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

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
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.


I think the film maker has the intellect of a gnat but if people are looking for somebody to blame how about those Clerics who are spurring those mobs on over this crappy C- rated movie?




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You're right Wrabbit - we cannot cherry-pick when we should apply the ethics of free speech. They either stand on their own, or they crumble.

Still, I can't help but wish for some flexibility in the matter, especially when something is said for the express purpose of inciting violence. But again, I return to what you've stated, and must concede that personal responsibility does come with some white-knuckle moments that require us to rise above. I subdue my urges to punch people in the nose practically every day, and I have never won a major award for it, nor do I expect to.

I sincerely appreciate your contribution. I have difficulty in locating my reason and logic centers when feeling very emotional about a topic, and emotions are terrible decision-makers.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:24 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.

Yeah everything is okay to say unless you say something about the Holocaust or Israel. Then it is anti-Semitic.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Sergeant Stiletto
 





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?


I agree, but it suits the propaganda machines agenda to claim it is the evil Christians and Jews.

If people kill other people over a movie trailer that's this lame, then they are the ones with the problem.

Plus you can surf you tube all day long and find anti Islam videos, that are much more graphic and offensive.

Why this specific video and why now?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


"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 we even start that debate for real, we might as well throw the whole Constitution through a shredder. Some may want to "trim" the first amendment. I KNOW others want the 2nd trimmed.... Some want major alterations to the 4th, 5th and 14th. Well..too bad, I say. The rights are not granted or given. They are simply explained from the position of what we have, by nature and by Birth.

edit on 13-9-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: fixing quote



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
First Amendment people. I don't care who gets offended or how stupid they act. Stupidity on one persons part is THEIR fault...not someone else's.

It shocks me how many people are ready to violate their own rights because some uneducated group of extremists got their panties in a bunch. If you get offended, turn away, don't look, or listen.

"Those that would sacrifice liberty for security will lose both and deserve neither" Benjamin Franklin...

But we already know most of the sheep out there suggesting this always run to their "herder", throwing their rights at their "master's" feet and begging for protection.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 




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.


What about the "death cult following savages" in Saudi Arabia..who America is allied with?

Should America also end all business/diplomatic dealings with those Saudi savages? Or should they remain an exception?




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


It's clearly just pretense for something already planned.

But the question is, who? Really who, not just the who that the PTB want us to think....



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I live in Canada. We have free speech here...to an extent. "Inciting hatred" is considered illegal, so there are limitations as to what you can say. Had this film been made here, this "gentleman" would have been hauled up in front of the human rights commission and charged with inciting. The human rights commission in this country is as close to an Orwellian institution as you will find, accountable to no one, above the law, and capable of passing a binding sentence with no jury of peers and no appeal. Is that something you would like to see in America? Is that a preferable state of affairs to absolute free speech? The only persons responsible for these murders are the murderers. Savages. Murderers. Oh, and they certainly don't give an eff about free speech.
edit on 13-9-2012 by Orwells Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by alphaskunk
 





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.


The film is ridiculous there is no doubt, but you can't expect other countries to tell us what we can and cannot say, we have hate speech laws here too.

What people are failing to understand, in my opinion is,

This is not about the stupid film!



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
First Amendment people. I don't care who gets offended or how stupid they act. Stupidity on one persons part is THEIR fault...not someone else's.

It shocks me how many people are ready to violate their own rights because some uneducated group of extremists got their panties in a bunch. If you get offended, turn away, don't look, or listen.

"Those that would sacrifice liberty for security will lose both and deserve neither" Benjamin Franklin...

But we already know most of the sheep out there suggesting this always run to their "herder", throwing their rights at their "master's" feet and begging for protection.


That BF quote is so out of context with the issue being discussed here. It has nothing to do with security or the killing of the Ambassador. It has to do with respect and dignity, having the freedom of speech does not mean you can simply humiliate and # all over someones beliefs, Muslims, homosexuals, Christians, Buddhist etc... If you can not tolerate differences then i would be the first one to revoke the right to free speech from you.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by alphaskunk

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)


Good point Alpha.

But then who decides what is acceptable speech, and what is hurtful?
And how would you respond as the head of a nation if suddenly a formerly innocuous term, like baseball, offended an ethnic group who had just arrived seeking asylum? Do you command your nation to stop using the term "baseball", or do you tell the expats "when in Rome..."?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Hold up -

Anybody else getting the "Islamic Marriage is Shulah" banner across the top?
Exactly how is my writing being translated into a cookie for advertising selection?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Oh and guess what, I was deeply offended by the Egyptian protestor holding the torn out star of the American flag, flashed all over the news yesterday, but I didn't see any Americans storming the Egyptian embassy.

The ambassador goes to Libya is instrumental in helping them, which I believe was a BIG mistake, for gods sake stop helping them.

And how does he get repaid?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I really do not consider myself an expert on the American constitution, so this question is more for my own understanding.

Has the constitution become to dated, due to the founding fathers having no way to anticipate the growing variety of issues the document would need to address?

Further, the constitution does not seem to be absolute or remain that way as it can be amended.
edit on 13-9-2012 by MDDoxs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 


I sincerely appreciate your contribution. I have difficulty in locating my reason and logic centers when feeling very emotional about a topic, and emotions are terrible decision-makers.


I know just what you mean...and it took sleeping half the day today to reset my mind a bit and get perspective, such as it is, to what they did to our Ambassador. Rage it a hard emotion to get a handle on...

You know, it just reminds me though, how much we lost and how many not only supported it but cheered for it to happen following 9/11. This isn't that and I don't mean to draw ANY comparison of any kind, outside one factor that you bring up....Emotion and passion drive more bad decisions that started with the best of intentions than anything else, IMO.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
We better defend everybody's "Free Speech".

How long will it be until the mob turns on you?

I don't like this dirtbag film maker any more than you.

Unfortunately, we must defend even the worst offenders.

Our "Free Speech" rights are what this Nation was founded on.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 




If we even start that debate for real, we might as well throw the whole Constitution through a shredder. Some may want to "trim" the first amendment. I KNOW others want the 2nd trimmed.... Some want major alterations to the 4th, 5th and 14th. Well..too bad, I say. The rights are not granted or given. They are simply explained from the position of what we have, by nature and by Birth.


I'm sorry, Im not American. I don't get what you mean by the 2nd, 4th, 5th and 14th amendment.
Can you break it down for me.
(Where I live, people don't use "free speech"...especially through the media to mock religions and religious figures.)

Also, do you mean to say that the concept of "free speech" allows one to mock, offend and insult anybody and anything? Even the "sensitive" issues? Please explain.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by Sergeant Stiletto
 





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?


I agree, but it suits the propaganda machines agenda to claim it is the evil Christians and Jews.

If people kill other people over a movie trailer that's this lame, then they are the ones with the problem.

Plus you can surf you tube all day long and find anti Islam videos, that are much more graphic and offensive.

Why this specific video and why now?


You bring up a good point StormDancer - videos could be found any old day of the week criticizing every religion on this rock. I wonder if this is retaliation for something that has been done which we in the US aren't aware - something that incited so much hate it was erased from US media. Something the US did to provoke, and then simply point at a poorly-made film to blur our perception.

People are most likely to believe whatever fits into their framework most easily, and for those in the US, that which fits most easily goes something like "United States best good place". Or something like that.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sergeant Stiletto
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


It's clearly just pretense for something already planned.

But the question is, who? Really who, not just the who that the PTB want us to think....


Exactly, and sometimes it just us what it is.

Then I saw three impure spirits that looked like frogs; they came out of the mouth of the dragon, out of the mouth of the beast and out of the mouth of the false prophet.

They are demonic spirits that perform signs, and they go out to the kings of the whole world, to gather them for the battle on the great day of God Almighty.


Then they gathered the kings together to the place that in Hebrew is called Armageddon.





new topics
 
12
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join