First american jailed for blasphemy

First american jailed for blasphemy

Posted in the Islam Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Onelawforall

London, UK

#1 May 11, 2013
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula deserves a place in American history. He is the first person in this country jailed for violating Islamic anti-blasphemy laws.
Nakkoula produced a video lampooning Muhammad. The video is [email protected] but freedom of speech is about allowing [email protected] and not condemning people on trumped up charges.
Faith

New Baltimore, MI

#3 May 11, 2013
The Administration needed a fall guy to back-up their ludicrous failure in Benghazi. This poor sap was handy.

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#4 May 11, 2013
Last time I checked the court proceedings, he was jailed for violating the terms of his probation.

But I guess in "anything goes when it is against islam", a multiply convicted felon (drugs charges in 1997, bank and credit card fraud in 2010; he also violated the terms of his probation in 2002) suddenly is a "good guy".
Onelawforall

London, UK

#5 May 12, 2013
It was an awful video but he was trying to bring attention to the plight of Copts in Egypt. Examine muslim countries and the larger the number of muslims in a country the more dictatorial it is, the more repessive and the more it persecutes minorites and the more fascist it is. Malaysia is supposed to be a democracy but it is a racist govt that persecutes Hindus & Chinese giving preferential treatment to muslims. That is no different than apartheid. The so called Arab spring has broughty democracy and who do muslims vote for? The right wing nutters of the Muslim brotherhood.
If Islam can't accept the parody of a man who went into and cave and claimed god spoke to him it shows they have no sense of humour. If they don't like democracy and human laws they should go and live in a muslim country where they will have everything ordered for them by Imams.
Proud American

Indianapolis, IN

#6 May 12, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
Last time I checked the court proceedings, he was jailed for violating the terms of his probation.
But I guess in "anything goes when it is against islam", a multiply convicted felon (drugs charges in 1997, bank and credit card fraud in 2010; he also violated the terms of his probation in 2002) suddenly is a "good guy".
Not suddenly a good guy, but that's beside the point. No one should be jailed for exercising their right to free speech. Or does that only apply when the person in question is attacking Christianity?
Hello

New York, NY

#7 May 12, 2013
Are you serious? There must be another reason he was arrested!!!

There is no way they can arrest people for freedom of speech. This is pure religious discrimination if it means appeasing one religion.
Hello

New York, NY

#8 May 12, 2013
Yup its true, here is a link:

http://news.yahoo.com/calif-man-behind-anti-m...

Americans are too busy watching tv and playing video games and living in a fake digital world instead of being out in the streets and protecting the Constitution.

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#9 May 13, 2013
Proud American wrote:
<quoted text>
Not suddenly a good guy, but that's beside the point. No one should be jailed for exercising their right to free speech.
He wasn't. He was jailed for violation the terms of his probation.
Onelawforall

London, UK

#10 May 14, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
<quoted text>
He wasn't. He was jailed for violation the terms of his probation.
That is what the govt says but would he have been brought to trial and imprisoned if the govt had not intervened? Violation of probation does not usually entail a prison sentence.
Hilary Clinton is quoted as saying "We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted." Well she did that.
They couldn't catch Al Capone on murder so they caught him on tax evasion. They could not catch Nakoula on fredom of speech so they caught him on violation of his probation and chucked him in jail.

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#11 May 14, 2013
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
That is what the govt says but would he have been brought to trial and imprisoned if the govt had not intervened? Violation of probation does not usually entail a prison sentence.
That depends on the priors. This guy had several prior convictions.
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
Hilary Clinton is quoted as saying "We will make sure that the person who made that film is arrested and prosecuted." Well she did that.
Is quoted by one father of a SEAL killed in Benghazi claiming she said this to him at a ceremony. One person whose experiences at the repatriation ceremony were also at odds with those of others at the same ceremony.
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
They couldn't catch Al Capone on murder so they caught him on tax evasion. They could not catch Nakoula on fredom of speech so they caught him on violation of his probation and chucked him in jail.
Looks like you're saying Al Capone murdering people was OK...(think about that for a while).
Onelawforall

London, UK

#12 May 14, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
<quoted text>
That depends on the priors. This guy had several prior convictions.
<quoted text>
Is quoted by one father of a SEAL killed in Benghazi claiming she said this to him at a ceremony. One person whose experiences at the repatriation ceremony were also at odds with those of others at the same ceremony.
<quoted text>
Looks like you're saying Al Capone murdering people was OK...(think about that for a while).
He had prior convictions but his violation of probation was to express himself in the USA using freedom of speech which is what the USA is supposed to be proud of. His expression was not criminal and had nothing to do with his past offences.

It was not only Hilary Clinton who wanted him in jail. Obama is quoted also. He said: The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
Now that is a stange thing for the President of the USA to say when America is supposed to believe in freedom of speech. It is more like something you would hear from an Imam in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia etc etc etc.

I am not saying Al Capone murdering people was OK. What I am saying is that if the govt wants to get you they will get you, charge you and then hope the case is forgotten while the convict rots in jail for blaspheming a mass muderer, slave owner, rapist, assassin, woman flogging, hand choppng imperialist. What I can't tell the truth about the fascist Muhammad anymore?

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#13 May 14, 2013
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
He had prior convictions but his violation of probation was to express himself in the USA using freedom of speech which is what the USA is supposed to be proud of. His expression was not criminal and had nothing to do with his past offences.
The violation of his probation included using aliases, something he had done before when he defrauded a few hundred thousand dollars from banks. So you are wrong.
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
It was not only Hilary Clinton who wanted him in jail. Obama is quoted also. He said: The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied."

Gee, add a little bit more to the quote and it all sounds a lot different, eh?
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
Now that is a stange thing for the President of the USA to say when America is supposed to believe in freedom of speech. It is more like something you would hear from an Imam in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia etc etc etc.
It's not a strange thing to say when you look at the whole quote, or better yet, the whole speech. It's a call to work together, not spread hate. And nowhere is there any reference to putting those who spread hate in jail!
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not saying Al Capone murdering people was OK. What I am saying is that if the govt wants to get you they will get you, charge you
In order to be convicted of a crime, you have to have committed a crime. And that's what both did. One evaded taxes, the other violated his probation.
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
and then hope the case is forgotten while the convict rots in jail for blaspheming a mass muderer, slave owner, rapist, assassin, woman flogging, hand choppng imperialist. What I can't tell the truth about the fascist Muhammad anymore?
As you will note, plenty of people do this (Terry Jones come to mind) without getting put in jail. The facts are that your newfound hero violated his probation and got caught, and that you are defending him for one reason only: his opinion on Mohammed/islam fits yours.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#14 May 14, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied."
Gee, add a little bit more to the quote and it all sounds a lot different, eh?...
Regardless of how much you add, under American jurisprudence, it's legally impossible to slander dead prophet, so exactly how is the Obama administration going to take away our future for it?

BTW, Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed and the Holocaust is denied throughout Islam.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#15 May 14, 2013
America is still protection Isolationist, so if it wants to trade with a billion and a half people then it shouldn't insult their religious leader i.e. The Prophet Muhammad.
The POTUS, polymath that he is, understands this, hence his statement "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam" for the economic future of America.
Re. Jesus Christ, he is irrelevant in world affairs.
Onelawforall

Darlington, UK

#16 May 14, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
<quoted text>
The violation of his probation included using aliases, something he had done before when he defrauded a few hundred thousand dollars from banks. So you are wrong.

But he was not committing a crime. He was expressing an opionion and he was sent to prison for using the first amendment.

<quoted text>
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam. Yet to be credible, those who condemn that slander must also condemn the hate we see when the image of Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed, or the Holocaust is denied."
Gee, add a little bit more to the quote and it all sounds a lot different, eh?

Have you seen the "Life of Brian". There have been countless criticisms of Christianity and of Jesus. It is not a crime. It has suddenly become a crime because muslims cannot abide the truth being told anbout their so called prophet. The law of libele only applies to those who are living. It would not apply to Muhammad even if he was alive because the truth is he was a murderer, rapist, slave owner and ruthless dictator.

<quoted text>
It's not a strange thing to say when you look at the whole quote, or better yet, the whole speech. It's a call to work together, not spread hate. And nowhere is there any reference to putting those who spread hate in jail!

No. It's called kowtowing to a doctrine of neo nazi racism. America has the first amendemnt of freedom of speech. Once you start accepting special rights of religious people you no longer have freedom of speech and you no longer have equality of people before the law.

<quoted text>
In order to be convicted of a crime, you have to have committed a crime. And that's what both did. One evaded taxes, the other violated his probation.

He violated his probation law by using the first amendment. Since when has using the American constitution become a crime?

<quoted text>
As you will note, plenty of people do this (Terry Jones come to mind) without getting put in jail. The facts are that your newfound hero violated his probation and got caught, and that you are defending him for one reason only: his opinion on Mohammed/islam fits yours.
And you are defending a neo nazi doctrine that supports racism, misogyny, homophobia, slavery, hand chopping, flogging, stoning, assassination and thuggery. I doubt very much that you are an atheist as you claim as an atheist would see through the charade of Muhammad which is poorly disguised nazism.

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#18 May 15, 2013
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
Regardless of how much you add, under American jurisprudence, it's legally impossible to slander dead prophet, so exactly how is the Obama administration going to take away our future for it?
Simple: make them irrelevant. Make them look like the followers of the Westboro Baptist Church.
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW, Jesus Christ is desecrated, churches are destroyed and the Holocaust is denied throughout Islam.
Islam doesn't do a thing. An ideology cannot do anything. As we have seen throughout history, it is people who do things, often using their ideology as an 'excuse'.

“... truth will out.”

Since: May 08

Stratford, Connecticut.

#19 May 15, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
<quoted text>
Simple: make them irrelevant. Make them look like the followers of the Westboro Baptist Church ....
As reprehensible as they are, the Westboro protests don't result in the murder and mayhem of most muslim protests.
Marco the atheist wrote:
Islam doesn't do a thing. An ideology cannot do anything. As we have seen throughout history, it is people who do things ...
In this historical example, the people are muslims, the followers of islam.

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#20 May 15, 2013
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
But he was not committing a crime. He was expressing an opionion and he was sent to prison for using the first amendment.
Again you are wrong. He had received specific restrictions on how he could express his opinion. The law can do that, and indeed does so. He could have published his writings through regular channels, or ask permission to do so on the Internet, using his real name, and he would have expressed the exact same opinion, but without committing a crime.
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you seen the "Life of Brian". There have been countless criticisms of Christianity and of Jesus. It is not a crime. It has suddenly become a crime because muslims cannot abide the truth being told anbout their so called prophet. The law of libele only applies to those who are living. It would not apply to Muhammad even if he was alive because the truth is he was a murderer, rapist, slave owner and ruthless dictator.
Sigh. This is a rather weak attempt to steer away from the evidence provided to you that Obama not only did not refer to any legal action, he even made it clear that if people get upset, they should do so reciprocally.
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
No. It's called kowtowing to a doctrine of neo nazi racism. America has the first amendemnt of freedom of speech. Once you start accepting special rights of religious people you no longer have freedom of speech and you no longer have equality of people before the law.
The full speech makes it clear there is no attempt to give religious people special rights. It's a call to stop the polarization. I'm sure you will give me the right to call you whatever insults I can come up with, but I am also certain you will not see it as constructive dialogue...
Onelawforall wrote:
<quoted text>
He violated his probation law by using the first amendment. Since when has using the American constitution become a crime?
See above: it is not his use of the first amendment, but the tools he used.
Onelawforall wrote:

And you are defending a neo nazi doctrine that supports racism, misogyny, homophobia, slavery, hand chopping, flogging, stoning, assassination and thuggery. I doubt very much that you are an atheist as you claim as an atheist would see through the charade of Muhammad which is poorly disguised nazism.
You are free to believe what you think. A bit of searching on this forum would have shown you that I have actually myself, on numerous occasions, called the current interpretation of islam a form of fascism. You are also not the first one who, when contradicted in a discussion about islam, accuses me of supporting islam. It appears some people can't see that two wrongs don't make a right. Christians are not nice people because muslims are evil. Homophobia amongst christians (and loads of others) isn't OK just because muslims are worse. The KKK isn't my friend if racism amongst muslims happens to be worse.

“Facts, not fiction”

Since: Apr 07

Earth

#21 May 15, 2013
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
As reprehensible as they are, the Westboro protests don't result in the murder and mayhem of most muslim protests.
And the relevance to my statement is...?
Joe DeCaro wrote:
<quoted text>
In this historical example, the people are muslims, the followers of islam.
I know plenty of muslims, who claim to follow islam, who don't do anything you claim they do. Just like I know plenty of christians, who claim to follow christianity, who don't do a lot of things others tell them they should do if they are christians. Ideology is an interesting fluid dynamic. Generalizations and charicatures can be fun in a debate with someone who you know isn't going to change any of his opinions, but in world politics it doesn't work at all.
Onelawforall

London, UK

#22 May 15, 2013
Marco the atheist wrote:
<quoted text>
Islam doesn't do a thing. An ideology cannot do anything. As we have seen throughout history, it is people who do things, often using their ideology as an 'excuse'.
Of course an ideology does things. People do the acts but their acts are based upon ideology. Nazi ideology depicted Germans as the superior Aryan race and Jews as inferior. And Germans acted upon that ideology. The Jews were vermin and the consequence was the holocaust.
The advertising industry is based upon ideology. The belief that they can sell a consumer product through ideology on the media. Not everyone acts upon it but enough do to make the advertising industry a very profitable organisation. All based upon ideology.
Communism did not appear out of thin air. The ideology of Marx and Engels enraptured people and millions of people waved little red books in praise of Mao Tse Tung.
The ideology of Islam leads to women being stoned or flogged, thieves having their hands cut off and gays killed. To claim ideology does nothing is very naive. They are not using ideology as an excuse. These people who flog women are as influenced by ideology as the person who buys coke.
Coca cola ideology sells cans of coke and people drink coke.
Evil ideologies sells evil thoughts and people drink evil.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Islam Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BREAKING-Kuwaiti PRINCE Abdullah CONVERTED to X... 3 min AussieBobby 11
News Will Islam Inherit the Earth? 19 min Lawrence Wolf 202
News Islam Will Conquer Italy and the Entire West (Sep '10) 20 min Raz 514,221
Why do Moslems lick each other's butts? 44 min MuHOGmad 1
Jay - The mentally ill troll of this forum 2 hr Mocking jay the dog 59
Jay: ISRAEL's uncertain future (May '14) 3 hr Khan 83
Islam will prevail in America 3 hr Rabbeen Al Jihad 46
More from around the web