However, “in a statement Friday afternoon, Horwitz said Morgan’s ‘apparent termination’ was driven by bad publicity rather than the content of his social media posts.”
That in a nutshell is why the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and allied organizations make a fuss when someone says something they don’t like: they know that most groups don’t have the stomach or the courage to stand up to the outrage mob, and so they will throw the putative offender under the bus just for the sake of peace.
Jerry Morgan’s statements are presented in the Tennessean in a highly pejorative light (of course), but all he essentially was support Trump’s travel ban on people entering the U.S. from jihadi hotspots and other places where officials cannot or will not provide adequate information about those wishing to enter; said Islam was not a religion of peace; linked Islam with violence, as Islamic jihadis do every day; and supposedly demonstrated prejudice against minorities and dislike of Democrats. The prejudice against minorities appears only to consist of disapproving of the “slave mentality” of some, which was likely a reference to their tendency to vote Democrat even against their own best interests.
But such things cannot be said today. America reveres the freedom of speech, except when it doesn’t. Freedom of speech is fine for Leftists, but for anyone else, it’s an egregious offense for which one can be fired.
“Tennessee legal watchdog out after lawyer accused him of being an ‘anti-Muslim bigot,'” by Adam Tamburin, Tennessean, December 12, 2020:
A legal ethics watchdog resigned after a lawyer he was investigating slammed him as an “anti-Muslim bigot.”
In a court filing Friday, the state board that punishes lawyers for misconduct said Jerry Morgan was “no longer employed” as a disciplinary counsel. Morgan had played a prominent role in punishing lawyers for misconduct as disciplinary counsel for the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility.
His split with the board came after a Nashville lawyer said Morgan couldn’t do his job effectively because of multiple social media posts he made criticizing Muslims and the Islamic faith.
Morgan made a slew of disparaging comments against Muslims on Twitter, praising President Donald Trump for “stopping Muslims” and “talking big against Muslims,” according to a Nov. 24 court filing. Morgan said Islam was not a peaceful religion and made comments linking the faith with violence and “Muslim terrorists,” the filing stated.
Morgan had argued in favor of sanctions against Nashville lawyer Brian Manookian, who was suspended from practicing law last year after the Board of Professional Responsibility said he violated ethics rules by sending threatening emails.
But Manookian’s attorney Daniel Horwitz argued his bias against Muslims tainted his judgement in the case because Manookian’s wife and children are Muslim.
“Allowing an extreme anti-Muslim bigot — whom Tennessee’s Board of Professional Responsibility has inexplicably employed and permitted to maintain prosecutions on our Supreme Court’s behalf — to undertake a prosecution against an attorney who has a Muslim family shakes confidence in the integrity of this entire proceeding,” Horwitz wrote in the court filing.
The filing argues that Morgan’s social media posts also show “extreme prejudice toward minorities,” including “disturbing views on ‘blacks,’ ‘illegals’ and their children, and the ‘slave’ mentality of minorities.” The filing stated Morgan also “has made countless statements evidencing extreme prejudice against ‘liberals,’ ‘Democrats,’ and attorneys who support the Democratic Party in particular.”
The Administrative Office of the Courts launched an investigation into Morgan and his social media posts. A spokeswoman for the office said Friday night that Morgan had resigned.
In a statement Friday afternoon, Horwitz said Morgan’s “apparent termination” was driven by bad publicity rather than the content of his social media posts. He said the “rot within this government agency is not limited to Mr. Morgan.”…
PRCS says
Note: while I agree with Morgan’s sentiments re: Islam…..
“Morgan had argued in favor of sanctions against Nashville lawyer Brian Manookian, who was suspended from practicing law last year after the Board of Professional Responsibility said he violated ethics rules by sending threatening emails.”
“But Manookian’s attorney Daniel Horwitz argued his bias against Muslims tainted his judgement in the case because Manookian’s wife and children are Muslim
Well, of course THAT would be used against him!
Why, oh why, do people continue to make social media posts which so frequently benefit Muslims at their own expense?
PRCS says
Hmmm: given that Mrs. Manookian is a Muslim–shouldn’t Mr. Manookian be a Muslim (per Islamic law), too?
gravenimage says
She could actually be murdered for marrying an Infidel in Dar-al-Islam.
underbed cat says
How about redefining religion as a faith that does not require killing non beleivers by those willing, that prohibits free speech, and life and liberty and should not get religious protection from the Constitution that does not protect lives of the kaffurs and justifies warfare against them called jihad. Just a thought……
Aussie Infidel says
UBC, The present blanket protection accorded religions by Western constitutions is a recipe for religious and cultural suicide. That sort of universal protection would be fine if all religions were benign and law abiding – but they are not. There are a number of religions which could only be described as dangerous cults, and Islam is the worst of all. Islam is a militant political ideology masquerading as a religion, and incites its followers to wage jihad or holy war against all who disagree with its barbaric 7th century code of ethics.
Why should our constitutions protect a brutal warrior cult hiding behind the veil of religion – that would cut our throats to gain political power – along with those which preach the Golden Rule?
Islam gets away with its violence, because only a few of its followers – the psychopaths in the Muslim community – actually commit these attacks. And if they are caught, these brainwashed miscreants are treated by our courts as individual criminals for contravening the civil laws, instead of retaliating against the much more extensive and militaristic organization which should be banned as a threat to our national security.
What is needed is a clear and concise definition of religion. There are suitable examples such as the one handed down by the High Court of Australia – “A belief in a supernatural being thing or principle together with canons of conduct to give effect to that belief”. But it MUST ALSO INCLUDE the prohibition of any tenets or activities which would incite violence against others, or contravene the normal civil laws.
gravenimage says
I don’t think it makes sense for us to change our language for Islam. Islam is a religion–it is an *evil* religion.
D. Plorable says
How ’bout this? “F Islam Up the Nose with a Rubber Hose!” *I’m an attorney
livingengine says
Please notice that CAIR only has white people fired
PRCS says
Here’s a definition of religion: “the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods”
While Islam does meet that qualification, (the U.S. in particular given that our constitution prohibits governmentally established religion) MUST make clear to the followers of any and all religions (especially Islam) that they can believe whatever they want, but that acting out religious laws which run afoul of our secular, man-made laws will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of OUR laws.
Although, IMO, there’s no way to redefine ‘religion’–it’s practices can be controlled.
PRCS says
Was supposed to be to underbed cat.
Infidel says
His suggestion wasn’t bad. The dictionary definition of a religion is one thing, but for it to have First Amendment protections, there are some criteria that must be satisfied. Not all religions would satisfy it
gravenimage says
Infidel, the FIrst Amendment does *not* protect Muslims raping children or murdering unbelievers.
Infidel says
I’d argue that that has yet to be tested. No one has ever argued in a court of law that raping kids or murdering unbelievers is established doctrine in islam, the way we know, since they want the world to think that islam is benign
Infidel says
Islam is more accurately a geopolitical cult, rather than a religion. Ali Sina once described the difference beautifully
https://www.faithfreedom.org/islam-cult-or-religion/
PRCS says
It meets the definition of ‘religion’. But it is MORE than that. It is a theocracy.
Infidel says
It does, but that also lends itself to odious comparisons and equivalencies w/ real religions like Christianity and Buddhism. When in fact, it’s more akin to Communism/Nazism on one hand, and cults like Heavensgate and Branch Davidian on the other
Which is why I cited this article. As it points out, even most cults just satisfy a few of the criteria of cults, whereas islam satisfies all of them
PRCS says
The problem: that’s a two edged sword which would cut without restraint.
Better, imo, to keep the definition and remind our friends and neighbors that Islam is not just a religion. It’s a theocracy and a complete way of life: “divine” punishments and all.
p.s. I read that AS article.
somehistory says
If he “resigned,” he wasn’t “fired.” They may have planned to fire him, but if he quit before they could, he didn’t get fired.
And, how was he to know that the “attorney” he investigated for sending threatening emails, had a moslim wife and children?
People should learn that whatever they say on “social media” “can and will be used against them when it comes to their trial in the court of public opinion.”
With one huge exception:
If he had said that Christians from the Middle East, Africa or any of the stans should be investigated before being allowed into the country, and then investigated an attorney who had a Christian wife and children, would this have caused such a firestorm and caused him to have to resign?
Of course not. Anything can be said about Christians and no one gets fired. But, just say anything about moslims and even if no one knows about the religion being in any way involved…secret moslims hiding out at the home of the accused, for instance…it’s go after that one with all weapons.
Anti-jihadists and those who know how evil islam is, should be aware that the social media of twitter, fb, etc. can be treacherous places to say so.
owensgate says
Here’s how it works. The thing that gets you fired is not the thing that gets you fired. Post “Men DO NOT have menstrual cramps”, or “Boys do not belong in girls locker rooms” on social media, and get fired for “poor job performance” or whatever. Doesn’t matter if you just received an “Employee of the Month” award. Nobody would ever refer to it in a rebuttal. They wouldn’t dare.
Eva says
I like to think I wouldn’t have made things quite so easy for them by resigning. In fact, I’d have made things as difficult as possible for them.
They’re ‘investigating’ the poor bloke anyway, which effectively means that what they can’t find they’ll make up, and they will conduct a witch-hunt against him, his family, his friends and will leave his life a smoking wasteland.
They’ll probably try to get him disbarred, on some total, obvious and ridiculous lie, which the wokesters will of course uphold, because nothing is more important than keeping a bunch of invading, rampaging savages ‘happy’.
What these idiots don’t want to see is that nothing will make them ‘happy’ until they’ve raped, tortured, murdered and plundered their way across the face of the earth. At least the ones who helped them do it will be first in line for the chop. It’s a kind of justice.
DavidR says
The stigma should be on the one pretending something that’s so obviously true isn’t. Prove him wrong, THEN fire him. But Islamic blasphemy laws, as interpreted by the Muslim Brotherhood, are now in place across the Western world. It has everything to do with image and not getting bothered or killed by “misled” Muslims. This is seen as a weakness. Standing up to it is seen as an insult. Even being neutral displeases Allah. There is no effective long term strategy to deal with Islamic terrorism apart from government sanctioned genocide. Only China and some countries in Africa are allowed to do that.
owensgate says
All other avenues of speculation exhausted, there are only two possibilities for allah. 1. A non-existent imaginary being as “Moon god”, or 2. Satan in disguise.
James Lincoln says
So, according to the Tennessean, December 12, 2020:
“A legal ethics watchdog resigned after a lawyer he was investigating slammed him as an “anti-Muslim bigot.””
Is it bigotry to be anti-nazi?
Is it bigotry to be anti-mafia?
Is it bigotry to be anti-muslim?
gravenimage says
Damn good questions.
Steve says
Getting fired for telling the truth. This country has become filled with puss**s.
gravenimage says
Tennessee: Lawyer fired for saying Islam isn’t a peaceful religion
………………..
What a grotesque miscarriage of justice. Jerry Morgan was quite correct.
dannyboy998 says
Being against Islam is based on it’s teachings toward all People of the Book, his defense is the written word within Islamic text that reveal what real hatred is…Accepting the notion of being against Muslims carries no weight since he has not met all 1.6 billion but, his defense is about Islam and that carries tremendous weight few can argue since a skillful attorney can present Islam as a political, legal and military ideology which is why those familiar with Islam hate Islam, dealing with specific text within Islamic teachings is long overdue in western nations and this case should it be directed in this manner will force CAIR to run away once again, they know full well religion is only a tool used in western nations to deceive, Mohamed used military, legal and political tactics we see even today world wide…IMHO.
notnolib says
Here’s the problem I see with CAIR. It’s a terrorist organization, with its members, supporters and officers all being terrorists. But it’s more than that. The gutter-cult of islam and its inventor mohammed the pig-faced dog promotes terror.
The atty in the article did nothing more than “point out” the facts.
Islam IS a terror gutter cult, and CAIR is a terror organization.
OLD GUY says
Islam is wagging war thru migration invasion of non islamic countries world wide. Our open border lovers are going to lead us into a collapse of freedom of speech and an attempt to give muslims and islamic followers power over everyone else. The only way to stop this is to close the border to islamic people, or to have an all out religious war.
Linda Rivera says
Every person, organization and business that is accused of, including being prosecuted in court, for being anti-Muslim, a bigot, racist and other rubbish must be allowed to give a TRUTH DEFENSE”
Presenting in court the massive numbers of Quran verses that demand violence, savagery, barbarism and mass murders of non Muslims, and
Give the horrifying record of 1,400 dreadful years of Muslims savagely slaughtering hundreds of millions of non Muslim innocents in obedience to bloodthirsty Quran commands.
I have NEVER yet heard of this defense being given. Is this because this TRUTH Defense is not allowed in the supposedly free Christian country of America?
STJOHNOFGRAFTON says
Non Muslims concurring with the memic paradox that Islam is a religion of peace whilst witnessing the destroyed cities, lives, misery and slavery it brings are exhibiting classic cognitive dissonance on a mass scale.
STJOHNOFGRAFTON. says
Non Muslims concurring with the memic paradox that Islam is a religion of peace whilst witnessing the destroyed cities, lives, misery and slavery it brings are exhibiting classic cognitive dissonance on a mass scale. Jerry Morgan truthed out this ridiculous meme and was fired because his employers subscribe to comforting lies.
STJOHNOFGRAFTON says
Non Muslims concurring with the memic paradox that Islam is a religion of peace whilst witnessing the destroyed cities, lives, misery and slavery it brings are exhibiting classic cognitive dissonance on a mass scale.