See I think people might have misinterpreted what I was saying as blaming the filmmaker for this. I don't blame him for this, but he knew going in what the reaction would be to this film: same as it has been for every time Muhammed gets desecrated, namely a violent reaction. Rather than stand behind his film out in public, he goes into hiding, like a coward, so that he can avoid any potential repercussions, all the while continuing to slam Muslims and slamming Obama too for good measure. For someone to know the likely reaction to their work, to do that work, and then act in fear for your life when you knew going in this was the likely outcome, speaks to a weak-minded, cowardly individual.
__________________
"Think I'm gonna be the scapegoat for the whole damn machine? Sheeee......."
The Following User Says Thank You to Senator Clay Davis For This Useful Post:
The late great Christopher Hitchens had a great point on this: "[Freedom of expression] is much more precious than the right of Muslims not to have their feelings hurt." This extends to any religious cult.
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
The film is a piece of crap meant to incite but for the al Qaeda it's just a good excuse to attack the US. Like many things in this world, in this case religion is used as a means to power.
The Following User Says Thank You to Vulcan For This Useful Post:
A pro- Al Qaeda group, the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades, were the killers.
The protests were just a cover so they could get close enough to start killing. No doubt they instigated the mob action but the mob wasn't responsible for the deaths of the four Americans.
Quote:
A pro-al Qaeda group responsible for a previous armed assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi is the chief suspect in Tuesday's attack that killed the U.S. ambassador to Libya, sources tracking militant Islamist groups in eastern Libya say.
They also note that the attack immediately followed a call from al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri for revenge for the death in June of a senior Libyan member of the terror group Abu Yahya al-Libi.
The group suspected to be behind the assault -- the Imprisoned Omar Abdul Rahman Brigades -- first surfaced in May, when it claimed responsibility for an attack on the International Red Cross office in Benghazi. The following month the group claimed responsibility for detonating an explosive device outside the U.S. Consulate, and later released a video of that attack.
So nobody believes that the fact that these attacks occured on Sept 11, 2012,11 years to the day from 09/11/01 isn't significant?
I read in one of the articles that a rocket propelled gernades were used to attack the vehicle the the US Ambassador was in.
Mobs do not run around with bazookas. This was a planned attack by anti-US extremists.
I think the film story is just a cover to get the general populace riled up. There is more to this than just a film protest.
You should look up the response to the Danish cartoons of Muhammad. Islamic extremists have shown more than once that they don't need anything more than an apparent insult to their prophet in some form of media to get all smashy and murdery, regardless of the date.
You should look up the response to the Danish cartoons of Muhammad. Islamic extremists have shown more than once that they don't need anything more than an apparent insult to their prophet in some form of media to get all smashy and murdery, regardless of the date.
Quite true. I doubt there is anyone on CP who would feel comfortable going into a Middle Eastern country and exercising their right to free speech in the midst of a crowd of muslims, by criticizing Mohammed, Islam, or the Koran. To do that you would probably be risking severe injury if not death.
This is doubly true if you are female.
Unfortunately large numbers of followers of Islam (perhaps even a majority?) are still stuck in the middle ages, when it comes to freedom of religion, freedom of thought and expression, and civil rights.
Most followers of other religions have moved on and evolved over the centuries. Islamists seem to have digressed (I read somewhere that Islam was much more progressive in centuries past).
There is no agressive response from both ends. There is only one end.
One person made a movie, the other group killed 4 people.
I don't care if someone filmed himself taking a s**t on baby jesus and then punting him across the street while screaming "9/11 was awesome". Extreme violence, especially murder, should never be the result.
Eventually islamic leaders need to be held accountable for what their people are doing or their cries against discrimination and hate should be ignored.
You can't be suggesting that Islam killed those people. An angry mob (or as we're now hearing, possibly a terrorist organization) killed those people.
Suggesting Islamic leaders (who are they exactly?) are responsible for the acts of a tiny, extremist minority makes as much sense as saying America's leadership is responsible for every nut job who decides to shoot up a movie theatre, or an office, or a shopping centre.
Kudus to them. Its not often you see muslims appologizing for the actions of religious extremists.... particularly in the Middle East. Takes guts on their part to do this. They are probably putting their lives at risk from said extremists.
Kudus to them. Its not often you see muslims appologizing for the actions of religious extremists.... particularly in the Middle East. Takes guts on their part to do this. They are probably putting their lives at risk from said extremists.
You really need to educate yourself.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to longsuffering For This Useful Post:
Maybe you've forgotten but it took a long time before muslims in the Middle East came out and apologized for 9/11. If I recall there was actually dancing in the streets to celebrate the tragedy.
I read somewhere that Islam was much more progressive in centuries past).
You can thank, in part anyway, Saudi Arabia for that - the house of Saud (current royal family) adopted a very conservative view of Islam (Wahabi or Salafi) and have the money & influence to export that view by building schools and mosques in the rest of the world, and especially the developing world.
Maybe you've forgotten but it took a long time before muslims in the Middle East came out and apologized for 9/11. If I recall there was actually dancing in the streets to celebrate the tragedy.
Edit: Found it...
What? So are you calling on those people dancing in the streets to apologize, or do you want Muslims completely unrelated to the crimes perpetrated to apologize? I would love to hear why you believe my fiancee, who is Muslim, needs to or should apologize for terrorist attacks.
__________________
"An adherent of homeopathy has no brain. They have skull water with the memory of a brain."
What? So are you calling on those people dancing in the streets to apologize, or do you want Muslims completely unrelated to the crimes perpetrated to apologize? I would love to hear why you believe my fiancee, who is Muslim, needs to or should apologize for terrorist attacks.
Just those dancing in the streets.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Rerun For This Useful Post:
Maybe you've forgotten but it took a long time before muslims in the Middle East came out and apologized for 9/11. If I recall there was actually dancing in the streets to celebrate the tragedy.
Edit: Found it...
Just the fact that you would use a term like "muslims in the middle east" as if they are a homogeneous group shows how much you have to learn.
Your video showed some Muslims celebrating the terror attack. They hardly represented all "muslims in the middle east".
Do you also believe the Tea Party represents all Americans?
