U.S. ambassador to Libya killed in rocket attack - Page 26

On September 14 2012 03:39 kamikami wrote:
Seriously in Arab countries do they make movies that attack other religions ?
If yes they don't have right to whine about other countries making movies bashing their religion.
There's no justification for the killings.

On September 14 2012 04:15 DannyJ wrote:


the US gets around 15% of it's oil from the middle East, almost all of it from Saudi Arabia.

Pro-American supporters have taken to the streets in Libya today to distance themselves from the rocket attack which killed U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens.

The diplomat, who has campaigned for peace in the Middle East, was killed by militants in the city of Benghazi on Tuesday.

Youngsters were among those who waved placards which stated 'this does not represent us' to express their dismay at the attacks.

One photograph shows a child holding a banner, which although containing some spelling mistakes had a clear message: 'Sorry people of America this is not the behaviour of our Islam and prophet,' it read.

Scribbled on another sign was the simple phrase 'Benghazi is against terrorism' while a third professed affection for the 52-year-old exclaiming: 'Chris Stevens was a friend to all Libyans.'

A placard written in Arabic sent out a message to those attempting to exert their power on the war-torn country.

It said: 'No to al Qaeda, no to violence, this is a youth revolution.'

Another read: 'No No No to Al Qaeda.'

The rally came the day after Mr Stevens became the first U.S. ambassador to be killed by terrorism in 33 years.

Stevens was struck down in a rocket attack by forces unleashed after Muammar Gaddafi's power crumbled - an uprising the ambassador had strongly supported.

Just like not all Americans are like the people who made the weird anti-Islam movie that is sparking protests in Muslim nations, not all people in Libya are like the ones who killed U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens. Some of the people of Benghazi, where Stevens was killed, held a demonstration against terrorism and to show sympathy for the U.S. Libya Alhurra TV, an Internet TV channel founded at the start of the Arab Spring in 2011, posted Facebook photos of a rally there showing support for America and sympathy for Stevens. Here are some of those pictures:

Update: With the help from The Atlantic's multilingual Heather Horn and some Facebook commenters, we have a few translations of the Arabic signs.

On September 14 2012 04:48 FlilFlam wrote:
This video scares me...

This thread scares me...

This planet scares me...

As an atheist I do however find it darkly amusing that the overboiling pot of religious hatred from all sides is going to fulfill their own prophecies and fuck up the world's people beyond reasonable repair when the very point and stated purpose of a religious instiutions is to "save the world and its people, and generally make it a better, happier, place".

RIP to the victims...

Violence, murder and general harm are abhorrent in all forms outside the narrowest limits of self defense.

The world grows darker...

On September 14 2012 04:49 Brindled wrote:


Friend, I think you should look at my post above. The pictures in my news links may make you smile.

On September 14 2012 05:41 Silidons wrote:

Can you explain to me how those people, and those who fly planes into buildings, and kill innocent people just because they're American and someone in America made a film about their religion, both get their faith from the same exact book? Those same people in the pictures you posted are against free speech. The women are covered up, and they would not like it if you drew a picture of their prophet. They won't kill you (like the "extremists" do) but they still are not in touch with the 21st century and the implied rights that it comes with in a large majority of nations around the world. Islam in its current form is not viable in the 21st century.

edit: I hope this doesn't go against the note at the top of the thread, but I don't see how this isn't a religious discussion when the intent is entirely religious. Please just erase my post if this goes against it.

On September 14 2012 05:41 Silidons wrote:

Can you explain to me how those people, and those who fly planes into buildings, and kill innocent people just because they're American and someone in America made a film about their religion, both get their faith from the same exact book? Those same people in the pictures you posted are against free speech. The women are covered up, and they would not like it if you drew a picture of their prophet. They won't kill you (like the "extremists" do) but they still are not in touch with the 21st century and the implied rights that it comes with in a large majority of nations around the world. Islam in its current form is not viable in the 21st century.

edit: I hope this doesn't go against the note at the top of the thread, but I don't see how this isn't a religious discussion when the intent is entirely religious. Please just erase my post if this goes against it.

On September 14 2012 05:41 Silidons wrote:

Can you explain to me how those people, and those who fly planes into buildings, and kill innocent people just because they're American and someone in America made a film about their religion, both get their faith from the same exact book? Those same people in the pictures you posted are against free speech. The women are covered up, and they would not like it if you drew a picture of their prophet. They won't kill you (like the "extremists" do) but they still are not in touch with the 21st century and the implied rights that it comes with in a large majority of nations around the world. Islam in its current form is not viable in the 21st century.

edit: I hope this doesn't go against the note at the top of the thread, but I don't see how this isn't a religious discussion when the intent is entirely religious. Please just erase my post if this goes against it.

On September 14 2012 06:02 s3rp wrote:


They don't get their views/faith from the same book. All of the extrememists get their views from radical "clerks" that interpret scripture written over a millenium ago in way that is not appropriate anymore. These are the kind people that radicalize others to widen their own influence. Extremism in general is wrong and produces nutjob foundamentalists.

On September 14 2012 06:16 neversummer wrote:


This is pretty much spot on, although every Muslim gains some knowledge from the Qur'an, extremist or not. I can't think for the life of me the arabic word for the "clerks" you're referring to; these people do, in fact, interpret words from an ancient time and try to appropriate them, which in most cases devolves into literal interpretations due to the fact that Islamic extremism is primarily a conservative movement, to a modern context.

Everyone in this thread needs to acknowledge these terrorist acts are caused by ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS and not Muslims as a whole. By generalizing them you are no greater than the people who senselessly bash Americans for being fat and uneducated.

On September 14 2012 06:27 s3rp wrote:


The word is Imam, if you want to use the word equal to priest , but i chose not to use it . I'm not sure how many of the radical leaders are actually Imams .

On September 14 2012 05:41 Silidons wrote:

Can you explain to me how those people, and those who fly planes into buildings, and kill innocent people just because they're American and someone in America made a film about their religion, both get their faith from the same exact book? Those same people in the pictures you posted are against free speech. The women are covered up, and they would not like it if you drew a picture of their prophet. They won't kill you (like the "extremists" do) but they still are not in touch with the 21st century and the implied rights that it comes with in a large majority of nations around the world. Islam in its current form is not viable in the 21st century.

edit: I hope this doesn't go against the note at the top of the thread, but I don't see how this isn't a religious discussion when the intent is entirely religious. Please just erase my post if this goes against it.

On September 14 2012 06:27 AttackZerg wrote:


I think they are called 'mullahs'

On September 12 2012 19:53 redviper wrote:
Its completely over the top to call the militants terrorists.

Also this is what comes from supporting the rebels in order to profit from oil.

On September 14 2012 06:16 neversummer wrote:


This is pretty much spot on, although every Muslim gains some knowledge from the Qur'an, extremist or not. I can't think for the life of me the arabic word for the "clerks" you're referring to; these people do, in fact, interpret words from an ancient time and try to appropriate them, which in most cases devolves into literal interpretations due to the fact that Islamic extremism is primarily a conservative movement, to a modern context.

Everyone in this thread needs to acknowledge these terrorist acts are caused by ISLAMIC EXTREMISTS and not Muslims as a whole. By generalizing them you are no greater than the people who senselessly bash Americans for being fat and uneducated.