Fitna (short movie about Islam)

[Dantediv86]

let's just say i was close to become one of them...*shiver*
i spent YEARS in muslim countries.

 

[Pariah]

Although I couln't really understand what was being said in the video, I think its safe to say it was one sided - a video like this isn't really helping with what's going on in the world - all I can see this video doing is stirring up even more prejudice.

Because it focuses on one organised religion (or at least the fundementalist ofshoots thereof), all it does is give a sense of "us and them" as apposed to just "us" (all humans) - encouraging division instead of unity.

I would be happier to see a more constructive "documentary" that gives a much wider scope than something that just seems to say 'muslims are bad' - a truer picture would be to show the bad AND good that each culture has done and analyse where they went right and where they went wrong: including Christianity, Islam, Buddism, Pagan, etc. not to mention the burgeoning Atheist culture (which in my opinion is somewhat like a religion itself).

Just wanted to share my opinion.

 

[Dantediv86]

one thing is sure, if other people had used more cannabis the world would be a Much betta ples!

 

[VerusDeus]

I don't think Cannabis is the answer, though it's certaintly a wonderful enlighting herb, not everyone who tokes is 'enlightened'. Take Joran van der Sloot for example, he smoked quite a lot, but still was a regretless moron.

I think the actual problem is, is that we humans live in a way too big herd. I mean chimps live in pacts as well, but maxing 30 chimps or something. We have sort-of grouped up with almost every living human on earth. It's nice, but it gets chaotic. Too many people, too many opinions, and a minimun chance of agreeing on things.

Peace.

 

[HeartCore]

Yesterday I zapped past the Dutch Islamic Broadcasting org on our national television. A nice integrated, well dressed Iman with a smile on his face that many christian evangelists would love to have, was telling about Islam. The guy was commenting about the fact that the Islam was the only relion which DOES promote violence and that it was actually a good thing.

 

[Dantediv86]

wow! just for that i'm gonna go join them for good! gee! that IS something i was looking forward all this time....
jes indeed we are too many


i'm gonna go live in a far away island where NO one will ever reach me, cultivating cannabis and practicing onanism.

 

[Forkbender]

Yesterday I zapped past the Dutch Islamic Broadcasting org on our national television. A nice integrated, well dressed Iman with a smile on his face that many christian evangelists would love to have, was telling about Islam. The guy was commenting about the fact that the Islam was the only relion which DOES promote violence and that it was actually a good thing.

:shock:

That's pretty bad.

On what basis? And was there no counterargument?

 

[Dantediv86]

"counterargument"??????????
it's islam we are talking about
there is NO counterargument
only the word of God is the righteous one

 

[Forkbender]

Words can be interpreted in many ways. If you look at for example Sufism (a mystically oriented subgroup of Islam), all they talk about is love, love, love. An Imam doesn't have to be a specialist on the Quran in the way that a pastor is on the bible, because basically an Imam is there just to read the text to the others. They have other people to deliberate about the text and its interpretation (less so now than, for example, in the 14th century, but still).

Saying that there is no counterargument possible, means that Islam is a unified whole, while in fact there are many factions and different sects and uses within. I tend to think that within Islam there are people who are pro-violence and those who are anti-violence, like you said before:

nobody can say
oh the muslim are good
oh the muslim are bad
THEY ARE PEOPLE FOR CHRIST SAKE!!
there are good ones and bad ones, just like the Christians

 

[Dantediv86]

but on an islamic channel (like on a christian one, in the end these two religions differ in the fact that one profet was completely misunderstood) you'll never have a counter argument.

 

[Forkbender]

^this is not exactly a channel, just a subsidiary that makes programs and have to follow certain rules. (Weird Dutch Broadcasting system). They do have some debating shows in my recollection, which were pretty open (within the limits of Islam).

 

[Dantediv86]

However it tells you how ignorant the dude was
Islam is not the only religion promoting violence.
tells you how stupid the majority of them are...
i mean, c'mon, they said that buddhism is a monoteistic religion..... :roll:

 

[silv]

However it tells you how ignorant the dude was
Islam is not the only religion promoting violence.
tells you how stupid the majority of them are...
i mean, c'mon, they said that buddhism is a monoteistic religion..... :roll:

Oi, Buddhism ain't even a religion right?

 

[Dantediv86]

Exactly! it's a Philosophy fo Hinduism!!!

 

[HeartCore]

Yesterday I zapped past the Dutch Islamic Broadcasting org on our national television. A nice integrated, well dressed Iman with a smile on his face that many christian evangelists would love to have, was telling about Islam. The guy was commenting about the fact that the Islam was the only relion which DOES promote violence and that it was actually a good thing.

:shock:

That's pretty bad.

On what basis? And was there no counterargument?

It was about the 'fact' that it was the only movement/religion which promotes violence to establish justice, and it was told with a certain pride. There wasn't a discussion, it was a monologue.

 

[Brugmansia]

^ That's because the Islam makes it it's followers a duty to create a world without kuffars. Kuffars are those who do not follow being submissive to Allah. To realise this, all kuffars should be slaughtered. With a sword as prefered weapon.

You can't accept people's their inner lifes or reason to live for if it's truly tied with a dominating eliminating idealogy, whether you're a psychonaut or not. 'The people' slogan doesn't apply to those.

Of course, if a Muslim is truly faithfull to his quran and acts within our Dutch laws he's welcome to be part of our society and should be respected.

As for Wilders, he merely attemped to spread an alarming massage to win support by the next elections. The movie IS representative for extremists, but should not be linked to those who I described above.

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

Ask yourself the following: has there ever been muslim suicide attacks when muslims where not oppressed? The cause is not the Quran in my view, but social inequalities. Fundamentalism is a natural reaction when your views are systematically attacked by someone stronger than you.

OK, there have been no suicide attacks yet, but the newspapers are now showing thousands of Pakistani muslims willing to sacrifice their lives to avenge the Netherlands. Are these Pakistani muslims really that oppressed? Are they even aware of the social inequalities between Pakistan and the Netherlands? Are we stronger than them and have we systemetically attacked their views?

No.

One Dutch individual made a video about the main root of Islamic violence: the Quran. The message of the video is confirmed by the Pakistani protests, because they immediately react with threats of violence to the Netherlands as a whole.

Stop arguing and face the facts. This is serious.

 

[Forkbender]

Yesterday I zapped past the Dutch Islamic Broadcasting org on our national television. A nice integrated, well dressed Iman with a smile on his face that many christian evangelists would love to have, was telling about Islam. The guy was commenting about the fact that the Islam was the only religion which DOES promote violence and that it was actually a good thing.

:shock:

That's pretty bad.

On what basis? And was there no counterargument?

It was about the 'fact' that it was the only movement/religion which promotes violence to establish justice, and it was told with a certain pride. There wasn't a discussion, it was a monologue.

Then what about the nation-state? It has a monopoly on violence (supposedly, but at least legally) in most countries and thereby upholds justice, also claiming that just because of this monopoly on violence they can do this. This shows the ignorance of how things are dealt with in the West by this Imam. The West promotes violence in a very subtle way, namely by law and bureaucracy. It just doesn't name it violence, because we are living in a Judeo-Christian country (mostly) where violence is looked down upon. Violence is everywhere, though not as explicit as in the Quran. I think that we have to both unearth the violence within our own conception of justice, to show that we are not that different, and criticize violence in others by giving a good example.

Pride shouldn't have a place in a religion based on submission to God. In your face, Imam!

 

[Caduceus Mercurius]

The West promotes violence in a very subtle way, namely by law and bureaucracy. It just doesn't name it violence, because we are living in a Judeo-Christian country (mostly) where violence is looked down upon.

You can keep on arguing like this ad infinitum, comparing the straightforward promotion of violence by the Quran with subtle encouragement in other political, economic and religious systems.

But this thread is about Islam and the Quran, and whomever voluntarily identifies with these. There is a very real problem here, but you keep pointing at other problems. How is that ever going to solve this particular problem? Why not try to solve this problem first before pointing the finger at other problems (christianity, kapitalism etc.)? There are already threads on christianity and materialism, there is no need to bring them up here.

 

[Forkbender]

Why I keep coming up with this is because we seem to keep pointing at the splinter in someone else's eye without seeing the beam in our own. The core of the problem of Islam is the same as the problems we are facing, they just have another way of dealing with it than us. And because of that, we are judging them, saying that their way of dealing with it is immoral, while in fact it is the basis of their morality, like in our way of dealing with it.

Funny how you seem to think that people identify voluntarily with the Quran or Islam in general. I don't think this is the case, since most muslims are muslims because their parents were.

So what is the problem? That people identify with violent ideas? They do that everywhere, be they muslim or not. That people identify with a specific form of these violent ideas? But why is that form different than other forms? Because of the openness about it? I don't think that this is much different than in our society from an external viewpoint.