September 13, 2012

“Disturbing Calls For Censorship In America By Professors, Journalists, U.S. Diplomats, And Egyptian Government”

Hans Bader makes the case:

In response to a film that mocked Mohammed, journalists on MSNBC, a professor, and the Egyptian government called for punishment of the film’s producers. Prominent left-leaning law professors have similarly advocated that such speech be restricted, citing customary international law. Their position, if accepted, would seriously menace free speech in America, and harm the publishing and film industries. (At the UN, the Obama administration has also lentqualifiedsupport to restrictions on “hate speech” and speech that incites hostility to Islam and other religions.)

The Egyptian government said, “We ask the American government to take a firm position toward this film’s producers within the framework of international charters that criminalise acts that stir strife on the basis of race, colour or religion.” In a commentary yesterday, Prof. Peter Spiro, one of the leading international law scholars in the country, cited international norms as a justification for banning such speech: “The deplorable killing of Chris Stevens in Libya suggests a foreign relations law rationale for banning hate speech. Remember, the Benghazi protests were prompted by this film depicting the prophet Mohammed in not very flattering terms. The equation from the protesters at the US consulate in Benghazi: this film was produced by an American; we will hold America responsible for it.” Earlier, he wrote, “an international norm against hate speech would supply a basis for prohibiting it, the First Amendment notwithstanding.” State Department legal advisor Harold Koh, the former dean of Yale Law School, has also suggested that such international norms provide a justification for restricting such speech.

Similarly, journalists and a professor argued that the film’s producer should be prosecuted. The professor’s USA Today op-ed is entitled “Why Sam Bacile Deserves Arrest.” Law professor Eugene Volokh quotes them as follows:

[Professor Anthea Butler of the University of Pennsylvania]: “Good Morning. How soon is [producer] Sam Bacile going to be in jail folks? I need him to go now.When Americans die because you are stupid…” “And yes, I know we have First Amendment rights,but if you don’t understand the Religion you hate, STFU about it. . . . people do jail for speech. First Amendment doesn’t cover EVERYTHING a PERSON says.” “[T]he murder of the Ambassador and the employees is wrong, wrong. But Bacile will have to face his actions . . .”

[MSNBC’s Mike Barnicle] “Given this supposed minister’s role in last year’s riots in Afghanistan, where people died, and given his apparent or his alleged role in this film, where, not yet nailed down, but at least one American, perhaps the American ambassador is dead, it might be time for the Department of Justice to start viewing his role as an accessory before or after the fact.”

[MSNBC’s Donny Deutsch]: “I was thinking the same thing, yeah.”

In reality, the minister that the MSNBC commentators blamed for the film depicting Mohammed does not appear to have been involved in its production, and the attack on our embassy in Libya that left our ambassador and three others dead appears to have been preplanned, and not inspired by recent outrage over the film after it was publicized in the Islamic world.

Nevertheless, prior to the attacks, the U.S. Embassy in Egypt not only condemned speech offensive to Muslims such as the film, but also apologized for the “abuse of free speech” in the United States. “Abuse of free speech” is a phrase used by lawyers and diplomats to mean speech that can be banned as unprotected. For example, many state constitutions contain an “abuse” exception in their free-speech clause. For example, California’s Constitution says, “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right.” These constitutions were written mostly at an earlier time when free speech was construed narrowly to ban prior restraints on speech (one example of a prior restraint is where a government censor reviews speech before it can be published), but not to prevent criminal punishment after-the-fact for speech deemed “bad” by the legislature. Similarly, in other countries, where freedom of speech is typically narrower than in the United States, legislatures are often authorized to pass legislation prohibiting and punishing “abusive” speech.

[…]

The Obama administration was earlier criticized by legal scholars for effectively endorsing anti-blasphemy legislation. UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh and George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin lamented the Administration’s support for proposals at the United Nations to restrict “hate speech” against Islam and other religions. In USA Today, liberal law professor Jonathan Turley criticized the Obama administration for endorsing a “blasphemy” exception to free speech: “Around the world, free speech is being sacrificed on the altar of religion. Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simple blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion. This growing movement has reached the United Nations, where religiously conservative countries received a boost in their campaign to pass an international blasphemy law. It came from the most unlikely of places: the United States.”

Allow me to interject and take this one step further: what the Obama administration is endorsing is sharia blasphemy laws — in a direct perversion and inversion of our own First Amendment.  Simple as that.  And in a direct assault on our Constitution and our very unalienable rights.

Why should we care what the Obama administration says to curry favor at the UN? After all, the First Amendment trumps customary international law, right? Well, not according to some respectedleft-leaning legal scholars, such as Peter Spiro. International law can undermine civil liberties either directly, by expanding the government’s enumerated powers, or indirectly, by giving the federal government a “compelling interest” for imposing an otherwise forbidden regulation.

Treaties can give the federal government the ability to impose legislation that would otherwise be beyond its enumerated powers. Congress can rely on its treaty powers to pass legislation regulating private conduct that would be beyond its power to regulate under the Interstate Commerce Clause. For example, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently so ruled in United States v. Bond (2012), where it upheld a woman’s conviction for an intrastate, non-commercial crime — attempting to sicken her husband’s paramour by putting chemicals on a doorknob and car door handles — because the federal law under which she was prosecuted was passed to implement an international chemical-weapons treaty (the implementing federal anti-poisoning law is so broad that you could violate it by feeding chocolate or onions to the neighbor’s dog).

International law (including unratified treaties) can also undermine civil-liberties by arguably creating a “compelling state interest” in regulating speech that conflicts with international norms. The First Amendment’s text does not contain any written exception for speech that the government has a “compelling interest” in banning, but the Supreme Court has made up such a “compelling interest” exception. Legal scholars argue that compliance with either international treaties, or  “customary international law” (international norms contained in treaties that the U.S. Senate may not even have ratified), is such a “compelling interest,” and that hate speech or speech that defames or incites hostility to religions such as Islam must be restricted pursuant to international law, since treaties have been interpreted by committees of legal scholars as requiring countries to restrict such speech. Left-wing legal scholars take vague international treaties and interpret them as mandating their ideological wishlists, like restricting criticism of Islam and minority religions as “hate speech,” and mandating quota-based affirmative action. The CEDAW equal-rights treaty has been construed by an international committee as requiring “redistribution of wealth,” “affirmative action,” government-sponsored “access to rapid and easy abortion,” and “the application of quotas and numerical goals.”

The federal appeals court in Washington once upheld a municipal ordinance restricting protests around embassies based on a “compelling interest” derived from international law, although a divided Supreme Court partly reversed that ruling in Boos v. Barry on the grounds that one of its restrictions was not proven to be essential to achieving that compelling interest, because Congress, unlike municipal authorities, had not supported the restriction or viewed it as essential. (It upheld other less onerous restrictions without really needing to rely on interests derived from international law.) Three of the Supreme Court justices, however, would have upheld the ordinance in its entirety, including its prohibition “on the display of any sign within 500 feet of a foreign embassy if that sign tends to bring that foreign government into ‘public odium’ or ‘public disrepute,’” based on the reasoning of the lower court, which had relied on international law to justify the restriction. (On the other hand, the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in Reid v. Covert (1957) said that “no agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the [federal government] which is free from the restraints of the Constitution” (i.e., the Bill of Rights). Still earlier cases arguably rely on international law to reject rights claims. The law is murky on this point.)

Some courts have held that corporations can be sued for violations of “customary international law” under the Alien Tort Claims Act, or Alien Torts Statute. So broadening the reach of customary international law has obvious implications for American business as well.

If “customary international law” prohibits defamation or incitement of hostility towards Islam, the argument might well be made that this creates a compelling interest in restricting otherwise protected speech that runs afoul of broad laws aimed at discrimination in public accommodations, including movie theaters, as I explain in more detail at this link.

If you believe the left is after a bureaucratic one-world government run by them — with subjects the whole planet over — you aren’t crazy or some fringe conspiracy nut.  You’re merely observant.  Our Constitution, under such conditions, must necessarily be deconstructed; and the safeguards for preserving our liberty, which are manifest in the limits placed on the power of government and the positing of natural rights that exist prior to government, which government can not either grant or rescind, must be attenuated or re-interpreted — yet again, by way of a scummy build-up of bad court decisions turned into worse court precedent, which then is held to supersede the Constitution itself.

This is all inexorable and inevitable, and it begins, as I’ve so often shown, with language, meaning, intent, and what comes to constitute legitimate interpretation.

Unless and until we change the foundational assumptions that are designed to structurally reinforce ideological leftism, we must content ourselves with doing what we’ve long been accustomed to doing:  losing more slowly, even when we “win.”

Which is why so much of this kind of reworking of our history seems to be repeating itself.

Posted by Jeff G. @ 2:55pm
122 comments | Trackback

Comments (122)

  1. I know we have First Amendment rights,but if you don’t understand the Religion you hate, STFU about it. . . .

    God almighty that is some world class stupid right there.

    Even for a college professor.

  2. Oh lord, Hitchens must be flipping in his grave

    Rage Boy keenly looks forward to anger, while we worriedly anticipate trouble, and fret about etiquette, and prepare the next retreat. If taken to its logical conclusion, this would mean living at the pleasure of Rage Boy, and that I am not prepared to do.

  3. I’ve got a sure fire way to get lefty professors and journalists off the anti-free speech bandwagon when it comes to religion. When they pass their anti-butthurt laws I am going to sue to the current most “edgy” version of piss christ for emotional distress.

    Just kidding, It wouldn’t make a difference anyway. The lefty journalist and professor are such shameless hacks these days. It would be good for chuckle to hear how defacto blasphemy laws should be just applied to just one religion though.

  4. The equation from the protesters at the US consulate in Benghazi: this film was produced by an American; we will hold America responsible for it.”

    How’s this for a translation? “The equation from the planners in the US task forces in the Gulf and the Med: these attacks were performed by Islamists; we will hold Islam responsible for them.”

    Same fucking construction, talking heads. ‘Splain to me why you’ll defend one set of stimulus/response and not the other.

  5. Blasphemy? Hell, nobody does a good blasphemy like a Catholic. Here:

    “Fuck Mohammad and the flying jack-ass he rode into history on.”

  6. Did anyone look at the comments to the USA Today article perchance? I can’t believe there are that many people who really have no concept of what freedom of speech really is.

    I weep for my country.

  7. Well, well, well … we see where Eric Holder’s priorities lay

    Federal authorities have identified a southern California man once convicted of financial crimes as the key figure behind the anti-Muslim film that ignited mob violence against U.S. embassies across the Mideast, a U.S. law enforcement official said Thursday.

    Attorney General Eric Holder said that Justice Department officials had opened a criminal investigation into the deaths of the U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other diplomats killed during an attack on the American mission in Benghazi. It was not immediately clear whether authorities were focusing on the California filmmaker as part of that probe.

  8. - So now its against the law to yell “Muslim” in a ceowded movie theater?

  9. Same fucking construction, talking heads. ‘Splain to me why you’ll defend one set of stimulus/response and not the other.

    The same way they say that violence isn’t the answer while they are surrendering.

  10. The same way they say that violence isn’t the answer while they are surrendering.

    – Or using some stupid trumped up excuse to do violence to the victim, especially when they can’t fight back.

  11. I just heard on ABC News that this “Innocence of the Muslims” —or whatever the hell the title of the little movie that started this big bruhaha is— aired on Egytptian state controlled TV. (ABC News neglected to mention that part). Now if that’s true, and not just ABC getting the facts wrong, this entire thing is a fucking setup cooked up in Tehran.

  12. my (blessedly few) lefty friends have told me recently that they are terrified of “all the religious extremists!!”

    Meaning, of course, fundamentalist Christians. When I point out that the Amish do not cut off people’s heads over any insult, and even forgave that guy who shot their children in their school house a few years back — in sharp contrast to Muslim behavior and violence?

    There is no answer. They will not allow themselves to acknowledge there is a difference.

  13. - Whatever the real truth is Ernst, 5 will get you 20 that Jug ears got punked by the MB/Al Qaeda.

    – Otherwise Him and the poodle press would not be aggressively pursuing this.

  14. I’ve read reports saying the muslims are pissed off about (among other things, but then isn’t that always the case) this administration’s “victory dance” over killing Bin Laden. Are these professors, et al asking for the admin to be brought to justice?

  15. They will not allow themselves to acknowledge there is a difference.

    you be forcing them to discriminate

  16. - Theres some speculation that the Bin Laden thing was also a setup. That Al Qaeda had no use for him and gave him up intentionally. So it goes even deeper than the embassy attacks.

    – But you’ll never see that even brought up by the Pravda on the Hudson press corp, let alone spiking the ball by Jug ears and the DNC.

  17. I think I’ve found an underreported possible cause for the Libya rioting that makes at least as much sense as a movie nobody saw: Libya’s hottest temperature world record overturned, Death Valley — in the U.S. — is now the champion.

  18. Am I the only one who is beginning to feel as if we live in some sort of long cosmic joke?

    I’ve never been a conspiracy buff, well not much, but I’ve gotten closer than before in these last 4 years.

  19. Frequent Bridge Collapses Help Boost China’s GDP

    Ah, yes: the “Galloping Gertie” Corollary to the Broken Windows Theory.

  20. “There was the intellectual or ideological level, which was dominated by Islamists and leftists. This was the part of the revolution that was most visible. But there was another level as well, the street level, which was dominated by the Islamists and this same collection of young toughs, high school and technical school students who hang out around Tahrir Square. They like fights, they like to storm buildings, some, if not most, are addicted to Tramadol. It’s a great anti-police drug. You don’t feel pain. They can beat you to death and you won’t feel a thing. They’re calling it the Zombie drug. Tramadol was a big part of the revolution.

    link

  21. BTW the movie is pretty good in a Troll II sort of way.

  22. Troll II had to be the worst movie evah.

    I’m going to have to watch this one now.

  23. The Left is determined to eliminate free speech. This is plain, naked evil, and there is already language in the law set to enable repression.

    For example, California’s Constitution says, “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right.”

    Like a lovely loaded weapon, just waiting to be used against dissent. The Prop 8 fight was very ugly in Clownifornia. Soon Sacramento will cite “abuse” of free speech to silence opposition to Leftist objectives in fights like that one.

  24. flashing light at drudge

    The US administration is now facing a crisis in Libya. Sensitive documents have gone missing from the consulate in Benghazi and the supposedly secret location of the “safe house” in the city, where the staff had retreated, came under sustained mortar attack. Other such refuges across the country are no longer deemed “safe”.

    Some of the missing papers from the consulate are said to list names of Libyans who are working with Americans, putting them potentially at risk from extremist groups, while some of the other documents are said to relate to oil contracts.

    According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and “lockdown”, under which movement is severely restricted.

    Mr Stevens had been on a visit to Germany, Austria and Sweden and had just returned to Libya when the Benghazi trip took place with the US embassy’s security staff deciding that the trip could be undertaken safely.

    link

  25. newrouter says September 13, 2012 at 6:00 pm

    flashing light at drudge

    Outstanding. The electorate in the United Kingdom will be well informed for November 7th’s election.

  26. . The electorate in the United Kingdom will be well informed for November 7th’s election.

    mark levin’s audience knows about now

  27. Revealed: inside story of US envoy’s assassination
    Exclusive: America ‘was warned of embassy attack but did nothing’

    Obama lied, the ambassador died.

  28. - I’m still monitoeing the Cairo embassy. Police continue to use tear gas to scatter protesters.

  29. - Obama did not attend a single intel meeting for a week before the attacks.

    – See, that way he had no way of knowing, and the fucking press isn’t going to ask.

  30. Ken White has an excellent fisking of the brilliant Perfesser at Popehat. Me, I don’t give a shit about the movie or who made it unless it turns out to be a Muslim Brotherhood false flag joint. I simply can’t take anymore idiocy.

    Speaking of idiocy, Barrett Brown has been arrested by the FBI and charged with threatening an agent. He’s currently detained, presumably without heroin.

  31. At least there’s something amusing going on, eh Mike?

  32. At least there’s something amusing going on, eh Mike?

    Yes Pablo, we could definitely use some comic relief about now.

  33. - Brown got Zeta’d by the Sith, coolies.

  34. - Has Jug Ears even done a Q&A press conference since this all started. I’ve seen no indication of one since his statement.

  35. Yup, they’re going to use the “don’t say mean stuff about Muslims” to enforce “you christers gotta STFU RIGHT NOW!”

    Which, molon labe and stuff.

    We really are two nations who occupy the same land. If only it were not the same dimension.

  36. No. After the one statement he made, as he was walking away someone asked whether this was considered an act of war. He didn’t answer.

  37. I think I’ve found an underreported possible cause for the Libya rioting that makes at least as much sense as a movie nobody saw:

    I like to think it was because they saw the Democrats booing God.

  38. “Any armed officials of the U.S. government, particularly the FBI, will be regarded as a potential Zeta assassin squad,” Brown says. “The FBI knows that I am armed, that I come from a military family, that I was taught to shoot by a Vietnam vet.”

    That. Is. Hilarious. Clearly, he sure skeered ‘em.

  39. We really are two nations who occupy the same land.

    bos-wash vs america

  40. Barrett’s tugboat ass couldn’t keep up with his battleship mouth.

  41. - So why isn’t the press asking where bummblefuck is hiding?

  42. I wonder how many of his buddies that prefered to keep that “anonymous” bit literal are sweating bullets right now.

    I am guessing BBs extensive military training didn’t include a lot of counter-interogation techniques.

  43. - Or even more to the point, since that question is purely rhetorical, why the fuck isn’t Romney flogging that like a rented BMW?

  44. So why isn’t the press asking where bummblefuck is hiding?

    Most of them are hiding with him, would be my guess.

  45. - Well Moe, based on that conspiratal confab they got caught in can you blame them.

    – I mean, the bullshit narrative squawkers are so busted there isn’t wadding boots long enough to keep their noses out of the cesspool at this point.

  46. I am guessing BBs extensive military training didn’t include a lot of counter-interogation techniques.

    I hear opiate withdrawal is a bitch.

  47. Barry? Fundraising or golf would be my guess.

  48. - As this thing developes its looking like a simple deopping of the ball, so his browness is trapped like a rat in a burning closet. He’s waiting to see how much of it will get out so he knows how to spin it and which lies to tell.

  49. You really can’t believe anything BB says. He talks so much bullshit it’s impossible to separate it from the pepper.

    Now he’s a heroin addict? He’s a firearms expert? A hacker and a counter-espionage dude? He’s a windbag, we know that.

  50. Mmmmm….sharia.

  51. When Barret Brown ( whoever the fuck-a doodle he is) says ‘Zeta Assassin’ is he referring to alien greys from the Zeta Reticuli star system as described by Barney and Betty Hill?

  52. - All together now people:

    WHERE THE HELL IS OBAMA???????

  53. I like Mr. Barrett he’s mostly a sensible libertarian type who sometimes gets kinda passionate about this that or the other thing when it strikes him

    he’s always seemed like a nice person to where it’d be fun to have coffee with him

  54. it’d be fun to have coffee with him

    tacos not so much

  55. if you buy a man a taco you’ve fed him for a day but if you teach him how to make tacos in a truck then he’s still gonna need to apply for lots of licenses from the city and wait for all sorts of approvals before he can even begin to sell any of them

    it can take a whole year or more

  56. WHERE THE HELL IS OBAMA???????

    Crying in the closet? Doesn’t he have pressing state bidness like raising money with his hip-hop buds Jay-Z and Beyonce?

    Maybe he’ll take them down to the Situation Room again so they can take some farewell pictures.

  57. When Barret Brown ( whoever the fuck-a doodle he is) says ‘Zeta Assassin’ is he referring to alien greys from the Zeta Reticuli star system as described by Barney and Betty Hill?

    Heh, maybe Barrett’s referring to the greys who visited Whitley Strieber as a child at Olmos Park in San Antonio.

  58. - Thats why we send you off to negotiate with the birdbrained kooks on the Left feets. You speak their language and you get to be among friends.

    – In other news…. Jimah is still not getting the memo’s.

  59. -Someone should email Cahtah and tell hin Arafat is dead.

  60. if you buy a man a taco you’ve fed him for a day

    and a wetback can open up a cart the next day no problem.

  61. your words drip with cynicism

  62. BB is refering to a Mexican drug cartel with the Zeta shit.

    And I don’t believe much of his rambling, but being a junkie kind of fits his behavior.

  63. Mini-thirty sawed off into ultimate suppressed zombie fighting instrument with REALLY bad photo-shoppin’.

    http://imageshack.us/a/img19/223/zombiefighter.jpg

    Why sawed off? Because…um…thingie.

  64. your words drip with cynicism

    you missed the fresh basil i sprinkled on top!

  65. That suppressor may be a converted marital aid. I’m not sure.

  66. That took me like a whole minute!

  67. Pssssssssssssst, Pala. There’s a new movie out about….Lincoln, starring Daniel Day Lewis.

    Coming to a theatre near you.

  68. Meh. Spielberg.

  69. My prediction: BB will go away for a while, and come out of Club Fed a Bible-thumping preacher haranguing us all about forgiveness and can’t-we-all-just-get-alongness.

  70. I’m gonna go see Judge Dredd instead.

    Some UK comic writers wanted to bitch about Thatcher cracking down on people because of suspicions that they had ties to the IRA but they didn’t want to risk losing their jobs so they set their dystopian police state piece in a giant post apocalyptic American city on the east coast and made fun of Clint Eastwood, american pop culture, jingoism, and the burger wars while they were at it. It caught on.

    Sylvester Stallone had his chance at making the movie, and kind of blew it. Now Carl Urban is taking a shot at it.

  71. BB becomes a latter day Chuck Colson? That would be a sight.

  72. I refuse to believe Daniel Day Lewis can behead a vampire with an axe. Hell, I didn’t believe him with Hawkeye’s rifle in Last of the Mohicans. He’d try to pick up one of Jeff’s dead weights and both his arms would fall off.

  73. Whoa — Eomer/Bones as Judge Dredd?

  74. I forgot about Lincoln being a vampire killer. That will be awesome!

    I hope it’s 3D.

  75. Yeah, ‘ Last of the Mohicans’ was just two hours of running and shouting broken up by fights and wide shots. Weird movie. Of course James Fenimore Cooper wrote pretty weird stuff so that might have been an appropriate approach.

  76. You know what movie I’d like to see? Cheech Marin in Last of the Mehicans. He plays the last guy in California who’s ever seen the south side of the border and doesn’t know why the fuck all the dumbshit kids are so big on La Reconquista. “You want to take this place back to Mehico? What are you, loco!?”

  77. “Whoa — Eomer/Bones as Judge Dredd?”

    He also played the head vampire in Sony’s “Priest” which I bought for $5 at a dollar store while trying to load up on lot’s of off-brand vanilla frappachino in a can.

    Hopefully he knows not to take the helmet off. Ever. He’s just a stubbly shin and scowl.

  78. Last of the Michoacans would be more like it.

  79. He was in the sequel to Pitch Black too. Can’t remember his character’s name.

  80. They updated the Barrett Brown lulz link…

    Anonymous sub-group AntiSec retaliated for Barrett Brown’s arrest tonight by publishing the purported addresses and credit card numbers of 13 federal government workers — promising more to come.

    Here’s the censored top of AntiSec’s missive:

    There ain’t enough butter in Cellblock 17 to save that boy’s ass.

  81. you can’t just up and arrest Mr. Barrett and expect there not to be any consequences I guess

  82. - Well thats what cell block 17 and butter is for feets.

  83. - Under the circumstances, this should be interesting….

    – After next week the Left will be able to blame Romney for any foriegn policy fuck ups, since we now know Bummblefuck is MIA on the subject.

  84. Rep. Louie Gohmert, on w/ Beck: “You don’t have to pay people to hate you. They’ll do it for free.”

  85. Zeta assassins, Mexico drug wars.

  86. Pingback: That talk of ‘artistic freedom’ turns out to be liberal crap « Pull My Chain

  87. I’m a head out on I-8 soonly … it’s part of my escape route, but not a really big part – I’m a hit a stretch of it that hugs the border close to Mexicali… then it’ll get me through Arizona without having to go through Phoenix

    I’m kind of dreading the border patrol cause in the past they’ve been real cocksuckers, but maybe this time they’ll behave better

  88. WHERE THE HELL IS OBAMA?

    If he’s in Vegas, he’s snorting blow off some hooker’s ass with the rest of the Secret Service.

  89. What’s his name? The hooker, I mean.

  90. WHERE THE HELL IS OBAMA?

    He has been having trouble getting to the end of “My Pet Goat”. Understandable seeing how it is a level 2 storybook.

  91. “What’s his name? The hooker, I mean.”

    Vladimir…

  92. Maybe it’s time we stormed a couple of Arab Embassies and just to let them know that the people take offense at the authorities gross inability to keep the peace and more importantly to keep things in perspective. A flashmob would do nicely and give the youths something to do.

    You don’t kill anyone because some z rated movie offends you. But you might get killed yourself if you do.

    Period. End of Story.

  93. - I can’t wait for the next round of Jug Ears “Kumbya” foreign policy.

  94. I hear Chris Matthews is in Vegas right now…

  95. What’s his name? The hooker, I mean.

    Reggie Love.

  96. Karl Urban also played the KGB assassin who killed Lola.

  97. “Disturbing Calls For Censorship In America By Professors, Journalists, U.S. Diplomats, And Egyptian Government”

    I’m still disturbed about Kobe being fined by the NBA for saying “faggot”.

    Don’t mean I’m not more disturbed every day though…

  98. USA: So Obama, uh…it’s amost been four year of hope and change now. Are we finally out of that ditch yet? ‘Cause the walls of the ditch look higher now than when we gave you those keys.

    Obama (blowing smoke in the face of the USA) : CHOOOOOOOM

  99. this whole dead diplomat thing has so far taken a lot of the heat off of whorenanke’s slutty slutty promiscuously madcap dollar printings

  100. - Not sure this link has been posted yet so here anyway.

    – Getting more and more grisely details.

    – I don’t believe this was about any obscure film. Obana got pinked by his Muslim ‘friends’ on the anniversery of 9/11.

  101. Pingback: Sad First Response: Fealty to the Enemy, Fail Your Own « SubConch

  102. Muslims rioting and murdering, and dollar printings, are as common as white rice and blue skies.

    What were once vices are now habits.

  103. white rice and blue skies

    that’s really nicely emblematic of American substanceless

  104. ness

  105. “A security unit is fine if you are facing 10 persons, but there were 400 attackers. [The Americans] would have needed an army to stop them.”

    There used to be a saying “One riot, one Ranger”, or maybe 9 SAS – 400 attackers. Now in this case, since the Obama-Clinton State Dept. wouldn’t issue warnings or even ammo, any number wouldn’t have helped much.

  106. Press? What Press? We have no Press. We have a dishonest filter hiding behind the label of press.

    As Sean Connery says in Outland: “My MEN? My men are shit.”

    Observe:

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/nytimes-columnist-sent-article-draft-white-houses-valerie-jarrett-comments-publishing_652278.html

    “Who do you work for? Number 2? WHO DO YOU WORK FOR?! “

  107. they’re not even hiding anymore

  108. “A security unit is fine if you are facing 10 persons, but there were 400 attackers. [The Americans] would have needed an army to stop them.”

    For some reason, I think the Marines would have outperformed the requisite 57 Swiss militiamen.

  109. My mistake, I thought we were still talking about the Cairo Embassy.

  110. Jeff wrote: Unless and until we change the foundational assumptions that are designed to structurally reinforce ideological leftism, we must content ourselves with doing what we’ve long been accustomed to doing: losing more slowly, even when we “win.”

    I like to word it a bit differently: Until we train our brains not to instinctively think like Leftists, we have to accept the fact that we’re part of the problem.

  111. I support free speech. The film is a piece of crap. As Andrew Breitbart would have said, “So?” You do not attack free speech because you hear or see something you disagree with. The depravity of those calling for censorship is frankly far worse than that film. Christians and Jews put up with such mockery all the time and they find it annoying. Muslims go bat shit crazy. I am sorry, the over reaction of the latter has to be addressed first.

    It is a red herring too. This attack was planned and coordinated and was done to mark 9/11 and give al Qaeda a boost (in response to drone attacks). The movie may have fired up the general mob, but the attackers who went after the Ambassador were not the mob, they were assassins.

    And Obama’s handling of these events has been terrible.

  112. Pingback: The Immolation Scene « The Camp Of The Saints

  113. The left has on a regular basis made false accusations of their political enemies doing something which in truth the same left secretly has done, is doing, or plans to do in the future. This tactic is used as a shield against the day when they are found to have engaged in the denounced activity.

    Bill and Hillary Clinton used it extensively during the 90’s. They also developed the prototype of the bus which Obama so frequently throws minions under.

    I never thought that the 9/11 truthers would turn out to be another case of the left accusing others of what they themselves entertained doing. My mistake.

    How long before Obama throws Hillary under his bus? Will Hillary preempt him by throwing someone below her to the wolves? Huma maybe?

Leave a Reply