• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Alleged "Innocence of Muslims Flim Director Taken in for Questioning.....

It does stand to reason that a Coptic Christian would not speak for a Wahhabist.

I am really tired of your lies....... Why are you so insecure?
 
Hate speech is NOT anything, because there is no such thing.

Of course there is... Don't you realize that you have the right to condemn the movie AND the violence... or are we sheep to let this guy speak for us to the Muslim world?
 
Carney cited official releases from Al qaeda operatives directing muslims to kill soldiers as revenge for the film in question, and you label it as spin. You then proceed to cite an opinion piece from the Weekly Standard of all places as an example of empirical, non opinionated truth, when it is in fact, anything but.

Oh...now we are to believe Al Qaeda??? Good god...

I get my information from a lot of sources...even liberal sources. I look beyond their spin for the kernels of truth and formulate my own opinion based on such information. The Weekly Standard article expresses the truth as we've seen from this latest government action against the filmmaker. The government's message is very clear in this - Americans...shut up.
 
I am really tired of your lies....... Why are you so insecure?

You have been quite stedfast in your promotion of Wahhabism since you first joined this forum and you have an undeniable track record here. You display hatred against Jews and Christians, with corresponding support for Islamism so my reference is to what you promote.


You can claim to be a Venusian for all I care, but the proof is in the pudding here rather than the claim.
 
Oh...now we are to believe Al Qaeda??? Good god...

I get my information from a lot of sources...even liberal sources. I look beyond their spin for the kernels of truth and formulate my own opinion based on such information. The Weekly Standard article expresses the truth as we've seen from this latest government action against the filmmaker. The government's message is very clear in this - Americans...shut up.

Shut up? I don't think so.. Americans are free to condemn the film and the violence.. but we are also free to promulgate the ridiculous, vulgar and insulting lies.

We are also free to embrace lack of education. See how that work?
 
You have been quite stedfast in your promotion of Wahhabism since you first joined this forum and you have an undeniable track record here. You display hatred against Jews and Christians, with corresponding support for Islamism so my reference is to what you promote.


You can claim to be a Venusian for all I care, but the proof is in the pudding here rather than the claim.

Not promotion.. education.. I fear you are unteachable.. I wonder where you got the notion that real Christians are required to be ignorant.
 
Actually, there is.

No.

If there is free speech, then there is no such thing as hate speech. Free speech is a human right, part of our natural human right to liberty, and it must be defended against nonsense like "hate speech" restrictions.

Of course there is... Don't you realize that you have the right to condemn the movie AND the violence... or are we sheep to let this guy speak for us to the Muslim world?

Condemn the "movie" all you want to, because it flatly sucks. There are cat videos and teenagers fighting with lightsabers in warehouses with better production values. It's just some stupid **** on Youtube. There's a LOT of stupid **** on youtube. Put the little thumbs down icon it and move on with your life.

Don't dare call it "hate speech" with the implications that you want to start banning freedom of expression, because that makes you the enemy of human rights, far worse than the maker of the film.
 
Shut up? I don't think so.. Americans are free to condemn the film and the violence.. but we are also free to promulgate the ridiculous, vulgar and insulting lies.

We are also free to embrace lack of education. See how that work?

Ah... But the filmmaker is not free to express himself without fear of government retaliation.

My dear, you've made my point.
 
Americans are free to condemn the film and the violence..

Condemning the film is pointless. God doesn't need ones defense.
 
So I still have a right to say the film is trash and shame on that SOB for insulting Muslims, making Americans look like dolts and putting us at risk?

This idiot Egyptian doesn't speak for me.

hate-speech-is-not-free-speech.jpg

Sounds like a social injustice you are talking about.....yet such cannot be. As in order to have a social injustice. Means one would have to have a Social Justice. Which there is no such thing.

There is only Justice.....Not Social Justice!


Should all the haterz in da world......Riot over Love Speech or films about Love and Compassion. Ya know some tenderness.
 
Speech which is used as incitement to riot is not protected speech

So please establish, then, how the movie informed people that they should attack Muslims.

Before doing so, I would suggest you learn what the word "incitement" means from a legal standpoint. It certainly does not mean "don't say anything offensive", since by your implied definition here, none of us could ever say a damned thing about ANYTHING political since there are always idiots out there who might react in violent ways.

Your attempt to subvert free speech to the dictates of Islamists is extremely questionable, since you base your understanding of incitement upon their reaction rather than anything qualifiable in the actual language of the film.
 
Oh...now we are to believe Al Qaeda??? Good god...

I get my information from a lot of sources...even liberal sources. I look beyond their spin for the kernels of truth and formulate my own opinion based on such information.

The Weekly Standard article expresses the truth as we've seen from this latest government action against the filmmaker.

The government's message is very clear in this - Americans...shut up.
Al qaeda has explicitly encouraged and fanned the flames of violence due to the film in question. It's quite useful as propaganda pieces go. There's little doubt that the film was used as a catalyst of sorts.

It was an opinion piece, and a piss poor one at that. You're attempting to rebuke empirical evidence with arm chair assertions.

The "government action" you speak of is in regards to the film makers parole status. It's a legitimate legal query, not a witchhunt, nor a violation of the individuals legal rights.

Actually, no. You're batting .000 so far on the subject in it's entirety.
 
So please establish, then, how the movie informed people that they should attack Muslims.

Before doing so, I would suggest you learn what the word "incitement" means from a legal standpoint. It certainly does not mean "don't say anything offensive", since by your implied definition here, none of us could ever say a damned thing about ANYTHING political since there are always idiots out there who might react in violent ways.

Your attempt to subvert free speech to the dictates of Islamists is extremely questionable, since you base your understanding of incitement upon their reaction rather than anything qualifiable in the actual language of the film.

I don't think it does qualify as incitement to riot. But, it gets a little close.
 
Not promotion.. education.. I fear you are unteachable.. I wonder where you got the notion that real Christians are required to be ignorant.

Real Christians do not promote Wahhabism.

Frauds are frauds no matter what they might call themselves.
 
120914030256-embassy-protests-5-horizontal-gallery.jpg


Israeli police officers stand behind their shields during clashes with stone-throwing Palestinian protesters in a demonstration against an anti-Islam film in front of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem's Old City on Friday.

120914030519-embassy-protests-6-horizontal-gallery.jpg


Israeli police arrest a Palestinian protester on Friday.....snip~


If the US is to blame.....then why are the Palestinian Muslims attacking the Israelis?
 
8700034_orig.jpg


Can't Restrict CarelessTalk and Still Have Freedom of Speech!!!!! :usflag2:


Note that Terminology Sharon.....NO Abridging! ;)

Dude, the man was brought it not for his speech but because a Judge ordered a review of his parole, its in your own OP. His probation includes a restriction to computer and internet access except for work due to the fact that his bank fraud convention was done over the internet.

Also like the Muslims around the world protesting the US, you seem to think the President can simply order the arrest of someone, the only difference is your protesting his questioning as opposed to his not being arrested. If you're going to quote the Constitution you may want to understand the separation of powers and the limits of the Executive Branch, the President cannot order a man to be arrested which is why a Judge (again in your own OP) ordered him brought in for questioning which is a condition of his parole.
 
120914030256-embassy-protests-5-horizontal-gallery.jpg


Israeli police officers stand behind their shields during clashes with stone-throwing Palestinian protesters in a demonstration against an anti-Islam film in front of the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem's Old City on Friday.

120914030519-embassy-protests-6-horizontal-gallery.jpg


Israeli police arrest a Palestinian protester on Friday.....snip~


If the US is to blame.....then why are the Palestinian Muslims attacking the Israelis?
Well first of all Israel is a U.S. ally and second Palestinians have other reasons to attack Israel you know like Israel stealing their land, etc.
 
Worst thing that'll happen is he'll be asked a few questions.

He DID do this specifically to provoke Muslims. Which is what happened. It does seem a little like yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre....not a lot, but a little. At any rate, the guy isn't very bright. Anybody who couldn't see what would happen...especially after he translated it into Arabic...it all says to me that this is what he wanted to have happen.

He'll get released, and he'll get a job working for breitbart.com.
 
Al qaeda has explicitly encouraged and fanned the flames of violence due to the film in question. It's quite useful as propaganda pieces go. There's little doubt that the film was used as a catalyst of sorts.

It was an opinion piece, and a piss poor one at that. You're attempting to rebuke empirical evidence with arm chair assertions.

The "government action" you speak of is in regards to the film makers parole status. It's a legitimate legal query, not a witchhunt, nor a violation of the individuals legal rights.

Actually, no. You're batting .000 so far on the subject in it's entirety.

LOL!!! Now you are excusing the actions of Al Qaeda. How low can you go, dude?

The video has been around for a long time. It's only now...when Obama needs a scapegoat...that action is being brought against the filmmaker.

The article had it right. Obama is telling Americans to shut up.
 
Dude, the man was brought it not for his speech but because a Judge ordered a review of his parole, its in your own OP. His probation includes a restriction to computer and internet access except for work due to the fact that his bank fraud convention was done over the internet.

Also like the Muslims around the world protesting the US, you seem to think the President can simply order the arrest of someone, the only difference is your protesting his questioning as opposed to his not being arrested. If you're going to quote the Constitution you may want to understand the separation of powers and the limits of the Executive Branch, the President cannot order a man to be arrested which is why a Judge (again in your own OP) ordered him brought in for questioning which is a condition of his parole.

Yeah and.....I asked the Question do you think it will affect Free Speech laws? I didnt say it would.....Did I? :roll: So explaining the rest of your assumption, means what? :doh

My Meaning was do you think some politicans now will attempt to file bills over this continuing violence over a film that over 95% of Muslims did not even know about. Until Their Religious Leaders Said soemthing. They now will also look to hook this Guy up on anything they can get him for.

Probation or any other laws. Over this Film.
 
So please establish, then, how the movie informed people that they should attack Muslims.

Before doing so, I would suggest you learn what the word "incitement" means from a legal standpoint. It certainly does not mean "don't say anything offensive", since by your implied definition here, none of us could ever say a damned thing about ANYTHING political since there are always idiots out there who might react in violent ways.

Your attempt to subvert free speech to the dictates of Islamists is extremely questionable, since you base your understanding of incitement upon their reaction rather than anything qualifiable in the actual language of the film.

If a person purposefully or knowingly commits an act or engages in conduct that urges others to riot, that is incitement. I don't think the person who did this did that. However, I do think it was a little close to that. I think what the guy did should be protected speech. My point was that what he did was getting a little close to not being protected speech.
 
I don't think it does qualify as incitement to riot. But, it gets a little close.

The actual incitement arises from the clerics in the countries where the riots are occurring, as this stupid little film would have died a quiet death were it not for the clerics using it as such a tool. None of US paid any attention to it before the riots and killings, that's for sure. Obviously, we cannot control what they do, and so this incitement is beyond our scope.

People are awfully ignorant if they do not realize that there is a worldwide push by Islamists to make criticism of Islam just as much an offense in the West as it is in their totalitarian cultures. Just look at how they are using the United Nations towards that end, for goodness sake. Just as we cannot control how they use media to incite in their culture, however, we should not tailor or notion of free speech to their dictates. We are only acting as useful idiots for Islamists if we do.

This whole staged event is just one ginormous bit of agitprop aimed at undermining our ability to speak while strengthening the Islamists within their own culture. Why people here are allowing themselves to be used by the Islamists like they are is anybody's guess, but my suggestion is to wise up, learn about the Islamist objective and think a little more about supporting OUR liberal, western values and a little less about appeasing their knuckle dragging ways.
 
LOL!!! Now you are excusing the actions of Al Qaeda. How low can you go, dude?

The video has been around for a long time. It's only now...when Obama needs a scapegoat...that action is being brought against the filmmaker.

The article had it right. Obama is telling Americans to shut up.

Hare used the phrase "explicitly encouraged and fanned the flames of violence" how does that convey an excuse?

You should read the OP again, the man has a COURT ORDER to not use the computer or internet due to a PREVIOUS CONVICTION, by posting a video to Youtube he could be determined by the Court to have violated his PROBATION which is why he's been brought in for QUESTIONING, to determine if that is the case.

He's not been arrested, Obama didn't order an arrest or questioning because the President has no authority to do that, AND this isn't about free speech its about a PAROLE VIOLATION.

What is there to not understand?
 
Back
Top Bottom