Mark Shea, one of many outside the mainstream pointing at the blatantly obvious truth the mainstream insists on not seeing:
One thing you can give our media Chattering Classes: They are utterly consistent. After Major Nidal Malik Hasan opened fire on a roomful of defenseless people in Fort Hood, it was absolutely assured that we would immediately be told that this outrage had nothing to do with his Islamic faith and that it was not an act of terror. Then, as time went on and the bleedin’ obvious became bleedin’ obvious, we would spend all weekend enduring TV pundits scratching the $200 haircuts on their 88-cent heads and pondering the question of whether there might be some remote connection between Islamic belief and a guy who praises Muslim suicide bombers as heroes and martyrs, sits under the teaching of a Radical Islamic imam who praises his act of slaughter as heroic, uses his authority as a psychiatrist to proselytize vulnerable patients with Islamic agitprop, and dresses in traditional Muslim garb and shouts “Allahu akbar!” as he guns down his prey.
It was a spectacular display of deliberate willed stupidity by a media culture that demonstrates repeatedly it does not want to acknowledge that Islam tends to breed such acts of terror with startling frequency. And it was predictable because it happens every time some Islamic butcher opens up on innocent victims in the name of the Prophet.
Well worth your time to read the whole thing.
Shea points at something in particular I’ve been trying to find; more evidence of Hollywood’s cravenness, in particular:
For 2012, Emmerich set his sites on destroying the some biggest landmarks around the world, from Rome to Rio. But there’s one place that Emmerich wanted to demolish but didn’t: the Kaaba, the cube-shaped structure located in the center of Mecca. It’s the focus of prayers and the site of the Hajj, the biggest, most important pilgrimage in Islam.
“Well, I wanted to do that, I have to admit,” the filmmaker told scifiwire.com. “But my co-writer Harald [Kloser] said, ‘I will not have a fatwa on my head because of a movie.’ And he was right.”
Emmerich went on: “We have to all, in the western world, think about this. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have … a fatwa, and that sounds a little bit like what the state of this world is. So it’s just something which I kind of didn’t [think] was [an] important element, anyway, in the film, so I kind of left it out.”
Traditionally, a fatwa has meant religious opinion by an Islamic scholar or imam. The term has gained currency in the West after Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini issued a death sentence in the form of a fatwa against British author Salman Rushdie for alleged blasphemies in his book “The Satanic Verses” in 1989. As a result, the Indian-born writer was forced into hiding for most of the ’90s.
But noooo, we’re told to believe. “Jihad” just means “a peaceful inner struggle with one’s self”. We’re told, “religion of peace”. We’re told, “selective quotation of scriptures.”
NO. As I always say at this point:
There is no god, not even Allah, and Mohammed, may piss be upon him, was nobody’s prophet, but a child-molesting mass murderer.
And I say that simply because, so far, I can, but I’m beginning to fear the day is coming when I dare not say such things in public.
And when that day comes, you watch: I won’t be able to say that, but anyone will be able to piss on a statue of Christ, or daub the Virgin Mary with shit, and will get public funds to do it.
Tags: 2012, Ft. Hood, Islam, Jihad, Mark Shea, Roland Emmerich
Wow…I know you might have been bullied by a Muslim kid when you were little or something, but you’re just going over the top here. I’m going to address your last ravings first.
Nobody’s going to get public funds to deface Christian art or whatever. I’m sure there are people who already do so in private, and I reckon some of them even, for their own bizarre reasons, call it art. (I imagine you heard about the controversial piece of art known as My Sweet Lord.) See, as you seem to have forgotten in your inane drive for state-sponsored oppression of Muslims, the Constitution forbids preferential or antagonistic treatment of any one religion by the government or government-funded persons or corporations. Read the fucking document, Dave, instead of focusing solely on the 2nd and 10th amendments.
Now, you shouldn’t say such bigoted and slanderous things in public, but the government, apart from disorderly conduct or slander laws, won’t be getting on your ass about it. We take freedom of speech seriously in this country, which is why Neo-Nazis are allowed to speak their minds about how they think things should be run and why the government allows the vast horde of rabid, fact-check-less critics to keep saying what they please. Your greatest danger in saying that (and I dare you to walk into a predominantly Muslim neighborhood and shout that at the top of your lungs) is that somebody (or maybe plural) will come up and give you a well-deserved ass-whupping. I’d help out if I could, or maybe just cheer the crowd on. And it’s not because it’s you, it’s because that kind of slander of a man whose legacy for hundreds of years was tolerance, brotherhood, and morality is just plain offensive to the ears. Why not start accusing the Dalai Lama of money laundering while you’re at it, you racist pig? (I am not saying that Mohammed was like the Dalai Lama, I know they have vastly different ideals.)
Now, I know you may like to listen to such vitriol (H2SO4), but take these exaggerations with a grain of salt (NaCl, or more generally, AB). One, the illustrious Mr. Shea (50% triglycerides, composed mostly of stearin and olein) does not seem to have read a single first-person account of the shooting, and has thus resorted to the dubious practice known as “making shit up”. He describes Hasan as dressing “in traditional Muslim garb…as he guns down his prey.” Seriously, Mr. Shea (contains various triterpenes and phytosterols), read a survivor’s account. I just read the one that Dave so kindly posted (thanks, Dave, such a window into this horror is a useful document), and the survivor described Hasan as wearing ACUs (Army Combat Uniform). Two, he did not sit under the tutelage of al-Awlaki so much as exchange a few emails with him, a number that ABC described as 10 to 20. That does not make al-Awlaki, who is assuredly a despicable piece of shit, Hasan’s mentor. Three, I’d like to see a reference if you’re going to say that he proselytized to his patients. According to the AP, he was belligerent and outspoken about his faith, but to his classmates and superiors; there is no mention of him pressuring patients. So quit jumping to conclusions.
You are making too much of the Islamic butchers. The sad truth is that there are those in any faith who will pervert their commandments to further a perceived cause. The KKK are an excellent and despicable example of “Christian” butchers. The difference with Hasan is that he killed many at once in a very public fashion, and so we are more aware of it.
And as for 2012, the vast majority of the sites I’ve seen in the trailers are non-religious. But let’s assume we see the Vatican get axed. So? It was built long after Jesus’s time. The Ka’aba existed as a site of pilgrimage long before Mohammed was born; according to legend, the original edifice was built by Abraham, and the Black Stone in its corner is said to date to the time of Adam and Eve. The Ka’aba is far more important to Islam than any site could be to Christianity, as all Jesus-related sites are now somewhat lost. The only parallel that could exist for Judaism is the Wailing Wall (the last remnant of the Temple). So now we have a little perspective. Would it be right for a cleric to call for people to murder Emmerich? Of course not. Should he refrain from doing so so as not to offend people? Probably a good idea. Especially seeing as he is not a Muslim, people might take it the wrong way.
Now let’s talk about Emmerich’s “cravenness”. He’s been standing up to intolerance (mainly racism and homophobia) for a long time. He cast Will Smith in “Independence Day” even though, seeing as he’s black, some higher-ups were opposed to it. In “2012″, he blocked efforts to have the interracial couple taken out of the movie. He is no stranger to making controversy. His private art collection contains, among other things, a Photoshopped picture of Ahmadinejad, who apparently has been put in a homoerotic pose. No, here he’s (in my opinion) just trying not to send the (sadly common) message that the West hates Islam. Not to mention, trying not to end up in an entirely unnecessary shitstorm.
Now, you are wrong about most of the shit that you add at the end. “Jihad” means simply a struggle or striving, most commonly “striving in the way of God”. There are four kinds of jihad: that which is against one’s self and those of the tongue, hand, and sword. The so-called Greater Jihad is the personal struggle for faith in God. Most religions have this. Jihad is valid, however, as a physical battle to defend Islam and Muslims. Where the extremists get this wrong is when they turn it into an attack rather than a defense. Saladin in his defense of the Holy Land and its citizens could be considered Jihad. The terrorism of today? Not a chance, and anyone who says it is is, again, perverting and dishonoring their faith. “Religion of peace” is not what I’m saying either. Islam, while declaring peace a good thing, does account for the necessity of war. This makes sense, as Mohammed and his followers were under martial attack from the very get-go by the Quraish (Mohammed’s tribe, who had decided him a threat) and other tribes of Mecca. The one thing that I have said to you is that you are cherry-picking the least representative verses of the English translation of the Koran. If we judge Islam by what you post from the translation of the Koran, we might as well say that the primary tenets of Judaism and Christianity are to worship God and stone homosexuals. So you should really just shut the fuck up.
You’re a spit-for-brains fool, sir,
venomlash
P.S. WTF is the phrase “88-cent head” supposed to mean? Is that some sort of Neo-Nazi reference? Because I know those motherfuckers just love the number 88.
P.P.S. Are you and Mr. Shea (antioxidant content includes tocopherols, caroteniods, and flavonoids) just jealous that pundits have better haircuts than you guys? Seriously, they should have at least decent haircuts. We don’t need to see any more mullets on national TV.
“Nobody’s going to get public funds to deface Christian art or whatever.”
Sigh. Homework, nood. Homework. Look up “Piss Christ”.
===
You dhimmi, you. Go pay the jizya. Can’t think of a worse insult than that.
Oh, Dave, you reckless exaggerator, you! “Piss Christ” won a competition run by a center for contemporary art that had received government dollars. Nobody in the US government paid the Serrano to piss on Christ. Heck, he didn’t even piss on Christ; I imagine he pissed in the cup and then dunked the crucifix in. While I’m being nitpicky, on what planet is a small chunk of plastic a statue? Back to the main point, he didn’t even get that cash award for the act of putting Jesus in the piss; he got it for the photograph.
And as for the charge that he did indeed “deface Christian art”, I reference the eminent Sister Wendy Beckett, a Catholic nun and art critic: “While advancing her opinion that Serrano is ‘not a very gifted young man, but he’s trying to do his best,’ Sister Wendy absolutely refuses to see Piss Christ as blasphemous. Instead she reads it as an admonitory work that attempts to say ‘this is what we are doing to Christ.’” (July 1998 issue of Art in America)
And to mock your pretentious use of the equals operator:
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
===
Now, I am obviously not a dhimmi, as I do not live in an Islamic state. If I were, I would be, as dhimmi in this case means one under the protection of Islam. And for the record, I’d feel a lot safer under the protection of Islam than under that of Christianity. You wouldn’t be a dhimmi, as you are not of the People of the Book; Islam is a lot fonder of Jews than atheists, even Christian-leaning ones. And yes, I would pay the jizya; every government taxes its citizens in some way. It’s not like it would be victimizing me for not being Muslim; Muslims would have to pay zakat. The big difference is the name of the tax, and that jizya was used to benefit only the non-Muslims, while zakat went to the benefit of the Muslim mainstream.
Feh. First “noodle”, now this. You seem to have all these horrible insults that are actually not bad at all…but then again, you are about as detached from reality as is possible.
Yes, you are the spit-in-his-eye fool, all right,
venomlash
P.S. WTF is 88c heads supposed to mean, anyway?
Oh, nood, you purblind puppy.
The issue is, as Emmerich said in the article, that if you do this sort of thing with Christian icons, or with the figures from any other religion, there may be grumbling, but that’s about it.
Even someone like Emmerich, though, finds that it is not safe to mock Allah or Mohammad, or even attempt to portray them, because the result is not grumbling, it’s threats and outright violence.
Look up the brouhaha over the Danish cartoons. There was a recent scholarly work on that whole affair, for which the University press that acted as publisher refused to publish the cartoons because of fears of Muslim reprisal. And that was indeed here in the states.
You are either sickeningly naive, willfully blind, or a flat out shill.
===
Pretentious? I thought I was being lazy. Three equals signs are simply easier to type than the code for a horizontal rule in WordPress, as well as being a divider I’ve been using for a very long time in forums that filter out most HTML. You do choose the most amusing things to get in a tizzy about, while refusing to see the central issues time and time again.
===
And no, I’m not a dhimmi, nor would I be. I would be, and am, proudly, a kufir.
===
“Love the Jews”? Oh, right, based on scriptures like this: “Hadith Sahih Muslim [41:6985] Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: ‘The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.’”
…Shrink Wrap…
I’ve told you once, I’ve told you twice, and now I tell you for a final time — do not so much as look cross-eyed at any other guest here.
Final warning. No argument, no excuses, no whining.
My blog, oodles. My blog, my rules.
Mine.