Jump to content
Islamic Forum
Ashir

Innocence Of Muslims

Recommended Posts

All credit goes to Nonsensei from the *********Forums:

 

In the natural course of my internet wanderings over the past couple of days I have, unsurprisingly, read a great deal about the attacks on U.S. missions in several countries in the middle east. I have learned that the attackers are upset about some B film supposedly produced by "an israeli-American from California with $5 million in contributions from Jews". The former, about his israeli-American dual citizenship status, is something questionable since despite speaking to news agencies nobody can verify the name he gave to the media - including the government of israel. The latter, regarding the contributions, sounds like an absurd and unsubstantiated claim of the sort that would be made by people with an agenda and a warped sense of respect for the value of truth. It could turn out that this is entirely correct, but until it is confirmed it sounds like nonsense.

 

(NOTE: I wrote this at 6am before the news confirmed what i suspected, that the involvement of "jew money" and his dual citizenship was all [email protected]#$%^&*.)

 

I have not watched the film and, indeed, I may not be able to as it is reported Youtube has restricted access to the video. I'm sure I could still dig it up somewhere, and I likely will at some point. I just haven't yet.

 

But I don't need to see it ever to render an opinion on the entire situation, because no matter how heinous the content, it is and always will be my position that freedom of speech permits this film to exist with an expectation that no legal repercussions or threats of physical violence will be leveled at the maker.

 

Now, I expect that an unknown number of people from the middle east may disagree. Certainly the mob of people who allowed themselves to be gripped so deeply by gross irrationality to the degree that they blamed a country for the actions of an individual and killed people that weren't even involved in the film would likely have no respect for our concept of free speech. What appears to matter to them is that someone broke the rules of their religion and the fact that it was someone who doesn't follow Islam and isn't subject to those rules doesn't matter to them in the slightest. Indeed the shameful history of fatwas issued on various western artists for "insulting Islam" shows the arrogance of the de facto Islamic assertion that everyone is subject to the rules of Islam.

 

But this is an old topic. I am unsurprised at the actions of uneducated, impoverished individuals who understandably have a fierce protective attitude toward the twisted ideology that allows them to retain some measure of pride and a sense (however false) of significance in an otherwise miserable existence. Religion, ignorance, poverty, and a lack of comprehensive education have been bedfellows since the beginning of civilization.

 

What disturbed me more than anything else about this situation was some of the comments I read by people who, presumably, were members of the western world and democracies like the United States. Certainly there is plenty of ignorance and hatred here as well as anywhere, but I had thought there would be a more widespread support for one of the most basic rights we enjoy in a democratic republic: free speech.

 

However that does not appear to be the case. There is a trend among article commentators talking about using free speech "responsibly". The insinuation being that if your exercise of your free speech rights offends someone else to the degree that they do something irrational like gather a mob and murder people, then you should be held responsible for that crime. The number of people on, for example, the CNN article about the man behind the film (who has now gone into hiding for good reason) that think his personal and private information should be made available to the world presumably to enable revenge is horrifying. There are even some who think he should kill himself as an apology to the Islamic faith.

I have a problem with this demand that free speech be used "responsibly" primarily because its such an easy thing to say. The standard of what is "responsible" use of free speech changes with each person you ask. Moreover, adding the requirement of responsible use without definition permits any use of free speech to be suppressed, as it is an entirely open ended requirement.

 

lets talk about responsibility in free speech. If you use free speech to intentionally excite a mob to riot, you have committed a crime. That's understandable. You spoke to a group of people vulnerable to your vernacular with the intention of enticing them toward violence. There are two points of this example that are relevant to the film situation. The first is the group of people and their readiness to do violence. It has been shown on many occasions that ordinary Muslims in the middle east are ready to destroy and kill in the name of their religion. Perhaps it can be argued that anyone making a film insulting Islam should have expected this sort of reaction. To me, that sounds like nothing more than lowering the bar. Nobody would think it a reasonable expectation that people murder and kill over a movie here in the United States. I see no reason that people in the middle east should be held to a lower standard. Furthermore, the reasons for their violent and murderous actions are utterly invalid. No actual harm was done to any of them by the film. They responded to words and images with murder and destruction.

 

Nobody could have anticipated such a ridiculous reaction and nobody should be expected to be able to predict it. This segues into the intent. Considering the reaction of the man claiming to be behind the film, the way those Muslims reacted was totally outside his expectations. He has been described as being distraught at the violence committed by these people in retaliation for his film. I think its fair to say that probably everyone here has spoken their mind on Islam and what they think about it. Considering the nature of this venue, much of it has not been complimentary. The man who made this film was doing the same thing we have all done. He simply did it in film instead of text. Consider that if a printout of everything we have said about Islam on these boards were distributed in the middle east along with our names and addresses, our lives would be put in jeopardy.

 

Instead of blaming the film maker for expressing his view of Islam, however misguided, we should place the blame for the violence where it belongs: at the feet of the people who committed it.

Edited by Absolute truth
Site promotion
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PropellerAds

Naturally the individuals who committed the violence should be held accountable. Islam does not endorse such action nowhere in the Qur'an and in fact through several parts of the Qur'an one could easily disspell such myths.

 

As for the movie maker. What will be will be but something like this movie is disgusting and should be taken down, in my opinion. If nothing is considered sacred then what is the line? How far does "free speech" go? When reading the constitution we should bear in mind the concept of taking things in context of when they were written. I do find it funny that individuals who encourage such reckless adherence to free speech are the first ones in line to talk about gun control despite the second amendment and the first to try and say that we need to keep Guantanamo Bay despite its blatantly contrary to the idea of habeas corpus.

 

When a video like this is posted its free speech but when Christians stand around a flag pole its a front and should be stopped. Where is the concept of free speech for people wanting to pray in school? Is it Islam trying to stop prayer in school for all religions or is that the atheists? I could go on but I think my point has been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note that I only had the time to copy and paste something and do not intend on discussing anything with anyone on this forum until I can become active enough to write more than a small stanza. The post is here: http://www.*************

Edited by Absolute truth
Site promotion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:sl:

 

This thread deserves to be in this section:

 

http://www.gawaher.c...stern-dialogue/

 

 

Such type of threads should be created in that particular section.

Edited by Saracen21stC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why can't people simply ignore the movie?

It was ignored before, so why not after it was dragged up by an Arab TV-Station?

Nobody on this planet takes this tripe seriously - except Muslims.

The movie does not demand anything, it does not incite anyone to do something and is just plain stupid. So why credit stupidity, fraud and ignorance with all this attention?

In the 21st century people are supposed to take each other to court, not kill the innocent. And that is exactly what the actress is doing who was duped into participating. I wonder whether a US court will punish a person for making a bad movie by tricking actors into taking part.

 

As for the suggestion of boycotting Google this is badly backfiring. Firstly, it's illegal. Secondly, people are laughing about the effect of a reduction of Google search terms people in Pakistan are infamous for. :)

Not exactly promising.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My posts get edited promotion? Seriously? Seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*for promotion.

I challenge any believer to explain how that was intentional promotion.

Edited by Ashir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*for promotion.

I challenge any believer to explain how that was intentional promotion.

 

No one said that it was intentional. That site contains many anti-Islamic views. And posting link(s) of anti-Islamic belief system here is against the forum rules. Just copy the content and user name if you want to give credit. No need post the name and links of the forums.

Edited by Saracen21stC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that preventing them from learning? Atheist forums always allow links to believer forums. Then again, they are normally to be laughed at...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that preventing them from learning? Atheist forums always allow links to believer forums. Then again, they are normally to be laughed at...

 

No, that's not preventing them from learning as you are allowed to post the content for learning purpose.

Edited by Saracen21stC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that preventing them from learning? Atheist forums always allow links to believer forums. Then again, they are normally to be laughed at...

 

You need to look at what you might be doing: creating interest. That is why free speech is rare in some countries and societies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this movie is an excellent example of the "Streisand Effect."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to look at what you might be doing: creating interest. That is why free speech is rare in some countries and societies.

What's wrong with interest?

No, that's not preventing them from learning as you are allowed to post the content for learning purpose.

So why is giving the name of a forum considered promoting it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with interest?

So why is giving the name of a forum considered promoting it?

 

There's nothing wrong with generating interest - unless you are afraid that interest in anything other than your own message might just generate too much sympathy or even fondness for concepts like free speech, critical thinking or counter arguments.

 

The mere mentioning could generate interest and cause people to see other opinions and loose interest in the preferred line of thinking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SubhanALLAH i am thinking.... when two muslims befriended eachother..is it All for the sake of Allah or money Sake? no more comments....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Youtube is not deleting the video!

 

YouTube only takes videos down if they are excessively vulgar. And I agree with them not taking the anti-Islamic video down. It was not vulgar and taking it down would be a violation of free speech. If I were a YouTube admin, I would not tolerate obscenities to ethnicity or color, but I certainly would to religions. Religions are ideas, beliefs; the freedom to criticism and even insult beliefs, I believe, should remain complete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YouTube only takes videos down if they are excessively vulgar. And I agree with them not taking the anti-Islamic video down. It was not vulgar and taking it down would be a violation of free speech. If I were a YouTube admin, I would not tolerate obscenities to ethnicity or color, but I certainly would to religions. Religions are ideas, beliefs; the freedom to criticism and even insult beliefs, I believe, should remain complete.

 

Once again, what is vulgar or not vulgar is subjective. Different people find different things as vulgar. For example, you can not use the F word when you talk to your teacher. I have seen almost all the times Teachers punishing student for this. And there was no reference to ethnicity or color. We can even argue whether refering to ethnicity or color is vulgar at all times or not. Not for now though. If you use the F word towards your friend, he/she might not get offended. Some friends can tolerate this. It's up to the people whether they are find something as vulgar or not.

 

So, the word 'free' in that 'Free Speech' is not really the case. Each and every country restricts human beings from speaking whatever they want. There is something called Verbal Abuse. Racial abuse is not the only type of Verbal abuse. Also, we have seen so far that you (and many others) feel offended by some words or tones of the sentence, which do not refer to race or ethnicity.

 

Finally, in this context, We mainstream Muslims never made Movies depicting Non-Islamic religious figures. We never showed them having sex with their wife in semi naked state. Majority of Muslims through out ages have respected figures like Jesus, Moses, etc. Even insulting other religions' gods is not permitted in Islam.

 

006.108 Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance. Thus have We made alluring to each people its own doings. In the end will they return to their Lord, and We shall then tell them the truth of all that they did.

 

 

So, We expect both the Muslims and non-Muslims to have mutual respect. We believe that we (mainstream Muslims) never depicted their Religious figures(in such manner), they should not do so with Ours.

Edited by Saracen21stC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By 'vulgarity' I was referring to excessive use of swearing and purposeful provocation of others. Sure, the movie was made to provoke others, but it could be argued that it was simply comedy.

 

I believe that verbal abuse should be illegal too. Even verbal abuse against the religious, to some extent. When it gets to the point where you just start throwing meaningless insults in front of a religious person's face all you're doing is provoking others. But I wouldn't find it so immoral for someone to give the odd 'F religion'; I have as much sympathy for religion as I do Nazism. They're both simply beliefs, and ones that in my honest opinion deserve to be mocked, but when you're doing it in front of someone's face, in deliberation to provoke them, that should be illegal.

I am offended by insults, which include belittlement, and I will lash back at will.

 

I do respect that, but I am aware of what the Qu'ran says about non-believers, and homosexuals, and other religions, etc, and it's rather disrespectful.

 

No. I, as an atheist, am breaking no rules by doing something like drawing Muhammad. What you said is like saying since I have granted you the courtesy of using Skype, others should also use Skype. The problem is it's not a courtesy to you for me to use Skype, you wouldn't care. The same goes with you drawing Jesus. Christians probably wouldn't care.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that Skype Analogy fits in here. Anyway...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that Skype Analogy fits in here. Anyway...

Was in a rush :D try this;

Imagine that I had a religion which said not to eat apples. Eve ate one in the Original Sin and God has forbidden them. Would you, in order to appease my religion, stop eating apples? Probably not, because you don't share that religion. I hope that's a bit clearer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way, I have to say, I found the video very immature and stupid. Just like burning the Qu'ran or something. It achieves no purpose and is obviously deliberately to annoy others. So, even being an anti-theist, I detest these sort of provocations which achieve no purpose other than to insult and aggravate others.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By 'vulgarity' I was referring to excessive use of swearing and purposeful provocation of others. Sure, the movie was made to provoke others, but it could be argued that it was simply comedy.

 

I believe that verbal abuse should be illegal too. Even verbal abuse against the religious, to some extent. When it gets to the point where you just start throwing meaningless insults in front of a religious person's face all you're doing is provoking others. But I wouldn't find it so immoral for someone to give the odd 'F religion'; I have as much sympathy for religion as I do Nazism. They're both simply beliefs, and ones that in my honest opinion deserve to be mocked, but when you're doing it in front of someone's face, in deliberation to provoke them, that should be illegal.

I am offended by insults, which include belittlement, and I will lash back at will.

 

I do respect that, but I am aware of what the Qu'ran says about non-believers, and homosexuals, and other religions, etc, and it's rather disrespectful.

 

No. I, as an atheist, am breaking no rules by doing something like drawing Muhammad. What you said is like saying since I have granted you the courtesy of using Skype, others should also use Skype. The problem is it's not a courtesy to you for me to use Skype, you wouldn't care. The same goes with you drawing Jesus. Christians probably wouldn't care.

 

a) for homosexuals, this problem only arises when people have too much time and the society begins giving into their lustful nature. It was seen when Greece was expanding, Rome, etcetera.

b) I highly doubt that you truly know any real content of the Qur'an, in fact I would suggest that your knowledge is (at best) limited to a translation only although more than likely your 'knowledge' is information you have garnered from the internet where things have been taken out of context. As for what the Qur'an says about non-believers I would suggest you show your 'knowledge' next time before making such suggestions. The true religion of Islam is a lot more tolerant than any other religion I have ever studied.

c) As for your drawing the prophet or what have you I got a news flash for you as a former Christian we were fully aware of what the atheists did for mocking religion, especially Christianity and honestly if you think these radical Muslims who were marching on the street were bad ya'll should keep pushing on the Christian issues. The fact of the matter is while Islam does not condone a lot of these actions the actual religion teaches to be tolerant of a lot of it and is to be quite peaceful of it as long as it is not oppressive towards a specific group. Too many of the new Darwinia...I mean atheists ;) show no actual tolerance of other people's believes and instead want their mindset in place and in this respect are no better than the Puritan settlers of the early American colonies, the Church of England before them or the Catholic church before them.

 

Who wants to take God out of currency or pledges? Hindus? nope. Christians? nope. Jews? nope. Atheists!

Who wants to take prayer out of school? again this is an atheistic push not reflective of the others

 

I could go on but I am going to stop there. I am sorry but as a political science major I can tell you that the concept of freedom of speech protects you from the government not the people. While you have the right to mock someone else's religion that doesn't mean they don't have the right to say something back. Atheists talk of tolerance and cooperation and understanding and then go and mock other's religion and make accusations against them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a) for homosexuals, this problem only arises when people have too much time and the society begins giving into their lustful nature. It was seen when Greece was expanding, Rome, etcetera. What does this have to do with anything?

b) I highly doubt that you truly know any real content of the Qur'an, in fact I would suggest that your knowledge is (at best) limited to a translation only although more than likely your 'knowledge' is information you have garnered from the internet where things have been taken out of context. As for what the Qur'an says about non-believers I would suggest you show your 'knowledge' next time before making such suggestions. The true religion of Islam is a lot more tolerant than any other religion I have ever studied. I have read several translations, all of them convey the same meanings. I lost IQ points hearing 'Islam is a lot more tolerant than any other religion I have ever studied'. You must have only studied Islam, or you must be lying.

Too busy to go rummaging around the translations for specific verses. It's like going through a book for a few sentances, in fact it is exactly that.

c) As for your drawing the prophet or what have you I got a news flash for you as a former Christian we were fully aware of what the atheists did for mocking religion, especially Christianity and honestly if you think these radical Muslims who were marching on the street were bad ya'll should keep pushing on the Christian issues. The fact of the matter is while Islam does not condone a lot of these actions the actual religion teaches to be tolerant of a lot of it and is to be quite peaceful of it as long as it is not oppressive towards a specific group. Too many of the new Darwinia...I mean atheists ;) show no actual tolerance of other people's believes and instead want their mindset in place and in this respect are no better than the Puritan settlers of the early American colonies, the Church of England before them or the Catholic church before them. I have seen many atheists and anti-thiests be tolerant towards beliefs.

Radical Muslims marching on the street? If I remember correctly houses were burnt and people killed. It was not just a march.

 

Who wants to take God out of currency or pledges? Hindus? nope. Christians? nope. Jews? nope. Atheists! You say it like it's a bad thing *rollseyes*

Who wants to take prayer out of school? again this is an atheistic push not reflective of the others Yes. How is this intolerance towards belief? This is intolerance towards excessive expression of beliefs. Would you like your son sent to a school which taught mythology as reality? Me neither.

 

I could go on but I am going to stop there. I am sorry but as a political science major I can tell you that the concept of freedom of speech protects you from the government not the people. While you have the right to mock someone else's religion that doesn't mean they don't have the right to say something back. When did I say anything against this? They do have that right, I agree. Atheists talk of tolerance and cooperation and understanding and then go and mock other's religion and make accusations against them. Mockery is not intolerance. I can, and do, mock religion, yet I do not force others to be atheist or avoid the religious, that would be intolerance, not mockery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×