Disgraceful treatment of Muslims in Orange County

[Harleyman]

"for tolerating such obvious hatred against people"

 

thats not saying ALL americans do it or support it, but arent doing a lot to crack down on it

 

Here's the problem or not the problem depending on how you look at it.

The First Amendemnt of the Constitution defends the right of freedom of speech no matter how hateful it is.

Cracking down on hate filled rhetroric would be tantamount to altering or deleting the First Amendemnt, something that wont happen as the Constituiton is not open, nor ever was to tampering by any adminstration or politician past, present or future.

I wouldn't want to say what I'd like to do to those in Orange county but the fact that the First Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights are tamper proof stops politicans from abusing it to further their own agendas and ambitions.

Politicans in other words are bound to obey, respect and work within the framework of the Constitution and not against it.

When an issue that comes up that is constitutionally questionable then the nine judges on the Supreme Court are the ones who decide if it falls within Constitutional Rights or not and in the case of the Orange County issue it does fall under the right of freedom of speech I'm afarid.

[Badlittlepup]

What extremist views?

 

They were attending a charity that feeds the homeless, what is your evidence that extremist views were expressed at the meeting?

 

 

Were the children expressing extremist views? If they were, does that make it ok for the local councillor to say it would be good if they were murdered?

 

What's your evidence?

 

Because the two main speakers at the event are Islamic fundamentalists who have gone on record with anti-semetic views, extremist views and have praised terrorism.

 

Even that link to the ICNA's one website explictly refuses to say that these speakers do not hold these views, it simply says that they may or may not hold these views.

 

Of course nobody should ever say it would be good for anybody to be murdered. But equally these two speakers have endorsed terrorist actions which in themselves are murder so they are equally guilty of what this councillor has done so it is hypocritical of you to condemn one and defend the other.

 

Both the woman who said that and the speakers are extremists but the fact remains that the OP tried to present this event as an innocent charity fundraiser when in fact it was a lot more controversial than that and there were people attending who certainly deserved protest against their views being aired in public.

 

OR are you saying that the views of right wing extremists are unacceptable but that Islamic extremists should be tolerated despite spreading a similar message of hate? That's what you seem to be saying to me and as I said it strikes me as extremely hypocritical.

[Glamrocker]

sickening purely sickening, no doubt people on here will excuse it

Do you mean like you and similar excused the Muslim ranters in Luton,You yourself have heard the anti American stance from Muslim posters on this forum ,like the video said America is not England but thanks to Cameron we may be going down that road soon,incidentally unlike the Luton Muslims of whom people said that they were allowed free speech,I didnt hear any of those protesters using the words "baby killer" or "burn in hell" .

Each to their own ,another saying that has been well stated on here,that is America,what goes on there is no concern of the British people,its their country they have different laws etc to us.One thing I did hear though was the American politician more or less mirroring Camerons comments on the failure of multi-culturism,what 's the rules ,it takes three to make something a trend,wonder who is going to come out next.

[newboy2011]

A bunch of jihadists supporters get together for a chat. What should the locals have done?

[Harleyman]

That fundraiser was a fundraiser for the the Islamic Circle of North America. This is an organisation that when holding it's annual convention requested that a local politician attend to welcome delegates. When they were offered a the female vice-chair they turned it down as they would not allow a female voice to be heard in their meeting as it would be 'sexually seductive'.

 

It has been linked with terrorist organisations and has solicited tax deductable donations which it has then given to Islamist causes. Their meetings have been addressed by a man who has been linked to 9/11, the Fort Hood shootings and the attempted Christmas Day bombings.

 

It supports the imposition of sharia law on the west and his linked with fundamentalist organisations in Pakistan and Bangladesh. More info here

 

Of course it's unacceptable for anybody to say they want to send people to an early grave but this is not exactly the Girls Scout cookie drive you are trying to portray it as.

 

Again, anyone can hold a meeting and advocate what he or she wants. It's all freedom of speech. When extremist speech turns into physical action that's another issue entirely.

 

There was a Klan meeting filmed somewhere up in Idaho or Montana a few years back and shown on a TV Documentary about hate in America.

 

What the Klan speakers said about Jews, blacks, homosexuals and Catholics was hate filled rhetoric in the extreme and there was a lot of loud verbal exchanges between the Klan speakers and a group of protestors who showed up to heckle them. The police stood by and only intervened if anyone on either side showed any inclination to turn it into physical violence and the one or two individuals who did were handcuffed and led off.

 

That's the way it should be in a democracy.

[Number Six]

I fear these American Tea Party, GOP, Palin, Glen Beck Republican nutjobs more than I fear any Muslim.

 

It's just the other side of the same coin.

 

As I've said on another thread, the bible and the Quaran both contain plenty of passages that can be used to justify such behaviour.

 

It's very hard to rationalise with someone who thinks they are doing what an all powerful being is telling them to do, whether they be 'Muslim' or 'Christian.'

 

And therein lies one of the biggest problems of our age - these people *actually believe* their holy books.

[Badlittlepup]

Again, anyone can hold a meeting and advocate what he or she wants. It's all freedom of speech. When extremist speech turns into physical action that's another issue entirely.

 

There was a Klan meeting filmed somewhere up in Idaho or Montana a few years back and shown on a TV Documentary about hate in America.

 

What the Klan speakers said about Jews, blacks, homosexuals and Catholics was hate filled rhetoric in the extreme and there was a lot of loud verbal exchanges between the Klan speakers and a group of protestors who showed up to heckle them. The police stood by and only intervened if anyone on either side showed any inclination to turn it into physical violence and the one or two individuals who did were handcuffed and led off.

 

That's the way it should be in a democracy.

 

Possibly. But equally if it is acceptable for extremist speech to take place at this meeting then by the same token what the protesters outside were doing was also permissable under the principle of freedom of speech.

 

Anyway, that's beside the point I was making, which is that the OP and subsequent posters have tried to portray this meeting as being as innocent as a bingo night for Africa in a church hall which these protestors have turned up at for no good reason to shout abuse at moderate Muslims purely because they are Muslims. The impression was given that a mob had turned up entirely unprovked and were shouting abuse purely because they were Muslim when infact it was a protest against extremism, rather than just Muslims in general.

[Sierra]

What "crazies"?

 

The lunatics screaming those horrible things at them. And at those poor kids, most of whom I'm willing to bet were born here, making them American citizens.

 

To all you good forum folk, I mean no disrespect when I say that I understand this situation better than you do. Those kids really shouldn't have been there. This isn't England, where people fight each other with garden spades and pointy scissors. The odds that there were a dozen loaded weapons in that crowd were 100%. On both sides. Thank God (any God, I don't care) there were no shots fired. Because let's face it, some of those people were downright loco.

 

We in California may have movie stars, and all things Disney, and Silicon Valley. But in many ways, it's still the wild, wild west.

[spindrift]

Possibly. But equally if it is acceptable for extremist speech to take place at this meeting then by the same token what the protesters outside were doing was also permissable under the principle of freedom of speech.

 

.

 

 

You think it permisable to scream abuse at children?

[Badlittlepup]

It's just the other side of the same coin.

 

As I've said on another thread, the bible and the Quaran both contain plenty of passages that can be used to justify such behaviour.

 

It's very hard to rationalise with someone who thinks they are doing what an all powerful being is telling them to do, whether they be 'Muslim' or 'Christian.'

 

And therein lies one of the biggest problems of our age - these people *actually believe* their holy books.

 

I totally agree with you, I think the people inside and the people outside in this case have a huge amount in common - they are just a the opposite extreme ends of the same spectrum.