Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


The actors should sue the producer then! I just do not see this as being an issue that requires further discussion.

So what if the actors where misled. Happens everyday to everyone. If they feel an injustice was done to them; then they need to sue.

So what if the movie led some people to kill others. To bad so sad. Those people who killed because of a movie have bigger problems.....like reality, and the ability to comprehend that it was "a movie"!

People kill because of the bible every day.....should we kill the bible in return? Maybe that is the real message that they are trying to get across! Lets kill the bible and burn them all in the streets. Then lets kill anyone who follows the bible and persecute them if they get caught with one!

Looks like things are falling into place!




posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by theclutch

So what if the actors where misled. Happens everyday to everyone. If they feel an injustice was done to them; then they need to sue.


My daughter works in film too.

I don't need the lesson on film - contracts - releases etc.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by theclutch

People kill because of the bible every day.....should we kill the bible in return? Maybe that is the real message that they are trying to get across! Lets kill the bible and burn them all in the streets. Then lets kill anyone who follows the bible and persecute them if they get caught with one!

Looks like things are falling into place!


I'm Atheist.

Who exactly are you defending?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I'm not religious but I'm not Atheist either! I'm a spiritual person that believes in good over evil! I refuse to be labeled just because others find that they need to do it.

The facts are that the bible claims that people will be persecuted for their beliefs. That they will try to ban all religions.

This looks like a good starting point to me.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
I found this pic while ago while reading across some articles...it says everything. If idiots WANT to be offended, they will be. It doesn't matter what you say or do. but this little pic says it all. If you do not understand the hypocrisy of sympathizing with brain dead idiots...you completely miss the point.

Some of you might be offended, some of you might see the point the artist was trying to make. If one is ok...both are ok...if one is hate...both are hate...does either one mean it's ok to be violent killers...NO!





posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by theclutch

The facts are that the bible claims that people will be persecuted for their beliefs. That they will try to ban all religions.

This looks like a good starting point to me.


So?

It was Christians that made this movie.

Do you know what the Quran says too? Or do you just know Christian belief? Non-labeled person.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:18 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.


They knew what making a film like that would do ,

There has to be a limit to freedom of speech,,it would also be freedom of speech if somebody went round the area were you live say you was a rapist or child sex offender , them saying that they would know there is a good chance you could be hurt by somebody if not lynched ,

whether it is true of not its freedom of speech , so there has to be a limit on what people can say especially when there is a high ricks of somebody been hurt



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by theclutch
reply to post by Annee
 


I'm not religious but I'm not Atheist either! I'm a spiritual person that believes in good over evil! I refuse to be labeled just because others find that they need to do it.

The facts are that the bible claims that people will be persecuted for their beliefs. That they will try to ban all religions.

This looks like a good starting point to me.

you mite be right religion is been pushed out of schools and work place ,it would be a good place to start war on religion and even try and bring in one world religion



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   
reply to post by seethetruth
 


If someone were to go around my neighbourhood claiming me to be a rapist or a pedophile, they would be required to provide proof, otherwise it would be slander; and my response would certainly not be to murder said liar.

I would much rather live in a society where I might be made uncomfortable by someone's words than one in which I must worry about the words I speak for fear of some kind of retribution from a mob or the authorities. If you prefer to be protected from offensive ideas and are unable to cope with divergent opinions, then I would recommend kindergarten; they'll take good care of you.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by seethetruth


There has to be a limit to freedom of speech,,it would also be freedom of speech if somebody went round the area were you live say you was a rapist or child sex offender , them saying that they would know there is a good chance you could be hurt by somebody if not lynched ,

whether it is true of not its freedom of speech , so there has to be a limit on what people can say especially when there is a high ricks of somebody been hurt
That is not freedom of speech, that would be libel. There is nothing provably untrue about what they said in the movie, and libel laws don't really apply to public figures anyway. If you want this standard for the muslims and the pedophile called mohammad, then the same standard would need to be applied to Christians and Christ. You don't see Christians murdering people over "poop Christ" or stupid southpark episodes.
edit on 13-9-2012 by DarthMuerte because: Fixed quoting error



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
. . . the pedophile called Mohammad,


You mean someone who lived by the culture of his time - - - that you are judging by modern society?


Did you know in early America girls were married off as young as 7? Oh wait - - those were Christians.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by trekwebmaster
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.


In bold you will find Sedition is only applicable criminally to one's own nation and inciting their "fellow citizens" to rebel against "their" state.

Meaning if the producers were inciting US citizens to storm Muslim Nations embasies in the US in rebellion, they would be criminally responsible. This is not an international law, as there is no world governemnt (yet).

They made a movie explaining how they view the prophet of Islam, it was silly, stupid and degrading; it is not the choice I would have made, but they are free to do so in this Nation, of which they are citizens and enjoy the freedoms that come with that citizenship.

The choice to kill was made by the ones who did the killing. This is akin to blaming Marilyn Manson for the Columbine tradgety. Because the music he created that is silly, stupid and degrading (IMO) incited those 2 boys to slaughter their classmates.

God Bless,



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

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
reply to post by seethetruth
 


. If you prefer to be protected from offensive ideas and are unable to cope with divergent opinions, then I would recommend kindergarten; they'll take good care of you.

Am i protesting , no i don't have a problem with freedom of speech but if you start insulting Jesus Mohammed or any other religion then you are going to get anger from which ever group you have insulted ,



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by chasingbrahman
 


It's bad enough that idiot muslims got their panties in a bunch over a movie, but I think I located some clips of the movie on youtube. The movie sucks!



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee


You mean someone who lived by the culture of his time - - - that you are judging by modern society?
Anybody having sex with a 9 year old is a pedophile. If the girl were at least old enough for breeding, then your argument might have some sliver of merit.



Originally posted by AnneeDid you know in early America girls were married off as young as 7? Oh wait - - those were Christians.

Proof? Or more of your anti-Christian rhetoric?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by seethetruth

Am i protesting , no i don't have a problem with freedom of speech but if you start insulting Jesus Mohammed or any other religion then you are going to get anger from which ever group you have insulted ,
Really? When was the last time Christians attacked an embassy because Christ was insulted?



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:18 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 others have pointed out, your "stupid" analogy is not stupid at all and very close to reality as to how the 1st amendment functions. One thing to help make it more fully correct.

You cannot come into my house without permission, I have the choice of who is allowed to show me a trailor. If you said the movie was about how "whorish" my mother was I would tell you to not come over and show it.

This movie was known to be anti-islamic, should an islamic choose to watch it or it's trailor, then they are responsible for any actions they take as a result (in this case murder). This movies trailor was not "forced" to be seen by anyone, that is the part you missed. We would have to choose to watch the trailor you made, just as they chose to watch art that incited them to kill.

Other then that you nailed freedom of speech.

God Bless,



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:20 PM
link   
So what! This is America we don't kill people for having opposing opinions. Other wise there would be a lot less people in this country. Hey, they might have something there? Remember in this country a crucifix in a jar of urine is concidered art. So I say TFB! Learn to deal with it.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by seethetruth

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost
reply to post by seethetruth
 


. If you prefer to be protected from offensive ideas and are unable to cope with divergent opinions, then I would recommend kindergarten; they'll take good care of you.

Am i protesting , no i don't have a problem with freedom of speech but if you start insulting Jesus Mohammed or any other religion then you are going to get anger from which ever group you have insulted ,


Any position you take on just about any subject is bound to upset someone somewhere. If you believe offending someone is a crime, then you may as well ban speech and writing all together. I find political correctness offensive; you may agree or disagree as is your right to do so.



posted on Sep, 13 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost




Any position you take on just about any subject is bound to upset someone somewhere. If you believe offending someone is a crime, then you may as well ban speech and writing all together. I find political correctness offensive; you may agree or disagree as is your right to do so.






I find political correctness has gone too far but to a certain extent you need it just to keep the peace ,
were as most people do not want to upset and offend other people, you get some people that like nothing better ,so political correctness was to stop them sort of people ,

There is having a difference of opinion on any subject but it how you have your difference of opinion and how you put your difference of opinion across ,you can do it in way that is not going to course offence or do it in away to course offence and anger
edit on 13-9-2012 by seethetruth because: (no reason given)





new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join