|
|
AMSTERDAM (Reuters) – A politician making an anti-Koran film that has stirred Muslim outrage, brought him death threats and alarmed the Dutch government said on Wednesday the movie would be finished this week.
Geert Wilders has given few details about the content of his film “Fitna”, other than saying that in it he intends to present his views about the Koran. In the past he has called for the Koran to be banned and likened it to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.
He said talks with Dutch broadcasters would begin next week over the screening of “Fitna”, an Arabic term used in the Koran and sometimes translated as “strife”. At the same time as the film is televised it will also be made available on a special internet site www.fitnathemovie.com, intended to skirt any restrictions on access.
“It is very good news. The film will definitely be finished this week, that is to say before March 1,” Wilders told Reuters. The project has sparked street protests as far afield as Indonesia. Turkey has voiced concern about the film, and the Iranian government called it a “provocative and Satanic” act. Several films purporting to be Wilders’ 15-minute film have appeared on the YouTube Web site. Access to the site was disrupted around the world last weekend after Pakistani Internet service providers tried to prevent local users from seeing them. Wilders defended his film: “I am not endangering anybody or stirring trouble. I am a democratically elected parliamentarian who is exercising his right to free speech.”
This will just get ugly……time will tell.
#32–OFTLO==you are making a key argumentative fallacy==arguing one absolute extreme off its opposite. Are all Muslims extremists?—No. Is anyone making that express argument?–No. So, speaking of shitting all over the internet, even if one was making that extreme argument, only a shitter would be serious about countering it.
No, the “relevant” argument is that we all know people will herd like sheep when it comes to politics/religion/national and ethnic pride.
Were/are the German people “bad” in the way some are concerned the the Muslims are?—Actually, yes. Not inherently bad, not absolutely bad==just had in that those majority folks willing to sit on the fence or stay quiet while their leaders take them into genocidal war REMAIN QUIET and would rather provide cannon fodder than take action against their own society.
GOUSA has more of a cultural value of individualism but it too is under attack by these conformity to your own worst instincts that we see in play today.
Use your own individuality for something more than striking down straw men and deal with the reality that is goose stepping in your direction.
#32
Iranians have the gov’t they will tolerate. We aren’t part of the UK anymore because at that time ,we wouldn’t tolerate it. My example stands as proof. Same as Nazi Germany.
That the US isn’t like Iran is because of the collective will of the citizens. And yes I know Iran isn’t arab. Never said it was. It’s part of the ME.
You can make excuses all day for the pervasive tolerance of insane behavior in that part of the world but, it doesn’t change plainly observable facts.
Patrick and Bobbo, apparently you missed my point. I’m not arguing for or against Islam, or defending or rejecting.
The point of my comments is that Wilders is apparently a political opportunist taking advantage of and stoking the social unease concerning Muslims for his own personal/political agenda.
I find it odd that the very people defending Wilders are the very same who curse conservatives here in America for doing much less. Here in the US we have a whole cadre of politicians crying about illegal aliens and stoking this fire to their benefit. Easy target, same thing.
Wilders appears to be an opportunist. If he wasn’t railing against Muslims, it would be against someone else as long as it suits his purpose.
BTW, although freedom of speech is protected, premeditated provocation of a riot is not.
#35–Ah Yea===
1. do you know the mind of Geert Wilders?—no.
2. have you seen the film?—no.
3. Is there an organized effort by the Muslim religion (Arab Sharia Sect) to undermine the government/culture/democratic freedoms of Holland—yes.
4. Are the Dutch people paying attention to this threat?—no.
Who is being the provocateur/somnambulist?
What I would give to be around when these people who have spent their life, spewing the words of their good book. When they find out they had it all wrong on judgement day. Priceless !!!
I’m a Christian but I often find myself defending Muslims.
In this case, it’s especially hard since there will no-doubt be deadly and bloody violence in protest of this movie.
But I can’t defend Koran bashing either. Our bible is no shortage of violence in it. And it isn’t just religion either — much violence has been done or enabled by all kinds of groups and professions both religious and secular.
Ooohhh, bobbo. Desperate attempts to hold onto a failing position.
#1. Let me introduce you to a wonderful instrument called Google. Type http://WWW.GOOGLE.COM into your browsers web address bar and then type “Geert Wilders” (without the quotes) into the search bar.
You will find that even you can learn the mind of Geert Wilders by what he has said and done.
#2. I have not seen the film, but I have read synopsis of the film. Again, I refer you to my answer above on how to find this for yourself.
#3. You state that there is an organized effort by the Muslim religion (Arab Sharia Sect) to undermine the government/culture/democratic freedoms of Holland.
Enlighten us with some evidence.
#4. You state that the Dutch people are not paying attention to this threat.
Again, enlighten us with some evidence.
Bobbo, just as a teaser, how about this about the person you are championing?
“In recent interviews Geert Wilders more than once indicated that the Dutch constitution and European Convention on Human Rights should be amended or temporarily suspended, if necessary, to better protect the Dutch people from Islamic extremism. He is in favor of stripping criminals with dual nationality of their Dutch citizenship and deporting them to their country of origin.”
Or how about this? “The 43-year old leader of the Dutch Freedom Party PVV, calls his movie an “anti-Koran movie.” He admits that it is devised as a deliberate “provocation” of Muslims worldwide.”
Hummm, suspending human rights, humm, mass deportations, hummm, deliberate provocation, hummm, certainly reminds me of the beginnings of ethnic cleansing.
Don’t you agree?
Ah Yea. Yes, you have teased me–sorry for the extra work it may have taken, but maybe “worth it” in some blog worthy way?
I won’t further challenge you on knowing Geert Wilders’ mind. If you think a quote here and there captures his essence, then ok. His actual intent should not be anyone’s concern except his family and his mental health counselor?
#2–Synopsis of the film? People interested enough to write such things are normally biased and usually also have not seen the film or only an early version? Be honest. Haven’t seen the film, but here is my opinion? Weak.
#3–They issue death threats to people who criticize their religion. In their home lands, people are not allowed to worship or not as they please. Their stated belief is theocracy and lack of freedom. If we can’t agree on this “objective” fact, not enough connection to discuss the subject really. Now–the open question is what any given faction of these Muslims in any given country have as their goals and how much the homebase influences that.
#4–Evidence the Dutch aren’t paying attention? They still allow Muslims to immigrate.
#5–Re Post 41–I think we should do the same thing. Why allow dual citizens to be criminals and stay here? What benefit to the occupied country is gained?
#6–Ok==his state of mind revealed and I too will accept that. You don’t believe in freedom if you can’t tolerate (ne accept?) a challenge to your cherished beliefs? If you think this is wrong, you don’t understand what freedom of speech is all about. It is the market place of ideas challenging one another with words. The Muslims counter with death and death threats. Not really the same thing. All occupied freedom loving countries should make the same challenges until the freedom haters are smoked out/reveal themselves.
Keep the good stuff coming.
Thank you , I appreciate it. It’s great fun to debate you and I enjoy it immensely! As I have said before, I probably learn more from you than the other way around.
Thanks!
#26, patrick
Because a MAJORITY of people (of all religions) in the US aren’t lunatics. Try this same example in Iran for instance.
We aren’t in Iran or discussing Iranian culture. Nor are we in the Vatican City.
Did you want to know about Christian hate? There is a radio station around here that continually broadcasts anti-abortion messages. They call the physicians murderers. They call it infanticide. They call anyone supporting a woman’s right to control her body murderers. They urge people to do what they can to stop abortions. Then the announcer asks for money. But it is always a man doing this. Plying his hate onto women.
The biggest difference is these fanatics have a platform to spew their hatred. The disenfranchised don’t have a platform. If Christianity were forced into the same position as most of the Muslim extremists I would expect the same reaction. As for the demonstrations? You just don’t see them because the majority don’t need to march through the streets to get attention.
The world would be a much better place without religion of any kind.
#32, OFTLO,
What they want is no different than what Americans want… to live in peace, without being cannon fodder for some extremist’s nightmare.
I like the way you put that.
#34, patrick,
Iranians have the gov’t they will tolerate.
Not quite. They have a theocracy imposed upon them. Their democracy is tempered by those that must sign off on any laws. Mind you, much of the opposition has fled the country to avoid death at the hands of the religious zealots. Given the chance though, I doubt if the majority of Iranians would not want to live in a free society. That really goes for everyone living in less than ideal circumstances.
Oh, and to comment…
I agree that by any meaningful definition of freedom, few Muslim countries, if any, qualify.
I also agree that those who love freedom, as we both obviously do, must be on our guard to protect it.
My concern is that Wilders is going about it in the worst way.
A definite example of where the cure could be worse than the disease. He may be destroying freedom in the guise of protecting freedom.
Let’s take deportation as an example. He said he would deport all criminals with dual citizenship, but he didn’t define what criminal activity qualifies for deportation. Murder? I would think so. Robbery? sure. A parking ticket? possibly. Speaking out against irrational government policies? why not!
Stoke a climate of fear. Suppress human rights. Throw in some religious intolerance for good measure. And if you don’t agree, you’re outta here!
Ah Yea–He’s not defending freedom, he is exercising it==as far as the movie goes?
Now, to his recommendation to change the law==what at all is wrong with telling people WITH dual citizenship to go back to their original country if they have violated laws? You say its ok to do so, then quibble against it. Are you this wishy washy in view of a direct threat?==or do you take ACTION to stop the threat.
You are very much confusing tolerance of dissenting views with the self destruction of not recognizing a threat to your own safety. You are confusing freedom of speech and religion with the anarachy of killing people who disagree with you.
I think the only way you can argue as you do is that the safe coziness and isolation of your keyboard has you a few steps removed from the religious based intolerance you recommend tolerance of! Deportation is much nicer than what they would do to the Dutch if they could. Get real. “Never Forget!”
#47, pedro
#44 so, you’re saying that muslim extremist have no way to voice their opinions in their own country and that’s why they kill? that is rich!
No, I didn’t say that. Because you did, I can only assume you feel that way.
I will say that Venezuelans with money have traditionally abused and stolen from the poor in their country. I will say that the majority of wealthy Venezuelans have earned the despised feelings of their countrymen.
#44 “Not quite. They have a theocracy imposed upon them. Their democracy is tempered by those that must sign off on any laws.”
Their decision to keep it. See U.S. Revolution. ’nuff said.
We should all be doing this…..
if attacking and smacking other peoples religion and point fun at them is freedom of speech then I pray for Allah to have mercy on everyone.
#49, pedro,
You said xtians don’t kill people because they can vent their hate.
No I didn’t say that. You invented it so I imagine it is another one of your subliminal attempts to justify oppressing the poor in your country.
I realize English is not your first language but still, I hoped the meaning was plain.
I was discussing a “Right to Life” propagandist. He has a platform to vent his hate. He also claims that he is doing “god’s” work. If he didn’t have his radio platform then I would expect him to be carrying a rifle to abortion clinics. BUT, because in America religions can speak what they wish, they don’t need to fill the streets.
Are fundies in Iran disenfrachised there?
Ask patrick. His diatribe follows your bile.
#50, patrick,
So it is the fault of the oppressed that they prefer to live under oppressive governments than be shot. Geeze, that is the same argument used by the Israelis and lap dogs to justify all those Palestinians that volunteered to be a bullet stopper. Even Pedro is using that same argument now.
#53
Remember, reading is fundamental.
What about the US Revolution don’t you understand?
If you don’t want to address fact why keep posting the same lame refutable arguments?
#53–catshit==I think you are losing your point just a bit.
It is clear that there is a sheeple element in herds of people. The jews are in fact a good example. In WW2, they allowed themselves to be round up and sent to camps rather than confront the local authority. Not surprising religious groups would do the same thing to their leadership that has the same core beliefs?
And same in GOUSA. We are being more regulated, controled, monitored, IMPRISONED, every day and no one now is even complaining.
People are social creatures. It is sad that so many Muslims live in oppressive regimes. They may have to suffer for it, but don’t think they somehow deserve it, just because they are going to get it. We are all mostly cogs in bigger wheels.
#56–Pedro==it occurs to me that the very best way to oppress a group of people is to oppress them very harshly (men or germans for example) but give them a release valve by sanctioning even greater oppression on a smaller or weaker group (women or jews for example).
I see the mechanism!!!!!
# 52 zorkor said, if attacking and smacking other peoples religion and point fun at them is freedom of speech then I pray for Allah to have mercy on everyone.
Freedom means that you can follow your conscience without fear of government punishment.
… and if it’s real freedom — it’s for everybody.
For Muslims, freedom means they can practice their faith in Christian countries without official persecution. They can even speak out against the majority religion.
But it also means that the irreligious can be ugly in their skepticism of faith.
#55, bobbo,
The jews are in fact a good example. In WW2, they allowed themselves to be round up and sent to camps rather than confront the local authority.
Gee, it is amazing how when people comply because there are guns pointed at them they are called “sheeple”. Also, if you know much about the Jewish roundups during WWII, they were promised they were being taken to safe havens. Many were promised to be sent to Israel. I don’t think too many Jews were told before hand they were being sent to their deaths by the train guards.
Since they also had had their weapons confiscated earlier, they wouldn’t have been able to put up much of a fight using table knives against automatic weapons.
We are being more regulated, controled, monitored, IMPRISONED, every day and no one now is even complaining.
So what are you doing about it? How many times have you written or phoned your Congressman or State representative to let them know your feelings?
Remember, not all regulation or control is bad. Blood/alcohol regulation for driving is usually considered a good thing. A traffic light to control the flow of pedestrian traffic across a street is also good. And face it, some people belong in jail.
If your answer is total, unrestrained anarchy, forget it. Society need the ability to regulate and control itself. It even needs the hammer of prison for those who disobey the rules we make and need to be a civilized society.
It is sad that so many Muslims live in oppressive regimes. They may have to suffer for it, but don’t think they somehow deserve it, just because they are going to get it.
I agree. But don’t limit yourself to Muslims in a restricted political environment. Remember many Christians are also in restricted environments in South and Central America. Many Orthodox Christians in Russia and Belarus also face discrimination. As do a hundred other religious beliefs around the globe. Then there is China.
Freedom shouldn’t be just another word for nothing left to lose.
But I digress. Let’s just shoot this bigoted asshole and be done with him.
#54, patrick
OK, so what part of the American Revolution is the problem here?
In the chronicles of history it is one revolution that succeeded. There are many that failed. How about the Whiskey Rebellion just a few years after the American Revolution? Or fifty years later the MacKenzie and Papineau rebellions in Canada. Or that grand people eating monster, the American Civil War? Or have you forgotten all the Mexican rebellions and revolutions?
And that is just one continent. I guess you are unaware of all the revolutions in South America and the rest of Latin America. Or how about the revolutions of 1848 throughout Europe? Or the African revolutions that came about after WWII.
And what is this English celebration noted every November Fifth? Or the Jacobites? Or the Textile Revolution of 1811?
Then what happened during the Peasants Revolt in 1328 in Flanders? Or the later English Peasants Revolt in 1381? Or the Cornish Rebellion a century later?
You suggest I keep posting the same lame, refutable arguments. If they are so refutable, why can’t you refute them instead of changing the argument all the time.
Tell me. How did the American Revolution change the world for Joe Smith and family trying to make a living out of the Pennsylvania wilderness? The Colony Assembly was replaced by a State Assembly. That doesn’t mean that Joe could vote or if he could that it would make a difference. If you were a slave or indentured servant before the revolution, nothing changed. Only at the top was there a change from the Crown to the American Establishment. There was a power shift from one to the other. But Joe didn’t get to see any of that. He was still assessed his taxes, only they were higher and had to pay for the war.
Patrick, you blame your financial problems on your employees. You post some silly reference to the American Revolution. You blame the oppressed for their plight. So pray tell, what intelligent offering have YOU offered up so far?
The european nations are beginning to regret their open immigration policies of letting in muslims.
Eastern european trash and gypsies is nothing compared to what they’re getting now in droves.
Rick,
Good point. We all want openness. Until your daughter wants to date one.
#62 So true!