MovieChat Forums > Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West (2005) Discussion > Film guide on Propaganda

Film guide on Propaganda

posted 17 years ago by coffeefroggie
88 replies | jump to latest

After viewing Obsession in a documentary film course at Trinity University, where we researched and analyzed documentaries of varying origins and topics, I constructed a viewing guide on this movie, with a coinciding research paper, on the film's propaganda techniques and misrepresentation of a people.

Please view the guide here:
http://www.trinity.edu/adelwich/documentary/comm3325.viewing.guide.dina.sayyed.pdf

And the research paper here:
http://www.trinity.edu/adelwich/documentary/d.sayyed.2006.obsession.pdf

Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you have via the email address included in the guide, or post your comments in this forum.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] coffeefroggie 17 years ago

Actually, I've never posted on an IMDB thread before. This was part of my assignment for my film course: to post my paper and get feedback.

And, I agree, people should make up their own minds. That's why there's a viewing guide. So those whose emotions are heightened by the horrible attacks that radical terrorists are making aren't brainwashed by this film's bogus claims, propaganda and misrepresentations targeted towards a vast people.

This film has an underlying purpose and goal that most who watch it do not see.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] coffeefroggie 17 years ago

Obviously you didn't read my viewing guide or paper.
Tisk tisk.

[–] Cronenfly 17 years ago

Obviously you didn't read my viewing guide or paper.
Tisk tisk.

Maybe he did and maybe he didn't but after the first page of your "Viewing Guide" (an interesting assumption of authority you make in thus providing so vital a service for those of us in need of your "guidance") I couldn't go any further.

You state that your "Viewing Guide" is "... targeted at anyone who is questioning the blanket statements presented by the film. For those who are open minded and willing to see the reality behind the glitz." You thereby infer that anyone who disagrees with your position is neither "open minded" or "willing to see reality," thus engaging in an obvious propaganda trick of your own.

Seems we have a pretty clear case of the pot calling the kettle black here.

You also state: "Most certainly, those involved in film, communications and speech studies should be interested, for this guide delves right up their expertise, and they are sure to pick up on the unjust propaganda methods used, perhaps even without this guide’s help" which, apart from being sub-literate, is almost too arrogant for words.

The first sentence in your guidebook is: "Supposedly stemming from the heightened emotions of the Western world after a stream of terrorist attacks hit their soil, Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West (Kopping, 2005) was produced under a cover of objectivity and factual reality in regards to the issue of radical Islam and its danger to society."

That statement is absurd on it's face. I'm not sure where you think support for that claim can be found, but at the very least it betrays a misunderstanding of the word "supposedly."

With the first sentence of your research paper, you state: "Throughout history, the United States has proven that our nation may not be the most responsible, in regards to standing up for the wrongs their people are suffering in times of crises. We treated the Japanese unfathomably, placing them in internment camps during World War II, and ruined so many lives during the period of McCarthy and the Red Scare."

Apart from the undocumented and biased assertions, these are two of the most poorly constructed sentences I've read since junior high school. I'm not going to waste time grading your work, but I'll give you a hint: start with the word "their" and go on from there.

That sentence also reveals your clear and obvious bias. You make the politically correct assertion that the Japanese were treated "unfathomably" at Manzanar but do not exhibit a true historian's interest in objective understanding and contextualization. You breeze over these "facts" about America's "proven" "historical" "irresponsibility" with the clear belief that no one will differ with you, that these are simply known facts and settled issues. You are thus a liberal parrot.

You make the claim that: "Though presented as an unbiased and straightforward documentary, “Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West” is dangerous propaganda against the Islamic religion, misrepresenting and dehumanizing a vast culture."

Interesting that you feel emboldened to make such a claim when you show virtually no understanding whatsoever of the actual tenets of Islam.

You confidently ascribe ill intent to the filmmaker's disclaimer at the beginning of the film by suggesting that they mean for us to: "put down our guard and in the same instance give the filmmakers some credit for being so responsible" without it ever occuring to you that your analysis is presumptuous and wrong. The disclaimer is not designed to assure snotty, self-important college students of the filmmaker's "responsibility." It's to point out that despite the clear doctrinal support for radical Islamism, not all self-professed Muslims are violent fanatics who support the global jihad. This is simply true, despite the fact that Islam is a fundamentally aggressive, imperialist religiopolitical system and always has been since the days of its warlord prophet.

The language you choose to employ in your "scholarly" analysis, such as calling Obsession "abhorrent" and "dangerous" are further betrayals of your bias. You even have the audacity to cite Noam Chomskey as a source. Your paper is an obviously ideologically driven parade of false assertions and emotion-baiting, blissfully free of actual knowledge of the subject you pontificate on.

If this kind of biased, uninformed, self-righteous drivel passes for scholarship in universities these days, we're all doomed.

I hope you pass this response on to your instructor, and then I hope you pick up a book. Start with the Qur'an.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

I find this to be very interesting because it is similar to what i interpretated when i first watched this film, the first five minutes are utterly ridiculous. How does anyone believe this. Fox is owned by a republican lover (Murdoch), therefore this film is funded by a republican lover. This movie is absurd and I should know I'm a Muslim. I've been to all these countries and all the "experts" they use are utterly biased and likely to have been paid for this. Its shameless. I'm going to circulate this guide. Thanks.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"*beep* you deny the holocaust too?"

Nope I believe in the holocaust, i actually think more then 6 million people got killed. I wouldn't consider myself a "moderate Muslim" as the media like to dub Muslims who aren't crazy. the people you see on the news are a very very very small minority. Certainly nobody wants to destroy the west because they hate freedom, Islam's Empire was the most peaceful at the time while the westerners spread their faith and power using bloody wars Islam let people of all faiths remain in their empire peacefully.
I would call myself a fundamentalist because Islam's fundamental beliefs are about peace and I love peace therefore I'm a fundamentalist.

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

I think there are some pretty valid reasons why Muslimsare wary of the West. And it's not a matter of Islam per se. Not the rabid statments from radicals. (And this has nothing to do with terrorists).

The US took a bad situation and made it into horror show. We've lost total control in Iraq and innocent people on both sides are getting killed. Our blood isn't just spilled, but the souls of our men and women are being smothered from being put into horrible situations.

They are killing civilians. I'm not saying that it's intentional. I hope its mostly from just being way over their heads, by the most awful mistakes possible.

But it's happening. And that world hates us for it, because we shouldn't be there. This war must end. And films like this one just muddy the water. It's misleading. It's demagoguery.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/world/middleeast/12abuse.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Civilian Claims on U.S. Suggest the Toll of War

In February 2006, nervous American soldiers in Tikrit killed an Iraqi fisherman on the Tigris River after he leaned over to switch off his engine. A year earlier, a civilian filling his car and an Iraqi Army officer directing traffic were shot by American soldiers in a passing convoy in Balad, for no apparent reason.

The incidents are among many thousands of claims submitted to the Army by Iraqi and Afghan civilians seeking payment for noncombat killings, injuries or property damage American forces inflicted on them or their relatives.

The claims provide a rare window into the daily chaos and violence faced by civilians and troops in the two war zones. Recently, the Army disclosed roughly 500 claims to the American Civil Liberties Union in response to a Freedom of Information Act request. They are the first to be made public.

They represent only a small fraction of the claims filed. In all, the military has paid more than $32 million to Iraqi and Afghan civilians for noncombat-related killings, injuries and property damage, an Army spokeswoman said. That figure does not include condolence payments made at a unit commander’s discretion.

The paperwork, examined by The New York Times, provides unusually detailed accounts of how bystanders to the conflicts have become targets of American forces grappling to identify who is friend, who is foe.

In the case of the fisherman in Tikrit, he and his companion desperately tried to appear unthreatening to an American helicopter overhead.

“They held up the fish in the air and shouted ‘Fish! Fish!’ to show they meant no harm,” said the Army report attached to the claim filed by the fisherman’s family. The Army refused to compensate for the killing, ruling that it was “combat activity,” but approved $3,500 for his boat, net and cellphone, which drifted away and were stolen.

In the killings at the gas station in Balad, documents show that the Army determined that the neither of the dead Iraqis had done anything hostile or criminal, and approved $5,000 to the civilian’s brother but nothing for the Iraqi officer.

In another incident, in 2005, an American soldier in a dangerous Sunni Arab area south of Baghdad killed a boy after mistaking his book bag for a bomb satchel. The Army paid the boy’s uncle $500.

The Foreign Claims Act, which governs such compensation, does not deal with combat-related cases. For those cases, including the boy’s, the Army may offer a condolence payment as a gesture of regret with no admission of fault, of usually no higher than $2,500 per person killed.

The total number of claims filed, or paid, is unclear, although extensive data has been provided in reports to Congress. There is no way to know immediately whether disciplinary action or prosecution has resulted from the cases.

Soldiers hand out instruction cards after mistakes are made, so Iraqis know where to file claims. “The Army does not target civilians,” said Maj. Anne D. Edgecomb, an Army spokeswoman. “Sadly, however, the enemy’s tactics in Iraq and Afghanistan unnecessarily endanger innocent civilians.”

There are no specific guidelines to tell Army field officers judging the claims how to evaluate the cash value of a life taken, Major Edgecomb said. She said officers “consider the contributions the deceased made to those left behind and offer an award based on the facts, local tribal customs, and local law.”

In Haditha, one of the most notorious incidents involving American troops in Iraq, the Marines paid residents $38,000 after troops killed two dozen people in November 2005.

The relatively small number of claims divulged by the Army show patterns of misunderstanding at checkpoints and around American military convoys that often result in inadvertent killings. In one incident, in Feb. 18, 2006, a taxi approached a checkpoint east of Baquba that was not properly marked with signs to slow down, one Army claim evaluation said. Soldiers fired on the taxi, killing a woman and severely wounding her daughter and son. The Army approved an unusually large condolence payment of $7,500.

In September 2005, soldiers killed a man and his sister by firing 200 rounds into their car as it approached a checkpoint, apparently too quickly, near Mussayib. The Army lieutenant colonel who handled the claim awarded relatives a $10,000 compensation payment, finding that the soldiers had overstepped the rules of engagement.

“There are some very tragic losses of civilian life, including losses of whole families,” said Anthony D. Romero, the A.C.L.U.’s executive director, in an interview. He said the claims showed “enormous confusion on all sides, both from the civilian population on how to interact with the armed services and also among the soldiers themselves.”

Of the 500 cases released, 204, or about 40 percent, were apparently rejected because the injury, death or property damage was deemed to have been “directly or indirectly” related to combat. Of the claims approved for payment, at least 87 were not combat-related, and 77 were condolence payments for incidents the Army judged to be combat-related.

About 10 percent of the claims were rejected because the Army could not find a “significant activity” report confirming an incident.

A summary of the cases is online at www.aclu.org/civiliancasualties.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

First, an aside -> By the way, if we want to introduce a connection between Muslims (when you really need to be less wildly general. Name who you speak of...), you must not neglect the Harriman Bank or IBM. Or how about the Germans? What's the point of playing the Hitler card?

OK, what I really wanted to reply to....

"fight those who you say are hijacking your religion."

Interesting, because that's what some of us are tryin to do here in the US. And it has nothing to do with Islam, but everything with the way Christianity has been manipulated to support pro-war politics.

Using verses from the Koran to prove your point is foolish. As noted in another thread, which I am sure you saw, cherry picking text is a game that can be played all day long.

Are you not familar with the Old Testament, many books of which are also the Torah?

From Deuteronomy 22

20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

(blood on the bedsheet after the wedding night)

21 then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die; because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.
22 ¶ If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.
23 ¶ If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto a husband, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her;
24 then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbor's wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

Notice that "because she cried not" ? A girl best be screaming when she is raped, or .... yep, stoning.

OK, let's take a peek at Numbers 15 and what happens if you work on the Sabbath:

32 ¶ And while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man that gathered sticks upon the sabbath day.
33 And they that found him gathering sticks brought him unto Moses and Aaron, and unto all the congregation.
34 And they put him in ward, because it was not declared what should be done to him.
35 And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.
36 And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses.

These sound like something you'd use to prove how Islam is evil?

How about that Moses?! Check out Numbers 31:

17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
18 But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

And quite simply Deuteronomy 17:

2 ¶ If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant,
3 and hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;
4 and it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and inquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:
5 then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.

What about the New Testament ? Well....

The verse used most to connect violence to Christ, in the same way it is connected to Mohammed, is Matthew 10:34.

¶ Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

http://www.bartleby.com/108/40/10.html

But that too --- dangerous if taken out of context. That passages of verses merits much study and reflection.

The point it:

Don't take things out of context. This isn't about winning an argument that Islam or Muslims are eeeeevil. We have issues in this world that need to be fixed so all our children can live on, and live in peace with each other.

Work towards that. That's the good we should all be trying to do. Seek peace. Don't look to falsely whip up most hate and fear.

Islam, Christiany, Judaism -- all got serious baggage. All got plenty of violence that's been committed in the name of their faiths. All are guilty.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

I've assumed that galilleo_2005 has been keeping up with past posts.

galilleo_2005, it doesn't matter if you are christian or jewish. The point is, if you are going to use verses from the Koran to show that Islam is rooted in violence, then it must also be discussed that there are similar passages found within the texts followede by Christians and Jews.

You say "some of the verses i posted from your book are calls for war.....why would you read a religious book that calls for war? interesting. why would a god need us to kill each other for him? wouldnt he be powerful enough to take care of his own business......or better yet....give us...FREE WILL ."

I'm a bit confused here. What do you mean by "your book." The point you raise can be applied to all three religions under discussion here.

The verse you mention, from the Hadith, which is not the Koran, but is a supplement. How is that any more or any legit that any other verse discussed here?

And as for "showing my hand", what are you trying to say?

I was raised as an evangelical Christian. Spent most of my life in the Church. I think that there are forces in the U.S. perverting the message of Christ for political power. I think that's very wrong.

I resist those who have "hijacked" the message of peace, charity, love and forgiveness put out by Jesus. I believe that true Christians are anti-war, anti-death penalty. That we should care for our poor.

How in the world does that render my posts as moot? How does that make me want to "take down America"?

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

Galilleo,

Nothing recruits people to fight against the Unites States faster than an American bomb falling down on one of their villages. It's lazy to pluck out verses and say -- aha! that's it right there! That's why they hate us.

In mamy ways, our government has made choices that come back to haunt us. It's irresponsible to pass around a movie like this and make it all about a religion, when it's much, much more complicated than that.

A pack of men -- largely connected to Saudi Arabia (our "partners in peace")-- attack us. We invade Afghanistan -- which mostly makes sense, save for the fact that the guy we are looking for might be hidden in the mountains of Pakisatn (our "partners in peace"). And that for the most part, prior to 9-11, we were funding and training the Taliban -- because our government picks lousy allies that usually turn around and bite us.

Then we blow billions on an ill-planned occupation of Iraq, that had zero connection to Sept. 11, to take down the idiot that we had been supporting and giving chemical weapons to during the 1980's -- because our government picks lousy allies that usually turn around and bite us.

In the process, we create power vacuum in the Middle East by taking out the nation that kept Iran in check. We actually end up helping Iran with our war, while shedding our own blood, draining our coffers and cauing the life of tens of thousands of innocent people.

Meanwhile, nothing has been done regarding Palestine. We reject and condemn murder by Palestinians, which is the right thing, no question, because violence is not the answer. But there are valid issues regarding those people, and that needs to be addressed, esp. in regards to water. Again, plenty of blame to go around, and Arafat certainly blew the best offer on the table.

Middle East tensions will be greatly deflated once the matter of Palestine is resolved. Many of these people are just people used as political pawns by all sides, including the Arab states. It seems like Japan is the only nation stepping up right now with some kind of movement toward peace.

We claim to be resisting the forces of Islamofacists, but there is quite a bit of moral relativity when it comes to politics. Pakistan has nukes. They have militant religious elements that attack Christians and Hindus. And we've given them billions since 9-11. Because they are our allies -- thus, it's ok.

But by far the most foolish choice of friends is Saudi Arabia. They play both sides, striking economic deals with the US while funding those radical elements that this movie is about. Because as long as those folks see us as the enemy, they will be less inclined to over through the monarchy.

That nation is run under Shari'a law. The most horrific things that occur that we all agree is unacceptable happens there. All citizens must be Muslim. All allowed by that government, who's leaders hang out at the White House and are close friends with the Bush family.

Are you kidding me?

Our Adminstration gives comfort and aid to the most egregious example of an oppressive Islamic regime. You wanna spout verses? That moving car you speak of runs on blood oil.

You want to do something about the problems we face? Sanction Saudi Arabia, the home nation of 15 of the 9-11 hijackers, the country that refused to allow our people to investigate the families of those terrorists much less share intel about those men. They fund the radicals. They give money to the families of suicide bombers.

Don't allow their leaders to come into the United States until they hold elections. Cut off military aid. Disavow the greed of the House of Saud, which is nothing less than a dictatorship. Stop buying their oil.

Penalize the corporations that do business with Saudi Arabia, or does that ask for too much integrity, too much morality? Because our values suddenly become irrelevant when it comes to making money, no matter the cost to human lives.

Spare me the hypocrisy of our foreign policy.

A movie like this wants you to fear the rants of a small group of people half a world away with a fraction of the resources and weapons that we possess, while the real threat plays cowboy at the Bush ranch.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

Lol. How do I hate America? I'm an American. I am part of "us" and one that's not going to ignore the relationship between our current administration and the House of Saud.

Please explain to me how it's acceptable for a regime that endorses Wahhabism to have such close ties to the Bush family. In your worldview, doesn't that create some sort of conflict?

Please, please, explain to me how that is ok. I thought you were opposed to "Islamofacists"? Or just the ones that aren't friends with the GOP?

I'm also a registered voter and formerly Republican until that party abandoned most of the things it used to represent. I disagree with the current administration. I feel that White House has made a series of bad decisions that damages our nation.

Last time I checked, it's my duty as a citizen to be a part of the political process. I have an inherent right to disagree and to use the power of the ballot, because this is a representative democracy.

That's not "hate," has nothing to do with emotional feelings about a man we elect to serve us. It's a matter of accountability, which is the responsibilty of a true patriot. "We the people," my friend. That's what makes this country great.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Zatoichi_Sanjuro 17 years ago

This film is not propaganda.
But it does need more political correctness for college students to handle, though.

You're one of those anti-intellect cretins aren't you. I bet you also don't know the correct definition of the word 'liberal'. But then...you didn't go to college did you.

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"We have issues in this world that need to be fixed so all our children can live on, and live in peace with each other."

I agree totally, there is this need for people to find connections between violence and faith, the truth is people crave violence. There's no doubt about it and just like to shift the blame from this world wide human problem to a religion or idea or whatever. And we are still in this perpetual cycle of violence and hate. Because this whole situation is the fault of another situation which is the fault of another... and it continues forever.

Secondly Galileo_2005 this whole idea of telling a Muslim like me to reform Islam is stupid simply because religion and faith are personal, and there is no problem with Islam. It's like when I hear people saying that the Muslim community should apologies for 911, I'm not responsible for anyones else actions.
The only real problem is political and Islam is just dragged in so the "enemy" seems connected in some way. Would Iraq have been connected to the Taliban for if it wasn't a a Muslim state, no. It's just a simple way to collectively make a mindset for the country of whichever country USA, UK whatever to know who they're fighting and how it links to that horrible day in September.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

Its seems to me you picking and choosing what agrees with your islam hatig agenda, I said there wasn't anything with Islam right after that comment. Secondly Relgion is personal because firstly people interpret things in different ways (if they didn't there would be no art) and secondly that I am only responsible for my own action, read the whole thing instead of picking and choosing.

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

I am going to have to agree with *beep* Not all Muslims are for the Jihad against the West, take for example *beep* himself. We cannot blame a single religion for the violence that has occurred across the world, the Christians as well as the Jews have perpetrated acts of violence in the name of religion for centuries as well as the Muslims. And it's not the entire religions themselves, it's denominations. Look at the Crusades for example.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

Yeah I'm a bad guy.

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

galilleo_2005 do u thin Islam is evil? do u think i want to kill you and are you one of those stupid people that believes the reason these terrorists hate America is because it got "freedom". It really makes me laugh when i see these articles about how Iraq is becoming democratic and these changes include entering the miss world competition.
Secondly Iraq's tally of death for American soldiers 3282 for Iraqi civilians in September 2006 alone 3539 and thats whats reported in the news which is even more than 911. ishttp://icasualties.org/oif/
The total amount of deaths of civilians in Iraq is well over 400,000 even more. The truth is I am tired of hearing people saying bring our troops home stop them from being killed, the truth is they signed up to "protect" they're country and know they're lives are gonna be on the line, the children that die everyday in Iraq didn't. When history judges this war just by supporting it you'll be partly to blame.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"and we both know that the big number is when the islamic terrorists blow up iraqis....i would like to know how you dont blame the ones doing it...i mean really american ammo didnt kill them...."

Yea really american ammo didn't kill them, no all the bombs and ammo they took to iraq was to shoot cans. And you say the islamic terrorists blow up the Iraqis, why is that happening mmmm... let me see, maybe its the *beep* invasion by the states. Secondly why does the fact they they are "muslims" matter, theyre all iraqis.

"why do YOU want another sharia law like opressive government that chops off limbs and squashes liberties? how does that further your agenda? all i want is peace, but if the states leave....the iraq people would have none. and you know this....man."

so the states have given the Iraqi's peace by starting a civil war and the fact there is a dummy "democratic" government in place is not oppressive. Many of these people are illiterate and if you give them a government that they know is controlled by foreign land and not not just any foreign land but the land that doesn't give a *beep* about them, well they will rebel and the only way they know to rebel is through violence.

"i'm ok with that, when you look at the whole picture, with the mass graves the gassed kurds and murder and fear everywhere.....im ok with it....the islamic terrorists making that large number you posted on the other hand will go down in history as some of the most terrible people since hitler. and if they get a nuke, and use it...they will be even worse. i seriously cant believe you support them."

Firstly I never ever said I supported them, secondly that large number which is from an official american website is not even the whole number because America doesn't like to keep the tally of the children and innocent lives they kill or destroy. The most terrible people since Hitler you say... really do you think they have a motive do you think these "terrorists" are killing people because they like to kill or do you think they have a point? I'd like to know why you think these terrorist are against USA.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

The truth is I don't understand how you think that the USA army and the British (we've got a hand in ti aswell) are not killing innocent people. Even these terrorists you speak of, are they really terrorists, because there not terrorizing anyone if you think about it they're on their own land, while the USA Army are the ones terrorizin. And Do u mean to tell me that some lower class high school graduates from the states knows the difference between a "terrorist" and a normal person. And you talk about the states going to help thats *beep* and you know it. The states are the most Capitalistic country in the world they never do anything unless it helps them. They barley admit Global Warming.
Do I support Iran or Syria? no, but I hate the fact that america believes its any better.
Again my question to you Galilleo 2005 which you haven't answered why do these eastern people hate America?

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Blastcage 17 years ago

yea i agree, jews should be punished for 11/9

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

Galilleo, there is a civil war going on and that's a fact. It may not be a conventional war, but there is bloodshed going on between factions. This probably went on during Husseins regime but has been allowed to grow because of the US lead operation in Iraq, and the destabilizing of the region. The US is failing and will continue to fail in Iraq because as soon as Husseins regime was terminated, the country became a breeding ground for terrorists. Look at all of these insurgents they capture, half of them aren't even Iraqi's. Bush is using Iraq as an excuse as the front lines of the "War on Terror" but he has done nothing but allowed terrorists to infiltrate the region, as well as helping create a whole new generation of anti-western insurgents.

And f cukt guy or whatever your name was, sure, the Western powers kill civilains. I can probably assume that most of the time it's unintentional, but I can't say the same for the insurgents. The insurgents purposely infiltrate civilain areas with the intention of killing many civilains as possible. In war, civilains die, and that's something the world needs to accept.

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

ghdorr01, I agree with you mostly although I question the the difference between a insurgent and somebody who rebels over USA rule over Iraq. What I mean to say is that when the army is killing insurgents, is that a right way to go about or if we're democratic shouldn't the people be trailed. I also agree that often the insurgents kill civilians to get attention but I'm sure there must be more peaceful rebellion thats isn't shown on the news.

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

Interesting points all around. I'd like to second the issue about the media, aand when I say that, I mean the TV news.

I've seen time and time again that the folks who select images like to go with the stuff that really riles people up. When there's something violent occurs in the name of Islam, there's a number of local Muslim groups in the US who always strongly condem that those acts are unacceptable.

There's a group where I live that raised money for churches that were vandalized after the Mohammed cartoon uproar.

Yet... I time and time again read posts about folks complaining that Muslims do not condemn violent acts by those who claim to be Islamic. WTF? Why don't these groups and these statements ever get any attention?

Is it that the TV outlets would rather air video of 30 guys burning an American flag and chanting somehting we are unable to translate?

And yet, when tens of thousands of Americans march on Washington in the name of peace, that also gets limited coverage, save for the cherry-picked images of the most out there of the radical doves. Something viewed as nutty or hateful gets play, but not the tens of thousand other regular folks exercising their American right to petition the gov't.

Those to the right complain about never seeing the good news in Iraq. Why don't we ever hear much about the Arab-Jew alliances that exist? The folks on the other side of the planet that push for peace -- or protest in a non-violent manner for whichever of the conflicts you'd like to discuss.

Doesn't fit. The accusations of a liberal media just ain't true. We don't get the full picture, never see the true impacts of the war, not until you see the kids coming home with limbs missing or the friend that served in Iraq who is able to tell the truth of what is happening.

Not right. We don't need to be misled. This isn't a fascist country. We can't let it become one.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

Even the liberal don't show the whole picture, the war between Lebanon and Israel is a perfect example. The Hizabollah fighters were named as terrorists although there is no proof of that. Secondly nobody questioned why Israel made such a big deal out of two soldiers, while they part of their policy detain many muslims that enter the country and subject them to torture I know this because it happened to my friend.
The media is often blocking the pictures of the many iraqis being killed by the states. There is more of a concern for soldiers who pledge their lives then for innocents.
Lastly the bull that I hear coming out of American news channels and documentary's such as these show that ure news is incredibly biased.

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

Hezbollah fighters aren't terrorists? HA! I've been to Israel and I know for a fact that years before the Lebanon/Israel conflict that Hezbollah fired rockets into the North of Israel. No proof that they're terrorists? Give me a break, there's a reason why they've been labeled a terrorist organization by basically every major power in this world.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"and as far as israel goes....i guess they can only be pushed so far", Come on trying to invade a country for no reason and don't say that the capture of the two soldiers was worth the death of over a 1000 Lebanese civilians and the death of a hundred Israeli soldiers.
They can only be pushed so farso when they took the land of a palistine, locked 1000s of lebanese in prison without trial. Hizabollah protected in my opinion the south of lebanease when the army couldn't.
Israel has slaughtered many many Palestinians and I'm not being racist and I have nothing against Jews but I dislike the Israel foreign policy, Little USA.
"An individual who uses violence, terror, and intimidation to achieve a result."
meaning of terrorist are you telling me that doesn't describe Israel, Hizabollah hasn't attacked for a while and is helping many civilians rebuild their lives.
And I haven't ever posted on a Michael Moore, who I think is pretty manipulative.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

No, it doesn't make sense its Israel picking the fights and have the more military power than Lebanon and Palestine. If they could be wiped out as easily as you say they would have been wped out years aso. And they did lose against Lebanon. I am also on of thos people who questions the reason for choosing the place for building Israel there but I'm also one of thos people who thins that its too late to chang anything now and that we should have peace in the middle east. Israel seemed to me last year trying to be mini-USA by giving a crappy reason to invide a country only they got chucked out.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

Most of the people who got killed between in Israels side were military, this is not my own statistic but from sky news. We're talking politics here nothing about Islamic ideals so lets leave it out of this. Lastly over a thousand civilians died in Lebanon around a hundred Israelis dies mostly military.
As I remember most of the Hizabollah targets were Military again from news, not any Islamic news channel but a news channel owned by your buddy Murdoch.
"it was israels lack of good leadership and in house fighting that beat them"
That doesn't mean they didn't lose, they still lost your just trying to make the blow a little softer.

"israel doesnt want to, and just wants peace once and for all."
By fighting two countries at once and considering how many innocents they have killed are you sure about that?

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

Israel didn't lose against Lebanon. It was because of international pressure that they stopped assaulting Lebanon. If Israel continued its assault it would occupy Southern Lebanon again like they did in the 80's. Hezbollah doesn't pick its targets, it shoots randomly across the border into Israel and hopes it kills anyone, regardless of military or civilain targets. Islamic ideals is most definitely a large factor contributing to Hezbollah, they are the "Army of God" after all.

[–] Zatoichi_Sanjuro 17 years ago

Israel didn't lose against Lebanon.

Wars are won on objectives. Israel's obejectives were to recover their captured soldiers and stop the rockets bombarding Northern Israel, they failed on both counts. Hezbollah on the other hand stood up to a far greater military force and continued fighting, they still have the IDF soldiers and retain the upper hand.

It was because of international pressure that they stopped assaulting Lebanon.

Really? I was paying close attention and I don't recall Israel listening to the "international pressure" at all.

'Cuiusvis hominis est errare; nullius nisi insipientis in errore perseverare.'

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

Did you run out of any argument so all you could do was make insults by calling me a Jew hater. If by criticizing Israel's foreign policy I'm a Jew-hater then by your standards doesn't that make you a Muslim-hater, and if it does that explains everything.
Just so you know I have nothing against Jews but Israel's policies, I've been to synagogues and have Jewish friends. They even didn't understand the reason for Israel going to war. The fact you can't differentiate Jews and Israel makes you ignorant.
Israel started the war with a pathetic excuse to take over Lebanon as they had before, they didn't achieve their aims. So they lost.
Because I'm curious galilleo_2005 I want to ask you how old are you? just to know that these immature insults are not coming from a 12 year old.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Zatoichi_Sanjuro 17 years ago

i am older than you. thats all you need to know....but i find it interesting that you picked the year 12.....just like that kid the taliban made behead that guy over there..... did you also hear that the murdered mans father called the taliban "the real infidels".

You have the mental age of a twelve year old, evident in your semi-literate ramblings.

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"just like that kid the taliban made behead that guy over there"
what are you talking about, give me some evidence not some random words that link with my 12 year old comment. If you want to talk about killing kids pictures such as this
http://www.greatestcities.com/6642pic/653/CP19653.jpg/Tank_Israel.jpg
are evident enough of who's killing who's children.

"if the surrounding islamic countries stopped attacking israel, and kidnapping their people"
I can tell you from personal experience that many more people are tortured in Israel. if tortured in Palestine its by non-governmental people but in Israel the government tortures people. I'm not defending anyone, just saying that Israel are as bad if not worse as they are officials are being barbaric not gorilla fighters.

"also the quran says not to take non muslims as friends, and to fight them and kill them, so you see, either youre a bad muslim, or youre lying about the friends you keep."
Mate, this again makes you sound like a child. Like I said previously Muslim countries used to be the only countries where people weren't prosecuted for their religion, although non-Muslims did have to pay taxes. Give me some evidence for your ridiculous claims because the Quran says not only can you make friend with non-Muslims but you can even marry them, that is only "people of the book" (Christians and Jews. Your also asking me to kill non-Muslims by saying that I'm being a bad Muslim by not doing so, making you unbelievably contradictory.

P.S: Fix your grammar and spelling.
Word of the Day for you
Kaffir, noun meaning Non-muslims not Infidels

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

Galilleo maybe that is one interpretation of the Koran but I'm pretty sure a lot of Muslims don't follow that. I know muslims in my personal life who practice that are my friends and we rarely if ever bring up the issue of our conflicting religions. There are different sects of Islam as there are in Christianity and Judaism, all which preach their own interpretation of the Bible, the Koran, and the Torah. My particular Christian religion says that you can drink alcohol but not to the point of intoxication. I find myself getting intoxicated at least once a week. That doesn't mean I follow what my church tells me too.

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

Ah, back to being a troll, eh? Yet you stopped posting on the threads where there were debates that invloved thoughtful discussion. What's up with that? Here's a chance to engage in dialogue with another culture, find common ground, make peaceful connection, but instead...

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

wilder1377 was that directed at me or somebody else?

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

Sorry, I thought the reply would have threaded under the person I was commenting to. Not you, but the one who's handle is similar to Galileo. (Honestly too tired from work to click back and see how it is properly spelled.) We had some back and forth discussions a few weeks ago that he abandoned in favor of being rude to folks. Shame. I thought he/she was finally coming around to having sincere conversation.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ghdorr01 17 years ago

Gallileo, I presume you are directing that slightly at me. The fact of the matter is I am not a Muslim, I am a Christian, I was born and raised one. The other fact is that I do have Muslim friends. Verse after verse of my bible tells me us we shouldn't eat meat on Friday, but I do anyway. Verse after verse of my bible says we shouldn't have pre-marital relations, but most people of all humanity do anyway. I guess it depends on how each individual person interprets their holy book and acts out on these interpretations. It's a shame that Muslim zealots commit heinous actions in the name of Islam because it reflects negatively on all those who practice the religion peacefully.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

galilleo_2005
"that just means youre a bad christian is all.....just like having non muslims friends makes them bad muslims"
your comments are getting more and more ridiculous how can u possibly tell somebody how to practice a belief. Its a very undemocratic thing to say. It goes against America's first ammedment.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"youre the one who says you dont follow christianity well, not me.....i can only tell you what the books say"
I\ve never said I'm Christian I'm Muslim. And you did't day what the books say, give me a quote instead of just these random accusations that Muslims can't be friends with non-Muslims. You know they can, I've mentioned this before but you can't understand it for some reason, the Islamic Empire was one of the most accepting of other beliefs at the time, check out any good unbiased History book you'll see. Secondly Muslims can marry non-Muslims don't you find it surprising that if they can marry non-Muslims why can't they be their friends. learn your facts and the use them to back you opinions, again you hit a new low with
"its not my fault that some people don't follow their faiths well."
"Their" is the keyword, in other words belief is personal you contradict yourself.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

"f cukdeath, i am telling you how to be religious"
I think the first word meant it was me, you keep contradicting yourself. Seriously read your own comments, the one i quoted from was aimed at me unless yyou like to start comments with f cukdeath

[–] Zatoichi_Sanjuro 17 years ago

You're wasting your time with this moron. Best just to employ the ignore function.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilder1377x 17 years ago

"you call me rude, but insult in the same breath. "

Yeah, that wasn't an insult. It's a fact. You don't have intelligent conversations or meanful debate. You just toss out misleading rhetoric. Folks like you are the problem. You add to the divide among cultures. You make things worse.

I'd like to hear some actual solutions from you. But the treality is, you are just a troll out to encourage mistrust and hate among people, instead of figure out how to bring peace to our world.

Again, Galilleo_2005, you embody the very things you speak out against.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

I only quoted the first line without the question mark i don't know how that possibly would make you zat but maybe you are now aware that your right wing beliefs don't have any evidence, so instead of backing your opinions you've turned this into an attack on my grammar or/and to emphasis how stupid you are by trying to invalidate my comments by saying you weren't talking to me. . Seriously this is over. You have shown nothing that any longer equates to a a serious opinion by a human being. You plunged this into a ridiculous arguments and I don't see why you can have these views when you know inside that they don't have any good basis.

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

People kill people, race and culture doesn't matter. Simple as that, you keep going after Muslims and brushing aside the other people in the world that kill. You say your against the fact that Muslims hate the west, but you hate all Muslims making you complete the circle of hate. Do you want to add to the problem or solve it.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fcukdeath 17 years ago

I never said you killed anyone, I just said you have hatred in you.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meatballmeedow 17 years ago

galileo you'd love to think that. Go study some history of Western intervention in the middle east and you'll find out why the people are so angry at the West, the democracies that were vital assets in destroying their nations.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meatballmeedow 17 years ago

Are you referring to Darfur? Maybe I can refer you to how Christian nations brutalized Africa and killed tens of millions? Islam isn't doing it you dummy, it's the people. Would you like to have a discussion about Islam, maybe I can educate you on a thing or two.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meatballmeedow 17 years ago

Wow, are you stupid man? Give Medina to the Jews?

Ok, let's see where I should start with such a dumb post.

All of them? What's all of them? Last time I checked it was just Darfur.

Europe colonized Africa in an attempt to "civilize" the Africans and give them Christianity. These were Christian nations, the idea of separation of Church and State came after, learn some history.

You are talking about what is going on right now? I can give you a list of illegal actions committed by the West galileo, but the point is that it is not Islam that is acting out these problems in Darfur or the Middle East, it is the people.
I won't even discuss Medina, that has to be the dumbest comment you've made in this.

I am glad you posted that verse, it helps prove my point that Islam is peaceful. In the Qur'an it says that if you kill a man that it would be like you killed humanity. If you saved a mans life, it would be as though you saved humanity. The fact that you thought that was a problem means you do know incredibly little about Islam.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] meatballmeedow 17 years ago

Medina was not taken from the Jews...Where do you get this?

Let's read the verse in its entirety

5:32 "Because of this did We ordain unto the children of Israel that if anyone slays a human being - unless it be [in punishment] for murder or for spreading corruption on earth - it shall be as though he had slain all mankind; whereas, if anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he had saved the lives of all mankind.
And, indeed, there came unto them Our apostles with all the evidence of the truth: yet, behold, not-withstanding all this, many of them go on committing all manner of excesses on earth.
5:33 "It is but a just recompense for those who make war on God and His apostle, and endeavor to spread corruption on earth, that they are being slain in great numbers, or crucified in great numbers, or have, in result of their perverseness, their hands and feet cut off in great numbers, or are being [entirely] banished from [the face of] the earth: such is their ignominy in this world. But in the life to come [yet more] awesome suffering awaits them (34) save for such [of them] as repent ere you [O believers] become more powerful than they: for you must know that God is much-forgiving, a dispenser of grace."

These peoples excesses are a reference to crimes of violence, in particular, to the ruthless killing of human beings. Only when, as is pointed out in this verse and many other verses in many sira, a Muslim's life and/or religious and civil rights are threatened is he allowed to fight physically.

This verse is not asking anyone to go and kill people it is saying that those who commit such actions are having a just recompense in this life, and will have one in the life after as well.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] wilder1377 17 years ago

Sigh. The issues in Darfur are about water, drought, famine. Lack of food. Resources. Etc. Grow up and learn a bit more about what makes the world go round.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mrzeebub 17 years ago

So are you planning a Part 2: a viewer guide and research paper debunking Bowling For Columbine, or any of Michael Moore's tripe masquarading as "documentaries?" Just curious.

_____________
Gun control, the theory that 110lb women should have to fistfight with 210lb rapists-Chris Morton