Israeli he isn’t. What we have here is just a common thief and nefarious trouble maker.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula is a convicted felon with a history of using aliases to hide his actions. He is an identity thief.
Law enforcement in Los Angeles consider Nakoula to be the filmmaker behind “Innocence of Muslims,” the 14 minute trailer film that portrays the Prophet Mohammed as a womanizer, buffoon, ruthless killer and child molester.
Islam forbids any depictions of Mohammed, and blasphemy is an incendiary taboo in the Muslim world.
According to cnn.com:
The movie, backed by hardcore anti-Islam groups in the United States, is a low-budget project that was ignored in the United States when trailers were posted on YouTube in July.
Is this clown in the country legally or illegally? Why isn’t he in jail?
Some far right groups are hailing Nakoula Basseley Nakoula as a “Christian filmmaker.” Not any Christianity I am familiar with. This guy is no stranger to law enforcement. Huffington Post reports:
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, was interviewed by federal probation officers for about half an hour at the station shortly after 12 a.m. in his hometown of Cerritos, Calif., said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Los Angeles County sheriff’s department.
After that, deputies dropped Nakoula off at an undisclosed location.
“He is gone. We don’t know where he went,” Whitmore said. “He said he is not going back to his home.”
Federal officials are investigating whether Nakoula, who has been convicted of financial crimes, has violated the terms of his five-year probation. If so, a judge could send him back to prison.
Nakoula went voluntarily to the station, wearing a coat, hat, scarf and glasses that concealed his appearance. His home has been besieged by media for several days.
Whitmore said Nakoula was not handcuffed and the heavy apparel was his idea.
It all sounds staged to me. I think we are talking about a cowardly scumbag with few accomplishments of his own other than engaging in bank fraud and identity theft, owning a meth house, violating his parole and making nasty films about another religion. His film isn’t very different than those Nazi propaganda films that showed Jews as caricatures of rats with beady eyes and sharp teeth. The purpose is to ridicule and degrade.
Meanwhile, the charges that the Los Angeles sheriff’s department had the “brown shirts” go in after him is absurd. Guess who is getting the blame? Obama. They should have picked Nakoula up. He can’t stay out of trouble, it seems. No pity here.
Yeah, they were going down his rap sheet last night. This guy’s a real piece of work! I’ll pitch in for a one-way flight to, say, Tunisia. I hear Tunisia’s nice this time of year. Hanging up infidel’s heads by the fireplace, etc, etc.
I will contribute also. Is he in the country legally? Did his visa run out? What is his status, just out of curiosity?
This is the kind of “illegal” *I* want rid of.
I may faint. I feel like Aunt Pitty-Pat after Scarlett auctions herself off to Rhett while in mourning in Atlanta.
Pokie, you know Elena and I have always supported the 287(g) program. You do something illegal, I don’t want you here. This dude is a toad.
Don’t act like we have changed our position. It is the same one we have always had.
No vapors!
This guy seems to be a real jerk. As we discussed last week, I agree that his “film” is crappy and in bad taste, and if I were Muslim I would be offended too. Just like I am offended as a Christian by “South Park” and Bill Maher. However, my main point continues to be that freedom of speech and the Constitution are the main concerns here. That view has nothing to do with Obama or Romney, or the election. Regardless of how distasteful any of us finds Mr. Nakoula or his film, he has a right to his freedom of speech, just like anyone saying less controversial things.
Recent polling shows that the overwhelming majority of Americans considers freedom of speech more important than not offending other cutures or nations:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/israel_the_middle_east/72_put_freedom_of_speech_ahead_of_not_offending_other_cultures
Are you going around the world and defending foreigners right to free speech? Nakoula, as a convicted felon, has lost a few rights including the right to internet use.
Do most Americans feel that identity theft is part of free speech? How about running a meth house? violating one’s parole?
Tell me again why we are defending free speech rights of a tunisian or whatever the hell he is?
How do all these Americans feel about restricted free speech during war time? Good thing most of them didn’t live during WWII.
I guess that war was more important than the one we are in now?
Back then I think people were more interested in protecting American lives than they were over the abstraction of free speech.
War time is war time.
+1 NTK
+2 NTK
Here is what caught my eye. If I am reading this correctly, the trailer has been on YouTube since July, right? The Libyans claim that the embassy violence was planned by Al Qaeda for months. Now we know that it was feasible for long-term planning to inflame the Arab street using the film since it has been available for such a long time. It lends support to the notion that this was NOT some instantaneous reaction to the film.
Kelly, I think that the leaders had this planned and the film was used to incite the worker bees into action and rock throwing. –In Libya at least.
I don’t think one idea excludes the other. All it takes is a smart phone and a bunch of dudes hanging out to whip about 20 in a frenzy. All you have to do is move on down to another crowd hanging out.
Anyone in the U.S., regardless of citizenship or immigration status, enjoys the protection of the U.S. Constitution. Mr. Nakoula made his film in California. If he is here illegally, processes are available to deport him. Immigration has been discussed on this blog at length. I don’t think any regular MH contributors support deporting anyone without due process. I don’t. Anyway, while he is here he is protected by the Constitution.
We engage in wars and millions of Americans have died to protect that Constitution.
He is getting due process. Too bad some of the right wing chooses to call those folks “brown shirts” and to claim that he has freedom of speech. They might want to check out that freedom of speech while of probation with a felony conviction. I believe terms of his probation banned internet use.
No rights are without boundaries.
You know, I don’t think that the Iraq War had one damn thing to do with protecting our Constitution. Afghanistan conflict either. Gulf War? No Vietnam? nah. Korea? No. World War II…not then either. Way of life yes. WWI? No. Civil War? OK, I can make an argument for that one.
He was on probation after serving almost 2 years in federal prison. Part of his probation has very specific stipulations, one of which is being forbidden to use any alias. Even if he is a naturalized citizen, he could still lose his citizenship, not for a stupid movie, but breaking probation.
I also believe in freedom of speech, i.e., the right to act like a donkey. People are responsible for their reactions to other people’s stupidity, no question. But there is also just as much right to call someone out for their horrible behavior they demonstrated through their first amendment right.
Why the anti american hatred still? There are still pockets, but what I see in Lybia is a large contingency who reject the acts of violence!
I always though that was a funny scene, with the other Atlanta ladies fanning Aunt Pitty-Pat. One of my favorite movies ever.
Another win for freedom of speech!
http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-administration-fights-for-the-ndaa-2012-9
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/09/14/doj-says-ruling-on-indefinite-detention-law-is-unprecedented/
Judge Katherine B. Forrest of the Southern District of New York, an Obama appointee, said in a ruling on Wednesday that the law impinges on First Amendment rights and violates due process. The law, passed as part of the National Defense Authorization Act, permits the U.S. government to detain indefinitely people who are part of or substantially support Al Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces engaged in hostilities against the U.S [TEA partiers, veterans, conservatives, libertarians, or anyone that mentions the Constitution].
@SlowpokeRodriguez
you lived in Georgia didn’t you?
I think all people who lived in Atlanta love Gone with the Wind. You just have to.
@marinm
Surely you don’t think this will stick, do you?
You might want to look at this another way, rather than like the kid who just found out they had a substitute teacher for the day and is cheering.
If protecting the freedom of speech
of those who would harm us is seen as more important than protecting the country, then there might not be any freedom of speech, or anything else left if some of these folks had their way with us.
Why not just give it all up and have anarchy? Your freedom of speech would be safe until someone came along and blew your brains out over it.
@Moon-howler
“Surely you don’t think this will stick, do you?”
The Constitution under Obama? No.
“If protecting the freedom of speech of those who would harm us is seen as more important than protecting the country, then there might not be any freedom of speech, or anything else left if some of these folks had their way with us.”
Big fan of PATRIOT, rounding up the Japanese and getting rid of habeas, eh? I didn’t think you were but you have surprised me more than once.
“Why not just give it all up and have anarchy?”
You can have limited government without anarchy.
“Your freedom of speech would be safe until someone came along and blew your brains out over it.”
Good. Embrace the hate flowing through you..
@marin, what a truly limited statement.
Taken enough history to see a censored letter from the field?
Let’s step back and talk about what you perceive as “embracing the hate flowing through me.”
Do you think if Al Qaeda got a good foothold in this country they would want to sit down and play tiddly winks with you? I think they would blow your brains out. That was the impression I got on 9-11. Perhaps I missed their statement on 9-11-01. Maybe I misunderstood.
I can draw no conclusions other than you really don’t understand the implications of free speech. There are all sorts of places you don’t have free speech. You don’t have it as a kid, you don’t have it at school or on most jobs. If you have a high security clearance, you really don’t have it. You don’t have it on blogs or in letters to the editor. Except in war time, the government supposedly can’t shut you down but your neighor sure can.
I think we may be debating the wrong issue. A news report quotes an intelligence source and an unnamed administration official that there was no ongoing demonstration in Libya at the time of the attack against the U.S. embassy. There was a demonstration earlier in the day, but nothing at the time of the attack.
I saw a similar report late last week from a Libyan soldier that claimed no crowds were at the embassy at the time of the attack, but I dismissed it because it was so out of line with official reporting.
If true, this implies that the infamous trailer had very little to do with the attack. The facts are still coming out, but this is the second report that calls into question the official narrative. The administration claims it has information that shows this was not a planned attack (not sure how they dis-prove a negative), but there seem to be quite a few inconsistencies with that hypothesis.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/17/obama-administration-libyan-president-clash-over-explanation-on-consulate/
It might take months to learn the real truth (vs the fake truth)
I don’t think it matters in the grand scheme of things. Obviously they wish us harm, for whatever reason.
the thing is, if 25% of the people think we are disrespectful of Mohammad, then that is just 25% who will never change their minds. I want to avoid things like that when possible. I think I see people like whats his name and Terry Jones and cowardly bullies. They are sticking their fingers in their ears and wiggling them at people who really tend to believe anything and who have no place to lash out except at Americans on their turf. I have a problem with that.
If Jones wants to do that up close and personal, have at it. They can chop his head off and he knows the risks going it.
As it stands, he is simply a distant ear wiggler and someone else gets face the wrath of a rather unsophisticated group of thugs who like to throw rocks and anything else they can get their hands on.
@Need to Know And rightly so. Look how our freedoms get curtailed every time “outraged” radical Muslims attack us. There is a clear pattern here. It’s what they want. And we should not give up another inch of our freedoms out of some misguided notion that it will somehow mollify them.
How do you propose to ensure air safety? Probably I didnt notice losing freedoms. I don’t feel like any have gone other than when flying. The answer to that, for me, is just not to fly.
I wonder why so many people on this blog turn a blind eye to the multitude of muslims in Lybia who are standing with America!
Seems to me that a well orchestrated attack was hidden under the planned stirring up of citizens by the Egyptian Cleric.
FYI, freedom of speech is often curtailed when you are felon convicted of fraud!
Marinm,
How much freedom of speech does someone have if they make a verbal eath threat against the POTUS? There is no absolute freedom of speech.
@Elena
Also in favor of indefinite detentions and assassination of American citizens? Color me disappointed. I thought on this topic I agreed with you – I guess not.
But, I am slightly suspicious on this – if we had an -R in the Administration would people here be quick to advocate the NDAA? Would you trust President Palin with this?
Provisions of the Patriot Act were upheld and strengthened when Obama took office. Are we to understand that you have always been onboard with the Patriot Act now, Elena, enacted under the guise of “protecting our freedoms”? Warrantless wiretapping? Extraordinary renditions? Americans overseas being targeted by their own government for execution?
No, rights aren’t absolute. We get that. Convicted felons lose their rights when they interfere with someone else’s rights. I don’t see where that’s even relevant to this discussion.
Pick on me, pick on me. @Emma. I was never that bothered by the Patriot act. I know lots of other people were though.
Why are convicted felons relevant? that film making dude is a convicted felons. All those defending his rights are wasting their breath.
@Elena
I don’t see how you get that I and any others on the blog defending free speech are turning a blind eye to the moderates in Libya and elsewhere, and those who are our friends. How does saying that we support free speech despite demands from some to return to an 8th century lifestyle imply that we harbor any ill-will toward moderate Muslims or anyone else who are our friends?
Fareed Zakaria had a good comment on this:
http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/09/14/fareeds-take-vivid-protest-images-do-not-tell-whole-story/?hpt=hp_t2
On a related note, those who signed security agreements not to reveal classified information did so voluntarily. I know that no one held a gun to my head when I signed. That’s not an abridgement of free speech at all. I understood when I got my security clearance that I would never be able to discuss any classified information to which I had access. I don’t consider honoring the agreement I signed voluntarily a limitation of my free speech at all.