|
Please don't use this thread as a platform to argue about religion. -semioldguy |
Do you think Afghanistan was a wonderful place before the US went in? It was barely even a country...
|
On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person."
Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all.
|
On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all.
Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads.
Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things.
There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic?
By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him.
|
An innocent person died for a stupid reason and that's always sad
|
On September 14 2012 12:34 DannyJ wrote:
Do you think Afghanistan was a wonderful place before the US went in? It was barely even a country...
Just in case you're interested, the Afghan population was actually ~90% in favor of intervention just before the 2001 occupation. The execution of the intervention, unfortunately, was terrible -- not to mention the fact that what little progress that had been made was immediately trashed upon the 2003 US misadventure into Iraq.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him.
I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!'
Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting?
I've said this before and I'll say it again:
If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.
There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!)
|
On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!)
you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 14 2012 13:24 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it.
You're still missing the point. The video was created with the intent to offend and directly aimed at Muslims. They may not have been forced to watch it, but if they did (which they did), then all's the same and my point still stands. That's the reality.
Or what, if I watch a movie on my own volition I can't get mad if it's a total piece of junk? Now that would be silly.
|
On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face. If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped. There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!)
If I continuously insult your mother in front of you, you will react however you will react largely because perhaps you can't avoid it. But if I said something about your mother on the Internet and you went out and punched someone else, then you're an imbecile. And if you went after me, then I'd consider you dumb as well, because nothing keeps you from just not looking at it and not thinking about it. More importantly, why would you right away resort to physical violence?
And yes Muslims should be allowed to protest, but what are they going to protest against? The specific individuals who have the rights to make those videos or the government which allows them? Either way, it's a bit ridiculous.
On September 14 2012 13:30 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:24 Silidons wrote:On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it. You're still missing the point. The video was created with the intent to offend and directly aimed at Muslims. They may not have been forced to watch it, but if they did (which they did), then all's the same and my point still stands. That's the reality. Or what, if I watch a movie on my own volition I can't get mad if it's a total piece of junk? Now that would be silly.
There are plenty of videos on youtube that aim to provoke atheists and Christians. They generate hateful comments, not bodies. Big deal. Some people like to tell me that I'm going to hell and I deserve it. If they say it on youtube, I'll disregard it.
Anyway, going to bed. Cheers.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
Forgot to put a space between the parenthesis and the link: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault . It's the Associated Press. I wouldn't call them crap.
On September 14 2012 13:39 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face. If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped. There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) If I continuously insult your mother in front of you, you will react however you will react largely because perhaps you can't avoid it. But if I said something about your mother on the Internet and you went out and punched someone else, then you're an imbecile. And if you went after me, then I'd consider you dumb as well, because nothing keeps you from just not looking at it and not thinking about it. More importantly, why would you right away resort to physical violence? And yes Muslims should be allowed to protest, but what are they going to protest against? The specific individuals who have the rights to make those videos or the government which allows them? Either way, it's a bit ridiculous. Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:30 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 13:24 Silidons wrote:On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it. You're still missing the point. The video was created with the intent to offend and directly aimed at Muslims. They may not have been forced to watch it, but if they did (which they did), then all's the same and my point still stands. That's the reality. Or what, if I watch a movie on my own volition I can't get mad if it's a total piece of junk? Now that would be silly. There are plenty of videos on youtube that aim to provoke atheists and Christians. They generate hateful comments, not bodies. Big deal. Some people like to tell me that I'm going to hell and I deserve it. If they say it on youtube, I'll disregard it. Anyway, going to bed. Cheers.
The Muslims are protesting against the movie. How hard is it to understand that? They're not out there fuming at every single American. Your example doesn't really have any place in this conversation as it's taken way out of context (first of all, their frustration is directed at the right target (the movie), and second of all, they did not murder those people because of the video).
And it does not matter if atheists or Christians get angry or not at the youtube videos they see. You base the situation on whether or not these Muslims are within their own right to be angry or not, which, as I've said, they definitely are. Just like if some Germans were to make a video that glorified Nazis and the Holocaust, Jews would be well within their right to express their outrage as well, or if some idiot Japanese made a video glorifying the Rape of Nanking, you can bet the Chinese would be furious.
|
On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him.
Clear something up for me, do you believe that the protestors are murdering people? Because they're not. Militants planning a terrorist attack on an embassy used the video as a trigger and excuse. They're just protesting at U.S. embassies because various media outlets in their countries are hyping this more or less as a U.S.-sanctioned video.
Just like how tea partiers probably would have protested at the Iranian embassy after they "stole" our drone if they knew where the embassy was or there was one in every state.
|
On September 14 2012 09:11 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 09:09 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 08:22 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 08:13 justinpal wrote:On September 14 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right? We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita. Who cares? It is irrelevant to the OP. Let's not get on a tangent. Protecting an embassy is not comparable to preventing civilians from murdering each other. No one has asked Libya to reach beyond their means. They had men there, and those men were allegedly "indignant" that a movie was made. That is why the OP as well as I am angry. The Libyan government is angry that America "allowed" an anti-Muslim movie to be made. A low budget film is the justification for violence on innocents from terrorists, inaction from supposed allies, and then blame for the entire event is placed on America? This has been addressed multiple times in this thread. The militants who murdered the people at the consulate were not a part of the protest - they manipulated it. Be angry that there are militants out there who would attack a U.S. consulate, do not be angry at the protesters for being angry. If we're allowed to strut our freedom of speech around, so are the protestors. The militants are a whole different story. ? What...that guy was telling the people who were discussing incarceration in the US that it was not relevant, which it isn't. Read the rest of his post. That was what I was addressing.
The protesters also had guns and home-made bombs. Militants weren't the only ones setting the place on fire and shooting ppl...read my post that he was addressing. Ie. look at the eye witness reports in the source articles from Reuters.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 14 2012 14:35 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 09:11 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 09:09 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 08:22 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 08:13 justinpal wrote:On September 14 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right? We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita. Who cares? It is irrelevant to the OP. Let's not get on a tangent. Protecting an embassy is not comparable to preventing civilians from murdering each other. No one has asked Libya to reach beyond their means. They had men there, and those men were allegedly "indignant" that a movie was made. That is why the OP as well as I am angry. The Libyan government is angry that America "allowed" an anti-Muslim movie to be made. A low budget film is the justification for violence on innocents from terrorists, inaction from supposed allies, and then blame for the entire event is placed on America? This has been addressed multiple times in this thread. The militants who murdered the people at the consulate were not a part of the protest - they manipulated it. Be angry that there are militants out there who would attack a U.S. consulate, do not be angry at the protesters for being angry. If we're allowed to strut our freedom of speech around, so are the protestors. The militants are a whole different story. ? What...that guy was telling the people who were discussing incarceration in the US that it was not relevant, which it isn't. Read the rest of his post. That was what I was addressing. The protesters also had guns and home-made bombs. Militants weren't the only ones setting the place on fire and shooting ppl...read my post that he was addressing.
If you read the link that I posted above ( http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault ), it was all part of a two-part assault. The ones who raided the compound were also a part of the militants.
|
On September 14 2012 14:40 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 14:35 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 09:11 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 09:09 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 08:22 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 08:13 justinpal wrote:On September 14 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:On September 14 2012 07:05 Prplppleatr wrote:
I honestly am still very angry at the Libyan Govt. Their 40+ troops stationed at the embassy simply walked away and allowed this, likely, planned attack to happen. And their defense leaders stated that it was our fault for allowing that video to be released. This gives me 0 faith in their forces, which means we will have to have troops stationed there permanently until we feel it is safe (likely not for a very long time) because of the importance of the country (oil).
Sources on page 19 in my first post. Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA. If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better? I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly. It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right? We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita. Who cares? It is irrelevant to the OP. Let's not get on a tangent. Protecting an embassy is not comparable to preventing civilians from murdering each other. No one has asked Libya to reach beyond their means. They had men there, and those men were allegedly "indignant" that a movie was made. That is why the OP as well as I am angry. The Libyan government is angry that America "allowed" an anti-Muslim movie to be made. A low budget film is the justification for violence on innocents from terrorists, inaction from supposed allies, and then blame for the entire event is placed on America? This has been addressed multiple times in this thread. The militants who murdered the people at the consulate were not a part of the protest - they manipulated it. Be angry that there are militants out there who would attack a U.S. consulate, do not be angry at the protesters for being angry. If we're allowed to strut our freedom of speech around, so are the protestors. The militants are a whole different story. ? What...that guy was telling the people who were discussing incarceration in the US that it was not relevant, which it isn't. Read the rest of his post. That was what I was addressing. The protesters also had guns and home-made bombs. Militants weren't the only ones setting the place on fire and shooting ppl...read my post that he was addressing. If you read the link that I posted above ( http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault ), it was all part of a two-part assault. The ones who raided the compound were also a part of the militants.
Look at my post on page 19...I already sourced similar articles and the eye witness accounts, which included all of that information.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 14 2012 14:42 Prplppleatr wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 14:40 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 14:35 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 09:11 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 09:09 Prplppleatr wrote:On September 14 2012 08:22 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 08:13 justinpal wrote:On September 14 2012 08:03 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 07:58 CajunMan wrote:On September 14 2012 07:28 Agathon wrote:
[quote]
Hum...USA has the biggest army in the world, they are also the richer in the world, and by far. But there's 13 000 murder per year in USA.
If USA can't ensure the protection of their own citizens, how a poor country like Lybia, barely coming from a violent civil war; is supposed to do better?
I'm not here to blame USA, the US's are fine, but come on...blaming a governement in this kind of context...sorry, I don't want to offend you, but it's silly.
It's also is 50x bigger than the average European nation but that doesn't matter right? We still have more homicides and prisoners per capita. Who cares? It is irrelevant to the OP. Let's not get on a tangent. Protecting an embassy is not comparable to preventing civilians from murdering each other. No one has asked Libya to reach beyond their means. They had men there, and those men were allegedly "indignant" that a movie was made. That is why the OP as well as I am angry. The Libyan government is angry that America "allowed" an anti-Muslim movie to be made. A low budget film is the justification for violence on innocents from terrorists, inaction from supposed allies, and then blame for the entire event is placed on America? This has been addressed multiple times in this thread. The militants who murdered the people at the consulate were not a part of the protest - they manipulated it. Be angry that there are militants out there who would attack a U.S. consulate, do not be angry at the protesters for being angry. If we're allowed to strut our freedom of speech around, so are the protestors. The militants are a whole different story. ? What...that guy was telling the people who were discussing incarceration in the US that it was not relevant, which it isn't. Read the rest of his post. That was what I was addressing. The protesters also had guns and home-made bombs. Militants weren't the only ones setting the place on fire and shooting ppl...read my post that he was addressing. If you read the link that I posted above ( http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault ), it was all part of a two-part assault. The ones who raided the compound were also a part of the militants. Look at my post on page 19...I already sourced similar articles and the eye witness accounts, which included all of that information.
I read your sources. Source 1 is speculation as nothing was clear when the article was released (the article I linked you was just released and has clearer information). Says it here in Source 1:
Much remains unknown, notably the extent to which armed militants may have prepared in advance for an attack as opposed to merely profiting from the opportunity of an angry crowd spinning out of control in a country where guns are everywhere.
Source 2 is more or less the same, lots of speculation, and they even group the protestors and attackers into one category.
"The protesters were running around the compound just looking for Americans, they just wanted to find an American so they could catch one," he said.
There is a possibility that actual protestors just joined in the assault, but there is no real confirmation of that (how do you even separate regular protestors from the people who planned the attack?). From what we currently know, everything was all a part of the plan.
|
On September 14 2012 13:30 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:24 Silidons wrote:On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it. You're still missing the point. The video was created with the intent to offend and directly aimed at Muslims. They may not have been forced to watch it, but if they did (which they did), then all's the same and my point still stands. That's the reality. Or what, if I watch a movie on my own volition I can't get mad if it's a total piece of junk? Now that would be silly.
i knew you would avoid the correction to your statement that i amde, your point does not stand, the reality is that the islamic world is against freedom of speech and expression and that should not and will not be tolerated by 1st world countries
|
On September 14 2012 15:06 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:30 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 13:24 Silidons wrote:On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it. You're still missing the point. The video was created with the intent to offend and directly aimed at Muslims. They may not have been forced to watch it, but if they did (which they did), then all's the same and my point still stands. That's the reality. Or what, if I watch a movie on my own volition I can't get mad if it's a total piece of junk? Now that would be silly. i knew you would avoid the correction to your statement that i amde, your point does not stand, the reality is that the islamic world is against freedom of speech and expression and that should not and will not be tolerated by 1st world countries half of the world is against freedom of speech and expression. From hardcore North Korea, to much more limited but still pretty powerful laws in democracies like Germany. I dont know what you want the first world to do? Bomb all of them? Spam them with even more stuff to set them off?
We are all on different cultural schedules. Quite frankly the only thing that the first world could do constructive would be to minimize dependence on countries who hate freedom and then offering the liberal minded citizens of those countries a path to citizenship over here.
|
Has anyone seen the film? He should be shot for making awful art...even Uwe Boll has better films.
And if this guy cries freedom of speech, I will be incredibly upset. If freedom of speech turns from whether or not we should have the right to speak out against the government for issues such as war, taxes, and politics to whether we should have the right to make god awful films that is meant to be hateful, then I am very sad for our most rights.
|
On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face. If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped. There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!)
You're way off base here. This is me walking into Compton, dropping the n word on a bunch of crips, and then them driving out to Montana and killing a bunch of people I've never even heard of in response. It makes no sense of any sort.
And even then, just because the movie is provocative doesn't excuse the people who get violent in response. Take those nutters from Westboro baptist for instance. They're about as offensive as it gets, but if the father of a dead soldier stabbed a few of them to death at one of their funeral demonstrations, he would be sent to prison and rightly so, even considering the circumstances.
|
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On September 14 2012 15:06 Silidons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 13:30 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 13:24 Silidons wrote:On September 14 2012 13:18 Souma wrote:On September 14 2012 12:54 Djzapz wrote:On September 14 2012 12:45 Orek wrote:On September 14 2012 12:03 Djzapz wrote:
"If a person overreacts to the mildest little thing, you don't blame the mildest little thing for the actions of the person." Yep, and the movie was not the mildest little thing. That's all. Yes it was the mildest thing for fuck's sake. I can't get mad at extremists for being extremists, those people are broken and unrecoverable. However, commoners on TL shouldn't get those ridiculous ideas in their heads. Mature people don't get angry when stupid people do stupid things. More importantly, they don't MURDER people who aren't even responsible for those stupid things. There's something wrong with people who demand an excessive amount of respect from a culture which promotes free speech. Mature people control their emotions, they don't demand blood. That video if nothing in comparison to some of the vicious blows that are thrown between for instance atheists and christians, and that just fine... But somehow it's worse when the reaction is more dramatic? By that reasoning, I can get out of any situation by crying or yelling. Oh, let's never make fun of that guy's beliefs because he's particularly sensitive! Let's censor that because we wouldn't want to hurt him. I love the hypocrisy rampant in this thread. 'We have the right to be immature and strut our free speech, but they should just shut up and take it like men!' Are you angry because extremists murdered innocents over a video? If so, you have nothing to worry about, because those people were not murdered because of the video (more on that here: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/libyan-attacks-said-be-2-part-militant-assault). Or are you angry because other people are demonstrating their own right to free speech by protesting? I've said this before and I'll say it again: If you continuously insult my mother in front of me after I repeatedly ask you not to, don't be surprised if I punch you in the face.
If you roll into Compton and drop n-bombs on a group of blacks, you have no one to blame but yourself if you get jumped.There is a line that is crossed when you repeatedly and knowingly offend someone and try to illicit action. Even our justice system realizes this and can acquit someone or lessen their sentence on the grounds of provocation. While in this case, murder is not justified (and a different story entirely as the video did not prompt the attack), Muslims are well within their right to be angry and protest (thank god for freedom of speech!) you're out of touch with reality. the man did not jump in front of muslims and say "WATCH THIS NOW". he made a film in an entire different country, which only people who CHOOSE to watch can watch it. You're still missing the point. The video was created with the intent to offend and directly aimed at Muslims. They may not have been forced to watch it, but if they did (which they did), then all's the same and my point still stands. That's the reality. Or what, if I watch a movie on my own volition I can't get mad if it's a total piece of junk? Now that would be silly. i knew you would avoid the correction to your statement that i amde, your point does not stand, the reality is that the islamic world is against freedom of speech and expression and that should not and will not be tolerated by 1st world countries
What are you even going on about? The Islamic world is not telling Western countries to get rid of their freedom of speech, they are condemning an atrocious movie. What part of this do you not understand? Talk about exaggerating. Are you sure you know what reality is?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
