Important Notice: WonderCafe has Closed

The United Church has sadly come to the decision that WonderCafe needed to close and all new discussion ended June 2014. Read More...

Alex's picture

Alex

image

Who is Sam Bacile?

Those watching the news have heard about the riots in the middle east and the killing of the American ambassador. With Obama sending in the marines to hunt and kill the people involved in the storming of the US consulate.

 

All this started by a Youtube video. posted by a guy named Sam Bacile. 

 

Yet no one knows who is the director Sam Becile. Reports at first claimed he was a coptic . AP has a report that  claims it was an Israeli. The Atlantic quotes a source who claims it was done by US Evengelicals. 

Perhaps it was just an Internet troll. 

People in the middle east widely believe  it was a US government operation?

 

Who do you think benefits from this?

 

Whoevr did it knew enough about middle east Islamic culture that they did whatever the could to insult and enrage people. 

 

Will it lead to war? 

 

 

Share this

Comments

InannaWhimsey's picture

InannaWhimsey

image

is this another False Flag?

 

just another day in Libya?

 

an example of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

 

a male prostitute hiring gone awry?

 

jihadists doing their thing?

 

*waiting three months*

graeme's picture

graeme

image

none of the guesses sounds impossible - which gives some idea of how far we've sunk.

Alex's picture

Alex

image

Perhaps Sam Bacile is also Pierre Poutine, and it expalins why  Stephen Harper closed the embassy in Iran, angry

Alex's picture

Alex

image

Some of course are now blaming  blaming Al Quida, claiming they created it to provoke a war with the US. (that one is the only one we can discount, as Al Quida is a myth, and is just a name given to a diverse movement by the US 

 

The actors appearing in the film say they were duped. The script had nothing to do with ISlam, and many of the words spoken do not match what was spoken by the actors during the filming. They were dubed over the original.

 

 

 

Mahakala's picture

Mahakala

image

Has all the markings of a false flag attack, to highlight Obama's supposed Muslim favouritism, lift up Romney as the American way, and provoke Obama to attack Iran to prove his credentials.

 

The CIA has long been active in Libya.

chansen's picture

chansen

image

What about the simple possibility that it was created by someone who hates Islam? Why does every action have to have a complicated conspiracy behind it? If it was a CIA operation, don't you think they could have done it without the obvious redubbing of lines and with higher production values?

 

And why is everyone blaming the idiot director? Why doesn't someone point out that it's not the director inciting the violence, but leaders who are inflaming muslims over a youtube video that most of them probably haven't seen?!?

 

There is misplaced anger and blame abound in this story.

graeme's picture

graeme

image

The inflaming began with Bush, in particular - and with his friends in the news media - who launched an anti-Islam campaign to give themselves an excuse to invade Iraq. They have created an environment of hatred, fear and paranoia which has launched attacks to kill well over a million moslems.,

And many actions, I'm afraid, do have complicated consiracies behind them.

Why blame the director? Because he did something idiotic if he didn't know the consequences, and quite reprehensible and irresponsible if he did know them.

Gee. I iwonder why those Moslems are going crazy? Could it have something to do with Bush calling for a crusade, with those silamic nations getting invaded and ripped off by the west for over a century?

Ever notice how the biggest dictators in the region are our allies?

InannaWhimsey's picture

InannaWhimsey

image

the 'net is rife with articles aboot it, blaming the incident on a certain internet 'movie' that my wife and I saw last night on youtube and...

 

if people are gonna die and blame it on a movie, they'd better blame it on a better movie than that one :3  the movie is quite badly done -- and IF there are people who take so much offense that they have to kill because of it...then they are incompetent and need to be protected from the rest of the world...

 

the movie allegedly is 'the Muhhamad Movie'...I also see links blaming the Florida Pastor...

 

the lovely insanity continues...

Alex's picture

Alex

image

chansen wrote:

What about the simple possibility that it was created by someone who hates Islam? Why does every action have to have a complicated conspiracy behind it? If it was a CIA operation, don't you think they could have done it without the obvious redubbing of lines and with higher production values?

 

And why is everyone blaming the idiot director? Why doesn't someone point out that it's not the director inciting the violence, but leaders who are inflaming muslims over a youtube video that most of them probably haven't seen?!?

 

There is misplaced anger and blame abound in this story.

 

I agree that it is simplistic to blame the violence on the creator, what I am serious about is that it is important to know who is behind it. After all if a war starts, or other acts of violence are committed, the question of who made the video will drop off the rador.

 

The original report says it was back by Jews and Israeilis. Rabbi Abraham Cooper, associate dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, says that that accusation (which was the first report by AP and others) was blood libel.

 Also the video among many arrows, and mud slung in it claims the Prophet was gay. Not only was this a false claim, not made by others, and  was stated only to provoke  Muslims, but it is also homophobic mud because the producer is making a claim that being gay is a shameful thing.

 

If it was just made by someone who wanted to expose the wrongs of Mulims, and their theology, it could have just stuck to truthful claims. As you know Chansen, there is plenty of truths that can be used aganisnt any and all religions, So why make up false ones, like claiming the phrofet was gay, and that Jewish money financed the film.  Especially since whoevr did make the film has an obvious knowledge of Islam, and can write in Arabic.

 

So we have a film that will be used by some to provoke muslims,  and will expose not just US interests, but increase the ammount of violence against LGBT people, and Jews who live in Arab countries.

 

My leading suspects are those  who are described  in the following  Harper Magazine article from a few years ago. 

Jesus killed Mohammed:

The crusade for a Christian military

http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/05/0082488

 

This article show how amny  evengelicals and many in the US Army are working together to wage a global war on Islam, and who also happen to hate Jews, and LGBT people.

 

If this is true we need to find out about it in order to stop it.

 

 

InannaWhimsey's picture

InannaWhimsey

image

graeme wrote:
The inflaming began with Bush, in particular - and with his friends in the news media - who launched an anti-Islam campaign to give themselves an excuse to invade Iraq. They have created an environment of hatred, fear and paranoia which has launched attacks to kill well over a million moslems.,

And many actions, I'm afraid, do have complicated consiracies behind them.

Why blame the director? Because he did something idiotic if he didn't know the consequences, and quite reprehensible and irresponsible if he did know them.

Gee. I iwonder why those Moslems are going crazy? Could it have something to do with Bush calling for a crusade, with those silamic nations getting invaded and ripped off by the west for over a century?

Ever notice how the biggest dictators in the region are our allies?

 

The inflaming began with Bush, in particular...is your choice to place blame with...

 

When, if you look long and big enough...

 

You can see the inflaming happening in other cultures as well...

 

There are multiple possible reasons for blaming the director; we are being given a narrative already packaged for us...who is making it?  For what reason?

 

Or is it just plain ol' tribalism?

 

What becomes true if we take the pov/BS of 'it's just plain ol' tribalism?'  What truth/facts disappear?  What becomes true if we take the pov/BS of 'the narrative has been created for us?'  What truth/facts disappear?

 

What becomes true if we include Saudi Arabia owning that huge US news service?  What becomes true if we include how our neurology works?  What becomes true and not true/exists and doesn't exist when we consider Islam's 1300 year imperialistic empire?

 

Who started the inflaming?  Perhaps that is what the science of History is all aboot -- to whom can one place blame for human events?

 

Get your cards on the table, youngins and lets get our minds together to see all the agents in this vast play...lay out our cards and our collective wisdom...

Alex's picture

Alex

image

InannaWhimsey wrote:

Who started the inflaming?  

Often it is the Question asked, but a better question to ask for me, is "Who has more power, and who has a greater ability, or who benfits the most, and who pays the greater price.

 

Jim Kenney's picture

Jim Kenney

image

The video was so stupid that, in the end, probably no one will benefit.  Whoever initiated it will almost certainly lose instead of gaining.  The crowds being distracted by the issue will have members die, will lose time from their daily tasks, and will look exploitable.  Libya lost 10 defenders who resisted the attack, lost status, and has more difficult task in dealing with the armed insurgents who organized the attack and came with weapons they are also prepared to use against their own government.  Other governments have new challenges in walking the line between maintaining the confidence of their citizens and maintaining useful internaitonal relationships.  Israel's support in the US and elsewhere will almost certainly be eroded by the accusations, even though they probably were not involved.

 

The originators probably thought they would gain something, but probably will not except for satisfaction for the public attention their hatred has achieved.

Alex's picture

Alex

image

Jim Kenney wrote:

 

The originators probably thought they would gain something, but probably will not except for satisfaction for the public attention their hatred has achieved.

Do you not believe it is possible that dead Muslims was the goal of the filmmaker?

 

II understand that  trolls mostly just want attention, but the need to get attention and feel important include killing or provoking the killing of muslim. We actually had a Troll in Canada, with a long history of trolling on the net, actually kill a man and send his body parts to various places. Killing in this case was just a means to an end.

 

If you read the Harper article (Jesus Killed Mohamed) you will also see how instead of killing as a means to an end, the reverse can be true and Trolling behaviour is just a wasy to provoke the conditions where killing would happen.

 

 

graeme's picture

graeme

image

The history of this incident goes back at least a century to quite ruthless klling and pillaging by, in particular, France, Britain, Italy, Spain, then, after 1945, the US. The region is unstable because we have made it unstable. We have tolerated, indeed, encouraged bigotry through our politicians and our news media. There is reason to hate us. Just in the last dozen years, we have mudered well over a million Moslems, and crippled nobody will ever know how many.

Not long ago, I could travel almost anywhere and, with the word Canada on my shoulder, expect a welcome. Canadians are now warned not to wear such identification in a great many countries. So are Americans. We have become, as polls show, the most distrusted and hated nations in the world.

The US, in particular bases its foreign policy on hatred, fear and paranoia. 9/11 became the excuse for the slaughter in Iraq. There are people in the US now looking very hard for an excuse to attack Iran. (something they also did sixty years ago - how often has Iran attacked the US?) And there are more wars to come.

What we are watching is a dying western empire desperately using military force while it still has it to stave off collapse. Our capitalism (a very perverse form thereof) is eating itself. And it's relying on our fear and hatred and paranoia to carry on.

The film, crude as it is, was obviously made to provoke violence. That puts it well beyond the boundaries of free speech.

We wouldn't riot if such a film were made in Iran about Jesus? probably not. But then, we  haven't been shot, bombed, manipulated, put under dictators and our resources stolen by Moslems for the past century.

graeme's picture

graeme

image

i should add that this has the potential to dance us in catastrophe -and those braying jackasses who follow Romney are using it to play election games with. I don't much like Obama. But he is at least sane. I'm not at all convinced i can say the same for the Republican leadership.

revjohn's picture

revjohn

image

Sanity is a one-trick pony.  The only thing it provides is rational thought but, when you are crazy, whooo-hoo-hoo-hoooooo!  The sky is the limit!

--The Tick

qwerty's picture

qwerty

image

Never mind who directed the movie.  Who paid for it?

redhead's picture

redhead

image

A  good question qwerty !

 

Pilgrims Progress's picture

Pilgrims Progress

image

One of the reasons I'm an advocate for international travel is that, through doing so, I became aware of how the differences in cultural mores play a huge impact on the way we all think and act. What was originally a vague concept became a living reality............

 

Yesterday we had ugly rioting in Sydney, Australia, concerning this very issue.

 

Last night talk-back radio highlighted thiscultural difference. Aussies from many generations highlighted free speech and protesting peacefully and lawfully.

Moslem newcomers highlighted the blasphemy and insult to their religion -which they saw as being necessary to defend.

 

Sadly, there was little regard from either how their views were culturally determined. Ironically, that was something they shared.

 

We don't come into this world with our beliefs, we learn them within a culture. IMO, if we first step back , take a breath, and acknowledge this fact we can take the first steps to reconciliation.

 

"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."        - Soren Kierkegaard.

InannaWhimsey's picture

InannaWhimsey

image

Pilgrims Progress wrote:
Yesterday we had ugly rioting in Sydney, Australia, concerning this very issue.

 

Last night talk-back radio highlighted thiscultural difference. Aussies from many generations highlighted free speech and protesting peacefully and lawfully.

 

Moslem newcomers highlighted the blasphemy and insult to their religion -which they saw as being necessary to defend.

 

and that's one of the things that is causing the current worldly hub-ub--it is cultural to react so negatively to their certain blasphemies & there are groups that intentionally inflame & manipulate to get their way (ie the jihadists)

 

i think we've gotten to the point globally where the enlightenment, the self-understanding like the Founding Fathers had or the various Holy People, will have to be adopted by everyone for us to survive as a species...or we'll keep on murdering each other over just feeling insulted...

 

even the Dalai Lama is getting even more involved, as one of his latest Facebook posts "All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether."

 

 

Alex's picture

Alex

image

I can not decide if the Dalai Lama is either twenty years behind other modern thinkers, or if he is 2000 years behind. After all  when has any religion has had all the answers, and people have been looking elsehwere to find answers that their relgions do not.

 

The major figures of most religions, have all  had a good understanding of this.St  Paul for example drew heavily on philosophy. For hundreds of years in the west novels, plays and other forms of literature  have been a primary place where ethics and spirituality has been explore. Social  Science has also played an important role.

 

IReligion has been shaped more by the arts, in my opinion than art has been by religions great contributions to it.

 

InannaWhimsey's picture

InannaWhimsey

image

Alex wrote:

I can not decide if the Dalai Lama is either twenty years behind other modern thinkers, or if he is 2000 years behind. After all  when has any religion has had all the answers, and people have been looking elsehwere to find answers that their relgions do not.

 

The major figures of most religions, have all  had a good understanding of this.St  Paul for example drew heavily on philosophy. For hundreds of years in the west novels, plays and other forms of literature  have been a primary place where ethics and spirituality has been explore. Social  Science has also played an important role.

 

IReligion has been shaped more by the arts, in my opinion than art has been by religions great contributions to it.

 

I'm going to be totally fascinated seeing how people's beliefs on the Dalai Lama on WC and elsewhere change with that quote going around; I wonder how many are going to 'Dawkinize' Him, to make Him not of their tribe...

InannaWhimsey's picture

InannaWhimsey

image
Back to Politics topics