What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard for the Obama administration, Eric Holder and the DOJ to understand? Whether it is not infringing on the Second Amendment right to bear arms, or not to infringe on the Freedom of the press, or now, to not infringe on Americans constitutional right of free speech when speaking of extremist Islamics or MuslimsJudicial Watch:
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.[...]
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 goal is to increase awareness and understanding that American Muslims are not the terrorists some have made them out to be in social media and other circles, according to a local newspaper report. The June 4 powwow is sponsored by the American Muslim Advisory Council of Tennessee.
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 question is, are we free to point out, via TheBlaze: As the world rings in 2013, the monitoring site “The Religion of Peace” (TRP) has tallied the number of people killed in the last year by Islamists, placing the death toll at 11,267 carried out across 2,459 savage terror attacks.
Is it "inflammatory" to provide the details of those attacks, the facts and figures? Who determines what is and is not inflammatory? By what criteria?
Does Kilian include the things that Muslims say about Jews and Christians too?
Frankly, any moderate, peace-loving Muslim that practices the Islamic religion, that takes more "offense" to others speaking out against Islamic extremist terrorists than they do the terrorists themselves that use the religion to justify murdering innocents...... can go straight to hell.
Let me take this moment to send a message to the corrupt DOJ, Eric Holder , Obama administration and Mr. Killian:
Oh my..... was that inflammatory?
(Updated post with the information on the event where Killian will speak)
