"Innocence of Muslims" Filmmaker Likely Doesn't Exist, Film May Not Exist

[Hauldren Collider]

Pakistan

[Wezil]

The Pakistan government distanced itself Sunday from a $100,000 bounty offered by a cabinet minister for the death of the maker of an anti-Islam film that has sparked protests across the Muslim world.

Railways Minister Ghulam Ahmed Bilour invited members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to take part in the “noble deed”, and said given the chance he would kill the film-maker with his own hands.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf rejected Mr. Bilour’s comments, made on Saturday, a day after angry protests across Pakistan against the film Innocence of Muslims left 21 people dead and more than 200 injured.

“This is not government policy. We completely dissociate (ourselves) from this,” the spokesman told AFP.

So a "film maker" (I use the term loosely) in the US makes a film and the muslim world holds the US government accountable for not stopping it from being made and distributed.

A Pakistani Cabinet Minister offers a $100K bounty but this is "not government policy".

Wow, what an awesome double standard.

Perhaps the folks arguing against free speech in this thread may want to offer a comment?

[kentonio]

So thinking that the filmmaker is morally (but not legally) responsible means that we must therefore think putting a bounty on his head is hunky dory?

[Wezil]

Keep dancing.

[Wezil]

The man is not "morally responsible" for people reacting unreasonably.

[Wezil]

Can we riot at the Pakistani embassy now?

It's the cabinet minister that provoked it.

[Kidlicious]

The Pakistan government distanced itself Sunday from a $100,000 bounty offered by a cabinet minister for the death of the maker of an anti-Islam film that has sparked protests across the Muslim world.

Railways Minister Ghulam Ahmed Bilour invited members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to take part in the “noble deed”, and said given the chance he would kill the film-maker with his own hands.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf rejected Mr. Bilour’s comments, made on Saturday, a day after angry protests across Pakistan against the film Innocence of Muslims left 21 people dead and more than 200 injured.

“This is not government policy. We completely dissociate (ourselves) from this,” the spokesman told AFP.

So a "film maker" (I use the term loosely) in the US makes a film and the muslim world holds the US government accountable for not stopping it from being made and distributed.

A Pakistani Cabinet Minister offers a $100K bounty but this is "not government policy".

Wow, what an awesome double standard.

Perhaps the folks arguing against free speech in this thread may want to offer a comment?

Who has praised the Paki govt?

[Kidlicious]

The man is not "morally responsible" for people reacting unreasonably.

No, he's resonsible for himself acting immorally.

[Wezil]

That's fine. Now connect to the rioters.

[Kidlicious]

That's fine. Now connect to the rioters.

??? He said a stupid bad thing. I don't think he had good intentions either. He showed a disregard for human life.

[Wezil]

So how does that excuse other's bad behaviour?

"He showed a disregard for human life. "

NO. The rioters showed the disregard for human life. He just made a (bad) film.

[Wezil]

I asked earlier about what other protected groups we should have but received no answer.

Why does Islam get a pass from our free speech protections? Could it be because they react badly? If stalinists were to riot whenever something not nice was said about Papa Joe would we have to stop talking about that as well? Can we only have free speech if no one is offended?

Something tells me this will go unanswered yet again.

[kentonio]

Keep dancing.

Come on, you're the one who's trying to tie those things together, so please explain why they are in any way connected.

The man is not "morally responsible" for people reacting unreasonably.

In your opinion. That's the thing about morals, there isn't just a single set of them that everyone agrees on.

NO. The rioters showed the disregard for human life. He just made a (bad) film.

Knowing that his little project could quite easily lead to loss of life.

I asked earlier about what other protected groups we should have but received no answer.

Why does Islam get a pass from our free speech protections? Could it be because they react badly? If stalinists were to riot whenever something not nice was said about Papa Joe would we have to stop talking about that as well? Can we only have free speech if no one is offended?

Something tells me this will go unanswered yet again.

It's been answered several times, you just apparently don't like the answer. Where exactly are people saying that the law should be changed to prevent anti-muslim speech?

[Wezil]

Still dancing. Come on Ken.


Scenario -

BenK insults atheism in a conversation with me here at Poly
I get enraged at the offence and go out and assault/kill the closest Ben I can find


Question - Is our Ben morally responsible for my act?


I'll even provide a clue - Ben has a right to free speech. I do not have a right not to be offended.

[giblets]

He had no reason to think his remarks would provoke such a reaction, so definitely not.