Top U.S. military officer called Pastor Terry Jones, urged to withdraw support for film

[Hissyspit]

Source: Reuters

@Reuters: Top U.S. military officer called Pastor Terry Jones, urged to withdraw support for film depicting prophet Mohammad -spokesman tells Reuters

Will update.

Read more: Link to source

[cindyperry2010]

1. i think it is time for

some arrests to be made for accessory after the fact for murder they knew what they were doing when they started this crap

[snooper2]

3. Um, no...this is still a semi free country...

People who get their panties in a wad over a fucking video to the point of destroying property and killing people need to have a fucking reality check...

[msongs]

4. snooper, accurate analysis. One need not quiver in fear of religious nuts after all nt

[snooper2]

11. I don't know what kind of conspiracy theory you've got cooking in your head..

But yeah, I place the blame on the low intelligence idiots that did the attacks

Are you like giving them a pass or something? Are we dealing with adults here or little 3 year olds that need to be coddled? And yeah, Mittens is really using this to his advantage to sway the election


Here, I'm posting this video in the attempt to show the greatness of Sir Mix A Lot. If you or anybody else that hits the play button are offended I believe there are software programs to help shield one from it LOL

[snooper2]

15. Well I guess they are getting worse at it, that's the definition of failure right?

Let me know when you have all the details worked out, major players, Mitten's involvement, etc.,etc.,

Meanwhile- I'll continue to see if I can offend somebody enough with a video on the Intertubes so they come to my house in Plano TX

[snooper2]

20. LOL, you are a funny one...Let me know when you find KKKarl Rove's boarding pass

Were you one of the folks who complained about this song

[snooper2]

62. Thank you Thank you!

Here's some more greatness for you!

I think these are some of the top two singers ever! Find boarding pass yet?

[snooper2]

70. the backgrounds were okay, but the costumes were lame and the jokes were flat, non-existent..

It's not even a C movie LOL...

Now, had they taken some cues from Weird Al, added some musical scenes, some good beats, who knows?

[frylock]

29. you may want to bring yourself up to speed before dropping the CT bomb with such invective

sam bacile appears to be non-existent.

[Tyrs WolfDaemon]

32. When I saw Sir Mix A Lot, I first thought of the Robot Chicken parody

Table Be Round:

http://video.adultswim.com/robot-chicken/table-be-round.html

[Volaris]

49. I hadn't seen that, that's pretty damn funny thanks for that...

And on a note more related to the actual thread, it seems to me that the response to this video is not just a product of our culture/religion vs. theirs, but has a lot to do with our history of Freedom of Speech (and ideas and the free expression that naturally follow from that enshrined Right)...allow me to explain my thoughts:

For almost 300 years, we in this nation have maintained an almost completely open flow of information in one form or another. Because of this, we have gotten very good at discriminating between legitimacy and truth, and propagandistic bullshit. We watch this video, and we say to each other "Really? The guy who proposed this actually got people to GIVE him 5 Million dollars to make this? What a bunch of suckers..." and then we all have a good chuckle at the expense of the dumbest among us. It was P.T. Barnum who let us all in on the secret to how this works the way it does...if you are not provocatively NOT being a sucker, guess what?...YOU are one of the people Mr. Barnum expected to make money off of. I don't hold it against the mass of Muslims the world over who live under even semi-oppressive regimes or closed information systems for reacting the way they did, as they have far less exp. in actually disseminating legitimate from bullshit when it comes to this kind of mass media exposure. And no, violence is NEVER the answer, but I only believe that because I grew up in an open system where access to accurate information leads me to an accurate assessment of the idiocy put forth in said released video. I can almost guarantee that if I were a Libyan, in THAT system, and saw THAT video put up as what the majority of American's believed about my religion, my response would have been to sure as hell sack that embassy, too.
We're not necessarily a better PEOPLE than they are, we're just a people better at not taking as truth everything we see on the internet. I think making an honest effort at closing that gap form both sides is a good path to start down.

Responses are always welcome, even if I'm going to get yelled at for not knowing what the hell I'm talking about=)

(on Edit)-- As more accurate information is becoming available, this attack on our Embassy was NOT the result of any kind of Popular Anger or correctly placed outrage, there seems to have been a peaceful protest outside said embassy regarding the aforementioned released video, and that PEACEFUL protest was used as a cover for a premeditated attack by a small militant group (that, apparently, our government has decided will be in quite a dire need of having the hell bombed out of them in short order, and rightly so. Again, my apologies for posting on inaccurate information, I'll be more careful in the future).

[onenote]

19. You're not saying that the people that actually carried out the attack on the embassy were

trying to change the course of the election, that they want Romney elected, are you?

Because they are the ones that "executed" the attack.

[pasto76]

28. oh my god you are over the top

"KNEW"[that crazy libyans would try and assassinate the ambassador and kill two marines] when they posted these clips.

You should really share that all knowing crystal ball with the rest of humanity

[Generic Other]

65. Are you saying Al Q or some other terrorist org made the film?

That was not on my list of possible suspects. I think they were opportunists who used the anger generated by the film as the perfect moment to act.

When I ask myself who was "intent on changing the outcome of the coming election," I find other names higher on the list than Al Q. The Coptic Christian Egyptian, for example who made the film...possibly a rightwing Karl Rovian type of action...or even Israel. So many suspects...so many reasons...

[Zoeisright]

69. Wrong. Intentionally inciting violence is illegal.

You might want to read up on the law before you spout off.

[snooper2]

71. post an OP when somebody is charged...

[MrDiaz]

6. so by using

your first amendment rights you should go to jail if you offend someone?

[MrDiaz]

22. should we

be worried that everything we say could offend some religious nut in another country? Bill of rights apply to every single american citizen, I do not agree with what he says but i agree he has the right to say it. Or do you think we should start picking and choosing who the bill of rights applies to?

[Volaris]

50. Isn't that why there's such as thing as Civil Suits?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but let's say that the Idiot Pastor is actually protected under the A1 form any kind of Criminal Prosecution, can't the families of the victims sue the holy living hell out of him for gross negligence or something? I kinda thought that's how this is supposed to work moving forward....

If I'm wrong, let me know, and I'll cop to it.

[MrDiaz]

51. lol

okay man whatever, just because i defend EVERYONE's right to free speech means i'm his friend right? I disagree with what he said, but nobody should have to stop and think about who or what country or religion they are going to offend before saying anything. I can say whatever I please and you or anybody else would ever know...The idiots who gave this ass a platform to speak and shoved a mic in his face and GAVE him all the publicity should be the ones you are concerned about not the idiot pastor. What you are basically saying is that we should punish those he speak against Islam, for fear of retaliation...right?

[Missycim]

53. Wow where have I heard these words before?

At this point, if you're not with us, you're against us. It's war from here on in. Fight with us or get the fuck out of the way.



Sounds familiar

[Missycim]

61. No lets get as wacko as them?

no thanks, but you go right ahead.

[frylock]

30. hate speech is not protected by A1

[msanthrope]

44. Yes. It is. Virginia v. Black, Snyder v. Phelps. Hate speech is protected. nt

[Missycim]

54. Whats your definition of Hate speech? I bet it differs from

a Republican. That's why your point is crazy, then anyone can define any speech they don't like to be "hate"

[frylock]

64. i don't make the definitions..

the courts have established what constitutes hate speech. now run along. go on now.

[Missycim]

66. who are you to tell me to run along?

Your post count means diddly squat. You just want to ban people who you disagree with.

[David__77]

13. Not at all.

It's preposterous that human scum are committing acts of violence in response to this film. They deserve not one bit of mercy. THOSE are crimes. There is no crime to make a film in this country, no matter that some consider it blasphemy.

[Patiod]

2. Yeah, I wonder how that will work out

That man Jones is essentially a murdering son of a bitch.

What he did is like lighting a match near a house doused with gasoline, and then saying he had every right to light a match, and his match-lighting isn't responsible for burning down the house and killing the people inside.

[MrDiaz]

5. so...

we no longer have free speech. Do you believe they were justified in what they did to our embassy?

[onenote]

18. If I go into a republican town hall meeting wearing an Obama button and burn a US flag

and the repubs beat the shit out of me, and then swarm out into the street and beat the shit out of anyone with an Obama bumper sticker on their car, is it my fault?

[MrDiaz]

26. nope

it is their fault. Nice way of putting it.

[onenote]

41. care to explain or are you only capable of name calling?

[Missycim]

55. Sounds exactly like the events that

sparked off this episode, just smaller in scale.

[MrDiaz]

25. so you believe

we should watch our mouths and what we do now all in fear of islam? I do not agree with what jones said or done! But i do believe he has the right to do so. And you say incite violence, like it was predetermined that they would do this. The fact that you are more concerned with why the murderers murdered, rather than the fact that they are murderers shows alot about you. Do you think a christian has the right to act violently if someone says something that he/she is offended by, or is that only for other religions?

[MrDiaz]

52. umm.

how was it that he put our foregin service people in danger again? Did he hurt anyone? How did he knowingly incite violence? Becuase if you are suggesting that he knowingly incited violence by simply using his first amendment rights...Then i wasn't putting words in your mouth my friend! If he broke the law and did not act within his constitutional rights then please educate me.

[LanternWaste]

21. Stand in at a busy corner sidewalk and yell racial epithets for three hours. It's free speech...

Stand in at a busy corner sidewalk (or heck, even on my front yard) and yell racial epithets for three hours. It's legal, and regardless of the obvious consequences, the law, if not common-sense is on your side...

[frylock]

31. i truly detest the smug sense of self satisfaction some people get..

defending hate speech as being protected by 1A. fucking imbeciles.

[msanthrope]

45. Well, hate speech is protected by the first amendment.

RAV v. St. Paul, Virginia v. Black. Snyder v. Phelps--black letter law at this point.

[brentspeak]

7. We are now in bizarro world

Where US military leaders beg fringe religious nuts for their cooperation in order to preserve national security.

[Poll_Blind]

10. No shit, I was thinking the same thing. This is beyond crazy. I don't know what to call it.

I...I seriously don't know what's going on when Terry Jones is getting calls from our military leaders. Honestly, this is the kind of crazy stuff you imagine when you're having a stroke. We've entered the Stroke Zone here.

PB

[Missycim]

56. Just ask the General what freedoms I am allowed to employ ok?

nt

[oldsarge54]

23. If all you can think of is defending First Amendment Rights

Then you flunked social studies, and possibly the human race. With freedoms come responsibilities. They go together, oppposit sides of the coin. That is the problem with this country from both sides of the political spectrum. Freedom is freedom of responsibility. Even Thomas Jefferson, early anarchist and pro-OWS, said that your freedom to swing your arm ends at another man's nose. Think a bit before responding, was Pastor Terry Jones behaving in an responsibly manner? And on a personal matter, how in the heck does his teachings resemble anything out of the Gospells?

[onenote]

27. Most of the posts that cite the First Amendment don't ignore the responsibilities

but they make the point that those rights don't mean much if you can be prosecuted for exercising them. Should people exercise their first amendment rights responsibly? Sure. Should the state be free to decide what constitutes reasonable exercise of first amendment rights? Only to the most limited extent possible. The original "fighting words" case held that calling someone a "God-damned racketeer" and a "fascist" wasn't protected speech and the person uttering those words could be arrested. Fortunately, the fighting words doctrine has been narrowed since then, but I would hope you would agree that arresting people for their words, or even for the reaction that their words evoke from others, is dangerous territory.

[oldsarge54]

33. I would Agree

that working in this or any other over hyped freedom from the BIll of Rights is like tap dancing in a mine field. However, we should be thinking about tackling the problem because people are not taught personal responsibility anymore. Even kinders will fight for their rights without thought about the responsibility.

Any idea where to start. I'm sure that the Republicans fighting to let employers choose whether or not to offer BC based on their religious beliefs feel that it is a victory for freedom of religion. However, they are not doing a darn thing about the results of their pushing this agenda. Same with their anti-gay marriage and pro-life agenda, when you get down to it, their position is entirely Bible based, but somehow the 1st Amendment does not apply when imposing the results of their beliefs on others.

The belief that the 2nd Amendment give the right to unlimited weapons and ammo is ludicrous. Half the damn amendment is all about a well regulated militia, District of Columbia vs Heller notwithstanding, a 5/4 decision is worth fighting over. Perhaps as a starting point something along the lines of "communication that can reasonably believed to result in anger leading to violence." as being the limit of speech.

I'm sure legal beagles on other wise heads can word it better, but it would be a start.

[onenote]

35. That would certainly take care of the need for a separate flag burning amendment

and it probably would resurrect the prohibition against calling someone a "fascist".

[oldsarge54]

42. Or

parasite, moocher, commie, welfare queen, etc. Then what would Republican yahoo posters have to say.

Seriously, I take the point on flag burning, except I feel that it is legitimate free speech. Don't like it, but I won't go out firing RPGs. C'mon, anyone dare try to find a common sense answer to that so-called preachers incitement to riot?

[Thrill]

24. If this was done. They likely feel this could blow up even bigger

Not good

[alfredo]

34. Jones needs to go to Libya to explain his support for the movie.

[oldsarge54]

43. What is your real problem

that is was a military officer that called on someone to cease and desists. With the implied words, you are getting my troops killed. Are Liberals as bad as 2nd amendment nutters, that think that military getting killed because of our free speech (as opposed to defending it)? Where the hell is the personal responsibility in this country. Mitt is a perfect example. He has personal responsibility up to his stockholders, but does he show any personal responsibility to his employees? That is why our industrialists and CEOs are messing up our country. They feel their only responsibility is to the stockholders. The rest of the nation can go hang.

[ripcord]

46. Am I going to get jailed?

If someone said the same things about Christianity should they be arrested because I would have been jailed long ago. It doesn't matter if they like it, my right to says it trumps all.

[Canuckistanian]

48. General Boykin?

Ahahahahahahahahahaha.

Sorry.

[polichick]

57. There's a law about inciting violence, right?

It's past time for arrests - and you can start with right wing leaders who try to incite violence from their safe perches at Faux News.

[davidn3600]

72. Oh give me a freakin break!

Im sorry. But im not going to forfeit my first amendment rights because some terrorist in the mid-east had their feelings hurt by some crappy and stupid YouTube-quality movie. Remember Theo Van Gogh? He made a movie that criticizes the way Muslims treat women. They responded by killing the man.

Are we now not allowed to make any movie that criticizes Islam since it COULD potentially spark violence? Do a search and there is an ENDLESS amount of stuff on the net that criticizes Christianity. I don't see violent retaliation from that. But if we did, would those movies then become illegal too?

Should we also arrest Christopher Nolan since the villains in his movies seemed to inspire that wacko in Colorado?

The terrorists are the ones that are violent and need to change....not me...not us. Period! It's not my problem they can't take criticism of their faith.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

58. I'm sure Terry Jones is loving this publicity

He makes his living by hating and by being hated. Much like Fred Phelps (RIH).

Criticism by a senior military officer is like music.

[askeptic]

63. Shocked at those who think criticising / mocking a religion is hate speech

Maybe I don't belong on DU either. This is what give liberals a bad name is that they think that anytime someone gets too upset, people should be forced to shut up.

While the reverend is completely out of place mocking one religion but not his own, it is not something that we should sacrifice because people in other countries might get upset.

I don't think our troops should be there, but if they are indeed "protecting our freedom" then this is included!

[Zoeisright]

68. I wish there was a hell so Jones could burn in it.

He's a despicable piece of filth.