Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)
22. Point conceded. The protesters are backward, not necessarily the countries.
Sun Sep 23, 2012, 12:13 PM
Sep 2012

I agree with JCMach1 - It's the clerics and a twisted version of the religion.

Take a break. nt Skip Intro Sep 2012 #1
Would seem so to me. safeinOhio Sep 2012 #2
What this has to do with the OP's cockamamie example, IDK. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #14
Extremely doubtful. COLGATE4 Sep 2012 #3
The First Amendment applies to civil actions based on protected speech. onenote Sep 2012 #4
I wonder... redgreenandblue Sep 2012 #19
They were dismissed because of the First Amendment onenote Sep 2012 #24
The actors may have a case.... Jeff In Milwaukee Sep 2012 #5
Not likely to succeed on that theory in America. DirkGently Sep 2012 #6
Should be brush Sep 2012 #7
She's not one of the backers of the movie oberliner Sep 2012 #23
I don't know brush Sep 2012 #28
The odd thing is that, were it not for the violent riots, the existence of this JDPriestly Sep 2012 #27
The idea that the lame anti-Islam video is the cause of the violence in Islamic countries is absurd slackmaster Sep 2012 #8
Absurd? brush Sep 2012 #9
Weak response slackmaster Sep 2012 #10
Agreed brush Sep 2012 #11
If the provocateurs didn't have that video, I'm confident they would have found something else slackmaster Sep 2012 #12
But they're protesting in Australia, Indonesia, the UK, Germany... none of these are "backward" riderinthestorm Sep 2012 #18
Point conceded. The protesters are backward, not necessarily the countries. slackmaster Sep 2012 #22
"the use of its existence by provocateurs" cthulu2016 Sep 2012 #17
Huh? brush Sep 2012 #25
How about if we sue YOU for YOUR words? Oh, wait; you think you are EXEMPT from your own idea? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #13
Simple answer: Yes, but only on an individual level. Public figures are pretty much immune. HopeHoops Sep 2012 #15
I was thinking of the individual level. redgreenandblue Sep 2012 #20
You sort of have to mention a name to be liable. HopeHoops Sep 2012 #21
Yes, and I hope they get sued for wrognful death nadinbrzezinski Sep 2012 #16
It could be treestar Sep 2012 #26
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Out of curiosity: I wonde...»Reply #22