Dana Loesch @ Big Peace:
An American has been killed on the 11th anniversary of 9/11 as Islamist mobs attacked and burned the U.S. consulate in Libya.
A US official was killed and another wounded on Tuesday as an armed mob protesting over a film they said offended Islam attacked the US consulate in Benghazi, an official told AFP.
Libya’s deputy interior minister Wanis al-Sharef said: “One American official was killed and another injured in the hand. The other staff members were evacuated and are safe and sound.”
He could not say if the dead man was a diplomat.
It is so far the only death from mob attacks in Libya and Egypt over Islamist anger at an alleged film in production by Coptic Christians focusing on Islam. The United States spent 9/11 apologizing for hurting Islamists’ feelings in Egypt which incited protesters to desecrate our flag and storm the walls of the U.S. embassy.
@Nan G, why must you bring up suffocation for homosexuals? Whether or not the Ambassador was gay is irrelevant. That was not the reason for the attack on the US embassy, or our diplomatic personnel there.
I disagree with posters here and elsewhere who think the video (or book burnings or cartoons) were done in order to incite Muslims to murderous rages.
I think there were good reasons to illustrate Mohammad for that child’s book, good reasons to burn the koran and in this case good reasons to expose the way Muslims treat Coptics in Egypt, as arising from some of Mohammad’s most weird &/or bloodthirsty habits.
When Christ is depicted in piss, or people make fun of Mitt Romney’s ”magic underwear,” they have an objective in mind that is much lower.
All they want to do is deride.
Islam claims it is ”from god, through Mohammad.”
They claim their god IS the God of the Bible.
Well, THAT God demands that his worshipers mirror his own important qualities.
One of those is long suffering.
That means they kindly put up with being maligned.
So, is Islam from THIS god IF Muslims cannot even suffer for an instant without making someone pay?
There is another invisible being who likes to transform himself into an angel of light even though he is darkness, personified.
That’s the devil.
Islam, studied both as words written and deeds by adherents looks to be one of the devil’s biggest success stories.
@Tom:
No praise for Romney. Nor any for Obama.
As for this;
It most certainly constitutes an official statement by the President, on behalf of the nation. That is the purpose of having embassies and consulates around the world, Tom. To speak for the President, and for the nation. If Obama now disavows the statement, then there is one of two problems. Either he is changing what was an official position earlier, OR, he has no control over US officials that are supposed to be representing him, and our nation, abroad.
@Tom:
Yeah, you’ve shown how against that sort of thing you are you hypocritical P.O.S.
@johngalt, it appears you’re willing to give a pass to Bacile’s intent and impose your own more benign interpretation. Sorry, must disagree, and Palin’s statement on Jones is still applicable. If your intent is to show that Christianity and our freedoms provide our nation’s foundations, this is still a counter productive approach.
As to Mr. Bacile, he has clearly stated his intent.
While Christians wouldn’t likely be rioting like radical Muslims, I’m sure they would protest their religion as being portrayed as a “cancer”. And Bacile deliberately placed this movie in the realm of politics.
His intent is no more pure than Jones’… who is busy distributing the movie as we speak. No big surprise those two would team up together.
In addition to his false claim, attempting to pull Israel in to his side… and even they vehemently disavow this man…. you can add another question mark to his truths. Bacile’s claim of $5 mil in donations for the production costs has raised the eyebrows at The Hollywood Reporter, stating that appears to be quite the embellishment.
Bacile’s intent, his choice of releasing it around Sept 11th, had predictable results. And it sure wasn’t going to accomplish anything of value, and would just lead to the predictable rah rah anti-Muslim sentiment. I hardly find it an example of American tolerance to throw your own intolerance of some one else’s religion in their face, calling it a “cancer” and hateful. Would that promote moderate Muslims to leave the religion? And that’s a subjective opinion that is not shared by Muslims who are not radicalized. Bacile is no educator. He is a propagandist who’s propaganda many here agree with.
You want to place all the blame at radical Islamists’ feet. They, in turn, want to place all of it at Bacile’s feet. I say they are both scum, and only those caught in the middle pay the consequences for the intolerance of both.
American should not be apologizing for our 1st Amendment. However we also don’t need to embrace idiots as the norm either. There are those who put their lives on the line to defend Bacile’s right to be intolerant and insensitive. Unfortunately, many more of them will die for his unwise and intolerant exercise of that right. I find him to be an embarrassment to our principles.
Apparently Embassies and Embassy Employees in the Middle East don’t warrant proper military protection, as far as this Administration is concerned.
Given recent history, don’t Embassy compounds in Libya, Egypt, etc. require upgraded defence against lunatics?
@MataHarley:
Intent has nothing to do with radical Islamists rioting and killing an American ambassador. It has to do with the actions of the murderers themselves.
And if we are going to support the freedom of speech, which includes the freedom of expression, we can’t cherry pick whose speech and whose expression will be allowed.
I don’t happen to like some of the things said by the abortionists, the communist left, or even certain journalists who use their position to create angst over Christian beliefs, but their right to say what they say is a Constitutional guarantee. Either you back the First Amendment or you don’t; there is no gray area.
The same counsulate was bombed in June. What was the excuse of the Islamists then?
I already told you I’d defend the 1st Amendment rights of Sam Bacile… which is not his real name, it seems… to my death. Do not turn this argument around into something else,
johngalt…oops… retire.. I will support the right of people to be intolerant bigots in this country. I do not have to personally approve of the way they use those rights… especially when you know very well that it will cause the deaths of those in harms way. I have a nephew in Afghanistan. Our own CJ is in Afghanistan. Their lives already exist in fragile conditions daily. I resent Bacile’s making that even more fragile… and for what? Just so he can spout his own intolerance about someone else’s religion?As I mentioned, Bacile doesn’t appear to be his real name. There’s an interesting article in the Atlantic. It seems that Bacile contacted a Vietnam vet, anti-Muslim activist in Riverside.
Klein’s impression that these Syrian, Turkish, Egyptian and Pakistani “Americans”, involved with making this movie, were “evangelical”. I’m actually wondering if exactly the opposite is true, and that they just posed as “evangelicals” to whip up this little documentary in order to accomplish exactly what it accomplished. And it may be that the non Jew, Bacile, is either their dupe, or not what he seems. We don’t know.
All we know is that he sure didn’t educate anyone about Islam that didn’t already feel the way they did prior to his little flick’s release. All it did was get those on both extremes of Islam back into their predictable rhetoric, while diplomats and soldiers face the physical consequences.
@Hard Right:
Indeed. It’s a different world when you don’t blindly box yourself into a partisan corner, Hard Right. One’s opinion isn’t a predetermined talking point.
@MataHarley:
If you read what I wrote, not just to you, but all of my comments here, I have not given a “pass” to the film-maker in anything, with the exception of those killed.
I have not promoted his views, nor condemned them. I have only stated that he, as anyone, has the right to express his viewpoints. Whether or not I like them. Whether or not you like them. Whether or not Greg, or anyone else, likes them.
I did say, however, that it was meant as an accurate portrayal of Mohammed. I should have stated that it was an accurate portrayal in the film-maker’s eyes(and in others’ eyes, as well).
You claim that it was “deliberately” placed in the realm of politics. What better reason to have free speech, if not for espousing your own viewpoints?
The why matters not, Mata. The film-maker did nothing to force those people to kill another human being. Merely gave them reason. Which, if one has followed international relations regarding Islam, they need very little reason to act impolite and violent, and would have found another reason if the present one was lacking.
That’s the difference between you and I, johngalt. I support his right to express his viewpoints, but I *do* condemn his viewpoints as irresponsible, unnecessary, ineffective and questionable in their intent. By you not condemning his viewpoint… just as you freely do the lib/progs political viewpoints… the unspoken lends a certain credibility to them. And that is enhanced by you stating that your subjective opinion is the same as his, by calling them “accurate”.
you see something there? what?
well I see them all getting unify to practice an attack on ISRAEL,
THEY ARE MOBILIZING TOGETHER AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING,
I Think that ISRAEL IS NOT SAYING BUT ASK SPECIFIC SUPPORT FROM THE FREE WORLD FOR WHAT HELP
WILL THEY BE ABLE TO DEPEND ON WHEN THE DAY WILL HIDE THE SUN TELLING THAT GO AHEAD TO BEBE TO TELL THE GIANT MOB, MAKE MY DAY,
@MataHarley:
I think that is the whole issue. It’s not that protesting the film is wrong, it’s the way it’s being protested.
I’m hearing people say Americans shouldn’t be blaming all Muslims for the acts of a few, but nothing about the Muslims blaming all Americans for the acts of a few. There are idiots on TV right now calling for blasphemy laws. Really?
But the bigger problem for me is the lack of involvement by the Egyptian and Libyan governments to protect our embassies. If a group of whackos started rioting the Egyptian embassy, the crackdown would be instant.
So I go back to what I said before, yank the money. Lack of protection by the responsible government is indicative of government support. See how supportive they are when the funds are cut off.
Aqua, don’t know how many times I can say it. I condemn both Bacile and the radical Islamists. The *only* sympathy I have is for those in the middle… our diplomats and military. I support the NYTs 1st Amendment for their dangerous leaks too, but I can still condemn their wisdom in exercising that right when it puts so many in harms way unnecessarily.
But you’ll notice that the condemnation of Bacile is quite thinly veiled here. That’s because many personally agree with him. There are separate issues here. Did he have the right? Of course. Did he accomplish any positive thing for *any* one by exercising that right? Nope. Did he accomplish anything negative? Hell yuh
But the man who calls himself Bacile, is not yet done.
Two things are for sure. He won’t be getting anyone to convert from Islam. And Israel plus our diplomats and military will find what is already an ugly environment even more ugly. Considering we already know the result, in advance, of his “work”, I have to wonder if that is not actually his intent.
@MataHarley:
I see your point, Mata. But what I believe about the film, whichever way it is, doesn’t change the fact that the murders were committed by people who had a choice, and made it. With that choice lies the blame for the killings. No one else. And that is the point of my postings to Greg, and now you.
I don’t argue radical Islamists culpability, johngalt. You keep repeating this as if I were giving them an excuse. But you don’t condemn the irresponsibility of Bacile, either.
I’m willing to state my distaste for Bacile’s intolerance and irresponsibility. You are not. It shouldn’t be rocket science. Only the brain dead wouldn’t anticipate the expected response. Radical Islamists are not in support of democracy or freedom of speech, so why would they embrace the freedom to be intolerant and disrespectful to another’s religion?
Me? I consider Bacile’s views to be absolutely within our rights, but the antithesis to our principle founding of freedom of religion. That is most important for religions that you *do not* like. The Mormoms and Scientology have also experienced that anti-founding bigotry over time.
You’re happy to speak up about the irresponsibility of lib/prog statements and policies, and their dangerous repercussions. But not this? This is similar to the Bachmann/McCarthy dodge you did… LOL I assure you, I don’t expect you to condemn Bacile right along side the Islamists, so I won’t be holding my breath. But I think your statements about the “accuracy” of his flick has already revealed why you find his intolerance acceptable.
@Aqua:
Attack may have been al Qaeda revenge plot, London think tank says
@Aqua:
That I wholeheartedly agree with. Protesting something you dislike, or even hate, is not the problem here. It is the choice to take another human being’s life, and, to a lesser degree, the destruction of property not belonging to them, that I take offense at. Particularly when the cause of the conflict is now being suggested as the cause, or at partial fault, for the murders.
@Tom:
I read that too Tom. It brings me back to the point of the Libyan Government protecting our embassy. The Embassy grounds are sovereign, but it has been a long standing international agreement that the host government protect the external grounds of the embassies to ensure stuff like this doesn’t happen.
Some experts in this part of the world are wondering aloud whether or not the whole ”free speech/insult Mo” line was a RUSE.
The REAL reason America was targeted on 9-11 had to do with a very recent drone attack that killed a major al Qaeda leader.
Using a RUSE as a way to whip up the rabble while allowing those ”useful idiots” to form the front line is not unheard of in Islam.
Hmmmmm…..
Looks like there were more reasons than the ONE about the Coptic Christian (or is he an Israeli Jew who lives in California?) movie.
@Tom:
That is plausible. Thanks for this information.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57511043/assault-on-u.s-consulate-in-benghazi-leaves-4-dead-including-u.s-ambassador-j-christopher-stevens/
If any of you all looked at the actual video which is 13 minutes long, you would have seen something eerie and common.
The Libyan police stood by taking photos as the Ambassador and his staff were being besieged.
Here’s how Sean Smith (one of the 4 victims) put it:
Now, go watch the video, if you haven’t already.
Watch what the ‘police’ do as the Islamic mob destroys a Coptic doctor’s clinic.
Same thing, only now we see it IS real life.
That Coptic video is being slammed for telling the truth in a cheesy and cheaply produced way.
Lest you forget, disparaging a Muslim can be a crime with a death sentence EVEN when the disparagement is the TRUTH!
This is usually carried out when a NON-Muslim does the disparagement, I mean tells the truth.
Have any of you bothered to watch this cheesy South Park (in many places) wannabe flick – Innocence of Muslims – you’re defending so mightily as “the truth” about Islam? Puleeeeeeeez…. Perhaps, before holding this up as some educational tool about Islam, you might want to invest about five minutes of your time. In fact, if it’s anything, I’d consider it an anti-war plea… i.e. those comments about how much money can be saved.
If you can stomach all of it… here’s the full 13 minutes. Altho frankly, there’s a five minute spliced version of all the “South Park” type areas that’s almost comical.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=iC6yGzpSvjU
My first observation to whatever this guy’s name is, keep your day job. Personally, I’d demand an accounting of the expenses from production to post production. If this costs $5 mil to make, and I say this from my former film background, then someone is creaming lots of funds off the top. Or perhaps Mr. Whatever His Name Is kept a great deal of it for himself so he could afford to hide out in comfort… as he knew he’d have to.
My second observation is that anyone who considers this educational, and not just meaningless, distasteful schtick, has one bizarre viewpoint of education.
My third comment goes to Nan G’s comment above,:
There’ no “truth” in this video. It’s designed solely to mock their prophet, Mohammed, as a babbling fool. This isn’t a “documentary”.
Now, had this idiot actually just spliced together various news footage videos of not only Coptics and Christians being abused, but also the razing of the Sufi mosques and shrines, he could have actually made a factual statement and saved himself $5 mil. It would be genuinely educational, and I doubt that would raise the ire of the radicals since many of them were probably the people shooting the news or YT footage. But that’s not what he did, is it?
Nope, no disagreement about how hypersensitive the human cockroaches are. And we actually know exactly where their hot buttons are located. So if you’re going to push those buttons, should it not be for a higher cause? Like, for example, a collage of news footage showing the radicals in action instead of this POS? Fighting an encompassing implementation of Shariah law? Protesting radicals in charge of Muslim nations? Giving outcry at the massive Muslim on Muslim violence that dwarfs Muslim on Christian or Zionist violence?
Again I’d like to point out the wisdom of Dehl back in the Terry Jones days:
therefore when I know something offends another
I refrain from doing it in front of them.
To me this is simply good manners.
I don’t look at it as a trial that I have to go through,
or that my rights are being violated.
I simply look at it as an opportunity to show a right spirit toward my fellow man.
You view condemning stupidity that offends Muslims unnecessarily (not like showing actual news footage of radicals in action…) as kowtowing. I view it as Dehl did in the comment. Simply taking the higher road and an opportunity to show our superior spirit of condemning religious intolerance, and not going to bat over irresponsible idiocy. And I might add, condemning the stupidity is an honest view which can be done without suggesting opinion rights be stripped away. We do it all the time here.
So if I’m going to cater to my personal feelings of feeling pressured, knowing that it is going to make an already difficult situation for our military, our diplomats and Israel even more difficult, it damn well better be for a good reason.
This ain’t it…
Pardon me, but what a load of horse manure. I doubt that anyone here that watches the crap our kids watch these days as “entertainment” doesn’t agree that it has contributed towards a society less concerned with morals, family and self-esteem. That doesn’t mean you put the *entire* blame on entertainment for our societal decline. But you can’t absolve it as not being a strong and influencing contributing factor either. Had entertainment not trended towards mainstream crap like the Kardashians, Housewives of “insert your town here”, etal, I doubt this type of real life existence would be the casually accepted norm, or model for behavior.
And this is exactly the case with whats-his-face-wannabe-be-a-director and the radicals. Both of them feed off each other with their respective intolerance and hatred…. all to the detriment of those in the middle. People should be condemning them both as counterproductive to co-existence.
BTW, General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the U.S. military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, called Terry Jones, and asked him to stop with his own drum beating (in a kinder way, of course) in order to not have it come back on our military and diplomats. Good luck with that… Jones’ hasn’t had any press for a while, so he’ll be exploiting this for his own reasons.
@MataHarley: @MataHarley: @Nan G: @Richard Wheeler:
An ugly environment? It was already an ugly environment in Germany in 1932.
Mata and Richard:
Just how is what Sam Bacile and Terry Jones have done more provocative and less pure than that of the anti-Nazi newspapermen at the Munich Post and at Fritz Gerlich’s Der gerade Weg back in 1932?
@MataHarley:
I realize you can’t fix stupid. I also realize that this guy is only trying to whip up the radicals. But honestly, that doesn’t seem to be very hard to do these days. The radicals are looking for any excuse to let loose. One example is the legitimate destruction of the Korans by the troops in Afghanistan. They did it as prescribe by the religion and still caught hell.
I have ex-military friends that have kids in Afghanistan, and my youngest son is seriously considering a military career. While I understand the danger they can be put in because of stupidity on the part of others, another part of me refuses to kowtow to radical maniacs. Storming our embassies and threatening our troops to intimidate us into silencing those that speak out about their religion is no less an act of terrorism than hijacking a plane.
@MataHarley:
I know that you don’t, Mata. I’ve read your postings. Several times. I always do, as you bring insight into discussions that I may not have thought about. I appreciate that.
However, whether or not I feel that Bacile’s film was over-the-top, purposely meant to incite rioting, or factual information, the choice to end another’s life over it rests purely on the shoulders of those who did the killings. No one else. That is my point. That has been my point.
Because it doesn’t matter, Mata. If I came out in agreement with him, the discussion would turn to one of me being biased his way. If I did as you did, it lessons the point of my postings. Either way, I lose out as the discussion turns from that which is most important. That is, that the people who ended the lives, are the one’s responsible. They made the choice. No one else.
Because those discussions are about the very statements and policies rendered by the lib/progs. This one? Not so much. Not after Greg decided that someone practicing freedom of expression should be held as accountable as the ones who did the deed.
Holding Bacile responsible, in part, verges on absolving those who killed of, at the very least, their reason for taking a life. If that is the measuring stick, then many who kill can be absolved similarly, whether the blame is rested on the shoulders of the movie industry, violent video games, hateful rhetoric, or what-have-you. And yes, that is accepted within our society, giving killers and violent persons absolution from reason for their actions.
But one fact has remained. Those who killed had a choice. They made it. Not the film-maker. Not me. And certainly not those who were killed.
There is no “absolute right of free speech” You can’t falsely yell fire in a crowded theater.
The film maker yelled fire knowing he would incite these fanatics. The blood of these American citizens is on his hands but more so on the hands of the cowardly killers who should be hunted down immediately.
Semper Fi
@johngalt:
Whether they be Muslims or dhimmis, under Sharia law, those who insult Muhammad or Allah are to be put to death. And since Muslims believe in and practice communal punishment any dhimmi community is endangered by accusations of (criticizing) insulting Muhammad or even Muslim mistreatment of dhimmis under Sharia. A single such accusation leveled at a single non-Muslim member for a single instance of offense could well bring about the annihilation of the entire dhimmi community. Under Sharia, dhimmi communities need police their own members so as to avoid any hint of offense to Islam.
Insulting Muhammad: Free speech, and death in Islam
@Richard Wheeler:
In your view Richard, did the democratic socialists and the Catholics of the Munich Post and of Fritz Gerlich’s Der gerade Weg falsely yell fire in a crowded theater back in 1932? The newspapermen of the Munich Post and Der gerade Weg were far far far more provocative than this film maker. Did they in your view yelled fire knowing they would incite these fanatics? They reported news and criticized Nazi violence and criminality and then the Nazi homicidal fanatics engaged in violence. In your view were the democratic socialists and the Catholics of the Munich Post and of Fritz Gerlich’s Der gerade Weg similarly guilty of innocent blood?
@Richard Wheeler:
Rich, Lib1 tried to make the same analogy. It doesn’t hold up. Not one bit.
When someone yells “fire” in a crowded theater, it invokes, immediately, a sense of danger to the life and limb of those within that theater.
When the film is shown, there is no immediate threat, or feeling of a threat, to the life and limb of those seeing it.
That is the difference, Rich.
And as I told Mata, those who committed the murders MADE A CHOICE to willingly take the life of another person. They are solely responsible for the murders. No one else. Unless, of course, you can show proof that the film-maker held a gun to their heads. Then I’d be inclined to agree with you.
@johngalt:
But what if you honestly yell fire in a crowded theater?
What if there was a fire?
What if there was a fire? If one were silent would one therefore be guilty of blood?
@johngalt:
Of course, this ignores whether or not there really is a fire in the theater.
Although the film is cheaply made and amaturishly acted it has no falsehoods in it about Mohammad.
He was a ”bastard” child brought up by people with little affection for him.
He did suffer seizures and claimed to see and hear things which were not real.
He did collect around him other sadistic men as his top aids.
He did ignore his own promises to keep peace between his people and neighbors.
He did torturously murder anyone (even an old woman) who seemed the least bit dubious of his divine vision.
He did twist both Christian and Hebrew scripture, even claiming he had it right while they had it all wrong.
He did take a child bride.
His followers today really do all of the things depicted in the film when it shows police complicity while Muslims destroy Coptic businesses, looting them and setting them on fire only afterwards.
So, the theater is on fire.
What should one do?
@Mike O’Malley:
Same thought.
@Mike O’Malley:
All good questions, Mike. I wonder what our liberal/progressives think about these questions.
Some people might claim that the film-maker was yelling “fire”, at the sight of a fire. Others think there is no fire present. History should be the judge. But how can we use history, when even truth, such as it is, causes the people of that religion to riot?
As well, I think my point is proven, by the claims happening now that even without the film, the “riot” and murders still would likely still have occurred. Those who murdered had a moral choice in which either they acted in the killings, or removed themselves. It is clear, by the bodies, what choice they made. The blood is on their hands, and their hands alone.
@Richard Wheeler:
You should read the comment in #45, Rich. It might give you more perspective.
I personally doubt the legitimacy of this Coptic Christian’s depiction of Mohammed just as I would question a movie about Christ or Moses made by a disgruntled Muslim. Common sense.
Mata says “Meaningless distasteful shtick”. There it is.
Radicals have absolutely no moral ground to kill innocent people because of this stupid offensive “movie” Don’t believe Mohammed or mainstream Muslims would condone these killings.
Would like to hear Word’s take on this
@Mike O’Malley:
Would you agree there is a huge difference between what these newspaper men did, writing about the Nazis in the 1930s with alarm, but specifically and intelligently, and a hypothetical person writing about the German people as a whole with alarm, insinuating they should all be treated with suspicion as potential Nazis because of what the actual Nazis did?
Although I have not seen this film, it seems to me that many similar criticisms about Muslims do that exact thing. They are not focused specifically on known extremest and terrorist elements. They rather extrapolate the crimes of the few as a tool to incite fear and anger against the many regardless of the fact not all Muslims are terrorists or extremists, or sympathetic towards terror. By needlessly clouding the issues, driving wedges between cultures and faiths, and inciting hatred and panic, they do not in fact help matters, they make them worse.
Condemn the maker of this YouTube video; blame Theo Van Gogh, the Dutch cartoonist, Salman Rushdie or anyone else who has the audacity of point out the barbarianism of Islam. All you are doing is looking for a scapegoat to blame the actions of 7th century cretins on.
How many Americans have to die before our government admits we are at war with Middle Eastern Islam?
If you’ve seen the 13 minute film and also read the koran, hadiths and sura, you know there are no lies in the film.
The truth about Mohammad seems to insult Muslims today.
For instance, his drooling, seizures:
Killing the old lady by pulling her apart with camels:
Muhammad went on a raid against the Fazara tribe.
The Fazara initially defeated the Muslims.
The wounded Muslim leader swore vengeance.
After he recovered he went out and attacked the Fazara again.
One very old woman was captured.
Here is the account from Guillaume, page 665:
“….and Umm Qirfa Fatima was taken prisoner. She was a very old women, wife of Malik. Her daughter and Abdullah Masada were also taken.
He killed her cruelly (Tabari, by putting a rope to her two legs and to two camels and driving them until they rent her in two.)
Several other Hadith accounts are cited here:
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/The_Story_of_Umm_Qirfa
As depicted in the film, Mohammad’s sadistic buddies do the dirty work for him.
Muhammad could not tolerate a woman enjoying a leadership role in any society, this much about his personal views towards women is made clear in Sahih Bukhari 9:88:219…..
When Mohammad heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.”” – Sahih Bukhari 9:88:219
Do the liberals STILL want to sweep all of Mohammad’s proclivities under the rug?
@Richard Wheeler:
What is a mainstream Muslim? How does one Muslim differ from those that attacked our people in Egypt and Libya? Do you not understand anything about Islam?
Mike Personally, I would not put Mohammed and Hitler in the same boat. Hell, not even in the same Ocean.You might feel differently.
Retire 05 What % of millions of worldwide Muslims do you see rioting?
Large majority, particularly in Libya are condemning these acts. Saw top American Iman condemning these acts.
Suggest you are the one that doesn’t understand.
@MataHarley:
I haven’t watched it nor do I have any intention of watching it. The film has nothing to do with it. I also didn’t watch the Last Temptation of Christ. I heard what it was about and made a choice not to watch a movie that made fun of my religion, (in my opinion).
First, I’m not defending the filmmaker. I could care less about him. I’m only condemning the attacks and the reaction. I guess we could put out national plea to walk on egg shells in matters that affect Muslim sensitivities. How long do we need this to last? Cartoonists have been making fun of everyone and everything since the beginning of time. We just tell them to carry-on, except when it comes to anything relating to Islam?
As for Terry Jones, I find him to be a waste of space. Unfortunately, he is an American waste of space, just like Al Sharpton. If I see him on TV, I do the same thing I do when Al Sharpton is on TV, change the channel.
Are these the same people who promise suicide bombers they will get 72 virgins for blowing themselves up?
Too much going on over in the Middle East….something is coming to a head…and I think it is going to be rather ulgy…
A former Libyan jihadist weighs in from CNN.
How much of this is disinformation I have no idea.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/opinion/benotman-libya-attack/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
He makes an interesting point…..
I imagine that’s true.
Sean Smith, one of the 4 victims, noticed cooperation between his attackers and the police, who, he noted, showed their ”secure location” to the attackers.
Here’s Noman Benotman however…
Noman B. claims:
But WHY would jihadists want the world to believe that ALL Muslims can get angry enough to kill?
Human shields.
See these egregious photos of jihadists and the human shields they get killed:
http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/03/24/when-human-shields-die/
http://blog.camera.org/archives/2008/05/hamass_human_shields_1.html
http://www.idfblog.com/hamas/2012/02/27/cover-hamas-illegitimate-human-shield/
http://sheikyermami.com/2008/12/31/hamas-explains-use-of-civilians-as-human-shields/
Jihadists actually have a term for dead human shields: inadvertent martyrs.
I once saw a video of a jihadist dragging a child around to act as his human shield.
Poor kid.
@Richard Wheeler:
Does it take every damn Muslim in the Middle East to riot for you to wake the hell up and understand what we are facing? Did the first speech of Mohamad Morsi as the leader of Egypt calling for, no demanding, the United States release Sheik Omar Abdul Rahman not give you any indication of where the Egypt “Spring” was headed? Do you not understand that the majorities of Egyptians believe the U.S. is the Big Satan? Do you really think you can teach, coerce, conjole, appease, and passify a people who still adhere to the teachings of a 7th century war lord?
@MataHarley:
Dehl’s comment is the way I live my life. Maybe not when I was younger. I used to provoke Marines all the time, which is why my nose has been broken three times.
If everyone in the world lived their lives that way, it would be utopia. But the reality is much different. JFK said freedom is not easy and democracy is not perfect. We allow idiots to speak as freely as scholars in the country. I don’t have to like or agree with Bascil’s (sp) film and I don’t like Terry Jones at all. And yes, I think telling people to keep their opinions to themselves out of fear (in this case, Islamist radical retaliation) is kowtowing.
Aqua, no one is “telling” Bacile to keep his opinions to himself. Dempsey is asking Jones not to further publicize the pathetic attempt at filmmaking tho.
I don’t agree with mandates for PC free speech. However along with free speech comes the right for others to point out that someone is being an dufus… and sometimes a dangerous dufus at that. However the choice to wisely, or unwisely, exercise his 1st Amendment rights fall solely to him. And along with that comes the responsibility of the fallout.
I think that Bacile did this for personal gain. Period. Nothing more, nothing less. Fifteen minutes of infamy, or perhaps more. It would be an insult to those like Irshad Manji to put him in the same category of Islamic reformers, or even as a helpful source of influence. Fact is, his actions have done nothing but aid the jihadists. Considering that his personal background and creds are actually invisible – unlike more prominent Islamic reformers – doesn’t this give anyone pause for cause?
Late to the party. Fun thread.
#1 – We are Americans and our first amendment doesn’t stop when some mussie gets butthurt.
#2 – I think the whole lot of you missed the bus. This is classic false flag event; the movie had nothing to do with it. Our enemies – Revolutionary Islamism – be in Salafists, Muslim Brotherhood, or AQ – one of those parties just hit us and killed our ambassador/sacked our consolutate on 911 – no coincedence.
I think you fool yourself to think it wouldn’t have happened if only that movie wasn’t released. This was a renewed vow of war against us on 911 no less. After Iran, Revolutionary Islamism is our next biggest threat. Our cultures will clash be it today or tomorrow. When they shout Death to America, they mean it. That is the Hilter lesson – they mean what they say. We are not listening, ignoring them won’t make it go away. We are at war with radical Islam (War on Terror); we forgot, put our guard down, and the enemy hit us.
Aqua
there are people we have been careful to talk with in a relax conversation, when we have seen his explosive side rise up out of nowhere to be from a smiling nice person in your eyes, to become a monster with a voice change becoming a some kind of loud sound expressing his anger which no one but him know the end, or the why,
his insults are being answered by some trying to calm him with a soft voice just to become his target,
i have seen that happened, horrified on the first time, and keeping away from that nasty upswing of behavior, and learned to avoid it but learned to try to see it coming never been able to prevent it,
and always notice his friend on a position to leave at the first sign, BUT AWARE OF
HIS UNPREDICTABLE MOOD SWING
that is my take of those MUSLIMS BEHAVIOR, IT SEEM THAT THEY FEED ON HIGH DEGREE FERTILIZER THAT MAKE THEM A WALKING BOMB, IT’S FIGURATIVE BUT EASY TO UNDERSTAND,
I see it as a brain defect generated collectively on a certain foreign breed of humans
those lean on killing and hating and comiting violence without a second of remorse,
HERE MY TAKE ON THOSE WHO FIT THE PROFILE,
WE ALL KNOW THE STORY OF CAIN AND ABEL, AND BEFORE I SAW A HUMAN AS I DESCRIBED ABOVE,
THAT ANCIENT STORY OF THE CREATION NEVER WAS TOO IMPORTANT FOR ME TO EXPLORE,
UNTIL THE DAY WHERE I SAW THAT PERSON WHOM I describe, he was TURKISH descent by the way,
and then hearing of the violent behavior from te enemies the clusterd bombs buried to disembody the opponent the violence of their family quarells to end by death, murder of who is not obeying,and torture of their prisoner, gave me the thought of their origin from CAIN,
AND MOSTLY PURE BECAUSE THEY WHERE NOT MIXING THE BLOODLINE AND I HAD READ THAT IS WHERE THE CREATION BEGAN, AND MY DEDUCTION IS THOSE HUMAN HAVE A ANATHEMA
SOME SORT OF A EVIL GENE WHICH THEY CARRY FROM CAIN DOWN TO NOW, A DEFECT OF THE GOOD PART IN THE SOUL MISSING, THAT’S WHY THEY FIND IT EASY TO KILL.
AND FURTHER MORE THEY SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO MIX THEIR GENES WITH AMERICAN
YOUNG GIRL WHO ARE READY TO PROCREATE, BECAUSE OF THE BAD GENE
THOSE FOREIGNER CARRY, SO THEY SHOULD BE FOREVER LIVE IN THEIR OWN LAND, AND
BE BAN FROM EMIGRATE IN AMERICA,
although we know that already is happening the mix of the bad genes.
mossomo
hi, did you read the following input after you left, on the POST WE WHERE,THAT WAS;
THE GAMES IRAN WILL PLAY, IT WAS AFTER THE MOBS MURDER,
SO IT SERVE TO CHANGE A POINT OF VIEW IF IRAN WILL BE JOIN BY THEM OR NOT.
BYE
3 – oh, our ambassador was assasinated. I think framing it as ‘murdered’ underwhelms the situation.
@MataHarley:
No one, not you, not General Martin E. Dempsey, has the right to tell another American what they should say or not say. And if you don’t see the significance of bringing down the full force of the American military on a outspoken pastor in Florida by having the highest military officer in the United States call that pastor personally, you disappoint me. What Dempsey did could be considered as an implied threat, Mata, and that, we should never accept at being OK.
The “full force of the American military” by a phone call, beseeching the obvious? Somehow I’m missing the official power they can bring to bear, retire. On what charges do you think they could proceed?
Or, in your book, they aren’t allowed to communicate, and appeal to his common sense, if they believe our military will experience an extra burden of danger?
Gets pretty low when you start defending the likes of publicity hound, Terry Jones. He has no interests save his own.
Mitt Romney apparently agrees with many here that crude provocative beligerance is the correct diplomatic response. Against whom isn’t important, as long as Muslims are the target. Are these the evil Muslims I keep reading about here?
http://m.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2012/09/does-not-represent-us-moving-photos-pro-american-rallies-libya/56803/
@Tom:
If they are so damned pro-American, why didn’t they take on their own and put a stop to the violence against Ambassador Stevens, and the three other Americans assassinated? Why don’t they put a stop to the ones that are the trouble makers? Or do they not have a responsibility to control their own nation?
And of course The Atlantic blames a movie no one ever heard of before today and that no body has even seen. Perhaps you could email the idiots at The Atlantic and asked them why our consulate was bombed in June, which they didn’t bother to report on?
@MataHarley:
I was with you all the way until that last sentence. What responsibility? For offending someone, or some group? Sure, I can go along with that. For making that someone, or some group, act in a violent and murderous fashion, and to a group of unrelated innocent people? No way. Why? Because as I said in my first posting on this topic, “Where does it stop?”
How far do we take the blame game, Mata? Do even the mildest of criticisms that cause someone to become unhinged get blamed? Or is it only those that most of us would feel are over the top?
When you start assigning blame for others actions, to a person’s freedom of expression, you are heading down the road to limiting people’s first amendment rights. Then the question becomes, who decides when the blame starts to get placed? How offensive must the speech be until that person becomes responsible, even partially, for the actions of others?
Do you see what I am talking about?
I have no problem with anyone condemning anyone’s speech, or expression. That is part of the ‘freedom of speech’ thing Americans hold dear. But Greg, and anyone else, who assigns blame, or rather, “blood on his hands”, to the film-maker, for things said and shown in the film, are starting down that road towards the limiting of that freedom. I want no part of that.
johngalt:
I assign responsibility, without breaking down the percentages, to all culpable. Do you?
Apparently, johngalt, you do. You will not “condemn” anyone but the jihadists. I agree that they are culpable. I just don’t think they are the only ones culpable for fomenting hate.