"The Innocence of Muslims"

[yodajazz]

While the embassy attacks are most definately criminal, so is that movie that ultimately provided cover for attacks, and plays into the hands of America's enemies. It's called Treason. No one has mentioned the big protest in the US, over one scene in the movie, "The last Temptation of Chirst". And that was only about Jesus imagining a different life as a normal married man. The results of the movie about Muhammed were predictable, just like that planned annoucement to publically burn the Koran, a while back. People (Americans) died as a result, of that also. And incidently, I read of the same Koran burning pastor, of helping to promote this movie. Imagine me, insulting your mother, and calling that free speech. This whole thing (the movie), smacks of manipulation for other goals, much different than the surface reactions, of common people. And it's not even about religion. It's about power and control, through hate.

[bishr]

the movie is beyond offensive, and the reaction so far and anything that follows is quite predictable! what a disastrous move and what bad handling by the US administration with the talk about the marines like that, which is just saying to the millions of Muslims rightfully enraged by that movie that the USA will teach u what free speech is and will further harass u by sending marines to teach u how to attack its embassies, how can any good come out of this???

would the USA administration handle in the same way a movie about Holocaust denial for example??? will the people of the world contemplate why the most aggressive reactions to the film took place in the countries of the fake so called arab spring?

our beloved prophet Mohammad (Allah bless him) certainly wouldn't agree to such a reaction, i think it is doing almost as much harm as the film itself, what a shame!!!

[Prospero]

One of the key problems is that some Arab states like Egypt in the past and presently Iran and Syria, (whose murderous and foul regime Bishr clearly supports), are used to banning all manner of things they don't like - and torturing and killing dissidents and those who offend the rulers.. The ideal of free expression and freedom of speech has been hard fought for in the West. Indeed it can be badly abused as it has been by the makers of this offensive and deeply provocative film. It is a filthy smear. On that we agree. But the mistake that the Muslim world makes is to beleive that it was in any shape or form endorsed by the US authorities. What goes out on the Internet is not contolled - and the only way to provent this sort of thing is the sort of wholesale contol and blocks imposed by regimes like your dear Assad or in other parts of the Arab world where freedom is quoshed - as in Saudi Arabia.

And yes the US government would ignore the poison of holocaust denial as well if posted by amateurish film makers on the Web. And funnily enough such a film would not provoke attacks on US embassies and killings by angry jews - beleive it or not.

And I see Bishr is gloating with his heavy handed irony. God stand up for bastards like Assad, eh, Bishr.

[flabbybody]

To equate producing an insulting video with murdering US State Department personnel is beyond insane. This perverse notion of an eye for an eye will only add to anti-Muslim attitudes in America

[nina_lisa]

Fundamentalist independ of their religion, tend to give each others a helping hand.

The thing is, the American government or embassies had nothing at all to do with the movie.

Had the movie producer decided to make a movie about Obama loving to sodomize a horse before breakfast, you would still have the movie out there.

On the other hand, take Abu Gharib, where army commanders, the pentagon and even the white house encouraged and promoted torture, the whole world had seen many pics of American soldier extremely happy and smiling from joy as they tortured civilians. Yet it did not seem to cause as much of an outrage as compared to this movie?

[Ben]

Activists troubled by White House call to YouTube:

Prominent civil liberties groups expressed concern on Friday over news that the White House urged YouTube to review whether an anti-Muslim video posted on the video sharing site violated the firm's policies.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-...be-135618.html

[Ben]

Noam Chomsky talking about public opinion polls in the Mid East. And, too, he says, "Almost anything can set off a conflagration."
Sadly, I think Chomsky is right. Ya know, almost anything will set off a conflict. Because there is so much tension between the West and the Mid East.
I mean, go back to 1953 and Iran.

[Ben]

[broncofan]

When the movie was released and the producer for whatever reason pretended he was a Jew being financed by other Jews I saw a number of articles asking what the Jewish response would be to Muslims mocking them. But the response would be what it always is, complaining not killing. And to be honest, while the movie is a hatefest I do not think it rises to the level of offensiveness of a state sponsored Holocaust denial conference or cartoon contest. This is not just because I am Jewish it's because it is not someone's religious beliefs being challenged in the latter case but the dead being mocked.

Remember us talking about the U.S ambassador being so bad because he put his thumbs up over the dead body of Qaddafi. Multiply that by a million. People in the Middle East always complain about Western double standards on free speech.

Well, what is a bigger threat to free speech? Complaining when someone has a Holocaust denial conference or murdering people when they insult your prophet. As far as I know, condemning hateful speech is in no way a threat to free speech. Killing people sort of is (intentional understatement).

And the entire first post is gibberish. Insulting my mother is free speech and in no way licenses murder. Even in states with laws against villification, the punishment should not involve harming third parties, those sharing their ancestry etc. The anti-semitism on Middle Eastern media is a thousand times what we see in Western media with respect to Islam and people are not murdered because of it. Some angry letters are written, it is roundly condemned, as this movie should be, but no murder.

Question for Bishr: Various Arab media outlets deny the Holocaust in one manner or another all the time. Usually no international stance needs to be taken because embassies are not firebombed as a result. Iran brought together neo-nazis to discuss the facts supporting the Holocaust. You talk about double standards? My understanding is that for there to be a double standard you have to actually have two different reactions to the SAME behavior. I haven't seen Jews storm embassies when we're insulted as we are every day in the Middle East.

[trish]

If your religion teaches you to go on killing rampages because someone made a silly and offensive YouTube video, or someone published a caracature of prophet whose facial features no living sole today remembers, then you might consider dropping that religion and taking up something more calming and productive...perhaps macramé .