Sharia in action in the U.S.: Man behind Muhammad movie arrested

Unbelievable! Really...This is Unbelievable!

Man did violated many probation terms, he is a criminal just as Jonathan Pollard. Many think Jonathan Pollard is also political prisoner.

I believe this is an historical event as one person being arrested for making a "contraversial" movie in USA. Bye Bye freedom in the USA. That is how it starts and since nobody on the steet protesting that this is against the freedom of speech that made us the greatest country on earth, it will get worse and worse. I came here from Turkey 34 years ago. I can not tell you how painful for me to see this happening here in America.

I don't know what's more valuable here. The arrest of the filmaker by the Feds, who apparently pick and choose which laws to enforce based on political ideology, or the fact that Robert was alerted to this story by...Daisy Khan!

Do the Feds customarily get involved in parole violation proceedings?

Islam's already turd-like image has taken an irreversible beating in the last few weeks. Bravo Robert and Pamela, Bravo!

I tend to agree with R. Spencer's comments today and earlier about questioning and now the arrest of Nakoula. Much of this is reminiscent of Gainesville Pastor Terry Jones. I run a small business and am not able to read as much as others on a daily basis.

Because Andrew McCarthy has quoted and linked to Walid Shoebat, I placed myself on Shoebat's mailing list. I see there are some who say Shoebat is a fraud. I don't know. Is he? How and why is he a fraud?

Would McCarthy support and rely upon a fraud. I notice the past few days Shoebat is putting out this theme, "Innocence of Muslims Film was Made by Terrorists."

What gives?

I propose that Jihad Watch (or an affiliated party) start an online petition for Obama to free the political prisoner. (He won't, of course.)

However... I think it would do our cause some good to have some comparisons. What normally happens to someone who violates the terms of their probation by going on the internet? Is there any information about normal consequences of what seems a minor violation? If we could get this, it would help to make the case I think.

Danny, dont be stupid. Pollard is accused of spying.

Nakoula, is being made an example of for political reasons. In an attempt to placate moslems.

The two have nothing to do with each other.

I also immediately thought that it was a heck of a coincidence that the maker of The Innocence of Muslims (can anyone explain that title) would be arrested for a parole violation! I doubt that the parole system is usually that efficient. Don't you think that if the video were a porn production, it wouldn't get much attention?

The "production values" of the trailer were laughable, but the ideas portrayed are certainly true to the biography of the (false, warlord, pedophile) prophet Mohammed. Making such of a fuss about the trailer may get it a much larger audience.

I watched this man's little clip and was not impressed in any regard. Was it factual? Yes! Crappy as its production was from just about every angle, it did nothing but present vignettes from Muhammed's life as they are recorded in the various hadith collections.

Did Nekoula violate the terms of his probation? He surely did; but a still small voice tells me that this was not the reason for his arrest.

When the feds start arresting people who have not violated the terms of probation, or who have never even been on probation, is when we will all be in trouble.

Our sacred laws, watered by the blood of centuries of patriots, guarantee me the right to speak my mind, but they do not assure me the right not to be "offended."

This is a grey case, is it not? The guy was guilty of actual, non-sharia illegalities.

But he was perhaps prosecuted for those non-sharia illegalities because he was thought to have sparked a violent uproar in the Muslim world. Thus a great deal of attention was drawn to him, and perhaps some law enforcement types wanted to take him down in order to placate violent sharia forces.

But suppose for a moment that there had been no film and no uproar. Suppose his violations had been discovered by his probation officer not through the news, but in some other way. Wouldn't the filmmaker still have been prosecuted for those probation violations?

The question is, who made the decision to prosecute him? Did it come down from on high at the Justice Department and Obama administration? If so, that is indeed kowtowing to Sharia law.

Or did the prosecution start not from Obama's Justice Department, but rather from the grass root of the probation officer? Did the officer simply freak out that his probee was suddenly all over the news? Did the probation officer then start worrying a great deal about whether he, the officer, might have been neglecting or mishandling the probee's case and failing to find violations that should have been noticed and punished? Did the probation officer worry that the intense public attention might eventually fall on himself and unflatteringly reveal to the wide world his imperfect or perhaps even failed performance of his duties as a probation officer? And then did the probation officer discoved violations and initiate the processes leading to arrest? Is there evidence that the filmmaker's arrest was initiated by the Justice Department and Obama administration? Or was it instead initiated by intense scrutiny by autonomous law enforcement anxious not to be caught by the media remiss in the duty of keeping former law-breakers in line? I haven't been following the whole story, so don't know...

The key question is, who made the decision to arrest and prosecute him. Was it the Obama administration and high up in the Justice Department? If so, then that kind of intervention from on high, in this international situation, does mean the arrest was a kowtowing to Sharia law.

But if the prosecution and arrest were initiated by the probation officer or by autonomous law enforcement, and not from on high, then it doesn't necessarily signify kowtowing to sharia. In that case the arrest might be simply enforcing the law on violations that had become visible to many because of the tremendous media attention on the man.

For this man's action,we lost 4 Americans in Libya including our ambassador. Please JIHADWATCH gang, don't tell me this criminal Coptic Christian does not share some responsibility for their death beside Libyan Terrorist.

The next step is for an American individual with a clean record to make a similarly offensive Mohammed film. See what happens.

Agreed, LemonLime, and I estimate that you are most qualified and have done so already. The trick is to transcend this commenting forum, the blogosphere in general, to attain instant global recognition.

Apparently, YouTube has that capability, but only if the progenitor, or already infamous associates, are connected.

It is indeed a long and tedious ideological war.

From Los Angeles Times:

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the filmmaker behind the controversial movie “Innocence of Muslims,” was being held in a federal detention center in Los Angeles late Thursday after a judge ordered him seized on a probation violation.

Under heavy security, Nakoula was taken to the Metropolitan Detention Center in downtown L.A. Officials said he was placed in protective custody.

Judge Suzanne H. Segal said Nakoula posed "some danger to the community" and had lied to probation officials.

"The court has a lack of trust in the defendant at this time," she said.

Nakoula was arrested earlier in the day. Federal prosecutors argued in a court hearing Thursday afternoon that he posed a flight risk and should remain in custody.

His attorney argued that Nakoula be released on bond, saying his client would be in danger at the downtown L.A. federal prison because it had a large Muslim population. He also denied his client violated his probation.

I hope Ali Sina can get his movie produced before it's too late. I like his proposal because he plans to show the Islamic source behind every scene and have the script verbatim where possible. This makes it more difficult to dismiss the film.

Oh yeah lets make it all about this filmmaker when in fact this was a planned TERRORIST attack by al-qaeda & company on our US Embassy! ...and on the anniversay of 9-11, no less! The U.S. needs to forget the filmmaker and focus on this terrorist attack and the fact that it was an act of war--again!!

Re: the Son of Hamas plans $30 million film about Muhammad:

Recently back from his trip to Israel where Yousef announced his plans to make an epic $30M film version of the Islamic leader, Yousef said his vision will not insult Islam nor be a religious film, but be based on historical facts taken from the most trusted Islamic resources. “Islam deserves to be represented in this arena like all other religions. We cannot expect religions to peacefully co-exist if we do not have some sort of equality in how we can celebrate all religions and question their beliefs.”

Unlike convicted felon Nakoula Bassely Nakoula, aka Sam Bacile, the man behind the film Innocence of Muslims, Yousef was born a Muslim, the grandson of an Imam, and the son of an Imam who also founded the Islamic terrorist organization Hamas. Yousef is now casting the film and promises that it will be at par with some of the most respected Historical movies produced in Hollywood and around the world.

Am I being paranoid, or do I detect the long arm of the OIC behind this?

How about a remake of The Life of Brian -- only this one about Mohammed and his followers, some of whom mistake some other guy for the Prophet:

The Life of Habib.

Ya think any Monty Python actors and Terry Gilliam could tear themselves away from their lucrative laurels that have made their lives so fulfilled and comfortable whilst lambasting their own Western heritage to do something now timely and worthwhile to defend that heritage?

Don't be silly!

It has even been suggested that he is a jihadist who made the movie in order to provide a provocation that Islamic supremacists could use to push for destruction of the freedom of speech

very true...the film made by jihadists to be an excuse to attack and suppress christians.
maybe Nakoula has nothing to do with it...maybe not

but as our experience of how many times muslims made crimes and accuse Christians with it (like Cameliah Shehata case. accusing our Coptic Pop of kidnapping her and so on..)I am sure it is done by them by some help of some islamic countries as well.

Patterico had an excellent post on this subject titled "Maker of Anti-Muslim Movie Arrested" at http://patterico.com/2012/09/27/maker-of-anti-muslim-movie-arrested/ .

Basically the fellow was originally convicted for using aliases and the Internet for fraud. He was ordered to avoid both practices as part of his parole terms. He produced the film using an alias and he posted it on the Internet. The latter might have been allowed to slide. The former is a repeat of his original crime using an alias. It's sad. But this fellow is due to take a serious fall.

I wish somebody with a clean record had done this, and had done it FAR better. It is something that needs doing.

{^_^}

Not to worry, the ACLU is all over this.

Just kidding.

Nakoula should be given an award for bringing attention of the world to the plight of the copts. No wait a minute no one is paying attention. In his movie he shows the Muslims coming for the copts and the police not doing anything. Why didn't Hillary speak out about the "reprehensible and disgusting" treatment of the copts shown in that clip? She's too busy calming the waters and appeasing Islam.
Not only should Nakoula be given award, his violation of probation should also be forgiven.

Youtube is a haven for rubbish of all kinds.
But many choose to watch them and the odd one is not bad.

The Muhammad film was about as corny, poorly directed, written and acted as is possible.

Yet we are supposedly a free society(child porn naturally excepted) and however poor and tasteless THIS MAN HAD A PERFECT RIGHT TO MAKE IT AND POST IT ON YOUTUBE.

The fact that one third of the world's population didn't like it says far more about them and their blinkered, brainwashed existence than anything else.

Danny...these violent lunatics need only the poorest of excuses to riot and be violent. For example if you are Jewish just wear an OPEN star of David in any major Sharia state and see how long it takes for that act to be an excuse for these morons to attack you.

you really need to brighten up a little if at all possible

"In some countries, blasphemy is not a crime. In the United States of America, for example, a prosecution for blasphemy would violate the Constitution according to the decision in Joseph Burstyn, Inc v. Wilson. The United Kingdom abolished its laws in England and Wales against blasphemy in 2008."

The arrest of this man is a clear violation of his rights. Ho absurd to use his ban on the use of Internet & computers for 5 years to arrest him !

How do you prove this ???

All the libs and gays don't undersand. With sharia law they are the first to go. And all the hollywood types will be in burkhas

Many times when a person is on probation or parole, supervised release,he/she can "break" the rules and nothing happens, even if the PO knows about it. Or he/she is given a lecture about obeying the rules or being sent back to prison. The prisons are full, after all, and PO's usually have a large number of persons to watch and monitor. It takes time to revoke and some PO's will tell you, they don't need a "reason" while others say, "I'd like to find a reason" to revoke.

As a general rule, relatives/friends/victims of said "parolee" may be told if he/she is returned to lock-up, but will not be told why said parolee is sent back to prison. They will only be told something like, "He/she broke the terms of his/her parole."

It could be associating with other felons, drinking, carrying a weapon, etc. I find it unusual that someone is arrested by cops instead of the PO going after the guy, and then the public is told what all the guy did and why he is in trouble now. Has the PO come forward to say that his "parolee" did not ask for permission? Why is the public informed of it at all? The answer is a simple one, answered by the article.

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/03/21/if-i-were-the-devil-the-1965-warning-from-paul-harvey-thats-chilling/

http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2012/03/21/if-i-were-the-devil-the-1965-warning-from-paul-harvey-thats-chilling/

from Bill Foley

May I please make a suggestion for all of the supporters of Jihad Watch. Please ignore people like Danny. He and others like him want you to engage them in debate. The best thing is to ignore them.