What is Digg?194 Comments
- rjmoriarty, on 02/02/2008, -30/+56Obligatory "Michael 'Savage' Weiner is a dick."
- roflbrothel, on 02/02/2008, -1/+20Well Bush sure as hell isn't a conservative. Biggest government ever under whose administration?
- MacEnvy, on 02/02/2008, -8/+26He's a social conservative, without a doubt. This one-axis "left-right" system we're accustomed to is inadequate to describe the current political spectrum.
Besides, like most socially conservative idiots he's using "liberal" as a pejorative rather than an accurate ideological descriptor. - inactive, on 02/02/2008, -15/+31On January 31, 2008, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) posted a press release from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/01/30-0
In the press release, CAIR Legal Counsel Hadhira Al-Khalili stated: "Michael Savage's frivolous and baseless lawsuit is a direct attack on First Amendment freedoms and on any citizen's right to comment on public issues...his suit is an abuse of the judicial system and a transparent attempt to punish those who challenge his hate-filled rhetoric."
While we welcome CAIR's newly discovered respect for the First Amendment; we wonder where CAIR's respect for civil rights was when CAIR sued Anti-CAIR founder Andrew Whitehead for defamation back in 2004? Or do "civil rights" only apply to Muslims whom support the overthrow of the United States government? We'd ask Al-Khalili, but as in the CAIR defamation lawsuit, we're sure she wouldn't be up to the challenge of defending CAIR. Given CAIR's proven ties to terrorists and terrorist groups, how can she? What could she possibly say about CAIR that would mitigate the proven truths about CAIR's associations with known terrorists and terrorist groups?
CAIR will never defeat Savage in front of a jury; CAIR's best hope is to find a sympathetic judge who will dismiss the case before it comes to trial. Failing that, CAIR will run away from this case, just as they did in their lawsuit against Anti-CAIR's founder.
But will CAIR be able to run from this case?
Our reading of Savage's material leads us to beleive that Savage would like nothing better than to see CAIR in court, in front of a jury. Somehow we doubt that Savage would be happy with anything less than the total demands he is making. CAIR is in a bind; if it pays Savage to settle, it loses. If this goes to the jury, it will lose as well.
Savage's attorney, Daniel Horowitz, has a "bull dog" reputation; would he have taken Savage's case if he thought he couldn't win? Horowitz can afford to pick and choose his cases, he obviously believes in Savage or he could have easily turned this case down.
Details of Savage's lawsuit can be read here: http://prosites-prs.homestead.com/index.html
Details of CAIR's lawsuit against Anti-CAIR founder found here: http://www.anti-cair-net.org/LegalDetails
In response to the EFF's support of CAIR, Anti-CAIR sent the following e-mail to EFF:
--------------------
Dear Ms. Jeschke,
My name is Andrew Whitehead, I am the founder and director of Anti-Council on American-Islamic Relations (Anti-CAIR); a small group of concerned citizens united in exposing the relationship between the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and various Islamic terrorist personalities and groups. I invite you to visit our web site, www.anti-cair-net.org for more information on our work.
For the several years we have been fighting and exposing CAIR's bigotry, anti-American rhetoric, and support for Islamist terrorism (along with CAIR's proven links to same), one thing we have learned that your organization apparently has not: CAIR is not what it seems to be. Beneath the colorful logo, the friendly handshakes, the photo-ops with various political leaders and community representatives is a group that is working, every minute of every day, to advance the radical Islamist agenda in North America.
The following list is proven true:
"Let there be no doubt that the Council on American-Islamic Relations is a terrorist supporting front organization that is partially funded by terrorists, and that CAIR wishes nothing more that the implementation of Sharia Law in America."
CAIR has proven links to, and was founded by, Islamist terrorists. CAIR actively supports terrorists and terrorist-supporting groups and nations."
CAIR is an organization found by Hamas supporters which seeks to overthrow Constitutional government in the United States and replace it with an Islamist theocracy using our own Constitution as protection."
"CAIR is not in the United States to promote the civil rights of Muslims. CAIR is here to make radical Islam the dominate religion in the United States and convert our country in an Islamic theocracy."
"CAIR receives direct funding from Islamic terrorist supporting countries."
I introduced this list by saying, "The following list is proven true".
How do I know for a fact that it is true? Simple, CAIR sued me for making these statements (additional statements are on the web site). When CAIR sued me, my legal team requested a jury trial. In preparation for trial, we went through the discovery process. Just before trial was at hand, CAIR dropped the case, "with prejudice" (meaning they cannot sue again for the same truths I wrote). Wouldn't you like to ask CAIR why they dropped the lawsuit? You would like to know why they couldn't defend themselves, wouldn't you? I know the answer: My attorney, Reed Rubinstein, was too close to the truth in our discovery questions. CAIR knew we had the goods on them and that a trial would expose them to the whole world for what they really are: an Islamic terrorist front group.
Go ahead, put these questions to CAIR; see if you get a better answer. You won't. Instead, they'll call me "Islamophobic, xenophobic" and a whole host of other words...all in the hope that you will forget the original question...because you don't want to appear to be "mean", you'll go along with it. How do I know? Because I've seen them do it a million times before.
CAIR has lately claimed that I paid them to drop the lawsuit. Would you care to ask them just how many pieces of silver it takes to get them to swallow their so-called "honor"?
Don't be surprised when your question is ignored.
Personally, I'd rather die than give up my honor...but then I am not an officer in CAIR; where "honor" is just another word in the dictionary.
By running from the lawsuit they instigated, CAIR has confirmed that every word I ever wrote about them is true.
We, among many other anti-radical Islamic groups, have pointed out CAIR's attacks on our civil liberties, CAIR attempts to bully organizations and government agencies into submitting to radical Islam, and CAIR's siding with Islamic terrorists in North America.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is siding with an organization that actively supports those who will shut you down the very moment they take power. You have very little idea of just how this will affect your group long-term; I can tell you from personal experience that North Americans do not respect organizations that stand with CAIR.
I have included those CAIR members you have posted to your web page, http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/01/30-0. In addition, please feel free to publish this e-mail or share it with CAIR.
Unlike CAIR, I do not fear the sunlight.
Please feel free to ask any questions you may have regarding CAIR, I can promise a truthful response. I also invite you share any further communications we may have in future with CAIR or anyone else.
Respectfully,
Andy
Andrew Whitehead
Director, Anti-Council on American-Islamic Relations (Anti-CAIR)
www.anti-cair-net.org - bardo, on 02/02/2008, -10/+26Anything to tweak the nose of CAIR is fine with me. CAIR is a group that after 9-11 posted pictures of the WTC with requests for donations to help the victims.... which they collected and sent to Hamas and other radical Islamic hate groups.
Why the left goes to such lengths to protect groups that openly discriminate against gays, women, non-muslims.. not to mention their penchant for bombing innocent people... Can anyone explain it? - inactive, on 02/02/2008, -16/+32Looks like CAIR doesn't like it when people do to them what they do to critics. I have no idea who Savage is and I honestly don't care, looks like another biggot, no surprise there.
But CAIR does the exact same thing he did, all the time.
http://www.nysun.com/article/18001
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTI ...
This one has about 100 examples: http://www.danielpipes.org/biblio_cair.php
I don't like groups. I espescially don't like groups that pretend to defend people by marginalizing them as an independent group instead of being an integral part of society. That's what CAIR and all other ethnic or religious rights group does, they promote and us vs them rhetoric and I think it's counter-productive. - cfizzo, on 02/02/2008, -14/+29Plain and simple CAIR is a front organization for terrorism. They protect terrorists, and their head supports jihad vocally and monetarily. The federal goverment has named CAIR an unindicted conspirator in a terrorism case. Ars didn't really show much knowledge of the case or its parties. BTW, the racketeering will stick because repeatedly using slander to silence critics and damage them financially is against the law.
- kolanos, on 02/02/2008, -4/+19The article is in regards to an EFF ruling, Ars TEchnica has been covering copyright law for some time now.
- inactive, on 02/02/2008, -5/+18There is nothing the Constitution that prescribes to us a right not to be offended. Now, I know the ***** Agenda is trying to get a law (HR 1592) passed that would make it a federal crime to offend gays, but hopefully, it doesn't pass the Senate. Offensive speech is not threatening speech.
- chicoer2001, on 02/02/2008, -2/+15Fight it in court and counter sue.
- Irco, on 02/02/2008, -13/+25dude! WTF!? this is not about him being a left or right winger! is about xenophobia, categorizing all muslims as terrorists and/or lazy is not only WRONG is plain STUPID, you need to be an absolute blinded retard to say all that he did.
- absurdist, on 02/02/2008, -1/+12OK, after reading this article, all you people who claim the Savage Weiner is just parody can STFU now.
- sleepbox, on 02/02/2008, -6/+17If there is "unacceptable" free speech then it should apply equally to all groups, not just minority groups but we all already know that political correctness doesn't allow that. If this applied to every organization that attacks/mocks Christianity there would be no media, just unlimited litigation in all media outlets among other things.
So this started as CAIR pulling advertisers (he claims threatening them) from Savage's radio show and he got upset about it. He set up a legal fund to fight CAIR and claims it's America's last hope for freedom of speech.
I was initially turned on to Savage due to his "shock" approach but once I really listened to him, I found there's really not much content to him and he is rather boring. And no, I'm not going to say he spews "hate" and I'm "offended" because saying "hate" is a cop out to what's really going on and it's only OK to be "offended" if the PC police advise that it's OK to be offended by a particular source or class. - inactive, on 02/02/2008, -10/+20No fieldcar, we on the left are not like you on the right... we do not hate you. we know you folks are just ignorant and that time will show you the errors in your ways.
no fieldcar, we dont hate you, we love you!!! (makes me smile to know that this pisses you off) - bilbus, on 02/02/2008, -7/+17Go savage!
In discovery savage will ask to see their books .... and we will finaly know what terrorist groups they are giving money to. - TomRitchford, on 02/02/2008, -4/+14Fascinating choice of phrase. Do you really believe that exercising your Constitutional rights is equivalent to anally raping someone? Or is being sodomized simply a topic that's on your mind a lot?
- Brad324, on 02/02/2008, -2/+12are you trying to use the care bear stare on him?
- karlcbl, on 02/02/2008, -9/+18CAIR is evil, look it up before you pass harsh judgements on the radio host.
- strictnein, on 02/02/2008, -0/+8What does that have to do with anything? I swear, some people couldn't debate/argue themselves out of a wet paper bag. Whether he did or not has absolutely ZERO relevancy to this conversation. It's just sad that some people think that statements such as yours are valid forms of argument.
- bardo, on 02/02/2008, -1/+9CAIR admits to having a picture of the WTC on their web site with a link to donate that linked to among other sites, The Holy Land Foundation.
References: paragraph 91 on http://prosites-prs.homestead.com/CAIR_ANSWER.pdf
For details re the holy land foundation, visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Land_Foundation_ ... - Crusader1145, on 02/02/2008, -2/+10I'm a conservative and I don't hate the Constitution. Quite the contrary. Every conservative I know feels the same way, and not just for the Second Amendment. The Constitution, all of it, is a brilliant document.
From my perspective its the liberal/left that wants to restrict free speech. Look at McCain/Feingold, a liberal bill that restricts political speech which conservatives are strongly opposed to. Or so-called hate speech laws promoted by the left, again opposed by conservatives. Ugly, hateful speech is protected too but liberals back these kinds of laws. Or look at the calls for silencing Fox news or conservative talk radio by liberals. Wouldn't that be contrary to the First Amendment? Conservatives may not like the New York Times or CNN but I don't know any mainstream conservative that would ever call for their closure. Can you point to similar anti-Constitutional positions taken by mainstream conservatives? (I do not consider Savage mainstream conservative, nor do I consider John McCain to be a conservative.) - bossm4n, on 02/02/2008, -2/+10I truly appreciate you posting all of that information, especially the correspondence. I think this is a very interesting and precedent-setting case. In addition, if CAIR is the cloaked, radical hate group that he and Anti-CAIR claim it to be, then by all means, expose them to the sunlight for all to see.
- faskill, on 02/02/2008, -4/+12So, according to the EFF... "as a matter of law, the US allows anyone to use copyrighted material for the purposes of criticism or commentary". With that being said, I now have ability to post any major motion picture of my choosing as long as a I preface it with: "This is the best movie ever in my opinion" or "This movie is the worst movie ever". We now have a precedent.
- inactive, on 02/02/2008, -5/+13CAIR will never let this lawsuit get to discovery.
- TubaTechno, on 02/02/2008, -8/+15Weiner has always been a hateful man towards people of other faiths and walks of life. He is very intolerant and filled with hate speech. Just asked him why he doesn't have a TV show anymore....
This man is far from a "right-wing" talk show host. He attacks Rush and Hannity almost on a daily basis. - stevebee, on 02/02/2008, -13/+20Someone tell me what was incorrect about what Savage says in that quote.
- SaladCactusKing, on 02/02/2008, -3/+10"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran ... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."
-Omar Ahmad, Founder of CAIR, former chairman
" * You know, when I see a woman walking around with a burqa, I see a Nazi. That's what I see, how-do-you-like-that? A hateful Nazi who would like to cut your throat and kill your children. Don't give me this crap that they're doing it out of a sacred ritual or rite. It's not required by the Quran that a woman walk around in a seventh-century drape. She's doing it to spit in your face. She's saying, 'You white moron, you, I'm going to kill you if I can.' That's how I see it! What do you want me to do, mince words with you? I'm not going to mince words. We're too far gone in this country."
-Michael Savage
Two groups of douchebags. They should get married and hang themselves. - Crusader1145, on 02/02/2008, -8/+15Irco: Its not about xenophobia or racism or anything like thatt. I don't care for Savage and I don't listen to his show, but he has a right to his opinions, whether you or I or CAIR agree or not. Free speech can be ugly, but that's the price we pay for that right.
Putting aside Savage's views and his copyright claim, I will say that I am glad to see someone giving CAIR a dose of the medicine they so freely dispense to others. - prashantpawar, on 02/02/2008, -2/+9A Nazi govt can easily classify any statement as hate speech and ban it if we start precedents like that.
If you don't like hate speech, put ear plugs in your ears.
In India, which is supposed to be a Democratic state based on the principles of freedom have clauses against Freedom of Speech, and you know how is it misused?
The criteria for banning something is if it incites violence, that is, if reading or listening to someone people go and commit violence, so what Muslims do is whenever they have to ban anything they find offensive(like Danish cartoons) they go and instigate riots, and because of that the govt bans anything which is offensive to any group, and free speech can ***** itself. - sahilamin, on 02/02/2008, -2/+8You people are idiots.
ars technica is a website I respect, but it seems they're filled with about as much liberal ***** as Digg is. - solid12345, on 02/02/2008, -8/+14Savage IS a dick, but boo hoo to Muslims who cannot take criticism, this is America, get used to it. Christianity gets blasted all the time and they don't paint signs saying "behead those who insult Jesus"
- OYAHHH, on 02/02/2008, -3/+9Yes, A lot of people don't understand what is going on, including you locriology.
Savage sued CAIR because CAIR took Savages copyrighted show and placed excerpts of it on a button directly next to a "please donate" button on their website. That is using Savages work to sell CAIR's product. NOT LEGAL.
If, they had, as you say, written a document refuting Savage and placing excerpts next to this document without the "donate" button then perhaps what they did becomes legal.
But, CAIR is in the business of promoting the Islamic message. And it is not legal to use someone else's work to promote your business, even if it is a charity business.
Savage will win this case. The EFF has overstepped their charter. - cfizzo, on 02/02/2008, -8/+14He doesn't say anything wrong. But you'll get dugg down because digg is full of ***** idiots who don't know ***** about *****.
- Crusader1145, on 02/02/2008, -4/+10Excellent post.
- elenchos, on 02/02/2008, -0/+6Yeah Phojo, your statement is a completely incorrect statement of the law. Holmes' fired in a theater language doesn't apply to this situation. The controlling case would probably be Terminello v. Chicago which stated, "Freedom of speech, though not absolute, is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience, annoyance, or unrest." Since this doesn't produce a clear and present danger, it cannot be censored. Additionally, the Supreme Court has never said that "hate speech" per se is proscribable. R.A.V. v. St. Paul, the Supreme Court's so-called hate speech case, says that the government may not regulate speech based on hostility or favoritism towards the underlying message expressed.
- Crusader1145, on 02/02/2008, -4/+10I think your absolutely right about that. They have too much to hide which is why they dropped the suit against Anti-CAIR.
- Herolint, on 02/02/2008, -8/+14Is anything that Michael Savage says NOT an on-air rant?
- inactive, on 02/03/2008, -3/+8CAIR is nothing but a front for those who solicit funds and personnel for the crazy jihadists. Basically they are Fifth Columnists protected by the PC apologists. I find Savage too vitriolic, but that does not counter the accuracy of his comments. I hope he is able to destroy the effectiveness of these terrorist enablers; the world would be a better place without this organization.
- strictnein, on 02/02/2008, -3/+8You know what happened to the Dixie Chicks? They said something that many of their fans disagreed with. And you know what the fans did? Stop going to their concerts and buying their albums. Freedom of speech does not mean that you are somehow not held accountable for what you say.
Ward Churchill's essay was the least of his problems. He was a fraud and a plagiarist and rightly fired.
Americans have always had their foreign policy criticized. It's nothing new and the idea that we "can't handle" it is wrong. - ThatsUnpossible, on 02/03/2008, -1/+6Why is it that liberals are the only people I ever see talking about limiting freedom of speech, because they don't like what is being said?
What happened to the most liberal of statements in history:
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
--Voltaire - cfizzo, on 02/02/2008, -4/+9No, the problem is his critics abusing copyright law to silence him. Fight fire with fire.
- rockets, on 02/02/2008, -1/+6As opposed to a left-wing extremist which are the worst type of... human being?? C'mon, any extremisms is bad. ANY. Coming from any direction and any political party. Oh, and they are not just Republican.
- Danial, on 02/02/2008, -2/+7Gotta love how paranoid the anti-Muslim folk are. I bet these are the same people who thought Y2K was the end of the world.
- Dweller99, on 02/02/2008, -10/+15Nice spin. Did anyone censor Mr. Savage? If anything his words are being heard by MORE people.
Granted, that is not a good thing for him.. get him outside of the AM talk radio bubble and he is exposed for what he really is. - dgp1, on 02/02/2008, -6/+10Good lord! I just listened to almost that whole rant. There's 3.5 minutes of my life I'll never get back. That man has got some serious problems. He screams like he's been held down for the "last 5 years" and tortured into accepting Islam as his religion.
I'm not religious at all but even I can see that nobody's going door to door in this country and trying to convert Michael Savage's sorry ass to Islam. He screams like 10 times how he's SO SICK OF IT. Of what? Islam has no effect on me, and no effect on Savage. And if we weren't over there ***** with them, their beliefs wouldn't have any effect on any of us at all. And don't use 9/11 as a reason for this hate. Timothy McVeigh wasn't a Muslim. It doesn't take Islam to have a terrorist attack.
I don't scream at Christians at the supermarket about why I think they're full of *****. So why does MS think he needs to urge people to scream at Muslims everywhere they go? (If you doubt he said this, listen to his rant). - Meatetarian, on 02/02/2008, -0/+4You misspelled "opportunity."
Also, you do realize that Savage was speaking those words, not writing them, and that any errors in the paragraph are due to poor transcription, right? - cfizzo, on 02/02/2008, -1/+5More than two religions last time I checked.
- inactive, on 02/03/2008, -3/+7Michael Savage is a Maverick, He has been paying attention to the invasion of America, while the rest of the so called Conservative lip jockeys have been propping up Judas George. The hate spewed out against him on this thread is evidence to the extent that people have not been paying attention. Better wake up people, your in the midst of a bad wind blowing, and many of you don't have a clue.
- sgtpppr, on 02/02/2008, -0/+4Why do people incorrectly use the 'fire in a theatre' precedent as a means of justifying limiting freedom of speech. It's a straw man. Screaming 'fire' in a crowded theater can cause a stampede or prevent people from leaving in a real fire because of 'crying wolf'. Hate speech has nothing at all to do with this. Your real argument is that causing someone 'emotional harm' is the same as being physically harmed. It's the argument overly sensitive people use to LEGISLATE political correctness. I hate republicans for many other reasons, but i hate democrats for this 'limiting freedom of speech' because they want to legislate political correctness.
- TubaTechno, on 02/02/2008, -1/+5Because name calling really shows maturity...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 194 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is