Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The AP Solves the Mystery of the Man Behind "Innocence of Muslims"

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

The AP Solves the Mystery of the Man Behind "Innocence of Muslims"


www.slate.com


The AP was one of a handful of media outlets to publish an interview early Wednesday with a man who claimed to be Bacile. Reporters traced the cell phone number used during that interview to Nakoula's address and, once there, noticed that Nakoula covered up his middle name of "Basseley" with his thumb when displaying his driver's license.


A little more digging on the part of Flaccus and Braun led to the discovery that Nakoula pleaded no contest in 2010 to bank fraud charges, had used numerous aliases in the past, and had a number of connections to the Bacile persona. An unnamed U.S
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
It would appear with some digi-sleuthing that the Associated Press was able to track the source of this film which has cause so much turmoil in the Middle East as 55 year-old Nakoula Basseley Nakoula from California. Terry Jones [of Quran-burning fame] was even solicited several weeks back for help promoting the film. Birds of a feather...

Now that the producer has been identified, how does anyone feel about the legality of making this film? I realize the actors and others employed by the film's producers are quite angry. But as to our future, and the internet's future, I'm concerned that this will result in an EO which suspends certain internet freedoms contingent upon staff review. I wonder if YouTube users will soon experience a delay in posting video while staff reviews it for content.

What say you, ATS?

www.slate.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Here is the original story from the AP.

APNewsBreak: US identifies anti-Muslim filmmaker

Looks like Nakoula Basseley is under investigation. If he is to blame hopefully he and his friends will be charged with accessory for the deaths.


+55 more 
posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   
It's free speech. One of the few great things still remaining in America. Does it offend you? Too bad, the ease with which you are offended offends me. It's certainly no reason to kill anyone. If you want to find the real villains in this story, do not look to the film makers, but to the savages murdering innocent people over a movie. Savages.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   
this could go either way, banning content, to the infringement on free speech as to not incite riots, or nothing happens at all. To what is said er posted, uploaded, and or down loaded. What the outcome will be??? What we are seeing now is just the beginning, this will make 9/11seem like a sparkler. If the radical Islam world wanted a reason to do us harm they have one now.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
It's free speech. One of the few great things still remaining in America. Does it offend you? Too bad, the ease with which you are offended offends me. It's certainly no reason to kill anyone. If you want to find the real villains in this story, do not look to the film makers, but to the savages murdering innocent people over a movie. Savages.


True. But he incited them. He should still be charged for his provocative actions. What did he expect the people would do?

People have lost their lives. Whether at the hands of the mob or the person who incited the mob.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Orwells Ghost
 


It was an epic troll, no doubt. Despicable and ignorant.

But nothing justifies violence and murder.

The question is, at what point does the public good out-weigh free speech? Or does it even at all?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
It's free speech. One of the few great things still remaining in America. Does it offend you? Too bad, the ease with which you are offended offends me. It's certainly no reason to kill anyone. If you want to find the real villains in this story, do not look to the film makers, but to the savages murdering innocent people over a movie. Savages.


Do you mean the all-American goons who play their lethal video games on some secret airforce base in the desert and guide a drone over in Pakistan to fire missiles at a group of houses, killing dozens of innocent women, old people and children, because they had the faulty intelligence that some al Qaeda guy was there?

And you cannot understand why so much anger gets directed at the symbols and representatives of American hegemony and hypocracy?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by BritofTexas
Here is the original story from the AP.

APNewsBreak: US identifies anti-Muslim filmmaker

Looks like Nakoula Basseley is under investigation. If he is to blame hopefully he and his friends will be charged with accessory for the deaths.


Thank you for adding the original story link to the discussion!

I walk a fine line right now between determining that either (a) the producer was free to allow their feelings about Islam manifest themselves in the form of a film and distribute it, and the people who are offended need thicker skin if they're going to build their culture around a belief system which, like all religions, cannot be empirically proven as true and requires much to be taken on faith and (b) the producer knew exactly what he was doing, the effect it would have, and he negligently incited a riot resulting in multiple deaths and should be punished as such.

To look at this slightly differently and perhaps illuminate our true concerns, would it be any different if a film, done in ernest on the history of Islam, mistakenly offended Muslims and resulted in rioting that killed people? In this example, I'd have to say that since it wasn't the producer's intent to offend, and instead educate, that the producer would be innocent and the group of offended people will, quite simply, never be happy.

Perhaps these people will never be happy and will always look for an excuse to be violent toward non-Islamic nations AND the producer was a jerk. And I was never any good judging which jerk in a jerk contest should win.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Not so fast on who the producer is here is a link that says... well... he not he, but could be?worldnews.nbcnews.com... from the link

Updated 12:22 p.m. ET: “Innocence of Muslims” -- the crude and provocative anti-Islam video blamed for a wave of deadly violence against U.S. diplomatic outposts -- was promoted by a small band of anti-Muslim Christian activists, according to reports, but the true identity of its director remained unclear.
so now it is not one person but a group of them, no wonder the world hates us



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 

It's interesting, knowing who made the movie they are using as cover for these planned and well thought out attacks against our facilities over there...but frankly, I don't see where it matters anymore. Prior to those people assassinating our Ambassador, I might have had a tiny shred of sympathy. A little.. After all, it's pissed me off to no end when they have the crucifix in urine or a crap covered painting of Christ or the Virgin Mary and actually call that garbage art....

However... That little thing called Freedom of Speech comes in and it's absolute...So the fact we may think this guy has all the brains of a turnip doesn't matter either. He's MORE than covered to say whatever vile crap he wants in a movie.

Civilized and intelligent adults don't go killing each other over being offended.... Then again though. Congressmen stated this morning that Intelligence seemed to indicate this was all well organized and planned in advance with military precision.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizard
True. But he incited them. He should still be charged for his provocative actions. What did he expect the people would do?


Not that I disagree, but on what charges?

What precedence will this set for those who may choose to write or film things others {Anybody} may disagree with say TPTB or Governments, etc etc etc


People have lost their lives. Whether at the hands of the mob or the person who incited the mob.


People {Anybody} are responsible for their own actions.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by bekod
 


Thank you for adding more material.

And yes, I mentioned Terry Jones as having been pursued for consultation in my commentary. I'm sure we will find out that this film's producer had many ne'er-do-wells as friends.

It's critical that we collect as much information as possible now, before there is time to obfuscate the facts.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sergeant Stiletto
reply to post by Orwells Ghost
 


It was an epic troll, no doubt. Despicable and ignorant.

But nothing justifies violence and murder.

The question is, at what point does the public good out-weigh free speech? Or does it even at all?

It definitely does not do so in this case. The savages following the death cult known as islam are completely to blame for the deaths here and should be punished as such. At a very minimum, all aid of any sort and all business dealings with the current regimes in place should end.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 


Civilized and intelligent adults don't go killing each other over being offended....


Not to be argumentative but...doesnt this depend on your definition of civilized?

Dont get me wrong, i agree with everything you have said but to me i see a large geo-cultural issue at hand. Have we come to a point in our history were we can say one culture is civilized and one is not?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
OMG I can't believe what I am reading, when you take into consideration all the anti christian, anti Jew rhetoric spewed all over the internet, should we silence them too?

Yea, yea, that's it let's shut them all up.

How do we know that this guy is really who he says he is?
edit on 123030p://bThursday2012 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:19 PM
link   
I really don't think anything has been solved whatsoever - yet.

Who's to say that the original funding wasn't Islamic to make it look like Christians? Or Jewish to make it look like Christians? Or, as the leading theory goes - Coptic Christian?

Clearly there is some intrigue going on here and we are as likely as not to discover that this Noukula Basseley whatshisname is just a front for some other person or organization.

No doubt whoever is behind it is likely a fundamentalist extremist of some variety or possibly a spook or at least contracted by an alphabet organization of some sort.
edit on 9/13/2012 by Sergeant Stiletto because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:21 PM
link   
"Free speech" sounds like a good idea on paper. But how far does it really go?

Does this concept of "free speech" allow neo-nazis to start making comedies based on the holocaust. Or is that too much.... i.e - free speech has its limits and its basically crossing the line?

If "free speech" was really as good as its made out to be, Americans wouldn't be enraged each time the Westboro church does their thing. If people really believed in "free speech" they would be celebrating it everytime the WBC picket a soldiers funeral or parade in the streets holding homophobic signs.

Also, I'm starting to wonder if "open season" has been declared on Islam and its followers...all in the name of "free speech", of course.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by MDDoxs
 

The Constitution doesn't have fine print for the First Amendment giving conditions or a 'but..'. It's absolute. That has no exception because someone's an idiot and others are using that idiocy as an excuse to rob, rape and pillage half a world away. It was horrible and outright deplorable when they murdered over a cartoon. It was obscene when they murdered people over the Quran being burned...after their own prisoners defaced it...and now, an American film is the excuse for a "Black Hawk Down" moment of dragging a civilian diplomat through the street and parading his body for the world.

Nope... It's covered and protected and I don't have to like it....because it's not about like. It's about rights that we, in America, consider inalienable and every human's right from Birth. Expression is the #1, literally, on that list.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
It's free speech. One of the few great things still remaining in America. Does it offend you? Too bad, the ease with which you are offended offends me. It's certainly no reason to kill anyone. If you want to find the real villains in this story, do not look to the film makers, but to the savages murdering innocent people over a movie. Savages.



There is a difference between free speech and hatred speech. In Canada anyways, you can not walk the streets and scream # the 'n-word's kill all the jews and faggots! You will be facing criminal charges and i think it is well deserved.

Free speech does not give you the right to humiliate a nation, religion or ethnic group. If you don't understand that then you do not deserve the right to have free speech. Free speech was given to the people to fight back against such comments, not promote them.
edit on 13-9-2012 by alphaskunk because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join