Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

brush

(61,033 posts)

25. Huh?

Reply to cthulu2016 (Reply #17)

Sun Sep 23, 2012, 07:24 PM

Sep 2012

Of course it did. If there are so many other films like this online which have been online all the time, why weren't they used? It's so obvious that it was a co-ordinated act, the making of the film, the posting online, the translation to Arabic just before 911, the alerting of Arab media, the protests beginning on 911 in Eygpt, the violent protest/attack with heavy weapons in Libya and then other countries. The posting of the film online it's translation to Arabic just before 911 is no coincidence.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

28 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Out of curiosity: I wonder whether there is civil liability for stuff like "Innocence of Muslims" [View all] redgreenandblue Sep 2012 OP

Take a break. nt Skip Intro Sep 2012 #1

Would seem so to me. safeinOhio Sep 2012 #2

What this has to do with the OP's cockamamie example, IDK. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #14

Extremely doubtful. COLGATE4 Sep 2012 #3

The First Amendment applies to civil actions based on protected speech. onenote Sep 2012 #4

I wonder... redgreenandblue Sep 2012 #19

They were dismissed because of the First Amendment onenote Sep 2012 #24

The actors may have a case.... Jeff In Milwaukee Sep 2012 #5

Not likely to succeed on that theory in America. DirkGently Sep 2012 #6

Should be brush Sep 2012 #7

She's not one of the backers of the movie oberliner Sep 2012 #23

I don't know brush Sep 2012 #28

The odd thing is that, were it not for the violent riots, the existence of this JDPriestly Sep 2012 #27

The idea that the lame anti-Islam video is the cause of the violence in Islamic countries is absurd slackmaster Sep 2012 #8

Absurd? brush Sep 2012 #9

Weak response slackmaster Sep 2012 #10

Agreed brush Sep 2012 #11

If the provocateurs didn't have that video, I'm confident they would have found something else slackmaster Sep 2012 #12

But they're protesting in Australia, Indonesia, the UK, Germany... none of these are "backward" riderinthestorm Sep 2012 #18

Point conceded. The protesters are backward, not necessarily the countries. slackmaster Sep 2012 #22

"the use of its existence by provocateurs" cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #17

Huh? brush Sep 2012 #25

How about if we sue YOU for YOUR words? Oh, wait; you think you are EXEMPT from your own idea? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #13

Simple answer: Yes, but only on an individual level. Public figures are pretty much immune. HopeHoops Sep 2012 #15

I was thinking of the individual level. redgreenandblue Sep 2012 #20

You sort of have to mention a name to be liable. HopeHoops Sep 2012 #21

Yes, and I hope they get sued for wrognful death nadinbrzezinski Sep 2012 #16

It could be treestar Sep 2012 #26