Can producers of the inflammatory anti-Islam movie be accountable for the Bengha

1. 73

   ithabiseposted 11 years ago

   Can producers of the inflammatory anti-Islam movie be accountable for the Benghazi deaths?
   
   Is there any way for the US government to hold the film producers responsible for what has occurred to the four that were killed and the destruction of the consulate quarters?

   replyreport
2. 76

   junksellerposted 11 years ago

   I don't think they should do any such thing, nor do I have any idea what legal justification they could possibly have. Not that that necessarily matters these days.
   
   In terms of accountability, I think these people have done enough to themselves. I wouldn't want to be anybody involved with this film (or even a family member). If groups are willing to attack US embassies over the movie (if that's actually what prompted the attacks) then they certainly wouldn't have an issue going after civilians. This guy may have basically built a prison around himself. Salman Rushdie had to hide out for years for a similar issue. Same thing with those Dutch cartoonists back in 2005.
   
   It's dangerous business messing with people's Gods and prophets.

   replyreport
3. 81

   Attikosposted 11 years ago

   Not under the law. Government in America is forbidden from violating Americans' freedom of speech. Even Hillary Clinton raised that yesterday, though her story today has shifted to the party line, which is a different matter altogether.
   
   That being said, the utterly political Obama administration is trying to, or more likely just trying to create the illusion it is. The incorruptible, ever honest Eric Holder's department of justice (sic) announced today it is conducting a criminal investigation of the deaths in Benghazi. Since it has no jurisdiction over Libyans, one would think its targets are Americans, presumably those involved with that putative movie.

   replyreport
4. 90

   Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years ago

   Good Question.
   
   The Benghazi attack is a separate issue from the Cairo Embassy onslaught. Cairo was where the riots began over the Arabic translation of the film. There was no riot at first in Benghazi. Four vehicles with machine guns and grenade launchers rammed through the outer parameters, blasting the Libyan guards, as a 9/11 anniversary attack. They killed the ambassador, who was visiting the Benghazi consulate at the time.
   
   The attackers appear to have been from Dema. Dema, I believe, sent the most people per population, to the jihad in Iraq against the Americans—just to show you how they feel about the U.S. in this place. In Benghazi, there is thankfulness about the liberation from Qaddafi and lots of love for the ambassador.
   
   When I think about your question, I think about the uproar about having a Muslim house of worship at the new World Trade Center. Some would like to blow it up. And just listen to Romney, saying Obama is an apologist for America. I think there’s people in the U.S. who would riot about a 15 minute film show Jesus fornicating on the cross with Mary. That’s about  the equivalent of what the Muslims in Egypt saw.
   
   Waddaya think?

   replyreport
5. 61

   nightwork4posted 11 years ago

   why should they be held responsible because a bunch a religious nuts went crazy? isn't the west about freedom of expression, speech and views? if muslims want to riot and kill over a depiction, so be it. all they are doing is proving, once again how peaceful their religion really is.

   replyreport
   1. 90

      Dr Billy Kiddposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I've been thinking about how differnt it is in the West.

      replyreport
6. 61

   Matt M.posted 11 years ago

   This is a complex issue.  I don't think that the film producers can legally be accountable for the deaths and destruction, but I'm sure all of them know that they screwed up.  And yes, we have the freedom of speech, which is a good thing.  But our country was also founded on a freedom of religion as well.  People shouldn't be poked at or denigrated because of their beliefs.  EVER.
   It would be like if you saw someone walking down the street, made a comment about their T-shirt and they punched you in the face.  Yeah, he shouldn't have hit you.  It's dumb and violent and it doesn't make sense.  But YOU shouldn't have made a comment about his T-shirt. 
   
   I also find it kind of annoying when people are back to attacking Islam again with all of this "Religion of peace my A**!" Hoorah, USA stuff.  Fundamentally all religions are beautiful and peaceful.  We as people tend to screw them up and make them look bad. 
   
   And not to sound like a psycho-conspiracy guy, but I do find it interesting that this is all happening around the time when we are talking about going to war with Iran, and Mitt Romney's impetuous rant about how we need to support Israel after this all happened...Who released this tape exactly?  And do they have ties with anyone who may want to get the people riled up so we can justify another war?   
   
   The world is getting too small and too big too quick.  We all need to start seeing one another as equals or the whole thing is going to do KABOOM!

   replyreport
7. 60

   Lycan333posted 11 years ago

   No. It's (on a much larger scale) like when a child hits his friend and when asked why, he replies ' he called me a name!" We must stay in control of our own actions. We are in America and we still have free speech even if the person speeking is an idiot.

   replyreport
8. 62

   beadreamer247posted 11 years ago

   Based on the "freedom of speech" law.....he cannot be held accountable. The response from the Islamic world was their own choice of response, very inappropriate. The people who died had absolutely nothing to do with the movie. But in an Islamic country (at least most) they don't know "freedom of speech" and I think from that thinking that it had been approved by our government - based off of their country - they believed they have to attack the government. I don't know if they can imagine what "freedom of speech" actually means?
   They also represent a minority of Islamic activists who have very little to do with the true Islam. Unfortunately, because of those we also get a distorted view of Islam and many believe that is what Islam is - while it is not!
   Now many do the same and judge ALL Islamic people as being violent etc.....Luckily we don't go and kill here, because we have gotten some education. Many over there, have no education at all....and that is a big problem. Often they only know what they hear from others and have no other media available to see what the US really is like etc.....which makes a lot of things even more difficult.

   replyreport
9. 61

   Sunny2o0oposted 11 years ago

   No.  While not all forms of speech are permissible under America's free speech laws (think shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater when there in no fire, or standing outside a corn dealer's house and inciting an angry mob in the street to go inside and "take back what it is theirs!"), this video is protected under 1st Amendment rights.
   
   People do not have a right not to be offended in American law.  The existence of free speech, in fact, almost guarantees that you will be offended at some point if you live in American society (or other societies that have such standards). 
   
   And, honestly, it takes a bigger person to shrug your shoulder and walk on when you're insulted than to grab a gun and start shooting into a crowd.  I have no sympathy, ever, for those who commit riot and murder for some perceived slight.

   replyreport