Justice Department Won’t Defend Free Speech

Back in July the Justice Department danced around protecting free speech. Assistant Attorney General Thomas Perez in July spent two minutes not answering the question “Will you tell us here today, simply, that this administration’s Department of Justice will never entertain or advance a proposal that criminalizes speech against any religion?” You would think this would be an easy question to answer but apparently not at the Eric Holder Justice Department. This is the same Justice Department that won’t comply with Congressional subpoena’s in the Fast and Furious case and enlists the George Soros Funded group Media Matters to spin the press. So it isn’t like these guys are all about Justice.

The exchange in question happened back in July. It’s only becoming clear now why Perez was reluctant to defend free speech. Hot Air and others opine that the administration backed a UN resolution which was sought by Muslim nations which would criminalize blasphemy. No doubt this plays a role in why Perez didn’t want to back free speech across the board. The Obama administration has spent the last four years trying to appease the Islamic world, the blasphemy resolution was one of the appeasement. That in the United States the Constitution trumps UN resolutions and therefore protects blasphemy against any religion doesn’t really matter to Obama or the left.

Last week the administration spent most of their time attacking an obscure anti-Islam movie on You Tube. This film is supposedly the cause of all the uproar in the middle east, though that has always been a dubious claim. After all, people like Bill Mahr have produced much nastier attacks on Islam (to say nothing of better ascetics) and no one has rioted. Other things are really in play in the middle east, the video is just a made up excuse.

That doesn’t change the administration’s attack on the video. They have roundly attacked it as vile, evil and disgusting. They’ve gone so far as to arrest the alleged producer of the film on bogus parole violations. They have since released him because they have no basis on which to detain the producer. The parole violations were of course nonsense, the administration was really sending a message that anti-Islamic blasphemy will not be tolerated in the United States by this administration. No wonder Thomas Perez danced around defending free speech. He knew the administration had no intention of protecting anti-religious speech.

Keep in mind the only blasphemy this administration will not tolerate is anti-Islamic blasphemy. Americans can continue to attack Jesus Christ and churches of all kind and the administration couldn’t care less and in some cases may join in. We can continue to attack Jews and just about everyone else. Just not Muslims. It isn’t that Obama is a Muslim, he isn’t. What he is though is an appeaser, especially with fellow socialists. Make no mistake, the rioters are Islamic socialists. They have a lot in common with Obama. You don’t actually think the rioters saw that silly video on You Tube do you? They were whipped into a frenzy by Muslim community organizers who are interestingly funded by Soros and other American leftists. They have similar goals, though different end games.

The video isn’t the cause of all these riots, they were caused by 0ther factors be it an organized event by the Muslim Brotherhood or a weapons deal gone bad with the CIA in Libya. The video serves its purpose here in the US, it’s a pretext for Obama’s attack on free speech. If we ever give up our right to free speech, our nation will be lost. We must be free to criticize Islam without government arresting film producers or harassing them. We cannot allow the government to do a perp walk with the producer of an anti-Islamic film like the Obama administration recently did. Their goal is to chill free speech before they try to censor speech via law. This cannot and should not be tolerated by a free people.

UPDATE: The LA Times apparently doesn’t think the movie in question is speech. One wonders how in the world the movie would not qualify as speech under the Constitution. After all, the Constitution protects pornography and all other forms of speech. The idea that it doesn’t protect speech that others find offensive is itself offensive.