PDA

View Full Version : When Freedom Of Speech Isn't Free At All


Beatriz Fontana
9th Mar 2008, 10:42
I've been following the international story of Geert Wilders (http://news.google.com/?ned=us&ncl=1136811972&hl=en&topic=w) and his film which is, apparently, rather non-flattering towards a religion. The Dutch government has been warned that broadcasting the film would lead to "perilous consequences".

Now, I know quite a lot about media laws in Europe and the UK. And from that, a lot of personal interpretation is employed when the laws are applied. Which means no one quite knows where they stand (and when censoring material, the best way to handle it is to tell the people why they have been censored).

But, as the piece in La Repubblica (http://www.repubblica.it/) put it, "is it possible that we Westerners will have to give in to the threats and ban the film simply because the thesis of the film is not to the taste of ayatollahs, imams and fundamentalists? A film that has yet to be released, that nobody has seen, but that is already endangering the world's security".

So here's the wrap. With freedom comes responsibility. But also tolerance. There are parts of the world where films don't look very favourably towards the "West", but you don't see the riots or threats - and acts - of violence.

I for one am very worried. Censorship is everywhere. We're told we have freedom of expression by our governments, but we don't. And now that an interpretation of a world religion has taken upon itself to threaten "perilous consequences" on a film that they haven't seen (and may not be any good), I fear the spiral backwards into totalitarianism has begun.

Discuss.

Flying Binghi
9th Mar 2008, 10:55
Hmmm... to be a little contrary... How would a movie fare in the US that was critical to the Jewish faith ?

Personaly I think half the mindless violent crap out of Hollywood should be banned.

I am surprised that religious Leaders of ALL faiths arnt up in arms over some of vile garbage put out as 'entertainment'.

Dan D'air
9th Mar 2008, 11:08
I've been following the international story of Geert Wilders (http://news.google.com/?ned=us&ncl=1136811972&hl=en&topic=w) and his film

Personaly I think half the mindless violent crap out of Hollywood should be banned.

FB, He's a Dutch politician and filmmaker. The film was made in Holland. But I agree about Hollywood:ok:

Tigs2
9th Mar 2008, 12:12
Beatriz

Isn't this what happened with Salman Rushdie and 'The Satanic verses'? There were fatwahs issued before anyone had read the book. The Fatwahs continued to be issued months later after the books distribution, by Imams and Ayatollahs who had still never read the book. We are way too tolerant with a faction of a religion that has zero tolerance.Why? Why? and yet again Why?

As an aside I read in the press over here the other day (in the far east) that one of the great bastions of education in the states, namely Harvard, have relented to pressure from Islamic female students, and have closed the gym for 10-12 hours a week so that muslim women only can use the gym and 'feel more comfortable'. The thousands of students who use the gym and are complaining about this situation are being ignored. Its good here, Buddah is a chap who doesn't seem offended by anyone.

Binoculars
9th Mar 2008, 13:26
I have major problems with the apparent consequences of the principle of freedom of religion. The way I understand it is that no group shall be actively discriminated against for their belief in whatever imaginary friend they choose as their own. That much I have absolutely no problem with.

So how far do we extend that, and when does active discrimination start? In the case quoted by Tigs2, (sorry if it's a hijack, Beatriz), it's tempting to say that two hours a day where the gym assigned exclusively to the modesty preservers shouldn't be considered unreasonable or excessive.

But is any amount of time reasonable, and does that time constitute reverse discrimination against those it excludes? This is a centre of higher learning we are discussing, and one with a formidable reputation. (For what, I confess I don't know).

While it's a favourite recourse for certain bigots, there is some validity in asking what sympathy an equivalent request from westerners would receive in an Islamic nation. Let's say for example an hour a day set aside for topless sunbathing around the pool, westerners only. In the unlikely event that the concept would be entertained without jail term being applied, the most reasonable answer expected would be "build your own bloody pool".

Perhaps the same applies here?

Out Of Trim
9th Mar 2008, 13:34
New Film - Is it a cartoon? :}:E

TBirdFrank
9th Mar 2008, 13:54
Pat Condell - never heard of him until a quarter of an hour ago - What a star!!!

http://www.dotsub.com/films/moredemands/index.php?autostart=true&language_setting=en_1618

mutt
9th Mar 2008, 14:52
Let's say for example an hour a day set aside for topless sunbathing around the pool, westerners onlyDon't worry about topless, how about starting with allowing females USE the pool or the gym in any Saudi hotel?

Mutt

brickhistory
9th Mar 2008, 14:52
Hmmm... to be a little contrary... How would a movie fare in the US that was critical to the Jewish faith ?

UFB! You really should think your positions through before engaging the keyboard. As just one example, remember Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" or whatever it was called? A fair number of Jewish groups were bent out of shape before they'd seen it.

But they didn't threaten 'dire consequences,' etc. Truth be told I didn't see it either, but then that's because Mel has a tendency to take himself/his films too seriously.

But one should have the right/ability to make up one's own mind unlike the threats against the Danish film. Seems some Muslim leaders want to make up my mind for me.

Personaly I think half the mindless violent crap out of Hollywood should be banned.

Banned? Is it up to you to decide? If so, when did that decision get made (I know, you are expressing your opinion not stating a fact)?

It would seem that if there wasn't an audience for the 'crap' to which you refer, Hollywood wouldn't make those films. And Hollywood typically makes as much or more outside the US as inside.

I am surprised that religious Leaders of ALL faiths arnt up in arms over some of vile garbage put out as 'entertainment'.

See the first point above - most of them are outraged by Hollywood, but other than protest or boycott, I don't hear many calls for violence.

Hmmm, tell me again why it isn't a genuine conflict between Islam and the non-Muslim world?

Two's in
9th Mar 2008, 15:20
Hmmm... to be a little contrary... How would a movie fare in the US that was critical to the Jewish faith ?

...did you not see Blazing Saddles? As for banning "Hollywood crap" (surely some redundancy in that phrase) cinema attendance is not yet compulsory here, in fact, in most places you have to pay money to see what it is that agitates you so much - bizarre really, almost like free will.

Binoculars
9th Mar 2008, 15:23
Pat Condell - never heard of him until a quarter of an hour ago - What a star!!!

Hear hear!

Should any ideological adversaries wish to jump on me for any perceived backflip in views I suggest you do a search for posts by me in Jet Blast, any date, with the key word Queensberry and see how long I've been saying exactly what this gentleman says about our adherence to political correctness causing us to be seen as soft.

It's time to call a halt, and if those who claim to be peace-loving Muslims who reject the fundamentalists' tactics don't take concrete steps to prove it, they can expect to have an old aphorism applied to them; "if it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...." you know the rest.

bnt
9th Mar 2008, 15:33
Don't worry about topless, how about starting with allowing females USE the pool or the gym in any Saudi hotel?
It's more serious than just recreation. Imagine being an intelligent woman in Saudi: you're barred from "manly" forms of education. One US university is working to set up an Engineering school in Saudi, knowing full well that women will not be allowed to take some courses: story (http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_8479451).

By those standards Iran look positively liberal: more female than male students, and co-educational. (Currently, but there are rumblings & attempts to set quotas on e.g. medical education.) Heck, one of Iran's top racing drivers is female, while women are not allowed to drive in Saudi. :hmm:

weido_salt
9th Mar 2008, 15:59
There is not and never has been free speech.

For example, try making a documentary or film, probing the inner workings of secret societies, that are in our midst and see how far you get.

Tigs2
9th Mar 2008, 16:28
Binos

So how far do we extend that, and when does active discrimination start? In the case quoted by Tigs2, (sorry if it's a hijack, Beatriz), it's tempting to say that two hours a day where the gym assigned exclusively to the modesty preservers shouldn't be considered unreasonable or excessive.

I do not think that the Muslim female population at Harvard accounts for 20-25% of the student population, therefore it does seem a little excessive in my books. The times they allocate are 8am-10am and 3pm-5pm, during which no male members of gym staff may be present (apart from any male student) as it quoteoffends their sense of modesty to exercise in front of the opposite sex.

Further quote
The policy is already unpopular with many on campus, including some women who consider it sexist.

We hear it time and time again on this forum 'when in Rome.....blah blah blah'. Why do these people choose to study in the US?, and if they do....!
The students fit their gym sessions around their classes, now they have limitations. I cannot believe that a US university has allowed this to occur. I can only imagine that the said females that complained are members of the Saudi Royal Family or members of The Royal families from UAE, Oman, Qatar etc, who else could afford it, and who else would the university take notice of?

Dan D'air
9th Mar 2008, 16:41
Tigs2,

:D:D:D Well said that man!!

Ozzy
9th Mar 2008, 16:46
I am a huge Pat Condell fan. All you can eat here (http://uk.youtube.com/user/patcondell).

Ozzy:D:D:D:D:D

Capt.KAOS
9th Mar 2008, 18:03
Discuss.Unfortunately Mr.Wilders himself categorically refuses to discuss his extreme viewpoints with Muslims, be it fundementalists or more free thinking Muslims or anyone else as a matter of fact. He drops his soundbites and disappears.

Dushan
9th Mar 2008, 19:17
We (the ones who are not offended by movies, or speech, or cartoons) are guilty of allowing this to happen. The likes of the "liberal" universities like Harvard who support carp (sic) like the "segregated swimming" are complicit in promoting "the agenda".

There are many Christians offended by movies - no riots. There are many Jews offended by movies - no riots. There are many Muslims who are NOT offended by free speech about Islam, even if it is derogatory. So why are we allowing this to happen? Because we don't have the collective ba11s to say "Build your own bloody pool!", and arrest, prosecute, and punish anyone who riots if they don't like it.

Capt.KAOS
9th Mar 2008, 20:39
I am a huge Pat Condell fan. All you can eat here (http://uk.youtube.com/user/patcondell). Interesting to see how some atheists are more fanatic to convince other people about them being right than many religious people. All Muslims beat their wife and Jews eat baby's...

BlueWolf
9th Mar 2008, 20:46
For example, try making a documentary or film, probing the inner workings of secret societies, that are in our midst and see how far you get.

What about the REEELLY secret ones, that no-one knows about? :suspect:

Solid Rust Twotter
9th Mar 2008, 20:49
Like the Duton Hill Badger Fondlers.


Oops, black Omega just pulled up outside.....:uhoh:

G-CPTN
9th Mar 2008, 21:26
http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z263/randomxnp/avatar_2897.gif

Solid Rust Twotter
9th Mar 2008, 21:33
Now THAT'S some really original sin...:}

Flying Binghi
9th Mar 2008, 22:16
Hmmm... Brickhistory, would you allow then films to be made that depicted adults having sex with very young children ?...
I would'nt think so.

Just as in real life there are restrictions on people, ie you can not kill as you please, I think there is a place for simular restrictions in the movies.

brickhistory
9th Mar 2008, 22:34
you can not kill as you please

You must have missed that I'm American..................












It's a joke.................

tony draper
9th Mar 2008, 22:41
I think what would be great would be a movie about islam in the manner of Life of Brian.
:E

Dushan
9th Mar 2008, 22:50
Life of Ma... er, never mind, I don't need a fatwa on me, the mods are enough.


Joking....

G-CPTN
10th Mar 2008, 00:30
Life of Ma...
Mahatma Koat.

modtinbasher
10th Mar 2008, 11:43
Well, funny old thread this, harks me back to the time a few months ago when I got myself a weeks ban here for daring to complain that a fellow Ppruner had called my monarch 'the lady with the big nose.'

Unfortunately, in my response, I theorised that if a similar suggestion had been made at a member of a certain minority (only of 2.8% according to the Office of National Statistics) then a fatwa would no doubt have been ordered!

Result? I'm accused of the horrendous crime of insulting Islam and my posting rights taken away. So it taught me a lesson and now I keep my thoughts to myself, well, mostly, unless I just can't resist! But why on earth should one have to?

"Freedom of speech?" About as laughable as saying that a 'particular religion' is a "religion of love!"

MTB

Load Toad
10th Mar 2008, 13:06
Seems to me very simple; everyone is being intolerant. Whatever people believe in - either keep it to yourself or listen to others beliefs and consider modifying your behaviour. I note that mostly it is when things become 'organised' the real grief breaks out. You don't like undressing in front of jewish men - don't. You don't like being in a gym with girls - don't go in the gym with girls. You don't have any right to have more rights than everyone else - no one. If it works for the majority FIFO rules apply or ask for a privilege to be granted that is as mutually agreeable as is practical.
Don't agree with the catholic faith and want to make a filum chastising it - OK - just don't expect it to be well received by catholics; be prepared to defend your views to catholics - catholics - be prepared to accept critisism with humour - or ignore it. And so on. Don't like any religion myself - I think it's sad and for the feeble minded and just plain stupid. But it seems to help some people much like a nice cup of tea and a cigarette helps me. Whatever.

Juud
10th Mar 2008, 13:40
I fear the spiral backward into totalitarianism has begun.


Far be it from me to stand in the way of a Righteous Rant, but ...

There is a Dutch law (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/11/18/wblas18.xml) from 1932, which explicitly forbids religious defamation. It's there, on the books. The UN also adopted a similar resolution recently BTW.
In Holland, you can not legally defame a religion.

So there we have it. Wilders, a virulent racist who as KAOS says refuses to talk to Muslims and who stirs up hatred at every opportunity, holds the country ransom with his promised movie Fitna. A movie which will hurt the country's internal communal relations, which will hurt our foreign trade and which makes me fear for the safety of myself and fellow crew members as visible overseas representatives for our country.
We have a law to put a stop to this.

But since we live in modern times, our PM does not wish to invoke this law before the movie has even been released. How could he?
He has not stopped the movie.
He has instead done many other things. He has put our embassies on a higher alert. He has asked security services to liaise more closely with overseas businesses and with the national airline. He has held talks with leaders of the Muslim community to explain that while the principles of freedom of speech Will allow this movie to be aired initially, that does not mean the country, the people or the government are behind its content.
He has reached out to Muslim countries via our ambassadors to assure them that the Dutch dedication to free speech does not equal an institutionalized contempt for Islam.
In short, our Harry Potter (http://www.digischool.nl/kleioscoop/balkenende.jpg) PM has done all that is within his power to protect both the freedom of speech in the country and limit possible damaging consequences of Wilders' (http://www.planet.nl/upload_mm/b/c/f/wilders-31002.onlineBild.jpg) movie.

I have never been a great admirer of our PM, but his handling of this case so far has increased my respect for him enormously.


All of you who wish to Rant Righteously because it makes you feel so good and virtuous, please carry on and don't let the facts stand in your way for even a second. :ok:

edusaeanna
10th Mar 2008, 13:48
Pat Condell - never heard of him until a quarter of an hour ago - What a star!!!

Oh, no no no! That man demonstrates as much a lack of empathy and understanding as your effigy-wielding extremists. Talk about from one extreme to the other
He strikes me one of those people who will make sniping put downs while feeling utterly superior, when in reality he's just highlighting his own ignorance.
Sorry, but that man needs a bloody good slap.

Capt.KAOS
10th Mar 2008, 14:17
Well said Juud :D:ok:

Freedom of Speech has been abused already too many times. In fact I'm pretty sure Osama is laughing his @ss of in his cave about provocateur Wilders who is giving him plenty of recruitment time :hmm:

Then again; Wilders, the Holy Ayaan, Condell prove that extreme Islamphobia is paying off nowadays.

Binoculars
10th Mar 2008, 15:03
I can only hope that based on my posting history here I'm not perceived as an extreme Islamophobe, or indeed an extreme anything.

And before I posted yesterday I had never heard of Pat Condell. He may well prove to be a bigot of the worst kind if I were to research further, but my opinion was in response to the link posted, and I'm sorry, but I didn't see Islamophobia there.

What was there in large quantities was frustration at our apparent willingness to bend over backwards, finally to our own detriment, to avoid any appearance of being anti-anything-to-do -with-Islam. As he pointed out somewhere in the middle of the clip, (and I'm sorry but I'm not going back to look for the exact quote) they are laughing at us for being soft. And I agree with him.

Like many others I know whose views I respect, I am getting tired of having our values spat on by people who choose to live here.

That is not anti-religion, it is most certainly not a bigoted call for all Muslims to bugger off. It is rather the culmination of several years waiting for the huge proportion of supposedly normal peace-loving Muslims who abhor violence as something rejected by Allah, Muslims living peacefully in our society, playing footie, going to barbecues blah blah blah, to denounce utterly and absolutely their fundamentalist compatriots and their "jihad" which has no place in a society which could equally accurately be defined as either Judaeo-Christian or secular.

And with few exceptions it just ain't happening.

If anybody chooses to label me as racist or a religious bigot, I can live with that; I'll just add it to the labels people have put on me over the years.

Curious Pax
10th Mar 2008, 15:49
Just ain't happening Binos, or just ain't being reported? Have you been out protesting in public? I suspect not, although you could argue that the onus isn't on you. Probably true, but they have to continue to live in their communities, and like most people just want a quiet life.

Given that so many of these things such as you describe tend to be as a result of white middle classers who think they are being PC, I sometimes wonder if it isn't all one big conspiracy!

For (a fictional) example, some functionary in Birmingham City Council decides that with a significant non-Christian population, Christmas lights should in future be banned so as to avoid offence. Daily Mail (for it is they!!) pick up on this and run many articles foaming at the mouth about it all. Result, many of the 'native' population who weren't already grumbling about Muslims are now. Subtle manipulation of the public by someone up to no good, or some do-gooder who hasn't thought things through? Who knows, but the effect is the same.

What I do know is that it is unusual in these examples for the original complainant to be one of the allegedly affected group.

Ozzy
10th Mar 2008, 16:02
Capt. KAOSAll Muslims beat their wife and Jews eat baby's... Blimey, who said that?

Pat Condell is a star who can eloquently point out what is wrong with how our society is being denigrated by appeasing the minority.

Ozzy

BOFH
10th Mar 2008, 18:33
There is a Dutch law from 1932, which explicitly forbids religious defamation.

That worked really well here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/news/2008/03/10/db1001.xml

BOFH

West Coast
10th Mar 2008, 18:57
How would a movie fare in the US that was critical to the Jewish faith ?


All the good ones have been nabbed by US posters. But to continue Flying Binghi's awakening. There's even Comedies that lampoon the Jews.

How 'bout the running of the Jews in Borat. Best part being the star is a Jew.

tony draper
10th Mar 2008, 19:26
From what I have seen the Jews are second only to the English in taking the piss out of themselves and each other.

S'land
10th Mar 2008, 20:20
Agreed Mr D. All of the best Jewish jokes I have heard came from Jewish friends. The same can be said of the Irish, they tell the best Irish jokes.

edusaeanna
10th Mar 2008, 20:26
From what I have seen the Jews are second only to the English in taking the piss out of themselves and each other.

Ahh, you haven't met my friend from Saudi. A devout muslim who went to a Halloween fancy dress party as a terrorist. His comment when getting his kilt altered for the ball the other day was, 'I wanted to look Scottish but realised I would have to contact Michael Jackson's plastic surgeon for that'.
I would love for Pat Condell to meet him, he'd learn a lot.

matt_hooks
10th Mar 2008, 20:28
No, I don't think he WOULd learn a lot, because judging from some of his vitriolic videos he's made his mind up, and has no intention of changing it no matter WHAT the evidence presented is!

Flying Binghi
16th Mar 2008, 11:37
Dutch right-wing MP, Geert Wilders, is still insisting to air his 15-minute movie "Fitna" (meaning strife and discord), before the end of this month, in Amsterdam and other Dutch cities, in preparation for its showing in all other European countries.
The movie deals with Muslims' reality with contempt and derision and depicts the Koran as a source of inspiration for terrorists, and calls Prophet Muhammad names.

full article at -

http://english.alarabonline.org/display.asp?fname=2008%5C03%5C03-16%5Czopinionz%5C960.htm&dismode=x&ts=16/03/2008%2010:17:34%20%C3%95

308Win
16th Mar 2008, 13:09
Not sure what you would call a man who used to raid camel trains before his ideology caught on or who married a six year old girl when he was 51 (at least he had the decency to wait until she was 9 before consumating the marriage). Any ideas?

Censorship is everywhere - the Ethnic Monitoring Committee produced a report a year or so ago about the rise of anti semitic acts and the conclusion drawn at the end of the report was that neo nazis were at fault (despite the evidence inside the report pointing towards the ever exapnding muslim ghetto communities). Take for example the government stand that sex education needs to be taught to children at an earlier age and free condoms distributed at school since that is the main source of new HIV infections in the UK (whereas you ask GPs they will tell you the vast majority of new HIV cases are african immigrants).

To not confront the truth and act accordingly is treason of the highest order by our lords and masters. Reason, facts and logic have given way to political corectness, pandering to so called "victim groups" and the gambling with the countries future health, wealth and societal cohesion.

Tigs2
16th Mar 2008, 13:25
308win

good post:ok:

Beatriz Fontana
16th Mar 2008, 13:28
308Win,

Thoroughly brilliant posting. :D

tony draper
16th Mar 2008, 13:37
Amen 308:D:D

stevef
16th Mar 2008, 15:26
Free speech is one thing but deliberately antagonising the radical Muslims is another. It's a perfect excuse for rabble-rousing rhetoric to be delivered to ignorant (I mean this as those living in countries without balanced media reporting) adherents and no doubt innocent Dutch expats are going to feel the brunt - and possibly the sharp edge of a sword - over this. Wilders is going to have blood on his hands.
Having said that, if non-indigenous citizens don't agree with their host country's general philosophy, then they should go back to the land of their racial origin. Of course, they'll miss all the benefits of living in a civilized nation, such as running water, health care, social security and open media access.

308Win
16th Mar 2008, 15:50
Censorship could be considered letting sleeping dogs lie (and I do see the irony) but there is are wider concepts that need considering here - that of the wider Umma and that which I find most distasteful - the concept of dhimmitude - the reduction of all other non-believers to a much lower social status. Let us not even consider the concepts of dar al islam (world of peace) and dar al harb (world of war). Does that not speak volumes for the quranic teachings of a pluralistic, liberal, democratic society?

It was Winston Churchill who once said "Appeasers are those who feed the crocodile in the hope it will eat them last". Perhaps there are parallels to be drawn with current attitudes to Islam?

Flying Binghi
17th Mar 2008, 14:32
Entertainment entrepreneur Harry de Winter has taken out a page-wide advert on the front page of Monday’s Volkskrant newspaper accusing MP Geert Wilders of racism.

‘If Wilders said the same about Jews and the Old Testament as he does about Muslims (and the Koran) he would have been long picked up and sentenced for anti-semitism,’ the advert reads.

Wilders, founder of the anti-immigration PVV party, has said repeatedly that Muslims are backward and that the Koran is a fascist book which incites violence and murder.

More at -

http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2008/03/wilders_antiislam_akin_to_anti.php

Stratofreighter
27th Mar 2008, 21:53
Well, Geert Wilders' film "Fitna" has proved to be "all talk" and "no show"...
:zzz: ...

See BBC's http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7317506.stm .

If you have 16 minutes to spare and REALLY nothing better to do, then click at
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d9_1206624103 ...
I've seen worse on Youtube. No new footage, no new insights...

The Danish cartoons were probably more offending. Holland can go to sleep again...

308Win
28th Mar 2008, 07:44
The fact that the film "may" not contain any new information, or blatantly inflammatory images, we are forgetting that we are looking at it from (hopefully) a pragmatic standpoint, able to balance both sides of an argument equally and come up with a measured and (hopefully) logical conclusion.

Unfortunately, many in the Islamic community do not need to have seen or read something to consider it insulting. As long as someone, be it the local Imam or Ali down the local tea house, finds it insulting and starts putting the word around, then that is sufficient. The majority of the Danish cartoons were printed months before the violence erupted, it was only when they were all reprinted together that people took notice and even then, orchestration of the masses was required.

As long as someone "thinks" it is insulting is enough to justify wholesale violence and calls for murder and retribution which will not be prosecuted due to the PC attitude that pervades throughout the governement and civic establishment that muslims are all "victims". Add to this the huge insult suffered in the late 1500s when after 800 years of ascendance and colonialism that pushed into the heart of europe, muslims were finally forcibly removed from europe and then lost the majority of their colonised lands which they still feel deeply about. Ask any Egyptian/Syrian/Jordanian about getting their asses handed to them on a plate by the Israelis and you will not be a welcome house guest!

Anyone who knows the arabs will know that to make them lose face, especially in public, is the highest insult - even if they are wrong and badly informed. Therefore to publicly question the supremacy of their religion (and they do believe it is supreme - the Quran is after all the LAST word of god on earth passd down by the LAST prophet), means Islam must be avenged.

We westerners will never fully understand the workings (or possible lack of) the Islamic/Islamist/Fundamental mind. But to venerate their religion and subjugate our own due to their percieved "victim" status is rampant idiocy and seen by muslims as a sign of weakness which they will make the most of (witness Islamophobia legislation etc etc).

Lets face it - Islam is a way of running your life, your whole life, and closes out the enquiring mind. If anyone can come up with any major social or scientific leaps forward generated by muslim nations since 700AD I would be impressed.

Try reading "The Clash of Civilisations and the Remaking of the World Order" by Samuel Huntington covers the issues raised by the shifting balance of world power. His conclusions on the Islamic future and conflicts makes interesting reading.

Many would state that they don't have a problem with Islam or Muslims as it is a "religion of peace". 1400 years of history would beg to differ.... As Ayatollah Khomeini once said "Islam has always been spread by the sword".

frostbite
28th Mar 2008, 13:10
Is there such a thing as a 'religion of peace'?

They all seem to be up to their necks in war and/or general aggravation, which is one of the reasons why I have avoided the lot for most of my life.

'Chuffer' Dandridge
28th Mar 2008, 14:21
How would a movie fare in the US that was critical to the Jewish faith ?

You've never seen a Mel Brooks Film then?

Blazing Saddles (Made in Pre-PC days) attacks just about everyone, including the various skin colours..... AND they get to say the 'N' word without worrying too much, all in the name of comedy. These religious loonies ought to lighten up a bit.

A similar film to "the Life of Brian" but featuring Islam? Fantastic, bring it on.......... Who's got the balls to do it?

In fact, why not a film which takes the pi$$ out of all religions (therefore an even balance to avoid arguments about which one was the best) to show what a waste of time it all is....:E

308Win
28th Mar 2008, 15:31
An interesting proposition, although I could see cinemas in ruins, pitched battles of shemargh wearing fanatics versus police... Sad really.

Frostbite - in some respects I completely agree. Although Buddhism strikes me as a peaceful way to live your life (not technically a religion, but a search for enlightenment - a worthwhile venture). It is worthy of note that the muslims have managed to p£$$ the Buddhists off so much in southern Thailand that violence has sparked between them.. Funny that isn't it...

Stratofreighter
28th Mar 2008, 20:54
Ahem...

See http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7d9_1206624103 again...

Yes, the movie has been pulled because of threats received! British media is also being blamed in the statement by Liveleak... :eek:

G-AWZK
28th Mar 2008, 23:04
I have just wasted 15 minutes of my life watching that piece of crap made by that other piece of crap Geert Wilders.

There was only one purpose to that film and it has failed. Wilders must be so p!ssed off that there are no riots in the streets tonight. Wilders is just aching for one of the islamic idiots to do or say something against him or this miserable piece of rubbish he spliced together, just so he can point his cowardly finger at all of islam and show how terrible muslims are.

Geert Wilders is an oxygen thief and a criminal waste of DNA.

Peace and love from a White Anglo Saxon Protestant who has lived in Holland.

Flying Binghi
28th Mar 2008, 23:06
The Danish cartoonist whose caricature of the Prophet Mohammed outraged Muslims said he would press copyright charges against a far-right Dutch MP for reproducing it in his controversial anti-Islam video.

More at -

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/28/2202374.htm?section=justin

bnt
28th Mar 2008, 23:34
New Film - Is it a cartoon? :}:E

It opens with one of those cartoons on the screen. As mentioned, the whole 17-minute film is up on LiveLeak now. I haven't watched it all, just the opening, because I read elsewhere that it contains some scenes of atrocities that I really don't need to see footage of. I got the message long ago. :ouch:

green granite
23rd Jun 2011, 15:34
The boundaries of free speech in Europe widened Thursday after a Dutch court acquitted politician Geert Wilders of inciting hatred against Muslims when he compared Islam with Naziism and called for a ban on the Quran.


Dutch anti-Islam lawmaker acquitted of hate speech - Yahoo! News (http://beta.news.yahoo.com/dutch-anti-islam-lawmaker-acquitted-hate-speech-141850197.html)

Capetonian
23rd Jun 2011, 15:39
Good. I believe in free speech, but then the speaker must be prepared to accept the conseuquences of expressing his views publicly.