the actual penalty for sedition was not crucifixion. it was stoning.e thousands and thousands of people who were crucified. there were others who were named jesus and called themselves the messiah who were crucified. after jesus there was a man called stephen who became saint stephen. there are cathedrals built to him all over the world. he claimed he saw a vision of jesus and the heavens standing at the side of god, and he was tried for sedition and stoned to death. there is a lot of strange things that are unanswerable and normal terms about the mission of jesus, why he came here, who he was. very little is known, although hisad four brothers, and brother james was actually the spiritual leader of the church but it all's death, comes down to the mystery of faith. you believe it, or you don't. i don't subscribe to the catholic church today, being opposed to dam near everything. pope? what about this new >> he seems very promising, doesn't he? he has been saying some wonderful things and doing some wonderful things, but then i remember how great jimmy

the protection of free speech begins 1919 with a series of cases dealing with the espionage and seditionct passed during world war i where many socialists were convicted. the court hears of a number of cases and that upholds the conviction and an holmes himself writes the opinions then he turns around eight months later with the dissent in first amendment professors teach the first amendment they begin with the case is of holmes initially appalled these convictions than 78 months later are writing this very powerful dissent. when i was a student this is how i teach my students there has always been a nagging question for me why is a different for holmes eight months later? we tend to gloss over as if the facts of the case were different but that did not sit well with me and i thought there must be something more to it. i was hoping to write a story that was more than the academic analysis i thought how it was with the history it was an effective story that involves much more than abstract ideas but involved so i got drawn into it. >> host: talk to us about the process of researching and

like him, that rome seized him tortured him and executed him as a state criminal for the crime of sedition. my question is how do you nont want to know -- not want to know about that person just the basic facts of his life make him worth knowing. >> worth following? >> worth following. i am a muslim but i have built my world view that the model i set for my world is set by this are peasant 2,000 people, his social teachings, about the reversal of the social order, his insistence for anyone who set as the gate keeper for salvation, that is what i want to be like. >> what is it like for you as a person be a part of a book, be part of an oftentimes fractious debate over its content? >> it means i get it from all sides. lay readers attack me because they say that what i am saying is so revolutionary, so beyond the pale, academics attack me because they say there's nothing new in this book, we've been saying these things all the time et cetera, et cetera. christians deny me, muslims attack me saying the jesus in this booking violates everything that muslims say about him. islam aphobes attack m

the majority, you know, passed the espionage and sedition acts and prosecuting people, but as a court we should step in. and this is really the beginning of what comes to be known as the double standard in constitutional law. where courts scrutinize very closely regulations of private activity, speech, reproductive rights, that sort of thing but don't scrutinize very closely economic legislation. it all, all that has its roots in in this opinion. >> please. >> good afternoon. my name is gamel. for listening to you and for the rest of my knowledge, justice holmes, he, he was right there at the beginning of, the beginning of the pragmatic generation. were they kind of reviewing that kind of dogmatic idealism. so for them the freedom of the speech a be, it was about having an educated opinion about those original things that that they believed in. >> right. >> so fast forward to the baby boomer generation who one way or another they rush into the existentialism, and there is the next generation. so here as baby boomers choose existentialism consciously, then the new generation which is p

this would be considered a hotbed of sedition. >> exactly. >> now it's just a hot bed of drinking. >>the blk jks have just finished watching the game when i join them for food. are these good times in south africa? bad times? transitional times? >> 1994 was the peak of the good time in south africa. then now with the other politics and other parties fighting, it's quite tense right now. >> it's not like it was before where everybody's -- you know, it's black and white. literally. we're unified on this. they're unified on that. >> these days, the party that freed the country from white rule, the anc, is not universally loved anymore. in recent years they've been criticized for inaction, corruption and cronyism. and opposition parties are gaining strength. >> anything that's maybe new to us, i think we're trying to navigate reality. how do you deal with so many opinions? the party that you loved the whole time, that brought about this freedom, is fumbling the ball. so what do you do? in democracy, you should act. >> smileys. fire roasted sheep's head. lips shrivelled back in a joker lik

this is the and prettiest and the sedition act. wilson, this great progressive was extremely regressive. it must not be forgotten. woodrow wilson did introduce jim crow to this city. says sam chang segregation, even the community. this goes back to the personal side, someone who grew up in a deep southern society, during the war, prewar. this is what he understood. all that being said, he was a racist, his writings, his thinking, no matter what time or context, it is racist plot. that being said, i don't think he was of virulent racist. i don't think that he hated african-americans. he only had hatred for a few individuals. israel hearing about regulation, and l.a. enough for you to decide whether you agree not. all the evidence pro and con. but he really did believe the country simply was not ready. and he said more than once, it will take a generation to before this country can deal with that problem which would put use some more in the mid-1950s which may be exactly on woodrow wilson's calendar. that being said, if you slow the

teach your robots of the future and the grim realities of life for guantanamo bay in the late sedition of breaking with. the. economic ups and downs of the final. day of the old saying i and the rest during the week will be if we. are. the loop. to speak your language such. close programs and documentaries in arabic it's all here on all t.v. reporting from the world talks books of p.r.p. interviews intriguing stories for you to sue finntroll a small t.v. arabic to find out more visit arabic don't all teeth don't call. dramas that can't be ignored to. stories others refuse to notice. the faces changing the walls the lights now. so picture of today's needs. on demand from around the globe. looking. to fifty. happy monday guys i'm at the martin and this is breaking. sad news to report out of india today at least twenty one people have died and tens of thousands have been locked homeless up a tropical cyclone phailin hit the eastern part of the country over the weekend now of course every death in the natural disasters tragic but consider this and one nine hundred ninety nine the last time

suspicion addition to us policy aimed at spreading sedition and turmoil among harmonized national communities that have lived for hundreds of years in harmony, unity and understanding. worst of all, some countries have launched destructive measure wars under the pretext of combating terrorism while at the same time, they are the ones supporting terrorism in my country in contradiction of all united nations resolutions and all human and moral values. here, once again, i ask the same question i had already asked last year. what is the international consensus on combating terrorism a serious commitment undertaken by the member states of this organization or was it just mere rhetoric? written and then not put into effect. what is happening in my country has become clear to everyone. yes, some countries do not want , thecognize that al qaeda most dangerous terrorist organization in the world and are fightinghoots the themes of murder, manslaughter and even shown human hearts were on tv screens worldwide. they did not touch blind consciences. mr. president, there are innocent civilians whose heads

on its website said, while saudi regulations bans anything open to sedition, follow the law decidedly against violators. halla, that seems to suggest if you do something they deem to be unpleasant or against societal rules, they will clamp down on you. is there any call for twoms drive indicate -- for women to drive has that happened? >> you mean the government step into the street? >> yes. >> subject is not to hand them the keys and to prevent them from driving, that has happened but of course this doesn't mean that we're not going to you know fight more and try more in a peaceful way to reach out and to challenge the ban because it's really unethical and illegal. >> is this about driving or is it about the bigger issues the oppression of women in saudi arabia? >> yeah, definitely, definitely to the bigger issues. we see times where the don't leans towards granting the citizens more rights and support the driving campaign but again once the religious people has tried to intervene and to impose their views of women as fitna or as causes of intimidation, this whole stand changes to sup

wave it, though they might not realize it, in historical terms, they're taking part in an act of seditiony the united states. that's what that flag actually symbolizes. and it's actually quite appropriate when you think about what they're doing. >> absolutely. it's accurate. eugene, what was your reaction to that whole scene? >> well, you know, i grew up in south carolina, late '50s, early '60s, when the confederate flag was flown in earnest more often. it was flown over the south carolina statehouse a few years ago at the state capitol. so i have no patience with that. i -- you know,it not a symbol of, you know, rebellion in general. it's a very specific symbol that represents slavery, that represents insurrection, that is aimed at our first black president. and it was appalling. but it was also -- you know, there were other appalling things happening around it at that rally. you know, it was a ridiculous event, and you laugh at it if it didn't make you so angry. >> thank you, gene and professor peterson and john alter, all of you for being so polite and deck orrous about the matter. the

sedition? >> i can't wait to defend them. this would really be an easy case to win.move on is an absolutely irresponsible organization. they are the mirror left wing image of the most extreme people on the right, and their idea of trying to criminalize policy differences is absolutely absurd and irresponsible. it's the same thing that some liberals tried to do to tom delay and, of course, his conviction was reversed in the texas courts. what the republicans tried to do to bill clinton. let's punish people politically if you disagree with their politics, but let's not use the criminal justice system improperly. in my book "taking the stand," i talk about overcriminalization, how we go after too many people, how we try to prevent people from seeing films they would like to see even though the state regards them as improper. the same thing is true with many, many other issues, but the idea of extending the criminal law and applying it to differences over politics would destroy this country. move on should be ashamed of itself and the 30,000 people who signed that petiti

i keep looking for the sedition, and it's very hard to find. but basically, debs was suggesting that american workers did not have to go abroad and fight in this capitalistic war, and wilson found that so distasteful when two million men had gone abroad and were risking their lives. that's when he said, that's it. now, that being said, again, this will show you what the times were. this was not a just woodrow wilson. debs was thrown in jail. his case went before the supreme court. where it was a 9-0 decision against debs, and he remained in prison. in wilson's final moments in the white house, even his own justice department came to him and said, mr. president, debs is an old man now, he is sick, he has served several years in jail, the war is over, he is hardly a danger, here is his pardon, all you have to do is sign it. and wilson pulled out his pen and wrote, denied. so, he never got over it. you didn't cross woodrow wilson more than once. and that was that. as for the palmer race and so forth that broke out in fact wilson had suffered his s

and for 16 days refused to negotiate on this single point while literally accusing republicans of sedition. this past monday, the president's press secretary made this stunning admission, the administration may itself seek to delay the individual mandate by dropping the penalty for noncompliance. they've got to be kidding. for the 16 days of the shutdown the only substantive dispute was the republican plea to delay the individual mandate for the millions of americans who couldn't find or afford obamacare policies. doing so would have ended the impasse instantly. during those 16 days it was clear to everyone that the exchanges weren't working. yet for 16 days the president and congressional democrats refused even to discuss the matter, while he they turned their formidable propaganda machine to the task of winning politically. then just four days after republicans capitulated on all points, including dropping our single substantive request to delay the individual mandate, the administration is now itself considering delaying the individual mandate. mr. speaker, these facts speak for themsel