You’ll remember that the Muslim bloc of nations amongst the UN Human Rights Council have attempted to pass a “defamation of religion” resolution multiple times that would make it a crime to defame Islam and Mohammed, and have tried other routes at the UN since 1999. Hillary Clinton sympathized. And we’ve seen Mr. Obama and Clinton, along with a raft of others, sympathize with Islamists being offended by a video, which was simply a pretext, considering that the video came out months ago.
Question: if this was a spontaneous grassroots demonstration, where’d all the al Qaeda style flags and headbands come from so quickly? Or is it that a ton of Muslims keep the flags and headbands that are similar to the al Qaeda ones around “just in case”?
Anyhow, here we go
(Daily Caller) If one well-known Pakistani politician gets his way, international law will forbid “anti-Islam” material from the Internet.
Friday afternoon, Pakistan Interior Minister Rehman Malik wrote in a series of tweets that he has spoken with and written to the Secretary General of Interpol about enacting an international law to stop all anti-Islam propaganda online.
Considering that, as I mentioned yesterday, the US government is acting in a censorship role in asking YouTube to see if the stupid video violates the terms of service, it seems the Obama admin. thinks that offending Muslims should be stopped on-line, too. Fortunately, Google decided not to remove the video. Yet. And then we have the film maker being brought in for “questioning” on the pretense that he broke the terms of his parole. The message is “don’t insult Islam”.
And where’s the ACLU? They’re “concerned”
(Daily Caller) In a statement to The Daily Caller, director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy and Technology Project Ben Wizner said,
“To our knowledge, no U.S. government official has questioned the right of anyone to make this repellent film, and rightly so. We do get concerned when the federal government appears to throw its weight behind a request for self-censorship, but we don’t know the details of the government’s interactions with Google.”
That’s about as squishy a message as one can offer. Boy Wonder Jay Carny stated during his press conference that White House asked YouTube to look at the TOS to see if there was a violation. On the bright side, the US State Dept. says to stop questioning them on what happened in Benghazi
The State Department told reporters Friday afternoon that it won’t answer any more questions about the Sept. 11 attack on the consulate in Benghazi that killed four Americans until the investigation into the incident is complete.
“I’m going to frustrate all of you, infinitely, by telling you that now that we have an open FBI investigation on the death of these four Americans, we are not going to be in a position to talk at all about what the U.S. government may or may not be learning about how any of this this happened — not who they were, not how it happened, not what happened to Ambassador Stevens, not any of it — until the Justice Department is ready to talk about the investigation that’s its got,” State Department spokeswoman Victorian Nuland told reporters late Friday afternoon.
Transparency. Of course, the American reporters probably want to know what effect Mitt Romney had on the situation for daring to question the Obama administration’s response. Which is interesting, considering
(Fox News) While the Obama administration says there was no actionable intelligence that could have prevented the assault on the U.S. Consulate in Libya, there was a heightened threat in the region due to at least four attacks on diplomatic and western targets leading up to the murder of the U.S. ambassador.
Hey, campaigning is hard work, and who would’ve thought that Islamists would riot and attack?