Of course civil rights aren't dependent on anything. But whether we believe his story that his civil rights are being violated is partially dependent on his credibility, which seems at first glance to be pretty close to zero.
He claims that his civil rights are being violated in the same breath that he claims that it happens to him all the time and that anti-semitism is okay. Why should we believe any of this, exactly?
EDIT: Okay you edited your post to be conditional on him telling the truth and requesting of evidence that he's lying. My point is just that crankishness is typically evidence that someone is lying, or at least good reason to not take things that people are saying at face value and to wait for independent confirmation for whoever cares to look for it. There's a burden of proof issue here.
Kindly retract that he said "anti-semitism is okay."
Screenshot 1 and 2 of the threatened indictment seemed believable and imply he is in legal trouble over a security disclosure. A quick search online implies the disclosure was responsible, proportionate and AT&T are pissed about it (e.g. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/att-explains-ipad-s...). So, from those two things, coupled with the fact legal aid is being denied to him, implies he is serious about needing help with a lawyer.
Is he already on some kind of FBI shitlist? Maybe, maybe not, it's irrelevant. Would it have been better not to mention it? Probably. Is he credible? I don't see why not given the corroborating evidence.
> Kindly retract that he said "anti-semitism is okay."
Fair enough. He didn't say anti-semitism is okay. What he did do, which prompted my inaccurate comment, is admit to make "joking" videos about the genocide of Jews which are in egregiously poor taste. And then go on to make paranoid comments about the FBI manipulating the Jewish lobby and Jewish reporters to alleging that he bombs synagogues, or something (I wasn't too clear on this part).
Thank you. He certainly did make such videos which he claimed to be parody adding useful balance to the Israel/Palestine debate -- I think we would agree that this was not useful, but I don't believe his intentions were anti-Semitic.
He does (going on his online postings) regularly spout anti-semitic nonsense, but then he is a very troll like person. So it is hard to figure where his real beliefs lie - he often sounds serious, but then he may just be a serious troll.
(and, also, I suppose it is arguable his intentions [trolling or meaning it] are irrelevant because it still goes out there and communicates to people without being clearly ironic)
He claims that his civil rights are being violated in the same breath that he claims that it happens to him all the time and that anti-semitism is okay. Why should we believe any of this, exactly?
EDIT: Okay you edited your post to be conditional on him telling the truth and requesting of evidence that he's lying. My point is just that crankishness is typically evidence that someone is lying, or at least good reason to not take things that people are saying at face value and to wait for independent confirmation for whoever cares to look for it. There's a burden of proof issue here.