US embassies in Egypt and Libya swarmed

DSGamer wrote:

In other news Muslims aren't doing much to refute the idea that Islam is a peaceful religion.

Assuming you meant "hostile religion", it's the surrounding society more than the religion, IMO.

These people live in a country which has known a high level of peace and security over the past several decades. No prolonged period of disorder, the country has, with the exception of some regional shortages for very short periods of time, had continuous access to food and all utilities continuously. Look at that vitriol, look at that hate.

If those people, of that religion, lived in a less secure and stable country, one where unrest--violent unrest--was a given and had recently gone threw an overthrow of the government, could I see them storming that site and killing people inside it?

Absolutely I could.

jibboom wrote:

It seems a little rich of some people to expect legal consequences/censorship for the makers of the film when the US government has done much more to endanger the lives of it's citizens through extremely provocative actions vis-a-vis middle-eastern relations over the last 60 years.

Yes, it seems unlikely they'd not be angry at America if only youtube was clear of offensive videos.

Yeah, upon closer inspection, it looks like a genuinely appropriate event (peacefully protesting an offensive movie) has been used as cover for a violent action. That's a lot different than spontaneous, deadly, religiously motivated outbursts.

Yonder wrote:

Absolutely I could.

Of course. I'm not sure why what I said was controversial. I've spent the better part of 11 years saying the American response to 9/11 was terrible. I've railed against Gitmo, black site prisons and torture. I've been one of the people saying that America is partly responsible for putting people in the middle east in the position they're in (poor and living under autocrats) and thus we deserve some blame for how they react to living under autocrats in poverty.

I just found it amusing that people like myself and others have spent so much time and energy saying "Hey guys, Islam isn't all violent, just these specific guys" (Al Qaida, etc.). And then a trailer for a movie that may or may not exist sends protestors into violent rage. Now, the killings in Bengazi look more and more like the work of Al Qaida so I think you set that alone for now. It's highly possible, probable even that those attacks are being attributed to protests falsely. Otherwise, though, you just have to shake your head at this reaction. I've spent 11 years saying America makes a big foot print on the middle east and deserves better. They deserve democracy, they deserve the right to self determination. And nothing in the last week has made me feel otherwise. I'm simply standing over here making the "cut it out" gesture metaphorically because storming the embassies over this is exactly what people like the filmmaker want. That's the exact reaction they would have hoped for.

When Americans on the fringe freak out about things like the Ground Zero mosque being able to provide them footage of muslims burning the flag and hanging off the side of the embassy, destroying vehicles and trying to get to the people inside isn't helpful to refuting those claims.

Good article. I approve. I think this is one of those times where you have to be able to entertain both ideas at once.

- Islam isn't a violent religion by nature. Not all Muslims are violent.

- However, the Middle East is constantly seeing repeated violence over things that would barely cause a ripple in other religions.

The latter has to change if they ever want to see American preachers cease making Korans or if they want to stop right wing nuts from making offensive movies. To put it in gamer terms, the extreme right in America is trolling the Middle East constantly. And they're feeding the trolls, unfortunately.

DSGamer wrote:

To put it in gamer terms, the extreme right in America is trolling the Middle East constantly. And they're feeding the trolls, unfortunately.

Well played, sir.

Actually, I'd say the extreme right in both cultures are trolling the other side. Most of us would get along just fine... nearly all of us. It's just that we've let the sociopaths have power, on both sides.

An unnamed source in a government filled with squabbling factions made a claim about which we have to ask, how does he know? Unless the gunmen told him or the Libyan government does a test on all shooting victims for that, I'd assume it's BS. it's also possible the lebanese media outlet just made it up.

It's not that weird to think they would do an examination of the body to determine the extent of the injuries before being killed. We often here about what was done to people before they were killed here in the US. Good police work, is good police work, regardless of the country you are in.

Just in case anyone had forgotten, here's an article about the time Salman Rushdie was sentenced to death for insulting Mohammed in a book. Except the characters his book that supposedly insulted him we're unsympathetic apostates.

This was in 1989.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012...

Yes, and the idea of killing the ambassador like that is just the thing to say to make people even more angry. Everyone has to be quite cautious in believing these reports.

rosenhane wrote:

It gets worse

The comments on that article are tragic.

US Embassies in Tunisia and Somalia have been evacuated, with travel advisories going up for those countries.

El-Taco-the-Rogue wrote:
rosenhane wrote:

It gets worse

The comments on that article are tragic.

Well there's yer problem.

rosenhane wrote:

It gets worse

I didn't read the article (the title pretty much told me everything I needed to know) but I thought he died from lack of oxygen due to the fire?

I'm surprised no one's mentioned this:

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2...

Just heard about that this morning, Bear. That's a good sign.

Double posting for quality!

First thought: That's good!

Second thought: Probably organised by a rival militia.

Third thought: I'm a cynical bastard before I've had my coffee.

Actually, word is it was organized by the government, and by a group that opposes *all* the 25 or so armed militias in Tripoli. They over-ran several of them today, but the one they really wanted, Ansar al-Sharia, had abandoned it's HQ compound and several others, so they settled for looting a heavy weapons depot (machine guns, RPGs, etc.) held by another militia, with the loss of several lives on each side.

Yeah, heard a bit about it on the radio - a couple of the militias have formally disbanded and a number more have abandoned the capital. Definitely a step in the right direction.

Yes, this was the San Francisco MTA response to that particular piece of filth.

IMAGE(http://i.imgur.com/9zNWb.jpg)

I heard on the radio that a woman tried to stab a police officer in Jerusalem because of the movie. It's not that they rally need an excuse to stab someone (especially non Muslim ) in Jerusalem. It's not that it happens every day but it happens often enough to remember.

There was also an attack on the Egyptian border , one soldier died but so did 3 terrorists. Those guys also don't need an excuse to attack.

I also heard of a new ad campaign by Pamela Geller

IMAGE(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/20/article-2205839-151A0753000005DC-366_634x286.jpg)

Yes , send us your money and guns . Not that Muslims are savages I've met quite a few and they are very nice. I guess she's an extremist from the other side. It's fairly silly campaign. I still don't understand how Israel or Jews are related to a Coptic Christian which made a silly movie to make Muslims angry because he didn't like the treatment of Coptic christian in Egypt.

Edit: It's confirmed : The attack on the Egyptian border was "because of the movie".

Heh, interestingly, SF Muni was legally required to run her ads. The New York transit agency tried to refuse them, but was slapped down by a judge for an unconstitutional ad policy. (how much you want to bet that if it had been a pro-Palestine, anti-Israel ad, the judge would have thought blocking those views were just fine?)

So SF felt they were required to run the ads. But they also ran those placards next to every one of them, and then donated all proceeds from Geller to the San Francisco Human Rights Commission.

Geller was infuriated, and is calling SF Muni "Sharia-compliant".

That is awesome on the part of SF. Wow.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/07...

An Egyptian-American man behind the inflammatory film "Innocence of Muslims" on Wednesday was sentenced to one year in federal prison after admitting to violating the terms of his probation from a 2010 bank fraud case.

Mark Basseley Youssef also was ordered to serve four years of supervised release after his prison term. The sentencing by Judge Christina Snyder came in a Los Angeles federal court after a hearing Wednesday in which Youssef admitted using an alias, which prosecutors said violated his probation.

The amateur filmmaker from Cerritos, California, was identified in initial news accounts in September as Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the name used in the bank fraud case. But the probation revocation case lists the defendant as Mark Basseley Youssef, which the filmmaker stated in court is his legal name.

In a plea deal, Youssef admitted to using a name other than his legal one; possessing a driver's license under the Nakoula name; possessing a fraudulent driver's license; and falsely telling his probation officer last month that he hadn't used the name of Sam Bacile, a name he allegedly used in making the controversial film.

Well, at least he needn't fear retribution from the people he offended.

IMAGE(http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/9453/usmuslimprisoners.jpg)

Oh, wait...