*shameful* The Fed outs Filmmaker

[Luddly Neddite]

Typical that the pubpots agree with Mittens' attacking the embassy statement which shows the blatant disregard of the First Amendment protection of religious freedom. And they sure don't mind that Mittens lied about who made the statement or that he is so willing to inflame and incite.

Mittens is really much worse than Bush and someone needs to get control of his loose cannon mouth. Even Ann Romney said she should do his talking.

Oh, and, op ... the idiot who made the video was known long before this.

 

[Barb]

....YOUR free speach does not outweigh the safety of others.

Now THAT is funny. HIS right to free speech is NOT ok since it supposedly endangered others, yet the violation of his right to privacy which ABSOLUTELY puts his safety in jeopardy is just fine!?!?

Dude, the right to free speech absolutely outweighs the rights of others who might be offended by that speech and commit crimes as long as there was no INTENT to incite the actions.

NO ONE has provided even a chip of proof that the person who made the film intended anything other than offending a religion. THAT is NOT a crime. It's offensive, but NOT a crime.

Don't believe it? How bout we post a picture of a crucifix in a jar of piss that was funded using YOUR TAX DOLLARS!

You guys are dead wrong on this!

The film is being used as a distraction...a slight of hand by liberal media and operatives. What was it Obama's guy said, never let a good crisis go unused?

"The violation of his rights" pertains to criminal prosecution. It does NOT APPLY to the world finding out that his PUBLICATION is OWNED by him.

 

[Truthmatters]

US Identifies Anti-Muslim Filmmaker Blamed for Attacks « CBS DC

WTF?!! Just who the hell does this government think they are?! This person had the right to make any film he wanted.. this is America..


Except:

Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed Thursday that Justice Department officials were investigating the deaths, which occurred during an attack on the American mission in Benghazi.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss an ongoing investigation, said Nakoula was connected to the persona of Sam Bacile, a man who initially told the AP he was the film’s writer and director.

And people have a right to know who made it

 

[HUGGY]

....YOUR free speach does not outweigh the safety of others.

Now THAT is funny. HIS right to free speech is NOT ok since it supposedly endangered others, yet the violation of his right to privacy which ABSOLUTELY puts his safety in jeopardy is just fine!?!?

Dude, the right to free speech absolutely outweighs the rights of others who might be offended by that speech and commit crimes as long as there was no INTENT to incite the actions.

NO ONE has provided even a chip of proof that the person who made the film intended anything other than offending a religion. THAT is NOT a crime. It's offensive, but NOT a crime.

Don't believe it? How bout we post a picture of a crucifix in a jar of piss that was funded using YOUR TAX DOLLARS!

You guys are dead wrong on this!

The film is being used as a distraction...a slight of hand by liberal media and operatives. What was it Obama's guy said, never let a good crisis go unused?

Interesting. What right to privacy does this creep have? If he was convicted or even charged with fraud his name and address are a matter of public record.

 

[JDzBrain]

They did not, you clown. Some unnamed and anonymous source gave the name anybody and everybody already knew...

Actually Barb, it was some unnamed and anonymous source INSIDE the Obama administration.

Kind of like the same guys who have been leaking secrets about SEAL Team 6 and the Pakistani doctor who helped find bin Laden and is now rotting in a jail.

It does not matter who 'outed' the guy first. The government of the United States of America...and ESPECIALLY the Justice Department, named or otherwise...has NO BUSINESS violating the privacy of private citizens and releasing their names for ANY reason other than those clearly defined by law established through constitutional challenge!

This source was NOT "deep throat," they are political operatives for the administration!

 

[koshergrl]

The filmmaker and that stupid video are completely irrelevant.

The attacks on our embassies are part of a cohesive and planned movement against the US that was planned to coincide with 911. Our state department knows this, and they are deliberately setting up an American citizen as a scapegoat to hide their part in supporting the people who are targeting us.

 

[JDzBrain]

Interesting. What right to privacy does this creep have? If he was convicted or even charged with fraud his name and address are a matter of public record.

Yeah, convicted under his REAL name. The film was released under a pseudonym. Just like THOUSANDS of other artist have over history have for various reasons of history. INCLUDING people like Steven King and Harriet Beecher Stowe who published under pseudonyms to protect themselves from damage. Did they not have the right to do that? Did they not have the right to expect their privacy would be preserved?

 

[Barb]

They did not, you clown. Some unnamed and anonymous source gave the name anybody and everybody already knew...

Actually Barb, it was some unnamed and anonymous source INSIDE the Obama administration.

Kind of like the same guys who have been leaking secrets about SEAL Team 6 and the Pakistani doctor who helped find bin Laden and is now rotting in a jail.

It does not matter who 'outed' the guy first. The government of the United States of America...and ESPECIALLY the Justice Department, named or otherwise...has NO BUSINESS violating the privacy of private citizens and releasing their names for ANY reason other than those clearly defined by law established through constitutional challenge!

This source was NOT "deep throat," they are political operatives for the administration!

I'm pretty confident of my memory about seal team 6. Which publication was it that ran that story first?

as for "NAMED OR OTHERWISE," you have proof, or you don't. Clearly you don't. It is what it is.

And it isn't
Quote: Originally Posted by Barb View Post
Quote: Originally Posted by Barb View Post
Mitt Romney Donates Entire Inheritance to BYU College Scholarship Funds | Specfriggintacular's Blog

Quote:
When Mitt Romney’s father passed away in 1995, he left an inheritance to Mitt totaling $1 million. Romney turned around and donated that inheritance money to Brigham Young University for the George W. Romney School of Public Management. This is an institute of public management that helps young people learn about government and about serving in public service.

Brigham Young University - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
Brigham Young University (often referred to as BYU, or sometimes just the Y) is a private university located in Provo, Utah. It is owned and operated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), and is the United States' largest religious university and third-largest private university.[7][8]
What was someone recently lecturing me about "public service" as a cash cow to an agenda?

Meanwhile...One Million is a piss in the bucket to the wealth Captain underpants received from and because of his fathers legacy. The rest he got the old fashioned way - he stole it.
What, nobody's interested in what Captain Underpants' "entire inheritance" consisted of, and where he "donated" it?
I guess not.

 

[Katzndogz]

The man has never been proved to have made this movie or any movie at all. He's nothing more than a suspect at this point and a suspect in what crime? Making a movie that muslims didn't like? Is that the crime? When Scott Roeder murdered George Tiller was the defense that Tiller incited his own murder accepted? No. But, we will blame some loon who may indeed have intended to bilk investors in his movie for violence around the world. Following liberal logic, when Tiller was killed, we should have rounded up all the abortionists for prosecution of inciting violence.

 

[Barb]

The man has never been proved to have made this movie or any movie at all. He's nothing more than a suspect at this point and a suspect in what crime? Making a movie that muslims didn't like? Is that the crime? When Scott Roeder murdered George Tiller was the defense that Tiller incited his own murder accepted? No. But, we will blame some loon who may indeed have intended to bilk investors in his movie for violence around the world. Following liberal logic, when Tiller was killed, we should have rounded up all the abortionists for prosecution of inciting violence.

This isn't a court of law, dipshit. THIS is the court of public opinion.

 

[Synthaholic]

His life is in danger, moron.

Then he shouldn't have made a film that he KNEW would cause anger. If someone kills his, its his own fault.

So if the guy you're dating kills you because he thinks you're flirting with other men and that makes him really angry, that's OK?

Really, Toro?

 

[Synthaholic]

So if the guy you're dating kills you because he thinks you're flirting with other men and that makes him really angry, that's OK?

Flirting... no.

Fucking your new boyfriend on your old boyfriend's front lawn while disparaging his cocksmanship... that's kind of reckless and it's hard to feel sorry for her.

So an asshole guy cheating the government makes a hateful film that enrages the Islamic world and suddenly he's a hero to the Right Wing.

Well, good thing he didn't make fun of Mormons, then.

'Cause if he did, he'd be a hero to you.

Why do I get the feeling that the closer to November, the more partisan you will post?

 

[Synthaholic]

'Cause if he did, he'd be a hero to you.

Yeah, I see a difference between cults and religions.

Religions are based on ignorance and superstitions.

Cults also involve fraud.

And if Mormons started killing others because they "blasphemed" Joseph Smith, no doubt you'd be rationalizing their behavior as understandable.

No, wait ...

A Toro analogy: If you know that waving a red cape in front of a bull makes him attack...

 

[Katzndogz]

They did not, you clown. Some unnamed and anonymous source gave the name anybody and everybody already knew...

Actually Barb, it was some unnamed and anonymous source INSIDE the Obama administration.

Kind of like the same guys who have been leaking secrets about SEAL Team 6 and the Pakistani doctor who helped find bin Laden and is now rotting in a jail.

It does not matter who 'outed' the guy first. The government of the United States of America...and ESPECIALLY the Justice Department, named or otherwise...has NO BUSINESS violating the privacy of private citizens and releasing their names for ANY reason other than those clearly defined by law established through constitutional challenge!

This source was NOT "deep throat," they are political operatives for the administration!

If you're looking at who leaked what, who leaked the location of the safe house in Libya that was attacked when the embassy was attacked.

 

[Jimbo]

Why do you feel his name should be held in secret?

Well, if you have to ask a question like that then you have to ask yourself, "Is this stuff I'm smoking doing my brain any good?"....

Personally, I'd say obviously NOT...

 

[Synthaholic]

Why do I have to leave your pirate in the signature then?? That's a partial welch isn;t it? I want my avatar left in then..

Geesh...I was ASKING if it was ok beforehand. If you don't want it in, I won't leave it in. Please try English comprehension, ok?

So...is this a bet or not?

I read what you said precisely.. No need to act like a bitch just because I asked for clarification.

What are you waiting on, with your mouth wide open like that?

 

[bodecea]

I read what you said precisely.. No need to act like a bitch just because I asked for clarification.

Noticing that you have not answered yet. Seem to be stalling for some reason. Is this a bet or not?

Yea, it's a bet on the signatures.. One month. You can keep your pirate if I win, and add whatever I choose to it.

Done!

 

[bodecea]

Why are people lying about who found out about this guy? Can it be that they are trying to make political hay on this?

 

[Synthaholic]

The free speech was exercised over two years ago. So why was this old bone resurrected now? And, who did the resurrecting?

It is not a coincidence that the discovery of this old You Tube arose at the same time terrorists made plans to attack our embassies.

It was only put on YouTube in July, dope.

 

[Katzndogz]

The free speech was exercised over two years ago. So why was this old bone resurrected now? And, who did the resurrecting?

It is not a coincidence that the discovery of this old You Tube arose at the same time terrorists made plans to attack our embassies.

It was only put on YouTube in July, dope.

Who put it on You Tube?