Merged: How an unseen film triggered a panic throughout the West

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...542255,00.html

All this leaves Wilders is the Internet -- unless, of course, he decides not to show the film, which no one has seen and of which no one can say whether it even exists. The truth is that the "provocateur" has already achieved his goal. Wilders has managed to portray the Dutch and the Europeans as cowards, shouting "we capitulate!" before the battle has even begun.

As he sees it, they are loath to intervene in Iran's internal affairs but raise no objections when Iran intervenes in their internal affairs. They behave as if they want to protect the members of all religions against insults and abuse, all the while overlooking the fact that it is usually the members of one religion who respond aggressively whenever they are accused of having a propensity for violence.

Wilders could not have achieved more if his film had been shown.

[mrbeast]

It seems to me that Wilders film is nothing more than a ploy by him to incite Muslim extremists to commit violence. This would no doubt increase support for his hardline policies concerning imigrants. I don't really see much merit in his film take this as an example:

According to Wilders, it would be shown on a split screen, with verses and suras from the Koran on one side and examples of Sharia law being carried out on the other, including a beheading and a stoning.

What important point is this going to make? Other than being calculated to cause maximum offense.

This whole situation is very tricky and appears to have many of the hall marks of a no win scenario. Ban the film and then be accused of appeasing Muslim extremists. let the film be released and no doubt there will be riots and killings, maybe not in the Netherlands, but elsewhere.

IMO I think in this case the prevention of extreme violence might trump the freedom of Wilders to make his opinions of Islam public. That is a terrible situation to be in as I firmly believe in freedom of speech, but we need to remember where all the deaths occur when something like this blows up and its not Europe. It would seem unfair that people in third world countries should end up paying for our freedom of speech with thier lives.

I'm in no way giving licence to Muslim extremists, I have nothing but contempt for their twisted creedo and ultra aggresive response to any percieved slight against Islam. Extremists only make up a small minority of Muslims but they have a very loud voice which too often drowns out the more 'moderate' voices. The progressive strand of Islam needs to make its voice heard above the fundamentalist loonies, until then we will see this type of situation time and time again.

It seems intersting that Wilders wants the Koran and Mein Kampf banning, so he seems in favour of some censorship when it suits his purposes.

[Yahoshua]

Would you still object if it were a split-screen film showing text of chinese domestic policy on one side and then showing their abuses in Tibet and against their citizens on the other?

Saudi Arabia still has stonings and beheadings (it's literally a weekly rally after mid-day prayers every friday), but ignoring them doesn't change the fact that they still happen. So why should the muslims be so offended about something they already condone?

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by mrbeast

What important point is this going to make? Other than being calculated to cause maximum offense.

If you cannot see that, nobody can help you. One could also stop showing documentations about the atrocities commited by the Nazi and inside KZs.

What such docus and Wilder's scene have in common: you have an ideology quoted by it's content, and the display of results that it triggers in hard reality.

That is the important point such displaying are going to make. Judge a tradition by its outcomes, not by what it claims it wants to be seen as.

And as Broder at the end says anyway: important is the kind of behavior Wilder was able to trigger by simple procclaiming to show that movie - that so far nobody has ever seen, and can comment on. muslim world already is in arms again, and Western dhimmis already bend over again in rushing ahead obedience.

If the movie does not even exist: a perfect and highly educational stunt by the man! He rose a mirror and showed us our real face.

Note that I do not further comment on the man, I do not know much about him, and don't care, and in no way I say that I agree or disagree with his other political activities. That some see him as controversial does not mean anything to me.

[Happy Times]

New 'Bin Laden tape' threatens EU

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7306002.stm

[Fish]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

New 'Bin Laden tape' threatens EU

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7306002.stm

Nothing about the film, so it's probable not a recent recording.

[SUBMAN1]

Finially - someone is trying to make a film about how things really are.

Reality sucks since the Governments are trying to make you believe you live in fantasy land.

Good for him! I want to watch it.

-S

PS. They better not censor it!

[mrbeast]

Originally Posted by Yahoshua

Would you still object if it were a split-screen film showing text of chinese domestic policy on one side and then showing their abuses in Tibet and against their citizens on the other?

No I wouldn't object to that because what Wilder is proposing to do and your hypothetical film are not the same. Wilders film is generally about Islam. Islam is not a nation or a government.

If your hypothetical film was gennerally about Chinese people and purported to represent what Chinese people believed in or supported; then showed images of the Chinese government commiting atrocities, with the association being that Chinese people advocated such behavior then it might compare.

Of course this assumes that thats what Wilders film will do. That is what I fear it may do.

Saudi Arabia still has stonings and beheadings (it's literally a weekly rally after mid-day prayers every friday), but ignoring them doesn't change the fact that they still happen.

If someone made a film about specifically Saudi Arabia I would have no objection, considering that it was no done in a deliberately inflamatory manner. I have already seen documentaries that show what happens in Saudi Arabia and it is an abomination.

So why should the muslims be so offended about something they already condone?

Here you assume that all Muslims advocate or condone public floggings, forced amputations and public beheadings. But this is nt the case. Its this lumping together of all muslims that is unhelpful and simplistic.

Originally Posted by Skybird

If you cannot see that, nobody can help you. One could also stop showing documentations about the atrocities commited by the Nazi and inside KZs.

What such docus and Wilder's scene have in common: you have an ideology quoted by it's content, and the display of results that it triggers in hard reality.

My fear is that Wilders film will not inform people but simply pander to exsisting prejudice and stereotypes of Muslims, simply stressing the negative aspects of Islam above all else. Nazism ideologically, culturally politically had absolutely no redeaming features. Nazism is to all intents and purposes a 'dead' ideology and those who still cling to aspects of it are tiny in number and unlikely to cause many deaths.

My objection is that Wilders film may be inflamatory and pander to streotypes, be designed purely to get a reaction adding nothing constructive to the discourse on Islam in the modern world and will cause the deaths of innocent people, and as I previously posted those deaths will more than likely be in poor Muslim countries where the populace already have to endure meadievilist societies. I find that objectional when this film is simply to serve Wilders populist political agenda.

By painting all Muslims as extremists you simply alienate the moderates and feed the fundamentalists more ammunition.

And as Broder at the end says anyway: important is the kind of behavior Wilder was able to trigger by simple procclaiming to show that movie - that so far nobody has ever seen, and can comment on. muslim world already is in arms again, and Western dhimmis already bend over again in rushing ahead obedience

The response, when this film has been reportedly grandstanded by Wilder in the manner it has, is predictable. Authorities who seem to be dancing to the extremists tune may simply be trying to keep control of the situation.

If you look in the Old Testement of the Bible it has many references to Genocide and other objectional acts, yet no one proposes making a film to point out this. Imagine what the reaction would be from Jewish groups if we showed just how fascist, elitist, genocidal, incestuous, sexist and racist it really is.

My personal view is that, generally, Abrahamic religion is a curse on mankind and has poisoned the world for over 2000 years. Thats not to say that I hold any animosity to Jews, Christians or Muslims, but all three religions in my view cause no end of suffering. I would say that it has caused more deaths than all the other religions of the world combined.

But I feel this film will only serve to pour more petrol on what is already an inferno.

Freedom of speech is a precious gift but I think we still have to use our heads before we open our mouths.

Ultimately this could all be moot: there may not be any film to show.

[Letum]

HA!
He wants free speech and he wants to band the Koran in the Netherlands.

He is unjustly and irrationally prejudice in the extreme and it is his ilk that are in part the
cause of them problems he complains about.

He paints many, many, many good, honest moral men with the same hateful brush.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

That Wilders guy claims to be "anti Koran" so finally that film will most probably put all the Muslims in the same bag. If he was only anti religious I wouldn't mind, but actually he states that the Koran is a fascist book and at the same time he's fond of Israel so I guess he has nothing against the old testament. That man is a joke.

Isn't the Koran a facists book? ANd whats wrong with Isreal?

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Letum

HA!
He wants free speech and he wants to band the Koran in the Netherlands.

He is unjustly and irrationally prejudice in the extreme and it is his ilk that are in part the
cause of them problems he complains about.

He paints many, many, many good, honest moral men with the same hateful brush.

Hahahahaha! That is funny! :p

Islam is only going to roll over you if you think that way. The other way, you put it back in its place - and that place is out of peoples lives. The only way to do that is to speak the truth, not sugar coat everything you run across.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Wilders is anti Koran but is fond of Israel, it's rather odd don't you think ?

No. Whats wrong with Isreal?

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

Israel is a Jewish state, so it's tied to the old testament. The old testament is as bad as the Koran if you take the text literally. Yet Wilders says the Koran is fascist but he's fond of Israel. So I think that this guy isn't really anti Koran, he's just anti Arabs.

I bet that has nothing to do with it. Last I checked, Isreal isn't in your face and blowing up your buildings. I think this is simply just anti whiny babies who like to kill people when they don't get there way. That is what it looks like.

-S

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Mikhayl

I wish you were right, but Wilders claimed himself to be anti-Koran. If he can't stand that book he shouldn't stand the old testament as well. Yet he doesn't bash the old testament nor does he say that all Jews are the same as orthodox Jews. That's quite double standard. Saying to moderate people that they're fascist isn't the best way to get rid of radicals I'm affraid.

I don't see it that way. I can see his need to say the Koran is facists simply because it is purported to be the word of God himself and not questioned, which leaves it mandatory that all Muslims take over the world. They have no choice in the matter. THe Old Testement doesn't call for this, and is actually superseeded by the New Testement if you are a Christian.

And these are not moderate people.

-S

[Happy Times]

Islam is to the believers a one nation, i treat it like that. Funny how the lefties defend islam to the end, when it is the number one threat to everything they believe in.:rotfl: