Background: Creators of the satirical animated series "South Park", Matt Stone and Trey Parker, received implied threats from a group operating a radical Muslim website called RevolutionMuslim.com. At the heart of the matter was the satirical depiction of the Muslim prophet Mohammad in one of South Park's upcoming episodes. The Muslim Revolution published an open warning to Stone and Parker saying that they may end up like assassinated film maker Theo Van Gogh, who's dead image was used showing his throat cut and dagger in his chest. Van Gogh, was marked for death when he made a documentary film presenting the brutal treatment of women by Muslim fundamentalists.
When the South Park episode aired on the Comedy Central network, the image or satirical image of Mohammad was replaced by a bear and mention of his name was bleeped out. The main issue here is that Comedy Central made the edits to the episode with out the permission of Stone and Parker, citing the implied threat from Muslim Revolution.
Research into Muslim Revolution leads to a bunch of individuals who use the website to espouse hatred, are in a sense paper tigers, beating their chests in an attempt to intimidate others about the power of Jihadism. None of the members behind the website explicitly state their intention to kill or maim, but indirectly imply that bad things happen to those who defile Mohammad.
So, did an act of terrorism occur right under our noses or did Muslim Revolution use their First Amendment rights to deny South Park creators Stone and Parker their rights under the First Amendment?
Defining terrorism has been a challenge for the ages. 30 different countries, 30 different definitions. Multiply that number by each country's multiple security, law enforcement, and intelligence agencies and the number of definitions can sky rocket. Amongst US federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies, terrorism is defined as a violent act committed for the purpose of causing political or social change. The following is the FBI's definition: "The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to
intimidate or coerce a Government, the civilian population, or any
segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."
Interestingly, it is possible for people to be charged by respective states for making, "terroristic threats". The following is the Terroristic Threat definition according to state of New York, where Muslim Revolution is based:
TERRORISTIC THREAT
ยง 490.20 Making a terroristic threat.
1. A person is guilty of making a terroristic threat when with intent
to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a
unit of government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of
a unit of government by murder, assassination or kidnapping, he or she
threatens to commit or cause to be committed a specified offense and
thereby causes a reasonable expectation or fear of the imminent
commission of such offense.
2. It shall be no defense to a prosecution pursuant to this section
that the defendant did not have the intent or capability of committing
the specified offense or that the threat was not made to a person who
was a subject thereof.
Making a terroristic threat is a class D felony.
State of New Jersey
(1) "A person is guilty of a crime if he threatens to commit any
crime of violence with the purpose to terrorize another or in
reckless
disregard of the risk of causing such terror."
(2) "A person commits a crime if he threatens to commit a crime
of violence with the purpose to cause evacuation of a building,
place
of assembly or facility of public transportation or otherwise to
cause
serious public inconvenience or in reckless disregard of the
risk of causing
such evacuation or inconvenience.
The failure to stand up to the veiled threats by the Muslim Revolution, is an example of how terrorism wins, even if the threat is implied. The best tool against Muslim Revolution and potential copycats is for democratic societies to learn to be resilient in the face of terrorism.