"Innocence of Muslims" Crisis

Originally posted by Ascendancy
Just fools using the video as an excuse to be fools. Maybe they're just unhappy because in the U.S. you can actually post dissenting videos even if they are idiotic. Considering that there was less fanfare when groups and U.S. troops in an unrelated even burned Qurans it's pretty clear this was stupidity masquerading as zealotry.

I hate Facebook, but some one needs to get these people on it and some 9gag so they'll waste their free time in inanity rather than shooting things up. Nothing sews apathy and laziness like the interwebs. "Oh, the horror; let's blog about it."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19680785

Hundreds of Libyan protesters stormed the headquarters of Islamist group Ansar al-Sharia in a backlash after last week's attack on the US consulate.

Security forces were also involved and took over several militia bases, evicting many militia fighters.

The assault follows a day of anti-militia protests in Benghazi, which were sparked by the storming of the US consulate.

Some 30,000 anti-militia protesters had marched in Benghazi earlier on Friday.

Militia flags were pulled down and a vehicle was set on fire inside the compound of Ansar al-Sharia's main base, the Reuters news agency reported.

The Associated Press reported that several thousand supporters of Ansar al-Sharia lined up outside its headquarters, in front of the crowd, waving black and white banners.

Militia control

Many Libyans have expressed outrage at the attack on the US consulate, which killed US Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Libya's interim government has since come under renewed and intense pressure to rein in well-armed extremist militia groups and force them to disband.

Friday's march is the largest seen in Benghazi, considered the heartland of Libya's uprising, since Colonel Gaddafi was deposed last year.

Armed militia groups, which have remained in force in many parts of Libya, are a legacy of last year's fighting which helped overthrow Gaddafi.

They are better armed and more numerous than Libya's real army, and there have been reports of militias intimidating and carrying out killings against rivals.

Earlier this week authorities in Libya arrested around 50 people in connection with the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi.

Yeah, the average Libyan really has no reason to hate the United States at this present time. We lent aid to the rebels (what little we could, considering we didn't want to fully commit) and Chris Stevens took to the streets to protest Qaddafi with them.

And in all honesty, the average Muslim is not responding to this video at all. It's extremists and others already discontented about their situations being whipped into a frenzy.

From what I've read, the awful video wasn't even translated into Arabic and other Middle Eastern languages until a day or so before the 9/11 anniversary.

Originally posted by Mairuzu
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19680785

An Egyptian Christian drug runner, thief, and con artist and his sister-raping militia buddies tried to start World War III by provoking a Muslim attack on 9/11 while at the same time building domestic animosity against Jews among the right and the retarded portion of the left.
Good summary?

Does he have to be conspiring to start WWIII. Can he not just have the simple freedom of speech to make a video?

Originally posted by Lestov16
Does he have to be conspiring to start WWIII. Can he not just have the simple freedom of speech to make a video?

I think a nuanced approach is called for in situations such as this, since you don't want to open the door to dangerous, irresponsible hate speech.

That said, I think the onus is on Muslims around the world to develop restraint and learn to live with the fact that not everyone holds their Prophet in the same esteem.

Freedom of Speech doesn't protect clear incitements to violence.

"Clear incitement" is relative, I imagine.

It's hard to distinguish intent from simply being an oblivious *******, like Astner in a way.

It's certainly possible that the guy who made the video is simply a sociopathic ass - I think the notion that he's some sort of mega-mastermind who carefully crafted a video with the intention of setting off a massive war between Muslim extremists and white people is giving the guy a bit too much credit.

i don't see an inflammatory video about a religious leader as 'a clear incitement of violence.'

i haven't seen the movie, so if there's more to it than simply being offensive and insulting to muslims and their religion, i could be misinterpreting this situation. like if he's actually calling for violence of some sort.

but if there's not, then i can't see the idea that we should try to stop shit like this as anything more than cowering to threats of violence. unpopular speech is the most important speech to protect.

I just finished watching that 13 minute movie. If there's something "inflammatory" about it, I'm not seeing it. It's poorly made and poorly acted. But it was satire. Pure and simple satire. I laughed a few times at some of the absurdity that I'm positive was intentionally included.

I thought very lowly before of all the people who reacted to this trite with violence and hate--no amount of "incense" in a film deserves such reaction:

But after watching it, and looking again at the protests/riots/killings that have been committed by people whom I very much doubt have even watched it, I can't help but agree with the overt message the film makes: they're savages.

[i]
That said, I think the onus is on Muslims around the world to develop restraint and learn to live with the fact that not everyone holds their Prophet in the same esteem. [/B]

Indeed. Fact of the matter is that whether it's America the UK, or any other western country, this is our way, our culture, our values. After all, in their countries they burn our flags, and exhort their compatriots to 'kill the Infidels.' Do we march and protest in their countries when they do so? No. They'd put us to death if we tried...

Freedom of speech aside, if one migrates to a country with different cultures and a different religion, then one should, as a guest here, or even as an immigrant, at least try to 'fit in' and accept that we are different in many ways; and that just because they may worship some deity, it doesn't mean that they have the right to inflict their 'gods,' or values onto us, by force or violence.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Freedom of Speech doesn't protect clear incitements to violence.

In legal terms I think "incitement to violence" only counts things like telling people to do something.

Originally posted by Laurie
Do we march and protest in their countries when they do so? No. They'd put us to death if we tried...

Lybians protest in Lybia.
Americans protest in America.

It's pretty consistent actually. There are also Americans who say Islam is a religion of inherent evil that needs to be annihilated.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Lybians protest in Lybia.
Americans protest in America.

It's pretty consistent actually. There are also Americans who say Islam is a religion of inherent evil that needs to be annihilated.

This is the land of the free, and we have free speech. The difference being, we don't fly planes into their countries buildings... We don't bury women up to their waiss, or necks, and stone them. We don't allow ours sons and and fathers to hunt down and murder errant daughters either.

And, I know that not all Muslims are radicals...

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Freedom of Speech doesn't protect clear incitements to violence.

lol, and where would one find a clear incitement to violence?

Originally posted by Laurie
This is the land of the free, and we have free speech. The difference being, we don't fly planes into their countries buildings... We don't bury women up to their waiss, or necks, and stone them. We don't allow ours sons and and fathers to hunt down and murder errant daughters either.

And, I know that not all Muslims are radicals...

I'm having a lot of trouble figuring out what your point in this thread is, aside from "dem towelheads bad!"

Like, you say that we wouldn't be allowed to protest in their nations, then say how people should adopt the values of the nation they live in. The muslims who are protesting are in fact protesting according to their own nation's values... and by your own logic, it is wrong for us to try and enforce free speech on them...

so I'm not sure if you were just trolling Muslims or if you were aware of the internal inconsistencies...?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
But after watching it, and looking again at the protests/riots/killings that have been committed by people whom I very much doubt have even watched it, I can't help but agree with the overt message the film makes: they're savages.

That's the main problem, most of these rioters probably haven't seen the film, they're just retards listening to their leaders who use the film's supposed message to send them off burning and breaking.

most of the protesters cannot access the internet...

Originally posted by Oliver North
most of the protesters cannot access the internet...

I'm not blaming them for lacking access to the internet, I'm blaming them for listening to others and causing violence.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Lybians protest in Lybia.
Americans protest in America.

It's pretty consistent actually. There are also Americans who say Islam is a religion of inherent evil that needs to be annihilated.

I think her point was more like: "Middle Eastern Muslim immigrants protested in Australia."

I do get what you're saying...because Australian born Muslims also protested. And the vast majority of Muslims who were foreign nationals did not protest. It was only a select few. Australia was arbitrarily chosen, btw: no significance to my point.