Islam, not the religion of peace:

Originally posted by sumydid
I judge the character of people individually. I try not to generalize either.

You have done nothing but refer to "the Muslims" in a generic, stereotyping way on this thread so far. There has been nothing to suggest that you "the judge the character of [Muslim] people individually". I don't think you try to do anything but generalize.

Originally posted by sumydid
The film threw a can of gasoline on a fire that was already burning. The match was already lit, FMF.

It's not just me, or KellyJay, or Christian Whiton that understands this.

So you concede that the film caused demonstrations and anger. Good. Then we agree on that.

Originally posted by FMF
So you concede that the film caused demonstrations and anger. Good. Then we agree on that.

Yes, I agree entirely that the film caused demonstrations and anger. Where we seem to disagree is whether it was the direct cause of the death of the 4 Americans in our embassy, and whether all the attackers actually saw the film prior to that attack.

Originally posted by FMF
You have done nothing but refer to "the Muslims" in a generic, stereotyping way on this thread so far. There has been nothing to suggest that you "the judge the character of [Muslim] people individually". I don't think you try to do anything but generalize.

Nope, I haven't generalized about Muslims inappropriately. I completely understand that most people in the Muslim community are not terrorists. I've never said anything that would contradict that. I understand very well that Islam has different groups within it that behave differently.

Originally posted by sumydid
Yes, I agree entirely that the film caused demonstrations and anger. Where we seem to disagree is that it was the direct cause of the death of the 4 Americans in our embassy, and that all the attackers actually saw the film prior to that attack.

I don't know how many times I have to say that I view the killing of the ambassador and the three others as an assassination. The demonstrations in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, India and Indonesia had nothing to do with that assassination and were caused by the film.

Originally posted by sumydid
Nope, I haven't generalized about Muslims inappropriately.

Well I think it is clear that you have. So we can just agree to differ on it.

Originally posted by FMF
Well I think it is clear that you have. So we can just agree to differ on it.

Or as Taoman says -- disagree to disagree. 😏

Originally posted by FMF
Well I think it is clear that you have. So we can just agree to differ on it.

I'm curious about your hypersensitivity when it comes to any possible "generalizations" about the Muslim community. Christians are lumped together and generalized about all the time. Sonhouse just got through saying the he/she detests Christians. That was a sweeping generalization. I don't recall you getting all bent out of shape about that.

In other words, your hypersensitivity is clearly selective, and steered in favor of the Muslim people, and away from the Christian people.

There's an obvious bias. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. I'm biased in favor of things and against other things too. I'm just saying your pro-Muslim/anti-Christian bias has not gone unnoticed, and it sort of flies in the face of your claim to never generalize, as if you are some completely fair, objective-minded individual.

Originally posted by FMF
I don't know how many times I have to say that I view the killing of the ambassador and the three others as an assassination. The demonstrations in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, India and Indonesia had nothing to do with that assassination and were caused by the film.

I know you have said that to me too, and I'm still telling you that the reason the
film became important was because it was used as an excuse to start a riot, to
cover up the attack which was well thought out. The film later became much more
important as a propaganda tool for those that hate America to get more recruits
the rev up the faithful, and those that want to protect Obama's foreign policies so
no one can say he is so weak eveyone views the USA as an easy target now, at
least in my opinion.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I know you have said that to me too, and I'm still telling you that the reason the
film became important was because it was used as an excuse to start a riot, to
cover up the attack which was well thought out. The film later became much more
important as a propaganda tool for those that hate America to get more recruits
the rev up the faithful, and thos ...[text shortened]... say he is so weak eveyone views the USA as an easy target now, at
least in my opinion.
Kelly

I think to suggest that demonstrations in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, India, Indonesia and elsewhere were somehow used to "cover up the attack" in Libya has no credence whatsoever. However, I think I know why you apparently want to implicate - seemingly - everybody in the murders in some way. Militant groups are using the film and the reaction to it for political ends and this has parallels in the U.S. where Republicans are trying to use the film and the reaction to it for their own political ends too, although it may have only succeeded in making candidate Romney seem unpresidential.

Originally posted by sumydid
Nice try. I am only voicing disgust.. not only with the sickos that attacked our Embassy, but with our country's leadership whose policies led directly to this, and whose reactions to it make it clear they side with the attackers.

You have this thing. You unceasingly defend Islam and Liberals. In fact, I think (on the surface at least) that it's a very ...[text shortened]... ay a peep about the harsh, degrading treatment of women in the Islamic community.

So why do Progressive Liberals hate Christians most? It has to do with credibility and insecurity, but I'll leave it at that.

I nearly fell off my chair laughing so hard at this, pure comedy gold sumydid. Keep it coming.

Originally posted by FMF
I think to suggest that demonstrations in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Iraq, India, Indonesia and elsewhere were somehow used to "cover up the attack" in Libya has no credence whatsoever. However, I think I know why you apparently want to implicate - seemingly - everybody in the murders in some way. Militant groups are us ...[text shortened]... ends too, although it may have only succeeded in making candidate Romney seem unpresidential.

If you follow the statement I made it was that the riots at first were used as a
cover for the murders. At the time of the murders there were only two small
riots taking place, the riots grew over time as the story of the film spread.
Kelly

Originally posted by sumydid
In other words, your hypersensitivity is clearly selective, and steered in favor of the Muslim people, and away from the Christian people.

There are dozens of posters here defending Christians from slights and unfair generalizations. [In certain contexts here in Indonesia I defend Christians from the stereotypes that some of my Muslim acquaintances and colleagues come up with, especially when they seek to generalize about European and American people.]

I am one of only very few on this forum who [in the face of a constant flow of inaccurate comments, sweeping smears and generalizations, and the occasional outright xenophobic or hateful thread or posts] contributes something that provides some modicum of balance, often based on my experience of living in the world's largest Muslim majority country.

You may try to dismiss or belittle these contributions as "hypersensitivity" or as "pro-Muslim/anti-Christian bias", but I am not concerned.

sumydid: So why do Progressive Liberals hate Christians most? It has to do with credibility and insecurity, but I'll leave it at that.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
I nearly fell off my chair laughing so hard at this, pure comedy gold sumydid. Keep it coming.

This coming from someone who's just after having said "I judge the character of people individually. I try not to generalize either."

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you follow the statement I made it was that the riots at first were used as a
cover for the murders. At the time of the murders there were only two small
riots taking place, the riots grew over time as the story of the film spread.
Kelly

So, putting the assassination to one side, you now concede that the mass protests in several countries around the world are about the film's content and are an expression of religious sentiment, contrary to what you suggested on page 2? Right?