The K M Links Game - June 2024 Week 2
Quizzes & Puzzles16 mins ago
Have you seen Fitna?
44 Answers
I have just watched Geert Wilders' film 'Fitna' and wonder what there is about it that has caused our interfering politicians to ban the man from this country.
Factually you cannot fault it. Without comment it gives us verses from the Quran that call for apalling violence against infidels (which is all non-Muslims), then shows hot-headed imams and others using those verses to incite that violence with the atrocious results that we see all too graphically in news film.
It is, of course, very selective and I have no doubt that there are many Muslims who abhor such evil mindlessness as much as any of us do. But the fact that many German people were appalled by the Holocaust does not mean that we should not draw attention to it.
The only contentious item I could see is at the end, when, having shown all the shouted declarations that Islam will take over the whole world by killing all infidels,
Wilders says that since we put down Nazism and Soviet communism, which also had those aims, should we not put down Islamism?
I find it sad that our goverment has ruined our fine reputaton for freedom of speech and of expression just for this.
What do others think? (You can see the film by Googling 'fitma'.)
Factually you cannot fault it. Without comment it gives us verses from the Quran that call for apalling violence against infidels (which is all non-Muslims), then shows hot-headed imams and others using those verses to incite that violence with the atrocious results that we see all too graphically in news film.
It is, of course, very selective and I have no doubt that there are many Muslims who abhor such evil mindlessness as much as any of us do. But the fact that many German people were appalled by the Holocaust does not mean that we should not draw attention to it.
The only contentious item I could see is at the end, when, having shown all the shouted declarations that Islam will take over the whole world by killing all infidels,
Wilders says that since we put down Nazism and Soviet communism, which also had those aims, should we not put down Islamism?
I find it sad that our goverment has ruined our fine reputaton for freedom of speech and of expression just for this.
What do others think? (You can see the film by Googling 'fitma'.)
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by chakka35. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Gromit, thank you for that pearl of wisdom. I'll bear that in mind. In the meantime, perhaps you'll read the Koran.
Octavius, wrong again. Gromit tells me, for example, that Muslims were as horrified by 9/11 as we were, therefore implying that I said every Muslim is influenced by the horrific commands contained within the Koran, rather than just the extremists. Therefore he has misunderstood.
Octavius, wrong again. Gromit tells me, for example, that Muslims were as horrified by 9/11 as we were, therefore implying that I said every Muslim is influenced by the horrific commands contained within the Koran, rather than just the extremists. Therefore he has misunderstood.
-- answer removed --
Mani, a point Gromit and I made previously� there are those amongst us that would take that message and use violence. In the same way many people in the UK would assume that when a Muslim cleric starts hollarin� from the mosque steps, that a handful of the people listening would take it all literally and act violently.
As I said, simple people will view the message simply (no context required) and these numpties will do whatever mindless things they think are righteous because they have been fuelled by the exposure of this film with a sense of purpose.
Similarly, I never really understand why the �videos from the bunker of Osama� or �suicide bombers� are publicly aired. If it is only to show the level of hatred, intolerance and contempt that exists in the minds of various people, then perhaps a similar analogy can be drawn from Fitna or such films.
The films don�t necessarily incite violence, but violence, further hatred and intolerance, is usually the outcome.
As I said, simple people will view the message simply (no context required) and these numpties will do whatever mindless things they think are righteous because they have been fuelled by the exposure of this film with a sense of purpose.
Similarly, I never really understand why the �videos from the bunker of Osama� or �suicide bombers� are publicly aired. If it is only to show the level of hatred, intolerance and contempt that exists in the minds of various people, then perhaps a similar analogy can be drawn from Fitna or such films.
The films don�t necessarily incite violence, but violence, further hatred and intolerance, is usually the outcome.
The problem with curtailing freedom of speech in any area, Mani, is that it can't be coupled with curtailing freedom of thought. We may be able to gag people, and stop them saying what they want to say, but we can't stop them thinking their own thoughts - and nor should we. The only way to deal with a problem is to get it out in the open and allow free discussion. Shoving it under the carpet and pretending it doesn't exist may suffice in the short term, but since the pot is left simmering with the lid on, that doesn't educate people, and therefore it will never facilitate greater understanding.
naomi24
I fear it is you that has missed the point, got the wrong end of the stick or misunderstood.
Fitna attempts to portray all Islam and the Koran as evil. The 'evidence' for this assertion is that some murderous madmen read the Koran and decided it justified their evil deeds. Fitna chooses to believe them because it helps Wilders own agenda to do so. The fact that 1,000billion+ muslims read the Koran and do not get the same message as Bin Laden is conveniently omitted.
You accused me of implying that (you) said every Muslim is influenced by the horrific commands contained within the Koran. I believe Fitna implies this, and In support of Fitna, you wrote...
I don't think there can be any doubt that it's factual. I can't see that any of the quotes have been taken out of context either.
It is wrong to sweep things under the carpet, but it is equally wrong to blow a problem out of all proportion.
I fear it is you that has missed the point, got the wrong end of the stick or misunderstood.
Fitna attempts to portray all Islam and the Koran as evil. The 'evidence' for this assertion is that some murderous madmen read the Koran and decided it justified their evil deeds. Fitna chooses to believe them because it helps Wilders own agenda to do so. The fact that 1,000billion+ muslims read the Koran and do not get the same message as Bin Laden is conveniently omitted.
You accused me of implying that (you) said every Muslim is influenced by the horrific commands contained within the Koran. I believe Fitna implies this, and In support of Fitna, you wrote...
I don't think there can be any doubt that it's factual. I can't see that any of the quotes have been taken out of context either.
It is wrong to sweep things under the carpet, but it is equally wrong to blow a problem out of all proportion.
Oh really? And where did you get that from? I think you've lost the plot somewhere along the line because Chakka's question doesn't relate to the rights and wrongs of this video - it relates to the curtailment of freedom of speech - and I agree with him completely. As he says the video is selective, but we can't deny that these things have happened, the quotes have not been taken out of context, and whilst anyone with any sense will know that all Muslims don't behave in the manner portrayed, we cannot deny that the video is factual.
Got to go out now. Bye.
Got to go out now. Bye.
Phew! Been out of touch for a while so will have to catch up.
naomi has talked nothing but sense here while Gromit and Mani have accused her (and me by association) of claiming all manner of things that we haven't claimed. Octavius is difficult to engage with because he hasn't seen it and 'blah blah' does not relieve him of that obligation. The facts about Fitma are:
1.The quotes from the Quran are certainly the sources of the violence portrayed. Those who scream for that violence do not deny it.
2. All that the film does (apart from its ending) is to draw the parallel between the quotes and the atrocities.
3. At no time does it suggest that all Muslims are murderous lunatics, merely that the acts of violence illustrated were certainly inspired by Quran teaching, and they are bad enough.
4. At the end and contentiously Wilders suggests that we should stop Islam from succeeding in its aim to take over the world just as we did with Nazism and Soviet communism. He certainly does not demand that it be done by violence and, in fact, makes no further suggestion at all.
My main question (as naomi reminded you) was whether we should have stopped him from entering this country.
This was surely an absurd action considering that his film is available for anyone to see!
And, of course, unprincipled, if we are to preserve our reputation for freedom of expression.
Mani, where do you see any signs of violence against Muslims because of this film?
Finally, if we kept him out because of the risk that he might inspire violence, what about all those imams and others who preach violence from pulpits in mosques? Homosexuals should be beheaded, Rushdie should be murdered, and all that. Should we deport them? And I can't imagine how many copies there are of an Old Testament which depicts a God who demands that whole tribes be
naomi has talked nothing but sense here while Gromit and Mani have accused her (and me by association) of claiming all manner of things that we haven't claimed. Octavius is difficult to engage with because he hasn't seen it and 'blah blah' does not relieve him of that obligation. The facts about Fitma are:
1.The quotes from the Quran are certainly the sources of the violence portrayed. Those who scream for that violence do not deny it.
2. All that the film does (apart from its ending) is to draw the parallel between the quotes and the atrocities.
3. At no time does it suggest that all Muslims are murderous lunatics, merely that the acts of violence illustrated were certainly inspired by Quran teaching, and they are bad enough.
4. At the end and contentiously Wilders suggests that we should stop Islam from succeeding in its aim to take over the world just as we did with Nazism and Soviet communism. He certainly does not demand that it be done by violence and, in fact, makes no further suggestion at all.
My main question (as naomi reminded you) was whether we should have stopped him from entering this country.
This was surely an absurd action considering that his film is available for anyone to see!
And, of course, unprincipled, if we are to preserve our reputation for freedom of expression.
Mani, where do you see any signs of violence against Muslims because of this film?
Finally, if we kept him out because of the risk that he might inspire violence, what about all those imams and others who preach violence from pulpits in mosques? Homosexuals should be beheaded, Rushdie should be murdered, and all that. Should we deport them? And I can't imagine how many copies there are of an Old Testament which depicts a God who demands that whole tribes be
chakka35
You appear to be suffering from the same persecution complex as naomi24.
My attacks on Fitna are nothing personal about either of you. I don't care if you think it is good. I think it is rubbish and you asked for our opinions.
I have just read my posts again, and I have not accused you of claiming anything.
For the record, I have been consistantly against banning Wilders in previous threads. I posted this last week.
I have not objection myself to a right wing Dutch MP coming to this country and showing this film to his friends.
...this is the cost we must pay to defend freedom of speech in this country.
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question70 6403.html
You appear to be suffering from the same persecution complex as naomi24.
My attacks on Fitna are nothing personal about either of you. I don't care if you think it is good. I think it is rubbish and you asked for our opinions.
I have just read my posts again, and I have not accused you of claiming anything.
For the record, I have been consistantly against banning Wilders in previous threads. I posted this last week.
I have not objection myself to a right wing Dutch MP coming to this country and showing this film to his friends.
...this is the cost we must pay to defend freedom of speech in this country.
http://www.theanswerbank.co.uk/News/Question70 6403.html
Like Gromit, I have also answered that, yesterday��
�As a general opinion, it would have been far better from him to come and then go, as he did in December and none of us would have been any the wiser. Many in the UK hadn�t even heard of him. All in all, it seems to have worked out quite well for Wilders, his film is probably now the most googled piece of propaganda in the world today.
�As a general opinion, it would have been far better from him to come and then go, as he did in December and none of us would have been any the wiser. Many in the UK hadn�t even heard of him. All in all, it seems to have worked out quite well for Wilders, his film is probably now the most googled piece of propaganda in the world today.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles17 mins ago
Body & Soul17 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles19 mins ago
Crosswords22 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles24 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.