U.S. Ambassador murdered over film blaspheming Mohammed.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
U.S. Ambassador murdered over film blaspheming Mohammed.

It's all over the news. U.S. Ambassador murdered(and he wasn't even the person who made the film) of course, but muslim thugs murdered him because the U.S. did not stop the film from being made.

And these assholes murdered a guy who loved the Lybian people and really wanted to help them progress.

To any Muslim reading this please explain to us how many claim you are a religion of peace when you murder, and not even out of self defense, but childish honor crap, and not even the film maker, but a guy who had NOTHING to do with it.

Unlike the assholes who did this, we would not have you murdered or even arrested merely for saying "Jesus did not exist" or "atheists will burn in hell". Many Muslims do value freedom of speech, but not enough Muslims do and not enough value it to the extent we do in the west.

I emplor the Muslims who advocate NON VIOLENT protests to understand WHY protecting free speech MUST include the right to offend and blaspheme.

 

Do you really think that murdering people will get the west to set up blasphemy laws? It wont. And for your own good, you really need to understand how dangerous those laws are, even amoungst your own sect.

Jefferson and Adams and all the founders valued freedom of religion, but they also knew that blasphemy laws and govenrments run on religion were bad. Even  if we in the west as non Muslims never existed and the world were all Muslim, you would still have political and religious division, as you show clearly now between Sunnis and Shiites.

It is my greatest wish that the East learn that protection of verbal dissent, and advocation of NON VIOLENT PROTEST, is what makes a civil society. Your use of violence wont make the billions of all sorts of other religions bow to you.

The more you use violence to protest A MERE FILM, the more films we will make. Peace and civility are opposite of violence. Peace and civility are not based on anyone submitting to anyone else.

I watched as the protestors ripped up an American flag. And if that had been where it had been left, without anyone dying, I would merely be annoyed and not angry. We did not help you just so you could turn arround and murder the very people still there trying to help you.

The film maker you are angry at was USING WORDS not physical violence. Maybe if you would make a film yourself like he did, maybe you would get more that way rather than acting like children in a schoolyard who got daddy picked on.

I have no sympathy for anyone who uses violent protest. As an atheist who has been vilely equated to Hitler and been deemd automatically immoral, I really don't want to hear shit about any blasphemy about your prophet. I live with the hate and the stereotypes and the bigotry every day.

You only piss the rest of the world off when you do this, it does not change our attitudes. I know there are some Muslims and Arabs I have meet who don't subscribe to violence as a tactic, but those non-Violent ones need to speak up and speek out.

NO MATTER THE LABEL, we are all humans first. But we cannot live nor should anyone have to live in a world of fear ESPECIALLY over MERER WORDS. I cannot believe anyone who had been arrested or torutured or murdered by Gaddaffi would dare turn arround and murder a man, not even involved, but even the man who merely made a film.

You are hypocrites to topple a dictator and then turn arround and act like dictators yourselves. And to lump us all in the same catigory with pathetic guilt by association. I supported the Mosque being built in NY, not because I think Islam is credible as a religion or a claim, but because it is part of the diversity of this country. I am also pissed that a Muslim cop who died on 9/11 was not honnored along with all the rest.

Peace is not always being free from being offended. Peace is knowing that no human wants to be physically harmed no matter who says what. Burn a flag, protest that film maker, but you get no sympathy or respect from me when you become murderous thugs.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Brian37 wrote:It's all over

Brian37 wrote:

It's all over the news. U.S. Ambassador murdered(and he wasn't even the person who made the film) of course, but muslim thugs murdered him because the U.S. did not stop the film from being made.

And these assholes murdered a guy who loved the Lybian people and really wanted to help them progress.

To any Muslim reading this please explain to us how many claim you are a religion of peace when you murder, and not even out of self defense, but childish honor crap, and not even the film maker, but a guy who had NOTHING to do with it.

Unlike the assholes who did this, we would not have you murdered or even arrested merely for saying "Jesus did not exist" or "atheists will burn in hell". Many Muslims do value freedom of speech, but not enough Muslims do and not enough value it to the extent we do in the west.

I emplor the Muslims who advocate NON VIOLENT protests to understand WHY protecting free speech MUST include the right to offend and blaspheme.

 

Do you really think that murdering people will get the west to set up blasphemy laws? It wont. And for your own good, you really need to understand how dangerous those laws are, even amoungst your own sect.

Jefferson and Adams and all the founders valued freedom of religion, but they also knew that blasphemy laws and govenrments run on religion were bad. Even  if we in the west as non Muslims never existed and the world were all Muslim, you would still have political and religious division, as you show clearly now between Sunnis and Shiites.

It is my greatest wish that the East learn that protection of verbal dissent, and advocation of NON VIOLENT PROTEST, is what makes a civil society. Your use of violence wont make the billions of all sorts of other religions bow to you.

The more you use violence to protest A MERE FILM, the more films we will make. Peace and civility are opposite of violence. Peace and civility are not based on anyone submitting to anyone else.

I watched as the protestors ripped up an American flag. And if that had been where it had been left, without anyone dying, I would merely be annoyed and not angry. We did not help you just so you could turn arround and murder the very people still there trying to help you.

The film maker you are angry at was USING WORDS not physical violence. Maybe if you would make a film yourself like he did, maybe you would get more that way rather than acting like children in a schoolyard who got daddy picked on.

I have no sympathy for anyone who uses violent protest. As an atheist who has been vilely equated to Hitler and been deemd automatically immoral, I really don't want to hear shit about any blasphemy about your prophet. I live with the hate and the stereotypes and the bigotry every day.

You only piss the rest of the world off when you do this, it does not change our attitudes. I know there are some Muslims and Arabs I have meet who don't subscribe to violence as a tactic, but those non-Violent ones need to speak up and speek out.

NO MATTER THE LABEL, we are all humans first. But we cannot live nor should anyone have to live in a world of fear ESPECIALLY over MERER WORDS. I cannot believe anyone who had been arrested or torutured or murdered by Gaddaffi would dare turn arround and murder a man, not even involved, but even the man who merely made a film.

You are hypocrites to topple a dictator and then turn arround and act like dictators yourselves. And to lump us all in the same catigory with pathetic guilt by association. I supported the Mosque being built in NY, not because I think Islam is credible as a religion or a claim, but because it is part of the diversity of this country. I am also pissed that a Muslim cop who died on 9/11 was not honnored along with all the rest.

Peace is not always being free from being offended. Peace is knowing that no human wants to be physically harmed no matter who says what. Burn a flag, protest that film maker, but you get no sympathy or respect from me when you become murderous thugs.

EDIT, I was just watching Newt and holly fuck we both agree on something. We both agree that we don't condone violence merey because the religious get offended.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
 I think it is time for the

 I think it is time for the Marines to have some target practice. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3593
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote: I

Beyond Saving wrote:

 I think it is time for the Marines to have some target practice. 

     ...or a B1-B.

I'm a right wing atheist because I enjoy being hated by everyone.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EaE66cl4Bz8


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Beyond Saving wrote: I

Beyond Saving wrote:

 I think it is time for the Marines to have some target practice. 

Who? These assholes also murdered 14 Muslims along with the Americans. Are you willing to risk murdering people who do support us? While we dont know how much support we have there, there was at least enough to have people there that do support us.

I'd rather find a targeted way to get them arrested or taken out, THE INDIVIDUALS, not the entire country.

We don't need anymore wars much less collateral damage they can use to recrute.

I DO support any Muslim's right to non violently protest the film. And I do support going after these criminals. I think we are far better off treating it like a crime than a political or religious war. That is what the nuts in Islam and Christianity want.

But I really want any Muslim reading this to comment. Why do you think it is ok to murder people who pick on your profit or god? If you dont, then what are you doing to send the message to the east that protest is one thing, but violence should be unnacceptable.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
The wrong response is being

The wrong response is being given from the west. Youtube took the video down and Clinton denounced the film. The correct response was for Youtube to feature the film and Clinton to praise it. For hollywood to announce that next summer will be the summer of roasting islam. As long as people cower to bullies, they give bullies all the power. When a bully hits you, break his fucking jaw. He won't hit you again. Likely not anyone else either.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Vastet wrote:The wrong

Vastet wrote:
The wrong response is being given from the west. Youtube took the video down and Clinton denounced the film. The correct response was for Youtube to feature the film and Clinton to praise it. For hollywood to announce that next summer will be the summer of roasting islam. As long as people cower to bullies, they give bullies all the power. When a bully hits you, break his fucking jaw. He won't hit you again. Likely not anyone else either.

I don't agree fully with this statement. She was not saying this guy didn't have a right to be an asshole. It wasn't coming from secular "this doesn't make sense". It was comming from a bigot. I condemn the video too. I do think however, youtube should not have take it down.

 

Now what I do agree with as far as that asshole's message I would have argued differently.

Mohammed, and most men of all religions back then would have had age gaps between men and girls and back then, the mortality rate would dictate that the quicker you make offspring the better chance of reproduction. Plus in all societies men were all ignorant and the concept of female equality didn't exist in most cultures.

I would argue to Muslims that in the west we don't find it acceptible today to treat girls or women as property. Mohammed did and so did Christianity and Hebrew. Marry by the social standards, would have been 9-14 years old and would have been promised by her family to Joseph just like the girls were Mohammed's bounty.

But nowhere in her condemnation did she say that laws should exist to prevent him from making that video. Nor was Youtube forced by the government to take it down. It is unfortunate they did, but they were not forced by the government to do so.

So it is a mixed bag for me. I am with her in her condemnation of the video. But I don't think she was suggesting or would suggest government laws forcing Youtube to take it down.

I am more pissed off at Youtube and even South Park to caving into PC violence. Sometimes it astounds me we learned nothing in the west after the cartoonist was threatened.

I do however think the language was to protect our diplimats in the Middle East and had little to do with oppression of free speech here.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3267
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
i don't think any muslims

i don't think any muslims are reading this.  i've been coming here over 4 years now and i can't remember any muslim ever being here.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
iwbiek wrote:i don't think

iwbiek wrote:

i don't think any muslims are reading this.  i've been coming here over 4 years now and i can't remember any muslim ever being here.

We have had breifly for maybe a day or a week a couple of Muslims. I remember one posting that stupid fucking picture of the Red Nebula claiming the Koran talked about "red skies" proved that science propped up their myth.

But it is true we don't get them posting here. I am quite sure there are pleanty of all labels who read even if they don't post. I am sure we have Muslims read, But they may not post out of fear or hate.

It is worth typing because it will be read by other moderates and social liberals who might have or do have contact in real life Muslim friends or co workers or family.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3135
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
This is quite chilling that

This is quite chilling that Obama, Clinton and the embassy would release comments critical of free speech in an official capacity. If they want to criticize the movie, do so as part of political speech and not on the taxpayer's dime. They are paid to protect free speech not criticize it.

So now when you exercise free speech, one needs to fear the government. Can they charge us with hate crimes for mocking religion?

Has anyone seen part of the movie? It is hilarious. It is really sad that these Muslims can not laugh at this.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3267
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
why has everyone turned into

why has everyone turned into such a chicken shit these days?  good god, why can't we ever have a president who goes on TV and says, "hey, if somebody wants to make a movie making fun of, or even just showing, the prophet muhammad, they're free to do that in our country and you can burn me in effigy all you want, but you're just gonna have to get the fuck over it."

then, if they happen to crash another plane into something else, go on TV again and say, "guess what?  that doesn't change shit.  because just like you're willing to die for your fuckin' fairy tale, we're willing to die for our right to react to your fuckin' fairy tale however we choose.  oh, and in a matter of days you're gonna have a SEAL shove a pineapple grenade up your ass and pull the fuckin' pin like a tampon string.  so start practising your 'allahu akbar' now, shit-for-brains."

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3246
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
iwbiek wrote:why has

iwbiek wrote:

why has everyone turned into such a chicken shit these days?  good god, why can't we ever have a president who goes on TV and says, "hey, if somebody wants to make a movie making fun of, or even just showing, the prophet muhammad, they're free to do that in our country and you can burn me in effigy all you want, but you're just gonna have to get the fuck over it."

then, if they happen to crash another plane into something else, go on TV again and say, "guess what?  that doesn't change shit.  because just like you're willing to die for your fuckin' fairy tale, we're willing to die for our right to react to your fuckin' fairy tale however we choose.  oh, and in a matter of days you're gonna have a SEAL shove a pineapple grenade up your ass and pull the fuckin' pin like a tampon string.  so start practising your 'allahu akbar' now, shit-for-brains."

I am 100% agreement with that .

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
EXC wrote:This is quite

EXC wrote:

This is quite chilling that Obama, Clinton and the embassy would release comments critical of free speech in an official capacity. If they want to criticize the movie, do so as part of political speech and not on the taxpayer's dime. They are paid to protect free speech not criticize it.

So now when you exercise free speech, one needs to fear the government. Can they charge us with hate crimes for mocking religion?

Has anyone seen part of the movie? It is hilarious. It is really sad that these Muslims can not laugh at this.

 

Show me where Clinton said that the guy who made the video should be arrested. Where did she say that Youtube should be prosicuted for putting it up?

This website and other websites blaspheme religion all the time and we have not been shut down.

And as I said before, I CONDEMN THE VIDEO TOO, so I dont see how you could claim I support censorship. I would condemn any lawmaker from banning it by force of law, but she was commenting on it only, she wasn't calling for censorship.

I find your chicken little crap chilling. The Supreme Court has already countless times weighed in on offensive speech, most notable "People vs Larry Flint". Condemning the content of something is not the same as calling for a ban on it.

When the fartbag Jerry Falwell brought his case to the Supreme Court, THEY DID condemn Flint for dipicting Jerry Fucking his mother in the parody add. But they also said SO THE FUCK WHAT JERRY.

Clinton never used the word "ban" or "arrest" in refference to the video maker. But I think anyone, even a politician has the right to condemn something even if they don't have the right to ban it by law.

Otherwise what rights do we as atheist have to condemn any form of bigotry which we often condemn on a daily basis.

You have the right to be a hateful bigot, but that does not mean others don't have a right to call you on it, and that is all Clinton was doing.

 

I am so fucking sick of you finding fault in everything a "libral" does. If it were not for liberals women wouldn't have the right to vote and blacks would still be using separate bathrooms. I blasted the stupid bitch who wanted to take "nigger" out of the Huckle Berry Fin Museum. But I damned sure am going to condem any white racist even if I wont censor them.

You don't have to use force of law to shut people  up and nowhere in her words did she even suggest that.

You just cant stand when you lose an election.

 

Before you go blasting her, why don't you go after the right who really wants to crawl up everyone's social ass and control the vaginas of women.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
iwbiek wrote:why has

iwbiek wrote:

why has everyone turned into such a chicken shit these days?  good god, why can't we ever have a president who goes on TV and says, "hey, if somebody wants to make a movie making fun of, or even just showing, the prophet muhammad, they're free to do that in our country and you can burn me in effigy all you want, but you're just gonna have to get the fuck over it."

then, if they happen to crash another plane into something else, go on TV again and say, "guess what?  that doesn't change shit.  because just like you're willing to die for your fuckin' fairy tale, we're willing to die for our right to react to your fuckin' fairy tale however we choose.  oh, and in a matter of days you're gonna have a SEAL shove a pineapple grenade up your ass and pull the fuckin' pin like a tampon string.  so start practising your 'allahu akbar' now, shit-for-brains."

 

I totally believe in the sentiment of what you just said, but even outside the issue of religion, there are some things you cant say in those words. At any level as a public figure, be it a sports star, or a celebrety, or a politician, cant say that laypersons can.

A comedian can get away with that before a politician can, and Bush who was much more a war hawk certainly used tougher language, but even he wouldn't have put it like that.

We still live in a reality where we are not the only country in the world. I don' think anyone on the right or the left that high up is suggesting we be wimps. If our politicians were, they wouldn't even allow laypersons or websites like this to exist.

This isn't about censorship in as much as it is protecting the people over there.

I think it is more a bottom up thing comming from us than it can be right now, comming from any republican or democrat, but it is an absolute mistake to think when this country is pushed that we wont react, we have and if we have to again, we will.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Beyond Saving

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 I think it is time for the Marines to have some target practice. 

Who?

The ones climbing the walls, defacing our embassies and killing our citizens.

 

Brian37 wrote:

These assholes also murdered 14 Muslims along with the Americans.

All the more reason to give them an extra hole in the head.

 

Brian37 wrote:

Are you willing to risk murdering people who do support us?

They obviously don't support us, and I do not consider it murder. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

While we dont know how much support we have there, there was at least enough to have people there that do support us.

We know exactly how much support we have, that is what we pay the CIA for. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

I'd rather find a targeted way to get them arrested or taken out, THE INDIVIDUALS, not the entire country.

Obviously, that is why I said "target practice" because you take your rifle, target individuals and execute. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

We don't need anymore wars much less collateral damage they can use to recrute.

Who said anything about war?

 

Brian37 wrote:

I DO support any Muslim's right to non violently protest the film. And I do support going after these criminals. I think we are far better off treating it like a crime than a political or religious war. That is what the nuts in Islam and Christianity want.

If they step foot on our embassy grounds they are trespassing on our property. They can protest anywhere else in the country for all I care, they put a hand on our property they should be shot. Treating them like criminals is absurd, they are outside our legal jurisdiction and the legal systems of the countries they are in are corrupt and unreliable.  

 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5089
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
As far as Islam

 

is concerned the facts are in. The koran is a gibbering crock of shit written by a child-molesting murderer.

When I read Arberry I could not believe how stupid the book was, how ignorant it was. Raw assertion passes for the word of god. Laughable.  

I'm not sure muslims understand the concept of irony. Killing people over accusations their religion is violent just makes them look more moronic than usual.

And I'm with everyone. Since when did religious threats govern our elected leaders? 

And why don't these same leaders react against the vile threats and insults in the Koran and the bible directed against unbelievers?

We should pull out of the Middle East entirely. Let them stew in their own half-witted juices. 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3135
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Show me where

Brian37 wrote:

Show me where Clinton said that the guy who made the video should be arrested. Where did she say that Youtube should be prosicuted for putting it up?

I never said they did. But Obama has supported so called hate crimes legislation whose only purpose is to stifle speech.

My problem is that they are on the taxpayers dime when they criticize someones speech, they are releasing these statements as representatives of the USA, not as their own personal or political opinion. If Obama condemned the movie at a campaign event, I would have no problem with it, but don't have our embassies and state department release statements critical of private individual exercising free speech.

To me, this is the equivelent of putting the 10 commandments on government buildings. What if Romney becomes president and the embassy released a statement that the only true religion is Mormonism and Joseph Smith was God's prophet? Romney can say this as a private individual or at a campaign event, but not as a representative of the USA. You get the difference?

 

Brian37 wrote:

 

I am so fucking sick of you finding fault in everything a "libral" does. If it were not for liberals women wouldn't have the right to vote and blacks would still be using separate bathrooms. I blasted the stupid bitch who wanted to take "nigger" out of the Huckle Berry Fin Museum. But I damned sure am going to condem any white racist even if I wont censor them.

Of course if we did what Democrats wanted, Blacks would still all be slaves.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
According to Reuters that

According to Reuters that guy was killed in a planned attack, not because of a movie, and the cast of the film is suing the producer because all the anti-religious parts were dubbed in during post production.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
To Beyond and EX, we had

To Beyond and EX, we had Dirty Harry in office for 8 years and look where that got us. I am all for putting a bullet in an assholes head. But we cant afford to create a shit filled tiolet in the process. Shoot first didn't work.

Getting into a war is easy, winning one and getting out is much harder. If we can get Bin Ladin like we did, I have no doubt we can get some if not all the assholes who killed the Ambassador without starting another ground war.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Quote:The ones climbing the

Quote:

The ones climbing the walls, defacing our embassies and killing our citizens.

Should our police here be allowed to go beyond arresting a pro lifer who only defaces an abortion clinic and allow them to kill someone who merely defaces property?

The pro lifers secretly support the abortion doctor killers, but in America we dont convict on guilt by association, nor is our government allowed to presume guilt.

We go after the killers. Anyone merely burning a flag or defacing property are merely being assholes, otherwise you and I should have license to murder anyone who has ever come in contact with someone who has defaced an Abortion clinic, or has an extreme right pro life website.

I am not going to lump all Muslims together because some are murderous thugs. Again, along with the 4 Americans, they murdered 14 Muslims. I'd rather not allow them to use anything we do as a recrutment tactic. Stick to evidence and stick to the killers.

John Wayne/ Dirty Harry forgien police has not worked. I think we can be strong without carpet bombing everything.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3246
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
Off topic here

Off topic here but the film maker is identifying themselves as a "Coptic Christian" whatever the hell that is. (All religions are false anyway so it really doesn't matter).

I'll try to go back through the news articles that I was browsing this morning and see if I can find it. But I noticed in the comments section of the article, there were a lot of these "Coptic Christians" stating the film was not that big of a deal.

Call me ignorant here ( I've been kinda busy the past couple of days and haven't had time to look into it) but what exactly is this film all about ?

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Quote:The ones

Brian37 wrote:

Quote:

The ones climbing the walls, defacing our embassies and killing our citizens.

Should our police here be allowed to go beyond arresting a pro lifer who only defaces an abortion clinic and allow them to kill someone who merely defaces property?

No but we are not talking about crime being committed in our country, we are talking about non-citizens crossing onto our sovereign territory with clearly aggressive intentions. There is no police authority in such a situation. They had guns and fucking RPGs. If someone attacked an abortion clinic with an RPG I would have no problem with the police (or armed citizen) shooting them in the head (assuming that the police could hit a head, I have far more faith in a US Marine hitting their target) but you are comparing apples to horse shit. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

I am not going to lump all Muslims together because some are murderous thugs. Again, along with the 4 Americans, they murdered 14 Muslims. I'd rather not allow them to use anything we do as a recrutment tactic. Stick to evidence and stick to the killers.

John Wayne/ Dirty Harry forgien police has not worked. I think we can be strong without carpet bombing everything.

I didn't suggest carpet bombing. I very clearly suggested Marines, with rifles, in the embassy, shooting out the fucking window, and shooting anyone climbing the wall in the head. If they want to burn copies of our flags, good for them. If they want to climb our embassy wall and take our flag from the top they should be shot. If you rush our embassy and start shooting shit, you should be shot. If you assault or kill an American in one of our embassies you should be shot. If you get away and we can identify you, we should track you down and shoot you, just like we did to bin Laden. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
The problem is the people

The problem is the people are there on a diplomatic mission and to provide assistance to their own citizens in the host nation. Killing a bunch of unarmed protesters, even if they violated the embassy would be counterproductive to those ends. It would be a kind of needlessly self-destructive over-reaction. When the host nation can anticipate a violent protest they have to defend the embassies with non-lethal force if they want to take part in that system.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:The problem is

Gauche wrote:

The problem is the people are there on a diplomatic mission and to provide assistance to their own citizens in the host nation. Killing a bunch of unarmed protesters, even if they violated the embassy would be counterproductive to those ends. It would be a kind of needlessly self-destructive over-reaction. When the host nation can anticipate a violent protest they have to defend the embassies with non-lethal force if they want to take part in that system.

 

WTF, they were not "unarmed"

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/2012913121437459208.html 

Quote:

What is clear is that, whoever did attack the consulate came well-prepared, with rocket-propelled grenades and sufficient small arms to outfight and outgun the consulate's guards, both Libyans and Americans. Indeed two American marines were amongst the dead, together with the ambassador and a consulate information officer.

Quote:

 

It was apparently a rocket-propelled grenade that started the fire in the building, in which the ambassador died whilst hasty arrangements were being made to move the staff to a safe house. 

 

Yet, the building also had Libyan guards who, by all accounts, were outgunned and effectively stood aside. Even after the attack, there was no attempt to cordon off the burning building, and locals were able to loot it at will. Yet, even though the attackers were well-armed, their numbers were small and surely the local authorities would have gone out of their way to protect the representatives of a state that had contributed so heavily to Libya’s own victory last year. 

 

In fact, the tragic incident in Benghazi highlights what is becoming the major systemic crisis in Libya; the inability of the government to assert its control over the state. Libya is still in thrall to a myriad of militias which do not necessarily listen to the central authorities in Tripoli. 

Obviously, Libya is either unwilling or incapable of providing security. Since they can't or won't we need to do it ourselves, which means more Marines. 

 

<----------target

<-------assholes that are not targets

<---- approaching target status- these people were in Yemen and the Yemen police fired a few warning shots in the air, realizing they were about to become targets they retreated causing zero casualties on either side. 

 

 

I suppose you are going to tell me the guys who did this were unarmed too? What did they do, spontaneously combust?

 

 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Both things happened. There

Both things happened. There are unarmed protesters and there was a coordinated attack. Killing people who are unarmed protesters would be so damaging to their mission it would defeat the purpose. What should the people say, that they are there in the cause of diplomacy but they killed six people who burned down a KFC? That would be stupid.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:Both things

Gauche wrote:

Both things happened. There are unarmed protesters and there was a coordinated attack. Killing people who are unarmed protesters would be so damaging to their mission it would defeat the purpose. What should the people say, that they are there in the cause of diplomacy but they killed six people who burned down a KFC? That would be stupid.

And I made it very clear I was not talking about shooting the unarmed protesters they can stand out there and yell death to America and burn flags all day long for all I care. You shoot the hostiles, not the civilians- it isn't complicated. When someone climbs the embassy wall and starts firebombing the place or has an AK-47, then you shoot them. Our Marines have access to good optics, they can tell the difference between an armed hostile and an unarmed protester. 

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:And I

Beyond Saving wrote:

And I made it very clear I was not talking about shooting the unarmed protesters they can stand out there and yell death to America and burn flags all day long for all I care. You shoot the hostiles, not the civilians- it isn't complicated. When someone climbs the embassy wall and starts firebombing the place or has an AK-47, then you shoot them. Our Marines have access to good optics, they can tell the difference between an armed hostile and an unarmed protester. 

Then why are you saying the people in that photo should be shot? They don't have AK-47s. The people who violated the embassies were vandalizing except for the Libyan embassy which was a planned reprisal.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5089
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
What this makes

 

 

clear is what can all look forward to when the number of muslims in the West increases, as it inevitably will.

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
"It was comming from a

"It was comming from a bigot. I condemn the video too. I do think however, youtube should not have take it down."

I don't give a fuck who made it, I fully support it in every way. I condemn those who condemn it.

Youtube should not have taken it down, every civilised person should support it, and every single "protestor" should be strapped down and forced to watch it. Twice.

All the idiots condemning the film not only are condemning free speech, but are apologists for a bunch of whiny little shits who've yet to learn the world doesn't revolve around them. I have no patience for bullies, nor those who would defend them.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote:Beyond Saving

Gauche wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

And I made it very clear I was not talking about shooting the unarmed protesters they can stand out there and yell death to America and burn flags all day long for all I care. You shoot the hostiles, not the civilians- it isn't complicated. When someone climbs the embassy wall and starts firebombing the place or has an AK-47, then you shoot them. Our Marines have access to good optics, they can tell the difference between an armed hostile and an unarmed protester. 

Then why are you saying the people in that photo should be shot? They don't have AK-47s. The people who violated the embassies were vandalizing except for the Libyan embassy which was a planned reprisal.

And have you noticed that the topic of the thread is the Libyan embassy attack? Did you notice that I only labeled one picture of one man as a target? The other photos I labeled quite clearly as not targets. You need to get your eyes checked.

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Vastet wrote:"It was comming

Vastet wrote:
"It was comming from a bigot. I condemn the video too. I do think however, youtube should not have take it down." I don't give a fuck who made it, I fully support it in every way. I condemn those who condemn it. Youtube should not have taken it down, every civilised person should support it, and every single "protestor" should be strapped down and forced to watch it. Twice. All the idiots condemning the film not only are condemning free speech, but are apologists for a bunch of whiny little shits who've yet to learn the world doesn't revolve around them. I have no patience for bullies, nor those who would defend them.

I DO condemn the video, because the guy was a bigot, not because he was merely questioning religion. I do support it being kept up ONLY and strictly as a free speech issue if Youtube chose to, but the government should not force them to take it down.. But freedom to condemn it is part of free speech too.

It is just like Rush having his ass handed to him by the public backlash. Rush has the right by law to be an asshole, but others should be allowed to call him an asshole.

There is a difference between condemning something in protest, and calling for a ban on it. Otherwise if we equate condemnation as a call for a ban on something, then no one would have any free speech rights at all.

And yes, the violent pricks are whiny little shits who think the world revoves around them.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Vastet wrote:"It was comming

Vastet wrote:
"It was comming from a bigot. I condemn the video too. I do think however, youtube should not have take it down." I don't give a fuck who made it, I fully support it in every way. I condemn those who condemn it. Youtube should not have taken it down, every civilised person should support it, and every single "protestor" should be strapped down and forced to watch it. Twice. All the idiots condemning the film not only are condemning free speech, but are apologists for a bunch of whiny little shits who've yet to learn the world doesn't revolve around them. I have no patience for bullies, nor those who would defend them.

I DO condemn the video, because the guy was a bigot, not because he was merely questioning religion. I do support it being kept up ONLY and strictly as a free speech issue if Youtube chose to, but the government should not force them to take it down.. But freedom to condemn it is part of free speech too.

It is just like Rush having his ass handed to him by the public backlash. Rush has the right by law to be an asshole, but others should be allowed to call him an asshole.

There is a difference between condemning something in protest, and calling for a ban on it. Otherwise if we equate condemnation as a call for a ban on something, then no one would have any free speech rights at all.

And yes, the violent pricks are whiny little shits who think the world revoves around them.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Beyond Saving wrote:Brian37

Beyond Saving wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Beyond Saving wrote:

 I think it is time for the Marines to have some target practice. 

Who?

The ones climbing the walls, defacing our embassies and killing our citizens.

 

Brian37 wrote:

These assholes also murdered 14 Muslims along with the Americans.

All the more reason to give them an extra hole in the head.

 

Brian37 wrote:

Are you willing to risk murdering people who do support us?

They obviously don't support us, and I do not consider it murder. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

While we dont know how much support we have there, there was at least enough to have people there that do support us.

We know exactly how much support we have, that is what we pay the CIA for. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

I'd rather find a targeted way to get them arrested or taken out, THE INDIVIDUALS, not the entire country.

Obviously, that is why I said "target practice" because you take your rifle, target individuals and execute. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

We don't need anymore wars much less collateral damage they can use to recrute.

Who said anything about war?

 

Brian37 wrote:

I DO support any Muslim's right to non violently protest the film. And I do support going after these criminals. I think we are far better off treating it like a crime than a political or religious war. That is what the nuts in Islam and Christianity want.

If they step foot on our embassy grounds they are trespassing on our property. They can protest anywhere else in the country for all I care, they put a hand on our property they should be shot. Treating them like criminals is absurd, they are outside our legal jurisdiction and the legal systems of the countries they are in are corrupt and unreliable.  

 

Don't sit there and benefit from our Constitution knowing you know it is much better than any government laws they have over there, and sit here and tell me we shouldn't apply our laws to our fellow human beings. I think our Constitution is great and if it is good enough for us, then it is good enough for anyone we accuse.

And they are criminals. They are not soldiers which makes them individuals and individual groups. When you conflate them to wariors you give them the status they do not deserve. They are criminals and thugs.

How the fuck do you sell due process to the rest of the world if you say "we get it, but you dont". If hypocrisy were a nuke you would have destroyed the world with yours.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Beyond Saving wrote:Gauche

Beyond Saving wrote:

Gauche wrote:

The problem is the people are there on a diplomatic mission and to provide assistance to their own citizens in the host nation. Killing a bunch of unarmed protesters, even if they violated the embassy would be counterproductive to those ends. It would be a kind of needlessly self-destructive over-reaction. When the host nation can anticipate a violent protest they have to defend the embassies with non-lethal force if they want to take part in that system.

 

WTF, they were not "unarmed"

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/09/2012913121437459208.html 

Quote:

What is clear is that, whoever did attack the consulate came well-prepared, with rocket-propelled grenades and sufficient small arms to outfight and outgun the consulate's guards, both Libyans and Americans. Indeed two American marines were amongst the dead, together with the ambassador and a consulate information officer.

Quote:

 

It was apparently a rocket-propelled grenade that started the fire in the building, in which the ambassador died whilst hasty arrangements were being made to move the staff to a safe house. 

 

Yet, the building also had Libyan guards who, by all accounts, were outgunned and effectively stood aside. Even after the attack, there was no attempt to cordon off the burning building, and locals were able to loot it at will. Yet, even though the attackers were well-armed, their numbers were small and surely the local authorities would have gone out of their way to protect the representatives of a state that had contributed so heavily to Libya’s own victory last year. 

 

In fact, the tragic incident in Benghazi highlights what is becoming the major systemic crisis in Libya; the inability of the government to assert its control over the state. Libya is still in thrall to a myriad of militias which do not necessarily listen to the central authorities in Tripoli. 

Obviously, Libya is either unwilling or incapable of providing security. Since they can't or won't we need to do it ourselves, which means more Marines. 

 

<----------target

<-------assholes that are not targets

<---- approaching target status- these people were in Yemen and the Yemen police fired a few warning shots in the air, realizing they were about to become targets they retreated causing zero casualties on either side. 

 

 

I suppose you are going to tell me the guys who did this were unarmed too? What did they do, spontaneously combust?

 

 

What the fuck? So by this logic of guilt by association, anytime an abortion doctor is murdered we should murder all those who are pro life because they might have come in contact with the nut who did it?

Will you even give credit to the Muslims who died protecting the Ambassador? Will you give credit to Egypt in saying " any protest must be peaceful"? Otherwise the Nam supporters should have shot all the Americans burning their draft cards and American flags in protest of that war.

Yes some violent Muslims did some violent shit and those people should be treated no different than a cerial killer or gang banger here. The East is stuck in the past, I don't think the way we pull them into the future is to be drug down to the level of the perpitrators of the violence.

If you advocate buring a Koran in Protest, does that make you guilty of being a bigot? Does that mean you will murder someone? I am not about to lump individuals as all being one anymore than we as atheist like it.

 Oh and did it ever occur to you with the KFC picture, that while it is an American company, the local investors and or employees would reflect the majority of religion of that country. I am sure they were happy their jobs were destroyed.

"My fellow countrymen fucked me out of a job for Allah YIPPY!" That is as absurd as saying LA benefited from the riots and all white cops are racist and all blacks are rioters.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
Beyond Saving wrote:And have

Beyond Saving wrote:

And have you noticed that the topic of the thread is the Libyan embassy attack? Did you notice that I only labeled one picture of one man as a target? The other photos I labeled quite clearly as not targets. You need to get your eyes checked.

I can't force you to post things that aren't about the Libyan embassy or stop you from doing it. You posted a photo of people climbing a fence in Yemen with the caption "approaching target status" and commented about another photo of a burned KFC restaurant in Lebanon that the people responsible were armed, I assume to imply they should also have been shot.

Anyone can go look at pictures of those incidents and see the people were unarmed. Here is a photo of that KFC being looted. They don't look like armed militants. Half of them are wearing skinny jeans, and I think there might be a girl in a tank top back there but I have to confirm that with my optometrist.

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Beyond Saving
Silver Member
Beyond Saving's picture
Posts: 4392
Joined: 2007-10-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Don't sit

Brian37 wrote:

Don't sit there and benefit from our Constitution knowing you know it is much better than any government laws they have over there, and sit here and tell me we shouldn't apply our laws to our fellow human beings. I think our Constitution is great and if it is good enough for us, then it is good enough for anyone we accuse.

The Constitution does not apply out of country and certainly not in a war zone. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

And they are criminals. They are not soldiers which makes them individuals and individual groups. When you conflate them to wariors you give them the status they do not deserve. They are criminals and thugs.

They are not criminals, they are foreign nationals who committed an act of war by arming themselves with significant weapons and attacking our embassy. 

 

Brian37 wrote:

How the fuck do you sell due process to the rest of the world if you say "we get it, but you dont". If hypocrisy were a nuke you would have destroyed the world with yours.

Due process only applies when everyone agrees to it. They did not agree to live under our Constitution, they are not part of our government, they want to destroy our government. Our courts have no jurisdiction in Libya, it would be illegal for us to prosecute them under US law. 

 

 

Brian37 wrote:

What the fuck? So by this logic of guilt by association, anytime an abortion doctor is murdered we should murder all those who are pro life because they might have come in contact with the nut who did it?

WTF, you are just trolling me now. I didn't say "kill all muslims" I didn't say "kill all the protesters", I specifically said shoot the fuckers with AK-47s and RPGs that broke into our embassy and killed everyone. I even went so far as to post fucking pictures to illustrate the difference. You will note that next to the picture of the flag burners I wrote "assholes who are not targets" NOT targets means don't kill them even though they are assholes. The guy with the AK-47 standing in the middle of our burning embassy is the fucking target, which means provide him with an extra hole in his head. I have said that in every single fucking post in this thread.

It was morality that burned the books of the ancient sages, and morality that halted the free inquiry of the Golden Age and substituted for it the credulous imbecility of the Age of Faith. It was a fixed moral code and a fixed theology which robbed the human race of a thousand years by wasting them upon alchemy, heretic-burning, witchcraft and sacerdotalism.-H.L. Mencken


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
Jesus Krist, why don't you

Jesus Krist, why don't you two just whip it out already?

 

 

 


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
" DO condemn the video,

" DO condemn the video, because the guy was a bigot,"

So you hate free speech, and you're a hypocrite. We're all bigoted against religion.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3267
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
Cpt_pineapple wrote:Jesus

Cpt_pineapple wrote:

Jesus Krist, why don't you two just whip it out already?

 

 

 

 

hey!  get your own bit, cap!

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10502
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Ahmed Shams, a

Quote:
Ahmed Shams, a 22-year-old arts student who works with the two, said the group cried out "God is great" in celebration after discovering he wasn't dead. "We were happy to see him alive. The youth tried to rescue him. But there was no security, no ambulances, nothing to help," he said.
The men carried Stevens to a private car to drive him to the hospital since there was no ambulance, all three witnesses said.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/witness-u-s-ambassador-was-breathing-when-found-after-benghazi-attack-1.959528

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.