The "Innocence of Muslims" movie and the embassy attacks

[K-II]

in the middle east people riot and kill people, in the west people get angry watching FoxNews and vote Republican(or the equivalent), which is really worse?

I guess that depends if you measure the harm done by each individual, or the resulting damage as a whole...

 

[Underdog]

Over there, it is not the dark ages, but it is definitely the Middle Ages. It is not the 21st Century over there so there was always going to be a lot of insanity erupting over this. They are tribal people. The same reaction to religious insulting will not be the same as in the West. It is like getting in a time machine and going over to 16th Centuryz England and insulting the King, a similar reaction would occur. Or going to Papua New Guinea and taking a photo of a tribesman, it the West that is an innocent action but in Papua New Guinea that would not be a smart move. It sucks that people will react like this but that is how different cultures work, sadly. They are not all at the same stage of historical evolution.

Sorry about your relatives, I hope they are keeping safe.

?

If these people are apparently stuck in the middle ages, where does that leave the UK, US..... Other countries? Both the UK and the USA (and other countries) have imperialist governments who colonise, abuse, torture... We are in no way different to people abroad, we're just luckier in our circumstances.

This time last year, London was unwinding from the riots. This began with a police officer shooting a black guy (
the police in London are known for their racism) and then hittingna 16 year old protestor. How is this different?

Look at the war on terror and how certain countries in the West have bombed and gone to war (terrorism imo) with Middle Eastern over oil. How Western governments have supported the very dictators who kill people for things like exercising their freedom of speech. This isn't a problem with any group of people... It's a global system bent on keeping certain groups of people oppressed.

Maybe.... just maybe.... there's more to this story than the government and business funded media lets on...

Whilst I don't believe it is you intent; your post could be interpreted as xenophobic.

 

[Underdog]

in the middle east people riot and kill people, in the west people get angry watching FoxNews and vote Republican(or the equivalent), which is really worse?

Given the history of the Republican party....

 

[led.boots]

in the middle east people riot and kill people, in the west people get angry watching FoxNews and vote Republican(or the equivalent), which is really worse?

I know this is supposed to be witty, but there is a huge difference. Getting angry is normal and human. Killing innocent people because you are angry is not. Attacking the embassy of another country and murdering its ambassador on your soil is criminal and an act of war.

And freesia, there is anti- American rioting in Australia now as well. A first world country.

 

[Freesia]

True, ledboots, but the people in those riots are from Lebanon and similar muslim countries. They are not the typical Western Australian. Their way of thinking will be similar to what you would find in the Middle East, the fact that it is happening in Australia is only because that is where they are. There are a number of other groups of people in Australia including Italians and people from the Balkans, and their own native people, also people from Asia, but you dont see them in these riots.

We dont seem to have any muslim riots here, Im not sure why that is, the muslim population seem to live in a very suburban area and seem to just shop at the malls etc. We tend to have Indian muslims here rather than Middle Eastern ones like Australia.

 

[led.boots]

I wish the pope had canceled his Lebanon trip.

 

[K-II]

We are in no way different to people abroad, we're just luckier in our circumstances.

I would say this depends heavily whether you mean 'we' as a society or 'we' as individuals. One person transplanted and raised in another society wouldn't magically grow up to be the same as they would have under the alternative circumstances, so as individuals we are 'luckier'. At the same time, the groups we have who are roughly equivalent in belief to those involved in this mess are a fair bit more sedate when they kick up a fuss in places like the UK or USA. Probably not by choice, but either way it demonstrates a notable difference between societies.

As for the actions of governments... what are you trying to indicate? It's not as though we've traded ******* social groups for ******* political groups, and they've just got it the other way around. They're both present in either case, just at different levels of severity. In spite of what certain western governments have... 'achieved'... in the realm of oppression, considering the power they wield compared to something like Syria's leadership, they've been incredibly restrained. If you're comparing them to rioters and/or militants as it seems, the difference is even greater.

This time last year, London was unwinding from the riots. This began with a police officer shooting a black guy (
the police in London are known for their racism) and then hittingna 16 year old protestor. How is this different?

Motivation, scope, severity, participants... wait, how are they similar?

Look at the war on terror and how certain countries in the West have bombed and gone to war (terrorism imo) with Middle Eastern over oil. How Western governments have supported the very dictators who kill people for things like exercising their freedom of speech. This isn't a problem with any group of people... It's a global system bent on keeping certain groups of people oppressed.

For a global system that actually has an express objective, that seems pretty arbitrary.

Maybe.... just maybe.... there's more to this story than the government and business funded media lets on...

I'm sure this is true of most stories regardless of who is doing the 'letting on': it's not as if an individual can't as easily be biased. But, what's the point? We can't work with information we don't have, just because what we do have can't be 100% reliable.

 

[Freesia]

I know, that seems like really bad timing. I guess he would have excellent security though. Perhaps he might help to smooth things over....

 

[Dave in MPLS]

The BBC estimates around 500 people participated in the protests in Cairo. Egypt has 84 million people. I'm not sure the 500 protestors are representative of the other 83,999,500.

 

[led.boots]

This is an interesting opinion by Egypt's prime minister on the US 's free speech laws. We will just change the constitution, no problem.

When the prime minister was asked whether the US should make amendments to its laws governing freedom of speech and expression, he replied,"I think we need to work out something around this because we cannot wait and see this happen again." Qandil also called on the US "to take the necessary measures to ensure insulting billions of people – one and a half billion people – and their beliefs does not happen and people pay for what they do and at the same time make sure that the reflections of the true Egyptian and Muslims is well [represented] in Western media."

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsCon...ays-number-of-US-embassy-rioters-were-pa.aspx

 

[beancounter]

The BBC estimates around 500 people participated in the protests in Cairo. Egypt has 84 million people. I'm not sure the 500 protestors are representative of the other 83,999,500.

But what about all the people who wanted to be at the protest but couldn't make it? You're assuming that everyone at the protest represents the total population of people who want to protest.

There are plenty of things I want to do, but I don't always have the time or resources to do them.

 

[led.boots]

But what about all the people who wanted to be at the protest but couldn't make it? You're assuming that everyone at the protest represents the total population of people who want to protest.

There are plenty of things I want to do, but I don't always have the time or resources to do them.

There are reports of 250 people injured,a pretty high percentage then.

 

[cornsail]

In case anyone thinks this type of violence only results from extreme attacks on Islam....

In February of 2012, Saudi poet and columnist Hamza Kashgari published three tweets about an imagined meeting with Mohammed:

-On your birthday, I shall not bow to you. I shall not kiss your hand. Rather, I shall shake it as equals do, and smile at you as you smile at me. I shall speak to you as a friend, no more.
-On your birthday, I find you wherever I turn. I will say that I have loved aspects of you, hated others, and could not understand many more.
-On your birthday, I will say that I have loved the rebel in you, that you've always been a source of inspiration to me, and that I do not like the halos of divinity around you. I shall not pray for you.

This resulted in reactions that included a Facebook group calling for his execution that 26,632 members joined as of 13 days after the tweets. Saudi Media Minister Abdel Aziz Khoja banned him from writing in any Saudi publication. He was extradited from Malaysia back to Saudi Arabia against the pleas of numerous human rights organizations, where he was arrested, despite issuing a letter of apology and deleting his Twitter account. I'm not sure if he's been charged yet or what his charge will be.

There is a real problem with certain (numerous) Muslims being intolerant to anyone so much as depicting Mohammed in drawing or saying they don't revere him. I'm not saying the film was good or bad (I haven't seen it--guessing bad though), but the film is not the problem. There are a bunch of videos made in the US about the US government being being 9/11, about Jews running the world, about Obama being a Kenyan imposter and on and on and on... The problem is the intolerance toward freedom of speech.

 

[Underdog]

Finally got to a proper 'puter.

I would say this depends heavily whether you mean 'we' as a society or 'we' as individuals. One person transplanted and raised in another society wouldn't magically grow up to be the same as they would have under the alternative circumstances, so as individuals we are 'luckier'. At the same time, the groups we have who are roughly equivalent in belief to those involved in this mess are a fair bit more sedate when they kick up a fuss in places like the UK or USA. Probably not by choice, but either way it demonstrates a notable difference between societies.

I'm not arguing that people have different socialisation, nor that radical Muslims, nationalists and other groups don't exist. It's just that I don't see myself, as a British person, as any way more advanced and less medieval than any other group of people. I don't think we can measure other societies against our standards and claim we are any more advanced, especially given that we have our wealth due to colonialism and we continue to have our wealth because our governments (speaking for the UK and the USA) actively support undemocratic governments for our economic gain.

Why don't many people kick off in the UK? Perhaps because for example, religious minorities have a lot more freedom here (I can't speak for any other country in great detail as I have lived here all my life) and there is a greater distribution of wealth. Perhaps to show displeasure at something, they would hold a peaceful protest because to bomb, or kick off, would be counter productive to achieving something. However, in countries where people might be shot, or tortured by their government for exercising freedom of speech, they may not have that option...

As for the actions of governments... what are you trying to indicate?

That governments commit acts of terrorism and in my view, contribute to keeping terrorist groups going for political gain. This has happened throughout history, probably in the majority of governments.

Motivation, scope, severity, participants... wait, how are they similar?

I was responding to another post, about tribalism, ect

For a global system that actually has an express objective, that seems pretty arbitrary.

How?


Do you follow the line of people in other countries being any more tribal, or barbaric than in Western countries? Do you not think that most people just want to have a roof over their heads, a little respect and some autonomy in their lives?

The majority of protests were peaceful... But where they tended to kick off, there have been tensions with the USA as it is.

 

[led.boots]

Finally got to a proper 'puter.


I'm not arguing that people have different socialisation, nor that radical Muslims, nationalists and other groups don't exist. It's just that I don't see myself, as a British person, as any way more advanced and less medieval than any other group of people. I don't think we can measure other societies against our standards and claim we are any more advanced, especially given that we have our wealth due to colonialism and we continue to have our wealth because our governments (speaking for the UK and the USA) actively support undemocratic governments for our economic gain.

Why don't many people kick off in the UK? Perhaps because for example, religious minorities have a lot more freedom here (I can't speak for any other country in great detail as I have lived here all my life) and there is a greater distribution of wealth. Perhaps to show displeasure at something, they would hold a peaceful protest because to bomb, or kick off, would be counter productive to achieving something. However, in countries where people might be shot, or tortured by their government for exercising freedom of speech, they may not have that option...


That governments commit acts of terrorism and in my view, contribute to keeping terrorist groups going for political gain. This has happened throughout history, probably in the majority of governments.


I was responding to another post, about tribalism, ect


How?


Do you follow the line of people in other countries being any more tribal, or barbaric than in Western countries? Do you not think that most people just want to have a roof over their heads, a little respect and some autonomy in their lives?

The majority of protests were peaceful... But where they tended to kick off, there have been tensions with the USA as it is.

Tensions in Australia?

And no, I do not by any means think that people in other countries are more barbaric or tribal. There is no excuse for murder, mayhem, or using religion as a club.

 

[Freesia]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bedouin

 

[Dave in MPLS]

There are reports of 250 people injured,a pretty high percentage then.

The 250 injured covers the entire week. The 500 attending a protest was talking about a single day.

The numbers don't really matter though. I was suggesting that the protestors did not accurately represent an entire culture, any more than Bachmann, Perkins, Jones, Schlafley, Falwell, etc, etc accurately represent Americans as a group.

 

[led.boots]

The 250 injured covers the entire week. The 500 attending a protest was talking about a single day.

The numbers don't really matter though. I was suggesting that the protestors did not accurately represent an entire culture, any more than Bachmann, Perkins, Jones, Schlafley, Falwell, etc, etc accurately represent Americans as a group.

Yes, I understand this, I just thought 500 seemed low judging by the video.

 

[K-II]

I'm not arguing that people have different socialisation, nor that radical Muslims, nationalists and other groups don't exist. It's just that I don't see myself, as a British person, as any way more advanced and less medieval than any other group of people. I don't think we can measure other societies against our standards and claim we are any more advanced, especially given that we have our wealth due to colonialism and we continue to have our wealth because our governments (speaking for the UK and the USA) actively support undemocratic governments for our economic gain.

I'm not sure how useful terms like 'medieval' really are, but there are going to be differences whatever standards we measure by I think. Even among countries of roughly similar wealth, some societies are going to be better* than others. We measure our (first-world collective) own against each other and find this as well.

Also, I don't really understand the last part. Why does that prevent us from losing wealth?

Why don't many people kick off in the UK? Perhaps because for example, religious minorities have a lot more freedom here (I can't speak for any other country in great detail as I have lived here all my life) and there is a greater distribution of wealth. Perhaps to show displeasure at something, they would hold a peaceful protest because to bomb, or kick off, would be counter productive to achieving something. However, in countries where people might be shot, or tortured by their government for exercising freedom of speech, they may not have that option...

In this case though, it seems more like violent opposition to free speech. They don't seem to be protecting themselves from anything.

That governments commit acts of terrorism and in my view, contribute to keeping terrorist groups going for political gain. This has happened throughout history, probably in the majority of governments.

I don't have any particular disagreement with that, but I would think when you want to judge what society is 'more advanced' or something like that, it only makes sense that if they both share one attribute, it doesn't affect the 'score' between them.

How?

Well, what's the motivation? I mean it's one thing for a system to be unconsciously biased against any random group, but for a worldwide system to specifically target 'certain groups of people' for oppression, there would have to be some reason they were chosen, or else it amounts to something like:
'hey *random group of people*, let's go oppress... uh... that one guy over there!'
'wait, why?'
'um... 'cause.'
'meh, alright.'

Do you follow the line of people in other countries being any more tribal, or barbaric than in Western countries? Do you not think that most people just want to have a roof over their heads, a little respect and some autonomy in their lives?

Barbaric... mm... probably not in principle, though maybe in practice. Tribal would depend where you go, but I don't think westerners in general are very tribal at all anymore, so probably. Then again, I'm thinking of tribes in a more historical cultural sense. There could be equivalents in western societies, depending on what exactly makes a tribe. Things like certain large gangs for example, which are more involved than just (criminal) enterprise.

The majority of protests were peaceful... But where they tended to kick off, there have been tensions with the USA as it is.

I don't expect any sort of violent majority. I can't even think of examples of that, really.

*better is obviously subjective, as preferences aside, a society may provide a better quality of life to somebody of a certain race, wealth, sex, and so on. I suppose it could mean 'better on average' or 'better worst case scenario that isn't a freak accident'.

 

[rainforests1]

Apparently the actors don't read the scripts before doing a movie? I have a hard time believing that.