Compost
Diamond Member
- Sep 11, 2015
- 15,016
- 13,807
- 2,415
Loretta Lynch Vows to Prosecute Those Who Use 'Anti-Muslim' Speech That 'Edges Toward Violence'
The day after a horrific shooting spree by a "radicalized" Muslim man and his partner in San Bernardino, California, Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged to a group of Muslim activists that she would take aggressive action against anyone who used "anti-Muslim rhetoric" that "edges toward violence."
Speaking to the audience at the Muslim Advocate's 10th anniversary dinner Thursday, Lynch said her "greatest fear" is the "incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric" in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech.
Assuring the pro-Muslim group that "we stand with you," Lynch said she would use her Justice Department to protect Muslims from "violence" and discrimination.
Claiming that violence against Muslims is on the rise and citing France's clamp down on potentially radicalized mosques, Lynch suggested the Constitution does not protect "actions predicated on violent talk" and pledged to prosecute those responsible for such actions.
“When we talk about the First amendment we [must] make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American," said Lynch. "They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted."
"My message not just to the Muslim community but to all Americans is ‘We cannot give in to the fear that these backlashes are really based on,'" said Lynch.
It is painfully clear that, like her predecessor Eric Holder, Lynch is far more concerned with promoting the social justice agenda than protecting the Constitutional rights of American citizens. What exactly is speech that "edges toward violence"? What exactly are "actions predicated on violent talk"? In the end, it is whatever she decides it to mean.
We've just had yet another terror attack here in the US, is "anti-Muslim rhetoric" really the most pressing problem the Justice Department ought to focus on?
The day after a horrific shooting spree by a "radicalized" Muslim man and his partner in San Bernardino, California, Attorney General Loretta Lynch pledged to a group of Muslim activists that she would take aggressive action against anyone who used "anti-Muslim rhetoric" that "edges toward violence."
Speaking to the audience at the Muslim Advocate's 10th anniversary dinner Thursday, Lynch said her "greatest fear" is the "incredibly disturbing rise of anti-Muslim rhetoric" in America and vowed to prosecute any guilty of what she deemed violence-inspiring speech.
Assuring the pro-Muslim group that "we stand with you," Lynch said she would use her Justice Department to protect Muslims from "violence" and discrimination.
Claiming that violence against Muslims is on the rise and citing France's clamp down on potentially radicalized mosques, Lynch suggested the Constitution does not protect "actions predicated on violent talk" and pledged to prosecute those responsible for such actions.
“When we talk about the First amendment we [must] make it clear that actions predicated on violent talk are not American," said Lynch. "They are not who we are, they are not what we do, and they will be prosecuted."
"My message not just to the Muslim community but to all Americans is ‘We cannot give in to the fear that these backlashes are really based on,'" said Lynch.
It is painfully clear that, like her predecessor Eric Holder, Lynch is far more concerned with promoting the social justice agenda than protecting the Constitutional rights of American citizens. What exactly is speech that "edges toward violence"? What exactly are "actions predicated on violent talk"? In the end, it is whatever she decides it to mean.
We've just had yet another terror attack here in the US, is "anti-Muslim rhetoric" really the most pressing problem the Justice Department ought to focus on?
