Back in 2001, a bunch of lowlifes flew airplanes into buildings. I suppose those who fear this North Korea attack don't go on airplanes or into tall buildings anymore.
In that case the government stepped in changed the way of doing things and to some extent reasssured the public that it would not happen again. Here all we have is the president saying essentially "Well I wish they would have called me because I would have told them not to give in to these tactics." How that would make anyone feel better I don't know.
The comparison is ridiculous, and borderline offensive.
What is ridiculous is that you could possibly find anything offensive in that statement, let alone inaccurate. Like it or not, dougrhon speaks the truth here.
But I do agree the original 9/11 comment was not relevant and should have been omitted here. That's why I passed over it yesterday. dougrhon did well explaining why it was a silly comment.
There is no hope for you.
Why don't you try articulating WHY you think his comment was ridiculous or offensive? Or you just hate dougrhon because he's conservative and automatically dismiss/ insult without consideration? Because lack of intellectual analysis is typically a conservative trait. I'm really confused, not used to fellow liberals being the drive by snarky types.
[Edited on 12/25/2014 by PerryBoynton]
I'm neither a liberal nor a conservative, and regardless of political ideology it should be obvious. Over 3,000 Americans died on 9/11 and scores and scores of combatants and non-combatants have died since as a result. There is no comparison. Period. The fact that I actually have to explain that to you is why I made the comment.
[Edited on 12/25/2014 by gondicar]
So how many people need to die before one terrorist action can be compared to 9/11 in any way shape or form without offending you? Your gracious explanation essentially boils right down to body count, so.... What's the number?
That makes no sense whatsoever. It's like you are comparing apples and dump trucks and then asking why dump trucks are different from apples.
Sold out in both of the theaters showing it in Columbus yesterday. I went, it was fun enough. Not a classic by any means but good for some laughs. Much ado about nothing.
Maybe I am not interpreting the thread correctly but are posters here really fearing threats from a terrorist state who threatens the U.S. on regular basis without following through? Really? are we supposed to live our lives in fear from these clowns?
But they followed thru this time. No?
No, I don't see anyone here encouraging others to be afraid. Was calling Bin Laden a terrorist after 9/11 a submission to fear, or simply an honest assessment of the events that had just occurred?
Not sure I would put 911 in the same category with the Sony database hack job. I doubt we would have the creation of the Homeland security dept or the invasive airport security we have now as the result of a hack into a corporate database so I don't see the parallel.
Should we be concerned about cyber terror? Sure, but IMHO it is a different animal altogether.
The cyber attack on a private company in itself is not with the 3 page of discussion here so far. Maybe on a technology website, sure. But the threats against ordinary American citizens that followed is what in my opinion makes it bona-fide terrorism and therefore fair comparison to 9/11 in some basic respects.
[Edited on 12/26/2014 by PerryBoynton]
If you are saying the threat to injure theater goers related to the cyber attack is terrorism I would tend to agree but IMHO the threat is no where near as concerning as one from the Arab terrorist groups we face today. Consider the sources and their actions.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. There are some participating in this discussion not willing to use the T word, I think they feel it gives North Korea too much credit, or is an admission of fear. But more importantly, Obama didn't call it terrorism either, and this bothers me a bunch. The United States' response to all this was weak, it feels like appeasement. I'm not asking for an invasion here, just let North Korea know we won't stand for threats of that nature.
You are of course se welcome to your opinion. It appears to be in the minority. Doesn't necessarily mean you are wrong, but it does mean you shouldn't be surprised if this doent to play out the way you think it should.
Maybe I am not interpreting the thread correctly but are posters here really fearing threats from a terrorist state who threatens the U.S. on regular basis without following through? Really? are we supposed to live our lives in fear from these clowns?
But they followed thru this time. No?
No, I don't see anyone here encouraging others to be afraid. Was calling Bin Laden a terrorist after 9/11 a submission to fear, or simply an honest assessment of the events that had just occurred?
Not sure I would put 911 in the same category with the Sony database hack job. I doubt we would have the creation of the Homeland security dept or the invasive airport security we have now as the result of a hack into a corporate database so I don't see the parallel.
Should we be concerned about cyber terror? Sure, but IMHO it is a different animal altogether.
The cyber attack on a private company in itself is not with the 3 page of discussion here so far. Maybe on a technology website, sure. But the threats against ordinary American citizens that followed is what in my opinion makes it bona-fide terrorism and therefore fair comparison to 9/11 in some basic respects.
[Edited on 12/26/2014 by PerryBoynton]
If you are saying the threat to injure theater goers related to the cyber attack is terrorism I would tend to agree but IMHO the threat is no where near as concerning as one from the Arab terrorist groups we face today. Consider the sources and their actions.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. There are some participating in this discussion not willing to use the T word, I think they feel it gives North Korea too much credit, or is an admission of fear. But more importantly, Obama didn't call it terrorism either, and this bothers me a bunch. The United States' response to all this was weak, it feels like appeasement. I'm not asking for an invasion here, just let North Korea know we won't stand for threats of that nature.
Meh, N Korea beats their chest and threatens us with some form of violence that they never follow through with on a regular basis so IMHO it is the usual saber rattling from them.
As far as the cyber attacks are concerned what would you suggest as a response? They are poretty much economically isolated already so what else can we take away from them?
it seems to be a forgone conclusion that China does this type of hacking o the U.S. on a regular basis and other then formally protesting not much seems to be done about it so what makes this different?
Does anyone besides me have an issue with Obama criticizing Sony? Not saying Sony made the right or wrong decision; though when there was the "Batman" movie massacre a few years ago the Studio caught heat for their "violent" movie. But you have a private company faced with international terror threats. And none of this was a secret. Don't you think a "strong" leader would have proactively gotten involved and lent a guiding hand rather than criticizing a movie studio after the fact? This is national security - take a stance and be responsible rather than commenting afterwards when the decision is out of your hands.
I never responded to the topic starter directly, so here goes and sorry for veering a bit.
Yes I do agree Obama's public criticism of Sony was unnecessary, but I don't think we have policy and procedure in place that would have resulted in better teamwork between Washington and Sony. As I said earlier, I think this event was unprecedented in many ways. Sony was obviously unprepared, Obama I think too. I don't think there will be so much rearview leadership next time around.
SO it took a lot of pages of posts; with the left/and the right marching in their predetermined direction for a BINGO post. This is sort of unprecedented territory ; but our country (I am a broken record) is more politically divided than at any time in my memory. With such polarization nothing gets done except name calling.
Anybody seen a good movie lately?
Amazing how "B" movie destined for basic cable a week after it's release will now make a lot of money.
The FBI now says it "probably was not North Korea".
Okay, was Sony really hacked or was this a very successful promotional gag?
Maybe I am not interpreting the thread correctly but are posters here really fearing threats from a terrorist state who threatens the U.S. on regular basis without following through? Really? are we supposed to live our lives in fear from these clowns?
But they followed thru this time. No?
No, I don't see anyone here encouraging others to be afraid. Was calling Bin Laden a terrorist after 9/11 a submission to fear, or simply an honest assessment of the events that had just occurred?
Not sure I would put 911 in the same category with the Sony database hack job. I doubt we would have the creation of the Homeland security dept or the invasive airport security we have now as the result of a hack into a corporate database so I don't see the parallel.
Should we be concerned about cyber terror? Sure, but IMHO it is a different animal altogether.
The cyber attack on a private company in itself is not with the 3 page of discussion here so far. Maybe on a technology website, sure. But the threats against ordinary American citizens that followed is what in my opinion makes it bona-fide terrorism and therefore fair comparison to 9/11 in some basic respects.
[Edited on 12/26/2014 by PerryBoynton]
If you are saying the threat to injure theater goers related to the cyber attack is terrorism I would tend to agree but IMHO the threat is no where near as concerning as one from the Arab terrorist groups we face today. Consider the sources and their actions.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. There are some participating in this discussion not willing to use the T word, I think they feel it gives North Korea too much credit, or is an admission of fear. But more importantly, Obama didn't call it terrorism either, and this bothers me a bunch. The United States' response to all this was weak, it feels like appeasement. I'm not asking for an invasion here, just let North Korea know we won't stand for threats of that nature.
Meh, N Korea beats their chest and threatens us with some form of violence that they never follow through with on a regular basis so IMHO it is the usual saber rattling from them.
As far as the cyber attacks are concerned what would you suggest as a response? They are poretty much economically isolated already so what else can we take away from them?
it seems to be a forgone conclusion that China does this type of hacking o the U.S. on a regular basis and other then formally protesting not much seems to be done about it so what makes this different?
First they threaten us, business as usual.
Then they execute a successful (and purportedly sophisticated) cyber attack on Sony. Significant, but still business as usual. Hell, they are even too lame to take credit for it.
Then they use assets acquired during the cyber attack to extort Sony. There are several leaks included here which include Sony property worth millions and millions of dollars. Hmm, this is getting a bit unusual....
By now they've built up just enough momentum (can we call it credibility?) that when they issue a specific physical threat of violence, the movie theatres blink and our society is disrupted -- superficially indeed, but the disruption is unprecedented.
Yeah it is my understanding too that our response options are quite limited. Obama promised a proportional response at our convenience. I like the sound of that, but he also called it a "prank" I think was the word? C'mon.
In fairness, I think additional statements from the White House are forthcoming. Maybe they will get a little tougher. They need to, the world (and other terrorists) are watching. I imagine some ISIS guys got a real kick out of this...
Obama says it was vandalism, not a prank. That is a big difference. And the N Korean Internet has been down several times since then. We didn't take credit for it as N K didn't take credit for their supposed attack. Sounds like the proper response.
Back in 2001, a bunch of lowlifes flew airplanes into buildings. I suppose those who fear this North Korea attack don't go on airplanes or into tall buildings anymore.
In that case the government stepped in changed the way of doing things and to some extent reasssured the public that it would not happen again. Here all we have is the president saying essentially "Well I wish they would have called me because I would have told them not to give in to these tactics." How that would make anyone feel better I don't know.
The comparison is ridiculous, and borderline offensive.
I understand why you weould characterize it as ridiculous as you do anything that makes Obama look bad. Why it would be offensive I have no idea. It's very easy to offend nowadays.
Back in 2001, a bunch of lowlifes flew airplanes into buildings. I suppose those who fear this North Korea attack don't go on airplanes or into tall buildings anymore.
In that case the government stepped in changed the way of doing things and to some extent reasssured the public that it would not happen again. Here all we have is the president saying essentially "Well I wish they would have called me because I would have told them not to give in to these tactics." How that would make anyone feel better I don't know.
You wear your biased hatred for Obama quite well. Obama said we should not give in to terror tactics. He said the move should be released. Basically, that follows what was said in 2001. Don't give in to terrorists. What a shame that you have lost your ability to ever be unbiased.
Pot say hello to kettle.
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
No Doug, I think people should be free to express themselves but if that expression is hurtful, demeaning, humiliating to others, then the person, or company should refrain from that. Even in the Bible Galatians spells out very clear in Chapter 15 verses 19-22 the characteristics of sinful nature versus goodly nature that God wants people to demonstrate.
5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious, sexual immorality, impurity, debauchery, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, envy, drunkenness, orgies and the like. I warn you as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control, against such things there is no law.
Later on in 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature from that nature will reap destruction.
IF SONY did not know if would be hurtful to Kim Jun Un and the North Koreans, when they was informed of their feelings about it, they should have been sorry. They are not, their goal is money and making fun of that country's leader. We here in this country know it is a spoof, but since it is hurtful, to anyone, it should not be shown.
I also wonder, IF someone even Koreans in this country retaliate and do an act of terror at a movie theatre showing the film, will SONY feel any moral responsibility for that? It's not a question of being held hostage by another country dictating to us what we can do here, they are calling our attention to what they perceive it to mean, and that they feel strongly enough to want us not to show the film. I think that should be respected, even though that request was delivered with a threat.
I myself would never deliberately offend Muslims by ridiculing their prophet or anything like that (though apparently any criticism at all is offensive) However others feel differently. OUR society which is NOT the world of Islam permits such ridicule. Therefore it should must and will be permitted. You have stated many times your support for shutting down expression offensive to muslims. Again this is the west where free speech is sacrosnact (or it used to be) In the world of Islam other values take precedent.
PPS I stop short siding completely with dougrhon on anything due to earlier comment regarding Muslims value of freedom of expression. Nauseating.
I agree it's nauseating that Islam doesn't value freedom of expression but what can we do about it? It's their faith. As long as they don't infringe on MY freedom of expression or any other freedom I enjoy here in the West.
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
No Doug, I think people should be free to express themselves but if that expression is hurtful, demeaning, humiliating to others, then the person, or company should refrain from that. Even in the Bible Galatians spells out very clear in Chapter 15 verses 19-22 the characteristics of sinful nature versus goodly nature that God wants people to demonstrate.
5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious, sexual immorality, impurity, debauchery, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, envy, drunkenness, orgies and the like. I warn you as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control, against such things there is no law.
Later on in 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature from that nature will reap destruction.
IF SONY did not know if would be hurtful to Kim Jun Un and the North Koreans, when they was informed of their feelings about it, they should have been sorry. They are not, their goal is money and making fun of that country's leader. We here in this country know it is a spoof, but since it is hurtful, to anyone, it should not be shown.
I also wonder, IF someone even Koreans in this country retaliate and do an act of terror at a movie theatre showing the film, will SONY feel any moral responsibility for that? It's not a question of being held hostage by another country dictating to us what we can do here, they are calling our attention to what they perceive it to mean, and that they feel strongly enough to want us not to show the film. I think that should be respected, even though that request was delivered with a threat.
I myself would never deliberately offend Muslims by ridiculing their prophet or anything like that (though apparently any criticism at all is offensive) However others feel differently. OUR society which is NOT the world of Islam permits such ridicule. Therefore it should must and will be permitted. You have stated many times your support for shutting down expression offensive to muslims. Again this is the west where free speech is sacrosnact (or it used to be) In the world of Islam other values take precedent.
I don't think anyone's religion should be offended because there is ONE God, he gave his laws to Abraham, Moses, Noah, Jesus, Muhammad and all the rest of the messengers and prophets, the advice remained the same, to treat people with kindness and goodness. If Freedom of Expression violates this basic tenet of people's conduct and behavior, then Freedom of Expression is just a secular concept and not something in accordance with what God related and asked people to follow; so it is not an Islamic versus Freedom of Expression issue, it is larger than that. When movies come out about Jesus that have been controversial, people have questioned things in them. No religions Prophets, messengers should be shown in a bad light.
If secularism and democracy and the West want to make fun of people in any land, it is hurtful, permissible here, because the nation has forgotten God. The Judge in Alabama told to take down the Ten commandments from his courtroom because it could bias a jury to convict a guilty person, what kind of jurisprudence is that?
PPS I stop short siding completely with dougrhon on anything due to earlier comment regarding Muslims value of freedom of expression. Nauseating.
I agree it's nauseating that Islam doesn't value freedom of expression but what can we do about it? It's their faith. As long as they don't infringe on MY freedom of expression or any other freedom I enjoy here in the West.
Islam limits freedom of expression to good manners. If it is bad manners (which violate true Islam and other faiths too) then they don't accept it. And I know people can point out instances of violation of this, ie. Isis parading the Jordanian pilot recently captured half naked to humiliate him and his homeland - but remember there will only be ONE true sect from each of the main religions who practice what they were given that gets God's approval. (that does not excuse bad manners, but it explains why it occurs).
Back in 2001, a bunch of lowlifes flew airplanes into buildings. I suppose those who fear this North Korea attack don't go on airplanes or into tall buildings anymore.
In that case the government stepped in changed the way of doing things and to some extent reasssured the public that it would not happen again. Here all we have is the president saying essentially "Well I wish they would have called me because I would have told them not to give in to these tactics." How that would make anyone feel better I don't know.
The comparison is ridiculous, and borderline offensive.
I understand why you weould characterize it as ridiculous as you do anything that makes Obama look bad. Why it would be offensive I have no idea. It's very easy to offend nowadays.
What? Has nothing zero nada zilch to do with Obama. I was talking about the comparisons being made here between 9/11 and the Sony hack. And I already explained why it is a ridiculous comparison and offensive to the memories of the thousands that died....if you don't understand, then that is your problem not mine.
It's kind of funny that the administration was so quick to condemn SONY; yet at the beginning of the Benghazi debacle
The man whose anti-Muslim film was wrongly cited for sparking protests that led to the Benghazi debacle doesn’t hold a grudge against the U.S. government, although he was shocked at how it all played out and is working on a book about his experience.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, speaking to CNN’s Jake Tapper after his release from prison, says the Obama administration acted irresponsibly in initially linking the deadly terror attack last September 11 on the U.S. diplomatic compound in eastern Libya to outrage over “The Innocence of Muslims.”
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
No Doug, I think people should be free to express themselves but if that expression is hurtful, demeaning, humiliating to others, then the person, or company should refrain from that. Even in the Bible Galatians spells out very clear in Chapter 15 verses 19-22 the characteristics of sinful nature versus goodly nature that God wants people to demonstrate.
5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious, sexual immorality, impurity, debauchery, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, envy, drunkenness, orgies and the like. I warn you as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control, against such things there is no law.
Later on in 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature from that nature will reap destruction.
IF SONY did not know if would be hurtful to Kim Jun Un and the North Koreans, when they was informed of their feelings about it, they should have been sorry. They are not, their goal is money and making fun of that country's leader. We here in this country know it is a spoof, but since it is hurtful, to anyone, it should not be shown.
I also wonder, IF someone even Koreans in this country retaliate and do an act of terror at a movie theatre showing the film, will SONY feel any moral responsibility for that? It's not a question of being held hostage by another country dictating to us what we can do here, they are calling our attention to what they perceive it to mean, and that they feel strongly enough to want us not to show the film. I think that should be respected, even though that request was delivered with a threat.
I myself would never deliberately offend Muslims by ridiculing their prophet or anything like that (though apparently any criticism at all is offensive) However others feel differently. OUR society which is NOT the world of Islam permits such ridicule. Therefore it should must and will be permitted. You have stated many times your support for shutting down expression offensive to muslims. Again this is the west where free speech is sacrosnact (or it used to be) In the world of Islam other values take precedent.
I don't think anyone's religion should be offended because there is ONE God, he gave his laws to Abraham, Moses, Noah, Jesus, Muhammad and all the rest of the messengers and prophets, the advice remained the same, to treat people with kindness and goodness. If Freedom of Expression violates this basic tenet of people's conduct and behavior, then Freedom of Expression is just a secular concept and not something in accordance with what God related and asked people to follow; so it is not an Islamic versus Freedom of Expression issue, it is larger than that. When movies come out about Jesus that have been controversial, people have questioned things in them. No religions Prophets, messengers should be shown in a bad light.
Exactly, people need to stop with all those showing Bacchus in a bad light. He is the God of wine, nature and pleasure. All of my favorite things. Stop saying he doesn't exist!!! There is just as much evidence that he exists as any of the other prophets!!!
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
No Doug, I think people should be free to express themselves but if that expression is hurtful, demeaning, humiliating to others, then the person, or company should refrain from that. Even in the Bible Galatians spells out very clear in Chapter 15 verses 19-22 the characteristics of sinful nature versus goodly nature that God wants people to demonstrate.
5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious, sexual immorality, impurity, debauchery, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, envy, drunkenness, orgies and the like. I warn you as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control, against such things there is no law.
Later on in 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature from that nature will reap destruction.
IF SONY did not know if would be hurtful to Kim Jun Un and the North Koreans, when they was informed of their feelings about it, they should have been sorry. They are not, their goal is money and making fun of that country's leader. We here in this country know it is a spoof, but since it is hurtful, to anyone, it should not be shown.
I also wonder, IF someone even Koreans in this country retaliate and do an act of terror at a movie theatre showing the film, will SONY feel any moral responsibility for that? It's not a question of being held hostage by another country dictating to us what we can do here, they are calling our attention to what they perceive it to mean, and that they feel strongly enough to want us not to show the film. I think that should be respected, even though that request was delivered with a threat.
I myself would never deliberately offend Muslims by ridiculing their prophet or anything like that (though apparently any criticism at all is offensive) However others feel differently. OUR society which is NOT the world of Islam permits such ridicule. Therefore it should must and will be permitted. You have stated many times your support for shutting down expression offensive to muslims. Again this is the west where free speech is sacrosnact (or it used to be) In the world of Islam other values take precedent.
I don't think anyone's religion should be offended because there is ONE God, he gave his laws to Abraham, Moses, Noah, Jesus, Muhammad and all the rest of the messengers and prophets, the advice remained the same, to treat people with kindness and goodness. If Freedom of Expression violates this basic tenet of people's conduct and behavior, then Freedom of Expression is just a secular concept and not something in accordance with what God related and asked people to follow; so it is not an Islamic versus Freedom of Expression issue, it is larger than that. When movies come out about Jesus that have been controversial, people have questioned things in them. No religions Prophets, messengers should be shown in a bad light.
If secularism and democracy and the West want to make fun of people in any land, it is hurtful, permissible here, because the nation has forgotten God. The Judge in Alabama told to take down the Ten commandments from his courtroom because it could bias a jury to convict a guilty person, what kind of jurisprudence is that?
For once I have to agree with Doug regarding the lack of tolerance of the Muslim religion to criticism.
The difference between the Muslim's and Christian's is when the "Passion of Christ" movie was released I don't believe I saw Christian leaders threatening violence against Mel Gibson. While the Catholic Church may verbally express their anger at criticizing their beliefs they don't usually threaten to kill the person expressing those views. The same can't be said for all Muslim's.
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
No Doug, I think people should be free to express themselves but if that expression is hurtful, demeaning, humiliating to others, then the person, or company should refrain from that. Even in the Bible Galatians spells out very clear in Chapter 15 verses 19-22 the characteristics of sinful nature versus goodly nature that God wants people to demonstrate.
5:19 The acts of the sinful nature are obvious, sexual immorality, impurity, debauchery, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, envy, drunkenness, orgies and the like. I warn you as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control, against such things there is no law.
Later on in 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature from that nature will reap destruction.
IF SONY did not know if would be hurtful to Kim Jun Un and the North Koreans, when they was informed of their feelings about it, they should have been sorry. They are not, their goal is money and making fun of that country's leader. We here in this country know it is a spoof, but since it is hurtful, to anyone, it should not be shown.
I also wonder, IF someone even Koreans in this country retaliate and do an act of terror at a movie theatre showing the film, will SONY feel any moral responsibility for that? It's not a question of being held hostage by another country dictating to us what we can do here, they are calling our attention to what they perceive it to mean, and that they feel strongly enough to want us not to show the film. I think that should be respected, even though that request was delivered with a threat.
I myself would never deliberately offend Muslims by ridiculing their prophet or anything like that (though apparently any criticism at all is offensive) However others feel differently. OUR society which is NOT the world of Islam permits such ridicule. Therefore it should must and will be permitted. You have stated many times your support for shutting down expression offensive to muslims. Again this is the west where free speech is sacrosnact (or it used to be) In the world of Islam other values take precedent.
I don't think anyone's religion should be offended because there is ONE God, he gave his laws to Abraham, Moses, Noah, Jesus, Muhammad and all the rest of the messengers and prophets, the advice remained the same, to treat people with kindness and goodness. If Freedom of Expression violates this basic tenet of people's conduct and behavior, then Freedom of Expression is just a secular concept and not something in accordance with what God related and asked people to follow; so it is not an Islamic versus Freedom of Expression issue, it is larger than that. When movies come out about Jesus that have been controversial, people have questioned things in them. No religions Prophets, messengers should be shown in a bad light.
Exactly, people need to stop with all those showing Bacchus in a bad light. He is the God of wine, nature and pleasure. All of my favorite things. Stop saying he doesn't exist!!! There is just as much evidence that he exists as any of the other prophets!!!
Agree 100%! I am toasting Bacchus as I type this with a glass of excellent California Cabernet. Have to say he is in my all-time top 4 list of deities along with Aphrodite (Sexuality), Shiva (Ganja) and Apollo (Music).
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
And if the film was made by Hamas about two idiots trying to kill the Israeli President? You would still laugh and defend their freedom of speech? Give us all a laugh and claim that you would.
Anybody seen a good movie lately?
Amazing how "B" movie destined for basic cable a week after it's release will now make a lot of money.
The FBI now says it "probably was not North Korea".
Okay, was Sony really hacked or was this a very successful promotional gag?
I had to skim over pages of political ramblings and senseless argument to get to someone who sat and thought for a moment.
I kind of changed my mine on that aspect when I found out that Kym gets killed in the movie. I can get the N Koreans feeling this is a truly hostile gesture. If Korea made a movie and Obama was lynched and hung I think their would have been a lot of anger in America
If Korea made a movie like that, then I would suspect they would get a job offer from Fox News.
It's kind of funny that the administration was so quick to condemn SONY; yet at the beginning of the Benghazi debacle
The man whose anti-Muslim film was wrongly cited for sparking protests that led to the Benghazi debacle doesn’t hold a grudge against the U.S. government, although he was shocked at how it all played out and is working on a book about his experience.
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, speaking to CNN’s Jake Tapper after his release from prison, says the Obama administration acted irresponsibly in initially linking the deadly terror attack last September 11 on the U.S. diplomatic compound in eastern Libya to outrage over “The Innocence of Muslims.”
Because the right to free express ends where the feelings of Muslims begin.
Rusty you are missing the point, it is the subject matter of the film that is wrong. The movie calls for an assassination attempt on a current world leader, doesn't matter if the people they would send are idiots and could never accomplish it, to suggest an agency or group would try to recruit people to carry out such an act is what the issue is, and again, if it was about any NATO ally President, they would not find it funny. If another country did a movie suggesting something like that for this country, nobody in the Pentagon would find it funny.
It's this one way street, if we do not like a country, it's leader or people, we feel it is fine to humiliate them, threaten them etc. etc. It is just plain wrong.
Naturally you, as a Muslim, do not highly value the notion of freedom of expression.
And if the film was made by Hamas about two idiots trying to kill the Israeli President? You would still laugh and defend their freedom of speech? Give us all a laugh and claim that you would.
I would. I would attack it and criticize them in the harshest language. I would not expect the government to prevent it. And might I add your tone and writing style are as deeply obnoxious as ever.
[Edited on 1/5/2015 by dougrhon]
Thanks for the laugh. You are so full of sh*t and hatred. It pours out in every post and you actually think you fool anyone. If you can not be honest with yourself, what is the point of posting?
Look in the mirror and admit that you hate every Muslim and want them dead. It would liberate you and we all know it already.
If Hamas made a similar film that would justify rolling in the tanks in your opinion.
You are funny, pathetic and sad. Feel sorry for you as all that anger and hate is just not healthy. You would defend a Muslim's rights - funniest statement on here in a long time. How many Muslims are in North Korea anyway? Doesn't stop you from making it about them. Let go of that anger. Thanks again for the laugh.
I know a bunch of you will say this is not the case in Korea; but this is why SONY originally capitulated. The world is full of sick; unrepentant animals
Thanks for the laugh. You are so full of sh*t and hatred. It pours out in every post and you actually think you fool anyone. If you can not be honest with yourself, what is the point of posting?
Look in the mirror and admit that you hate every Muslim and want them dead. It would liberate you and we all know it already.
If Hamas made a similar film that would justify rolling in the tanks in your opinion.
You are funny, pathetic and sad. Feel sorry for you as all that anger and hate is just not healthy. You would defend a Muslim's rights - funniest statement on here in a long time. How many Muslims are in North Korea anyway? Doesn't stop you from making it about them. Let go of that anger. Thanks again for the laugh.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You are deeply mentally ill dude. Everyone on this site knows it. You insult fight and put down everybody all the time. Talk about transference. Life is too short to deal with a mental case like you so do me a favor. Don't respond to my posts and I sure as hell will not respond to yours. Goodbye.
Thanks for the laugh. You are so full of sh*t and hatred. It pours out in every post and you actually think you fool anyone. If you can not be honest with yourself, what is the point of posting?
Look in the mirror and admit that you hate every Muslim and want them dead. It would liberate you and we all know it already.
If Hamas made a similar film that would justify rolling in the tanks in your opinion.
You are funny, pathetic and sad. Feel sorry for you as all that anger and hate is just not healthy. You would defend a Muslim's rights - funniest statement on here in a long time. How many Muslims are in North Korea anyway? Doesn't stop you from making it about them. Let go of that anger. Thanks again for the laugh.
More than a tad extreme and way out of line.
Thanks for the laugh. You are so full of sh*t and hatred. It pours out in every post and you actually think you fool anyone. If you can not be honest with yourself, what is the point of posting?
Look in the mirror and admit that you hate every Muslim and want them dead. It would liberate you and we all know it already.
If Hamas made a similar film that would justify rolling in the tanks in your opinion.
You are funny, pathetic and sad. Feel sorry for you as all that anger and hate is just not healthy. You would defend a Muslim's rights - funniest statement on here in a long time. How many Muslims are in North Korea anyway? Doesn't stop you from making it about them. Let go of that anger. Thanks again for the laugh.
More than a tad extreme and way out of line.
But accurate,
Thanks for the laugh. You are so full of sh*t and hatred. It pours out in every post and you actually think you fool anyone. If you can not be honest with yourself, what is the point of posting?
Look in the mirror and admit that you hate every Muslim and want them dead. It would liberate you and we all know it already.
If Hamas made a similar film that would justify rolling in the tanks in your opinion.
You are funny, pathetic and sad. Feel sorry for you as all that anger and hate is just not healthy. You would defend a Muslim's rights - funniest statement on here in a long time. How many Muslims are in North Korea anyway? Doesn't stop you from making it about them. Let go of that anger. Thanks again for the laugh.
More than a tad extreme and way out of line.
But accurate,
No it's not accurate jerk off. And the fact that you would extrapolate such nonsense from anything I write demonstrates you are as mentally ill as he is. This is why discourse in this country can no longer exist.
Thanks for the laugh. You are so full of sh*t and hatred. It pours out in every post and you actually think you fool anyone. If you can not be honest with yourself, what is the point of posting?
Look in the mirror and admit that you hate every Muslim and want them dead. It would liberate you and we all know it already.
If Hamas made a similar film that would justify rolling in the tanks in your opinion.
You are funny, pathetic and sad. Feel sorry for you as all that anger and hate is just not healthy. You would defend a Muslim's rights - funniest statement on here in a long time. How many Muslims are in North Korea anyway? Doesn't stop you from making it about them. Let go of that anger. Thanks again for the laugh.
More than a tad extreme and way out of line.
But accurate,
No it's not accurate jerk off. And the fact that you would extrapolate such nonsense from anything I write demonstrates you are as mentally ill as he is. This is why discourse in this country can no longer exist.
Discourse in this country can no longer exist as long as we have people who are experts on everything and look down on those who disagree with them as being mentally inferior. I think that sums you up.
