Friday, September 14, 2012 ... Français/Deutsch/Español/Česky/Japanese/Related posts from blogosphere

Innocence of Muslims: watch HD here

Off-topic: Czech government imposed a full prohibition of beverages with 20 or more percent of alcohol, after 19 people died by methanol poisoning in recent days. Well, I think the prohibition is counterproductive.

Millions of Muslims – including the Iranian mullah-in-chief and the official Fars News agency – seem to be super-upset about a $50,000 movie by a Coptic guy who lives in South California (and who has made some illegal financial transactions in the past).

Khamenei is crazy enough to demand the U.S. will execute the filmmaker for blasphemy. Savages in Libya have murdered the U.S. ambassador. U.S. flags are burning everywhere. All the top 12 stories at Fars News right now are dedicated to the movie: no kidding.

I couldn't understand what and where the movie was. Finally, I decided that it's really this 14-minute silliness:

Sort of an amusing a piece but not something I would recommend for Emmy awards. ;-)

How such an unimportant amateurish video with a rather small number of views can make someone go ballistic is beyond me. Some of our ancestors loved to protect similar insane religious cults and threaten everyone who didn't with blasphemy. But holy cow, I really do hope that these reactions belong to the dumping ground of the history. If you're angry, just f*ck your personal Allah and Muhammed and Piss Bullshit Upon Him (PBUH). The anger is just your problem.

I was also disgusted by the reaction of Mitt Romney, reinforcing the idea about the Mormon-Muslim proximity. Romney, it's just not your f*cking business to tell people what they should show in their films and criticize a movie on religious grounds, especially if you haven't even watched it. Please shut your f*ck up and do your best to protect the basic constitutional principles of the U.S. which say, among other things, that Coptic Egyptian Americans have the full right to shoot movies describing their religious attitude that Mohammed was a f*cked-up faggot which is just a different attitude than the attitude that he was a messenger of God – the former is surely more likely.

Add to Digg this Add to reddit

snail feedback (70) :

reader Vangel Vesovski said...

"How such an unimportant amateurish video with a rather small number of views can make someone go ballistic is beyond me.

I don't think that the video had much to do with what we saw. News of it was simply used by opportunists to spark the protesters and focus their anger. Nobody likes occupations and meddling with local affairs by foreign powers. It seems that someone who does not like the US has used natural sentiment against American interests.

What I found interesting was Putin's warning prior to the actions. He warned Canada's Prime Minister that Western leaders were acting as Trotskyites pursuing continued revolution in the Arab world without understanding the consequences. The shot was clearly against the neocons that justified the Iraq conflict by falsifying evidence. It would not surprise me if the Russian government did not stir up some of the trouble and guided a few of the protesters.

reader Shannon said...

These guys can only understand one thing : the schlague (can't find the translation in English).

reader Mephisto said...

I don't know what the "schlague" is, but I image it is something like a flamethrower.

reader Shannon said...

No, not a flamethrower... In German schlagen which means to beat... In French la schlague is like a whip, like the one muslims use to punish infidels.

reader Steve R said...

I'm sorry, but I just dont see how your interpreting Mr Romney's statement correctly. He was simply pointing out that people ought to have some decency about such things, but I don't see anything in his comment to suggest the first amendment should be abused. It seemed pretty clear when watching Romney that he was trying to explain that the first amendment requires this tolerance. This is entirely different from the Embassy statement that actually condemned a US citizen for exercising his first amendment rights.

By the way, its looking like the DOJ and the press have been complicit in outing this guy that made the movie. I suppose he will be lucky to live through next week. As far as I know, The Dutch government didnt give out the directions to Theo VanGogh's residence.

reader papertiger0 said...

Does it speak ill of me that I was more offended by Lubos characterization of Mitt Romney's comments, then I was by the anti-Muslim video?

I found three flat out lies at the Americablog link without even really looking for them.

Lie (1) Romney condemned the movie using similar language as the "apology" issued by the embassy.

No he didn't.
What Romney did say was, "I wish people wouldn't do it."
'It' being deliberately waking up and poking the mean dog with a stick.

The embassy otoh, speaking in the official capacity with the full force of the United States Government, said "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.

The bolded part is lie number 2.
Because the United States Government under Obama doesn't give a rat fuck about offending, and more than offending the religious beliefs of Catholic Christians, forcing them to fund abortions against their religious beliefs through Obamacare.

Later the Americablogger says , "Romney just said exactly the same thing that the embassy did, but Romney went one more step. He said that you should abuse the First Amendment." which is lie number 3.

What Romney actually said was, "... under the First Amendment, people are allowed to do what they feel they want to do. They have the right to do that..."

You know what's impressing me, Youtube still has a mildly offensive video wrapped up in an international controversy still available on their website.

I've seen them delete way less offensive things because they hurt the feelings of notable liberals, like Oprah for instance.

reader James Gallagher said...

They're not educated (very well) - so they're practically animals, although left-wing (silly) people prefer to think of them (just as badly (ironically)) as little cuddly animals who might misbehave if we haven't properly fed them.

reader Steve R said...

I just watched the
movie, and I agree that it is a little rough., but we need to be careful of
a rush to judgement. Here we have a member of a discriminated minority
group living in the US, trying to express himself, albeit awkwardly,
through the cinematic art form. But this was just the trailer for the
film. Perhaps some of this awkwardness can be fixed up in editing, and
I'm certain a proper music score will help. The point is, it seems like
someone is struggling to tell a story here, and I don't think we should be so
critical of it in its present form. Perhaps a grant from the National
Endowment for the Arts is just what this project needs to be a proper movie,
something that would make both Coptic Christians and Muslims proud.

In its present form, one
could hardly blame the Islamic world for being upset. But instead of
lashing out in hatred, maybe they could offer to provide some help with the
project, some technical consultation as they say.

I certainly hope the
producer of the film all the best, and I pray that our own government doesn't
throw him to the wolves.

reader James Gallagher said...

I mean, you cant't argue with the uneducated, can you? You can only calm them and excite them by what you feed them.

reader Gene said...

This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by the media. The best estimates of the rioting crowd in Cairo is 2000 to 3000 rioters. If you happen to be at the scene, that is a scary number but it also means that for every rioting Egyptian there are 20,000 to 30,000 Egyptians that are not rioting.

Given Egypt’s history, where, for decades, it has been in the government’s best interest to keep the populace ignorant and convince the people that all of their (very real) economic troubles were due to the America and the West rather than to officially sanctioned corruption, this really should not be surprising. It is damn easy to stir up a crowd and with the internet it is even easier to form one.

The rioting numbers are, in fact, two to three orders of magnitude smaller than the numbers that were involved in the anti-Mubarak demonstrations. Morsi, too, has condemned the rioters and vowed to maintain order. He’d better; that’s his job now.

Libya is a more dangerous place than Egypt, of course. I would fault our own leaders for failure to provide adequate protection for our ambassador. We lost a very able diplomat and an exemplary human being. Sending in the marines after the fact seems silly to me.

I don’t really disagree with Romney but I wish people would not use the word “abused” in this context. When you abuse something you are causing it harm and you can be sure that the second amendment is quite safe from this one jerk.

reader Gene said...

Lubos,Prohibiting beverages containing more than 20% alcohol is really dumb. What’s the matter with your government? (I probably shouldn’t ask.)

reader Gene said...

My arithmetic sucks. That should have been 30,000 to 45,000 non-rioting Egyptians for each rioting one.

reader Sage Basil said...

Problem: people are trying to make their own booze, and failing

Solution: ensure that everyone has to try to make their own by banning hard liquor

So uh. I thought .cz was no longer communist?

reader Taco Bell said...

I'm glad Lubos has some backbone as opposed to all those clowns that irrationally bend over backwards to excuse murder in the name of religious sensitivity. A couple of points on the issue.

1) This movie has been around for months and thus, as occurred with the cartoons, a religious element within these countries fueled and coordinated this violence.

2) Civilians don't normally have RPGs even in Libya. The attack on the compound was planned and supposedly the White House had clues it ignored 48 hours prior to the attack. Its sad, as I know one of the guys that died there (he is a famous players in a online game called EVE-ONLINE called Vile Rat). I was shocked that we lost him to these animals.

My view is that Islam is a vile backward religion. Intolerant, hanging gays from cranes, stoning teenagers, refusing women equal rights and even in fundamentalist regimes, access to education. A male dominated repressive hell. The closer one gets to true fundamentalist Islam, the worse it gets. Completely and utterly incompatible with Western democracy. The entire Arabs muslim block produces less science than Spain. An abomination for human advancement.

So yes, in that sense I totally support the movie and what it stands for. I've lost count of how many Coptics Christians have been murdered and their Churches burned down in Egypt without a hint of muslim protest.

'But..but..not all muslims are bad people?' goes the liberal mime. Very true but they remain silent especially in the West where they could protest openly. Not only that, if you view some of the polls of American or European muslim attitudes, you would see some pretty messed up opinions. When a faith protests over cartoons and not over murder done in the name of their faith, you can be fairly certain that it doesn't represent a loving God.

reader Shannon said...

So true James. Like animals, muslims are calm only under dictatorship (one man's or the crowd's). Mass hysteria, Islam's mind control, sway in the crowd, women's total submission etc... They are so screwed as a people ! And they've no sense of humour whatsoever... screeeeewed !

reader Luboš Motl said...

Sorry, papertiger, but concerning Romney, you're just cherrypicking a sentence that isn't too offensive but you skip many others that are. Romney said, for example:

"I think the whole film is a terrible idea. I think him making it, promoting it showing it is disrespectful to people of other faiths. I don’t think that should happen."

Sorry but whether the film is a good idea is just a personal opinion, of Romney or somebody else, and Romney doesn't have a "greater" importance than e.g. the filmmaker. And being allowed to be discrespectful to people of other beliefs is *exactly* what the First Amendment was designed to protect. Speech that isn't a problem for anyone doesn't need a protection.

You know very well that there are thousands of comparably "offensive" videos on YouTube as well. One can't just erase videos for their being "offensive" although Obama is doing his best to make something like that possible.

Papertiger, I lived in a regime that suppressed the freedom of expression and I am amazed how eager you and other Americans are to reproduce its methods.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Gene, I am pretty sure that your government or a state's government would do it as well, if there were the same number of deaths, and probably much faster than mine. It's exactly the kind of Hollywood-hero-like posturing of the politicians that they would make as tough an intervention as possible.

You have had this system from 1919 to 1933 or so? We will have it for a few weeks or so. So while I think the decision is counterproductive, I don't think that as an American, you have the moral capital to selectively criticize my government. ;-)

reader Luboš Motl said...

Dear Gene, what I find more important is that these riots are officially sponsored by those states. That's really why all 12 top stories at Fars News were about the movie yesterday, and so on. The people who think it's appropriate not to revenge to a completely innocent ambassador may even be a majority at those places, as your simple counting could suggest, but they are a majority without any power.

Your point that the non-rioting people are a majority will only become relevant when those countries will become secular democracies and the prominent representatives of the Islamist regimes will be put in jail.

reader Shannon said...

"In its present form, one could hardly blame the Islamic world for being upset".... Steve, the problem with Islam is that they don't know what "forgiving" means, when it is a central point in Christianity.

reader Luboš Motl said...

"In its present form, one could hardly blame the Islamic world for being upset"

It's not only upset, it's also murdering ambassadors and doing lots of other harmful things. I apologize but I *always* blame the actual culprits. Whom else do you want to blame?

Blaming someone else would be the same thing as blaming the Jews for the Holocaust: it was their existence that made the Nazi reaction inevitable, wasn't it? What's the difference?

There must be clear lines what is allowed and what is not and the Western civilization has very clear lines. Shooting a historical movie is fine but shooting an ambassador is not! I find it extremely, infinitely dangerous for someone to try to make these key difference obscure, just in order to lick the asses of some brainwashed savages in an irrelevant part of the world.

reader James Gallagher said...

I sounded harsh, but just to be precise, they're not as bad as Nazi's or Stalinists, I mean, most of them would probably behave if they hadn't been brainwashed, but Nazis and Stalinists were bad people looking for an excuse to behave like assholes

reader Casper said...

Surely we need a lot more of these wacky videos. Who knows we might get lucky. The mullahs might be persuaded to issue a fatwa against the immigration of themselves and the rest of the faithful horde to Western countries. We can only live in hope.

reader Dilaton said...

I will just never get it what "psychological" defect these fundamentalists have that they want to immediately kill everybody that says something slightly negative or disagrees with certain points about the way Islam is practised etc somewhere in the world ... we have 2012 now and I thought that the dark middle ages are over ...

If the Islam is a strong and good religion and way of living, they should be able to CONSTRUCTIVELY explain people why it is a good thing and just ignore stupid Youtube videos, pictures put in newspapers, what certain people write in books, or whatelse usually drives them mad instead of always providing the "Kalashnikov-answer" to the slightest ridiculus pinprick.

And more important to request that countries in other parts of the world murder people ect is really over the top. The fundamentalists have no right to enforce their brutalities on the whole world! All governements should make a really strong statement that they dont tolerate such things and will protect people on their territory! And of course they should effectively do it ...

reader papertiger0 said...

From what I read in the wiki you still do.

Does this sound familiar?

Law Against Support and Dissemination of Movements Oppressing Human Rights and Freedoms (2001)§ 260 (1) The person who supports or spreads movements oppressing human rights and freedoms or declares national, race, religious or class hatred or hatred against other group of persons will be punished by prison from 1 to 5 years. (2) The person will be imprisoned from 3 to 8 years if: a) he/she commits the crime mentioned in paragraph (1) in print, film, radio, television or other similarly effective manner, b) he/she commits the crime as a member of an organized group c) he/she commits the crime in a state of national emergency or state of war§ 261 The person who publicly declares sympathies with such a movement mentioned in § 260, will be punished by prison from 6 months to 3 years.§ 261a The person who publicly denies, puts in doubt, approves or tries to justify nazi or communist genocide or other crimes of nazis or communists will be punished by prison of 6 months to 3 years.[22]

Depending on who gets to define religious hatred, you might be already in breach.
Maybe this is the source of your hypersensitivity to Romney's personal opinion regarding the film, because if the wrong guy gets into office in the Czech Republic you could be only one bad election from going to jail.
The framework already exists, only waiting for some bad apple with the will to use it.
It's not like that here. President Obama can't send out the thought police to lock up Sam Bacile , Pastor Jones or whomever he would like to shut up.

The fact is Obama has taken concrete steps (sending a General of the Army to ask Pastor Jones to stop promoting the film - despite Pastor Jones not even being involved with it {which makes Obama a double dumb ass} and calling out his DOJ attack dog Holder to investigate Bacile) in disregard of the 1st amendment.

Romney just expressed his personal opinion, which is his right to do, that it's not a good idea to go out of your way to offend the easily offended.

As far as my personal opinion, if I were a Coptic Christian exiled from my home land, I would have kept the basic content intact, but made a better movie.

No scratch that. Being exiled from Egypt is a blessing.
I would thank the Lord that the blood thirsty savages encouraged me to move.

reader Shannon said...

I am not so sure about that. They are like hyenas, they function in horde. The crowd decides over the individual.

reader Shannon said...

The problem is that there will always assholes who will say "we musn't upset people in their religious beliefs"... and then countries will put some crazy anti-blasphemy laws etc... This is the road to end freedom of speech. So dangerous.

reader Dilaton said...

Hi Shannon,

Yeah I think the problem is some kind of equipartitioned between the fundamentalist first kind of assholes and the second kind of assholes you mention that listen to the fist kind of assholes, leave them their will, and even support them by their refusing to take an appropriate strong position to defend their country and protect peole living therein etc ... :-(

Wait ... is it meaningful to talk about two kinds of assholes or are they quantum mechanically indistinguishable ... :-/?

reader Shannon said...

Yes Dilaton they are in some kind of bound state ;-)

reader Dilaton said...


reader HenryBowman419 said...

Do they use such a device for their traditional wife-beating, as well?

reader HenryBowman419 said...

Please note that this little Youtube video is not the source of the alleged Muslim rage. It is perfectly obvious that this widespread violence, which just happened to commence on Sept. 11th, was incited quite deliberately by Muslim wackos. If the video did not exist, another trumped-up reason would have been used to incite the violence. To believe that the MB-dominated Egyptian government did not know about these attacks in advance strains credulity. And, whether or not the Iransians were in on the planning is almost irrelevant: even if they weren't, they could see an easy opportunity to attack the Great Satan, so they used it, and will continue doing so.

The reactions of the U.S. government have been shameful at best.

reader Shannon said...

Yes like this one. The woman is punished because she wore trousers

reader Luboš Motl said...

I assure you that I am in no violation of these Czech laws but you may be if you were living here because you're demonstrably promoting a political movement attempting to suppress basic human rights, in this case the Islamofascist movement trying to suppress the basic freedom of expression.

At any rate, Google thankfully agrees with me and it told Obama to screw his own asshole

YouTube will not remove the video in the West or globally because it will not surrender to political pressures. It will only allow the content to be removed according to the laws of individual countries, exactly as it should be, and the video is clearly in no violation of any laws of the U.S. or the Czech Republic so if an Obama doesn't like the video, the only thing they can do is to go to screw their mullah brothers to the Anticivilization.

This is the first major example showing the reason why I always found e.g. Google's decision to localize the blogs to be a pro-freedom decision. It's the same point - if something is defensibly claimed to be illegal, such claims of an illegal content could only be defended in a few particular countries and probably not in the U.S. Taking TRF as an example, I am almost absolutely confident that all of the content is legal under the U.S. law so if Iran or Saudi Arabia wanted to ban a particular blog entry, Google gives them the room to do so and I don't give a damn.

reader Dilaton said...

Amen ;-), and well done google!

reader Dilaton said...

I think with the fundamentalists and their followers it is exactly the same:

They use the religion as an excuse for beeing assholes, murder, harm, threaten, genozid, and suppress other people at will, etc ...

reader Carlos said...

I fail to comprehend the origin of their anger. It is a perfectly legitimate basic mathematical equation.
MAN + X = BT (Islamic Terrorist)

reader James Mayeau said...

Now who is cherry picking?
I'm reasonably convinced that this is a targeted legislation to deter a return of Nazism, and as such is mostly a dead letter, but imagine some future election where instead of Milos Zeman you have a President Barack Obama.

Suddenly the dead letter is breathed with life, and the guy who gets to reinterpret what is meant by nebulous phrases such as "Oppressing Human Rights" or "Support and Dissemination" or "Religious Hatred" is fully willing and capable of pointing to this movie or that book and declaring their authors an outlaw.

Someday, probably by accident, after an election featuring empty rhetoric about Hope and Change, you will be stuck with a guy like Obama, who will use that law as a weapon to destroy his political opponents.

reader Gene said...

Egypt is undergoing a process that is unavoidable on its long road to democracy. It is simply untrue that the Cairo riots were government sponsored; I think you know that. Of course it is possible that Egypt will revert to a suppressive dictatorship but there is a better chance that it will go the way of Turkey and slowly become more open and democratic. The most populous Muslim nation, Indonesia, is making surprisingly good progress. You, and we, are buying many products from Indonesia and those Indonesian exports are going to become increasingly sophisticated. When you start seeing non-agricultural Egyptian products on your store shelves it will be due to direct foreign investment (DFI) in Egypt and you will know they are on their way. Religion has nothing to do with it. Corruption has everything to do with it.
There are always people who will riot if given the chance. In the US we have had scores of riots (most recently in Oakland, California) but they have never threatened our civil society or our democracy.
By the way, you should get rid of those stupid laws that limit free speech in Czechia.

reader papertiger0 said...

Holy shit. Barry Soreto just moved from the worst president in living memory to the worst president of all time bar none.

“Just after midnight Saturday morning, authorities descended on the Cerritos home of the man believed to be the filmmaker behind the anti-Muslim movie that has sparked protests and rioting in the Muslim world.”

Somewhere Andrew Jackson and Woodrow Wilson are smiling.
They are off the snide.

reader Gene said...

I have known many Muslims, Shannon, but none that bear any similarity to your description. In fact, my daughter married one and it is the best thing that has ever happened to her. She was emotionally and financially independent before they met and if he did not treat her as an equal or if he cheated on her she would dump him in a heartbeat. She would also be very well off because the California courts would give her alimony and child support amounting to about half of his large income. She would also likely get their 420 m^2 house in the Bay Area. My daughter is not subservient to anyone on this planet. Please do not let your biases get the best of your good judgement regarding Muslims. They are just like us. Maybe not in France but that is your problem.

My Muslim son-in-law is an engineering director for one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies . Incidentally, Lubos, he took a class in physics from Herb Kroemer (physics Nobel, 2000) at UC Santa Barbara. Herb was my first boss in industry.

reader Shannon said...

Dear Gene, I'm sure your son in law is a nice guy. It sounds like your daughter is the one "wearing the pants" in her family ;-) That's the best compromise when living with a muslim. However this doesn't help your biaised judgement regarding Muslims either. We in France know how Muslims are like. Algeria was a French colony in the past and we've seen what they are capable of. My parents lived there for a couple of years in the early 60s (my dad was in the Armée de l'Air at the time. After Indochine -as a "zouave"- he came to Algeria) until De Gaulle took the wrong decision to drop Algeria with the results we see. We know how fanatics they can be. We know how hateful they are. We know how their religion holds them. We've learned. You Americans only see them through the American prism. Muslims are not like us civilized people. Remember that always.

reader joel said...

I knew an American girl married to an Iranian years ago in Boston. They had two kids in elementary school. He was an educated man, an engineer of some sort. Nice guy. One day he took the kids to the zoo. He never came back. He got on a plane to Iran with the kids. End of game.

You would be shocked what you will find when you scratch the surface of an educated Muslim.

reader James Gallagher said...

yeah maybe.

I just feel sorry for young muslim children and their life of brainwashing ahead. Whereas many nazis/stalinists just made the choice in adult life to be cunts.

reader Eugene S said...

Gene, do you remember that BBC documentary about the Muslims in the city of Luton UK? There was that interview where the filmmaker went to a mosque and talked to a number of articulate, normal, reasonable, and genuinely peaceful Muslims -- people who I'd be delighted to have as neighbors. But that was sandwiched between a demonstration of a hateful Muslim mob and interviews with hateful Muslims on the street. Good for your daughter to be married to one of the first kind.

reader Dilaton said...

For the children it is always worst ...:-(

But I'm not sure if concerning nazis/stalinists all of them decided to be assholes as fully concient grownups either. I've heard there was something like Hitler Jugend, and the communists had their methods to educate children in their spirit too ...

reader James Gallagher said...

The few decades in which Hitler and Stalin had power doesn't allow for much influence from indoctrination at the level of children - surely you need a generation or twoof indoctrination

reader James Gallagher said...

oops, ignore

reader lanvin said...

lanvin Crafted in a signature fabric as elegant as it is durable, and finished with a convenient outside pocket as well as an adjustable crossbody strap, this silhouette is a favorite for weekends, errands and travel. lanvin bag Pockets inside and out keep personal items organized and secure.Inside multifunction pockets.

reader James Gallagher said...

sorry about the empty posts, I realised I was descending into monumental incoherency and couldn't find a delete button so edited the posts to blanks.

reader cynholt said...

The Obama Administration is doing everything it can to pin the violence
on the 'movie' discovered on youtube, and deflect any allegation that
the attacks are a direct result of his policies (and continuing US
policies) in the Middle East.

Even for those in the Middle East carrying out the attacks and
agitating the crowds, the 'movie' is nothing more than a pretext, and an
excuse to get the attacks in motion. It doesn't take a rocket scientist
or a political 'expert' to understand that most protesters (yes, even
Muslims) usually don't show up to protest a film with assault rifles,
grenades, and rocket launchers.

I see the attacks as a clear indication of the rejection of Western
interference in the region, and the longer we and our NATO 'allies' stay
there, the worse it's going to get.

reader Gene said...

No, Shannon, my daughter definitely does not “wear the pants” in her family. They have as balanced a relationship as I have ever seen. He wanted to get married in a mosque and she wanted to get married in a church. They settled on getting married in a winery. Good choice.

Of course we have to be careful in defining a “Muslim” or a “Christian”. He does not do daily prayers to Allah and she does not attend church services regularly, if at all. They are not raising their daughter in either tradition. He is an Iranian, not an Arab, and he is as good and loyal American as anyone I know. Of course he detests the current regime in Iran. The ascendance of the clergy is the reason his family fled Iran when he was fourteen. His father was a wealthy businessman in Tehran and too close to the Shah to stay there, although he was almost brought to ruin when the Shah was bought off by our CIA and he had to trash seven million textbooks that had already been printed.

I would ask you to accept the fact that the five million Muslims in my country are productive citizens, who contribute to the richness of all our lives. I have been privileged to know many of them and I assure you that they are exactly like us. You French people see them through a distorted prism, which is a direct result of of your failure to provide for their integration into society. We Americans have a huge debt to France for your vital help in breaking our ties to England but now you can learn from us.

Most of your Muslims remain bound by their religious ties because they are not being blended smoothly into your society and your economy. Of course we have a long history of successful integration of large minorities. We are (almost) all immigrants.

reader Gene said...

Yes, Lubos, the US had “prohibition" in the 1920s. I just assumed that everyone, including our Czech friends, learned from that unmitigated disaster. I guess not.

reader Gene said...

Today, I heard an interview with a man who has just returned from Benghazi. He said the Libyans who grieve over the death of Chris Stevens enormously outnumber the young punks who killed him.

As a Frenchwoman you know well that the violent overthrow of the existing order can lead to unspeakable horrors because it happened in your country. There will be other incidents but the West must stay involved in the slow transformation of Libya into a modern society. The Arab spring is real but I’m not sure “spring” is the right description for such a catharsis.

reader deflator said...

Hi Lubos, I thought you will like this
to put your mad ayatollahs, Benes and Masarik in perspective:

reader cynholt said...


There's an old saying from the Prohibition Era (1920-1933): "If you drink methyl, you'll never live to drink ethyl." Back then, a considerable number of Americans died from drinking methyl alcohol, commonly called wood alcohol.

reader papertiger0 said...

I tend toward the prickly when in the wrong. Please accept my humble apology for the emotional outburst.
You are far seeing, great, and wise, (and I hope this won't affect my TRF pension).
Also please disregard certain characterations made by me about the fitness of your faculties.
Obviously you are like Rush. Smarter than me with half your brain tied behind your back.

There's alot.. I have a lot of hope riding on seeing an end to Obama's regime. Clouded by that.

When I was cherrypicking you were of course refering to my strategic skip over this part of the interview.

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: We’ve seen General Martin Dempsey call Pastor Jones to say, “Please don’t promote this film.” You think that’s a good idea?

MITT ROMNEY: I think the whole film is a terrible idea. I think him making it, promoting it showing it is disrespectful to people of other faiths. I don’t think that should happen. I think people should have the common courtesy and judgment– the good judgment– not to be– not to offend other peoples’ faiths. It’s a very bad thing, I think, this guy’s doing."

Stephanopuolos gave Romney the opening to denounce Obama's strong arm tactics, but instead Mitt kept playing film critic. I have half a feeling that this informed the "Can we get away with this?" planning phase of Obama's midnight raid on freedom of speech.

reader Luboš Motl said...

Sorry, James, but our political system doesn't work in this way, and neither does yours, by the way. If we ever happen to elect a Barack Obama as a president or a prime minister, nothing will change about the interpretation of this law whatsoever because the laws are interpreted by the judges and not by the executive power! The president or the prime minister only have certain limited possibilitiies to do things like banning movies and their decisions may still be challenged in the court, so if the ban is illegal, it will be reverted. So your threats are really bullshit.

Our system - and your system - is largely immune towards a Barack Obama's becoming the boss. The deconstruction of the Western society promoted by the apologists for the murderers is much deeper than a random politician who may win an election at some moment. The warriors for the ban of this movie are really trying to undermine the whole essence of the Western civilization.

reader Shannon said...

Gene, again I am sure your son-in-law is a good guy, but do you believe that all 5 millions muslims are like him ? I doubt it. Today's events show that I am right. We French see muslims as they are. In France they are totally free to live the way they want, which they've always mistaken for a weakness on our behalf... Islam is a dangerous religion that is totally incompatible with our civilisation. End of the story.

reader papertiger0 said...

They are - and perhaps you are - trying to impose a completely independent, parallel way of resolving disputes and harrassing people who are and whose products are politically inconvenient for certain powerful enough groups, some kind of an alternative Sharia law

Was I doing all that?Not on purpose, believe me.

reader Luboš Motl said...

OK, sorry if I misread.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

I have watched a good hunk of Palestinian and Egyptian TV, and this is about even with the quality that they use when attacking Jews and Christians. To the Arab viewers, this is very recognizable.

BTW, most of the more active terrorists ARE well educated. The less the people know about Islam, the safer we are. The more they are able to read the Quran, the Hadiths, and the interpretations of Muslim scholars, the more dangerous they are toward us because there are just a few teaching in the Quran that are the focus of 80% of the book: 1) Good Muslims pray. 2) Good Muslims participate in zakat (religious alms). 3) Good Muslims participate in jihad, risking their wealth and their lives. BTW, one major focus for zakat? Supporting the poor so they can participate in jihad, too. Who is jihad to be against? Anyone who gives associates to Allah (meaning pagans and in some contexts Christians, since most Christians believe in the Trinity), Jews and Christians who are not in dhimmitude, and anyone who denies God (meaning all atheists and agnostics). The goal for Islam is the submission of the world to Allah, with the surviving Christians and Jews as a heavily oppressed and often enslaved minority and everyone else dead.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

A very good friend of mine had a best friend who was a model. She was persuaded by an extremely wealthy Muslim to marry him, and he laughed at her concerns about cultural misogyny as being something rooted in the distant past. Then he took her home, outside the United States, and she discovered that she was his third wife and lived essentially as his prisoner for many years before escaping.

I can tell you many, many similar stories of women who thought they were being treated with the deepest respect....until they set foot in a Muslim country.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

If he does not do his daily prayers, then he is not a Muslim. Just so you know. It's like saying someone is a Christian but doesn't believe that Jesus is the Son of God. It's a prerequisite of the religion. He is, at most, culturally Muslim, as your daughter appears to be culturally Christian.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

I think smoking is a bad idea. It is bad your your health, for the environment, and it stinks. I think smoking shouldn't happen.

....I also would not outlaw it and believe that people should be allowed to smoke.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

They are taught in the Quran and Hadiths that this is oppression of Islam, which they must fight against.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

There should be no expectation that democracy will end in freedom. The new president of Egypt has been very blunt--he hopes that a religious awakening in the country will make the PEOPLE demand full Shari'ia law. Not all oppression is caused from above.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

There is no film. The two trailers are it.

reader MimiReed1234 said...

Only if they leave Islam behind, except for nominally. Your views are painfully slanted by a culture of individuality and human rights. Other people believe these things to be narcissism and evil.

reader Shannon said...

I will never let that happen.


reader kk said...

Lubos , You are such a stupid ignorant asshole , I suggest that you fu**ck yourself . You don't seem like a respectable scientist . You are a moron pretending to be a scientist . Just do something productive instead of blogging 24 hours a day insulting others . You're insulting yourself actually .