Wow...what a Jerk

[Brandenburg-Altmark]

"I would really think it's an incitement of hatred against Muslims," said mosque board of trustees member Syed Jaffri. "Law enforcement should take it very seriously. Tomorrow, somebody could say, 'Oh, they have weapons' - and people believe it."

I wouldn't think it's an incitement of hatred. I would think it's libel.

Yeah. Saying "Muslims are jerks" is, as stupid and pointless as it is, the kind of speech deserving of protection. Saying "the mosque next door is making explosives!" is libel. It's a direct accusation that can be displayed as being 100% false.

[Dazchan]

Not being familiar with US law, couldn't the mosque use the fact that he's accusing them of making bombs to bring about a charge of libel/slander? Surely that's not protected by free speech...

[Veblenia]

I wonder how much you'd have to pay his neighbour to put up a sign saying "Child molestation next driveway".


I wonder if a fund could be started for just such a purpose.

[Neo Art]

Those muslims are so vain. They probably think that sign is about them.

[Al-Harakut al-Islami]

Those muslims are so vein. They probably think that sign is about them.

Yeah, just because it's in front of their building. And because of the stereotype. And all the anti-Muslim sentiment that's been shown already.

Irrational ragheads.

[EnragedMaldivians]

Those muslims are so vein. They probably think that sign is about them.

Yeah, just because it's in front of their building. And because of the stereotype. And all the anti-Muslim sentiment that's been shown already.

Irrational ragheads.

Neo-art was being facetious. And yeah, the person who placed that sign is a bigoted asshole.

[Tekania]

Link

I LOVE how he says that the Bomb making sign isn't about the mosque, and yet....he lives right next to the mosque....could this guy make any less sense if he tried?

Also, I don't think law enforcement can act on this (and shouldn't since it IS protected speech), it's only when people decide to ACT on the speech that should be acted upon. Also, how bad is it that one of my thoughts reading this was "Wow, that's a bad stenciling job."?

Thoughts?

I think the Mosque has a very good case of defamation and/or slander against the man, and I would not fault them if they decided to pursue such a case.

[Neo Art]

I think the Mosque has a very good case of defamation and/or slander

Seriously, this is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Defamation, as a legal concepts, takes two forms, "slander", which is spoken, and "libel" which is written. You can't have a case for "defamation or slander", it's like saying "this is a mammal, or a cat", slander is a form of defamation.

Secondly, it's written, so it's libel, not slander, if it's anything

[Farnhamia]

Those muslims are so vein. They probably think that sign is about them.

Oh, so close, Neo, so close. Must have been the clouds in your coffee. Vain, not vein.

[Neo Art]

Those muslims are so vein. They probably think that sign is about them.

Yeah, just because it's in front of their building. And because of the stereotype. And all the anti-Muslim sentiment that's been shown already.

Irrational ragheads.

Really? REALLY? The only way my reference could have been more obvious is if I started singing the bloody song.

[Neo Art]

Those muslims are so vein. They probably think that sign is about them.

Oh, so close, Neo, so close. Must have been the clouds in your coffee. Vain, not vein.

if you're refering to my spelling, it's been corrected

[Veblenia]

Yeah, just because it's in front of their building. And because of the stereotype. And all the anti-Muslim sentiment that's been shown already.

Irrational ragheads.

Really? REALLY? The only way my reference could have been more obvious is if I started singing the bloody song.

Brilliant reference....a bit dated for the NSG chilluns?

[Al-Harakut al-Islami]

Yeah, just because it's in front of their building. And because of the stereotype. And all the anti-Muslim sentiment that's been shown already.

Irrational ragheads.

Really? REALLY? The only way my reference could have been more obvious is if I started singing the bloody song.

Sorry. I...um...yeah... Sorry.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Yeah, just because it's in front of their building. And because of the stereotype. And all the anti-Muslim sentiment that's been shown already.

Irrational ragheads.

Neo-art was being facetious. And yeah, the person who placed that sign is a bigoted asshole.

Neo was paraphrasing Carly Simon. It was an obscure reference, probably why Al-Harakut al-Islami missed it.

[Neo Art]

Neo-art was being facetious. And yeah, the person who placed that sign is a bigoted asshole.

Neo was paraphrasing Carly Simon. It was an obscure reference, probably why Al-Harakut al-Islami missed it.

Since when did that song become obscure? I'm not that old but I've always known it....

[Ashmoria]

people complain about churches in their neighborhoods all the time.

the bells are too loud. they generate too much traffic in the area. their lights are too bright.

this guy isnt wrong in being pissed that a mosque got built next door. but he is an asshole for putting up a sign like that.

[Lordieth]

What a justified and reasonable way to deal with a neighbourly dispute.

Libel is different to slander. Libel is easier to prove for one thing, so I hope he does have a case put against him.

Clear cut case of racial stereotyping I think. His motives are the issue, not his right to 'free speech'. People also have the right not to be racially discriminated. The two shouldn't be seen as mutually exclusive, as it simplifies what is essentially a grey area issue.

His rights aren't the only rights in question.

If he has a complaint then he should do it through legal means. A bit hypocritical to attack the rights of others when he feels his has been infringed.

[New Rogernomics]

After seeing the tourist traps in NY and doing some shopping I got bored. Interesting place, but only for the short time. As for the case at hand, its a clear case of religious discrimination, the equivalent of having a sign pointing to an atheist club saying 'Atheists are evil', wait, that already exists in popular culture. Give him a fine and move on.

[Tekania]

I think the Mosque has a very good case of defamation and/or slander

Seriously, this is like nails on a chalkboard to me. Defamation, as a legal concepts, takes two forms, "slander", which is spoken, and "libel" which is written. You can't have a case for "defamation or slander", it's like saying "this is a mammal, or a cat", slander is a form of defamation.

Secondly, it's written, so it's libel, not slander, if it's anything

I stand corrected then...

I think the Mosque has a very good case of libel.

[Gun Manufacturers]

Neo was paraphrasing Carly Simon. It was an obscure reference, probably why Al-Harakut al-Islami missed it.

Since when did that song become obscure? I'm not that old but I've always known it....

It's not like it's a recent release, it came out in 1972 (a year before I was born). Also, it's not played often on the radio (in fact, I don't remember when the last time I heard it played on the radio, and I listen to the radio a lot at work).

[Flameswroth]

Well, this isn't the first time I've seen people use their signs, stencils and yards to make public their opinions on something in the area. I'm not sure that so much makes him a jerk in and of itself, if having the opinion itself does not do so.

Even so, if a neighbor put up a sign saying, 'Flameswroth rapes minority babies' or something because they didn't like me, that isn't exactly nice either...

[UCUMAY]

Not being familiar with US law, couldn't the mosque use the fact that he's accusing them of making bombs to bring about a charge of libel/slander? Surely that's not protected by free speech...

That they might be able to do.

[Tekania]

Not being familiar with US law, couldn't the mosque use the fact that he's accusing them of making bombs to bring about a charge of libel/slander? Surely that's not protected by free speech...

I would say yes... Free speech rights only applied to government restriction of speech... It does not absolve someone of the civil legal liability of said speech... Someone is perfectly free to stand in front of my office with signs attempting to lie to people that I am a baby-rapist... However that is no protection against the lawsuit I will bring upon them for defamation.

[Mike the Progressive]

It is moments like these, I wish we held the original interpretation of the Bill of Rights. That they are restrictions on the federal government, not explicit rights to the people.

[Grave_n_idle]

He should be allowed to do it, but he's either a dumbass or a troll, probably the fromer

Why should he be allowed?

Is the claim true? Are they making bombs?

If not, he's lying, at the very least. Probably criminally.