US ambassador killed in Libya

opinion guy

ejmaztec wrote: »

Film critics on the rampage.

Hmm. Makes more sense than anything the news has told me. Thanks.

ejmaztec

opinion guy wrote: »

Hmm. Makes more sense than anything the news has told me. Thanks.

I'll pass on your gratitude to the Nutshell Production team.

token101

old hippy wrote: »

Corrupt politicians and businessmen who pilfered from the nation? Paramilitary groups opertating north and south of the border? A rapist church that still holds sway over people? An economy in ruins? Mass unemployment? An increase in drug related crime?

LOL. You better take them blinkers off, a chara.

Of course it's not all blinkered to think that, because of a few corrupt politicians and poor economic situation, we have now degenerated to the levels of Libya.

Also nice to note the massive hypocrisy in your ramblings. You keep saying how all Muslims shouldn't be tarred with the same brush, which is a valid point, but then refer to the 'rapist church'. Classy.

snafuk35

I just watched the return of the bodies of Chris Stevens, his aide and his two bodyguards to America.
Heart breaking stuff.

SEPT 23 1989

snafuk35 wrote: »

I just watched the return of the bodies of Chris Stevens, his aide and his two bodyguards to America.
Heart breaking stuff.

Hilary Clinton looks really rattled

i wonder is there something big coming around the corner?

SamHarris

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-provocateurs-know-politics-and-religion-dont-mix-8131297.html

An embarrasingly poorly researched and edited article. Islam is not a race, it is a religion.

The pastor was from Florida, not Texas.

The movie was not released on 9 11, so conivingly as Fisk would have it, but 2 years ago. It was translated into Arabic months ago.

The Islamic world cannot have a discussion untill all Westerners stop 'insulting' their religion? The stupidity and nonsensical nature of this assertion should be clear but lets try explain by analogy. Would Muslims take the assertion that Israel cannot stop building settlments or corraling Palestinians untill the Muslim world stopped criticising, or even insulting, the Israeli state, or Jews? Of course not, because it doesnt make any sense.

Lastly, an opinion piece dedicated to violent protests over a movie spends 90% of the time dealing with the movie and barely even mentions the murder of an abassador from another state? Fisk really has gone to sh*t.

Fisk and his weak ass arguments is embalamtic of the Western sympathisers of all things Muslim, (and in his case, Arab). Every act, no matter how heinous has excusable reasons behind it. Every retalion from the West is evil and deranged. Muslim public opinion is entirely sweet and salutory, until proven differently. Western governments are entirely motivated by greed and hate, until proven differently (what proof they would take that isnt all part of the 'propoganda' is always hard to say).

Fisk really has become not just dishonest, but near insidious with his 'accidental' jab. He will say pretty much anything as long as his far left and Muslim friends pat him on the back. He is the George Galloway of journalism. It's a joke that an article this poorly researched is printed in a somewhat respectible newspaper.

SamHarris

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Hilary Clinton looks really rattled

i wonder is there something big coming around the corner?

Wait, you think this was a conspiracy?

Wibbs

SamHarris wrote: »

Fisk really has become not just dishonest, but near insidious with his 'accidental' jab. He will say pretty much anything as long as his far left and Muslim friends pat him on the back. He is the George Galloway of journalism. It's a joke that an article this poorly researched is printed in a somewhat respectible newspaper.

I have to admit I used to like Fisk, at many points he was the Al Jazeera of western journos, giving the other side to the same story and often informative, but of late he's taken that and run with it to the polar opposite of the numpties he derides.

SamHarris

Notice, those that are determined to stand by the idea that this violence does not reflect on Islam at all are still more sickened by the man who made the film than the murderers of a diplomat. It really says something about the mindset of these people.

SamHarris

Wibbs wrote: »

I have to admit I used to like Fisk, at many points he was the Al Jazeera of western journos, giving the other side to the same story and often informative, but of late he's taken that and run with it to the polar opposite of the numpties he derides.

Yeah, maybe 10+ years ago he was a good interesting read. His book Pity the Nation is pretty good. But he is damn near rabid now in his opinions - they are incredibly extreme and absolutly no event shakes them in any way. Every event is just wittled in various ways until it fits his paradigm. Wish that wasnt so common.

snafuk35

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Hilary Clinton looks really rattled

i wonder is there something big coming around the corner?

She knew him well from working with him since the Libyan Revolution began. He was her top man in Libya.

Of course there is something big. Embassies in Mid East countries are all being taken out one by one. The U.S. is going to have to use force against the organizers of the attacks.

De Dannan

US elections just around the corner. Obama needs this like a hole in the head.

snafuk35

De Dannan wrote: »

US elections just around the corner. Obama needs this like a hole in the head.

Americans rally around their President but they expect tough talk to matched by action.
Obama gave a good speech and is promising to nail the SOBs who did this.
He got Osama and he has been zapping senior Al-Qaeda commanders.
He's going to unleash hell on the terrorist groups across the Middle East.
He has to get tough - much tougher than Bush ever did.
If he doesn't he can kiss the White House goodbye.

IvySlayer

Make or break for Obama...inspiring speech or unrest in America?

I bet Romney is loving all this.

cometogether

Do all of these people attacking the US embassy in Cairo not realise how much cash the Americans pump into that country? Morons tbh.

snafuk35

IvySlayer wrote: »

Make or break for Obama...inspiring speech or unrest in America?

I bet Romney is loving all this.

I don't think there will be much that separates Romney and Obama on foreign policy. Both believe in tracking down and killing and capturing the terrorists.
Any attack on American targets is going to be met by force.

snafuk35

cometogether wrote: »

Do all of these people attacking the US embassy in Cairo not realise how much cash the Americans pump into that country? Morons tbh.

They do know.
But for them America is the Great Satan.
They want an Islamic Empire from Morocco to Indonesia, from Central Asia to Sudan.

De Dannan

snafuk35 wrote: »

De Dannan wrote: »

US elections just around the corner. Obama needs this like a hole in the head.

Americans rally around their President but they expect tough talk to matched by action.
Obama gave a good speech and is promising to nail the SOBs who did this.
He got Osama and he has been zapping senior Al-Qaeda commanders.
He's going to unleash hell on the terrorist groups across the Middle East.
He has to get tough - much tougher than Bush ever did.
If he doesn't he can kiss the White House goodbye.

Yeah Bush was a real softy alright
Going around killing terrorists is not going to solve anything other than create more
Wont be long till Israel hits Iran then the **** will really get bad

SamHarris

Untill even moderate Muslim media bodies change their tune from 'Who and why did this person make this video?' to 'Why are people reacting like this over a video?' they are part of the problem, not the solution.

Reading and watching al JAzeera and al Arabiya is a depressingly good course in responsibility avoidance. I can only imagine what the Arabic sites are like. Probably feature maps of the embassies :rolleyes:

SamHarris

De Dannan wrote: »

Going around killing terrorists is not going to solve anything other than create more

I dont think Bush' policies should be emulated, but this is pure bull (obviously depending on how and how targeted the killing is).

The idea that hundreds or thousands of terrorists can be left in, say, Afghanistan to plan and co ordinate attacks untill they leave to do said attacks is not feasible or advisable at all.

The type of people that become furious when an al Qaeda member is killed are the type of people looking for a reason to become one. The type of people that a movie would be enough to push them over the edge, come to think of it.

snafuk35

De Dannan wrote: »

Yeah Bush was a real softy alright
Going around killing terrorists is not going to solve anything other than create more Start world war 3 maybe . Wont be long till Israel hits Iran then the **** will really get bad

Al-Qaeda attacked America in 1993 when they first bombed the WTC towers in NY and tried to topple them into each other. In Africa U.S. embassies were blown up and the U.S.S. Cole was nearly sunk by a suicide bomb. Clinton was President at the time. That was years before Bush was in the White Office.

These maniacs want to an Islamic Empire from Morocco to Indonesia, Central Asia to Sudan. World War 3 is already being fought.

It doesn't matter if a conservative dunce like Bush is in power or a humane intellectual liberal like Obama is in the White House, the bronze age savages who want a return to the Dark Ages don't care.

Forget about born again Christians in the Deep South, it is East Coast and European Liberals who are socialist in outlook, anti-war, pro-democracy, pro-human rights, pro-women, pro-gay who are the Islamists real enemy.

De Dannan

snafuk35 wrote: »

De Dannan wrote: »

Yeah Bush was a real softy alright
Going around killing terrorists is not going to solve anything other than create more Start world war 3 maybe . Wont be long till Israel hits Iran then the **** will really get bad

Al-Qaeda attacked America in 1993 when they first bombed the WTC towers in NY and tried to topple them into each other. In Africa U.S. embassies were blown up and the U.S.S. Cole was nearly sunk by a suicide bomb. Clinton was President at the time. That was years before Bush was in the White Office.

These maniacs want to an Islamic Empire from Morocco to Indonesia, Central Asia to Sudan. World War 3 is already being fought.

And the US want an empire too. They want to control the Middle East for reasons of their own. Its not just about protecting america. Do any of these terrorists pose a real threat to invade the US ? Does a few terrorists attacks warrent invading entire countries ?

SamHarris

De Dannan wrote: »

And the US want an empire too. They want to control the Middle East for reasons of their own.

Ah your one of those. Nice to see they are the only ones left that have anything but complete disgust for the violent protestors and the murderers.

De Dannan wrote: »

Its not just about protecting america. Do any of these terrorists pose a real threat to invade the US ? Does a few terrorists attacks warrent invading entire countries ?

When the government of a country is supporting them, of course. Well according to the UN anyway, you can have your own opinion as much as you want.

No one ever even implyed any country let alone terrorist group has a chance of invading the US. They do have a chance and have succeeded in targeting and killing thousands of American civilians. Do you think they should have turned the other cheek?

SamHarris

Also if 'they' were looking for an empire they must have forgotten when forming the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan. And Germany. And Japan. Just forgetful I suppose.

fedor.2.

Hopefully America and Israel can bring this to a conclusion soon, its getting old.

De Dannan

SamHarris wrote: »

Also if 'they' were looking for an empire they must have forgotten when forming the governments of Iraq and Afghanistan. And Germany. And Japan. Just forgetful I suppose.

Whats your point? They went to war with each of those countries first. It would have been rude to walk out without asking
I dont spend much time posting here. I can see you do so obviously spending time in an internet forum gives you a solid view of the world. Maybe get out more?

fedor.2.

De Dannan wrote: »

Whats your point? They went to war with each of those countries first. It would have been rude to walk out without asking
I dont spend much time posting here. I can see you do so obviously spending time in an internet forum gives you a solid view of the world. Maybe get out more?

Why do you hate freedom?. Id hate to think what these countries would be like had America not helped them

SamHarris

De Dannan wrote: »

Whats your point? They went to war with each of those countries first. It would have been rude to walk out without asking
I dont spend much time posting here. I can see you do so obviously spending time in an internet forum gives you a solid view of the world. Maybe get out more?

Ha! Yeah ok, I form my views from an internet forum. You don't spend time on any? Wow, you must be a pretty cool guy.

Or it could be... Why dont you go ahead and look at wiki and see what it says about 'empire' see all those things that are needed but the US has not got/ does not do? You do? Fantastic! Now your view of the world is a little more 'solid'.

You think the meaning of an 'empire' is having fought in wars? Maybe you should get out less and read more.

The point, of course, is that you are wrong. Well, according to what 'empire' actually means. Your free to have your own meaning for words as much as you like.

RandomName2

"I found Transformers 3 so offensive to Western art I shot my neighbour."

"What! Did watching Transformers 3 really make you that angry?"

"Oh no. I haven't seen it"

kulareggae

I think there's more to this story than the media is letting on, I mean apparently it was a $5 million movie but the clips looked very crude and low budget, The actors and actresses themselves they didn't realize that the film is anti Islamic, The director is supposedly a ghost nobody knows who he is only a Jewish backed Coptic, I condone any violence the film is completly blasphemous as a muslim i wont be looking at it, To be honest maybe its Obamas way of getting votes i think its to fishy.

namloc1980

kulareggae wrote: »

I condone any violence the film is completly blasphemous as a muslim i wont be looking at it,.

You reckon the violence is justified because the film is "blasphemous" but you haven't seen it and won't look at it.....

partyatmygaff

kulareggae wrote: »

I think there's more to this story than the media is letting on,

Do tell us your suspicions.

I condone any violence the film is completly blasphemous as a muslim i wont be looking at it,

You condone violence, destruction and killing based on a film you refuse to see because a few other people who also didn't see it are angry?

To be honest maybe its Obamas way of getting votes i think its to fishy.

What the hell is wrong with people? Everything is apparently an American/Jewish conspiracy. Think of what you're saying, even just for one tiny moment. Why would Obama want to force himself in to so many difficult positions and give his opponents so many opportunities to one-up him so close to the elections?

up for anything

SamHarris wrote: »

... You realise your on the 20th page of a thread, right?

Oh gosh, no, I didn't.

SamHarris wrote: »

The type of people who are protesting all over the world. You might want to watch the news.

You mean the Occupy crowd?

You don't do sarcasm terribly well.

kulareggae

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Do tell us your suspicions.

You condone violence, destruction and killing based on a film you refuse to see because a few other people who also didn't see it are angry?

What the hell is wrong with people? Everything is apparently an American/Jewish conspiracy. Think of what you're saying, even just for one tiny moment. Why would Obama want to force himself in to so many difficult positions and give his opponents so many opportunities to one-up him so close to the elections?

I actually did try and watch the clip on youtube but my husband saw it. I really think it will come into some more war or something time will tell

And as for american jewish I love everyone doesnt matter what you believe in its how you act towards others that matters

kulareggae

namloc1980 wrote: »

You reckon the violence is justified because the film is "blasphemous" but you haven't seen it and won't look at it.....

my husband has tho and he told me its pretty bad

partyatmygaff

kulareggae wrote: »

I actually did try and watch the clip on youtube but my husband saw it. I really think it will come into some more war or something time will tell

And as for american jewish I love everyone doesnt matter what you believe in its how you act towards others that matters

You love everyone but you condone violence, death and destruction against a few of them?

Duggys Housemate

1% on RottenTomatoes, this movie. Will be giving that a miss.

SEPT 23 1989

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ9r8LMU9bQ

Killer Wench

IvySlayer wrote: »

Make or break for Obama...inspiring speech or unrest in America?

I bet Romney is loving all this.

Romney has stuck his foot in his mouth and even conservatives are bashing him for his misstep.

Killer Wench

De Dannan wrote: »

Judging by the reaction do they believe that this video was made by the US government or what. ?
I thought it was made by some random nutter on the internet

We each live in societies that permit freedom of speech. We can be critical of our government, our respective religions, and our religious leaders. In their region, they have been governed by rulers who did not permit speech and criticism of the government. To them, they cannot separate the film from the US government, as they are used to government run tv and controlled media. It is really a clash of cultures; they don't understand the freedom of speech, and independent actors, because they have never experienced it.

ascanbe

Obama and his administration has got this all wrong so far, as far i can tell.

I'm no fan of either Obama or Romney but i'd prefer Obama for some reasons.
But he's screwing up so far here, and is plain wrong.

He need's to come out and emphasis that the very reason that this video could be made in the USA is the fact the USA values freedom of expression and freedom of religion.

He should not in any way be seen to 'kowtow' to, or give succor to religious fundamentalist lunatics that have used this as an excuse for murder.

It's time to forget the 'deeper issues' at play here.

He needs to make that clear pretty f*cking quickly and make clear that his country/army will stomp on any of these lunatics who threaten anyone deployed overseas under his name as 'Commander in Chief'.

If he doesn't do this then this could well be the losing of the election for him.

And more importantly, it would be 'wrong' in that it would be an abdication his duty/the role he chose to play.

old_aussie

These muslims don't care who they attack, as long as they have some to attack.

What have the UK and germany to do with the movie?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5i1mN2VNhxxIj4gRN9msAaRVV7FRg?docId=N0183651347664490859A

Wompa1

Heard on the radio that the government emplored YouTube to reconsider allowing the clip to be online. Without actually saying they had to take it down because it would be denying their freedom of speech.

YouTube apparently responded saying it did not disobey any of the guidelines and thus they had no right to take it down.

This could be the start of something big...over a f'kin video!?! Could you imagine if the Irish got violent after every disparaging video of us.

partyatmygaff

Killer Wench wrote: »

De Dannan wrote: »

Judging by the reaction do they believe that this video was made by the US government or what. ?
I thought it was made by some random nutter on the internet

We each live in societies that permit freedom of speech. We can be critical of our government, our respective religions, and our religious leaders. In their region, they have been governed by rulers who did not permit speech and criticism of the government. To them, they cannot separate the film from the US government, as they are used to government run tv and controlled media. It is really a clash of cultures; they don't understand the freedom of speech, and independent actors, because they have never experienced it.

They're not *that* clueless. Most know the US government didn't make the film. They just think the US government is supporting the film by allowing it to exist. It's not that they don't understand the concept of free media but they want to censor anything and everything that they don't like.

Killer Wench

The question should be: Is this the equivalent of entering a crowded theater and yelling "fire" when there is no fire?

asherbassad

golden lane wrote: »

are you saying that the riots and murder is ok......because somebody decides to make cartoons and videos....

Grow up and then try to contribute something to this discussion.

asherbassad

SK101 wrote: »

I am very tired of the feeling of having to tip-toe around Islam. I do not have a problem with their beliefs, rituals, culture but I do not like the extremes to which these people go.

Is the holiness of the Koran so strong that it drives people to acts of violence on innocent bystanders?

Is it a lack of education that causes these people to riot and attack embassies? I mean I do not know the Koran's teachings so I do not want to be pushing any ideas out there without the proper knowledge but does it teach it's followers that they can attack whoever they deem responsible for an insult to Islam and be perfectly justified?

Actually is the Koran in likeness to the Old Testament?

Good question from a good thinking person. I've read the Qu'ran, Bible and Talmud. To me I prefer texts that are indisputable, that cannot be misinterpreted.

The Bible states, Leviticus I believe, that one must stone to death he who works on the Sabbath.

Pretty tough call that. A man/woman mows the lawn or bakes or does their duty (nurse, doctor, flight attendant) on a Sunday is fair game to be killed in the eyes of the biblical god.

I'll forego overtime over a volley of rocks.

asherbassad

Conall Cernach wrote: »

On a point of information the two soldiers were not killed by the crowd. They were taken away and shot in the head by the IRA.

Point of information noted.
By whose hand they died is immaterial.
They were set upon by a mob, enraged who would just as easily have torn them limb from limb or delivered upon them a shocking and brutal death much like the setting on fire of people in South Africa (necklacing, they call it).
To get back to my original point, these two soldiers died a brutal death. Are all Irish people now to be lambasted as Stone Age dwellers as a result of such barbarism?

asherbassad

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Not at all. Using government troops to protect your country's diplomats when they're under threat of extreme violence is not suspicious.

Obama wants to get re-elected. If that means sending in troops for a week or two until things calm down and then recalling them, that's what he'll do. If you think they're planning to convert a security detail to a mass occupation of the Middle East you're delusional.

You're not too bright are you.
A diplomatic enclave is just that so long as both governments agree. These fanciful and moronic notions that you have about an embassy or consulate being "a piece of US soil" in another land are laughable.
An embassy and it's personnel are protected by international, none stronger than the GOVERNMENTS of host and guest.
A mob attacked the US Embassy ... NOT troops of the host nation. So please stop talking sh!t.
Having said that, if diplomatic staff were so in danger then why (as in the past) was not the embassy evacuated? Why didn't the US request of the hosting government protection to remove vulnerable staff rather than send in soldiers to "defend" them?

asherbassad

SamHarris wrote: »

Seems pretty clear your at least willing to pass some of the responsibility for the Muslim worlds childishness onto others. If your not condoning it you sure as hell are trying your best at defending it.

Assume what you want, Sam. I never gave the impression that I condone this violence and I challenge you to demonstrate otherwise.