Iran will pursue makers of anti-Islam film: vice-president

[Bosonic]

Source: Reuters

Iran's government will "track down" those responsible for making an amateurish film clip mocking the Prophet Mohammad, a senior official said, Iranian media reported on Monday.

The video made in California and posted on YouTube portrayed the Prophet Mohammad as a womanizer and a fool. It has ignited a week of violent protests across the Muslim world.

"The government of the Islamic Republic of Iran condemns ... this inappropriate and offensive action," First Vice-President Mohammad Reza Rahimi said, according to the Mehr news agency.

"Certainly it will search for, track, and pursue this guilty person who ... has insulted 1.5 billion Muslims in the world."

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/17/us-protests-iran-idUSBRE88G0FQ20120917

[Turbineguy]

1. Another chance to stick it

to the American taxpayer who will pay to protect these people.

[WCGreen]

2. So they got him cornered here in th USA, they grab him and want to take him

back to Iran....

How's that going to work when we really don't have normal relations with Iran.

Nothing could go wrong, Right!!!

[lunatica]

4. I think a jihad doesn't go through legal channels

They will just kill him, or them.

[Missycim]

3. More and more reasons to think

its ok for this country to get a nuke.

[robinlynne]

11. funny thing. I immediately saw the opposite side. I'm thinking, here come the drones to california.

Remember how we take care of business?

[oldbanjo]

22. I was thinking the same thing.

[CJCRANE]

5. Who would've thought

that this so-called anti-islam film would make a great talking point for radicals, hardliners and fundamentalists and make them even stronger?

What a coincidence.

[Firebrand Gary]

6. Especially considering the funding appears to have come from Egypt! Hmmmmm nt

[Katashi_itto]

7. I have no sympathy for the Terry Jones and the Filmmaker. Guess they should have thought

about the real consequences.

[Frank Cannon]

9. Yup.

Sucks to be them.

[robinlynne]

12. They probably did think about the consequences!

[JoeyT]

8. Just so everyone knows what this threat is worth,

Salman Rushdie's new book came out this month and they were going to kill him 20 years ago.

So it should be taken with a big grain of salt. Actually it should probably just be ignored completely and not taken at all.

[EnviroBat]

10. Exactly...

Thanks for injecting some sanity into this thread...

[Ron Obvious]

21. Rushdie was in hiding for years...

Salman Rushdie was in hiding for years and called that time the blackest period in his life.

We are meeting to discuss Rushdie's longest-running role, his 13-year performance as a character called Joseph Anton. This was the pseudonym he took after going into hiding following the fatwa declared upon him by Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini on Valentine's Day 1989. His protection officers suggested he choose another name to increase his security when he turned up at a new home (though being flanked by four armed men in bulletproof Jaguars usually did the trick). "Probably better not to make it an Indian name," counselled his minder Stan. And so, Rushdie writes, he became "an invisible man in a whiteface mask". Joseph was Conrad's first name, Anton was Chekhov's. He was Mr Anton until March 27 2002, when the police Jaguars finally drove out of his life for the last time.

That pseudonym now supplies the title for his new 636-page memoir. Why would he want to revisit those years? During that time his first wife Clarissa died of cancer, his second and third marriages broke up, his fourth was shaky, his Japanese editor was murdered, his Norwegian publisher shot, his Italian translator stabbed, hundreds died in riots protesting against his novel, his books were burned from Bradford to Islamabad, he did things that still make him burn with shame and he found that writers he admired such as John Berger and John Le Carré, both writing in the Guardian, attacked him for not withdrawing the novel.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/sep/17/salman-rushdie-blackest-period-of-my-life

[smirkymonkey]

30. Didn't they just renew the Fatwa on Rushdie?

I thought I read that here somewhere, although I can't find it again. Maybe I saw it somewhere else.

[JoeyT]

31. Yep.

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/pageviews/2012/09/salman-rushdie-is-a-wanted-managain-satanic-verses-fatwa-renewed

I don't know if they ever actually lifted it or if they just recently upped the amount they're offering for his head. It kind of reads both ways.

[Marrah_G]

13. LOL

He is a comedian!

[Bragi]

14. So do I have this right?

Posters in this thread are okay with foreign religious activists entering the country and killing someone who exercised their free speech right to be offensive against any religion they choose to target?

Moreover, they are opposed to protecting the film makers because it would cost taxpayer money?

Seriously? Think this through people.

- B

[frylock]

15. i'm having a real hard time mustering any concern

[Bragi]

16. Then you won't mind f free speech rights disappear? /nt

[qwlauren35]

19. Free Speech in AMERICA.

Free Speech is not globally guaranteed. Only in certain countries. It is very awkward when a US citizen, exercising a US right, becomes involved in an international incident. This is the problem with Information Technology. It imposes a US value on other countries. In countries where Free Speech is actually illegal, the country should have the right to enforce their law in some way.

It's a complicated situation with no simple answers.

I am not saying that the individual should not be protected. But to translate the film to Arabic and disseminate it... the protests are reasonable. (The violence is not.)

We also need to acknowledge that violence is a way of life in many Muslim countries. It is how the coups/revolutions occurred, and we are not consistent in how we address it. When it's against an "enemy", we condone it. When it's against us, that's another story.

We need to acknowledge that our embassies and consulates are in countries where some people routinely use violence to express themselves, and we must be prepared to address this at all times.

And yes, it would be equally stupid for an American woman to dress provocatively in one of those countries where rape is common, and not necessarily prosecuted.

There is a line that must be draw between exercising one's freedoms and common sense, especially when another country with different customs and laws is involved.

[christx30]

24. So to you,

If an American were to say, "Tibet should be a free an independent country if that is what the people want." or commentate Tiennamin square, ect, you think China should be able to demand that person's arrest and inprisonment? Am I reading that correctly?

[frylock]

20. watch me pull this rabbit out of my hat

[sofa king]

17. No, you do not.

I'll freely admit that I am enjoying a moment of schaudenfreude, but it is because the people behind this operation must now depend upon the guy they are trying to unseat to protect them.

They now exist at the pleasure of our President. That is amusing.

(Yes, I am assuming that these "filmmakers" are a front for a Republican attempt at yet another October Surprise. Just wait. You'll see.)

[Marrah_G]

18. I am amused by the blustering of an Iranian official

He is posturing for the radicals in his country. There is no threat.

It's like watching bagdad bob

[JoeyT]

23. No, not really.

Although if we wanted to play the "How dare someone attempt to kill someone on our soil?!" card, we probably should've thought of that about three or four decades ago. Hard to complain about assassination attempts given our record in South America and the Middle East.

I've got no real problem with protecting the guy, although I don't want him to have special protection we wouldn't give someone that say testified against the mob. I'm good with him going into the witness protection program and going into hiding.

[trouble.smith]

26. Looks like you have it right.

[LilSol]

25. Nonsens

The film is so pointless and nonsense, stupid! It is not worth to discuss this movie! But some idiots and Volksverhetzer uses this to mobilize some stupid people for them. This film doesn't insulted 1.5billion muslims, just the stupid and ignorant one!

[justiceischeap]

27. One thing I will give Iran on this situation, at least they are laying blame at the feet

of the people it belongs. They aren't condemning all of America, just the filmmaker. Who would have thought, on that point, Iran would be the sensible one's in the room.

[octothorpe]

29. Hey, you're right. I didn't think about that.

[octothorpe]

28. All this over a ridiculously stupid film made by some idiots...

It's hard for me to understand how this happens. I can't think of anything that could be mocked to get me upset to the level that I'd want my government to go on TV and claim they will track down the makers of the movie.

[fascisthunter]

32. oh brother...