DC Trawler

Not All Muslims are offended by the following post, even though it may be illegal

Font Size:

If you take blood pressure medication, it might be time to double up. Then come back in 15-20 minutes and read this.

Judicial Watch:

DOJ: Social Media Posts Trashing Muslims May Violate Civil Rights

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…

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 area’s top federal prosecutor, Bill Killian, will address a topic that most Americans are likely unfamiliar with, even those well versed on the Constitution; that federal civil rights laws can actually be violated by those who post inflammatory documents aimed at Muslims on social media. “This is an educational effort with civil rights laws as they play into freedom of religion and exercising freedom of religion,” Killian says in the local news story. “This is also to inform the public what federal laws are in effect and what the consequences are.”

The DOJ political appointee adds in the article that the upcoming presentation will also focus on Muslim culture with a special emphasis on the fact that the religion is no different from others, even though some in the faith have committed terrorist acts, Christians have done the same.

Well, I’m sure that’s a great comfort to the victims of Islamic terrorism and their survivors. Christians have done bad stuff too, y’know!

So, what exactly constitutes “inflammatory documents aimed at Muslims on social media”? Who gets to decide that? Not you or me, I’m assuming. Let me guess: If I post something about a terrorist attack committed by Islamic extremists, and a single Muslim anywhere in the world is offended by it, his hurt feelings will constitute the proof of my wrongdoing. It’ll be up to me to prove otherwise.

Let’s see if this rings any bells among the big brains at the DOJ:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Do we need to amend this amendment? We probably need to add: “…unless a Muslim’s feelings get hurt by a big meanie on Twitter.”

That’s the thing about making concessions to a culture of victimization. The members of that culture will never stop finding new ways to make themselves the victims. A guy gets beheaded in broad daylight on a London street, and then the murderers stand around, literally red-handed, explaining why Allah made them do it. And what’s the headline the next day?

“Muslims Brace for Backlash.”

It never fails. It’s pathetic.

If it’s a civil rights violation to point out that Muslims have the same rights as every other American, no more or less, and they’re not the victims when Islamic terrorists strike… I guess I’m guilty as charged.

Wait. Which country is this? Somebody help me out here.

But hey, our fiercely intelligent, highly capable friends in the Justice Dept. are just following their leader:

Update:

Update: And it’s worldwide.

Update: John Hayward has a great column on the paranoid style of Obama politics. Regarding Islamic self-victimization: “A seething mass of white racist Neanderthals lurks forever just out of sight, ready to explode in a violent backlash against innocent Muslims any day now. Who knows – maybe the next atrocity will finally set them off.”