Nakoula, or Youssef, or whatever his name is, apparently deceived many people in order to get his crude movie made. 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. But no matter who he really is, no matter how terrible of a man he may be, no matter how checkered his past or present or both may be, make no mistake: he is a political prisoner. He has been arrested not for the technicality of the probation violation, but for insulting Muhammad. His arrest is a symbol of America’s capitulation to the Sharia.
The protests were not about the film. The protests were attempts to intimidate the U.S. into criminalizing criticism of Islam. Youssef is nothing more than the fall guy who became the first offender against the new federal crime of blasphemy against Islam.
“Anti-Muslim filmmaker says he did not violate parole,” from the Associated Press, October 10:
LOS ANGELES “” A California man who was behind an anti-Muslim film that sparked violence in the Middle East denied on Wednesday he violated his probation stemming from a 2010 bank fraud conviction.
U.S. District Judge Christina Snyder scheduled an evidentiary hearing for Nov. 9 for Mark Basseley Youssef.
Youssef, 55, has been in a federal detention center since Sept. 28 after he was arrested for eight probation violations and deemed a flight risk by another judge. Prosecutors said Youssef lied to his probation officers about his real name and used aliases.
Youssef fled his home in the Los Angeles suburb of Cerritos and went into hiding when violence erupted in Egypt on Sept. 11 over a 14-minute trailer of “Innocence of Muslims” that was posted on YouTube. The trailer depicts Mohammad as a religious fraud, womanizer and pedophile.
The violence spread, killing dozens, and enraged Muslims have demanded severe punishment for Youssef, with a Pakistani cabinet minister offering $100,000 to anyone who kills him.
Youssef was arrested on Sept. 28. Federal authorities have stressed he was taken into custody for probation violations and not because of the content of the film, which is protected by the First Amendment….
They’re lying. He would never have been picked up again had it not been for the film.