.
There is 0% chance of that. No one gives a damn about parole violations unless the person is actively violent. Exercising free speech is not considered an act of violence, regard of how offensive the speech is.
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
Muslims are all fucking batshit crazy. I am sick of this PC attitude the Obama administration is taking toward this extremist, backwater, uneducated, woman abusing piece of shit religion. I am an atheist personally (I think all religions are moronic), but I don't recall seeing Christians out burning down embassies when some "artist" creates a painting of Jesus taking a shit or whatever the fuck it was. I've never heard of Hindu's or Buddhists rioting. Why is it always the fucking Muslim retards?
Christianity has its extremists and wackos (Westboro), but the number is so miniscule compared to the Islamic world that Islam should be put in a category all by itself. If I were the PUSA I would give a big fat middle finger to the Islamic world when they "requested" Google take the video down. I would tell them to shove it up their hairy sand-filled Islamic assholes. Even if the price of gas went up to $10, I say fuck it. I would rather deal with that than put out a vibe that we are capitulating to extremist demands. But then again, Obama has always tried to appease wackos and apologize for America everywhere he goes, thus this latest episode isn't surprising.
Blah Blah Blah. This situation is far simpler than than all this...
1. If he violated his parole/probation then he goes back to jail. Delay or not, if you effed up and are on parole then you might get pinched for any violation.
2. There is no acceptable reason for anyone, anytime to be prosecuted for anything they've said under the First Amendment. Don't give the "cry fire" set of counterarguments, that's not what I'm talking about. Inciting foreign crazies into a frenzy does not constitute "fire in a theater" or "fighting words".
3. Insane and overly self-important religious fanatics (or people with another agenda who cloak it in religion) will always try to kill off anything they don't like, for whatever available "catalyst". This practice does not legitimize their actions in any way, but more importantly it does not diminish (not even one teensy little bit) our right to catalyze via free speech.
Is this a religion full of angry teenagers? Constantly overreacting to slights against the precious prophet (who was only one of many)?
I say some desensitization is in order.
Let's has a monthly slight against Muhammad that is widely publicized. Not racist insults against Muslims, no comments about towel heads or sand niggers, just humorous cartoons and documentaries about his life that uses the best available info with no pandering to either the Muslim faithful or those opposed to Islam - and not backing down to intimidation.
Keep this up for a few years - that should (I hope) exhaust all that misplaced fervor.
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
My take on things is that this film is really made to show something else. 'Innocence' can also be explained as 'naivety'.
If we see this film, then we most probably react with a facepalm. 'Plan 9 from outer space' probably has more going for it.
Yet (some) Muslims react violently. These actions come more from naivety than from knowledge.
For me, it is like this film has been made to show how naive some Muslims are, and that is also what I think that the title stands for.
I'm sure their anger is all from that video and has nothing to do with the unmanned drones dropping bombs on their family members in the name of the USA. And now this guy who was outed as being an informant for the FBI makes a film attacking Islam.
Now the FBI wants to go into Libya and and investigate and the USA acts surprised that the Libyan government and Libyans in general don't want the FBI in their country? Would you want the FBI in your country after this?
People in the USA are so naive and don't even consider the different perspectives other than their own.
Two weeks ago, this guy was picked up by police and "questioned" for eight hours. For what? He made a movie that pissed people off and he was detained for a day.
Two weeks later, after going through this guy's activities with a fine toothed comb, they come up with a charge that he violated his probation for using a pseudonym when posting on YouTube.
You cannot seriously believe that, had this movie not caused this upset, the police would have arrested him for using a pseudonym on YouTube. Yes, it is a violation of his parole. But, they would not have even looked at him were it not for wanting to charge him over the movie.
On one hand, they got the guy who broke he law, that's a win. But on the other, it makes it look like he's being jailed for expressing his opinion about something controversial. That's a not a win, that's a loss.
Who cares how it looks? He's still a scumbag. His video was trash and hurt the USA. He's not a hero of free speech any more than George Zimmerman is a hero of the first amendment. If you believe in these principles as I do, then lets find some better heroes than this. Don't you think it's a bigger concern that Julian Assange is now an enemy of the State for publishing classified information?
I think that is a far bigger concern than this peon FBI informant Film Maker who committed bank fraud and who accomplished nothing positive or useful with his video beyond pissing people off and getting people killed.
If you had a group of men living next door to you who were beating up women, forcing them to make babies for Duulah, stay at home, no chance for a career or even go outside, and these men were making bombs so they could blow up people down at the market, wouldn't it be a good idea to take them on? Why would you just let them fire rockets into your communities? So they claim that wife beating is their religion. Does that make it a real religion? They want to take over the world, force everyone to bob their head at their religious books for hours on end, is that really a good thing? Especially when you're trying to be creative, using our artistic mediums like painting, dancing, writing, comedy, etc. to worship the Creative Almighty in a constructive, inspiring way. Your way, but they are going to force you to worship in a primitive, violent way. Don't be so cowardly,and please support people who are trying to fight primitive violent men. The Democrats are so corrupt they don't want to fight this, they just want to rip off working people. On Jan. 1 your taxes are going up $3,000. Do you have that money? The following year, Obamacare kicks in and your company may dump the insurance plan so that you'll have to come up with the entire $8,000 or Health care insurance. This is so that sickos can get endless, marginally effective treatments for the rest of their unhealthy life. Don't be so apathetic... fight for what's right. Castrati end up being good slaves. mensunion org
1. He's not a 'film maker', he's a criminal. Hence the conviction.
2. He's very unlucky. Unlucky to have released his non-film about the same time certain politico's were looking for 'another' excuse to roll out the masses.
3. If you throw crap into the fan of someone more powerful. Expect repercussions as the powerful do not like insignificant idiots jacking with any part of their domain.
He's been re-incarcerated because of point #1 above. This serves the administrations plans as they don't want him making any more statements about anything. An alternative look at this specifically might conclude he has been placed in protective custody for the good of all.
He could have been bounced through a fast tracked deportation hearing and either have his residency revoked on grounds of moral turpitude.
I'd like to hear one thing from his video that wasn't true. Just one. That's why they a flipping out. Islam is a cult, and Mohammed was a pedophile and mass murderer. You know why they are off limits? Oil money. Someone needed to say it.