4 ms·

What is the line between exercise of free speech and incitement of violence? If a white supremacist openly advocates for the murder of Jews and helps organise

What is the line between exercise of free speech and incitement of violence? If a white supremacist openly advocates for the murder of Jews and helps organise armed militias, should that person be tracked by the FBI and prosecuted? If a high school student openly advocates for the murder of teachers and flaunts his access to firearms and knives, should that person be tracked by the FBI and prosecuted?

untog 8y ago
I'm not sure how either of those examples relates to the individual discussed in the article, given that: "the FBI had no evidence of Balogun making any specific threats about harming police" Absent of any actual connections your post just sounds like whataboutism.
nwah1 8y ago
I think you are being downvoted because you only read the headline. I'm with you that it is ok for the FBI to track people's public comments when they fit a risk profile, and to track their private communications with a warrent. But in this case, the problem is that this man was arrested and charged with a vague terrorism thing for what amounts to facebook posts expressing sympathy with copkillers. But in the US, it is your legal right to do that.
- thinkcontext 8y ago
  > this man was arrested and charged with a vague terrorism thing Incorrect. He was charged with illegal possession of a firearm, that's a specific and not vague thing. He was denied bail as a potential threat based on him expressing sympathy for copkillers.
  - nwah1 8y ago
    Thank you for the correction.
  - miek 8y ago
    His possession of firearms was legal, and the judge tossed that charge. They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. It certainly appears that they came on a fishing expedition because he was "identified" as a threat. The FBI admitted a lack of any direct threat.
    - thinkcontext 8y ago
      > They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. I was curious about this as well, the Foreign Policy article has more detail: "In his affidavit, Keighley describes learning that Daniels placed a firearm in his checked luggage — in compliance with airline regulations, according to the defense — which was then delayed, before being returned to his home address in Dallas. The FBI obtained a search warrant on Dec. 7, based on Daniels’s prior conviction, and the raid took place five days later." http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas-the-first-prosecution-of-a-black-identity-extremist/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas... This indicates the warrant was indeed for illegal possession.
      - miek 8y ago
        Interesting, nice find and thanks- I was curious as well. I guess the warrant was wrongly issued and pursued then, given that the judge tossed that charge out. If that is the case, it really seems to boil down to intimidation.
dsfyu404ed 8y ago
Tracked? Sure. Prosecuted? Not unless it violates the law Have their door kicked down at some odd hour in a show of force/intimidation? Whoever's responsible should at least get their ass chewed out by the boss and be assigned shitty jobs for a few months.

untog 8y ago

I'm not sure how either of those examples relates to the individual discussed in the article, given that: "the FBI had no evidence of Balogun making any specific threats about harming police" Absent of any actual connections your post just sounds like whataboutism.

nwah1 8y ago

I think you are being downvoted because you only read the headline. I'm with you that it is ok for the FBI to track people's public comments when they fit a risk profile, and to track their private communications with a warrent. But in this case, the problem is that this man was arrested and charged with a vague terrorism thing for what amounts to facebook posts expressing sympathy with copkillers. But in the US, it is your legal right to do that.

thinkcontext 8y ago
> this man was arrested and charged with a vague terrorism thing Incorrect. He was charged with illegal possession of a firearm, that's a specific and not vague thing. He was denied bail as a potential threat based on him expressing sympathy for copkillers.
- nwah1 8y ago
  Thank you for the correction.
- miek 8y ago
  His possession of firearms was legal, and the judge tossed that charge. They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. It certainly appears that they came on a fishing expedition because he was "identified" as a threat. The FBI admitted a lack of any direct threat.
  - thinkcontext 8y ago
    > They didn't come to his home because they suspected an illegally possessed firearm. I was curious about this as well, the Foreign Policy article has more detail: "In his affidavit, Keighley describes learning that Daniels placed a firearm in his checked luggage — in compliance with airline regulations, according to the defense — which was then delayed, before being returned to his home address in Dallas. The FBI obtained a search warrant on Dec. 7, based on Daniels’s prior conviction, and the raid took place five days later." http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas-the-first-prosecution-of-a-black-identity-extremist/ http://foreignpolicy.com/2018/01/30/is-a-court-case-in-texas... This indicates the warrant was indeed for illegal possession.
    - miek 8y ago
      Interesting, nice find and thanks- I was curious as well. I guess the warrant was wrongly issued and pursued then, given that the judge tossed that charge out. If that is the case, it really seems to boil down to intimidation.

dsfyu404ed 8y ago

Tracked? Sure. Prosecuted? Not unless it violates the law Have their door kicked down at some odd hour in a show of force/intimidation? Whoever's responsible should at least get their ass chewed out by the boss and be assigned shitty jobs for a few months.