Muslim trash assaults paradegoer, victim lectured.

[Blaidd Drwg]

The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.

The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet.

The case went to trial, and as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a Muslim. What transpired next was surreal. The Judge not only ruled in favor of the defendant, but called Mr. Perce a name and told him that if he were in a Muslim country, he’d be put to death.

Even if Judge Martin was right on the law in dismissing the assault charges and refusing to allow the video to be admitted into evidence (and I’m not arguing he was), his admonishment to Perce was way out of line. It’s extremely difficult to discipline or remove a judge over a ruling, and perhaps there’s good reason for that. But it seems to me that Martin’s decision to use his courtroom to scold a man who had been assaulted over his Halloween costume—and to imply that the right not to be offended trumps the First Amendment—gets more into the realm of judicial conduct and temperament.

http://www.theagitator.com/2012/02/25/m ... gitator%29

[Turdacious]

He should be lectured for being an attention seeking dipshit who needs to grow up.

[Blaidd Drwg]

ohh poor ting....did the zombie pope costume get your panties in a wad?

[tzg]

http://zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/

Most interesting are the Islamic depictions.

[The Crawdaddy]

The judge should have recused himself. Immediately.

[Turdacious]

ohh poor ting....did the zombie pope costume get your panties in a wad?

Could care less about that. He's a Mikey Weinstein who likes to dress up in public.

[Blaidd Drwg]

ohh poor ting....did the zombie pope costume get your panties in a wad?

Could care less about that. He's a Mikey Weinstein who likes to dress up in public.

Why does everything devolve to anti-Semitic remarks form this place?

[Turdacious]

Just add koolaid.

[Protobuilder]

The Pennsylvania State Director of American Atheists, Inc., Mr. Ernest Perce V., was assaulted by a Muslim while participating in a Halloween parade. Along with a Zombie Pope, Ernest was costumed as Zombie Muhammad. The assault was caught on video, the Muslim man admitted to his crime and charges were filed in what should have been an open-and-shut case. That’s not what happened, though.

The defendant is an immigrant and claims he did not know his actions were illegal, or that it was legal in this country to represent Muhammad in any form. To add insult to injury, he also testified that his 9 year old son was present, and the man said he felt he needed to show his young son that he was willing to fight for his Prophet.

The case went to trial, and as circumstances would dictate, Judge Mark Martin is also a Muslim. What transpired next was surreal. The Judge not only ruled in favor of the defendant, but called Mr. Perce a name and told him that if he were in a Muslim country, he’d be put to death.

Even if Judge Martin was right on the law in dismissing the assault charges and refusing to allow the video to be admitted into evidence (and I’m not arguing he was), his admonishment to Perce was way out of line. It’s extremely difficult to discipline or remove a judge over a ruling, and perhaps there’s good reason for that. But it seems to me that Martin’s decision to use his courtroom to scold a man who had been assaulted over his Halloween costume—and to imply that the right not to be offended trumps the First Amendment—gets more into the realm of judicial conduct and temperament.

http://www.theagitator.com/2012/02/25/m ... gitator%29

Without doing a moment of research, what do you say the odds of this story being correct are? 1:1000?

[DARTH]

ohh poor ting....did the zombie pope costume get your panties in a wad?

Could care less about that. He's a Mikey Weinstein who likes to dress up in public.

So you don't care that an American was assulted while carrying out his first amendment rights by a fucking dirt worshiping Jawa and then was fucked in a courtroom?

Oh that's fucking nice.

The guy might be an atheist asshat, it might have been in bad taste and the Zombie Pope might have insulted you Catholic sensabilities but he was with in his rights where as the raghead commited a crime and a Judge, a fucking American who converted to that sick fuck slave faith subverts the law and insults the victum.

Well shit, I guess it's open season?

Lot's of people offend my sensabilites and I can put most people I come across through what amounts to car wreck levels of damage in seconds but there is this thing called the law and what it can do to me and mine if I do so I only get to fuck up those who are stupid enough to come at or threaten me. What gives a fucking raghead rights over mine that he could assult me and get away with it if I offended his Boyfucking Fag, Homocidal maniac Prophet of shit?

So I hope someone puts a bullet in the judges head, cuts off his hands and shove a pork chop in his dead fucking mouth. This way according to his slave faith he will not go to heaven.

It's OK for Maplethorpe to put a crucifix in piss but Muhamid is off limits. Shit as our resident Papist I'd figure you at least would get a kick out of someone fucking with the rags and be appalled that a Judge in America can rule based on him having the same Slave faith.

[Turdacious]

ohh poor ting....did the zombie pope costume get your panties in a wad?

Could care less about that. He's a Mikey Weinstein who likes to dress up in public.

So you don't care that an American was assulted while carrying out his first amendment rights by a fucking dirt worshiping Jawa and then was fucked in a courtroom?

Oh that's fucking nice.

The guy might be an atheist asshat, it might have been in bad taste and the Zombie Pope might have insulted you Catholic sensabilities but he was with in his rights where as the raghead commited a crime and a Judge, a fucking American who converted to that sick fuck slave faith subverts the law and insults the victum.

Well shit, I guess it's open season?

Lot's of people offend my sensabilites and I can put most people I come across through what amounts to car wreck levels of damage in seconds but there is this thing called the law and what it can do to me and mine if I do so I only get to fuck up those who are stupid enough to come at or threaten me. What gives a fucking raghead rights over mine that he could assult me and get away with it if I offended his Boyfucking Fag, Homocidal maniac Prophet of shit?

So I hope someone puts a bullet in the judges head, cuts off his hands and shove a pork chop in his dead fucking mouth. This way according to his slave faith he will not go to heaven.

It's OK for Maplethorpe to put a crucifix in piss but Muhamid is off limits. Shit as our resident Papist I'd figure you at least would get a kick out of someone fucking with the rags and be appalled that a Judge in America can rule based on him having the same Slave faith.

Assault is and should be a crime-- no doubt the judge has no business staying on the bench. But do I feel bad that this guy who got a needed ass kicking? Not really. Big differences between people who face danger for expressing their faith (i.e. Chinese Christians and Buddhists, Shia making a pilgrimage to Karbala, Coptics in Egypt) and this moron who demands the public protect his right to be an idiot in public.

[Sassenach]

demands the public protect his right to be an idiot in public.

The public doesn't have to protect his right, but the law sure as fuck does. He was assaulted. Was he being an inflammatory asshat? Maybe. But it's still an assault and should have been handled by the judge that way. The judge can not like what he had to say, but too fucking bad.

For example, Turdly. You can haul off and punch someone dressed up as a cardinal pretending to diddle little boys and saying all sorts of nasty things about the church, but expect to be charged and prosecuted for it.

[DARTH]

That slave faith should be ridiculed as much as possable, make it even with everyone else.

Christians, Jews and Buddist in the West don't tend to attack people when their faith is made fun of, the Jawas need to learn that shit if they want to continue to live here.

Welcome to the West Raghead, all faiths get fucked with here, even those that established OUR colture and OUR laws. What makes you think your going to get special treatment in a Nation you have very little possative history with? Get used to it, we have.

They want to play by dirt worshiper rules they can go the fuck home to their sandbox.

I think it's time to wear a "Muhamid loves Anal! He Catches!" t-shirt. In Va. if one attacks me I can beat the fuck out of him. If 2 or more come? well it's Virginia.

[Turdacious]

The public doesn't have to protect his right, but the law sure as fuck does. He was assaulted... But it's still an assault and should have been handled by the judge that way.

Thanks for restating my point. Nice selective quoting by the way.

Was he being an inflammatory asshat? Maybe.

No maybe involved here. Deliberately insulting centuries old, well established, fundamental beliefs is inconsistent with good citizenship. The way it works is that spoiled children like this (and the ones who dominate the Occupy movement) force police to protect their childishness-- taking resources away from protecting victims from real criminals.

[Stillwater]

Judge is an idiot and the asshole guilty of assault.

Christians in the West don't tend to attack people when their faith is made fun of

No they just attack people they don't agree with.

Go stand outside an abortion clinic some time and see how pleasant those "good christians" are.

even those that established OUR colture and OUR laws.

Except our culture and our laws aren't based on any one religion.

In fact, the words "Jesus Christ, Christianity, Bible, Creator, Divine, and God" are never mentioned in the Constitution-- not even once.

http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html

[Sassenach]

. Deliberately insulting centuries old, well established, fundamental beliefs is inconsistent with good citizenship.

But not illegal, physically assaulting someone is. Part of being an American, if I recall, is respecting free speech.

[Turdacious]

. Deliberately insulting centuries old, well established, fundamental beliefs is inconsistent with good citizenship.

But not illegal, physically assaulting someone is. Part of being an American, if I recall, is respecting free speech.

Only as long as you ignore 90% of our history.

[Blaidd Drwg]

. Deliberately insulting centuries old, well established, fundamental beliefs is inconsistent with good citizenship.

But not illegal, physically assaulting someone is. Part of being an American, if I recall, is respecting free speech.

Only as long as you ignore 90% of our history.

You argue from this position most of the time, you'll throw universally held ideals under the bus in favor of feeling superior that you have some broad understanding of the world you can hover over. Only no one cares, once you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater we just ignore you savoring your flatus.

[Fat Cat]

Turd is a religious reactionary who hates the U.S. Constitution.

[Turdacious]

. Deliberately insulting centuries old, well established, fundamental beliefs is inconsistent with good citizenship.

But not illegal, physically assaulting someone is. Part of being an American, if I recall, is respecting free speech.

Only as long as you ignore 90% of our history.

You argue from this position most of the time, you'll throw universally held ideals under the bus in favor of feeling superior that you have some broad understanding of the world you can hover over. Only no one cares, once you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater we just ignore you savoring your flatus.

This from a guy who has rejected the traditional universally held ideals.

Let me refocus this for you. Guy assaults someone, takes responsibility for it, judge lets him off-- you call him trash. LOL.

[Blaidd Drwg]

I don't reject any universally held ideals, I reject the preposterous notion they are divinely inspired.

[Turdacious]

I don't reject any universally held ideals, I reject the preposterous notion they are divinely inspired.

So what are the universally held ideals, if you reject the generally accepted source of those ideals?

[Blaidd Drwg]

I don't reject any universally held ideals, I reject the preposterous notion they are divinely inspired.

So what are the universally held ideals, if you reject the generally accepted source of those ideals?

Ha!! there is no generally accepted source, you idiot. There are so very many wildly divergent sources as to boggle the mind.

[nafod]

This ought to cool things down.

From a CNN interview (starting at 2:15):

Interviewer: When I spoke to him over the phone, Judge Martin acknowledged it’s his job to protect the rights of people like the atheist, no matter how offensive they might be.

Interviewer to Judge Martin: … There are some who believe you were failing to protect that right.

Judge Martin: No, I don’t think so. Here’s the thing: It’s a right, it’s not a privilege, it’s a right. With rights come responsibilities. The more that people abuse our rights, the more likely that we’re going to lose them.

But I don’t quite see how this is “the thing,” at least in the sense of an explanation of the judge’s actions at the trial. I don’t think that we’re in danger of losing our free speech rights because some people say things that are offensive to Muslims. I do think that free speech rights are in danger when judges berate alleged crime victims for their anti-Islam speech, and thus convey the message that the legal system may be biased against those who engage in such speech and may fail to protect those people because of such speech.

http://volokh.com/2012/02/27/more-from- ... nt-on-cnn/

On his behalf, the Judge is a Lutheran, not a muslim, and is also a mil reservist who has deployed multiple times to Iraq and Afghanistan. Worth reading...
http://volokh.com/2012/02/25/zombie-moh ... -responds/

[Grandpa's Spells]

1. Zombie-man deserved an ass-beating.
2. Ass-beater probably should have been convicted.
3. All parties described in that story are assholes.