Posted on 05/31/2013 7:21:57 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Yes, but you can still dunk a crucifix in a jar of urine and have that considered "art":
From Judicial Watch:
In its latest effort to protect followers of Islam in the U.S. the Obama Justice Department warns against using social media to spread information considered inflammatory against Muslims, threatening that it could constitute a violation of civil rights.
The move comes a few years after the administration became the first in history to dispatch a U.S. Attorney General to personally reassure Muslims that the Department of Justice (DOJ) is dedicated to protecting them. In the unprecedented event, Attorney General Eric Holder assured a San Francisco-based organization (Muslim Advocates) that urges members not to cooperate in federal terrorism investigations that the "us versus them" environment created by the U.S. government, law enforcement agents and fellow citizens is unacceptable and inconsistent with what America is all about.
"Muslims and Arab Americans have helped build and strengthen our nation," Holder said after expressing that he is "grateful" to have Muslims as a partner in promoting tolerance, ensuring public safety and protecting civil rights. He also vowed to strengthen "crucial dialogue" between Muslim and Arab-American communities and law enforcement.
Evidently that was a precursor of sorts for an upcoming Tennessee event ("Public Disclosure in a Diverse Society") that will feature the region's top DOJ official, who serves as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Tennessee, and an FBI representative. The goal is to increase awareness and understanding that American Muslims are not the terrorists some have made them out to be in social media and other circles, according to a local newspaper report. The June 4 powwow is sponsored by
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Naturally, just about ANYTHING could be construed as being
“inflammatory” against Muslims, so it might be better in short and long run, for us to totally drop out of this dialectic that’s being put in place by the DOJ. It’s a trap of a type the devising of which is just second nature to them:it’s their ATTITUDE towards this subject that dictates which way they bait us. They seem to be operating as the “official” arm of CAIR, which is already bad enough to deal with. It’s a no-win situation, so it might be best to just let them twist in the wind, and NOT give them any opportunities to prosecute US. Islam will do itself in , over time, in ways we probably even now can’t quite grasp or predict. When that tipping point comes, all DOJ strategies will be swept off the table in a revelatory moment that growing numbers of the public AND the media will see ever more clearly.When that moment comes, its game over, and the way I see it we’re part of the way there already.
Mohammed was a pedophile and a murderer. Islam idol-worships a black box.
Military veteran: check
Supporter of all ten Amendments of the Bill of Rights:check
Firm opponent of abortion: check
White: check
Male: check
Christian: check
Car sports bumper stickers favoring conservative ideals: check
Under DoHS guildlines that makes me a domestic terrorist times seven.
You can't so limit the freedom of speech without openly rejecting the entire constitution.
:-)
Few things piss me off more than listening to Eric Holder (and Barack Obama) tell me "what America is all about," as if they had the foggiest clue.
I'm sure the DOJ can subpoena FR for my contact info.
Muslims suck. Repeat ad nauseum...
Muslims are terrorist. Repeat ad nauseum...
Mohammed and Allah are losers. Repeat ad nauseum...
And, unfortunately, liberals won’t call a spade a spade.
I was talking to someone more liberal about terrorism, and Ft. Hood came up. Even though the shooter at Ft. Hood shouted Allah Akbar (sp?), this person was unwilling to say that he was inspired by Muslim faith or Muslim theology.
Liberals are so into this “Islam is a religion of peace” stuff, that they can’t admit that, even someone who shouts that he is doing his atrocities in the name of Islam, is not considered by liberals to be motivated and inspired by radicals in that religion.
But the rare cases of violence against abortion clinics or abortion doctors are cited as evidence by liberals of how intolerant and dangerous radical Christianity is.
And Whoopi Goldberg called Timothy McVeigh a “Christian terrorist”. Christianity can be attacked by liberals, but not Islam.
And the irony is to think about what Muslims do to women and homosexuals, among others, when they control a country. These liberals would be the first targets put in their place by Muslims.
There's massive case law defining what can and can't be said about people without being held liable - laws that were created by newspapers defending free speech. Do those defined 'rights' belong to the news profession or to all of us? It's an important question and a carrot for the administration to use. The carrot this administration holds out will help the press in the short run and destroy them in the long run.
Newspapers have first Amendment lawyers on retainer - they do that because freedom of speech is tricky. Newspapers blazed the path we blithely walk upon... we need to remember that ...
“Please note: By “spreading information considered inflammatory against Muslims” - even if it’s true - you could violate the civil rights act and be subject to prosecution.”
This is another reason why we have a Second Amendment.
Islam is a STATE religion.
There is no separation of church and state with it.
Don't accept their premise and don't let them get past that fact.
“Muslims and Arab Americans have helped build and strengthen our nation,”
What?
They sure helped build America when they crashed into the twin towers like a bunch of barbaric thugs.
It was like the kid who broke the store owner’s window they actually HELPED the economy you know....
Because only the idiots in the current administration beleive in the “Broken Window” theory of economics...
“Muslims and Arab Americans have helped build and strengthen our nation,” Holder said after expressing that he is “grateful” to have Muslims as a partner in promoting tolerance, ensuring public safety and protecting civil rights.”
Oh yeh, the goal of every Muslim public safety and protecting civil rights. What a crock!!!
Fortunately for all of us infidels it looks like Eric will not be with us much longer. I see resignation in his future.
But those are almost all cases dealing with the perameters of freedom of the press rather than freedom of speech. Although there is much overlap between the two, the media cases generally are dealing with specific press issues such as prior restraint of publication, privilege of sources, etc. etc. On a pure freedome of speech case (such as we have here) the issue of whether one is a "journalist" is irrelevant. (as it generally is, and should be, in the press cases.)
Bullshit.
Christian Arabs have yes...but that is it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
