If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters)   The chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff to Terry Jones: "Shut the fark up, a**hole"   (reuters.com) divider line 320
    More: Obvious, Joint Chiefs of Staff, U.S., military officials, Yoshiaki Iwasaki, tone hole  
•       •       •

8121 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Sep 2012 at 4:39 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



320 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-12 03:24:30 PM
fta: U.S. military officials are concerned that the film could inflame tensions in Afghanistan, where 74,000 U.S. troops are fighting.

That's what this psychopath wants. He wants attention and he wants people to die. He doesn't care if the people who die are American as long as it brings more attention to him.
 
2012-09-12 03:36:46 PM

Lunaville: fta: U.S. military officials are concerned that the film could inflame tensions in Afghanistan, where 74,000 U.S. troops are fighting.

That's what this psychopath wants. He wants attention and he wants people to die. He doesn't care if the people who die are American as long as it brings more attention to him.


People already HAVE died because of this dickbag. I simply cannot fathom why he has not yet been charged with two counts of inciting a riot and four counts of first-degree murder.
 
2012-09-12 03:42:16 PM
TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-12 03:47:03 PM
The funny thing is that if this guy were an Al Queda member who claimed that some American made a film like this to start a riot his name would go on the kill list.
 
2012-09-12 03:54:01 PM

King Something: People already HAVE died because of this dickbag. I simply cannot fathom why he has not yet been charged with two counts of inciting a riot and four counts of first-degree murder.


I don't think it applies if the riots happen outside of the country.
 
2012-09-12 03:58:30 PM

vpb: The funny thing is that if this guy were an Al Queda member who claimed that some American made a film like this to start a riot his name would go on the kill list.


Well, you can always use the justification that was used for the killing of Anwar al-Aulaqi
 
2012-09-12 04:03:38 PM

Aarontology: King Something: People already HAVE died because of this dickbag. I simply cannot fathom why he has not yet been charged with two counts of inciting a riot and four counts of first-degree murder.

I don't think it applies if the riots happen outside of the country.


Wasn't it "American soil"?
 
2012-09-12 04:08:53 PM
Does this fall under the pretense of the WBC using hateful speech, consequences be damned? Because on the one hand this is a general basically saying "stop using free speech" and on the other hand his free speech is directly (if only partially) responsible for now, an actual body count.
 
2012-09-12 04:11:44 PM
Instead of giving the guy more attention, they should quietly rendition his sorry ass to someplace Muslimy and let them deal with him properly.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-12 04:12:28 PM

Elandriel: Does this fall under the pretense of the WBC using hateful speech, consequences be damned? Because on the one hand this is a general basically saying "stop using free speech" and on the other hand his free speech is directly (if only partially) responsible for now, an actual body count.


I don't know. You could compare it to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.
 
2012-09-12 04:25:40 PM
Too bad people didn't get this video taken off YouTube when it was first uploaded...two years ago.
 
2012-09-12 04:27:50 PM
Did he make him an offer he couldn't refuse?
 
wee [TotalFark]
2012-09-12 04:29:06 PM

Lunaville: That's what this psychopath wants. He wants attention and he wants people to die. He doesn't care if the people who die are American as long as it brings more attention to him.


You gotta admit, he lays a pretty good claim to the title of "Epic Troll". Though some Muslim groups seem like fairly low-hanging fruit in that regard. And the filmmaker didn't even have to go to the trouble of making a movie. All he had to do was draw a cartoon if he was looking to incite riots and death...
 
2012-09-12 04:29:23 PM

GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.


I think the sentence for someone found guilty is still death by hanging, isn't it?
 
2012-09-12 04:34:45 PM

vpb: Elandriel: Does this fall under the pretense of the WBC using hateful speech, consequences be damned? Because on the one hand this is a general basically saying "stop using free speech" and on the other hand his free speech is directly (if only partially) responsible for now, an actual body count.

I don't know. You could compare it to yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.


This is kind of what I'm thinking. I tihnk his words are indefensible, ethically speaking, but it does kind of tread a questionable line if we start getting all Freedom Smash on the jackass.

Personally, I hope he is shamed into self-exile by his irresponsible and deadly actions. This man has no place in civilized society, and no place as a representative of our country; yet due to his actions he paints us in others' eyes with the same broad brush. It speaks volumes both to the ignorance and hatred we have earned and in some ways cultivated. He, and the people who used his words as justificiation for launching these demonstrations and attacks, are one and the same; religious extremists writing their scriptures with the blood of others.
 
2012-09-12 04:39:03 PM

GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.


Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.
 
2012-09-12 04:41:05 PM

Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.


Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.
 
2012-09-12 04:41:16 PM
For a second, I had hope that the headline was accurate.
 
2012-09-12 04:42:27 PM
Didn't say TJs what response was, but I bet it was something like "I answer to a higher power than you."



/exile this tard
//someone at least kidnap and sell him off to the sex trade
 
2012-09-12 04:42:39 PM

Elandriel: Does this fall under the pretense of the WBC using hateful speech, consequences be damned?


Sort of. That's why they're calling him rather than arresting him. The guy could say "go fark yourself" and Dempsey couldn't do anything about that.

If they could somehow show that he was involved in the distribution of the Arabic version to spark the riots, though, it would cross a legal line.
 
2012-09-12 04:44:19 PM

coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.


You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.
 
2012-09-12 04:45:16 PM

coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.


Correction of a correction: If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty AND violence does erupt as a result of such dickish and dangerous things, that's treason.

Proving intent... still a biatch.

Also, proving causality, somewhat problematic but not as difficult.
 
2012-09-12 04:45:24 PM
I think we're missing a valid point here.

A CHRISTIAN PASTOR is putting his support behind a PORNOGRAPHIC MOVIE.

I am pretty damn sure this will not be overlooked.
 
2012-09-12 04:46:27 PM
Lots of lib butthurt in this thread.
 
2012-09-12 04:47:27 PM

Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.


It's not. It's cultural differences, sadly. In the US, people do sometimes get hurt or killed for what they say. In any country dominated by religion, especially one lacking infratructure, their reaction to this is usually even more retarded than this one (rioting in their own streets, etc.).

Basically--no cops, or at least no where near enough to prevent a crowd from going insane like this against someone who had nothing to do with what you are angry about. And the religious fervor to get whipped up over jack shiat.
 
2012-09-12 04:47:43 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.


Let me refine my comment: If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty AND violence does erupt as a result of such dickish and dangerous things and you know that the counter-response is to start a war, that COULD be treason if you can wrangle a convincing argument to state that provoking war is levying war.
 
2012-09-12 04:47:58 PM
Remember, folks: freedom of speech has lots of restrictions placed upon it during times of war that have been upheld by the Supreme Court.

/not that this is an infringement of the First Amendment, anyways
 
2012-09-12 04:48:07 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.


The enemy aren't necessarily the idiots yelling in the streets, the enemy may be the people who use those idiots.
Helping al-qaidi fire up idiots so al-qaida has a free run at an american installation is providing aid and comfort to al-qaida
 
2012-09-12 04:48:18 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Lots of lib butthurt in this thread.


0/10. Can we get some new ones, please?
 
2012-09-12 04:49:46 PM

coeyagi: Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.

Let me refine my comment: If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty AND violence does erupt as a result of such dickish and dangerous things and you know that the counter-response is to start a war, that COULD be treason if you can wrangle a convincing argument to state that provoking war is levying war.


That still in no way meets the specific and extremely limited Constitutional definition of Treason.
 
2012-09-12 04:50:52 PM

AnEvilGuest: Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.

The enemy aren't necessarily the idiots yelling in the streets, the enemy may be the people who use those idiots.
Helping al-qaidi fire up idiots so al-qaida has a free run at an american installation is providing aid and comfort to al-qaida


So saying anything that AQ can use as propaganda is now Treason? You sure you want to stick with that?
 
2012-09-12 04:51:05 PM

PreMortem: Didn't say TJs what response was, but I bet it was something like "I answer to a higher power than you."


And my response would be the following: Don't come biatching to me when the Muslims arrange for the meeting.
 
2012-09-12 04:51:06 PM
Unless he's directly advocating for imminent violence, he's in the clear.

And that's how it should be. No one should be silenced just because other people threaten to react violently.

The guy is a dick, without a doubt. But sharing an offensive opinion doesn't make you responsible for what other people do when they hear it.

I'm gay and I openly advocate for gay rights. A lot of people react violently to that kind of thing. But I'm not responsible for how they channel their disapproval.
 
2012-09-12 04:51:25 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.

Let me refine my comment: If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty AND violence does erupt as a result of such dickish and dangerous things and you know that the counter-response is to start a war, that COULD be treason if you can wrangle a convincing argument to state that provoking war is levying war.

That still in no way meets the specific and extremely limited Constitutional definition of Treason.


Sure it does, it's all in how you frame the argument. If you can argue that provoking war because of solid well-known policy counter-measures was someone's intent to start a war, how is "starting a war" any different than levying war?
 
2012-09-12 04:51:52 PM

coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.


That doesn't make the saying dangerous and dickish things part treason. Trying to aid enemies is treason. Good luck showing that.

He's a shiatbag, though, yeah.
 
2012-09-12 04:52:17 PM
No one forced people to watch the video. Or did they?
 
2012-09-12 04:52:23 PM
I saw the video trailer on YouTube and having now read about the doubts surrounding the identity of the filmmaker (or whether there actually is a film and not just a trailer on YouTube), I'm obliged to conclude that Facile or Klein or whatever his name is, is not Jewish, because Jews make good movies, and that one sucked.
 
2012-09-12 04:52:28 PM
Can't we all agree that extremist religion is just the bees knees?
 
2012-09-12 04:52:54 PM
Freedom of speech has taken a serious farking hit today judging by the calls from Americans calling for this pastors arrest. You farking idiots are sliding down a very dark ugly path and you will not like where it ends up.

When you get there, and you will, remember! You asked for this.
 
2012-09-12 04:52:54 PM
When it comes down to this 'jihadits vs. Terry Jones' debate, we can FINALLY say that "both sides are bad", and not have it be just empty words that you think make you sound cool. It's amazing that we put up with these ridiculous extremists in this day and age. Let's nuke the whole lot, and see if that helps. Florida is a lot closer than Libya though, so we should be hearing about the drone attacks any minute now.
 
2012-09-12 04:52:55 PM

GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.


How so? Did he provide comfort or aid to the enemy? Was he in Libya torching the place?

Stop posting silly things.
 
2012-09-12 04:53:51 PM

GhostFish: Unless he's directly advocating for imminent violence, he's in the clear.

And that's how it should be. No one should be silenced just because other people threaten to react violently.

The guy is a dick, without a doubt. But sharing an offensive opinion doesn't make you responsible for what other people do when they hear it.

I'm gay and I openly advocate for gay rights. A lot of people react violently to that kind of thing. But I'm not responsible for how they channel their disapproval.


I think he'll be in the clear, but the difference is, he knows that some Muslims will start shiat if provoked regarding Mohammed. Not quite as likely for Mississippi bigots to burn down San Francisco's City Hall.
 
2012-09-12 04:54:07 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: So saying anything that AQ can use as propaganda is now Treason? You sure you want to stick with that?


Hell no, I don't mean to imply it is treason in any legal sense of the word - only that I believe it helps al-qaidi as opposed to hurting them, the idea that it was the "opposite of aid and comfort" was what I meant to respond to.
 
2012-09-12 04:54:39 PM

Relatively Obscure: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

That doesn't make the saying dangerous and dickish things part treason. Trying to aid enemies is treason. Good luck showing that.

He's a shiatbag, though, yeah.


I refined my comment at least twice since that post.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-12 04:56:05 PM

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Lots of lib butthurt in this thread.


Only liberals don't like to see Americans killed by mobs of lunatic fanatics. A true patriot would have a smile (or at least a smirk) on his face.

thinkprogress.org
 
2012-09-12 04:56:16 PM

coeyagi: Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Philip Francis Queeg: coeyagi: Relatively Obscure: GardenWeasel: TJ is getting dangerously close to crossing over from "Free Speech" to Treason. And I don't say that lightly.

Saying dangerous and dickish things isn't treason.

Incorrect. If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty, that's treason.

Difficulty: proving intent.

You are wrong.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

Publishing something that enrages the enemies of the US is pretty much the opposite of giving them aid and comfort.

Let me refine my comment: If your intent is to incite violence against your country from a foreign sovereignty AND violence does erupt as a result of such dickish and dangerous things and you know that the counter-response is to start a war, that COULD be treason if you can wrangle a convincing argument to state that provoking war is levying war.

That still in no way meets the specific and extremely limited Constitutional definition of Treason.

Sure it does, it's all in how you frame the argument. If you can argue that provoking war because of solid well-known policy counter-measures was someone's intent to start a war, how is "starting a war" any different than levying war?


No, it's not a matter of "framing an argument" by redefining terms and words. The Constitution is extremely clear and specific.

Your zeal to execute those who you disagree with does not change that.
 
2012-09-12 04:56:17 PM
I don't understand people like him.

I know some people do crap to enrage people and insight violence because they somehow see a way to make money or gain power from it. But in this guy's case neither of those seems like a very real possibility for him. The only reason why I can see him doing this is that he just wants to watch the world burn and enjoys the idea that he is creating misery and chaos.
 
2012-09-12 04:56:28 PM

Elandriel: Because on the one hand this is a general basically saying "stop using free speech"


Not really, this is a General, saying 'Hey, stop and think before you open your farking mouth, you stupid assbag.', remember, even in this country of free speech, it's illegal to shout "Fire!" in a crowded movie theater, and free speech also doesn't cover slander and libel. If this happened in the US, he could face charges for inciting a riot, it wouldn't take away his right to say these things, it would just make him be held accountable for the consequences...
 
2012-09-12 04:57:31 PM
The General, pursuing an appeasement strategy.
 
2012-09-12 04:58:13 PM

AnEvilGuest: The enemy aren't necessarily the idiots yelling in the streets, the enemy may be the people who use those idiots.
Helping al-qaidi fire up idiots so al-qaida has a free run at an american installation is providing aid and comfort to al-qaida




Troll: "LOL Islam sux"
Al Qaeda Guy #45: "I AM OUTRAGE"
Government: "OMG Troll IS TREASON"
 
Displayed 50 of 320 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report