Unbelievable: State Dept. Condemns Anti-Islam Video in Pakistani Ad - Page 5 - New England Patriots Forums

Titus Pullo · 09-23-2012, 04:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

It does matter who produced it, it always does. You are one of the ones who want to take out Westboro Baptist Church because of their protests outside of funerals of veterans, supported the effort of the right to quelch the Dixie Chicks because of 7 words... but now you are a champion of free speech??

...... epic.

***Nikolai*** · 09-23-2012, 07:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hebeill

At this point Everyone knows that the US government didn't put the movie out or approve of it, that it was a coptic christian bent on stirring up trouble. So theres really no excuse for any riots to continue but they are, it seems obvious (at least to me) that while this may have originally been about the movie its being used by radicals to foment trouble and an apology isn't going to do much if anything.

I agree on your basic point. As I think was alluded to earlier in this thread, the riots/protests are not really about the movie. The movie was just the spark; the fuel is the discontent with the US, its policies, and the proliferation of its culture.

wistahpatsfan · 09-23-2012, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikolai

Without getting into some long post no one will read, I'll just say that apologies will have no to negative impact on the protest situation. Apologies are for embattled autocrats in those countries to flaunt as proof that they care about their subjects.

I read long posts...

***patsfan13*** · 09-23-2012, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

Your effort to try to answer a question, is poor as you put on your extremism suit in the end....

It does matter who produced it, it always does. You are one of the ones who want to take out Westboro Baptist Church because of their protests outside of funerals of veterans, supported the effort of the right to quelch the Dixie Chicks because of 7 words... but now you are a champion of free speech??

.

Apples and oranges, but whatever. I missed the part where people called for the Westboro be denied their first amendment to write or make a movie on their beliefs.

The only thing I saw people seeking to prohibit was harassing people at private events like funerals.

***DarrylS*** · 09-23-2012, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

Apples and oranges, but whatever. I missed the part where people called for the Westboro be denied their first amendment to write or make a movie on their beliefs.

The only thing I saw people seeking to prohibit was harassing people at private events like funerals.

So free speech is situational.. you forgot about the attempted purge of the Dixie Chicks, where they are threatened with violence..

The Brandon Five · 09-24-2012, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

Free speech, but there is always that responsibility thing.. see the rules of this message board.

Does this apply to the Muslims who are demanding that we treat their prophet with respect? They might start with showing some for those of others faiths themselves. Forgive me if I don't take a pack of bigots too seriously when they complain about somebody hurting their feelings.

***Harry Boy*** · 09-24-2012, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

Your effort to try to answer a question, is poor as you put on your extremism suit in the end....

It does matter who produced it, it always does. You are one of the ones who want to take out Westboro Baptist Church because of their protests outside of funerals of veterans, supported the effort of the right to quelch the Dixie Chicks because of 7 words... but now you are a champion of free speech??

As much as you do not want to believe that this caused violence, and somehow know all the answers while the bodies are still warm.. it was a match to a tinderbox, a tinderbox that wants to be violent and by doing so served that purpose..

Do not understand how any can minimize a person who deliberately incited violence that caused the death of americans, a person who initially posed as a jew in an effort to spark more violence towards Jews and a person who put fellow coptic christians in the crosshairs...

Free speech, but there is always that responsibility thing.. see the rules of this message board.

I criticized these jerks also but I have never criticized anybodys right to spew their shltty garbage, I would never throw pies at them Like The Liberal Nasty Students did to Ann Coulter (privately in a back alley i'd like to behead one of the baptists though)

Hamar · 09-24-2012, 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

Your effort to try to answer a question, is poor as you put on your extremism suit in the end....

It does matter who produced it, it always does. You are one of the ones who want to take out Westboro Baptist Church because of their protests outside of funerals of veterans, supported the effort of the right to quelch the Dixie Chicks because of 7 words... but now you are a champion of free speech??

As much as you do not want to believe that this caused violence, and somehow know all the answers while the bodies are still warm.. it was a match to a tinderbox, a tinderbox that wants to be violent and by doing so served that purpose..

Do not understand how any can minimize a person who deliberately incited violence that caused the death of americans, a person who initially posed as a jew in an effort to spark more violence towards Jews and a person who put fellow coptic christians in the crosshairs...

Free speech, but there is always that responsibility thing.. see the rules of this message board.

The boycott of the Dixie Chicks was an example of free speech at work.

And, the rules of this message board have nothing to do with free speech, not even as an example. This is a privately own forum and as such is not covered by free speech. unless of course you are just pointing out that everything has rules

The Brandon Five · 09-24-2012, 04:01 PM

Thinking about this some more, why are non-Muslims like Obama and Clinton offended by the video? I can see a Muslim being offended by it, but why are two Christians offended by it?

If they are offended "on behalf" of Muslims, why weren't they offended on behalf of Mormons? Just trying to understand the principle at work here.

chicowalker · 09-24-2012, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brandon Five

Thinking about this some more, why are non-Muslims like Obama and Clinton offended by the video? I can see a Muslim being offended by it, but why are two Christians offended by it?

If they are offended "on behalf" of Muslims, why weren't they offended on behalf of Mormons? Just trying to understand the principle at work here.

Did they say they were offended by it?

Even if they were, why are you stuck on this notion that if you find one thing offensive you must automatically find another offensive? Is it Book of Mormon you're referring to here again? Are Book of Mormon and the video pretty similar (if you've seen them both)?