Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government United States Games Politics Your Rights Online

EVE Online CSM and Diplomat Killed in Libyan Consulate Attacks 680

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the small-world dept.
New submitter overmoderated writes first with news of an attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya. From the article: "The U.S. ambassador to Libya and three other embassy staff were killed in a rocket attack on their car, a Libyan official said, as they were rushed from a consular building stormed by militants denouncing a U.S.-made film insulting the Prophet Mohammad." An anonymous reader adds: "Sean Smith, a.k.a. Vile Rat, an EVE Online CSM member, and diplomat for the GoonFleet corporation, was one of the four killed in the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Libya last night. He was 34. A fundraiser is being organized for his children by the Something Awful forums." Update: 09/12 21:28 GMT by U L : Ozma from Something Awful mailed in a link to the memorial thread on the SA forums (including details on the memorial fund).
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EVE Online CSM and Diplomat Killed in Libyan Consulate Attacks

Comments Filter:
  • Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:20PM (#41313915)

    'Nuff said.

    • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by cayenne8 (626475) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:41PM (#41314199) Homepage Journal
      Gotta love those "peace loving muslims" don't you?

      I mean...really? You go apeshit crazy, right and kill people over a fucking film?!?!

      I mean hell...the guys they murdered weren't even involved in the film.....

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Yah, all Muslims were responsible. Just like all people from Colorado were responsible for the Aurora massacre.

        I think this was done by some angry Eve Online players under the guise of a riot.

      • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by allcoolnameswheretak (1102727) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:59PM (#41314533)

        Extremists feed of each other. A jewish extremist makes a film ripping on Muhammad, and islamic extremists go on rampage, thereby proving jewish extremists' point to the world, serving his propaganda purposes.

        Maybe we can found a new country, Extremistan, and put them all there to kill each other while the rest of the world enjoys peace and pluralism.

        • by Minwee (522556) <dcr@neverwhen.org> on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:32PM (#41314991) Homepage

          Maybe we can found a new country, Extremistan, and put them all there to kill each other while the rest of the world enjoys peace and pluralism.

          I think the country you were thinking of was Ethniklashistan [theonion.com].

        • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by jmottram08 (1886654) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:38PM (#41315089)
          Sorry guy, but making a movie and killing an innocent person are two very different forms of "extremism".
        • by Hatta (162192)

          A jewish extremist makes a film ripping on Muhammad

          I haven't seen the film in question, so I have to ask how extreme was it really? I've heard that it portrays Mohammed as a war monger and pedophile, but isn't that historically accurate?

          In any case, no matter how detestable the content of the film, it's just speech. The responsibility for the deaths here lies entirely on the heads of the people who meet speech with violence.

          • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Informative)

            by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @02:55PM (#41316135) Homepage Journal

            it portrays Mohammed as a... pedophile...

            ... and the implication is that makes Mohammed (and apparently, by association, every Muslim who ever has or ever will live) a horrible person not worthy of attention, right? That's funny.

            Why, you may ask? Because it's a silly double standard - for example, it's a well known fact that Edgar Allen Poe, considered one of the greatest poets of all time, married his 13-year-old cousin less than 2 centuries ago, yet nobody calls him a(n inbred) pedophile, nor do they accuse his readership of supporting pedophilia.

            Lewis Carroll wrote "Alice in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass" in order to convince an 11-year-old to let him fuck her, but nobody calls Lewis Carroll a pedophile (well, almost nobody - myself being an obvious exception).

            Shit, a few thousand years ago, the Greeks made a career out of fucking kids, but nobody I've ever met thinks that all Greeks are disgusting perverts.

            But then some non-Muslim makes a movie portraying the Muslim prophet as a filthy child-buggerer, and all of a sudden it's proof positive that every Muslim in the world agrees with pedophilia.

            So, to summarize: Real white people who like to fuck kids == no worries; Possibly imaginary prophet of one of the worlds largest religions is speculated to be a pedo == ALL MUSLIMS MUST DIE IN FIRE!!!

            I guess that's not funny; It's stupid. Really, really stupid.





            Note that this post should not be taken as being supportive of pedophilia; quite the opposite. Rather, it is a condemnation of bullshit double standards and the egocentric asshats who perpetuate them.

            In any case, no matter how detestable the content of the film, it's just speech. The responsibility for the deaths here lies entirely on the heads of the people who meet speech with violence.

            Couldn't agree with you more.

            • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:4, Insightful)

              by Hatta (162192) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @03:40PM (#41316691) Journal

              ... and the implication is that makes Mohammed (and apparently, by association, every Muslim who ever has or ever will live) a horrible person not worthy of attention, right? That's funny.

              It certainly makes him someone we should not look to for moral guidance.

              Edgar Allen Poe, Lewis Carroll

              Both authors, not moral leaders. If you look to the writings of Poe or Carroll for moral guidance you have serious issues.

              Rather, it is a condemnation of bullshit double standards and the egocentric asshats who perpetuate them.

              Why should we not have two standards for two different things? Authors of fiction are not moral leaders.

              • by ifiwereasculptor (1870574) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @03:59PM (#41316909)

                Why should we not have two standards for two different things? Authors of fiction are not moral leaders.

                Ever heard of that Bible thingy?

      • by sl4shd0rk (755837)

        Gotta love those "peace loving muslims" don't you?

        Be careful there. There are plenty of peace loving Muslims who are not batshit crazy. Don't condemn an entire populous because a handful of murders think they are justified through the eyes of their religion. Society gets to be a pretty cold place when you judge the intent of many based on the actions of a few.

        • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Rogerborg (306625) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:23PM (#41314881) Homepage

          There are plenty of peace loving Muslims who are not batshit crazy.

          Apparently not enough to police the crazies though.

          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by GameboyRMH (1153867)

            Just like Christians, can't they keep their Breiviks and McVeighs in line? Must be mostly a bunch of crazies right?

      • by chill (34294)

        Semantics are at the root of many misunderstandings. Just like many fundamentalist Christians don't know the proper definition of "theory" and ignorantly deride evolution as "just a theory", you don't understand the Islam definition of peace.

        It is "the peace of Allah". That is, peace for those who submit to the will of God. For those who don't submit... that's different. If you want "peace", then submit to God's will. The word "Islam" itself translates as "submission" -- as in submission to the will of God.

      • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by NeutronCowboy (896098) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:20PM (#41314831)

        I wonder if you love those "peace loving christians" when they plant bombs and shoot up a summer camp [huffingtonpost.com]. Or do you make really weak generalizations just when it comes to muslims? The reality is that the muslim terrorists are a tiny minority of the billion+ muslims in the world. To label every muslim a terrorist on par with Al-Qaeda merely does three things:
        1) It legitimizes the terrorists as the only real muslims.
        2) It legitimizes and fuels their calls for a culture war by calling for a culture war yourself.
        3) It pisses off every muslim who just wants to get on with their lives, and turns them against you. Which, incidentally, is again what the terrorists are hoping for.

        So congratulations for doing exactly what the muslim terrorists want you to do. What a good little puppet you are.

        • Re:Batshit Crazy! (Score:4, Interesting)

          by darkmeridian (119044) <william@chuang.gmail@com> on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:56PM (#41315331) Homepage

          Al Qaeda is shitting their pants that they are increasingly becoming irrelevant to the modern world. Documents from Osama Bin Laden's compound showed that he was concerned that the Islamic world is starting to reject his group's philosophy. If America went into the ME and started slaughtering more Muslims then this would only validate the hardliner's position.

          What should America do? Speak quietly and politely and fucking kill all the bad guys (and only the bad guys) using drones and whatever other military methods we have at our disposal.

      • Christian did riot and attack people due to the "last temptation of christ" , look back in the news from 88-89. Cocktail molotov were thrown at a cinema in France, and 14 people wounded. Granted it is not as bad as a RPG into a car, but the fact is that there are fundemmentalist everywhere, and in that country a lot ofn military hardware is floating around. I am not excusing the act of those nutcase, but jsut like I did not condemn the WHOLE christianity when tehy killed doctor, shown "god hate fags" sign
    • by poetmatt (793785) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:20PM (#41314841) Journal

      that psycho pastor had involvement in what ended in this situation.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Jones_(pastor) [wikipedia.org]

      In September 2012 it was reported by The Atlantic that Terry Jones was involved in the promotion of a movie vilifying Islam, titled Innocence of Muslims. The movie led to protests in Egypt and Libya. In Cairo, protesters breached the wall of the U.S. Embassy and burned the flag. The U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was largely burnt and looted; killing Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other American citizens.[26] Jones screened the film for his followers on September 11, 2012, a day he dubbed, "International Judge Mohammad Day"

      I hope this guy knows he has blood on his hands now, as batshit crazy as *he* is, he is now partially at fault. I knew he'd do something to incite violence overseas ever since his ridiculous quaran burning.

      • Bullshit! No one has responsibility for this except the religious fanatics that did it and their own leaders. And as long as these radical idiots keep this kind of thing up only more people will be willing to speak out against them.
      • by X0563511 (793323)

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_Jones_(pastor) [wikipedia.org]

        In September 2012 it was reported by The Atlantic that Terry Jones was involved in the promotion of a movie vilifying Islam, titled Innocence of Muslims. The movie led to protests in Egypt and Libya. In Cairo, protesters breached the wall of the U.S. Embassy and burned the flag. The U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, was largely burnt and looted; killing Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other American citizens.[26] Jones screened the film for his followers on September 11, 2012, a day he dubbed, "International Judge Mohammad Day"

        So, in order to protest the film, they all went and proved the film right?

      • by will_die (586523)
        Do you also think that woman that don't wear burqas deserved to be raped?
  • vr (Score:5, Insightful)

    by masternerdguy (2468142) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:22PM (#41313937)
    rip vile rat.
  • by Qubit (100461) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:26PM (#41313983) Homepage Journal

    is here [somethingawful.com].

    (how did story get posted w/o a link?)

  • by Bob9113 (14996) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:55PM (#41314451) Homepage

    Obligatory Streisand Effect link to the video that they are acting against: Innocence of Muslims [youtube.com]

    And, for bonus points, here's an emoticon depiction of The Prophet Mohammed: 0-<-<

    Come get me.

  • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @12:56PM (#41314471) Journal

    First it was Afghanistan. You thought that everyone [photobucket.com] fighting against authoritarian Soviets was automatically pro-democracy and pro-human rights; and what's wrong if they speak of Islam and jihad occasionally? Clearly it's only against the bad guys. And so you gave them money and guns and trained them, and the end result was a country where most schools (build by those very Soviets) were demolished and replaced by madrassas, and secular if authoritarian government replaced by fanatics who were stoning women on football stadiums for adultery after they were raped.

    (Oh, and don't say that you didn't support Taliban. This guy [wikipedia.org] was no better, and most of his troops ended up in Taliban anyway.)

    And what do you get for it in the end? A whole country turned into a giant terrorist training camp that's now working against you, and using those very weapons that you've supplied them to kill your soldiers, and workers that you send to try to rebuild the country. The training camp that produced those people who committed the biggest terrorist act ever in the history of this planet, against the USA.

    Then there was Kosovo. Again, "freedom fighters" against a totalitarian regime and all that. Again, a decade afterwards it's slowly growing to be another place where Wahhabism spreads, only this time in the middle of Europe (and also a major drug transit center to boot, to finance the operation). And, again, the chickens are coming [cnn.com] home [wikipedia.org] to roost [wikipedia.org].

    Now there's Libya. It's only been a year since the downfall of the regime - thanks largely to heavy NATO military backing of the rebel "freedom fighters" - and we've already seen genocide of the black population, widespread persecuting of Christians, and now this act of outright hostility towards USA and the murder of its citizens and representatives. You can go on at length about how the real, democratically elected government of Libya is liberal and all about human rights and such, but what this incident clearly shows is that they're not a government. They're simply not in control of the country. And people that are in control, because they have guns (that you gave them) and troops and determination - people like this [worldcrunch.com] - hate democracy and human rights with a passion, and hate you because you are representative of that. And you can't even say that they haven't warned you [vice.com] if you were only willing to see and listen...

    But, hey, that's still not quite enough jihadis, right? Let's create another breeding ground for them in Syria as well?

    • by NeutronCowboy (896098) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:13PM (#41314733)

      Of course, none of the real-world stuff is as simple as you portray it. Libya started as a very real effort by the general population to overthrow a pretty scummy dictator. There were three options: support the government (thank god we learned our lesson on supporting dictators for some very fuzzy "strategic" goal), do nothing, or support the people fighting the government. We did pretty much the best thing we could have: even the fight by taking out heavy armor and artillery, remove the threat of aerial assault, and let the Libyans sort out the rest. We're seeing the results of the do-nothing approach in Syria: a prolonged war that is getting more violent as time goes on, with more extremist elements joining the fight on both sides.

      Libya is a pip-squeak compared to what we're getting in Syria.

      I hate to break it to you, but sometimes the best we can do results in a situation that is only somewhat of an improvement over a total catastrophe. And yet, it is still better than to just sit on your ass. What is it with people who think that if something's not perfect, nothing should be done?

      • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @01:22PM (#41314861) Journal

        Of course, none of the real-world stuff is as simple as you portray it. Libya started as a very real effort by the general population to overthrow a pretty scummy dictator.

        Not quite. It started as a very real effort by a part of the general population to overthrow a petty scummy dictator ruling in the interests of and supported by the other part of the general population. That's why we eventually called it a civil war, not an uprising.

        But even then, so what? If someone revolts against a dictator, it doesn't mean that they are any better themselves. The problem is that Americans seem to assume that everyone revolting against a dictator is a champion of freedom. In practice, more often than not, they just want a different kind of dictatorship.

        We're seeing the results of the do-nothing approach in Syria: a prolonged war that is getting more violent as time goes on, with more extremist elements joining the fight on both sides.

        There was no such threat in Libya without foreign involvement. To remind you, the loyalist Libyan army has all but steamrolled the rebels by the time NATO intervened. Syria is different because, on one hand, the pro-government side is much more of a minority (it's basically Alawites and some Christians vs the Sunni majority), and, on the other hand, there are already a bunch of states around that are supporting both sides of the conflict - Iran backing Assad, and Arab states backing the rebels. That's what prolongs the conflict.

        I hate to break it to you, but sometimes the best we can do results in a situation that is only somewhat of an improvement over a total catastrophe.

        And, pray tell, in what sense is the situation in Libya "somewhat of an improvement" over what was there under Gaddafi?

        That was the whole point of my post. In none of the cases that I've outlined, the situation is actually better. It is, at best, different, and usually worse, especially when you look at it from western perspective. So why get involved to help one bad guys against other bad guys, and get burned in the process? More importantly, why keep repeating that?

        • I see - the argument is of the type "better the devil we know than the angel we don't". There's some merit to it, but quite frankly, blind application of this leads to.... blindness. As a result, I don't put much faith into that. At some point, you have to do what is right, because the alternative is not doing anything at all - and I quite frankly find that repulsive.

          There was no such threat in Libya without foreign involvement.

          The parallels of the war in Syria are much closer than you think. The rebels were initially getting rolled everywhere as well. At some point,

          • I see - the argument is of the type "better the devil we know than the angel we don't".

            No, the argument is that the one we don't know is the devil also - we know enough to determine that.

            And Ghaddafi relied almost exclusively on support from his tribe and hired goons from Africa to protect his rule.

            Not just on his own tribe. There were a number of tribes aligned with him. Did you miss the part where, after the end of the civil war, rebel militias have evicted citizens of several towns for being "pro-Gaddafi"?

            "Hired goons from Africa" was mostly rebel propaganda they've used to justify their genocide against black Libyans. To date, there has been very scant evidence of those mythical black mercenaries. A

            • by NeutronCowboy (896098) on Wednesday September 12, 2012 @02:19PM (#41315649)

              "Islamic democracies" work quite nicely. Ask Turkey, Malaysia, Indonesia. Those are actually the only Islamic countries I can think of that have an actual functioning democracy. Not sure why you think that they are some backward shithole. Again, the differentiating factor here really seems to be governance, and not religion.

              But that's imperialism, and hence not politically correct. Not to mention, insanely expensive - more so than buying AKs for jihadi "freedom fighters" and dropping an occasional JDAM to support their advance.

              And that's why it's not done anymore - not because it's not PC, but because it's just so fucking expensive and long. Not to mention that it requires an actual exit strategy with a proper handover. In short, every thing the US as a country doesn't want to do anymore. So we have three options: do the right thing and pay for it, do nothing, or do the cheapest thing that still has a positive ROI. And do remember that doing nothing has always costs associated with it as well.

              What exactly was wrong about what I said about Kosovo?

              That it was worse now than what would have happened with non-intervention. I'm fully aware of the sorry state of Kosovo right now - and I'm ecstatic that the entire region isn't like that, which is what would have happened with a full-on war.

              The best thing that could be the outcome of the Libyan civil war as it actually went was Gaddafi staying in power but having to negotiate with other factions, and therefore the regime becoming less oppressive.

              And that would have never happened. That's right up there with Unicorns farting rainbows.

              "Hired goons from Africa" was mostly rebel propaganda they've used to justify their genocide against black Libyans.

              Actually, Ghaddafi did employ hired goons from Africa. The problem was that black Libyans were regularly assumed to be just hired goons. And since there were far more black Libyans than hired goons.... well, you do the math. And yes, persecution of black Libyans is a problem. I'm not arguing that Libya isn't a significant basket case right now. However, it's a better start than we're getting with Syria, and at least there's the opportunity there for something positive to happen. Syria basically is going to be a basket case for the next decades.

nohup rm -fr /&

Working...