Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 213 posts

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#181

Post by derleth »

Steko wrote: post #106
tokenadult wrote: post #100

As I commented on this issue earlier, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4511247 "As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speec…

Freedom of speech =/= freedom from consequences. You can go all Fred Phelps and tell some marine's family he's in hell now at his funeral and that they are inbred hillbillies that could never have invented the internet but don't expect shock on my part if his dad and brothers decide that would be a good time to beat the shit out of you.

> Freedom of speech =/= freedom from consequences.

The next time you use the word 'yellow', I'm going to murder someone.

Just try me. You'll see that actions have consequences.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#182

Post by GlennS »

genwin wrote: post #178
comex wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just because someone in a free country laughs or scorns at their delusions. Give me a break - by all indications, the author of the video made it for his own religious reasons, because of his own delusions, rather than as some kind of enlightened critique, which explains why it's, y'know, so extremely crude. He made his video specifically to cause maximum insult to a culture: that doesn't put him anywhere near the…

> He made his video specifically to cause maximum insult to a culture. Like Team America , but no cities burned over that one. I'd like to see a continuous stream of such insulting videos, so those offended finally concede to change the channel.

If you think Team America was made specifically to insult a culture then you may have missed the point of it.

It has subtleties: a lot of the things that seem blatantly insulting are actually poking fun in the opposite direction.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#183

Post by [deleted] »

Steko wrote: post #84
protomyth wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It was just a request" And one that not only shouldn't have been made, but one that shouldn't even of crossed the mind of anyone in the White House. The oath is to protect the Constitution. The video is not the cause of the deaths. The actions of people who made personal decisions to be murderous killed people. The world would be a better place if we started blaming people instead of some stimulus or tool.

"The oath is to protect the Constitution." Are you insinuating they've violated the Constitution somehow?

[deleted]

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#184

Post by Turing_Machine »

nico wrote: post #155
tokenadult wrote: post #100

As I commented on this issue earlier, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4511247 "As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speec…

> If free citizens of free countries can't live in freedom because of fear of terrorists, the terrorists have already won. Seriously? People living in fear of terrorists is actually a feat mostly of US politicians, inciting it and using it to manipulate the masses. If people were rational, and weren't purposely deceived by people on TV, they would be more scared of driving than terrorists, since more people die in ca…

Intent matters. Sorry, it just does.

Car accidents are, well, accidental. Terrorist attacks are not.

Rational people understand this.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#185

Post by arrrg »

powertower wrote: post #124
tvladeck wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's completely unreasonable to ask the American people to throw out parts of the Constitution to try to appease clearly incompatible religious and juvenile groups half a world away. This is crazy hyperbole. Can you please explain how the Administration's request (not demand) to take down the video is even remotely similar to your description?

That's how the government has been phrasing it so far in their responses... The first sentence of which has been that the "Innocence of Muslims" video is some type of an abomination (rather than a silly movie), and we should all try not to offend Islam. Then they end that paragraph with "...but wait, almost forgot, we don't condone the violence either.". And CNN is doing the same thing with their reporting... Constan…

Yes, everyone should try to not offend people. I think that much is obvious. There also, obviously, shouldn't be legal consequences for offending someone.

It seems to me like the protests are mostly peaceful – and as such, there is nothing wrong with them and freedom of speech really has nothing to do with them.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#186

Post by pbhjpbhj »

Aloisius wrote: post #179
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the protests had been peaceful [...] I doubt this request would have ever been made // So USA doesn't negotiate with terrorists but does what they want as long as there's a threat of violence?

When did violent mobs become terrorists?

What's the approved definition of terrorist that you are using?

From Collins, via dictionary.com - "systematic use of violence and intimidation to achieve some goal". Seems to fit?

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#187

Post by lolcraft »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #184
nico wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If free citizens of free countries can't live in freedom because of fear of terrorists, the terrorists have already won. Seriously? People living in fear of terrorists is actually a feat mostly of US politicians, inciting it and using it to manipulate the masses. If people were rational, and weren't purposely deceived by people on TV, they would be more scared of driving than terrorists, since more people die in ca…

Intent matters. Sorry, it just does. Car accidents are, well, accidental. Terrorist attacks are not. Rational people understand this.

I don't see how any rational person could see any difference between dying in an accident and being murdered in a random, untargeted act. Is it dishonorable or something? Would they be heartbroken by this terrorist cell show of rudeness?

Now, if I were an embassador, or judge, or some big fish, I could understand that this intent would make an attack more probable. The vast majority of people, however, will never have the luxury of a powerful enough enemy mailing a fundamentalist hit squad to their homes. We, fortunately, are the tourist-class fliers of global terrorism, lacking any kind of personal attention.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#188

Post by Turing_Machine »

lolcraft wrote: post #187
Turing_Machine wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intent matters. Sorry, it just does. Car accidents are, well, accidental. Terrorist attacks are not. Rational people understand this.

I don't see how any rational person could see any difference between dying in an accident and being murdered in a random, untargeted act. Is it dishonorable or something? Would they be heartbroken by this terrorist cell show of rudeness? Now, if I were an embassador, or judge, or some big fish, I could understand that this intent would make an attack more probable. The vast majority of people, however, will never hav…

"I don't see how any rational person could see any difference between dying in an accident and being murdered in a random, untargeted act."

So you, as a rational person, don't seen any difference between someone bumping into you accidentally and apologizing, and someone deliberately shoving you? Really?

Rational people forgive accidents and punish intentional or negligent harm. The RATIONAL basis for this is that the punished offender is less likely to repeat the offense in the future.

I'm not sure why this is a difficult concept.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#189

Post by onetimeuse001 »

comex wrote: post #112
tokenadult wrote: post #100

As I commented on this issue earlier, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4511247 "As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speec…

> just because someone in a free country laughs or scorns at their delusions. Give me a break - by all indications, the author of the video made it for his own religious reasons, because of his own delusions, rather than as some kind of enlightened critique, which explains why it's, y'know, so extremely crude. He made his video specifically to cause maximum insult to a culture: that doesn't put him anywhere near the…

Who cares why he made it? The internet is full of videos and posts mocking Jesus, Buddha and virtually every sect or religion or lack of religion out there. Also people mock fat people, skinny people, black, white, green and everyone in between. Do they have to blow something up to get attention from Google?

I understand that just because you can do it, you shouldn't do it, but Google is different, they did not make the film and their platform should be open to all but illegal stuff (child pppron for example).

I am upset that certain people call me an infidel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kafir . Google should remove those videos that cal everyone else an unbeliever or else ;).

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#190

Post by lloeki »

comex wrote: post #112
tokenadult wrote: post #100

As I commented on this issue earlier, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4511247 "As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speec…

> just because someone in a free country laughs or scorns at their delusions. Give me a break - by all indications, the author of the video made it for his own religious reasons, because of his own delusions, rather than as some kind of enlightened critique, which explains why it's, y'know, so extremely crude. He made his video specifically to cause maximum insult to a culture: that doesn't put him anywhere near the…

> I'll defend to the death his right to say it, but it's hard to support it in any way.

This does not mean you need to support it in any way.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". — B. Hall [0]

[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evelyn_Beatrice_Hall

Post reply on HN