In Response to Muslim Rioters, U.S. Embassy Apologizes for Offensive Speech

Pastor Terry Jones, a Christian pastor who specializes in making everyone in the world hate him, recently announced yesterday that today was International Judge Muhammad Day:

In the video, Jones refers to “Hussein Obama,” calls Muhammad “Mo,” says Muhammad was a pedophile… the list goes on.

Jones was also promoting a movie with a misnomer of a title — Innocence of Muslims — that compares Muhammad to a goat and Muslims to “child-lovers.”

Anyway, there are now riots taking place in Libya and Cairo. Rioters today “scaled the embassy walls and one of them tore down the US flag, replacing it with a black one inscribed with the Muslim profession of faith.”

Because that’s a rational response…

***Edit***: The protests are in response to the movie, not Jones, though his promotion of the film has not helped matters.

It’s not just a protest. One U.S. official has already died as a result of the violence.

So how does the U.S. Embassy in Cairo — where much of this is taking place — react to all this?

Instead of calling the violence an overreaction to one man’s warped viewpoint and the film he’s promoting, they’ve caved in and put all the blame on Jones (who did nothing violent whatsoever):

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others.

Goddammit. The U.S. Embassy is going to force me to side with Terry Jones.

Religious beliefs deserve no respect. Religious people do, and even they aren’t immune from criticism. Blaming Terry Jones for the overreaction of extremists makes as much sense as blaming Salman Rushdie for having a fatwa issued against him for writing The Satanic Verses.

The politically correct part of me understands why they did it. They’re trying not to fan the flames. But by issuing that statement, they’re saying that the people using their right to free speech (though unpopular) are to blame for how it is received by people who can’t deal with any criticism whatsoever.

***Update 1***: I found out after posting this that the Embassy released the previous statement before the violent attacks. That still doesn’t mean religious beliefs deserve respect. And, as far as I know, the Embassy has not revised their statement in light of the violence.

Is Terry Jones a bigot? Obviously.

Is he trying to piss off Muslims? Yep.

Do Americans give a shit what he has to say about anything? Not at all. He’s like the Westboro Baptist Church. He’s famous for being hateful. His fan base is tiny.

At least on Twitter, the Embassy has criticized both Jones (without naming him) and the rioters:

Jones is an awful human being. But he’s not hurting anybody. That’s more than we can say about the extremists who think violence is the response to offensive speech.

***Update 2***: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued this statement in response to the attacks:

I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack.

Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the editor of Friendly Atheist, appears on the Atheist Voice channel on YouTube, and co-hosts the uniquely-named Friendly Atheist Podcast. You can read much more about him here.

  • Philovaihinger

    With you 100%.

  • Philbert

    I’m inclined to cut State a break in matters of diplomacy, they have to live amongst these barbarians, as do a lot of  innocent people who could get hurt if this madness continues. 

    Jones is a troll and deserves to be called out as such. 

  • Cat’s Staff

    Muslims need a better PR person to advise them on when to keep their mouth shut.  If they hadn’t done anything half a dozen people would have seen this video…now millions will hear about it and many peoples stereotypes of Muslims being violent will be justified.  Not to say that they shouldn’t use their freedom of speech (not that they truly have it where they live), but they can make a strategic move to improve their image by not violating an embassy and killing someone.

  • TheExpatriate700

    I frankly fail to see any problem with the State Department’s response. As the US Embassy points out in the tweets, they’re the ones living through it. Any idiot can figure out they condemn it. 

    Let’s be blunt: Jones knew violence would be a probable reaction, and might even have been hoping for it.  He bears at least indirect responsibility. If I worked at that Embassy, I would publicly challenge him to come to Egypt and see the damage himself. Somehow, I don’t think his mouth would be quite as big then

  • Croquet_Player

    Hey, don’t anybody tell the rioting Egyptian  Muslims about Reddit, ‘K? ‘K.

  • Arval Becker

    I am usually non-violent, but I really think that speech comes with consequences.  If this preacher is really so sure of his convictions, he should follow his god and go to Lybia or Egypt and say these same things to them.  After all, if he believes his bible and that his god will protect him, he should be fine.

  • Mike De Fleuriot

    Next year, when a crazy Muslim convert slays Terry Jones, I wonder what will the US goverment say, and what will the silent supporters of Terry Jones say. 

  • Joe Zamecki

    Free speech isn’t harmful, but some folks want it to be. Violence can be very harmful, and some folks want us to just blow it off. To me, the problem is violence. I know, I know this puts me in opposition to a great many other supposed rationalists, who support the violence. But I just have to say, nothing excuses it. Free speech is tolerable to people who have seen a lot of it. Obviously some folks just need to see more of it. This fact simply cannot excuse the violence. No rationalist should ever take the violence-addicted side. That’s just not rational. The violence is part of the problem that the free speech addresses, and no matter who says it, it’s true: Religion is a problem. 

  • TheExpatriate700

    Where do you see anyone endorsing violence here?

  • Anubis_1974

    Freedom of speech. Period.
    Islam doesn’t like it? Too bad! Get over it and grow up.

  • TooManyJens

    “Instead of calling the violence an overreaction to one man’s warped viewpoint and the film he’s promoting, they’ve caved in and put all the blame on Jones (who did nothing violent whatsoever)”

    The U.S. embassy in Cairo says its statement was issued before the embassy attacks, not after.

  • Kevin T. Keith

    The embassy didn’t say Jones was responsible for the violence. It condemned bigotry and deliberate offensiveness, as well as violence, but kept them separate. It seems to me they hit it exactly rightly.

  • ortcutt

    Just to be clear on this point, Freedom of  Speech doesn’t mean that government can’t disagree with someone’s speech or condemn it.  It just means that they can’t restrict or penalize someone for that speech.  The State Dept. is free to disagree with Terry Jones and even condemn him as long as he has a right to communicate his views.  I might personally disagree with the State Department on the value of religious feelings, but I’m not charged with maintaining foreign relations.

  • John Small Berries

    Blaming Terry Jones for the overreaction of extremists makes as much sense as blaming Salman Rushdie for writing The Satanic Verses.

    Um… Salman Rushdie did write The Satanic Verses. Do you mean blaming Rushdie for the fatwa against him?

  • Hemant Mehta

    *sigh* Yes, that’s what I meant. I’ll make that more clear. Thanks!

  • Octoberfurst

      This is why I hate religion. On the one hand we have a lunatic, Bible-thumping nutcase named Terry Jones who is doing his best to cause strife being Christians and Muslims. He is a despicable human being who is desperate for fame and notoriety.
      And on the other hand we have a bunch of froth-at-the-mouth Muslims who become wildly violent whenever anyone dares to criticize their precious prophet and faith. They riot, burn things down and try to maim or kill anyone they think is responsible for such “blasphemy.”  It just makes my head spin.
       Is Terry Jones a total jerk? Yes. Are the Muslim rioters total a–holes? Yes.  I say a pox on both their houses! Jones had the right to say what he said–no matter how offensive it may be.  If the Muslims had just ignored this fool no one would have known about it or cared.  But no, they had to act like a bunch of raging banshees.
       This world would be a much better place without religion. Truly it would.

  • John Kyrk

    People who engage in violence are endorsing violence.

  • Philbert

    I’m not seeing any mention of Jones here. They claim it’s about some guy called Sam Bacile and some unnamed Egyptian.

  • skylights

    Terry Jones isn’t blameless here. He KNEW this violence was the type of response his idiotic movie would provoke, and that American diplomats overseas would be in harm’s way while he sat safe at home. It’s like  if you hurled insults at a street  gang and ran away, leaving your wheelchair-bound friend to be beaten and robbed. Yes you have the RIGHT to insult them, but you know the likely consequences, and to put someone else in harm’s way while knowing you’re safe is just wrong.

  • Silo Mowbray

    But…um…by all accounts Mo WAS a pedophile. Didn’t he have a 9 year old bride?

    (Gaaaaah. Makes me ill.)

  • David Starner

    I’m rather tired of us having to walk on eggshells. Yes, Terry Jones is a troll, but no one should

  • Red_Rabbit

    Thank you psychotic muslim rioters for proving Terry Jones’ point. 

    They all suck.  

  • midnight rambler

    This post is completely wrong; the embassy statement came out hours before the riot:

  • Salwinder

    Where is the so-called “moderate” Muslim majority speaking out against this violence? People have died because of these protests, yet there has been silence from all leading “moderate” Muslim figures. Yet again, there is tacit acceptance by moderate Muslims everywhere (and much of the wider international media) that religion should be exempt from criticism and that somehow the victims of such violence (such as embassy staff) should be treading on eggshells in case Muslims “have” to exercise their “right” to violent protest yet again.

  • JohnnieCanuck

    It’s not in their best interests to ignore provocation. They want to make sure that every Muslim hears about any disrespect, anywhere. They will be using this to try to fan riots wherever they can.

    Radicals in each camp feed off of each other. Retaliation is the hoped for response because it justifies retaliation in return. Over and over. Every provocation is welcomed by the leaders as a way to increase their influence and power. It is so important that insults and attacks be seen to come from ‘them’ that in their absence, false flag attacks are a recurring strategy.

    Without religion, this world would have one less excuse for violence. Unfortunately that still leaves competition for resources and political ideology, amongst others.

  • Rich Wilson

    And of course being an election year, Romney has to find some way to attack the Obama administration

    “I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi,” Romney said in the statement. “It’s disgraceful that the Obama Administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.” 

  • yohocoma

    Analyzing any Muslim reaction to the west, in particular the US, is incoherent without regarding the context of many years of western aggression in their countries, in their world, upending their social structures, destroying their homes and ways of life, killing their people – disrespecting them thoroughly.  Since religion is an integral part of most cultures, and definitely of most Muslim nations’ cultures, what’s happening now is completely understandable.

    Come on, Hemant.  You’ve got to stop treating religion as some kind of phenomenon sealed off from the global social, political, economic, MILITARY contexts.  Atheists’ reactions to religious events sometimes remind me of Ayn Rand devotees’ analysis of the political/economic/social – too idealistic, too pristine, too divorced from all the factors.

  • JohnnieCanuck

    Actually, no, they didn’t put all the blame on Jones. They said “misguided individuals”. The links you give blame the movie as the provocation. Jones doesn’t even appear to have set it all off with his promotion of the movie but he would probably like to get all the credit he can.

    According to the WSJ link Bacile, an Israeli-American California real-estate developer, posted the trailer to his movie on YouTube in early July. Activists on Twitter only recently became aware of it and began agitating. Egyptian clerics amongst others picked it up from there and now Egyptian media have been broadcasting the clips.
    The State Department would seem to align rather closely with your position.

    “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others,” Mrs. Clinton said Tuesday night.”But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind,” she said in reference to the attacks.

  • Throne Stone

    It’s too bad that the freedom of speech will cost you a lot, esp when a lot of Americans will die in that cause! and guess what? It was an Israeli man who was enjoying your country’s freedom of speech Sam Basil and the majority of who sponsored the event were Jews. so your country is getting fucked by Jews not Muslims. you freaking cock sucker.

  • JohnnieCanuck

    Turns out, it’s not his movie. He really does like it though and he’s promoting it.

    You are right about the coward part. I expect though that a close look will show that the clerics and TV news publishers and other activist leaders are also well away from the violence they have so willingly promoted.

  • skylights

    Without a doubt. There’s plenty of blame to go around.

  • Georgina

    If I don’t like what is being said, I put my fingers in my ears.
    If I don’t like what is on TV, I switch it off.

    Violence is not comparable, since I can do neither of these things if I don’t like having my head cut off.  I can only fight back. If rioters invade an Embassy, can’t they just be shot?

    You are right off course, they use the same methods as blackmailers throughout the ages – fear and cowardice. Apologising to them is just feeding the crocodile.
    A better answer would be “He, this guy is in America – it’s what they do there.”

  • AB

    Insulting Billions of Peoples faith is not freedom of speech.
    Freedom of speech can be political, personal , regional . But it can not be against faith and it can not be against a country.
    My simple question,those who are supporting freedom of speech , will they accept if some one says deteriotary comments against their belief  and accept as freedom of speech. No way. Many example can be cited.  When MF hussain , drew a paint of Hindu goddess,  he has to run for his life and took  assalyum in another country. If some one says anything against  Jesus , will so called christian will accept that as freedom of speech? Absolutely not. So why “Double Standard”. Selft introspect is needed , than pointing fingers to others.
    Fortunate that, we a muslim will never do the same to Jesus  (Isal- ale- Salaam  PBUH) .

  • Georgina

     Maybe he just wants to ensure that his right to say what he believes does not rust in the air of political appeasement.
    As long as he can prove it is true, why so  hostile?

  • After Thought

    I only saw a clipping on  youtube. The film is a welcome move. US and the world is cowering in front of Muslims with Jihadi mindset. There must be more movies to satirize Islam. It is an inevitable process for Muslims to realize the horror their religion has inflicted on this world for 1400 years.The riots expose the fact that it is the  the illiterate who lead that community everywhere.

  • Abdul_bari

    Tell me please , if you can not stop  2-3 idiots , how can you stop  millions  from using their freedom of faith.

  • Salwinder

    We could start by not excusing acts of violence in the name of religion? How about governments and religious leaders setting the tone by condemning these attacks which have led to the death of at least one person? The silence of the “moderate” Muslim majority is deafening……

  • Salwinder

    “Insulting billions of people’s faith is not freedom of speech”

    Actually – yes it is. Faith is not entitled to claim exemption from criticism, and freedom of speech means that people have the right to mock or criticise without fear of persecution.

  • TheBlackCat

    Insulting Billions of Peoples faith is not freedom of speech.
    Freedom of speech can be political, personal , regional . But it can not be against faith and it can not be against a country.

    Why not?  On what grounds do you assign those, and those alone, to being off-limits?  Why can we not criticize faiths for their problems?  Why can we not criticize countries from their crimes?  Its insulting to catholics to point out the child molesters in their ranks.  Should we just not be allowed to mention that issue at all?

    simple question,those who are supporting freedom of speech , will they
    accept if some one says deteriotary comments against their belief  and
    accept as freedom of speech.

    Of course.  I may disagree with it, but if I do I will use my own speech to criticize theirs, I will not try to prevent them from being able to voice their opinions at all. 

    When MF
    hussain , drew a paint of Hindu goddess,  he has to run for his life
    and took  assalyum in another country.

    And I consider that deplorable.

    If some one says
    anything against  Jesus , will so called christian will accept that as
    freedom of speech? Absolutely not.

    Depends on the Christian I suppose.  Some are certainly hypocritical, supporting freedom to criticize religions they don’t like while trying to stamp out any criticism of those they do like.  But not all of them are (in fact there is plenty of criticism of Jews and Israel from Christians in the U.S. as well).

    So why “Double Standard”.

    What “double standard”.  First, you do realize this is an atheist blog, right?  Talking about what Christians would do and then criticizing us for it is about as relevant as talking about what Martians would do and then criticizing us for that. 

    Second, you have not provided any reason to think that anyone here actually supports using violence or legal threats to curtail freedom of speech.  You provided examples that other people don’t support freedom of speech, assume we agree with those efforts, and then criticize us for that agreement.  On what basis do you conclude that we agree with any effort to limit freedom of speech anywhere?

    In In fact the people on this blog have a long history of supporting the rights of people to criticize Christians, Muslims, Hindus, even Atheists.  We may disagree with peoples’ speech, but to counter it we use out own speech, not the law and certainly not violence.

  • Wajihocg

    To explain this issue , the 9 yr was very mature ans she lived much long after him to convey his messages and behaviors ,(peace upon him) , she was very smart and the marriage was not sexual or physical till she was much older 
    If you go back to the bible ( king James old testament ) many prophets were accused of incest , in Islam we have the biggest respect to all prophets , on top of them prophet Jesus peace upon him and that who doesn’t believe in Jesus as a wholy prophet can’t be a Muslim 

  • bernardaB

    What is wrong with deliberately offensive speech? What is wrong with deliberately mocking someone’s faith? Both are integral parts of free speech.  Faith is ridiculous so how can you not make fun of it? I am offended every time I see Fox News, but I don’t advocate violence against that bunch of  liars.  O’Reilly regularly insults people, especially atheists, liberals, and such by calling them pinheads, nutcases, or worse. In no way do I intend to respect religion in any way, just as I don’t respect any other frauds like Fox News, Wall Street, Corporations and so on.

  • Anonymous Atheist

    Um… “According to the traditional sources, Aisha was six or seven years old when she was betrothed to Muhammad and nine when the marriage was consummated.”

  • Coyotenose

    Jones is doing exactly what he did last time. He is hoping for a backlash so that he can play the victim and solicit donations. The scum got a big payday off of inciting violence last time.

  • Energy18

    first. let us see that mecca will open to us……can you and me go to mecca???

  • TheBlackCat

    You will find we are not very big supports of the old or new testament here, so citing it to defend the behavior is not going to help you (quite the contrary, actually).

    I can understand that Muslims are showing up to defend their faith.  But did they not even read the title of the blog?  They seem convinced we are Christians somehow, or at least strong supports of Christianity.

  • Troels Jakobsen

    Interesting how Wajihocg tries to justify the arrangement through erroneous and invented excuses. It’s as if he actually feels uncomfortable about Mohammed having sex with a nine-year old. But at the same time he will of course insist vehemently that their relationship was perfectly fine.

    There’s nothing like religion to create cognitive dissonance.

  • Rahim Moosa

    As a Muslim (and having seen the trailer of the movie), I am not bothered.  It seems like a comedy, something patterned along the lines of “Life of Brian”.  Einstein is someone I also respect and if you call him a donkey or burn his general relativity article it does not bother me because it doesn’t change the truth.  Similarly vilifying the Prophet Muhammad does not change what he did: he was a seeker after truth who taught the freeing of slaves, gave women the right to inherit property and prevented the taking advantage of orphans and with his followers held nightly vigils (meditation sessions).  He taught that the scholars ink is more sacred that the blood of a martyr and that the meaning of jihad was a struggle against our own egos (nafs).  Unfortunately, many in the Islamic world do not cultivate the peace in one’s heart and are too easy to fly off the handle.  Let me recommend a book about Muhammad, one by Martin Lings based on the earliest sources.

  • Brepublic2010

    first) cultures defer from one another, in the arabic and islamic culture we define freedom of speach to be within the civilized and responsible context, in america you define it other wise, that suits you, and this suits us, you have no right to impose your idea of freedom of speech on us, if you don’t like our ways take your embassy and go.
     second) when accuse someone of being a pedophile, dont you need some sort of evidence? are we living in a world where anyone can accuse anyone of anything and the one who needs the evidence is the one being accused ? if thats so then i guess all the presidents of the united states were pedophiles, go defend that ? 

  • Am_urz

    Freedom of speech my ass, u come and criticize somebody’s prophet and accuse them of things aren’t even mentioned in the Quran nor muslims know about and you want them to accept it, where did you bring all these facts about muslims, if they were fact i dont think anybody will do anything but because none of these facts were right ppl came out and protest.. did ever any of you read about Islam, u just judge them according to what you hear from others not bothering yourself to find the truth for yourself! and u still talk like you know everything! your real enemy live among you and u dont even know it, u feed the beast that gonna turn against you when they are confident enough that they dont need u anymore and u still dont see it… ignorance is a choice you stupid bastards

  • Glasofruix

    He also liked to fuck 9 year old girls, just saying…

  • jim

    unresponsible stepes from basil caused violations and losses of life

  • BOB Jhon

    always the  jews after these toubles

  • skylights

    Your dedication to non-violence is commendable, but your religion is still wrong.

  • Bernhard Rosenberg

    last night I WAS THE KEYNOTE SPEAKER AT OUR TOWNSHIP 9/11 PROGRAM. I was one of the chaplains at 9/11 and now have asthma. . I am angry and will be on several media outlets todays. The right wing Muslims should BURN IN HELL. HOW DARE THE U.S. apologize as our ambassador to LIBYA LIES DEAD. . THE NEW Nazis ARE THESE Islamic EXTREMISTS. Rabbi DR. Bernhard ROSENBERG

  • Denis Robert

    There’s a bit of grey here: the film wasn’t criticizing Islam, but was also a racist screed against muslims (calling muslims pedophiles, for example). So the film should be condemned as racist.

    On the other hand, of course, the riots can’t be tolerated. Let’s not forget that when the US Embassy released the original, the riots hadn’t started yet. Once the violence started, they explicitly condemned it.

    But I do agree that the language they used in their condemnation of Pastor Jones was ridiculous. Blasphemy shouldn’t be a crime. It doesn’t attack the person; at worst, it attacks a person’s cherished beliefs. There’s a difference between the two.

    But I repeat this to be clear: Pastor Jones is not committing blasphemy alone: he is also calling for violence against a people, and attacking them through rhetoric exactly identical to that used by the Nazis against the Jews.

  • Denis Robert

     1. It’s a story, with very little evidence.
    2. Mo may have been a pedophile according to our standards, but marriage at that age was somewhat common in those days, in the West as well as in the East. I don’t condone it, but refusing to look at it in historical context is intellectually dishonest.
    3. The film doesn’t just say that Mo was a pedophile, but that ALL MUSLIMS are.

    The last one falls in the category of the “Jews eat babies” told by anti-semites over the years to justify pogroms against them.

  • El Bastardo

    *sigh*  Firstly, freedom of speech is just that, the freedom to say as you will, you don’t get to redefine it as “polite speech only” and then claim someone else is pushing their definition on you.  You’ll also find, if you looked, that in America hate speech, that’s covered by freedom of religion, which is enjoyed by muslims, jews and christians alike.

    Secondly, when muslims accept that Muhammad consumated his marriage to Aisha when she was 10 (though some claim she was 9) then that’s all the “proof” you need.   You can make similar claims when the Americans claim their president deflowered a child.

  • Lefty

    No violence is without a context. Actually, no action we do is without a context.
    Does the fact that there is a context justify the violence?

    The answer is that the context argument can justify just about anything,  what you choose to justify says more about you than on the context or the issue.

  • Blablus

    “In the United States, by the 1880s, most states set the age of consent
    at 10–12, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only 7. A
    New York Times article states that it was still aged 7 in Delaware in
    1895.” Source:  “PURITY
    CONGRESS MEETS; A Great Gathering for Moral Work in the City of
    Baltimore. AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE MOVEMENT Determined to Prevent State
    Regulation of Vice and to Rescue Fallen Men and Fallen Women.”. The New York Times (BALTIMORE, Oct. 14.). October 15, 1895.Now wake up Mr. Green…

  • Firas Maher

     what the fuck, look through history. at the time of prophet people did that, not just Arabs. everybody. it was common back then. besides 9 year old were more mature than 9 year old now

  • Blablus

    “In the United States, by the 188os, most states set the age of consent at 10–12, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only 7. A New York Times article states that it was still aged 7 in Delaware in 1895.”
    Source:  “PURITY CONGRESS MEETS; A Great Gathering for Moral Work in the City of Baltimore. AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE MOVEMENT Determined to Prevent State Regulation of Vice and to Rescue Fallen Men and Fallen Women.”. The New York Times.

    How about now ?

  • Hello_world125

     Muslims also believe that the Prophet Muhammed split the moon and put it back together. That he traveled to the 7th Heaven on a being that flew faster than light. If you believe that he was a pedophile, then the same Hadith source also state he had split the moon and traveled faster than light. So have you suddenly become a Muslim too? Or do you just “selective” believe only certain verses (pertaining to pedophilia) is only true?

  • Hello_world125

     Do you believe all Hadith sources are true?

  • Charles Crain

    My understanding is that the Embassy condemned “the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims” BEFORE the rioting started. They knew that PEACEFUL protests were planned, and wanted to keep them from becoming non-peaceful, so they released the statement.  Something I think we can all agree was well within their mission of maintaining peace with the Muslim world and, more specifically, protecting the Embassy.

    However, after the protests became violent, Secretary of State Clinton released the following statement:

    “Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.  The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But let me be clear:  There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”

    Once you have the timeline, it looks like the Embassy and the State Department acted appropriately.   

  • ragarth

     Terry Jones is in the US, ergo Islamic rioters kill a diplomat. Somehow this seems not only out of proportion, but also misdirected.

    Or can you justify killing a diplomat in one country for something some moron says in another?

  • ragarth

    If we don’t have the right to impose our ideals of freedom of speech on muslims, then by extension, they don’t have the right to do so to us, and its the rioters trying to impose *their* ideal of freedom of speech on us, not the other way around. Terry Jones is in the US, the riots are taking place in a completely different country. When Terry Jones flies to an islamic country and starts preaching, you *might* have a point, until then, your people are doing the exact thing you decry in your post.

  • Blablus

    “In the United States, by the 1880s, most states set the age of consent at 10–12, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only 7. A New York Times article states that it was still aged 7 in Delaware in  1895.”

    Source:  “PURITY CONGRESS MEETS; A Great Gathering for Moral Work in the City of Baltimore. AIMS AND OBJECTS OF THE MOVEMENT Determined to Prevent State Regulation of Vice and to Rescue Fallen Men and Fallen Women.”. The New York Times (BALTIMORE, Oct. 14.). October 15, 1895.

  • Glasofruix

    That doesn’t necessarily make it right. I assume you’re a muslim, what’s with everyone of you people here talking about mature 9 year olds?

  • Adam

    why not ? it’s freedom of speech isn’t it ?

  • Ned Ludd

     I have heard that Muslims are not as stupid as they sound.  So far I haven’t seen any evidence of that.

    If you believe in prophets, you might as well believe fairies. Given the sexual hangups of Islam and the strict separation of the sexes, it is more than likely that most, if not all, Muslim male adolescents and men have had homosexual relations.

  • Glasofruix

    Oh for fucks sake, give it a rest it’s like the fifth time you post the exact same thing. Anyway, it’s not like puritan americans were not crazy even back then…

  • Troels Jakobsen

    I’ll have to remember that the next time a Christian advocates traditional marriage. They should have no problem with letting nine year old girls marry, then.

    The question is, does the fact that something was common behavior make it moral? Slavery was also common and accepted back then, but I don’t hear many defending that practice today. They’ll make excuses for its existence thorugh history, sure, but not many actually defend it as morally right. I feel the same pattern may apply to marriage of minors.

    But actually, all I wanted to point out was how Wajihocg is clearly uncomfortable with such a marriage arrangement, but we all know he’ll defend it regardless, even though it’s nagging him. I find it to be a poignant example of the power of religion.

  • Glasofruix

    How’s religion excluded from the free speech now? Just because you believe in fairies doesn’t make you or your stupid beliefs immune to criticism…

  • Glasofruix

    It is, desn’t mean that it’s not stupid or plain wrong.

  • Troels Jakobsen

    Anyone is free to say any dumb shit they want. And anyone else is free to call them on it. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean anyone is expected to respect what you say.

  • Dandy

     And as such, none of those licentious Americans claimed to be the Prophet of God.
    If you are going to claim that God speaks through you, it would be shrewd to stay away from questionable behaviors. Like consummating marriage with a child. It is indefensible.

  • Troels Jakobsen

    So? You can also find old American laws concerning slavery. Did that make it ok? You can find many examples of laws that were bad or unfair.

  • Samcrown

    how about incitment, is that freedom of speach.  How about the Halocoust, wouldn’t saying any thing about it freedom of speach? 

  • Glasofruix

    Freedom of speech my ass, u come and criticize somebody’s prophet and
    accuse them of things aren’t even mentioned in the Quran nor muslims
    know about and you want them to accept it,

    There are many nasty things about jebus many christians ignore (even though they are written in the bible), same thing is true for islam.

    u just judge them according to what you hear from others not bothering yourself to find the truth for yourself!

    Let me see:

    -Some nutcrack says something hateful in the US.
     “Let’s kill an american diplomat in our country !!!!”

    -Some newspapers post caricatures or satire about islam.
     “Let’s burn flags, send death threats to authors, burn their buildings, beat the shit out of people who disagree and riot in non-islamic countries!”

    -Some woman wants to drive a car
    “Let’s stone that bitch to death!!!”

    I’m not sure that you’re painting your faith in a very positive light…

    ignorance is a choice you stupid bastards

    Thats why you chose religion instead of reason, there’s nothing better than having someone saying to you what to think and how to live.

  • Glasofruix

    We can assume that fucking a 9 year old is a possibility for an old pervert, splitting the moon and flying on a unicorn’s back are just embelishements to the main story.

  • Blablus

    Dude…you’re not obliged to agree with what everyone says…but it is good to respect it though it is different…but if you’re not into the “respect” thing you’re free…and it would be nice to use polite sentences as we are discussing in a civilized way.

    Now regarding your points and excuse me i just noticed them…what you define as “moral” might not be in the eyes of another…it is a relative notion and you can do nothing about it…respect dude…it’s all about that.

  • Adam

    yeah it might be for you…it’s your opinion …happy? :)

  • GabyYYZ

    One thing I may have to thank Mr Jones for is helping me come out as an atheist. I’ve posted a couple ditties on Facebook about him and Pat Robertson in the past and my born again mom privated me saying she’s noticed I care less about religion these days and I should not have called him “that name” (I called him an a–hole, spelled in full). I responded that he really has no more moral authority and that’s the only name he deserves. The conversation continues…this may force my hand.

  • Glasofruix

    Kind of reminds me about the muslim guy “deabating” a biologist (Dawkings i believe) about a foetus’ developpement and even when presented with evidence denied it outright just because the koran says so…

  • Adam

    i’m free to post as long as i want…and you’re free to ask about it…and i’m free to answer you or not…the fact i mentionned is to show that it is something that was done in the US until late 19th century…so blaming only muslims for it is kinda lazy thinking.

  • JWH

    A few things:

    in the arabic and islamic culture we define freedom of speach to be within the civilized and responsible context, in america you define it other wise, that suits you, and this suits us

    You are free to define freedom of speech as you choose within your country.  This does not give you any right whatsoever to dictate what citizens of other countries may do within their countries.  It also does not give you the right to vandalize embassies and terrorize third parties because you do not approve of the actions and/or speech of one individual and his fellows.  

     if you don’t like our ways take your embassy and go.

    That decision is not up to you.  But you are not helpless.  If you believe the United States should withdraw its embassy from your nation, then petition your own government to ask the United States to leave.  If your government’s leaders do not listen, then campaign for a change of leaders. 

    when accuse someone of being a pedophile, dont you need some sort of evidence? 

    From the standpoint of American defamation law, such evidence is not required if the target has been dead for seven centuries.   And if you wish to accuse a person of blasphemy … well, America has no blasphemy laws.  From a rhetorical standpoint, one does require evidence.  And I am sure that Terry Jones would be willing to offer that evidence, as dubious as it might be.  Instead of spouting off on an atheist’s blog, why not evaluate that evidence and dispute it?

  • Adam

    right questionable in 20th century…how old are you dude? 3ooo years?…how can you judge something and base it on what you see nowadays…

  • Adam

    facts are scary aren’t they ? :)

  • Adam

    Why such hate dude?

  • Adam

    I don’t know what you believe in dude…but such hate against someone or something cannot be from a sane source…think about your path again fella…

  • Hello_world125

     As is the possibility that Jesus liked to take it in his ass.

  • The Other Weirdo

     Did they pull a Streissand Effect?

  • Glasofruix

    I don’t believe in any god. I also hate everyone equally.

    This is the common religious ranting around here “Oh you don’t believe in my god? You must be full of hate”

  • Glasofruix

    I’m totally open to that possibility… You seem to have missed the sign on the front door that says “ATHEISTS, they don’t care about gods, prophets and sacred fairy tale books”

  • Adam

    what “evidence” did you give?
    PS: Avoid the word “evidence” cuz you’ll be laughed at among scientific people…there are only valid results under specific conditions…and still…science is not that strong as it may seem to you…algebra foundations are based on a number axioms…means that there is an unverifiable thing that you need to accept in order to continue your reasoning…and it might turn out wrong after couple of years…decades…you never know…

  • Glasofruix

    Why? I’m not a US citizen nor a religious person. You made your point already, there’s no reason to repost the same exact thing every 5 comments or so.

  • Hello_world125

    “Secondly, when muslims accept that Muhammad consumated his marriage to
    Aisha when she was 10 (though some claim she was 9) then that’s all the
    “proof” you need.”

    That is your retarded atheistic logic. Muslims also believe that Allah exists. Muslims believe in spiritual beings called Jinns that roam around on earth.

  • The Other Weirdo

     No prophet is complete without a few hangups, I suppose. Jesus liked the occasional bloodbath and was suicidal-by-proxy.

  • Adam

    so basically…well help me understand what you believe in…if we suppose that an explosion happens inside a drug store…following your belief…all the drugs will mix up and in the end cops will find the cure of AIDS and Cancer in the remaining of the store…think about it…

  • Adam

     easy dude…easy…no hate.

  • Adam

    I hate no one anyway…you should try it dude…instead of poisoning your life with hating 7billion people “equally” :)

  • Glasofruix

     Oh come on, for a moment there i thought that you had at least SOME functionning brain cells…
    That’s the dumbetst of the “got’cha” questions creationnists came with (and they have their share of stupid). We’re getting it severeal time a week. So i’m just going to assume that you’ve never read anything about evolution or natural selection and recommend you read some books not written by Ham or his crazy buddies.

  • TheExpatriate700

    If that’s the case, then the first tweet was meant to head off the violence. The media needs to make that clearer.

  • Glasofruix

    How can you live on 3000 years old principles and try to impose them as absolute truth in 21st century?

  • Glasofruix

    I never sait that I was debating with him. Anyway,

    Koran = the bones grow first then the flesh.
    Biology = the flesh THEN the bones

    Hint, i trust biology, because you know it kind of proven by now.

  • Adam

    i did not say ur american and i got nothing against americans anyway…and i metionned nothing about your religion…when u spend your time insulting the prophet of 2 billion people…i find it important to publish and republish the facts showing that there were occidental people up to the late 1890′s marrying young girls…i assume u didn/t about that…but now u know…do me a favor dude and go dig a bit about age of consent throughout history…and avoid using that point again because it is irrelevant…you can try to find another one if you want.

  • Glasofruix

    I know about people marrying young girls/boys in the past, but none of those painted themselves as the apex of morality or as whatever god’s best buds.

  • Glasofruix

    Try what? Believing in fairies? No thank you, i’m perfectly fine as a sane person.

  • Adam

    you might find the question dumb and easy…but i would be grateful to hear to clear scientific (you love science don’t you?) from you…waiting :)

  • Adam

    Try to hate no one…relax dude i’m not inviting you to any religion

  • Glasofruix

    The magic skyfairy got bored one day, so it decided to make some planets and stars. Then put a naked dude on one of the planets, ripped a rib out of him and molded a woman. Then it got angry at them because they ate some fruit and watched them as one their sons fucked his mother to populate the planet… oh, wait that’s what you believe, right?

  • Glasofruix

    … you don’t get sarcasm, do you?

  • Adam

     How about the pope-Vatican system…how about passages in the bible where having young girls as wives is  clearly allowed…are you truely an atheists or a disguised islamophobic…i got atheists friends…but never seen as much hate as the one u got dude…get some help man…truely

  • Adam

    u didn’tanswer my question dude i be

  • Adam

     i prefer frank talks

  • Cat’s Staff

    Incitement is advocacy of unlawful actions if the advocacy is both intended to and likely to cause immediate breach of the peace.  It usually has to be pretty specific.  A minister can say “Gay people are evil, dirty, immoral, etc” and even “the Bible says they should be put to death” and that is protected speech.  If the minister says “Gay people are bad, and on your way home kill that gay guy who lives down the street”, that would be a problem.

    Not having seen the videos, I don’t know if anything in them would rise to the level of incitement or if it could be prosecuted as what is known as “fighting words”.  Either way you would need a victim to show up, someone can’t do it on their behalf.  If someone claims I am a pedophile, I can take them to court for defamation (assuming it’s not true), but if someone claims my long dead great-great-great grandfather was a pedophile, there isn’t much I can do about it unless I can show that it’s being said to defame my character and I can show damages.

    In the U.S. you can say whatever you want about the Holocaust.

  • Adam

    who’s trying to impose them…aren’t they threatened instead ?

  • Adam

    i don’t think you’re got scientific background when you say “i trust biology, because you know it kind of proven by now.”…scientific facts are not the truths…earth was believed to be plane for centuries…though there are some findings that some people in the BC era believed it was round…anyway facts are confirmed and refuted throughout the years alright ?…i agree that what science says now on the matter you mentioned is the opposite of what  quran says…one thing we are sure of…is that quran saying will not change…but how about science ? are you sure those findings will not change in couple of years ? century ? thousand years ?…science is a just one of the tools to explain the reality…don’t put on it what it can not handle…peace

  • DeviousSoybeans
  • Glasofruix

    So science adapting in the light of newly discovered evidence is bad? How so? If it says that right now, theory X is explained by Y, and later it’s Y+1 or even scratch the Y and replace it by Z because Y was wrong, i think it has much more credit than “gawd did it” written 2000 years ago in some magic book.

  • Adam

    Dude dude you’re not adding anything to the conversation…Who says it is  bad ?…don’t start to put words on my mouth…all i said is it cannot be seen as the absolute truth because it can change throughout the years…alright?…now if someone prefer to believe something else…then u gotta respect it…because what u believe is not necessarily the truth.

  • Guest

    I agree.  I don’t think atheism deserves respect either, but atheists do.  And to blame someone for violence resulting from a statement no matter how offensive is peddling down the wrong road.   Freedom of speech means just that.  We have the right to be offended, but they have a right to offend.  

  • Glasofruix

    No you’re implying that something written 2000 years ago is better than scientificaly proven facts. Also, i don’t have to respect your beliefs in any ways.

  • Guest

    So how does your universe square with P.Z. Myers doing the same thing? 

  • Rich Wilson

    This is kind of funny since most Christians get upset when we point out those things in the Bible, and ask why we don’t also criticize Islam.

    What you all fail to recognize is that we are critical of telling other people how to live based on your own belief in a work of fiction.  What books you use in the series is irrelevant.

  • Adam

     you don’t learn fast don’t you?…your scientifically proven facts are not the truth and can change within a a month…a year …or a century…and yes many people believe something else…u can keep hating people for being different…but u will not change the world…difference  has always existed here :)

  • Rich Wilson

    Probably happened more than once, but there was one with PZ Myers and Aaron Ra outside the big atheist event in Australia.  The Muslim knew who PZ was, but did not know that he was a biologist.

  • Rich Wilson

    quran saying will not change

    Exactly!  It will always remain wrong!

  • Guest

    Site references please. 

  • Guest

    Yeah, I think that’s the first time a politician ever criticized a sitting president during an election year.  Thanks for pointing that out. 

  • Guest

    Hopefully it won’t come to that. 

  • Josh West

    Instead of calling the violence an overreaction to one man’s warped viewpoint and the film he’s promoting, they’ve caved in and put all the blame on Jones (who did nothing violent whatsoever):”

    Your timing and correlation is off. The statement calling Jones an idiot(which is pretty much all the initial statement was) Took place before the violence had started. There was no blame to place on him. 

  • Josh West

    I hate Frank. I heard he was a jerk

  • Michael

    The bible passages are not an issue because nominally Christian countries tend to follow secular laws, which disallow people of any faith from having child brides whatever their favourite book may say.

    The vatican … well it has a few problems we’ve gone into on other threads.

  • Josh West

    [Citation Needed]

  • TheBlackCat

     A developmental biologist, specifically.  It is a really bad idea to try to throw B.S. about fetal development at someone who specializes in fetal development, they are likely going to catch it.

  • smrnda

    If you can’t offend people’s religious beliefs, then you don’t have free speech. If nations want to promote a counterfeit ‘free speech’ where you can only say things that don’t offend people’s religious sensibilities, those nations should expect to be treated as pariahs by the rest of the world.

    Terry Jones strikes me as a genuine American bigot and ignoramus, but it’s ten times more ignorant and bigoted to attack the embassy of a nation where 1 man and his fan club offended your religion, given that nobody in the embassy was even involved in this to begin with. All said, I’m sure that Terry Jones is happy people died because it fits in with his own fundamentalist religion and its turf battles.

  • Octoberfurst

      I don’t know what you are refering to.  Perhaps you could enlighten me.

  • Rich Wilson

    Science inches ever closer to the truth.  Is it always right?  Of course not.  And today it might be a bit more wrong than yesterday.  But it is more right than it was 100 years ago, and will be more right in 100 years than now.

    Religions doctrines stay wrong until they look so stupid when compared to the truth discovered through science that they have to make up some BS re-interpretation of what they said in the first place to sorta kinda fit science.

    Tell me, the thing you’re using to make these posts… it wasn’t developed through science was it?  Or are you praying your thoughts onto my LCD monitor?

  • Rich Wilson

    I don’t see anything essentially different between Jones burning a Quran and Myers putting nails in crackers.  The reactions to each are different of course, but if burning a Quran makes Jones a jerk, then equivalently nailing crackers would make Myers a jerk.  I’m pretty sure Myers would chortle at the accusation.  And nail another cracker. 

    I don’t tend to do either, but a good way to make me is to tell me I shouldn’t.

    Maybe I’ll spit on my kindle when I’ve got my copy of the Quran up.  Tell you what, I’ll do the same for the Book of Mormon and the NIV Bible as well.

  • Pluto Animus

    Just because Muslims act like murderous crybabies doesn’t justify calling them murderous crybabies!


  • RKHB

    If I remember correctly, there were quite a few voices in the U.S. and Europe blaming Rushdie for writing the book and causing “discomfort” to a major religion.

  • Art Glick

    That just shows how little you understand the concept of Freedom of Speech.

  • Firas Maher

     slavery ended with advent of Islam. which tells you that certain practices were suitable for some time and then they ended. Prophet Mohammed married Aisha in front of all the pagans in Mecca, and they didn’t say a word, but recently Muslim scholars looked through this again. and they came to a conclusion that Aisha was between 19- 21 years old when she got married to the prophet. 

  • Art Glick

    There are no real aetheists!

    It’s a waste of time to debate the existence of the traditional Biblical God.  Those that believe in such will likely never change their view, and those that deny the notion of a selfish, petty, vindictive, male gendered God need not be convinced of what they already know.

    Those who have a spirituality tempered by science would do better to discuss the nature rather than the existence of God, for it can be anything you define it to be and therefore exists by definition!

    Why should it come down to a choice between only the Biblical God or no God whatsoever?  Ask not whether God exists, but what is the actual nature of God.  Many self avowed atheists would divorce themselves from the term, if they looked up the definition of pantheism.

  • Blablus

     where is the answer Michael gave to my commentary…Hey Admin starting to delete stuff huh ?…alright one last thing…think about the timing of the movie…and the US election campaign…now…think again…

  • Rwlawoffice

    Hemant you have made some corrections to this post as it developed.  You really should correct it so say that Terry Jones was not the provocation of these attacks.  It was the anti Muslim film produced in the US shown on Cario news.  Unless you have facts otherwise this is giving Terry Jones more credit than he is due.

  • Rich Wilson

    LOL  So if Muslim scholars came to the conclusion that Aisha was between 19-21, why then it must be true!

  • Rich Wilson

    (re-posted to avoid the column monster)

    Science inches ever closer to the truth.  Is it always right?  Of course not.  And today it might be a bit more wrong than yesterday.  But it is more right than it was 100 years ago, and will be more right in 100 years than now.

    Religions doctrines stay wrong until they look so stupid when compared to the truth discovered through science that they have to make up some BS re-interpretation of what they said in the first place to sorta kinda fit science.

    Tell me, the thing you’re using to make these posts… it wasn’t developed through science was it?  Or are you praying your thoughts onto my LCD monitor?

  • Firas Maher

    conclusion based on the life of Aisha before and after the prophet, because there were contradictions between the single Hadith that said she was 9 with certain years of her life

  • Glasofruix

    Yep, was the one i was thinking about (dunno why i thought it was Dawkins)

  • Glasofruix

    The bible?

  • Troels Jakobsen

    Sure, you can post the same comment as much as you like – until some moderator gets tired of it. It’s common netiquette to not post the same comment many times.

    But to get back to your point – I don’t think anyone has said that only Muslims married minor girls. The moral implications of such an arrangement exist independent of who did (or does) this.

    Which is also why I sincerely doubt you’ll find any American who will defend that piece of legislation you reference. The majority will be repulsed to know laws existed which put the age of consent at 7 or 10 or 12. That should indicate to you that there might be a potential problem with marriage to very young girls – regardless of whether Christians or Muslims or Hindus are the ones doing it.

    However, it’s only in Islam that God’s primary representative does such a thing. Pointing out that there might be some moral problem with Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha is not unfair.

  • LesterBallard

     if you don’t like our ways take your embassy and go.”

    That is beginning to suit me. I find I’m becoming something of an isolationist. 

    Evidence of being a pedophile? Did Muhammad marry a nine year old girl and then two years later “consummate” the marriage or did he not do those things?

    You are free to say that all US presidents were/are pedophiles. I’m not going to kill you for saying it.

  • LesterBallard

    Yeah, but we think it’s wrong and say so and are free to say so. I don’t hear many Muslims condoning Muhammad’s rape of a child. And I have the feeling that it is still practiced in  a lot of little backwater places; and if you criticize it, you’ll hear, it’s in the Koran, Muhammad did, or words to that effect.

  • LesterBallard

    As long as he wasn’t taking it from, or giving it to, a child, I don’t care.

  • LesterBallard

    I don’t burn books or “desecrate” crackers or anything like that myself. But I shouldn’t be discouraged from doing such, or afraid of doing such, just because someone thinks the item is holy or sacred. 

  • Rich Wilson

    Try refreshing the page, and make sure to load all comments at the bottom.  With so many, it will take 4 or 5 clicks.  It’s doubtful Hemant is deleting anything.

  • LesterBallard

    All religion is bullshit. But the big three monotheistic religions lead the pack. Fuck it all.

  • julie

    It makes me so mad that he goes out of his way to offend these people, knowing that he is mostly safe, while other people end up dying for it. 

  • julie

    The point is not that we believe any of this actually happened. The point is that Muslims believe this happened, and it’s pretty twisted to worship someone who you believed had sex with a nine or ten year old girl. 

  • julie

    But don’t you think a religion that claims to be the moral authority of everyone should probably have higher standards? 

  • Philo Vaihinger

    This morning the news everywhere is saying the pastor’s video is “to blame” for “inciting” all this violence.

    Liberals are actually the worst of the lot, blaming the pastor on this.

    And they would be the first to protest if someone shrugged off the Muslim rapes of those American news women in Cairo a while back by saying they deserved it, they should have known better than to go out dressed like that or without male companions.

    Or if American Christians rioted over a traveling Museum exhibit of Piss Christ.

    Devout progressive though I am, anti-interventionist and sure-thing supporter of Obama – Mr Lesser Evil – over Romney, Romney is right to call the American government reaction shameful.

    The shame started when GW, in the days right after 9/11, assured America and the world that Islam is “a religion of peace.”

    No doubt bullied into it by his chums among the Saudi oil princes, he was immediately at pains to assure the world’s Muslims that we weren’t mad at them.

    Oh, heavens, no.

    The truth is that Islam is the most intolerant, barbaric, and violent reglion on the face of the Earth, at this time.

    And every incident like this makes that point, loud and clear, to the American people even if not to the punidts who claim to speak for progressives, liberals, and Democrats.

  • Troels Jakobsen

    slavery ended with advent of Islam. which tells you that certain practices were suitable for some time and then they ended.

    1) That is just blatantly false. Slavery was very much in practice under Islam, and it is regulated by the Quran.

    2) Just because a practice occurs at some point in time doesn’t mean it was ever appropriate or morally justified in the first place. Was the resurgence in slavery in the 15th-19th centuries suitable for that period? Or any period? No, it wasn’t. Slavery is morally wrong, no matter the time period.

  • John Alexander Harman

    Having sex with little girls is possible, miracles are not.  That the Hadith asserts miracles makes it less plausible than it would be otherwise, but it’s still reasonably likely that the parts describing Muhammed’s marriage to Aisha describe an event that actually happened.  Marriages between adult men and pre-pubescent or barely-pubescent girls were not uncommon in the Arab world then, and still happen today.

    Whether or not that makes Muhammed a pedophile (i.e. someone whose primary or exclusive sexual orientation is toward pre-pubescent children), it does make him a child molester* if you believe the Hadith describes his life.  You don’t get to simultaneously believe that “the Hadith in which Muhammed deflowered Aisha when she was ten (or nine, depending on the particular version)” and “Muhammed was not a child molester;” the set of “non-child molesters” does not have any overlap at all with the set of “men who fuck nine or ten-year-old girls.”

    *That’s both a legal and a moral term. Legally, there is no state in the U.S., and very few if any countries around the world, where you can have sex with a ten-year-old and not be liable for criminal prosecution for child molestation (or an equivalent crime with a different name — the legal terms vary). Those laws reflects the moral beliefs of the great majority of people, and those beliefs are supported by a solid body of evidence showing that having sex with a child that young is harmful to the child in the overwhelming majority of cases.

  • Rich Wilson

    On par with worshiping someone who was considered correct in agreeing to kill his own child.

    Which all three of them do.

  • John Alexander Harman

    From the context, it appears you meant “condemning,” not “condoning;” those two words have opposite meanings.

  • Michael

    I still see my reply to you. And yes you’re right, the man who made the film probably hoped to influence the US election, but he probably won’t.






  • Larry Meredith

    Next thing you know, US government officials will denounce Draw Muhammad Day as “intentional effort to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims.”

    This is like shaking your finger at a beaten woman because she dared antagonize her abusive husband. No matter what Jones said, trolling or not, he doesn’t deserve any blame here. Saying something to purposely piss people off doesn’t give those people any justification for lashing out violently.



  • RobMcCune

     I don’t see Jewish nationalists storming embassies and murdering people.

  • RobMcCune

     Regardless of whether or not it’s true, Muslims believe a man who married a 9 year old was morally right in doing so.

  • LesterBallard

    Yep, got all het up.

  • Tony


    Freedom of speech was not at stake here. Not one thing about American freedom was changed because of their statement, but it may very well have saved some lives. 

    When you and yours are in a building  with people rioting literally outside the gates, you can take others to task for playing it safe rather than taking a pointless ideological stand. 

  • John Beshir

    Thinking that Terry Jones is wrong, and approving of rioters are completely different things.

    Reading a statement saying one thing is bad, as being support for *everything* opposed to that thing is wrong. It is wrong whether it is religious people saying everyone who disagrees with their views on homosexuality must be supporting bestiality, or people saying everyone who disagrees with a statement must hate freedom of speech or support angry mobs. You can’t raise the tone of debate by only opposing this kind of bad argument when other people use it; you must oppose them everywhere, so they become unacceptable whoever uses them.The article is as harmful to healthy political discourse as the typical crap put out by the likes of Fox News, and should be retracted. The irrationality of the core argument that their statement condemning Terry Jones was supporting rioters is tidily demonstrated by the fact that as of Update 1 we now know it is impossible for them to have been doing that, because the riots hadn’t happened yet!

  • Glasofruix

    Naaah, they’re already busy throwing poop at little girls on their way to school.

  • NogahdzNoughmasters

    Hmmm….don’t think I like your tone, son.

  • Glasofruix

      ignorance is a choice you stupid bastards

    And that’s why you chose islam, right?

    Anyway, we’re free to criticize your idiotic belief, your shitty book or your pedophile prophet Mo as you are free to criticize christian idiotic belief, their shitty book or jebus.

  • Patience

    Hillary got it right; condemn bigotry, violence, and hatred on both sides of the aisle.

  • Hello_world125

    It is ONLY Islamophobes who keep accusing the Prophet as a pedophile (using Islamic Hadith sources as proof of their claim). Muslims do not believe Aisha was 9 years old, but 18 or 19. Hadith sources are open to interpretation and Muslims interpret it as she was older. Bigots and hate-mongerers make this accusation as a way to criticize Muslims.  So your argument is invalid.

  • Hello_world125

     So you believe in the truth of all Hadith sources as well, such as Muhammed split the moon in two, Muhammed rode on a animal that flew faster than light. Islamophobes use Hadith as proof that he was a pedophile, well Hadith also says he split the moon and flew faster than light.

  • Hello_world125

    Do you have absolute Historic proof that Muhammed was a child molester apart from Islamic Hadith? No.

    “Having sex with little girls is possible, miracles are not.  ”

    Yet, you would call him a child molester just because…it is possible.

    Muslims do not believe Aisha was 8-9 years old, Muslims believe she was 18-19 years old when she got married. It is only Islamophobes who claim he was a pedophile using Islamic Hadith as justification.

  • Hello_world125

     You will not find one Muslim who believes Aisha was 8 or 9, Muslims believe she was 18 or 19.

  • Rich Wilson

    So Saudi Cleric Muhammad Al-’Arifi  isn’t a Real Muslim? 

    Maybe he’s a Scotsman.

  • Rich Wilson

    And I’m sure Najood Ali’s husband isn’t a True Muslim either.

    Look, we know not all Muslims want to marry little girls.  But some of them do, and, like always, find some religious reference to defend it.  To say that no Muslims think Aisha was 9 is massive denial.  It shouldn’t reflect on Muslims today.  But they choose to be offended by any truthful criticism of their beloved Mo. 

  • Rich Wilson

    No, not one, but many.  In fact, from what I can tell searching, most Muslim Clerics seem to think Aisha was 6 or 7 when married, and 8 or 9 when the marriage was consummated.  And they’re fine with that.

  • Hello_world125

    The saudi cleric Muhammad Al-Arifi is a retarded Wahabi who even claims that the Prophet sold Alcohol.

    Al-Arifi also supports the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and he kill all Shite muslims. So why do you bring out the “terry jones” of the Islamic clerics when you want to prove that Muhammed was a pedophile?

    Listen to Yusuf Estes instead, when he explains that Aisha was not 8 or 9 but older.

  • Hello_world125

     Instead of searching hate forums like MEMRI TV which are full of videso of  Wahabi or Taliban Clerics , try to read through more established and mainstream websites.

  • Rich Wilson

    I don’t know any of them.  I just did a quick search on youtube because I know I’d seen Muslims talk about Aisha being young before.  He maybe the Terry Jones of Islam, but he is a Muslim, is he not?  I would never say “You can’t find an atheist who” because I know that whatever it is, there’s an atheist who is.

    More to the point is how people react to the accusation.  Who cares if it’s true?  For the sake of argument, Aisha was 19.  Fine.  What do you care if someone says Mohamed liked to fuck pigs?  Why are so people so tied up in knots over it that many will kill over an insult to Islam?  Can’t Allah defend himself?  If Allah is real, he’ll punish us.  If not, then there’s nothing to punish anyone for.

  • Hello_world125

    “Look, we know not all Muslims want to marry little girls.”

    Because they don’t believe Aisha was 8 or 9 years old.

    “But some of them do, and, like always, find some religious reference to defend it.”

    Yes they do. Most of the Islamophobic posters here think that the Islamic world is just one big monolith. But it is not. We have our terry jones and anders beveriks and we among ourselves have constant debates to put some sense into the backward wahabis. Don’t say that you think most moderate Muslims are just passive, just because you have no idea about the Muslim world because you never stepped foot there. We debate and we are vocal in our mosques, cafes, schools and universities.Not all those conversations get recorded and put on the internet for you to view.

     No, Najood Ali’s husband isn’t a True Muslim either because he is a piece of trash child abuser and I hope he rots in jail or better yet is shot.

    It is people like them, who we appeal to and try to convince that Muhammed did not marry Aisha when she was 8 or 9, but older. We try to use Hadith to show them that marrying a girl younger than 18 is Haraam and forbidden in Islam. We hope that sending the message Aisha was indeed 18, would dissuade child marriage in the backward regions of Yemen and KSA.

    Then you come along, and Terry Jones and films like this one which claim Aisha was 8 years old.

    Now do you see why this film pisses us off? Because you are not just criticizing Islam you are undermining our work and efforts to end Child abuse in our countries.

  • Rich Wilson

    It is people like them, who we appeal to and try to convince that Muhammed did not marry Aisha when she was 8 or 9

    it is truly unfortunate that you can’t just say “no matter how old Aisha was, having sex with kids is wrong”.

    Because you are not just criticizing Islam you are undermining our work and efforts to end Child abuse in our countries.

    That assumes that someone who wants to marry a child would use this film as evidence for the fact that it’s ok.  I haven’t seen the film myself, but somehow that seems highly unlikely.  Whatever this film stirs up, it surely can’t be accused of causing more child marriages?

  • Hello_world125

     I agree. The stupid film was virtually unknown to anybody. So Wahabi cleric in Libya or Egypt came across it while surfing for material to find to whip up a mob riot. This is why I am surprised the crowds in Pakistan or Indonesia are silent, because they didn’t even know about this. But needless to say, within a few days they will and they will start rioting as well.

    Then the Islamophobes, who didn’t even know about this film, will go on a free-speech holy war to propagate the film because they believe all Muslims are pedophiles.

  • Ned Ludd

     What hate? What did I say that you object to.  Have you ever been to an Islamic country? If you had you would see couples of guys and even groups going around holding hands and acting as lovers. No women around.

     Alone on the beach, I would be approached by Muslim men and ados who would overtly propose having sex with me. I don’t go to Muslim countries anymore. Men or woman can’t be tranquil.

    So I don’t see anything that contradicts my statements. Why do you think that so many gay Western writers and artists go to Morocco for example?

  • Rahim Moosa

    I really don’t like to go tit for tat with people but you are implying that Muslims have a special penchant for murder which members other religions don’t.  This is not true.  Have you read about the white flag incidents in Gaza where IDF soldiers murdered civilians holding white flags.  Have you heard of the Irgun and Haganah, Jewish terrorist groups who murdered British and Arabs.  Have you heard of Israeli youth who are attacking Arabs for no reason.  Naturally, these incidents are not the norm and do not reflect on the Jewish religion which has love of fellow man and God at its core.

    No one religion, political group, country, race has a monopoly on killing innocent people.  Unfortunately, despite the attempts of Judaic, Christian, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu teachings to teach the logic and value of cultivating inner peace, compassion, forgiveness and using antidotes for negative emotions like anger, greed and jealousy, there are people who are not properly taught their own religion and that of others.  This view of religions comes from my study of them and writers such as Karen Armstrong, who I highly recommend.

  • Hello_world125

     Having sex with kids is wrong. Most educated and modern Muslims know that having sex with children is wrong, but we have a lot who are not educated and live in backward villages. It gives us more ammunition when we use Hadith and Islamic sources to talk to people like Nujood Ali’s husband and tell him that the Prophet did not marry Aisha when she was a child. It gives us more ammunition against debating Wahabi clerics like Al-Arifi who goes on TV and says it’s okay to marry children.

    This film may not be used as evidence, but there is a very clear and present Islamophobic rhetoric that is centered around calling the Prophet a pedophile. The rhetoric of this film is not new, it has been spewed before by Geert Wilders, Pamela Anderson, Brigitte Gabriel, Robert Spencer, Ayaan hirsi ali, Bill Maher. From the far-right, to atheists like Bill Maher spew a rhetoric that the pedophillic religion of Islam is a threat to the entire western civilization.

    Just as how you show me clips on youtube about Wahabi clerics and say “look, that is what Islam is”, the radicals in our society bring out clips of Bill Maher or Geert Wilders talking about Islamophobic rhetoric and say “look that is what the west is, they are our enemy”.

    I have had uncountable conversations with Muslims trying to tell them not all Americans hate Islam, that America did not go to war in Iraq because they are on a crusade. That America and the west is not a monolith, that when a Terry Jones or Bill Maher or Robert Spencer spews hatred against Muslims, we should just ignore them and try to work on fixing our societies, on improving education, science and technology and entrepreneurship.

    And then a film comes out that whips up a frenzy in Benghazi that leads to the death of the US Envoy.

  • JohnnieCanuck

    If you had checked, you might have learned that Romney was shooting before he had taken aim, all by yourself. The information was in the links in the OP.

    The embassy statement was made before any violence occurred, not in reaction to it. The State Department’s response seemed fair and above criticism to me:

    “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others,” Mrs. Clinton said Tuesday night.”But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind,” she said in reference to the attacks.

  • JohnnieCanuck

    By now you should have gotten the message that the Embassy sent their Tweet before any violence had occurred.

  • No More Mr. Mo

    The fact that you are emotionally posting cmments to defend your religion is assine.  You appear to be very immature and ignorant.  The facts speaks for themselves and to deny that makes you suspect.  Just go to bed or something.  How about condeming the killing of innocent human being.  No you choose to defend a murderer, pedophile, and killer of anyone who doesn’t believes as he does.  What a loser.  You look stupid and have no credibility.  People dies because of the same lack of emotional content and maturity.  Muslims like this expose a certain truth that cannot be denied.  Most religions of the world have gone through a “GROWING UP PROCESS” AND LEARNED HOW TO TOLREATE  and at least live in peace with one another.  But you extremist wear 2,000 year old garb and want to forceit on the society you leave in.  You have honor killings and try and defend this lifestyle.  You treat your women as though they were less than dirt.  You run amuke on ths site as if you are intelligent but most you look like you live a lifestyle from the Quran.  Hated non religious but political pushing manual you claim was written by God through man.  What a Joke.  There I said it and i meant it.  Grow up and eat a peice of pork…..USA!!!!!!!!!!

  • No More Mr Mo

    That film didn’t lead to the death of Americans.  Murders killed them.  Not a film, not Terry Jonrs, not Bill M, but Muslim.  Go and say it.  Any real Muslim would behave in this manner if threathen or offended as such!!!!

  • I hate mohammed the pedophile

    I believe that you are an swine eating ass hole

  • No More Mr. Mo

    And they were just as sick as his ass was.  major prophet can’t differeniate the truth from the false.  Fucking a baby girl and thinking it’s ok.  You can post anything you want about America the old but this makes me just as sick  A prophet….my ass A PEDOPHILE OF EPIC PROPPORTION

  • No More Mr. Mo

    Exactly they were trying to settle untame territory not making claims of being Gods representive.  PEDOPHILE IS PEDOPHILE no matter how you look at it.

  • No More Mr. Mo


  • Hello_world125

     Get all American Military out of the Middle-East. USA invaded Iraq for no reason. Shoving freedom down the throats of people who don’t want it, is not justification for war. There is no Islamic Military stationed in the US, there are American military stationed all over the M-E. We don’t want you, go back where you came from.

  • Hello_world125

    Invading a Middle-Eastern country for no reason and occupying it for 10 years > killing an American Ambassador.

  • Hello_world125

    ” How about condeming the killing of innocent human being. ”

    how about you condemn the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq for 10 years and support that Bush be charged for war crimes at the Hague?

  • Ned Ludd

     Yes, I have heard of all those things including the Jewish bombing the the King David Hotel and the assassination of  UN representative Count Bernadotte because of his plan to bring back the Palestinian refugees. The Jews have always been the criminals and terrorists in Palestine. But the American politicians and media only give the Judeo-Nazi point of view.

  • Richard Smith

    First, the Obama administration was wrong to apologize for the actions of an American – on American soil.

    Second, while the message was as ignorant as possible in it’s delivery, Jones is correct, Muhammed had a 6 year old wife – no matter how you slice it, he was a pedophile!

    Third, and this is for pastor Jones. If you ever bothered to read ‘the word of god’ you’d know that the jews, christians and muslims actually worship the same god, you all just get screwed up in the interpretation. While I’m an atheist, I do believe Jesus (and by extension, Muhammed) exsisted, albiet they were the Sun-yung Moons of their day. The Jesus you worship stands for everything you hate, he was anti-business, pro-poor, and he was a 33 year old, unmarried man who lived with 12 other men! So you may want to take the advice that came from your god himself, let he who is without sin, cast the first stone. That wouldn’t be you, as your ignorance is a sin against humanity!!!

  • LesterBallard

    No, I don’t believe a fucking word of the shit, but the Muslims do, right?

  • Hello_world125

    So it is retarded logic to call the Prophet a pedophile USING Hadith as a source, while you don’t believe a word of the Hadith. Muslims Don’t believe the Prophet was a pedophile because our interpretation of the Hadith is that his wife was 18 or 19 when she got married. What is your justification now?

  • LesterBallard

    Your “interpretation”. Isn’t that sweet . . .

  • Hello_world125

    as opposed to your historical evidence.

  • Hello_world125

    Name one muslim country which has invaded and occupied a non-muslim country for 10 years in the 21st century.

  • Rich Wilson

    Name one non-muslim act of terrorism that killed over 3000 people in the 21st century.

    And then tell me how the hell that demonstrates anything.

  • Hello_world125

     US invasion of Iraq in an offensive war of occupation = terrorist act.

  • Hello_world125

     “Jones is correct, Muhammed had a 6 year old wife – no matter how you slice it, he was a pedophile!”

    What historical proof do you have other than Hadith. Hadith also claims Muhammed split the moon in two and he traveled faster than light.

  • Hello_world125

     But questioning the holocaust will still get you arrested. So much for free speech in the western world.

  • Hello_world125

     Just because the US is the only western country in the world right now to be actively invading and occupying sovereign nations does not justify calling the US a war-mongering hawkish danger to world peace, right?

  • Hello_world125

     In the U.S, you just get fired from your job for questioning in the holocaust, and in Europe, get arrested. So much for free speech.

  • Larry Meredith

     huh? that’s not true…

  • Hello_world125

     So is not bigoted to have prejudice over a “savage” because of his beliefs. Abet a “noble savage” dedicated to non-violence but a “savage” nonetheless.

  • Hello_world125

    Questioning the Holocaust will get you the following minimum sentence in prison or fine in the following countries:-

    Austria 6 months
    Belgium Fine
    Czech Republic 6 months
    France Fine or 1 month
    Germany Fine or 1 month
    Israel 1 year
    Italy 3 years
    Lithuania Fine or 2 years
    Poland Fine or 3 months
    Romania 6 months
    Slovakia Fine or 1 month
    Switzerland Fine or 1 year

  • Rich Wilson

    No, that’s war, not terrorism.  There’s a reason for having two different words.  They’re two different things.

    But that’s besides the point completely.  Perhaps a better example would be “Name a number between 1 and 10 that is larger than 10″.

    Even if I agree with your point, you have presented it in such a juvenile fashion that I can’t be bothered to take it seriously.

    Your point is that US occupation in Muslim nations is creating anger and frustration among Muslims and creating an environment leading to events like this.  No?  Then say that.  You don’t have to set the goal posts to pretend that Muslim nations never invade anyone.

  • Hello_world125

    “You don’t have to set the goal posts to pretend that Muslim nations never invade anyone.”

    Name one muslim nation which has invaded a non-muslim nation in the 21st century. 

  • Larry Meredith

    never heard of that, and I was talking about US government, so I dunno why you think other governments are relevant. Are those laws even enforced in all those countries? There’s laws on the books in 18 states that make oral sex illegal, and sex outside of marriage is illegal in Georgia. Just not enforced…

  • Hello_world125

     Bush has a personal vendetta, ergo invades a sovereign nation and occupies the said nation for 10 years. Bush gets no war crimes trial at the Hague for conducting an offensive war.

  • Hello_world125

    “I dunno why you think other governments are relevant.”

    Because you have no problem if a newspaper in Denmark publishes a bigoted cartoon of Muhammad, but you don’t care if questioning the holocaust will get you in jail.

  • Hello_world125

     Stop buying Saudi oil.

  • Larry Meredith

    wha… huh? Are you trying to troll me or something? If you are, you’re doing it wrong. You’re not upsetting me, just confusing me. I didn’t say anything about Denmark publishing an image of Muhammad or state that I don’t care about holocaust denying being illegal.

    but if you want to know, I think both should be legal.

  • Rich Wilson

    Name two non-Muslim nations who went to war for nearly a decade in the last 50 years and sent children as young as 8 into battle.

  • Hello_world125

     No, not trolling you, just pointing out the hypocrisy of western countries who hold themselves up on a pedestal as the protectors of free speech.

  • Hello_world125

     I can think of one land of the free who did annex a sovereign nation for 10 years in an offensive war which lead to the deaths of a million civilians.

  • Larry Meredith

     I don’t think you’ll find anyone here who will argue that merely denying the existence of an historic event should be illegal. Certainly people here will argue against the truth of it, maybe even mock it. But nobody’s saying that governments should make it a criminal offence.

  • Rich Wilson

    We can play this game all day.

    The US invaded and occupied Iraq for 10 years.  One could argue that they removed a dictator who was murdering his own people, and one could argue that nothing excuses the invasion of a sovereign nation.

    Iraq invaded Iran in 1980 setting off the longest ‘conventional’ war of the 20th century, in which children as young as 12 (sorry, 12, not 8) fought and died in the military.

    And of all the major religions, Muslims alone seem to be the ones who get sobutt hurt over criticism of their ‘prophet’ that they’re willing to kill over it.,29553/ 

    Why are so many Muslims such cry-babies?

  • Hello_world125

     Let’s put this to perspective.

    One US ambassador dies in violent protests.

    US invades and occupies a sovereign nation in an offensive war (lasting 10 years)  for which the perpetrators of the illegal war never stands trial for war crimes.

    Why do Americans cry-babies when their people die while ignore the war crimes they commit?

  • Rich Wilson

    Right.  The ONLY reason three people were killed at that embassy was because of the US invasion of Iraq.  That’s like saying that the ONLY reason the US invaded Iraq was because Iraq was building WMDs.

    Your warped perceptive isn’t doing a very good job of showing the supposed warp in our perspective.

  • Richard Smith

    And I need proof because I’m maligning an ancient whack job who talked to ‘god ‘, for what?

  • Hello_world125

    You are so steadfast in your claims that this whack job was a pedophile, well what historical proof do you have? Because  in Historical scholarship, you cannot pull things out of your ass, you need to provide proof of any factual statement you make. So once again, do you have proof that this whack job actually existed and/or that he was a pedophile?

  • oneyestang

    they seem to have a thing with butt holes. They need to be removed from our earth. I think a space ship called a rocket would get them there.

  • 4rtuor4

    There are a few who seem to believe it. They might believe somehow it would be bad for people who aren’t Muhammad to do it, but what Muhammad did somehow was not worse than not doing it.

  • Hello_world125

     Zakir Nair also believes 9/11 attacks were justified. Is that the best you can do? You bring out the Terry Jones of the Muslim world and you say that is proof that Muhammed was a pedophile?

  • whocares?

    she was 18/19 when Mo died

  • Uomo05

    ALLAHU EKBER!!!!!!!!

  • Meteor

    Hai everybody! First of all we Muslims do love our holy Prophet Muhammad PBUH and it is a part of our faith same like  others are loving theirs but it is a fact that we Muslims are  giving respect to other prophets as well but some of others are not giving the  same  to our Prophet -that is not the issue ,but the issue is that of the Peoples like serpent Terry  Jones who are spoiling the peace of the world – most people are one sided -a civilized nation must also need to ensure the correct and ethical use of the plea of freedom of expression .
    If someone can not give respect then he must at least did not do acts like the same which the bigot Terry Jones did.
    This freedom of expression may not be a type of  propaganda and if any one who believe in this must show a correct picture of every thing they must also think about the Holocaust which is also a freedom of expression.
    Most people did not know what type of media is free only Fox is their resource i expect it from the American people that to condemn such type of acts and to promote the things which might bring peace to the world  and to understand propaganda element.

  • Rich Wilson

    Muslims are  giving respect to other prophets as well

    There are no prophets.  Just people.  People deserve respect until they do something to lose that respect.  Some things one can do to lose respect: Demand respect.  Claim to deserve more respect than other people.

  • 4rtuor4

    I haven’t made such a claim. My opinion on it is that it seems hard to tell if it’s accurate that Muhammad actually had some sort of sexual interaction with the person named Aisha at a young age. That age would be one  at which sexual interaction would often be said to be molestation now if done by a person of say thirty years old, for example. I am agnostic in my beliefs as to whether it’s accurate or inaccurate. Though, I think here are a few people who seem to believe it. They might believe somehow it would be bad for people who aren’t Muhammad to do it, but what Muhammad did somehow was not worse than not doing it.

    I was thinking  that Zakir Naik had many beliefs that are commonly believed among Muslims of the world. I was thinking that so many Muslims agree with so many of his beliefs that he could in general be said to be a person who is ‘mainstream’. I don’t think that all of his beliefs are equally as commonly believed.


    The Muslim extremists and fundamental extremist Islamists are worse than Nazis. At the end of the war, the Nazis tried to cover their tracks, hoping they could hide their crimes. They were afraid of retribution, and they were ashamed. How do we know this? Because, like children who knew they had been discovered, they tried to lie their way out: We didn’t know, I was just following orders, etc.
    The extreme radical Islamists, on the other hand, have no shame about anything they have done. They do not try to hide anything. To the contrary, they are proud of their actions.
    This is why, at the end of the day, the German people could come back from the abyss into which they had fallen. Their shame at what they had done allowed them to rejoin civilization.
    The extreme Islamists have no shame. How can they be part of the civilized world?
    I call upon moderate Muslim imams and leaders in the Muslim community to speak out. Those who are rioting are a small minority. The moderate Muslims are not at fault and have been dragged into this horrible enviroment where many of them and their families are held hostage and murdered. .
    Rabbi Dr. Bernhard Rosenberg