Skip to comments.Foggy Bottom:"balance in restricting offensive speech" needed
Posted on 05/22/2010 1:39:11 PM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion
Many of the images that appear today on Facebook were deeply offensive to Muslims and non-Muslims alike
U.S. is deeply concerned about any deliberate attempt to offend Muslims or members of any other religious groups
Do not condone offensive speech that can incite violence or hatred
We respect any actions that need to be taken under Pakistani law to protect their citizens from offensive speech
There needs to be a balance in restricting offensive speech and continuing to protect and promote the free flow of information
(Excerpt) Read more at state.gov ...
I deem what generally comes out of Foggy Bottom to be offensive speech. Now what?
Islam is offensive. Ban it.
“We respect any actions that need to be taken under Pakistani law to protect their citizens from offensive speech”
In other words, speech control by the government.
Does that mean zero has to shut up?
CitizensUnited, FCC, Net Neutrality, Elana Kagan
its a full frontal assault on the first amendment
They are just passing on the words of the bama boy who is Muslim and hates to hear his religion exposed.
How about worrying about terrorist/radical Islamic websites?
What fools have the power here.
They really think being silent will pacify the Islamists? Next they will demand obedience and then conversion
There is no end until Islam rules the world
The State Department is made up of sniveling marxists.
A Star of David must have snuck in there.
How could muslims take offense at an image of someone whose true image they don’t even know themselves?
Musta been one ugly critter not to want his image on every damn lamppost like the rest of their dead insane heroes.
No religion has more icons and relics defaced, destroyed and parodied than Christianity because we don't blow things up or chop off heads when we get 'offended'.
How can this be?
It’s all very simple; change the language, Alinsky style.
Little by little, until 0bagger and his communist government succeed in subjugating the population. That’s how they think in there little, twisted communist minds.
Later, you’ll hear: enemy of the people, enemy of the state, reactionaries, counter-productive (mini counter-revolutionaries,) etc.
Attacks on the first amendment will necessarily involve restricting the Internet, talk radio and conservative publications to cut the communications between Americans. Since they are aided and abetted by the regime compliant media, many people will not realize what’s happening.
Once this is done, then they’ll disarm the population and a huge part of their plan is accomplished.
If we see the civilian communications running into trouble, then the rest isn’t far behind.
I’ll throw this back into the ring. “Freedom of speech is the first bow to break....”
Know it, if you don’t, learn it.
“HAIL COLUMBAIA 2010” — http://www.youtube.com/user/PitchforkPatriot
So we're not allowed to offend people any more?
How does one control whether what one says offends someone else?
I find the President of the U.S. saying "at some point, I think you have enough money" offensive. Can we please redact that?
“How to interpret this?”
Our government opposes the 2nd amendment, so why should they support the 1st? Free speech has got to go. Probably can be regulated as “interstate commerce”.
There is another end, but it is unthinkable to Obama.
That end is to destroy enough of them where they go back into remission for another 200 years.
When Muslims are kept trimmed back they are no problem.
‘bow’ should be ‘bough’, I think — unless you are trying to pun on Obama’s obsequious curtseys......
In a related story, researchers have unearthed a rare photo of Mohammad and his first wife:
I think that was the method behind Bushes war on terror ..
I find the rogue agency known as “The State Department” offensive. Can we eliminate it now?
Muck Fuslims and the camel they rode in on.
The only speech I want to see banned is “Workers of the World, Unite!” :-)
Browsing around a bit on the source website, I cannot but conclude that it must be a ‘spoof’ site. The general nature of statements is just too silly.
Just take the statement that the cited Facebook publications would be ‘offensive to muslims and non-muslims’ alike. ROTFLMAO!!!
Nice job, whoever you are.
They are getting bolder and bolder. Can you imagine predicting this a couple of years ago? All the 0 supporters were yelling “He’s a moderate!”
That’s the State Department site. Those are briefings for 5/20/2010.
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.