Germany embassy in Sudan stormed

[Timedraven 117]

Yes he can be. Manslaughter is a valid charge, then you can add in so many other things on him as well.

So now we're responsible for the actions of others?

You really want to create a world where you're responsible for how other people react to you're opinion?

By that reasoning someone could read one of your thread posts, kill a bunch of people because of it, and it's your fault not theirs, with you being punished.

Edit to my posts before: Never mind, realizing now that the video was released in june this was obviously a concentrated effort, making my opinion a stupid post.

And no, your misunderstanding me, we can't punish the people directly responsible because we don't KNOW who did it. your example holds no merit to my line of thinking which your trying to disprove, but i never fully explained my line of thinking so its understandable your response was not as well thought. Good point though, just wrong mindset.

 

[Lyri]

So now we're responsible for the actions of others?

You really want to create a world where you're responsible for how other people react to you're opinion?

By that reasoning someone could read one of your thread posts, kill a bunch of people because of it, and it's your fault not theirs, with you being punished.

I'd like to live in a world where people are informed on what they're talking about.
Sadly this is not the case.

Yes, intent to hate speech & intent to incite violence is something you can be arrested for.

There is no world to create, you're already in it.

 

[wulf3n]

There is no world to create, you're already in it.

And that is why I hate the world and everyone in it.

edit: I should probably clarify that statement.

I don't hate the world because people aren't allowed to spew hate, I hate the world because supposedly rational people would rather defend murderers over an idiot who made a stupid movie.

 

[BNguyen]

You're essentially saying don't express an opinion because it might piss people off, and if they get pissed off enough you'll be sent to your death, which is basically removing freedom of speech.

Nope it's saying express your opinion in a way that doesn't piss people off. If a person cannot constructively express their opinion and it pisses someone off there are consequences. Holding someone responsible for their actions is not the removal of freedom of speech.

Then punish him for that.

Sending him to his critics would be a fitting punishment.

That's not justice, and would send the wrong example.

You're wrong it is justice. It would set an excellent example it would let people know that there are consequences for their actions.

All you've been saying to that other guy about this director is that death is a fitting punishment for something stupid and that nobody should voice there opinions because it could offend anybody. You can talk constructively all you want about anything but if the other person or group is going to turn violent because of that, then I'm sorry but I should be able to get mad at them for reacting that way.
I'm sorry but I can't support your views of throwing people to the dogs after that person essentially got bit by the dogs. Sure the man may have taunted the dogs by sticking his fingers past the fence and they got bit but you don't kill someone for not causing physical or psychological harm, these people just couldn't turn and walk away, they had to come back with guns and kill innocent people.

Sure the man responsible for the film needs to be punished for fraud but it was the extremists and possible terrorists amongst them that need to be severely punished for doing what they did. Seriously, these extremists need to grow a thicker skin or be more civil.

 

[Sansha]

What bothers me is the US government's noncommittal response. By not defending our citizens actions (no matter if we personally agree or not), we are abandoning the freedoms laid forth in our constitution. If citizens of another nation can silence American citizens by protest, violence, and murder, then all that America stands for is truly dead.

Free Speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

Exactly. Yes, you can make an anti-Islamic movie, calling out an entire religion for being primitive and detrimental to society - but that doesn't mean you SHOULD.

You don't insult other people's religions. You just don't. There's absolutely no excuse for the movie, it's despicable and I'm fuckin' tired of 'artists' and film-makers saying they can get away with it because they're protected by free speech. Which they are, but that doesn't make it a good idea, especially when you're only doing it either out of spite and ignorance, or just for attention and fame.

Hate begets hate.

 

[ironkex]

Guys,if anyone can remember the reason for WW1 this movie is just a spark to start the fire not more...People are not so bright so the religious goverment is using them to do some damage and turn your eyes on them untill one very ....uhmm not nice country finishes its nukes

 

[BNguyen]

Yes he can be. Manslaughter is a valid charge, then you can add in so many other things on him as well.

So now we're responsible for the actions of others?

You really want to create a world where you're responsible for how other people react to you're opinion?

By that reasoning someone could read one of your thread posts, kill a bunch of people because of it, and it's your fault not theirs, with you being punished.

Edit to my posts before: Never mind, realizing now that the video was released in june this was obviously a concentrated effort, making my opinion a stupid post.

And no, your misunderstanding me, we can't punish the people directly responsible because we don't KNOW who did it. your example holds no merit to my line of thinking which your trying to disprove, but i never fully explained my line of thinking so its understandable your response was not as well thought. Good point though, just wrong mindset.

so basically, if someone does something that indirectly leads to others conducting violence in the name of the first person's action, then go into hiding and the cops can't find them after a while, we have to go back to the first person and give them the punishment we were going to give to those who incited violence. makes perfect sense to me

 

[Mr.BadExample]

Without YouTube the movie would have remained obscure enough not to cause any problems. Line up the executives in front of a firing squad.

 

[Giftfromme]

Without YouTube the movie would have remained obscure enough not to cause any problems. Line up the executives in front of a firing squad.

Really, Youtube is the Devil in this scenario when you think about it. And I have. If those Devils didn't make Youtube, or maintain it, there would be no violence. I am never watching a youtube video again in protest of this evil

 

[jebara]

Well fuck, looks like the United States isn't alone in this one. I have absolutely no idea why, but apparently the German embassy in Sudan was stormed because of that anti-Islamic movie that pissed so many people off.
http://news.yahoo.com/sudan-protesters-storm-german-embassy-raise-islamic-flag-124438100.html

We really do live in a hate filled world, don't we? Incidentally, I wonder how that guy who made this movie feels knowing that he's a key part of this mess. Oh, and by the way I learned an interesting piece of trivia. Remember that guy who wanted to organize a massive burning of Quarns? It's the exact same guy...lovely.

Pardon me for just reading the first page or so and jumping in the conversation but it sounds to me that your mainly blaming the movie maker for this saying that he is responsible for all this.
But I have to say it was the protester's actions that made it the mess that it is, saying it was the movie makers fault for provoking them is like saying that these people are complete savage animals that are unable to think or be responsible for their actions and react mindlessly.

But these are humans,which in my mind makes them completely responsible for what happened,I don't blame the movie maker at all.

 

[NotALiberal]

SNIP

This means "kill apostates". Not "attack countries that insult Islam". With this verse, neither you nor I are in any danger from a dedicated Muslim.

See, that's where you're wrong. We are "apostates". Had an alcoholic beverage recently? Had premarital sex? Those are "apostasy" as defined by Islam.

 

[Smeatza]

Somebody insulted my religion?
Well I guess I better forget all it's teachings then, and re-enforce every criticism of my religion that exists.

Y'know if it rained every once in a while in these countries they might not be so angry all the time.

 

[Sniper_Zegai]

Somebody insulted my religion?
Well I guess I better forget all it's teachings then, and re-enforce every criticism of my religion that exists.

Y'know if it rained every once in a while in these countries they might not be so angry all the time.

I hate to be that douche but Islam is not a peaceful religion, these people are following the general order of the Prophet (or should I say the original people who wrote the Quran and Hadith) that anyone who actively speaks out against the religion should be punished, the punishment itself varies but there is no "turn the other cheek" style passage in Islam.

 

[Mau95]

What bothers me is the US government's noncommittal response. By not defending our citizens actions (no matter if we personally agree or not), we are abandoning the freedoms laid forth in our constitution. If citizens of another nation can silence American citizens by protest, violence, and murder, then all that America stands for is truly dead.

Free Speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

This is not a consequence. This is a violent mob response to an "offensive" video (from a group who get murderous if you even DRAW He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Insulted). This is an American making a (poorly-produced) protected statement, and being thrown to the wolves in order to appease those same wolves.
In essence, the US is saying "These people's request that you not insult Islam matters more to us than your freedom of speech or expression."

Dude. They depict one of their most important historic and religious figures as an adulterer, pedophile, wifebeater and murderer. They have a right to be angry, even if their actions are over the top.

"in the air"

 

[Sniper_Zegai]

Dude. They depict one of their most important historic and religious figures as an adulterer, pedophile, wifebeater and murderer. They have a right to be angry, even if their actions are over the top.

"in the air"

Well to be fair . . . he is. Even by the accounts of the Hadith which is basically a biography of his life written by his most dedicated followers. He was a paedophile, wife-beater and murderer not to mention a warmonger, opportunist and very likely a schizophrenic. They have every right to be offended if they choose but that does not give them license to murder people, I'm offended by what they have done but I don't think I will take a torch to a mosque in protest. If anything they prove the points made against them, Islam teaches people to ignore criticism in favour of being reactionary and violent as we can clearly see by these riots.

 

[Friendly Lich]

What bothers me is the US government's noncommittal response. By not defending our citizens actions (no matter if we personally agree or not), we are abandoning the freedoms laid forth in our constitution. If citizens of another nation can silence American citizens by protest, violence, and murder, then all that America stands for is truly dead.

The constitution doesn't apply in other countries, you're a bit national-centric.

 

[BoTTeNBReKeR]

What bothers me is the US government's noncommittal response. By not defending our citizens actions (no matter if we personally agree or not), we are abandoning the freedoms laid forth in our constitution. If citizens of another nation can silence American citizens by protest, violence, and murder, then all that America stands for is truly dead.

Free Speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

This is not a consequence. This is a violent mob response to an "offensive" video (from a group who get murderous if you even DRAW He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Insulted). This is an American making a (poorly-produced) protected statement, and being thrown to the wolves in order to appease those same wolves.
In essence, the US is saying "These people's request that you not insult Islam matters more to us than your freedom of speech or expression."

Dude. They depict one of their most important historic and religious figures as an adulterer, pedophile, wifebeater and murderer. They have a right to be angry, even if their actions are over the top.

"in the air"

While I do find the video in question to be particularly vile and unappropriate, most of those things you just mentioned probably did happen. Look up how Mohammed spreaded his religion, it wasn't through peaceful means. It's also pretty likely he married a 6 year old girl and I believe there's a verse in the Koran where Mohammed decapitates Jews.

 

[Altaria87]

Snip

Yep, I hate shit like this too. It will never end until one of two things happen, one shitty and one likely impossible:

1)No films are allowed based on Muslims. Meaning the terrorists win, and free speech has taken a hit to the balls.
2)All radical Muslims either die down or simply stop being radical, the Muslims who protest learn to not get offended and stop causing shit because of it. Which will most likely never happen. Islam sadly has the largest amount of extremists in ANY religion, which just saddens me because normal Muslims are fine people.

Maybe a couple hundred years down the line they'll die out, you don't really hear about modern Christians starting crusades and inquisitions. At least I freaking hope so.

No, instead we get Christian extremists killing abortion doctors and lobbying to rpevent homosexuals to have equal rights. All religions have their grotesque fundamentalists and deviants, don't presume that yours is any different.

 

[DazBurger]

Probably jealousy.
You know... Germany is the only country to really live out the arab fantasy about jews.
/troll

(-Totally out of context snip.) Plus, burning flags is incredibly disrespectful.

Well, burning the danish flag is actually the correct way to dispose of it.
Imagine the laughs we had under the "Muhammed-drawing crisis."

 

[DazBurger]

double