US official killed in embassy raid in Libya

[413x]

Just shows the rest of the world how retarded some of these people are.

I can understand people getting annoyed and even hating the makers ofthey feel it is that bad an offence . What I don't get is them targeting people with no links apart from heritage. Pathetic.

 

[NeilF]

Its is a "grossly offensive communication" which a young man was recently found guilty of in the UK.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/uk...pK3BMAdAR5y4BZyGg?docId=N0173331347626432336A

There's a difference of course.

One is aimed at living (grieving) people and the just deceased. Where as the other is about an individual from 1500 ago that is revered for debatable reasons?

One is also forcing the intended audience to see the comment(s). Was anyone forced to watch that video?

One was also clear in its intent. The other less so.

But I can see your comparison....

 

[NeilF]

Just shows the rest of the world how retarded some of these people are.

I can understand people getting annoyed and even hating the makers ofthey feel it is that bad an offence . What I don't get is them targeting people with no links apart from heritage. Pathetic.

World scorn should be aimed entirely at the individuals and organisers of this violence. This culture and attitude has no place in the 21st century and this should be made clear from all countries and all governments. Indeed it's a good few hundred years past its sell by date!

 

[badcompany]

nm

 

[badcompany]

I gave up as soon as the LOL RELIGION posts started.

its is a bit LOL hey?


LOL Religion.


On a side note good way to boost USA GDP just put the price of flags up and only allow there manufacture in the USA. Debt problem solved

come on its the 21st century

 

[Draeger]

Why does it appear that Muslims believe they have some sort of 'special right' to not be offended by something?.

There have been videos posted all over the internet over the years showing Muslim extremists beheading innocent people. And guess what?. Hey - I find that quite offensive and so do millions of others in the Western world but I've never felt the need to take to the streets causing destruction and mayhem and killing or injuring others.

On a related note - Why don't ignorant Christians and Jews rally and have destructive, murderous mobs when anyone makes fun of or insults Jesus or Moses. Why are Muslims so much better organized for doing that?

 

[badcompany]

On a related note - Why don't ignorant Christians and Jews rally and have destructive, murderous mobs when anyone makes fun of or insults Jesus or Moses. Why are Muslims so much better organized for doing that?

Religion of peace in'it

 

[Craterloads]

There's a difference of course.

One is aimed at living (grieving) people and the just deceased. Where as the other is about an individual from 1500 ago that is revered for debatable reasons?
One is also forcing the intended audience to see the comment(s). Was anyone forced to watch that video?

One was also clear in its intent. The other less so.

But I can see your comparison....

Not really, they are both things that cause offence to different peoples that don’t physically harm anyone, since they are just "words" right?

Many of the people that were upset by his comments were not even relatives of the deceased. 30 or so demonstrators were at his hearing were EDL members and he required police protection.

No one’s forcing them to read his comments, if you don’t like what he says skip it. Is he not allowed freedom of speech? He has not asked anyone to commit violence, these are his opinions.

And why do you question why the prophet is revered by Muslims? what debatable reason?

One is also forcing the intended audience to see the comment(s). Was anyone forced to watch that video?

And again you seem to be ignoring the facts purposely, the author of the film had it translated into Arabic and sent to Arab new stations, why would he do that? You are being purposely ignorant. Furthermore the actors in the film were not even told it was an anti-Islamic film, they were lied to by the creator, is this not enough intent

World scorn should be aimed entirely at the individuals and organisers of this violence. This culture and attitude has no place in the 21st century and this should be made clear from all countries and all governments. Indeed it's a good few hundred years past its sell by date!

Tell that to groups like the EDL, seems your target is only directed on one target.... And as i have shown above the creator of the film did what he did with intent and malice, but you choose to ignore that.... You think its ok to punish free speech when its for something you are offended by but for others, its who cares free speech is king.

 

[Robbo]

There has been an attack on the main Allied military base in Afghanistan, and injuries have been reported, Pentagon sources say.

It is thought that buildings at Camp Bastion in Helmand Province were damaged but it is not known if walls were breached.

There was small arms fire but the military does not know where the attack originated from.

It is not known how many people were wounded or what their condition was.

http://news.sky.com/story/985315/afghanistan-injuries-as-camp-bastion-hit

I wonder if this is related...

Obviously it would be wrong to generalise, but there do seem to be an overwhelmingly large number of Muslims (mostly in the middle east) who seem to think this sort of 'protesting' is okay.

 

[badcompany]

Having stayed out of GD for a while now, why waste your time arguing about this its 1000+ year old dispute that will go on and on until one side destroys the other.

move on and forget about it.

ciao.

 

[Craterloads]

http://news.sky.com/story/985315/afghanistan-injuries-as-camp-bastion-hit

I wonder if this is related...

Obviously it would be wrong to generalise, but there do seem to be an overwhelmingly large number of Muslims (mostly in the middle east) who seem to think this sort of 'protesting' is okay.

Or maybe the afghans are fed up with being occupied for the last 11 years by americans, and want rid of them.

Didnt the rebel forces in afghanistan launch attacks last weeks, the weeks before that and before that on western targets, that had nothing to do with this protest?

 

[[TW]Fox]

Or maybe the afghans are fed up with being occupied for the last 11 years by americans, and want rid of them.

They have already announced they are leaving in the near future, so why waste the ammo if that was the motive?

 

[NeilF]

Not really, they are both things that cause offence to different peoples that don’t physically harm anyone, since they are just "words" right?

Yes. But if I went to a site paying tribute to some soldiers that died, I wouldn't expect to see posts along the line of what that individual put there to do nothing more than insult visitors.

The video is questionable, yes, but it is not being placed infront of people in the same fashion. It's message is also more questionable. It's certainly not as blatant.

No one’s forcing them to read his comments, if you don’t like what he says skip it.

Alas he posted it in the middle of a Facebook page where people expecting (A) got (B), with (B) being his comment.

Is he not allowed freedom of speech? He has not asked anyone to commit violence, these are his opinions.

Tricky indeed isn't it. I don't pretend to know the answer. I do know the answer has nothing to do with attacking innocent people though. So let's keep that most important point top of the list!

And why do you question why the prophet is revered by Muslims? what debatable reason?

I meant most people on the planet do not revere him. So why should we be expected to tip-toe around him?


Consider a parallel. Have you watched some of the South Park episodes featuring the Catholic Church, or Scientology? Their content is incredibly cutting. Yet we do not see riots as a result. I see no reason why we should not expect the same from Muslims. I'd consider it flat out wrong to put this one particular faith on a pedestal due to a clear problem with its members/cultures.

 

[Xordium]

I can now agree with some of what you're saying.

However, the issue we clearly disagree on is if the video is in anyway to blame. You've deemed it was "not produced for comedic value". Can I ask what qualifies you for this comment? How do you know others do not find it funny? How do you know the makers (or dubbers) did not aim it at irony?

When we apoint ourselves moral guardians of freespeech it's dangerous. Especially when it's regarding such trivial subject matter such as this. And I say trivial because it can all be easily ignored by simply not watching it.

So I can understand your view on this, but I'm afraid I cannot agree with it.


The fact some of the American administration are knee jerking against this video IMHO is unfortunately counter productive. It implies these tactics of violence have value or merit. They should be deplored and scorned no matter what the reason for them. The video is inconsequencial and does not deserve the time of day, yet alone apologies. The only thing worth consideration is how a culture can produce people who believe violence is acceptable in reponse to nothing more than words and hearsay.

Well if you did not assume I was taking a position I was not then you would have seen common ground all along.

I am not disputing that some people may have seen comedy in the video. Some people laugh at the most wholly inappropriate things: photographs during the rape of nanjing, trophies by hutu militia, urinating on dead Taliban troops etc etc. That does not make it actually funny to the larger part of the global society or the local society it just says some people are sick puppies who have severely abnormal neural pathways for a variety of reasons.

The general population will not find it funny they'll find it deplorable or just plain sad depending on how it effects them. The nature of comedy is that it always has to stray close to the edge of what is socially acceptable and that is the key. What is clearly socially acceptable to you is different from people who see relevance in Islam.

The telling part is in your post here:

There's a difference of course.

One is aimed at living (grieving) people and the just deceased. Where as the other is about an individual from 1500 ago that is revered for debatable reasons?

You are attributing your own belief onto Muslims and presuming they then see the world the same way you do. For a large proportion of this planet this is not an individual from 1500 years ago - it is a prophet (the most significant one) and the nature of their living god that is being offended. So it is grounded in the present to something that is intrinsic to their belief structure.

Once again freedom of speech is not something that comes without an element of responsibility. To have the knowledge that the person did with no background of demonstrated ability in comedy then it is pretty hard to draw the conclusions you do. Hilary Clinton one behalf of the US administration indicates the movie was meant to disrespect and then it hardly takes a genius to figure out that it would then provoke. Therefore, this is why I say the filmmaker is culpable for what occurred - not accountable not responsible - but definitely culpable.

The later part of your post also shows poor logical thought. Criticism of the violence and criticism of the video are not mutually exclusive - we can condemn both.

 

[Craterloads]

They have already announced they are leaving in the near future, so why waste the ammo if that was the motive?

Maybe revenge, or the fact they cant stand to see them for a minute longer. Maybe for protection, they are attacking the very people that will attack them the next day. Or a hundred other reason, which they have been using for the last 10 years.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Maybe for protection, they are attacking the very people that will attack them the next day.

Good point - I hadn't considered the possibility that firing at an American army base might protect you from being attacked by them

 

[Robbo]

Good point - I hadn't considered the possibility that firing at an American army base might protect you from being attacked by them

 

[RDM]

Tell that to groups like the EDL,

You keep bringing up the EDL as they are some sort of similar group to the protestors murdering their way across the middle east. However they haven't actually killed anyone and most of the violence tends to be precipitated by counter protests by UAF and the like. I think more arrests have been made against UAF than the EDL.

 

[Craterloads]

Yes. But if I went to a site paying tribute to some soldiers that died, I wouldn't expect to see posts along the line of what that individual put there to do nothing more than insult visitors.

And im sure muslims in arab countries wouldnt expect to see anti-islamic films purposely dubbed in arabic on thier news stations.

The video is questionable, yes, but it is not being placed infront of people in the same fashion. It's message is also more questionable. It's certainly not as blatant.

Not as blatant, did you not read he had it dubbed it to arabic, lied to the cast abouts its agenda, hid his identity and pretended to be an israeli jew, the film was backed/financed by right wing extreme fundementalist groups, how much more blatant do you want. Again my only conclusion is you are being purposely ignorant.

Alas he posted it in the middle of a Facebook page where people expecting (A) got (B), with (B) being his comment.

So, where else was he to share his opinion, they were ony words. What harm can words do as you claim?

Tricky indeed isn't it. I don't pretend to know the answer. I do know the answer has nothing to do with attacking innocent people though. So let's keep that most important point top of the list!

I agree, tell that to the EDL, who have resorted to violence against people they felt insulted thier britishness and uk soldiers, as i agree violence is retarded for these protests going on now.

I meant most people on the planet do not revere him. So why should we be expected to tip-toe around him?

A lot of people dont give a **** about dead britsih soldiers, why should they tip toe around them.

Consider a parallel. Have you watched some of the South Park episodes featuring the Catholic Church, or Scientology? Their content is incredibly cutting. Yet we do not see riots as a result. I see no reason why we should not expect the same from Muslims. I'd consider it flat out wrong to put this one particular faith on a pedestal due to a clear problem with its members/cultures.

Because Muslims and British people or any other culture/people take offense to different things. Britain is a secular society and most british people dont give a **** about religion, whilst muslims do. What offends you might not offend someone else. For example did you see many Muslims retorting to violence against the idiots protesting at wotton basset? no you saw mainly "white" non muslims resorting to violence to them protestors at wotton basset.

 

[Craterloads]

Good point - I hadn't considered the possibility that firing at an American army base might protect you from being attacked by them

Well if they killed a few of them, there would be less soldiers to attack you back. Surely this concept is not beyond you.