Staff and crew of film that ridiculed Muslims say they were grossly misled

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by benrl


this whole thing stinks, from the film to the organized part of the attack that took out the ambassador.

How easily are people manipulated and pulled by the nose into their own destruction.

Fastest way to ensure a thumping by the US military is to attack US assets during and election year.


Well before the us military starts thumping anybody and creating more enemy's i sure hope they bring the makers of the film to justice , the film maker knew what effect the film would have and that lives could be lost , Same as when terry jones the satanic pasta burnt the quran he knew what effect that would have and people could died again ,

if this turns out to be terry jones again then it will be 10 people who have lost there lives because of that fool ,,we should all have freedom of speech but not when your words and actions are causing the deaths of innocent people




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
It is actually an Israeli that has produced the film that all the outrage is about.
Suspicious of this I am.

Source


An Israeli filmmaker based in California who made a movie belittling Islam’s prophet Muhammad that has ignited Middle East riots and led to the death of the U.S. ambassador in Libya says he is in hiding. Sam Bacile, 56, who described himself as an “Israeli Jew” who develops real estate in California, told the Associated Press by phone that he went into hiding Tuesday after assaults by conservative Muslims on U.S. missions in Egypt and Libya.
.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:39 AM
link   
reply to post by seethetruth
 



if this turns out to be terry jones again then it will be 10 people who have lost there lives because of that fool ,,we should all have freedom of speech but not when your words and actions are causing the deaths of innocent people


The problem is that he's not telling people to go kill each other.

If he were saying that - sure, there's legal basis.

However, what you're saying leads down a rather slippery slope. If someone were to do something crazy, like, say, kill a few people at a meeting of a liberal group - should vocal liberals like Oprah be brought on trial for aggravating the situation and endangering the lives of liberals everywhere?

... I would find it absolutely hilarious and entertaining (the trial of Oprah or other vocal liberals - not the murders), I will admit - but it's not something we should do.

However, I certainly wouldn't want to be any person who had a hand in this film's production. I'd probably make sure he left my presence with a lasting reminder that I am not at all impressed.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 05:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps
It was obvious they were filming something else and then on some drunken idea decided to change it.


Incorrect if what others are saying is true - and those involved seemingly have no reason to lie about the films origin -

www.nytimes.com...

It seems that it was a collaboration between Christian and Jewish extremists, with several individuals known to authorities for their radical views and actions in the past.

This is not some fudge of a movie intended to poke fun, they intended to incite violence.

The question is now what to do about it?

Personally, even though people have the right in the USA to pretty much say anything they want, there is grounds here for legal action by those appearing in the video. It can be argued that they were deliberately mislead, which is fraud, and because those individuals are now at risk of injury or death they have the right to go after those responsible for it.

If the actors and crew did not know that the video would be used in such an inflammatory way they have the right to pursue those responsible.

Can you imagine if a black person were duped into making a film about the KKK? How about a Jewish person being conned into making a film glorifying Hitler and the holocaust?

This is the same as that, but worse because these peoples lives have been put at risk, all because some group of religious extremists wanted to prove some BS propaganda.

I think some government agency should be working around the clock to track down all of those involved, decide who knew what, and get those people in court.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C
reply to post by seethetruth
 



if this turns out to be terry jones again then it will be 10 people who have lost there lives because of that fool ,,we should all have freedom of speech but not when your words and actions are causing the deaths of innocent people


The problem is that he's not telling people to go kill each other.

If he were saying that - sure, there's legal basis.


But he is acting with the intention to cause outrage and violence. He is aware of the potential outcome of his actions, yet he does it anyway.

Is there no precedent for endangerment actions in the US? If someone causes a death through negligence, are they not responsible?

If a guy in a warehouse neglects to replace the bolts on a 20 foot shelf and someone dies when it collapses, they are deemed responsible for that accident. This guy is acting deliberately, knowing the possible outcome, and doing it anyway.

How can someone be tried for the death of another when it was not deliberate, but another who knows the potential outcome of their actions is free to continue putting lives at risk indefinitely?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 05:27 AM
link   
reply to post by seethetruth
 


I hope they go after the film producer - for his dubious acts - as hard as the US Gov is going after Assange, but a little voice in my head says that's going to happen the same day I win the lottery ( and considering the last time I purchased a lotto ticket was 10 years ago... )


Originally posted by detachedindividual
Is there no precedent for endangerment actions in the US? If someone causes a death through negligence, are they not responsible?


^^^ This, and the entire reason why I brought up Assange above. The US Gov has claimed that Assange's leaking of the US diplomatic cables has placed American's lives in danger. This movie's producer has actually had people killed!
edit on 13-9-2012 by Evil_Santa because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 06:12 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 



But he is acting with the intention to cause outrage and violence. He is aware of the potential outcome of his actions, yet he does it anyway.


This would be true if it were mechanical. Setting up a machine you know to be dangerous, for example.

However - we are talking about people. People made the conscious decision to storm the embassy and kill individuals inside.


Is there no precedent for endangerment actions in the US? If someone causes a death through negligence, are they not responsible?


Except he didn't cause death through negligence. He wasn't driving recklessly, he didn't fail to comply with building codes. He did something that made people upset. That is it.

To then say that the decisions made by the people who were upset are now his responsibility just doesn't work.

If I make you angry - I'm not responsible for your actions. You are.


How can someone be tried for the death of another when it was not deliberate, but another who knows the potential outcome of their actions is free to continue putting lives at risk indefinitely?


Freedom can be an inconvenient thing, can't it?

I know that when I speak ill of our President, I'm going to upset more than a few people with my words. I'm also going to please a few with them, as well. If the angry group then goes off and starts a riot - should I be held financially responsible for the damage done?

Of course not. That goes against the concept of free speech. The damage wasn't done because I was negligent - the damage was done because other people made the conscious decision to inflict it. They can sit there and say that you, me, or anyone else was the reason they were angry... but being angry isn't an excuse for that kind of behavior, and no one can be held liable for the behavior of other legal adults.

That's the entirely wrong direction to go, legally.

Have a spook on this guy's tail 24/7, audit every financial transaction he's ever made that's legally relevant today - when he slips up, nail him to a tree.

That's how you handle people like this (executively). You don't pervert the laws of the nation to serve at the convenience of individual cases.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


If you wind someone up, if you press their buttons, with the intent to make them react, then you are equally as responsible for their actions.

I have not watched this movie, and neither do I intend to waste my time on it, but it seems that both sides in this are as bad as each other. When will people wake up and realise that religion serves no good whatsoever? The amount of blood that gets spilled because of ignorance is terrible.

I am completely against religion, but as long as those who practice it do so without bothering me, then I will just let them be. I have no right to enforce my beliefs on them just as they have no right to do so to me.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 06:48 AM
link   
It has got to the point where no one can criticise or satirise Islam without the fear that such an act will result in general mayhem and / or a threat of reprisals from assorted fanatics.

It is incumbent on people who believe in free speech and expression to react robustly against these Islamic fascists where any form of debate is taboo.

To the OP. Whether these people were misled at all is moot. What is true is that they are probably fearful of not waking up tomorrow.

Regards



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Firefly_
 



If you wind someone up, if you press their buttons, with the intent to make them react, then you are equally as responsible for their actions.


Were these people made to watch this video involuntarily?


I have not watched this movie, and neither do I intend to waste my time on it, but it seems that both sides in this are as bad as each other. When will people wake up and realise that religion serves no good whatsoever? The amount of blood that gets spilled because of ignorance is terrible.


Religion is the excuse people use to kill each other. Nothing more. If they didn't have religion, it would be some other concept they would use to kill each other.

Perhaps it would be eugenics. Perhaps it would be political ideology. Perhaps they would kill each other in the midst of debates over scientific concepts.

People are often ignorant of the predatory and sociological instincts that influence our emotions and impulses. Because of this, they are vulnerable to those influences.

Before the conscious mind can have a chance at truly ruling one's actions, one must learn to become conscious of and embrace the reality of their evolution.


I am completely against religion, but as long as those who practice it do so without bothering me, then I will just let them be. I have no right to enforce my beliefs on them just as they have no right to do so to me.


I associate most closely with the protestant denominations of Christianity. That said - I am more of a spiritualist than a religious person. Since I believe in a somewhat personable God - I believe God gave me the exceptionally inquisitive mind that I have for a reason (or made it possible for us to have such inquisitive minds - and I just happen to be that eventuality). So, I have no reservations in applying my mind to the facets of Religion - from the good to the silly to the bad.

I enjoy it when I run into people who believe the Bible to be the literal, infallible word of God... and then I ask them simple questions like who discovered Jesus' body missing from the tomb, and point out that each author tells a slightly different story.

Faith unchallenged is faith undeveloped. Plus, I admit it's fun to see the look on their faces and the arguments they try and come up with to explain it while still remaining in the "God made this" line of reasoning.

Ultimately - they'll believe what they want to.

The only time I get downright belligerent, however, is when people start using the pulpit to preach politics. That I don't stand for. Anyone who does that speaks with a forked tongue - regardless of their position. It's one thing to have a political opinion and share your faith - it's another to try and tell people that God wants one candidate in the white-house or the other.

But I'm straying off topic.

The point is - people will use whatever they have at their disposal to justify killing each other. They can't simply own up to it and say: "meh, I am just going to kill this douche because I feel like it." - they have to try and hide behind various impersonal ideas to deflect the responsibility.

That's really all it amounts to.

For example - many women in, say, Afghanistan will be stoned in the town square for Adultery. In reality - she didn't do anything wrong. The man simply wanted another wife (he's got an upper limit of three but has to be able to afford that many, and most can't). Divorces aren't really allowed - so you accuse her of adultery, kill her, and take the new wife for a spin.

The same thing happens in our society - though a little less often because we have divorce. However - it exists in our history with overly restrictive laws in society (Salem Witch Trials, anyone? - most excitement those girls got to see in their lives, I imagine).

Sure - religious ideals were behind the restrictions; but you saw similar things happen in Russia under oppressive regimes. Perhaps not to the same extent, because of the different objects of oppression - but history shows that policies that restrict natural human behaviors involuntarily tend to create the type of environment we see in the Middle East - where people make up excuses to kill each other and act up.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:17 AM
link   
The thing is in Islam your not aloud to draw or make any sort of picture of the profit Mohammed so to make a film the not only shows Mohammed but makes him out to be a paedophile then there reaction is going to be anger ,
That still does not give them the right to go and kill an innocent person but if the same was done about Jesus then you would have anger from the Christian community around the world ,

The difference is most of the Muslim country's are unstable and are or have had some sort of uprising



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:21 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 





The producer Sam Bassiel, an Israeli-American was acting on his on in raising money from Jewish donors and has proven himself to be a manipulative liar. Even the Israeli government appears to be distancing themselves from him.


actually



A California Coptic Christian with a fraud conviction has admitted he managed the 'blasphemous' Muhammed movie that sparked riots across the Middle East - raising suspicions he is the elusive producer behind the film.

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, 55, revealed he was manager for the company that produced 'Innocence of Muslims' which mocked Muslims and the prophet Muhammed as a womanizer and paedophile.

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk...


But I think it s all some sort of set up, blame the Jews, blame the Americans, good reason to riot, these riots were planned in advance of the knowledge of the film.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Firefly_
 



There really isn't a movie apparently the short you-tube video is all that exist.

Like I said it was an excuse to riot on 9/11



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


You are right, is smells like propaganda to me, a short film to cause riots and deaths in Libya, then again, why in Libya?

Still the whole Mohamed supposedly film is nothing but a whole bunch of crap.

We all know historicaly what Mohamed was or not, and he is not holier than the crap the Taliban spews.

And the last time I check we were fighting the Taliban terrorist in the middle east.

Agendas nothing but agendas.

edit on 13-9-2012 by marg6043 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
www.yahoo.com...=An.C6wsx4xoepoUyP_gRlkSbvZx4;_ylu=X3o'___'VqMzAxNmc2BGEDQWN0cmVzczogRGlyZWN0b3Igb2YgYW50aS1Jc2xhbWljIGZpbG0gZGVjZWl2ZWQgdXME Y2NvZGUDcHpidWFsbGNhaDUEY3BvcwMyBGcDaWQtMjY0MzUwNgRpbnRsA3VzBG1jb2RlA3B6YnVhbGxjYWg1BG1wb3MDMgRwa2d0AzIEcG9zAzEEc2VjA3RkLW53cwRzbGsDdGl0bGUEdGVzdAM3MD EEd29lAzEyNzk4NDgw/SIG=13lj0ffdr/EXP=1347629535/**http%3A//news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/actress-director-anti-islamic-film-deceived-us-233244788.html< br />
I find it interesting that the actress said the directors spoke Arabic on the set...............if she could actually know that. Wouldn't it be ironic if it were Muslims making this film to cause trouble. Would that be an ultimate blasphemy?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 08:51 AM
link   
I think it is a shame that people kill over a cartoon book or movie

Once at work I said something to a guy and he punched a hole in the wall

The boss blamed me for the hole! I said whoa my words are so powerfully they can make holes in walls?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gauss
I tried watching the trailer - who the hell makes a 15 minute trailer anyway? - but it was too damn boring, ridiculous, cheesy and amateurish. I stopped at the three minute mark, roughly. And then I asked myself, what the hell is this pile of crap? Muslims should be above getting upset over that piece of junk that nobody cares about, seriously.


It's a shame you stopped at the 3 minute mark, you missed the best part. I watched the whole thing, seemed accurate enough.

Clearly, the point of it was to inflame muslims and their hatred of "The Great Satan". While it had all the production quality of a 6th grade school project there were a lot of people, a fair amount of time, money and effort involved. I really don't see someone just doing this on a lark, I think it was a government job.

The question is which one? The US and Israel are obviously the top two picks but what about the ones you might not expect? For example the muslim brotherhood, seems like a pretty sure-fire way to rally the masses against "The Great Satan" and the reaction is exactly what the creator of it wanted (whoever that is).



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by KaiserSoze
Clearly, the point of it was to inflame muslims and their hatred of "The Great Satan". While it had all the production quality of a 6th grade school project there were a lot of people, a fair amount of time, money and effort involved.


Like I said on the other thread about this "film". There's no way they could've spend 5 million on this. Absolutely no way. There's 4.9 million hidden somewhere and that is a generous guess. Also about using the word "efford". I would not say that. A drunk monkey would do better.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
If your likeness is used in material you did not approve of, you can request all media be taken off line by the offending party. If these actors have been misled as they claim, they should ask youtube and all other sites that may host the video to remove it.

I would.

In addition to that, if I were one of the Jewish contributors that helped amass $5 MILLION for this movie to be made, I'd be furious the movie ended up costing a 1000 times less to make. In my opinion, unless the movie as it came out was their intention, then they all got swindled as well and the 'producer' walked away with 99% of that money and produced a film an amateur could have done for a couple of grand.

It all smells fishy anyway.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Bull.They knew what they were getting into. They released that statement to appease Muslims. Why I don't know. It's a damn movie and they need to get over it.(the muslims,not the actors) I'm so sick of it.Muslims need to get over themselves too. The world will not and should not change because they want things their way.


"Islam is a cancer," ...dude is 100% correct. If more people thought that way then we'd all be better off. I'm sure you all will criticize me for agreeing with him though.
edit on 13-9-2012 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join