|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:18 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| yawarakaijin wrote: |
On principle I don't disagree with much of what you wrote. Say there is a hive of angry bees. Everyone knows what is going to happen if you throw a rock at it. Are you suggesting that the kid that knocks down the beehive, knowing full well what the consequences will be, bears no responsibility whatsoever?
I do not disagree that there is a threat out there from radical islamists. I do not disagree that it needs to be dealt with. I disagree with much of the unproductive methods we are using to combat it. I disagree with the west back tracking on much of what we hold dear to combat this "mortal" threat.
Believe it or not, I actually supported the invasion of Iraq. I'm not a pacifist by any means whatsoever but it has become painfully obvious, hasn't it? that this war has been mismanaged from the get go. I simply cannot stand the doublespeak from this administration. This is supposedly a war to usher in a new era in the middle east, vital to our survival. How do you think it's going so far? No draft, no national mobilization, no strategy. In this fight for "our very way of life" most Americans are still content to sit at home and bitch and moan about the economy and price of cheetos. You can't have it both ways.
Also, I believe you are being slightly disingenuous by implying that I am only blaming the "film maker" don't you think?
| Quote: |
| I hope this "film maker" is willing to accept his portion of the blame and be willing to explain to some dutch peacekeepers' or government agents' children what led to their parents' death. |
|
I think you have re-hashed what I said months ago about the cartoons.
Yes, radical extremists need to be dealt with but is provoking them very productive. Does it hurt or harm Westerners? Isn't that concern an important one? Should we not be responsible for our speech and be responsible in our actions. Yes, terrorists will be terrorists and whatever acts they commit are not justified, without a doubt.
In the end, the Muslim world must accept more than it does criticism of Islam and Muslims. There are many critics in this world, and if you cannot accept criticism, you cannot accept progress or democracy.
Here is another thought: even if there is a bad reaction by some radicals which leads to the death of Westerners or some violent protestors could more and more Muslims be less affected, in the end, after getting used to hearing criticism to be more likely to ignore it? That would be a positive thing if it happened. So far, less people went crazy then when something first emerged from Europe with the cartoons....
I would appreciate it if I don't get lambasted with personal attacks, though I do have a thick skin, because I am not here to clash personally with anyone, just to debate. I've been in the trenches of trenchant debates and dirty ones. It doesn't interest me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| yawarakaijin wrote: |
On principle I don't disagree with much of what you wrote. Say there is a hive of angry bees. Everyone knows what is going to happen if you throw a rock at it. Are you suggesting that the kid that knocks down the beehive, knowing full well what the consequences will be, bears no responsibility whatsoever?
Also, I believe you are being slightly disingenuous by implying that I am only blaming the "film maker" don't you think?
| Quote: |
| I hope this "film maker" is willing to accept his portion of the blame and be willing to explain to some dutch peacekeepers' or government agents' children what led to their parents' death. |
|
Are you seriously comparing living, breathing people with a hive of "angry bees?" Bees can't reason and determine the level of threat of human speech or action. People CAN reason and determine the threat of human speech or action. Making a movie is not threatening Muslims or their homes. I boy knocking down a hive gets a reaction as if the boy is out to destroy them. The bees are incapable of determining if the boy is just playing or not. Are you saying Muslims are incapable of making those same kinds of determinations? Really, that was a very bad analogy.
What portion of the blame should the film maker take on? HE MADE A MOVIE. He didn't physically attack Muslims. Do you think that possibly the reaction far outweighs the "transgression?" Look, radical Muslims don't need any help or excuses to keep from taking responsibility for their own actions. They do a great job of that for themselves. "They" expect "us" to fear them. The moment we quit making movies, writing books or just generally being critical of ANYTHING, let alone Islam, is the moment civilized society has lost.
I think we agree on Iraq. There's not much to argue about there. A very poorly managed affair. I only disagree about Cheetos. They are a food group, aren't they? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MollyBloom
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Location: James Joyce's pants
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Michael Savage coined the term "islamofacists."
www.michaelsavage.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yawarakaijin
Joined: 08 Aug 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 4:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| "They" expect "us" to fear them. The moment we quit making movies, writing books or just generally being critical of ANYTHING, let alone Islam, is the moment civilized society has lost. |
As long as by "they" you are referring to radical islamists, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Look, I'm in no way trying to legitimize the action of people who are ready to go on a killing spree because someone insults their imaginary friend, be that imaginary friend jesus or mohammed or whoever.
I held out judgment and support the guys right to make the film and would do it again but honestly, can you tell me that that man's goal was to enlighten us about the evils of Islam? It was a poor, juvenile piece barely worthy of youtube, made with no other purpose in mind than to try and spark some violence in order prove the director's point that "they" are "animals."
Many of his quotes in from the Koran were taken out of context with no other intent than to make the viewer believe that crazy muslims are out to kill every single infidel they can find. What purpose was there in insinuating that he had torn out some pages of the Koran? To educate us, to enligthen us? I think not. There is speech to educate and then there is speech meant to incite hatred and bigotry. I would argue that one needs to look to the motive when determining blame, it's not a very difficult concept to grasp. From the "film" I got the distinct impression it was done to feed the fire. What was your take on it? Were you educated by it? Did you learn something you didn't already know? Were you impressed by his thorough research?
Last edited by yawarakaijin on Sun Mar 30, 2008 7:40 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
crusher_of_heads
Joined: 23 Feb 2007
Location: kimbop and kimchi for kimberly!!!!
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| DID YOU EVER FIND THAT MISSING POST OF YOURS, steve? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Adventurer
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yawarakaijin wrote: |
| Quote: |
| "They" expect "us" to fear them. The moment we quit making movies, writing books or just generally being critical of ANYTHING, let alone Islam, is the moment civilized society has lost. |
As long as by "they" you are referring to radical islamists, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Look, I'm in no way trying to legitimize the action of people who are ready to go on a killing spree because someone insults their imaginary friend, be that imaginary friend jesus or mohammed or whoever.
I held out judgment and support the guys right to make the film and would do it again but honestly, can you tell me that that man's goal was to enlighten us about the evils of Islam? It was a poor, juvenile piece barely worthy of youtube, made with no other purpose in mind than to try and spark some violence in order prove the director's point that "they" are "animals."
Many of his quotes in from the Koran were taken out of context with no other intent than to make the viewer believe that crazy muslims are out to kill every single infidel they can find. What purpose was there in insinuating that he had torn out some pages of the Koran? To educate us, to enligthen us? I think not. There is speech to educate and then there is speech meant to incite hatred and bigotry. I would argue that one needs to look to the motive when determining blame, it's not a very difficult concept to grasp. From the "film" I got the distinct impression it was done to feed the fire. What was your take on it? Were you educated by it? Did you learn something you didn't already know? Were you impressed by his thorough research? |
Certain parties in Europe do not want any Muslims at all in the country and in the Netherlands. He does have a political agenda, he is not trying to be objective at all. It would be one thing to present the dangers of radical Islamists and how they look at the Quran and actually quote Binladin or something. Most Europeans didn't agree with with the film maker. Frankly, before many of the posters here were discussing Muslim immigration, I was talking about as far back as the 1990s in that there shouldn't just be an open door policy, not that the doors should be closed, and this would apply to immigration also from Mexico. Immigration policies must be sound when dealing with whatever culture, though there are stellar people from all cultures.
The film is not really educational, it is rather more propaganda.
Let's view the Quran as some sort of literature. Aren't you supposed to look at the time period, put the words in context and the like? True, many Muslims take their own religion out of context and look at the literal Arabic words in front of them and seize upon those things to act like Stewie in Family Guy. There are Muslims who do try to spin their holy book the way Geert looks at it, but to say the majority do or to imply such runs into problems. The polls show a lack of support for Al Qaeda in the Middle East and South Asia, though they have enough support for mischief, so it shows Geert's film doesn't stand up scientific type scrutiny in terms of applying religion, anthropology, and history together. If it did, I would say "Spot, on, Geert".
No one can deny that, and Mohammed freaks out on the streets creating mayham are responsible for their actions, but the film maker should also be responsible for what he creates in terms of not being propagandistic, but I do understand he wants right wing votes
from the anti-immigrant constituency he responds to, so it's not hard to understand his motives, but to seize on the film as a must see when he has an axe to grind is not scientific. I would rather read an atheist French Jew like Maxime Rodinson (if he is still around) who was socialist regarding the subject or maybe Bernard Lewis who may not be the best in town, but is much better than what Geert produced. Lewis is a scholar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nicholas_chiasson
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Location: Samcheok
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
the difference between Christianity and Islam is quite simple. The founder of Christianity said stuff like "Blessed are the Meek." and "Those who live by the sword will die by the sword" and "If my kindgom were of this world then would my servants fight". Now sure, there have been religious wars of Christian state against Christian state. But no one has ever claimed Jesus wants you to go kill the guy over there. Maybe your Pope, or Bishop had, but even they never said "Jesus wants YOU to snuff a muslim." Just "Go kill and we, and Jesus, will bless you."
-Islam was founded by a wingnut camel rider, who ripped off Nestorian Chrisitianity and invented a package he could sell. And thus we have the problem...
Sometimes Mohammed says "Kill people"
Jesus does not say "Kill people."
thus Christianity is a religon of peace. Islam is a religon of peace every time they feel like it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Adventurer wrote: |
No one can deny that, and Mohammed freaks out on the streets creating mayham are responsible for their actions, but the film maker should also be responsible for what he creates in terms of not being propagandistic, but I do understand he wants right wing votes
from the anti-immigrant constituency he responds to, so it's not hard to understand his motives, but to seize on the film as a must see when he has an axe to grind is not scientific. I would rather read an atheist French Jew like Maxime Rodinson (if he is still around) who was socialist regarding the subject or maybe Bernard Lewis who may not be the best in town, but is much better than what Geert produced. Lewis is a scholar. |
Bla Bla Bla. You prattle on about "scientific" this and polls for that. The ground zero point is this: Radical Muslims react to criticism of their faith by killing people. How have "radical" Christians reacted to this piece?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LkitSgYxL0
They haven't. Its buried on Youtube. There's your "scientific" analysis. Geerts bears NO responsibility for making radicals kill other people. I would say the same about the film maker in the above film even if radical Christians were attacking Muslims for that film.
Geerts most certainly did make a piece of propaganda, but that doesn't make him responsible for people dying. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
