GostHacked Posted September 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 The Muslim Brotherhood isn't so-called western backed. You got some serious reading comprehension there. Where did I say Muslim Brotherhood? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 These are the fruits of Obama's labour. He worked to oust Mubarak, he worked to oust Gaddafi. He needs to take responsibility for the fallout. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Your faulty grammar may be throwing me, but, again, what are you talking about? Where in that CBS article does it say Clinton apologized? Did you read the headline? Why did she have to qualify that the US doesn't want to insult anyone's religion? Who cares about their religion? Did Denmark feel the need to comment on the Mohamed cartoons? Why must the world feel the need to tip-toe around these people? If a Christian killed Bill Maher for his Religulous movie would the government comment on the country's need to be inclusive and not offend other religions? Edited September 12, 2012 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Did you read the headline? Why did she have to qualify that the US doesn't want to insult anyone's religion? Who cares about their religion? Yes, I read the headline. I also saw the question mark at the end of it, which is the universal sign for misleading, speculative spin. I thought you might be able to provide some insight into what she actually said that sounded like an apology to you. I guess saying the U.S. doesn't want to insult anyone's religion is an apology now? I think, since there was a mob of raging lunatics at the embassy door who thought the U.S. was insulting their religion, she was just trying to contain that situation as well as she could. When you have crazed lunatics on one side trying to instigate a fight with crazed lunatics on the other, it seems prudent to be a voice of reason. But I guess that's not what you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 These are the fruits of Obama's labour. He worked to oust Mubarak, he worked to oust Gaddafi. He needs to take responsibility for the fallout. Obama has SFA do to with this. This is the standing foreign policy of the US government that is in play here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 I think, since there was a mob of raging lunatics at the embassy door who thought the U.S. was insulting their religion, she was just trying to contain that situation as well as she could. Well then Obama coming out today condemning the actions of the mobs wouldn't help that now would it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Well then Obama coming out today condemning the actions of the mobs wouldn't help that now would it? Huh? You're saying condemning violence instigates violence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Huh? You're saying condemning violence instigates violence? Well if the mob thinks they're in the right then no. What about sending Marines to Libya? http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1255410--u-s-ambassador-to-libya-three-staffers-killed-in-attack Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 What about sending Marines to Libya? No, that's not an apology either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 No, that's not an apology either. Well this is today, I suspect they got heat for qualifying this incident with reminding people how inclusive the United States are as if these people really thought that in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Well this is today, I suspect they got heat for qualifying this incident with reminding people how inclusive the United States are as if these people really thought that in the first place. I agree that this is today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Obama has SFA do to with this. This is the standing foreign policy of the US government that is in play here. It shows just how ill-informed you are. In both cases, Obama stated publicly that Mubarak must go, and that Gaddafi must go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Well this is today, I suspect they got heat for qualifying this incident with reminding people how inclusive the United States are as if these people really thought that in the first place. That statement went out before the innocent. Mitt Romney is the only time traveller around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 It shows just how ill-informed you are. In both cases, Obama stated publicly that Mubarak must go, and that Gaddafi must go. Yes just like Bush said Saddam must go. I remember you were very supportive of that. FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Signals.Cpl Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Well if the mob thinks they're in the right then no. What about sending Marines to Libya? http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1255410--u-s-ambassador-to-libya-three-staffers-killed-in-attack They killed the ambassador I think sending marines is more than warranted in this situation. I would say pulling out their people altogether might be a better idea but either way they are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 They killed the ambassador I think sending marines is more than warranted in this situation. I would say pulling out their people altogether might be a better idea but either way they are right. Isn't this the act of a war monger? Shouldn't their be a diplomatic solution to this problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 It shows just how ill-informed you are. In both cases, Obama stated publicly that Mubarak must go, and that Gaddafi must go. Shady: pro-dictator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Yes just like Bush said Saddam must go. I remember you were very supportive of that. FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP. But Bush was also responsible for the aftermath. So must Obama be. No I wasn't supportive of ousting Mubarak because he was an ally. Replacing an ally with an extreme Islamic is the essence of idiocy. Kind of like Carter replace the Shah and giving us the Mullahs. Shady: pro-dictator. Nope, pro-ally, and anti-replacing allies with extremist Islamic regimes like Carter did in Iran, and now Obama in Egypt and Lybia. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 It shows just how ill-informed you are. In both cases, Obama stated publicly that Mubarak must go, and that Gaddafi must go. Shhh big kids are talking. As per the US intelligence services and advice from top military brass. You have to be one of the most ill-informed posters on this board. Got some balloons to complain about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) He knows that if he insults them they will start some violence.This is a deliberate attempt to stir the pot. Of course it is! And he is an ass for doing so.... but the violence is the sole responsibility of the perpetrators. If you are so faithful that a silly film makes you want to kill people, then you are an idiot and your faith is ridiculous. Crazy Muslim extremists can go to hell, like any religious nutbar. "Religion of peace"? My ass.... Edited September 12, 2012 by The_Squid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted September 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Of course it is! And he is an ass for doing so.... but the violence is the sole responsibility of the perpetrators. If you are so faithful that a silly film makes you want to kill people, then you and your faith suck ass. Crazy Muslim extremists can go to hell, like any religious nutbar. "Religion of peace"? My ass.... Do you go around provoking bears in the woods? Why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Nope, pro-ally, and anti-replacing allies with extremist Islamic regimes like Carter did in Iran, and now Obama in Egypt and Lybia. Shady: objectively pro-dictator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 Do you go around provoking bears in the woods? Why not? So Muslims must be treated as unthinking animals? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Do you go around provoking bears in the woods? Why not? Because the Bear will attack you. This guy is an ass and a coward but he didn't commit a crime. Just like the Danish Cartoonist and the Quran Burning Pastor didn't commit crimes. They're goal is to expose how absolutely insane these people are. That being said, his douchiness shouldn't excuse the people in these countries that turned into a violent mob over an internet movie. Edited September 12, 2012 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted September 12, 2012 Report Share Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Do you go around provoking bears in the woods? Why not? We are not talking about bears and woods. We are talking about intolerant religious fanatics who happen to be human. You analogy is a bad one... bears are not as senseless as these people... Do you always voluntarily remove your rights because of extremist religious idiots? Richard Dawkins receives threats all the time because of his books/lectures that are anti-religion. Should he just shut up? Edited September 12, 2012 by The_Squid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.