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

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   
We can play semantics all we want, but this is a HUGE problem in America today - NO ONE wants to accept ANY responsibility for their own actions. What happened in Libya is a horrible crime, but that attack, most likely, had nothing to do with the movie, but all of the protests spreading throughout the Middle East are. This film was created to fulfill the producers agenda. THEY KNEW the reaction they were going to get, that's what they WANTED. All of these angry protesting Muslims are a DIRECT result of the actions of those who produced this religious hit-piece.

Freedom of Speech will not protect you from reactions overseas. To pretend that these scumbag, xenophobic bigots are absolved of all responsibility of their actions due to one nation's policies is just irresponsible. Just like someone who spills hot coffee on themselves is not responsible for their burns - it's the store's fault for giving an idiot hot coffee without having WARNING: HOT COFFEE emblazoned in huge red letters on the side of the cup. The Libyan incident most likely would of happened without this movie ever being made, but those protestors would not be outside our embassy's, all worked up and pissed off, if these religious bigots didn't piss all over the cherished beliefs of half the world's population.

I'm not saying the Muslims are not responsible for their actions (they are) but you can not, at least in an intellectually honest manner, excuse the actions of the movie's producers. They had an agenda, and boy did they get what they wanted.

But there are plenty of people trying to absolve these producers from any responsibility, probably because they share similar beliefs.




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


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.


The First Amendment allows objectionable speech and perhaps especially the most objectionable. Rights are easy when we agree with the issue....they matter when we don't yet still respect someone's right to do, say or be whatever it is we don't like.

The best example of how the First cuts both ways here and HAS been run through the system on a case I think the people were basically disgusting and vile pigs on...is the Neo-Nazi march in Skokie, Illinois. They were pretty much the bottom and base level of our society in my opinion. However, they had their right to have a parade down main street, despite the whole town pretty much being as offended as it's possible to get.

National Socialist Party of America vs. Village of Skokie, Illinois

I may hate everything those people stand for...the Nazi types..and I DO. That doesn't matter to their right to speak freely though. Frankly.the more they speak, they more mystique and power they LOSE anyway....so it turns out as a net gain in the end, but the principle wouldn't change if it was the opposite for effect and their best recruiting drive, IMO.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n

Free speech when it comes to artistic/creative expression = good.

Free speech when used to insult, offend and ridicule other people = not good.

I cant change the way you think... but can you imagine a "free speech" proponent show up at a funeral of a loved one holding insulting signs.... or yelling abuses through a microphone. Would you go out, shake their hands and celebrate this thing called free speech.... or would you walk out with a plank and knock some manners into them?

Speaking for myself, I'd use the plank.


But what happens when me and a large group of my friends decide that we are offended by the word "Scorpion"? What then?

Sometimes we can't make things better - we can only prevent them from becoming worse. One of the hardest lessons I've ever learned...



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by FlyersFan
 




They are the ones who couldn't control themselves when someone came out with an opinion they didn't like.


So when exactly was the word "opinion" redefined to include senseless ridicule and insults?



It's when we compare your definition of "senseless ridicule" with my definition that we run into a problem.

There's only one way to slice it, and it provides the most personal freedom while simultaneously requiring us all to swallow a bitter pill from time to time.
edit on 9/13/2012 by chasingbrahman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
We can play semantics all we want, but this is a HUGE problem in America today - NO ONE wants to accept ANY responsibility for their own actions.


Good, I'm glad we are in agreement there. The people spurring those mobs on to KILL and the mobs doing the KILLING are both responsible for THEIR actions.



I'm not saying the Muslims are not responsible for their actions (they are)


It's called MURDER.


but you can not, at least in an intellectually honest manner, excuse the actions of the movie's producers. They had an agenda, and boy did they get what they wanted


Can you arrest and prosecute somebody for stupidity?



But there are plenty of people trying to absolve these producers from any responsibility, probably because they share similar beliefs.


His asinine stupidity is protected under the Freedom of Speech in this country.
Yeah, I know how it sounds, but true.
edit on 13-9-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by alphaskunk
 


The movie is a "Red-Herring" to give provocation to do what was done. The movie is a joke, a front, a false-flag, Doesn't Follow, There's no way the video could have been dubbed with subtitles after it was shot and produced. Allegedly, the "real" intention was not told to the actors before titling and dubbing was done, from what I've read.

This video is junk and propaganda. But the intention behind it rings clear as a bell.

You bet this was a planned-event, from whatever group master-minded the fiasco, it would seem.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
If we're going to make stupid analogies, then I might as well join in:

I'm going to make a movie about how big of a dirty, nasty whore your mother is. I'm going to make it as offensive towards you as I can. THEN I'm going to go over to your house and show you some trailers of said movie - Now, lets say you get offended, and punch me square in the face - Now, apparently, I'm in no way responsible for your reaction. That makes perfect sense, right? Not really, if I never made that movie, you wouldn't of punched me in the face - but apparently, since I have the right to make a movie about how your mother, I am absolved of all responsibility for any reaction you may have.

Oh yeah, as for the above, it's all pretend - I'm sure your mother is/was a wonderful person, and I truly mean no offense =)



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Well yes - it would set a bad precedent, tone and lesson.

That being - that if you don't like what someone is saying, if what someone is saying offends you - then all you have to do is get some of your buddies together and have a riot! Then whoever said whatever it was that ticked you and your buddies off so deeply is to blame.

Heck - lets take South Park for instance as they make fun of everything.

If the Scientologists had burned down TV stations and killed a guy working in one of them because of the Tom Cruise episode, should South Park be censored and charges be brought against Trey Parker and Matt Stone. They knew they'd make some people angry with that episode.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
If we're going to make stupid analogies, then I might as well join in:

I'm going to make a movie about how big of a dirty, nasty whore your mother is. I'm going to make it as offensive towards you as I can. THEN I'm going to go over to your house and show you some trailers of said movie - Now, lets say you get offended, and punch me square in the face - Now, apparently, I'm in no way responsible for your reaction. That makes perfect sense, right? Not really, if I never made that movie, you wouldn't of punched me in the face - but apparently, since I have the right to make a movie about how your mother, I am absolved of all responsibility for any reaction you may have.

Oh yeah, as for the above, it's all pretend - I'm sure your mother is/was a wonderful person, and I truly mean no offense =)


Perfect analogy of Freedom.

Where you messed up was coming to my house...



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Yeah, Max I think too, that this "unfortunate" event and the tragic loss of the US Ambassador to Libya, will only give Egypt an opportunity to "radicalize" itself, and justify tensions and anti-american, anti-israeli, anti-freedom of speech sentiment. Sounds like a "re-aligning" in Egypt-Iran-Pakistan countries.

What I find odd is that there is a sudden realization of how singular and nationalistic VS. individual freedom and liberty the Middle Eastern countries are compared with the US, UK, EU countries; and makes me wonder if there isn't a sudden up-tick in extremism becoming moderate happening.

Interesting and tragic at the same time...
edit on 13-9-2012 by trekwebmaster because: Correction...



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
If we're going to make stupid analogies, then I might as well join in:

I'm going to make a movie about how big of a dirty, nasty whore your mother is. I'm going to make it as offensive towards you as I can. THEN I'm going to go over to your house and show you some trailers of said movie - Now, lets say you get offended, and punch me square in the face - Now, apparently, I'm in no way responsible for your reaction. That makes perfect sense, right? Not really, if I never made that movie, you wouldn't of punched me in the face - but apparently, since I have the right to make a movie about how your mother, I am absolved of all responsibility for any reaction you may have.

Oh yeah, as for the above, it's all pretend - I'm sure your mother is/was a wonderful person, and I truly mean no offense =)


Fantastic.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by alphaskunk
 

Of course the movie had nothing to do with the Ambassadors death, it was a convenient excuse. But two posts ago you were ready to ban my freedom of speech because I said people should have "freedom of speech". The biggest test of an individual is not when they exercise their rights, but allowing someone you disagree with to exercise "their" rights.

This whole thing is a charade. It's nothing more than a ploy to continue hostilities...plain and simple. I have little doubt there was focused intent behind the whole thing. Who benefits from continuing and growing conflict? The people that make the bombs, weapons and ammunition...that's who.

We will never know, but the timing of all of this is too convenient. Another reason to continue the "war". There is too much money being robbed from your wallet in the form of taxes and then those taxes pay to bomb third world countries even further into the stone age...



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
If we're going to make stupid analogies, then I might as well join in:

I'm going to make a movie about how big of a dirty, nasty whore your mother is. I'm going to make it as offensive towards you as I can. THEN I'm going to go over to your house and show you some trailers of said movie - Now, lets say you get offended, and punch me square in the face - Now, apparently, I'm in no way responsible for your reaction. That makes perfect sense, right? Not really, if I never made that movie, you wouldn't of punched me in the face - but apparently, since I have the right to make a movie about how your mother, I am absolved of all responsibility for any reaction you may have.

Oh yeah, as for the above, it's all pretend - I'm sure your mother is/was a wonderful person, and I truly mean no offense =)


I am responsible for my own actions. If I punch you because you intended to incite violence or not, I am still the person with the brain that sent the impulses to my nerves which directed my muscle fibers to contract and expand all over your face.

If I'm offended when you didn't intend to offend me, I'm suddenly culpable when I hit you? But not culpable when you intended to upset me?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   
I never said what happened in Libya wasn't murder - Also, it appears like the movie protest in Libya was used as cover for an attack by a militant group that had planned the attack far in advance. I'm not absolving anyone of responsibility for their actions - I'm not saying ANY murder is justified. But there are plenty of people on this thread TRYING to justify horrible actions by using semantics. Everything isn't Black and White, Good vs Evil, the middle east isn't filled to the brim with "evil-doer" caricatures.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 


No - I am culpable, and so are you. That's what I'm getting at.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Syyth007
 


Syyth007:

We need to start here...

Rev. Jones should be charged with Sedition and Treason...if Treason won't do then perhaps Sedition would. This is a classic-case of sedition.



Definition:
In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one's state. Sedition is encouraging one's fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one's country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.

See: Public Order Crime.

Definition of Public Order Crime (Example
Public order crime should be distinguished from political crime. In the former, although the identity of the "victim" may be indirect and sometimes diffuse, it is cumulatively the community that suffers, whereas in a political crime, the state perceives itself to be the victim and criminalizes the behaviour it considers threatening. Thus, public order crime includes consensual crime, victimless vice, and victimless crime. It asserts the need to use the law to maintain order both in the legal and moral sense. Public order crime is now the preferred term by proponents as against the use of the word "victimless" based on the idea that there are secondary victims (family, friends, acquaintances, and society at large) that can be identified.


Wikipedia Definition of Sedition.
edit on 13-9-2012 by trekwebmaster because: Added Definition...



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   
I find it funny that people want to charge this man with a crime. This isn't Europe! I also find it funny that none of these people would actually try to charge those outwardly calling for Israel or Americas destruction. Typical, actually.

Is he an idiot? Yes. Are people dying because of his movie? No. They are dying because we still have those hellbent on killing Americans worldwide, and will use any chance they can get.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Syyth007
If we're going to make stupid analogies, then I might as well join in:

I'm going to make a movie about how big of a dirty, nasty whore your mother is. I'm going to make it as offensive towards you as I can. THEN I'm going to go over to your house and show you some trailers of said movie - Now, lets say you get offended, and punch me square in the face - Now, apparently, I'm in no way responsible for your reaction. That makes perfect sense, right? Not really, if I never made that movie, you wouldn't of punched me in the face - but apparently, since I have the right to make a movie about how your mother, I am absolved of all responsibility for any reaction you may have.

Oh yeah, as for the above, it's all pretend - I'm sure your mother is/was a wonderful person, and I truly mean no offense =)

As a matter of fact, if I understand your point right here, you ARE absolved of and never HAD any responsibility for someone ELSE committing criminal assault of you for a film you made.

Now making a film derogatory to my mother would piss me off greatly. I might even decide 30 days in county lock-up is worth breaking your nose over the film you've made. Having said that, I WOULD deserve that jail time and criminal charges...you, would not have anything coming to you in any legal way.

Making a movie to piss me off is where my self discipline and maturity would be put to the test and the idea of responsibility that accompanies rights comes in. However much I'm offended by anything of this sort, it never excuses violence in return. Never the excuse, no.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by trekwebmaster
 




Rev. Jones should be charged with Sedition and Treason


After Obama.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
I find it funny that people want to charge this man with a crime. This isn't Europe! I also find it funny that none of these people would actually try to charge those outwardly calling for Israel or Americas destruction. Typical, actually.

Is he an idiot? Yes. Are people dying because of his movie? No. They are dying because we still have those hellbent on killing Americans worldwide, and will use any chance they can get.


Oh why do I have deja vu?





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join