If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(LA Times)   Taking filmmakers into custody for questioning, complete with perp walk: another thing that's perfectly okay when your guy is in charge but was an outrageous Orwellian crushing of dissent beforehand   (latimesblogs.latimes.com) divider line 409
    More: Asinine, muslims, perp walk, Los Angeles County, innocent  
•       •       •

3541 clicks; posted to Politics » on 15 Sep 2012 at 3:02 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



409 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-15 10:23:29 AM
[Updated at 1:40 a.m. Saturday: Whitmore told the Times that Nakoula was taken in for a voluntary interview with probation officials and has not been arrested or detained.]
 
2012-09-15 10:26:35 AM
FTA: On Friday, U.S. courts spokeswoman Karen Redmond said the Office of Probation in the Central District of California is reviewing whether Nakoula, who was convicted on bank fraud charges, violated terms of his probation in relation to the video and its uploading onto the web.

He had been ordered not to own or use devices with access to the Web without approval from his probation officer -- and any approved computers were to be used for work only. "Defendant shall not access a computer for any other purpose," the terms read.


So, they're looking into a probation violation related to his agreement to only use computers connected to the web for pre-approved work. Dude agreed to those terms for probation; if he's the butthole that uploaded his crappy videos, then he violated probation. If not, they'll let him go. What's the problem?
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-09-15 10:30:22 AM
If this guy sparked the riots, I'll look the other way while Obama has him rendered to custody of some Islamic activist group overseas.
 
2012-09-15 10:32:39 AM

St_Francis_P: [Updated at 1:40 a.m. Saturday: Whitmore told the Times that Nakoula was taken in for a voluntary interview with probation officials and has not been arrested or detained.]


Voluntary as in "come with us or we might accidentally leave your real name and address where the local bin-crazypantses can find it".
 
2012-09-15 10:33:31 AM

Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: [Updated at 1:40 a.m. Saturday: Whitmore told the Times that Nakoula was taken in for a voluntary interview with probation officials and has not been arrested or detained.]

Voluntary as in "come with us or we might accidentally leave your real name and address where the local bin-crazypantses can find it".


If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.
 
2012-09-15 10:41:24 AM

St_Francis_P: If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.


So do you think LA officials and the Feds would be this intensely interested if he had violated probation by uploading a video of his day at the zoo?
 
2012-09-15 10:41:47 AM

St_Francis_P: Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: [Updated at 1:40 a.m. Saturday: Whitmore told the Times that Nakoula was taken in for a voluntary interview with probation officials and has not been arrested or detained.]

Voluntary as in "come with us or we might accidentally leave your real name and address where the local bin-crazypantses can find it".

If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.


If you're on probation and half the damned sheriffs in the state show up to request your presence at an interview downtown, you're probably not going to hesitate to volunteer
 
2012-09-15 10:44:41 AM

Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.

So do you think LA officials and the Feds would be this intensely interested if he had violated probation by uploading a video of his day at the zoo?


Maybe not; but people died because of this little prank, so they may look at it a little harder.
 
2012-09-15 10:49:24 AM
He looks like a real hero.
latimesblogs.latimes.com
 
2012-09-15 10:50:02 AM

Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.

So do you think LA officials and the Feds would be this intensely interested if he had violated probation by uploading a video of his day at the zoo?


of course not. the probation violation is just the pretext.
 
2012-09-15 10:50:44 AM

St_Francis_P: Maybe not; but people died because of this little prank


Nobody died because of this prank.

They died because they had the bad fortune to be living their lives in the midst of religious batshiattery that will use any pretext for murder, or make one up if there's none at hand.
 
2012-09-15 10:56:29 AM

Weaver95: Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.

So do you think LA officials and the Feds would be this intensely interested if he had violated probation by uploading a video of his day at the zoo?

of course not. the probation violation is just the pretext.


If he had uploaded videos of his kids at the zoo, no one would have likely been aware. They suspect he uploaded some shiatty movie clips which are related to dumbasses going apeshiat and murdering people. If you're on probation, it is probably best not to call significant attention to yourself.

Of course, he may have not uploaded anything. If so, they'll have to let him go. If they want to, though, it is probably easy to find some silly thing to violate you back into custody while you're on probation. When the cops and DA don't like you, there are no real protections.
 
2012-09-15 10:58:18 AM

Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: Maybe not; but people died because of this little prank

Nobody died because of this prank.

They died because they had the bad fortune to be living their lives in the midst of religious batshiattery that will use any pretext for murder, or make one up if there's none at hand.


Yeah, motive is totally irrelevant.
 
2012-09-15 11:03:08 AM

ZAZ: If this guy sparked the riots, I'll look the other way while Obama has him rendered to custody of some Islamic activist group overseas.


Because?
 
2012-09-15 11:04:48 AM

dr_blasto: Weaver95: Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.

So do you think LA officials and the Feds would be this intensely interested if he had violated probation by uploading a video of his day at the zoo?

of course not. the probation violation is just the pretext.

If he had uploaded videos of his kids at the zoo, no one would have likely been aware. They suspect he uploaded some shiatty movie clips which are related to dumbasses going apeshiat and murdering people. If you're on probation, it is probably best not to call significant attention to yourself.

Of course, he may have not uploaded anything. If so, they'll have to let him go. If they want to, though, it is probably easy to find some silly thing to violate you back into custody while you're on probation. When the cops and DA don't like you, there are no real protections.


hey, chaos happened. powerful political people have taken notice. of course, if a proper scapegoat can be found...well that solves everything, doesn't it? so we've got someone here, a film maker, who's got a parole issue. he's got a funny sounding name. maybe he's not 'the guy' who started it all but hey, he's close enough. so we arrest him, put him in isolation and hit him with a ton of charges while we sort out just how to frame the story.
 
2012-09-15 11:05:12 AM

Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: Maybe not; but people died because of this little prank

Nobody died because of this prank.

They died because they had the bad fortune to be living their lives in the midst of religious batshiattery that will use any pretext for murder, or make one up if there's none at hand.


Actually, it's looking like Al-Qaeda was behind the attacks, using the riots as cover to get close to the embassy, but don't let that get in the way of your xenophobic rants.
 
2012-09-15 11:05:43 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: ZAZ: If this guy sparked the riots, I'll look the other way while Obama has him rendered to custody of some Islamic activist group overseas.

Because?


because the 1st amendment is for wimps, that's why.
 
2012-09-15 11:17:42 AM

Weaver95: dr_blasto: Weaver95: Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: If he violated probation, it might indeed be involuntarily voluntary.

So do you think LA officials and the Feds would be this intensely interested if he had violated probation by uploading a video of his day at the zoo?

of course not. the probation violation is just the pretext.

If he had uploaded videos of his kids at the zoo, no one would have likely been aware. They suspect he uploaded some shiatty movie clips which are related to dumbasses going apeshiat and murdering people. If you're on probation, it is probably best not to call significant attention to yourself.

Of course, he may have not uploaded anything. If so, they'll have to let him go. If they want to, though, it is probably easy to find some silly thing to violate you back into custody while you're on probation. When the cops and DA don't like you, there are no real protections.

hey, chaos happened. powerful political people have taken notice. of course, if a proper scapegoat can be found...well that solves everything, doesn't it? so we've got someone here, a film maker, who's got a parole issue. he's got a funny sounding name. maybe he's not 'the guy' who started it all but hey, he's close enough. so we arrest him, put him in isolation and hit him with a ton of charges while we sort out just how to frame the story.


It is how it works, though. If he had been on probation for a possession charge and pissed off the DA by writing a letter to the editor biatching about local politics, something similar may have happened. I'm not agreeing with the actions of the authorities in this situation and I'll say that given the situation this is significantly more severe than my other example, but we've given so much leeway to authority that this is no surprise.
 
2012-09-15 11:20:29 AM

Weaver95: because the 1st amendment is for wimps, that's why.


It seems so.
 
2012-09-15 11:28:40 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: Weaver95: because the 1st amendment is for wimps, that's why.

It seems so.


Have fun going to a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!" and using that as your defense, then.
 
2012-09-15 11:32:59 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Dancin_In_Anson: Weaver95: because the 1st amendment is for wimps, that's why.

It seems so.

Have fun going to a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!" and using that as your defense, then.


its more like someone ran into a crowded theater and shouted 'Cherry pie!'. then a riot happened. then after the riot happened, the state cops went 3 towns over and arrested a kid from a different movie theater for selling popcorn and plan on blaming the riots on him. Because hey - f*ck you, that's why!

this whole thing is surreal.
 
2012-09-15 11:37:52 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Have fun going to a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!" and using that as your defense, then.


We covered this yesterday. But since you seemed to have missed it, take 21 minutes of your life to get an education. The first minute is all you will need but the remaining 20 is very enlightening too.
 
2012-09-15 11:44:36 AM

Weaver95: its more like someone ran into a crowded theater and shouted 'Cherry pie!'. then a riot happened. then after the riot happened, the state cops went 3 towns over and arrested a kid from a different movie theater for selling popcorn and plan on blaming the riots on him. Because hey - f*ck you, that's why!


I'm sorry, did this guy not produce an anti-Islam video? I'm not seeing a correlation between the two things, here. It's not like the Muslim world is rioting because this guy's video was nice to Muslims. Additionally, if he did violate parole by uploading this video to the Internet, what's so surreal about that?
 
2012-09-15 11:46:06 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: cameroncrazy1984: Have fun going to a crowded theater and yelling "FIRE!" and using that as your defense, then.

We covered this yesterday. But since you seemed to have missed it, take 21 minutes of your life to get an education. The first minute is all you will need but the remaining 20 is very enlightening too.


I'll tell you this one time:

Speech has consequences. If you are not prepared to deal with the consequences of what you say or produce, don't do it. Criticism is not censorship. Additionally, if your speech leads directly to bodily harm in another, it is illegal. This is Communication 101 stuff.
 
2012-09-15 11:54:03 AM
Seems like your typical coward.
 
2012-09-15 11:54:51 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: its more like someone ran into a crowded theater and shouted 'Cherry pie!'. then a riot happened. then after the riot happened, the state cops went 3 towns over and arrested a kid from a different movie theater for selling popcorn and plan on blaming the riots on him. Because hey - f*ck you, that's why!

I'm sorry, did this guy not produce an anti-Islam video? I'm not seeing a correlation between the two things, here. It's not like the Muslim world is rioting because this guy's video was nice to Muslims. Additionally, if he did violate parole by uploading this video to the Internet, what's so surreal about that?


no, he worked on a film project. a bunch of muslims (radicals all) in another country decided on their own that the film was 'anti-muslim'. but rather than writing a stern letter to the editor, they felt it more important to go out and murder a few people because hey - a wicked put down on a film review blog just wasn't gonna cut it in their universe.

But we're not gonna punish the actual murderers. no, we're going to punish the film crew. Because the first amendment is for wimps, and the people of this country only pay lip service to our own bill of rights.
 
2012-09-15 11:55:04 AM

cameroncrazy1984: I'll tell you this one time:

Speech has consequences. If you are not prepared to deal with the consequences of what you say or produce, don't do it. Criticism is not censorship.


That goes without saying...EXCEPT in the case of official censure or oppression.

cameroncrazy1984: if your speech leads directly to bodily harm in another, it is illegal.


Thank you John McCollum.
 
2012-09-15 12:00:23 PM

Weaver95: no, he worked on a film project. a bunch of muslims (radicals all) in another country decided on their own that the film was 'anti-muslim'.


How do you just decide a movie is anti-muslim or not? Either it is, or it isn't. Trying to say that this guy isn't the cause of all of this crap is weasely at best.

Dancin_In_Anson: That goes without saying...EXCEPT in the case of official censure or oppression.


Parole violation isn't either of those things.
 
2012-09-15 12:00:45 PM

cameroncrazy1984: 'll tell you this one time:

Speech has consequences. If you are not prepared to deal with the consequences of what you say or produce, don't do it. Criticism is not censorship. Additionally, if your speech leads directly to bodily harm in another, it is illegal. This is Communication 101 stuff.


If I could write a book or produce something that I knew would cause someone on the other side of the globe to confront their own failures and expose weaknesses in their ideology...I'd do it in a heartbeat. those people might be angry. they might go out and hurt other people. they might even murder someone because of my words....and I would STILL do it. in fact that would be the ONLY reason for doing it.

And the laws of this country, the laws of the United States say I can do this...and there is nothing you can do to stop me.
 
2012-09-15 12:01:30 PM

Weaver95: But we're not gonna punish the actual murderers. no, we're going to punish the film crew. Because the first amendment is for wimps, and the people of this country only pay lip service to our own bill of rights.


I missed this the first time around. How do you plan on "punishing the murderers"?

Additionally, do you think the riots would have still happened had this film not been made? No? Sounds like a primary cause to me. Thirdly, is a parole violation worth punishing or not?
 
2012-09-15 12:01:52 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: no, he worked on a film project. a bunch of muslims (radicals all) in another country decided on their own that the film was 'anti-muslim'.

How do you just decide a movie is anti-muslim or not? Either it is, or it isn't.


it's not my job to decide if a movie is offensive to someone else. my job would be to make a movie and sell it. if you get offended - hey, have at it. not my problem.
 
2012-09-15 12:02:29 PM

Weaver95: If I could write a book or produce something that I knew would cause someone on the other side of the globe to confront their own failures and expose weaknesses in their ideology...I'd do it in a heartbeat.


Then you must be prepared for the consequences if they don't react the way you intend for them to react. Man up and admit that you made a mistake in producing something that you knew they would see as anti-Muslim, and that Americans died because of it.
 
2012-09-15 12:03:14 PM

Weaver95: cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: no, he worked on a film project. a bunch of muslims (radicals all) in another country decided on their own that the film was 'anti-muslim'.

How do you just decide a movie is anti-muslim or not? Either it is, or it isn't.

it's not my job to decide if a movie is offensive to someone else. my job would be to make a movie and sell it. if you get offended - hey, have at it. not my problem.


It is entirely your problem if you are so negligent in your production that four Americans die in reaction to it. That is 100% on you.
 
2012-09-15 12:03:50 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: But we're not gonna punish the actual murderers. no, we're going to punish the film crew. Because the first amendment is for wimps, and the people of this country only pay lip service to our own bill of rights.

I missed this the first time around. How do you plan on "punishing the murderers"?

Additionally, do you think the riots would have still happened had this film not been made? No? Sounds like a primary cause to me. Thirdly, is a parole violation worth punishing or not?


we found Bin Laden, i'm sure we could find a couple of murderers in libya.

As for the rest - i'll go in order

1. I have no idea
2. depends on the political situation.
 
2012-09-15 12:04:33 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: cameroncrazy1984: I'll tell you this one time:

Speech has consequences. If you are not prepared to deal with the consequences of what you say or produce, don't do it. Criticism is not censorship.

That goes without saying...EXCEPT in the case of official censure or oppression.

cameroncrazy1984: if your speech leads directly to bodily harm in another, it is illegal.

Thank you John McCollum.


This is what happens after decades of voting for "tough on crime" politicians. Rampant authoritarianism allows cops and DAs the power to selectively apply rules and seemingly don't have their judgement questioned whenever they step over the line. Outside of the fact that there's an international incident associated with this dude, this is no different than the cops pulling you over more often because you tapped the cief of police's daughter and didn't call her the next day. This how we live.
 
2012-09-15 12:04:57 PM

Gulper Eel: St_Francis_P: [Updated at 1:40 a.m. Saturday: Whitmore told the Times that Nakoula was taken in for a voluntary interview with probation officials and has not been arrested or detained.]

Voluntary as in "come with us or we might accidentally leave your real name and address where the local bin-crazypantses can find it".


This has been on the local news for the past few days...there are news crews camped outside of his house 24/7. Everyone in SoCal knows where this guy lives.

This asshole is a convicted felon who served time in county and federal prison for two different crimes. He's a threat to his community.
 
2012-09-15 12:05:57 PM

Weaver95: 1. I have no idea
2. depends on the political situation.


Let me answer hat for you:

1. No, because that's the central rallying point for the riots and
2. Laws aren't dependent on political situations. That's why we call it the "rule of law"
 
2012-09-15 12:06:00 PM

cameroncrazy1984: It is entirely your problem if you are so negligent in your production that four Americans die in reaction to it. That is 100% on you


Your words anger me. So much so that I am going to shoot my coworker because of it. Now if you will just go quietly with the nice policeman who will soon be knocking at your door....
 
2012-09-15 12:06:52 PM
If I make a film that incites hundreds of KKK members to storm and burn down black churches, are the authorities going to go "hey, that's not his fault that they decided to go do that"?

No, they're going to get me for incitement to riot.
 
2012-09-15 12:07:28 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: cameroncrazy1984: It is entirely your problem if you are so negligent in your production that four Americans die in reaction to it. That is 100% on you

Your words anger me. So much so that I am going to shoot my coworker because of it. Now if you will just go quietly with the nice policeman who will soon be knocking at your door....


Only if I tell you "Hey, your coworker is a douchebag. Someone should kill him. I mean literally, go kill him"
 
2012-09-15 12:07:51 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Weaver95: If I could write a book or produce something that I knew would cause someone on the other side of the globe to confront their own failures and expose weaknesses in their ideology...I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Then you must be prepared for the consequences if they don't react the way you intend for them to react. Man up and admit that you made a mistake in producing something that you knew they would see as anti-Muslim, and that Americans died because of it.


f*ck.

no.

again - if I force you to confront the flaws in your ideology, then how you handle that is on YOU, not me. As a writer, if I evoke an emotional response that forces you to confront yourself...then I've done my job. the consequences of that are that my books will sell, people will discuss what i've written and maybe someone will carry my thoughts and ideas forward. if YOU don't like it, then it's your problem...not mine.

that's how it works. what you seem to be advocating is censorship and theocracy. neither ideas fit well in this country.
 
2012-09-15 12:08:46 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Only if I tell you "Hey, your coworker is a douchebag


So now we're narrowing it down...
 
2012-09-15 12:08:50 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Additionally, if your speech leads directly to bodily harm in another, it is illegal.


You mean like gangsta rap and violent movies and video games? If they can show that those things lead to violence in the streets, the government can ban those things and punish the producers? Is that your view of the First Amendment?
 
2012-09-15 12:08:57 PM
I love this line of thinking, that speech has no consequences. I bet DIA is the kind of guy that would run into a black neighborhood and shout racist slogans and when a bunch of guys come out all pissed off he'll defend himself by saying "Hey, first amendment!"
 
2012-09-15 12:09:12 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Dancin_In_Anson: cameroncrazy1984: It is entirely your problem if you are so negligent in your production that four Americans die in reaction to it. That is 100% on you

Your words anger me. So much so that I am going to shoot my coworker because of it. Now if you will just go quietly with the nice policeman who will soon be knocking at your door....

Only if I tell you "Hey, your coworker is a douchebag. Someone should kill him. I mean literally, go kill him"


but that's not what happened here and you know it.
 
2012-09-15 12:09:34 PM

Weaver95: then how you handle that is on YOU, not me


He obviously doesn't have the self control.
 
2012-09-15 12:09:57 PM

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: Additionally, if your speech leads directly to bodily harm in another, it is illegal.

You mean like gangsta rap and violent movies and video games? If they can show that those things lead to violence in the streets, the government can ban those things and punish the producers? Is that your view of the First Amendment?


No, because Call of Duty isn't an explicitly pro-street-violence video game. You're comparing apples to oranges here.
 
2012-09-15 12:10:36 PM

cameroncrazy1984: I love this line of thinking, that speech has no consequences. I bet DIA is the kind of guy that would run into a black neighborhood and shout racist slogans and when a bunch of guys come out all pissed off he'll defend himself by saying "Hey, first amendment!"


actually, I suspect DIA would be heavily armed, so I think you need to rethink your scenario....
 
2012-09-15 12:11:19 PM
Protesters are now clashing with police in Australia outside our Consulate, according to Google. But...anti-protests were calmer in the ME this morning. So there's that.
 
2012-09-15 12:11:26 PM

Dancin_In_Anson: Weaver95: then how you handle that is on YOU, not me

He obviously doesn't have the self control.


that's how authoritarians think. or what passes for thinking for them anyways. I find that world view to be...painful.
 
Displayed 50 of 409 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report