How he proposed to distinguish between benign, chummy Islam and radical Islam, he didn’t say — but that is not the key point here. Lynch has clearly thrown down the gauntlet on the freedom of speech. There needs to be a national conversation on the freedom of speech and why it matters, as well as what we must do in the face of the jihad threat — and whether prosecuting speech critical of the motivating and guiding ideology of jihad terrorists is really a good idea.
“Pataki Demands That AG Lynch Arrest Him For Urging War Against Islam,” by Neil Munro, Breitbart, December 4, 2015:
Former Gov. George Pataki made a dramatic lunge for publicity in the GOP’s 2016 primary race with a Twitter-broadcast demand that he be arrested by Attorney General Loretta Lynch.
Lynch made it easy for Pataki — who has approximately zero percent of the GOP’s primary vote — by suggesting Thursday that she would arrest people who criticize the ideology of orthodox Islam. “When we talk about the First amendment we [must] make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American. They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted,” she said at the Thursday fund-raiser for a radical Muslim advocacy group.
Lynch will have a long, long list of Americans to arrest, because traditional Islam promotes many ideas that are very unpopular among Americans. For example, orthodox Islam urges the murder of people who cause “mischief,” targeted enemies, people who give up Islam, gays, non-Muslims, women who annoyed Mohammad, etc., etc., etc.
However, her phrase — “actions predicated on violent talk” — is vague, and may refer to actions, not statements….