Advertisement

LJWorld.com weblogs Left lane's the fast lane

Freedom of speech? Or abuse of our freedoms in order to incite?

Advertisement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmodVun16Q4

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/11/world/meast/egpyt-us-embassy-protests/index.html

Let me first say, I couldn't stomach watching the entire clip of the "movie." I made it half way. I'm fairly confident anyone else that can sit through that much would probably come to some of the same conclusions I have, though probably not all.

I'll also say that the maniacal and homicidal rage this POS has incited is unbelievably sad and irretrievably stupid. There are no excuses. However, the 'stupidity' needs to be considered. To wit, we're talking about Libya and Egypt. I've only done cursory research on each education system, but if one wants to argue literacy rates and what that really means, our nation probably doesn't fare much better. But I do believe it's fair to say neither country's population has had a liberal exposure to media of any form, and certainly not outside media w/ out a solid censoring from Big Brother. I think this is proven true just by watching the clip; I mean, let's say any Muslim or person of Middle Eastern descent were to make a similar movie with Jesus in the role of Mohammad, it would be little more than a joke to any of us. Forget motivations and any political/religious connotations, this thing isn’t watchable outside a high school AV project. It's horribly laughable. With the possible exception of only the most certifiable religious zealots (and the Klanesque bigots looking for any opportunity), the person responsible would merely be a subject of ridicule here, nothing more.

The adherence to the word and teaching of fanatics certainly lends to the 'stupidity' here. This is true anywhere, granted. Initial reports state that a number of the rioters hadn't even seen the 'film' but had heard about it through leaders or the crowd. And it is the ultra-conservatives one has to worry about violence with anywhere, as well. Gee, I wonder who’s stirring the pot.

Like I said, no excuses though. At least one American has been killed, more injured. Two embassies attacked. All because of a ridiculous excuse for a ‘movie.’ (I do apologize for returning to the quotes around “movie” and “stupidity”; I vow I’m not following the moronic format of FHNC; I’m merely using “stupidity” in the context I lay out, not that the populace is inherently dumb, and I refuse to refer to this POS as an actual film, movie, or short, therefore the sarcastic quote font)

Now, Sam Bacile is the writer and director of this garbage. He supposedly financed this masterpiece w/ $5 million from one hundred Jewish donors. All this news is still breaking while I write this, but this is Bacile’s reaction:

“Bacile, an American citizen who said he produced, directed and wrote the two-hour film, said he had not anticipated such a furious reaction. “I feel sorry for the embassy. I am mad,” Bacile said.”

He feels sorry for a building and he’s mad?! He’s a liar. Anyone that can generate 5 mil for such a project has certainly heard the story of the Danish cartoonist and that backlash. And he never anticipated this kind of “furious reaction”?!!! Who’s buying that?

Which begs the question: what’s the true motivation here? I fully believe in our freedom of speech and expression, but can anyone truly watch this garbage and believe it was meant for any other reason than to incite? This isn’t art or expression. It’s a cattle prod to the privates of inciteable Muslims. And I fully believe the reaction it’s generated was indeed intended. The timing sure is coincidental, of all days, and many in the crowd in Egypt supposedly chanting “we are Osama”. I’m not one for civil litigation for the most part, but in this case, if all this proves true, I certainly hope the family of the envoy that was murdered and anyone else so affected sue this guy and any cohorts back to the Stone Age. I want him living “in a van down by the river.”

Not to make light of the situation, but the writer in me wonders if this isn’t the most elaborate suicide plot this side of “Seven Pounds.” (Sorry for the spoiler alert, but if you haven’t seen it by now….) I mean, who in his right mind puts this together and immediately cops to it? Ya gotta wanna get capped, don’tcha? At least Rushdie actually published exceptional prose, true art. Putting something out like this, you have to know you’re life will probably not be safe ever again. So you put out the worst, most inflammatory crappola you can think of? At the very least, his donors must be wondering, “Where’d all the money go to?” He almost had to be thinking one faction or the other would come after him.

Comments

WristTwister 1 year, 7 months ago

This has little to do with the internet movie and everything to do with Extremist opportunists in their jihad against the west and America in particular. Most of these uprisings were planned by the Extremists to occur on 9/11 and the movie was used by them to incite the mostly uneducated Islamic followers to join their assault on America and Americans. The Extremists are attempting to gain power in the Middle East and recognize that their opportunity is now. They view the United States as being in retreat from this region of the world and are racing to fill the void of US leadership. The foreign policy of the current administration has contributed to the perception of the Extremists. Beginning with the President's Middle Eastern apology tour and his encouragement of the overthrow of established governments called the Arab Spring. This President has dissed Israel and implied that he is further considering further nuclear disarmament when he was caught on an open mic telling Medvedev that he needs more space on missile defense and that he would be more "flexible" after his re-election. Is it any wonder that Netanyahu is nervous about Obama's position when Obama was again caught on mic bemoaning Israel and Netanyahu with the French President? It is the Obama foreign policy and not a grade B internet movie that has the world in turmoil. The wolves are sensing weakness in this administration and racing to take advantage.

0

1957 1 year, 7 months ago

Wow-

This is a frightening thread with so many people willing to surrender their freedoms and take away the rights of others.

The Bill of Rights was written and passed into constitutional law to protect us from the likes of the speech police.

Also why is it so hard to understand when you protect other's free speech you are protecting your own?

On a side note the violence is not connected to any stupid movie anyway. If you believe it is then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you. News flash, people lie.

So sad on so many levels.

0

Amy Heeter 1 year, 7 months ago

Obsession. Yes when you stop obsessing the object of contention fails to trigger reaction. Haha, you'll never get over me getting over you.

0

Greg Cooper 1 year, 7 months ago

Well, all I can say is that I'd be eminently po'd, to, if someone made a movie about my country and the acting was this bad. No wonder there's been so much violence.

0

remember_username 1 year, 7 months ago

So why is shouting "fire" in a theater not protected under the first amendment? As I recall free speech that is likely to, or intended to, cause "imminent lawless action" is considered not covered by the first amendment. The people who made this video, or burned another cultures holy books, knew exactly what their actions would trigger.

We in America (Liberals and Conservatives both) hold the right of free speech to be critical to our civilization. To us the loss of that right is more repugnant than what others often say upon exercising that right. But we are not the only group of people on this planet and there are civilizations that consider blasphemy to be the greater insult than the loss of certain freedoms - even the loss of life. Surely, most Americans are aware of that fact, even if we don't understand it.

0

oldbaldguy 1 year, 7 months ago

i was referring to the dink who calls himself a pastor in florida and the egyptian who put this video out. we will get the guys who attacked the consulate. not a liberal and i took an oath to defend the constitution a long time ago.

0

booyalab 1 year, 7 months ago

I already knew liberals were iffy on the first amendment. This isn't a surprise.

1

Gotland 1 year, 7 months ago

So should I send the message to Christians that it is open season on aspects of American culture that offend?

1

oldbaldguy 1 year, 7 months ago

actions have consequences. all of you are talking in the abstract. the folks that give the radicals an excuse to attack us cost lives, our people and the attackers if we kill them. it does look like the attack in libya was planned. the others may have been incited by the video. the constitution is not under attack, our people are under attack. stand on a battlefield or in a street after a firefight, smell the burning bodies, the blood, the burning vehicles and equipment and then tell me these clowns do not deserve retribution.

0

Liberty275 1 year, 7 months ago

It's looking more and more like a planned attack, not a riot incited by a cheesy video. Even so, some of you had your pitchforks out and found it perfectly acceptable to deprive an American citizen of his rights.

How does it feel to abandon the constitution?

2

oldbaldguy 1 year, 7 months ago

all I can say is this. talked to my son this morning after he came off shift. back when we had the koran burning fiasco in afganland, some of his squadron mates were involved in that, they had to fire on people and they were attacked. afgans and others were killed. now more people are dead and we have to worry about our embassies being attacked. the clowns who put out the film should be held accountable

0

pizzapete 1 year, 7 months ago

From the video clip that I've watched of this movie I'd have to say it is art. It's not high art, it's really bad art, but it is art. Even if we can't agree if it's art or not, I think this should be protected freedom of speech. It's my understanding that people in Islamic countries can be killed for depicting the prophet Mohamed in any way, that would include drawing a picture, a painting, or making a movie. Mocking Islam or the prophet Mohamed will also result in a death sentence in many Muslim countries. So, if I paint a picture of a man with beard and put a title under it saying it's Jesus or the Buddha, it's art. If I change the title of the same painting to say it's Mohamed, I might be put to death in a Muslim country for painting the image of Mohamed. It's unfortunate that some religious fanatics take things to such extremes, but we shouldn't use that as an excuse to limit our freedom of speech and expression. It's a founding principal of our democracy that we can express our ideas and opinions. In the USA anyone can make a movie that implies that Jesus was gay and a child molester, That same movie shouldn't be illegal just because instead of Jesus the object of ridicule is Mohamed. Where would we be if our government decided that someone wasn't allowed to say they think Jesus lived with the American Indians and he'd like for us to all wear special underwear? Freedom of speech and religion are what make our country great, let's not use this tragedy to change that.

2

Kathy Getto 1 year, 7 months ago

Aha the H. Black influence, conduct is not speech. Hmmmmm.

1

tbaker 1 year, 7 months ago

Burn the US Flag? No problem.

Burn the Holy Bible? No Problem.

Christ on the Cross in a bottle of urine? No problem.

Post a 13 minute YouTube video critical of the Prophet Mohammad no one forces you to watch?

Riot and murder.

The same clowns who think all the aforementioned should be protected speech in the US, are the same ones now stammering apologies to the Muslim world for the US constitution permitting such a slight to Islam. Despicable.

56 days folks. No matter what someone may think of him personally, or of his policies, it’s pretty obvious Mr. Obama is in way over his head and is surrounded by ideologues who are just as incompetent. At the very least they are rank amateurs who don’t know what they are doing. We can do better.

1

tbaker 1 year, 7 months ago

As I’ve said in previous blog posts: There is nothing wrong with Americans expecting the rest of the world to “change the channel” if they see something they don’t like in American media.

We should not apologize for our constitutionally protected rights, most especially the freedom of speech. We should champion our first amendment to the rest of the world – not express regret for having it. We shouldn’t urge terrorists and murders to be patient with us. Remember what Vladimir Putin just did to the female punk rock band who sang a song he didn’t like? In how many countries on this Earth can you expect to be jailed, maybe even tortured for saying something the government doesn’t like?

The American record is rife with examples of reprehensible examples of free speech, there is something there to offend just about any belief system, but none of it justifies violence such as attacking an embassy or killing an American diplomat. Remember the Danish Cartoon about Mohammad? Remember the crucifix in the bottle of urine? Remember the reaction to these things? Who changed the channel? Who rioted and murdered?

The apologists who compare the "Innocence of Muslims" to shouting fire in a crowded theater are as predictable as the sunrise. They demonstrate their ignorance. The shouting fire example contains malice. The legal concept of malicious intent to cause harm (in this case panic). Where is the intent to cause harm in this clumsy, offensive little video by this well-established kook/trouble maker? Where was the intent to cause harm when the soldiers put the Quran in the burn pit in Bagram AFB in Afghanistan? Are these things stupid? Insensitive? Repugnant to some? You bet.

Are they designed to cause harm, or just express an objectionable opinion? Wise up apologists.

"The freedoms of speech, press, petition, and assembly guaranteed by the First Amendment must be accorded to the ideas we hate, or sooner or later they will be denied to the ideas we cherish."

-- Justice Hugo Black

0

George Lippencott 1 year, 7 months ago

Interesting question.

If I know a group might become destructive if I publish something they may not like must I refrain from posting. Does that allow distasteful groups to avoid criticism by threatening violence? Does such a requirement lead to self-censorship? Does it lead to group censorship? How do we sort out which groups need protection and which groups should be open to public censure? Who makes the call that a particular criticism is “over the top”? Who is the censor?

For a couple of hundred years we have elected to error on the side of freedom of expression, however distasteful the form that expression has taken. We have endured all sorts of hateful speech against religion, culture, ethnicity, and so on. We have survived it all. Are we now to reexamine our time tested approach because one particular group reverts to violence if we do something they do not like? Where does that stop? Must we ultimately impose Sharia law to satisfy them?

0

verity 1 year, 7 months ago

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anybody excusing what was done. I think we all agree that these murders are inexcusable.

However, if I don't care that the neighbor's pet runs across my yard, but I know that it infuriates him if my pet runs across his yard and he might shoot my pet or even me, then it would be stupid of me to encourage my pet to run across his yard. Seems pretty simple.

Not exactly on topic, but related---inciting/encouraging/participating in the overthrow of a government in another country often does not lead to the results we anticipated or want.

0

verity 1 year, 7 months ago

Sorry, it won't let me delete the double post, just change it.

0

fiddleback 1 year, 7 months ago

Ultimately, while this video is a cringe-inducingly clumsy piece of junk, its intent seems comparable to how South Park has lampooned Mormonism or Scientology, i.e. mocking the extreme leaps of faith inherent to the religion’s theology. And the video was not initially translated into Arabic, so I'd suspect that the intended audience was most likely American/English-speaking. The fact that Muslim fundamentalists are more violent and incitable than Mormons or Scientologists does not mean that such expressions of ridicule equate to deliberate incitement or sedition. So I’d be surprised to see litigation against the filmmakers.

2

75x55 1 year, 7 months ago

Typical post-modern american navel-gazing....

"Oh, why do they hate us?"

"Oh, you shouldn't say things like that because those people will kill someone..."

Some of you people sound like domestic abuse victims - blaming yourself for others irrational and unjustifiable actions.

The very obvious fact that this was done (started) on 9/11, using a cheap pretense to inflame ignorant, violent and easily manipulated masses to provide cover for assassination operations - come on people, get a clue.

If we even consider surrendering our liberties (such as freedom of speech) to avoid the potential of negative reactions, then we've already lost the moral ability to claim those rights.

Related - does anyone know why there is a reference to Tripoli in the USMC hymn? [Think "tribute"]

We should perhaps consider why we are feeding these societies with billions of our tax dollars as "aid" to attempt to buy their friendship and good will - that is called "TRIBUTE". Honestly, it's time to cut 'em off.

0

SageonPage 1 year, 7 months ago

Talk about abusing Free Speech, Kathleen 'The Hammer' Sebelius has broken Federal Laws and been charged for her hack political work for Obumble. She broke the law pertaining to the Hatch Act which disallows public officials from campaigning for their bosses (mob bosses in this case). She has always been a political hack disguised as a 'public servant' and her enthusiasm for abortion is abhorrent.

0

fu7il3 1 year, 7 months ago

Even if it was, that isn't illegal in our country.

Entire TV shows have made their reputations on trying to inflame Christians, conservatives, liberals, and just about any other group. Why does Islam always get a free pass? If the tea party went and burned down Trey Parker's house after something on South Park, no one would say that it was Parker's fault.

People burned an embassy and killed an ambassador, none of whom had the slightest thing to do with the movie. There is no way that is okay. There is definitely no way we should be making excuses for it.

1

Armstrong 1 year, 7 months ago

" We are Osama" Huh. I believe the appropriate American response should have been lock and load

1

uggadyboogadyboo 1 year, 7 months ago

I'm I missing something?

Laws about freedom of speech in the USA. Got it..... LJW censorship on this forum. Got it

Islamic law on Mohammed knows what. ..... Duck and cover and I got it. ...... I understand those people can't stand the jewish state that we support.........So

Bottom line stay far far away................ Let Halliburton handle it.

0

Liberty275 1 year, 7 months ago

Freedom of speech unless it called for a very specific action and the audience was capable of taking such action.

Hands off!

0

Leslie Swearingen 1 year, 7 months ago

This from the Washington Post:

"Though reports were still sketchy, it appeared that a militant jihadist group, Ansar al-Sharia, took advantage of the Benghazi protest to stage an armed assault that overwhelmed the Libyan security force at the consulate.

At a news conference, Mr. Romney claimed that the administration had delivered “an apology for America’s values.” In fact, it had done no such thing:"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-death-of-an-ambassador/2012/09/12/ed3b719e-fcfa-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html?hpid=z3

So, now I ask. what are we supposed to believe and when are we supposed to believe it?

0

Timothy Eugene 1 year, 7 months ago

New reports say the State Department now leaning toward the idea the attacks had nothing to do with the film, but were a 9/11 anniversary attack. The "film" is a clever "excuse" to attack. The fact this film has been out and known about for several months, but they wait until 9/11 to attack makes it obvious......

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 7 months ago

Being horrified and furious is one thing. Going out and killing people is a different kettle of fish.

3

Leslie Swearingen 1 year, 7 months ago

If you read the news you might think that the only two religions on earth are Islam and Protestant Christian. Why? Because they are the only two who are at each others throats? I think that all Muslims should be horrified and furious at this movie. Also, manipulated as they movie was made to incite them. But, some things are worth fighting for, it is up to the individual to decide just what that is.

1

Flap Doodle 1 year, 7 months ago

Do you want Islamic Rage Boy to decide what is acceptable speech in America?

0

somedude20 1 year, 7 months ago

"Mohammed sure used to love bacon. He'd wake up in the mornings and tell his nine-year old wife to "get in that kitchen and fix me a bacon sammich!" Does that incite you? Are you stuck in the 14th Century?"

Have you ever been to Egypt ( no, watching a History Channel show about the pyramids does not count)? I have while in the Corps back in the 90's and yes, some of their beliefs are more like 14th Century than the rest of the world (although some of your buddies on the LJW could give them a run for their money). Add in that many are not well off and they have Fox-like news programs that feed them the same kind of BS that Faux does here. Grab a Weegie Board and ask Tiller about extremists and their14th Century views (yes, we have them here). Ask yourself why this "man of God" went ahead with this "movie" when the last time he tried a stunt like this (burning the Quran) it incited riots(calling it a movie is a stretch as it seems like a bad SNL skit)? Asking questions is good, asking the right questions is better!

0

Glenn Reed 1 year, 7 months ago

Yes, it was meant to incite some kind of reaction. Every single artistic work or piece of text is supposed to do so.

When I say ghosts don't exist, there is no god, the Dali Lama's a jerk, Jesus never existed, or Muhammad was a pedophile, I fully expect a reaction. The hope is to engage in a discussion that will leave folks more informed. Rarely ends up that way.

No, it wasn't an abuse of freedom of speech. I think it's dangerous to suggest that it was. Problems happen and get covered up when there's things you can't question.

The fact that these folks are so easily riled up to an angry, violent, murderous mob is a problem. Pretending that it's not their own fault is a greater one.

1

Flap Doodle 1 year, 7 months ago

Mohammed sure used to love bacon. He'd wake up in the mornings and tell his nine-year old wife to "get in that kitchen and fix me a bacon sammich!" Does that incite you? Are you stuck in the 14th Century?

1

somedude20 1 year, 7 months ago

I am not even Muslim or from the Middle Eastern and I found this "movie" to be a POS!!!! Many of the bad actors are white with the worst brown face makeup and recite their version or another's religion. Yeah, it seems to me that this spitbox was made just to jab the Muslims and to get press/money for himself and his "church."

2

Roland Gunslinger 1 year, 7 months ago

What I find odd is that this movie came out four months ago... yet just now, coincidentally on the same day in two separate nations, there's a reaction to it?

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but is it entirely possible something -else- is stirring the hornet's nest and this movie is getting the blame by the government?

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 7 months ago

Changing our laws to avoid offending the Muslim Brotherhood would be no different than changing our laws to avoid offending Phred Phelps. Do you really want to go down that road?

2

RoeDapple 1 year, 7 months ago

Okay, now I can read it! ;-)

Let me first say, I couldn't stomach watching the entire clip of the "movie." I made it half way. I'm fairly confident anyone else that can sit through that much would probably come to some of the same conclusions I have, though probably not all.

I'll also say that the maniacal and homicidal rage this POS has incited is unbelievably sad and irretrievably stupid. There are no excuses. However, the 'stupidity' needs to be considered. To wit, we're talking about Libya and Egypt. I've only done cursory research on each education system, but if one wants to argue literacy rates and what that really means, our nation probably doesn't fare much better. But I do believe it's fair to say neither country's population has had a liberal exposure to media of any form, and certainly not outside media w/ out a solid censoring from Big Brother. I think this is proven true just by watching the clip; I mean, let's say any Muslim or person of Middle Eastern descent were to make a similar movie with Jesus in the role of Mohammad, it would be little more than a joke to any of us. Forget motivations and any political/religious connotations, this thing isn’t watchable outside a high school AV project. It's horribly laughable. With the possible exception of only the most certifiable religious zealots (and the Klanesque bigots looking for any opportunity), the person responsible would merely be a subject of ridicule here, nothing more.

The adherence to the word and teaching of fanatics certainly lends to the 'stupidity' here. This is true anywhere, granted. Initial reports state that a number of the rioters hadn't even seen the 'film' but had heard about it through leaders or the crowd. And it is the ultra-conservatives one has to worry about violence with anywhere, as well. Gee, I wonder who’s stirring the pot.

Like I said, no excuses though. At least one American has been killed, more injured. Two embassies attacked. All because of a ridiculous excuse for a ‘movie.’ (I do apologize for returning to the quotes around “movie” and “stupidity”; I vow I’m not following the moronic format of FHNC; I’m merely using “stupidity” in the context I lay out, not that the populace is inherently dumb, and I refuse to refer to this POS as an actual film, movie, or short, therefore the sarcastic quote font)

Now, Sam Bacile is the writer and director of this garbage. He supposedly financed this masterpiece w/ $5 million from one hundred Jewish donors. All this news is still breaking while I write this, but this is Bacile’s reaction:

“Bacile, an American citizen who said he produced, directed and wrote the two-hour film, said he had not anticipated such a furious reaction. “I feel sorry for the embassy. I am mad,” Bacile said.”

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 7 months ago

Are you copy/pasting from another application? Try something else.

0

jaywalker 1 year, 7 months ago

Yeah, sorry, I know. I've requested help from Alex, I'm sure he'll have it straightened out before long this morning. For the life of me, can't figure out how to avoid this, this is twice in a row.

0

Flap Doodle 1 year, 7 months ago

FS,DR (formatting screwed-up, didn't read)

0

riverdrifter 1 year, 7 months ago

Try again. I'm going to hit the sack.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.