What US movie would trigger this event?

[Master Dan]

Any official reaction to this over there yet, gentlemen? I know what would happen if this were the C19th and it had been a British ambassador in the days of Empire but it's another world these days. Even so, I cannot imagine that a stiff diplomatic note will be sufficient to deal with such an outrageous act for such little reason.

EDIT: Dan, from what I read on the BBC, the embassy security forces did what they could but were overwhelmed, possibly because they didn't want to be responsible for a massacre.

Second edit: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19577913

We are sending in between 50 to 200 Marines right now and Drones are on the way they say for surveylance only but we know what our Drones do Bombs Away!!!

 

[Tgace]

Latest news is that the Lybia attack was a planned operation, using the protest over the movie as cover. This according to CNN.

Look, hate mongering is hate mongering and violence from either side due to the hate mongering is ignorant. You don't get a pass to be free from the responsibilities of your actions because you are free to do them. This movie was made in two hours for 2 million dollars. It does the very best it can to insult anyone who believes in Islam. Why do you think they did that? Why did they spend 2 million dollars to basically just insult Muslims?

The makers of that "movie" are equally responsible as those idiots that used the movie to incite the violence. This is exactly what those makers wanted to happen. It was planned, orchestrated, and paid for all with that one goal. That some Muslims were just as stupid to fall for it and do the violence does not excuse the movie makers. Anyone thinking it does, well we'll refer back to your moderator statement

So what do you suggest? That we should censor free speech because it may offend??

 

[WC_lun]

I don't know if there really is anything that can be done without infringing on our constitutional guarantees. Even douchebags get those rights. At the same time, knowingly promoting hate in order to instigate a violent reaction should have some sort of penalty to it. People's lives are being lost because of this nonsense. Yelling fire in a crowded theatre is not free speach, even if the theatre is full of over reactionary idiots...maybe especially if you know the theatre is full of over reactionary idiots. I honestly don't know what the answer is other than not letting someone who knowingly instigates violence off because the impending violence will be done by religious fanatics.

 

[Tgace]

Will artists who offend Christians get the same treatment?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ

Or only if Christians start resorting to violence?

 

[Tgace]

knowingly promoting hate in order to instigate a violent reaction

So people should be held responsible for OTHER PEOPLES ACTIONS?

 

[granfire]

So people should be held responsible for OTHER PEOPLES ACTIONS?

if they instigate it, yes.

 

[WC_lun]

If an artist did something that knowingly triggered violence from Christian extremist, then yes, that artist is just as responsible as those actually comitting the violence. I think the thing that sticks in my craw is knowingly and purposefully putting others at risk needlessly. There is a point where others' personal safety should come before your own right to spout hatred. The movie makers have a complete right to believe any nonsense they want to, but do they have a right to put others at risk to try and prove a political point? If it was just their hides in risk for it, I might feel differently. It isn't just thier lives being effected though.

Let's go with a tota hypothetical situation. You have a friend who gets violent when drunk. If you rile him up against a fellow bar patron and that patron is injured, are you free from responsibility? I mean you were just talking, practicing free speach. However, at the same time, taking the history of your friend, you know what the likely outcome would be. Certainly your friend must take responsibility for his actions, but how guilty would you be in the injury of the other bar patron?

 

[Master Dan]

I don't know if there really is anything that can be done without infringing on our constitutional guarantees. Even douchebags get those rights. At the same time, knowingly promoting hate in order to instigate a violent reaction should have some sort of penalty to it. People's lives are being lost because of this nonsense. Yelling fire in a crowded theatre is not free speach, even if the theatre is full of over reactionary idiots...maybe especially if you know the theatre is full of over reactionary idiots. I honestly don't know what the answer is other than not letting someone who knowingly instigates violence off because the impending violence will be done by religious fanatics.

Yelling fire in a crowded theater amounting to people stampeeding and getting hurt or killed is actionable because of emediate intent to harm or cause civil unrest resulting injury. To write an opinion or piece of artwork that is used as an excuse by others to break civil or other laws is speach. Is it Moral? Well Bill Maher HBO it could be said could have violence done to him for the way he attacks organized religion why not? becuase the culture here and laws protect him. I do not think he could go today to any of the religous sites he was at in the Middle East when he mad Religulous? But I look forward to what he will say this Friday becuase when it comes to man's misstreatment of man he is usually right.

We should be thankfull we live were we live. I had freinds in the 80's retiring to Mexico to small villages to live and collect SSI and retirment don't know if that would be such a good idea today?

 

[Josh Oakley]

So.. has anyone actually SEEN this movie?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[granfire]

So.. has anyone actually SEEN this movie?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

Probably not.
A brother of a cousin of a friend who's wife is the nice to a guy I know from an internet forum said it was demeaning Islam....

It kid of reminds me of the incident with the school teacher who made her class read 'Nappy Hair' a critically acclaimed children's book. Then the community got wind of it and people who were not even affected (as in no kids in the school) took umbrage.

Not to mention that this looks like a made for TV special: You need a diversion to attack something, so you instigate a little protest.
And for heaven's sake...I don't think it is hard to do a little anti American protesting in the middle east.
The fact that it started in Egypt and cause trouble in Libya ought to be suspicious.

 

[Carol]

Interesting timing. This week is Jackal Stone, the joint coalition exercises (yup, live fire) sponsored by SOCEUR.

Lots of decision makers in one place. I wonder what they are talking about?

 

[Josh Oakley]

My guess is not. That usually is how these things go.

Ow in a more directed comment to WC_Lun: have YOU seen the movie? What is the name? In what way is this different than the Dutch cartoons depicting Mohammed a couple of years ago?

And since when should we come down on the guys excercising their free speech because people died as a result of their actions. That would have been the end of the civil rights movement for sure.

But even then, do you actually know what it is you are angry about? Because if you haven't seen the movie, frankly, you don't.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tgace]

if they instigate it, yes.

So exercise of 1st amendment speech needs to be restricted because someone else MAY do something violent? Something entirely legal should be restricted based on the possibility of what a third party may or may not do??

Wow...this country is in deeper trouble than I thought....

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[granfire]

So exercise of 1st amendment speech needs to be restricted because someone else MAY do something violent? Something entirely legal should be restricted based on the possibility of a third party may or may not do??

Wow...this country is in deeper trouble than I thought....

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

You are trying to give people a free for all card.
When you say things you know will inflame a certain populous you are no better than the people committing the act.
It's no different when you aggravate the enemy or entice vulnerable people to do your dirty bidding.

And it's no different from the people who I strongly suspect staged the protests to launch an attack.

 

[Tgace]

You are trying to give people a free for all card.
When you say things you know will inflame a certain populous you are no better than the people committing the act.
It's no different when you aggravate the enemy or entice vulnerable people to do your dirty bidding.

And it's no different from the people who I strongly suspect staged the protests to launch an attack.

So...no political cartoons if it offends Islam? No SNL skits if they may cause a riot in Cairo? How can you prove this was intentionally crafted to start a riot?

We don't limit our freedoms in this nation out of fear. Hell the KKK can still protest on the capitol steps. If African American citizens started rioting over it we should stop allowing it?

Its far far different....

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Big Don]

You are trying to give people a free for all card.
When you say things you know will inflame a certain populous you are no better than the people committing the act.
It's no different when you aggravate the enemy or entice vulnerable people to do your dirty bidding.

And it's no different from the people who I strongly suspect staged the protests to launch an attack.

This then, would be completely wrong?

Piss Christ is a 1987 photograph by the American artist and photographer Andres Serrano. It depicts a small plastic crucifix submerged in a glass of the artist's urine.

Because that is pretty fing offensive if you ask me.

 

[granfire]

So...no political cartoons if it offends Islam? No SNL skits if they may cause a riot in Cairo? How can you prove this was intentionally crafted to start a riot?

We don't limit our freedoms in this nation out of fear. Hell the KKK can still protest on the capitol steps. If African American citizens started rioting over it we should stop allowing it?

Its far far different....

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

This then, would be completely wrong?

Because that is pretty fing offensive if you ask me.

You are missing the point completely.

Offending is one thing.

Instigating violent acts is another.

The cartoon? Over the top, kind of like the Satanic Verses...if the radicals had not made a fuss over it, nobody would have ever paid attention to it.

But making inflamatory material and promoting it where you know the manure will hit the fan...that crosses the line.

My background is different. In Germany the lesson was costly that not all speech has to be protected. Some the people need to be protected from.
Instigating riots is a punishable offense there.
Of course....to my knowledge nobody there has ever tried anything like the good pastor there...

 

[Tgace]

So much for the old saw of "I may not agree with what you say, but ill defend to the death your right to say it." Eh?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tgace]

Try to prove that this was some sort of instigating act...with that standard we may as well eliminate all religious or political speech. All you need is someone to commit violence and point the finger at something that offends them.

The difference between "Piss Christ" and this film? Christians don't typically assault embassies or send out hit squads to kill people who put Crucifixes in jars of urine.

It all reminds me of the "let the Wookie win" line from star wars.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[Tgace]

These same nations have no issue with broadcasting this kind of stuff..

http://www.adl.org/special_reports/protocols/protocols_recycled.asp



Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2