Robert Spencer at the University of California Irvine, November 26, 2012

LOL. This is one of the best videos I’ve seen in a while. Robert, I’d be interested in seeing the other speakers’ presentations, and especially the Q&A. Please post!

(video, start) Rep. Michele Bachmann "...policy of appeasement"
2 Min "...(LIAR) President Obama & Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed the UN resolution 16/18"

http://schnellmann.org/hr-resolution-16-18-criminalisation-of-criticism-of-islam.html

Truth revealed as fundamentally basic to our American Constitution, simple, to the point, wide ranging, a touch of humor thrown in, even, and with style and class.

Robert, a speech about such fundamentally important matters to American Liberty and Our Constitution, as you’ve delivered, doesn’t get more outstanding than this. It left me wanting more, and thank G-d, we all have your blog site, as well!

Kudos is due to you, Robert!

This new Ex. Order. of November, would include government infiltrated Muslim Brotherhoods, muslims, and the occasional rogue individual, and with typically, traditionally different motives than destroying America, whistleblowers, as well, seemingly strange rule, since the subject is already covered by alternate agencies, and codifications.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/have-you-heard-about-the-quietly-released-obama-memo-on-insider-threat-policy/

By the way, just now as I was Google-searching videos to try to find the other presentations, I came across this recently uploaded video by a poster named 'Khilafattvv' entitled ‘meaning of freedom of speech, this is what Robert spencer and murtad sina www.faithfreedom.org want'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9j4npScpocE

I certainly hope it is true. Yet another reason to support Robert and the anti-jihad movement.

And pertinent to this whole discussion regarding protections and rights against out of control government and judicial encroachments against our Constitutional principles, the recent questionably motivated imprisonment of Nakoula, and this equivalently doubtful case, among others currently ongoing, see this:

http://www.wnd.com/2012/12/appeals-court-continues-border-agents-twilight-zone/

The great thing about listening to Robert making a presentation is that - unlike so many polemicists on the right - you don't have to worry that he's going to go too far or say something stupid to undermine what is an otherwise credible argument. He's always engaging and very human, and yet, he stays on message and is absolutely disciplined in his approach. Kudos, Fearless Leader.

Here is a timely re-visit of the September 26, 2011 article from PipelineNews.org that reported on the "Irvine 11." Where were they during your speech Robert?

In a case that came to be known as that of the "Irvine 11," an Orange County jury has found 10 of the 11 defendants guilty of disrupting a February 2010 speech by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren. Their sentencing amounted to a slap-on-the-wrist at best, 56 hrs of community service and two years of a very loose form of probation.

Throttling of free speech by radical Muslim college students has become a familiar and accepted tactic on most major American campuses, which are now often serving as test beds for the type of civilizational jihad advocated by the Muslim Brotherhood and its numerous American front groups.

Understandably this stidently anti-democratic and bigoted mindset has made UC Irvine a particularly unfriendly campus for Jewish students who constantly complain of Muslim thuggery, racial and religious slurs and other forms of harassment. The campus features a yearly "anti-apartheid" week during which Israel and Jews are pilloried.

"...There, on the campus of the University of California at Irvine, Jewish students were physically and verbally harassed, threatened, shoved, stalked, and targeted by rock-throwing groups and individuals. Jewish property was defaced with swastikas, and a Holocaust memorial was vandalized. Signs were posted on campus showing a Star of David dripping with blood. Jews were chastised for arrogance by public speakers whose appearance at the institution was subsidized by the university. They were called "dirty Jew" and "fucking Jew," told to "go back to Russia" and "burn in hell," and heard other students and visitors to the campus urge one another to "slaughter the Jews." One Jewish student who wore a pin bearing the flags of the United States and Israel was told to "take off that pin or we'll beat your ass." Another was told, "Jewish students are the plague of mankind" and "Jews should be finished off in the ovens." [source, Kenneth Marcus, A Blind Eye To Campus Anti-Semitism?," Commentary Magazine, http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/a-blind-eye-to-campus-anti-semitism/]
Stoking this particular incident was UC Irvine's notorious Muslim Student Union which was suspended for a year and put on probation for a similar period because of its history of this type of bullying behavior.

"During the trial, prosecutor Dan Wagner told jurors the students infringed upon the rights of 700 people who had gone to the Irvine campus to hear Oren. He showed video footage of university officials pleading with students to stop interrupting the diplomat's speech and emails sent among members of UC Irvine's Muslim Student Union planning the disruption and calculating who was willing to get arrested." [source, Amy Taxin, Calif. Muslim Students Found Guilty Of Disrupting Speech, Associated Press, http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5h7LR8AXH1-t4SuTj2exRgPaHQNNw?docId=97bad286c9d04c3882a894210c17e9f0]
Though it calls itself the Muslim Student Union, its actions seem to be in lockstep with those of the national Muslim Students Association [MSA], of which it is reportedly an affiliate. [see, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Students'_Association] The MSA is a known Muslim Brotherhood front group.

"The Muslim Students Association (MSA) of the United States and Canada was incorporated in January 1963 when members of the Muslim Brotherhood came together at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign with the goal of 'spreading Islam as students in North America.'" [source, http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/31.pdf, Investigative Project,
Even with such a brief overview it becomes clear that justice in this case was assaulted rather than served, allowing UC Irvine's MSU to once again commence its psychological reign of terror upon its reestablishment on this campus.

"deep fat fry the Koran" - I wish I had thought of that.....

"deep fat fry the Koran" - I wish I had thought of that.....

Hi Robert. Excellent talk, again, both current and deeply insightful.

I got nervous as the other speakers took their place as you looked a bit apprehensive and at first I did not recognize them. I wondered what sort of set-up you were in. I was, of course, relieved to discover that it was Jamie and Nonie

Then I got thinking: Maybe it's a good time to reduce the frequency with which several recognized antijihad warriors all appear on stage in the same room in public. I mean for the sake of the West. You guys are brave, but all would take is one nutjob with a pipe bomb.

The problem condemning the OIC for wanting to criminalize hate speech is that so many European countries (in addition to Islamic and sharia law states, of course) already do criminalize it (though not by death). See
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3474/blasphemy-laws-europe which recites in pertinent part:

"The Venice Commission, the Council of Europe's advisory body on constitutional matters, issued a report about "The Issue of Regulation and Prosecution of Blasphemy, Religious Insult, and Incitement to Religious Hatred." The report noted that, in Europe, blasphemy is an offense in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands and San Marino.

In addition, "Religious Insult" is a criminal offense in Andorra, Cyprus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain and Switzerland.

[I]n 2006 the British government enacted the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, which created a new crime of intentionally stirring up religious hatred against people on religious grounds. The new law has led to zealousness bordering on the irrational...

In Ireland, a new blasphemy law went into effect in January 2010. The Irish Defamation Act, which created the crime of blasphemous libel, makes "publication or utterance of blasphemous matter" punishable by a fine of up to €25,000 ($32,500).

According to the Irish Times, Ireland's blasphemy law is being cited by Islamic states "as justification" for persecuting religious dissidents. Pakistan, for example, has cited the Irish statute at the United Nations to support its own blasphemy laws."
.....................

Until such time these members of the world community recognize that there should be no laws against criticizing an idea or belief system even if such criticism may offend the believers, it is going to be a real struggle to make a cogent argument against the OIC proposal. I would like RS and others who abhor the OIC proposals to address the laws now on the books in liberal democracies - to be a catalyst to free thinking patriots in those countries to seek change in those blasphemy and hate speech laws.

As for the USA, Robert's fear that 5 Sup Ct justices may adopt exclusions to the first amendment to validate such OIC-like hate speech laws is without solid foundation. Exceptions to the constitution's free speech provisions have been limited to well defined types of speech (commercial speech, shouting fire in a crowded theater or fighting words etc.) by long and well established jurisprudence. For a fine analysis of the exceptions to freedom of speech carved out by the US Sup Ct see http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/95-815.pdf. Moreover, to the extent there was such a possibility of expanding exclusions to include OIC-like hate speech in the US, the odds would be minimized with "liberal" judges appointed by a liberal president (such as BHO) inasmuch as Con Law jurisprudence clearly demonstrates that the so-called liberal judges are more protective of the first amendment rights than their conservative brethren.

RS's attempt to ridicule Hillary Clinton by analogizing her call for "public shaming" of hate speakers to place such hate speakers public stockades is silly. The remedy for hate speech is more speech...that notion is central to analysis to the freedom of speech. Public shaming is simply another way of saying more speech is the remedy to hate speech, more speech that would give the lie to the targeted hate speech...if that hate speech were, in fact, false.