We continue to suffer the catastrophic consequences of Obama’s fantasist, anti-freedom foreign policy. The U.S. government is now saying that these anti-freedom riots have nothing to do with America or U.S. policy, but are solely about a video about Muhammad.
In fact, the riots have everything to do with America and U.S. policy. They are about freedom of conscience and freedom of speech: they’re an attempt to get the U.S. to shut down free speech and criminalize criticism of Islam, in accord with Shariah blasphemy laws. And the Obama administration is responding by putting a huge target on the head of the First Amendment (and on that of every U.S. citizen who exercises that constitutional right). This is a constitutional coup.
34 comments
Right, cos you were tossed into jail for saying this, weren't you, Pam?
What do you mean, nothing happened to you?
So let me get this straight... Obama secretly orchestrated all these protests & riots in numerous foreign countries so he can suspend the First Amendment here in the U.S.?
And since when does the POTUS have the power to suspend parts of the Constitution on a whim?
"putting a huge target on the head of the First Amendment (and on that of every U.S. citizen who exercises that constitutional right). This is a constitutional coup."
First amendment: Congress shall make no law regarding establishment of religion.
Wing nut daily editorial: Nobody can have an abortion because it's against my sharia er religion.
The first amendment already has a head wound, inflicted by christianists.
With freedom comes responsibilites. Yes, you have the freedom to openly acknowledge your opinion. But where's the harm of respecting other people's genuine religious icons?
Sure, you don't have a right to not be offended, but what's the point of offend 1,6 billion people in one stroke? Especially when you know that YOU will probably not be blamed, but the country you live in will be, and your poorly made movie may be the cause of people being killed.
In the first place, Ms. Geller, we know you were soliciting sponsorship for this piece of cuck at least a year ago. In the second place, we know you did it with a view to inciting violence so you could prove to the world how "all" Muslims "really" are. In the third place, what "we" stand for in the world is Bush/Cheney penis-in-your-face diplomacy, which in the fourth place is what you are engaging in all these manipulations to reinstall in the first place.
What strange logic. The riots are about a video about Muhammad, which happened to originate in the United States, though I don't think the man who made it was an American.
Newsflash: People in other countries don't necessarily know or care about the US Constitution or its contents. How can everything be Obama's fault? And how does trying to calm things equal attacking the first amendment?
The people in these protests and attacks on embassies, etc, probably don't know and don't care what the first amendment is.
The demonstrations etc in the Middle East and elsewhere were organised and orchestrated by the Islamic version of the Tea Party. A small, unrepresentative group of delusional, right wing, fucknuckles who seek social dominance for their own parochial version of a freedom denying religious viewpoint.
In the countrys concerned, these medieval minded sockpuppets are derided and disowned by the vast majority of the citizenry,- witness the recent event in Benghazi - while, in the west, certain media organistations blow their influence out of all proportion to reality, in furtherance of their own agenda.
"...they’re an attempt to get the U.S. to shut down free speech and criminalize criticism of Islam, in accord with Shariah blasphemy laws."
Well I'll agree with you there. But if you think that Obama will knuckle under to that you are seriously deluded.
People who kill people over a video piss me off. And those riots are probably connected in some ways to American foreign policy...
Also there was one fellow, I think from the UAE, who renewed a call for anti-blasphemy laws. So yes, these people don't like the idea of freedom of speech or expression.
And no, I'll not respect someone's religious icon just because they want me to. I try to be fair to people, but if I wanted to call Mohammad a violent paedophile I could very well do so and not care if I pissed anyone off. Though Mohammad was arguably neither of those things...
Saying Obama is in on it? Stupid.
i bet if someone made a video about how a certain palestinian goat herder i know of is a sex crazed, wine loving bisexual you wouldbe up in arms too. but im sure you would passively accept it as "their right to freedom of speech", right?
If Christians killed people every time they got offended, there'd be no atheists left alive. Time to actually step up and say this is crap instead of going "oh, but it's part of their culture" like they don't know any better.
Take a good look; that's what the US will look like in 10 years if we don't stop breeding people for jobs that will not be there. Jobs that cannot be there, because the relentless trend is toward more productivity, not semi-skilled labor which requires a lot of workers. A bunch of young people raised on religious fairy tales, a government that claims to have the approval of the head sky fairy, and nothing much to lose is a recipe for violence. Middle Eastern governments love distractions and conspiracy theories because they distract from government corruption and no viable plans for the future.
@stop groveling:
Christians are contaminated by Western values. They want to riot burn and lynch when they're offended, but the Western values they've absorbed partially restrain them, and the Western country/legal system they live in restrains them more.
Muslims lack both. They truly don't know any better.
(Continued)
With the possible exception of the Libyan attack, which appears to have been a calculated al-Qaeda terrorist strike, the mobs around embassies in Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, etc. have been motivated by The Innocence of Muslims , an anti-Muslim propaganda piece created by a meth-cooking fraudster who conned amateur actors and actresses into starring in it and dubbing over their lines. Furthermore, he made damn sure this would incite a violent reaction by advertising the film as [i]The Innocence of Bin Laden[/i] in order to attract the attention of only the most fanatical Muslims. And lo and behold, he got the reaction he was hoping for. Now innocent people are being killed and intimidated because they were caught in the crossfire between Islamist mobs and fundamentalist Coptic Christian exiles. Of course Nakoula Basseley Nakoula has a right to produce this trash--barring the aforementioned conjob on the movie's stars--but as Salman Rushdie noted , it doesn't make him any less of an asshole.
"...complaining about Obama throwing the victums under the bus by blaming a movie for them getting killed."
Okay, let's get one thing clear: Obama has done absolutely nothing wrong in this scenario. Contrary to prevailing Republican groupthink, he never apologized to the Muslim world. He also never threw anyone under the bus. If I were to say that an anti-Islamic film was responsible for the majority of the Islamic riots going on, I'd be correct.
The first 9/11; Chile 1973.
America; number 1 terrorist state since WW2.
Your foreign policy is not about promoting; "freedom of conscience and freedom of speech". It is in fact the opposite.
Let's see here:
1. Under Obama's watch, the Muslim Brotherhood has been allowed to take power in Egypt and other countries "liberated" by the "Arab Spring" (the Islamic Winter). Nice going there, America. And now you're STILL sending them military aid in the MILLIONS.
2. He wants to arm Syrian rebels who are jihadists, NOT freedom fighters.
3. He's been silent on the genuinely secular uprisings (like in Iran in 2009).
4. He thinks Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance. (Ha ha! Read "Reliance of the Traveler" then tell us with straight face that Islam is a religion of peace.)
5. He seems completely indifferent to the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda of "eliminating and destroying western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands" as revealed during the Holy Land Foundation trial
6. Despite his claims of being very pro-free speech he's consorting with the OIC and co-sponsoring resolution 16/18, another of the latest OIC (a cartel of mostly Islamic dictatorships and theocracies) attempt to limit criticism of Islam under the illusion of "combating religious hatred". That's not good. One that is so ardent about freedom of speech would tell the OIC to drop these infantile attempts, year after year, to find ways to curb criticism of Islam. It's not the first time they've done it, but previous attempts were outright rejected by the west because they were overtly anti-free speech. So now they pretend it's about "combating religious hatred" and not "defamation of religions". People should know better.
These are all legitimate concerns but FSTDT prefers to sweep everything under the rug, refuse to address the points being made and pretend the other side is just "crazy" and "fundamentalist".
It has long ceased to be an objective website exposing real fundamentalists and is now biased against the right.
There is a clear pattern where 99% of political comments you find "retarded" and "fundie" come from right-wingers, rarely from left.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.