An American has been killed in the consulate in Lybia over this issue, per CNN.
This is a depiction of Muhammed, the prophet of the Muslim faith:
@:^)—|----<
Anyone who feels compelled to riot, loot, pillage, and MURDER as a result of my actions is fuckin’ crazy.
Seriously?
I, for one, would have a hard time caring.
Unless the Cohen Brothers are doing it. Then I"m all in!
qfmft
Yeah, I definitely get a vibe of “Muslims are the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human beings we’ve ever known in our lives, and we want to make sure every member of the bloodthirsty mob surrounding us keeps that in mind…”
You know, I thought about that. When it started talking about ‘hurting religious feelings’ and all that, I honestly wanted to believe that was code for, “Hey, Americans. We don’t really mean a word of this bullshit, but we are kinda in a pickle here, ifyaknowwhatImean!”
The statement from the embassy seems cowardly until you consider that Egyptian muslims have been known to gang rape in the name of Allah as they did with western reporters during the revolution. Even if you don’t mind dying for your beliefs I can see not wanting your colleagues gang raped.
I like to believe this country was not just founded on freedom of religion but as much freedom from it and thus the embassy statement is wrong though I understand why they would say it. It makes me want to tell all the nuts, whether they worship Allah, God, or multiarmed blue octopi that they and thier gods can all suck a turd. Freedom of speech and thought should come before prostrating your mind to what someone tells you to believe.
So naturally I come here where none of them are to say it. As much as I hate myself for it, I DO consider peoples feelings in person. I too puss out. It’s a problem I’ve yet to solve for myself.
The problem with Terry Jones is that he keeps doing things to prove muslims are on the verge of frothing violent lunacy and they keep disproving him by being frothing violent lunatics.
There’s nothing wrong with not being a dick, and refrain from insulting religious people just for the fun of it. Or even if you’re trying to make what you think is a valid point.
The problem here is that the US government is voicing disapproval of “abuse” of free speech. The government’s job is to protect free speech. It takes no courage to protect popular speech. The government can disagree with the speech without chastising someone for exercising the very free speech it is supposed to be protecting.
There were two just this year making fun of Abraham Lincoln, as a Vampire Hunter and against Zombies.
The only riot was from critics at Rotten Tomatoes. So we feel ok, thank you very much…
Moreover, there is arguably something wrong with being a religious bigot. The filmmaker in question, who is on record as saying “Islam is a cancer. Period” and who deliberately made a viciously anti-Muslim movie in order to promote hatred and contempt for Islam, is certainly entitled by the right of free speech to do so. And nobody has the right to use violence or threats of violence against him or anybody else as a response to that.
However, he is undeniably a religious bigot. And there’s nothing wrong or craven or anti-civil-liberties about pointing that out.
Personally, I have no problem with the US government calling out religious bigotry, as long as they make it very clear that the religious bigotry in question also qualifies as protected speech (which I think the embassy’s reference to “universal right of free speech” did do).
By the way, the more recent official White House response that is being reported as “disavowing” the embassy statement seems to me to say pretty much the same thing:
Emphasis added.
CBS and NBC now reporting US Ambassador to Libya among dead in attack on US Consulate there. More people angry about this film that virtually no Americans would have seen if their protests hadn’t brought this to the forefront.
Fucking intolerant assholes can’t stand any views about their prophet other than their own.
You should live in India, where there’s a whole lot more appeasement of Islam(and any other religious fanatic for that matter) that goes on. They didn’t allow Salman fucking Rushdie, who we should be proud of, into the country because Muslim crazies protested. They allowed M.F Hussain, our best artist, who again we should be proud of, to be chased off because Hindu crazies protested against some of his paintings. Man, I hate religion and spineless governments.
Libya where have I just heard about them, oh that’s right we just had fighter planes helping some rebels win control of that country didn’t we? Nice to see they cared…
The world is going to be looking very carefully at how Obama deals with this. An attack on an embassy and the death of a diplomat are very serious matters indeed. This could break Obama’s presidency.
No it can’t. The election will be won or lost on the economy. Thats it.
If President Obama does not respond to this with immense anger and force he is essentially throwing himself on the dustbin of history with Jimmy Carter. I think President Obama has mostly been an average to middling President, I’ll blast him rhetorically in pit threads when Democrats here are being especially stupid about Republicans, but President Obama has been “Ok.” Not okay enough to get my vote but not the failure most people in my party make him out to be.
But the killing of a United States Ambassador simply cannot stand and cannot be allowed.
President Obama needs to denounce violent Islam. And all Muslims who tolerate violent Islam. I don’t care if abortion bombers are only 0.0001% of the far right, any member of the far right who defends or supports their actions is an abomination and a monster. Any Muslim who does not massively condemn the violence, intolerance, stupidity, and pure evil of some of their brethren is an abomination deserving only of the worst that befalls their evil brethren.
Islam is not a religion of peace and saying so is just as ludicrous as saying Christianity, the religion that lead to the Crusades and 1,000 years of violent religious warfare is a religion of peace. Islam is incompatible with peace, and only by secularization can any society, Christian or Muslim, avoid religious violence.
Anyone who defends any Muslim apologists over this is an imbecile and a fool. The people who have talked about the Islamists who took over in Libya and Egypt as nothing more than Islam’s versions of “Christian Democrats”, namely people like BrainGlutton are lying, idiotic fools who have said stupid, irrational things to support preconceived political biases.
Islam is our enemy, especially the irrationality that Islam creates. Christianity is a domestic enemy that leads to the spread of STDs, unwanted pregnancies, and various anti-scientific policies that damage the entire world. However through years of progress society has bound and restrained the worst impulses of Christianity so that it is mostly not a violent threat to society. Islam is not there yet, and until it is we must view the religion and all its practitioners as our enemies.
During the Enlightenment the brave men who started the thrust against religious insanity that had dominated the West for a thousand years didn’t hug and coddle religious nuts, they ostracized them, destroyed their ability to control policy, and violently struck them down anytime they got out of line. Islam requires exactly the same response. We must mandate secular societies onto Muslims, wherever they resist we kill them.
We do not have anywhere near the will necessary for this righteous action. So our only hope is the innate harm that extreme religion wrecks upon its own society causes Islamist countries to collapse into poverty and despair, which we should do everything to exacerbate and aggravate.
Given the effect persecution has on religiosity, the end result of that would be millions dead and it wouldn’t even work.
Exactly. It’s called “diplomacy.”
If you’re going to set up an embassy in someone’s country, the whole point is to show that you can appreciate their interests and concerns. It’s your job. This isn’t rocket science.
Wait a minute, isn’t the point to denounce violence? It seems to me that singling out a particular manifestation of violence would weaken the message, which is the opposite of what you want.
Surely the important thing here is to make it crystal clear that responding to offensive speech with violence or threats of violence is wrong and unacceptable on the part of anybody. We don’t care who you are or why you’re going apeshit about somebody else’s remarks, but whoever you are and whoever they are, violence is not to be tolerated.
DaFUQ?! Is that what you want the President to say? How on earth are we supposed to reconcile a statement like that with our fundamental national commitment to religious freedom?
Oh. You’re whooshing us here, right? Well played, you caught me!