Please Explain to me why the "Islam Terror" DVD is racist / fear mongering

[masmdu]

Not kidding here. I understand that it is being used politically to attempt to influence the election. But, after WATCHING it I didn't find it racist or hate speech as some claim.

It speaks about the growing threat of Radical Islam.

"Islam Terror" is the name used for it here. The title is, "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMLJJEDDDGc

Seriously, can anybody tell me why they find it so offensive.

In what way is it racist?

In what way is it hate speech?

In what way is it 'garbage/crap'?

Thanks

I'd be especially interested to hear from people who have actually seen it.

[originalpckelly]

1. Islam Terror?

You really don't get it?

[d_b]

2. lulz

[masmdu]

7. No...Care to elighten me?

[The Straight Story]

3. Because it wasn't about fundie christians

;)

[spoony]

83. Man did you hit THAT out of the park

Just browsing the replies, there must be half dozen like that. Well played.

[kikiek]

4. as soon as they spend the same amount of time and money on a DVD about radical Christianity

I will rethink my position on it.

[gateley]

5. Islam = Muslim = Obama. That's what they're going for. nt

[d_b]

6. that too.

[Hissyspit]

8. It serves to paint only one particular view of Islam, playing up the religion as 'other.'

I know they SAY they don't do this, but then they proceed to do it. This is not particularly good scholarship, does not serve scholarship and greater understanding well, and is unfair to the majority of muslims. I admit I only watched a part of the DVD, but I didn't need to watch anymore to make this judgment, and had seen part of it before. The DVD is part of an effort to ONLY provide this point of view, despite their disclaimers. The film features right-wing commenters and not mainstream islamic scholars.

There is a point where scholarship just turns into pure propaganda.

[masmdu]

14. Actually they do go out of their way to say that they are not talking about all Muslims...just radic

radicals.

They have several non-radical muslims giving views on the radicals and how they give Islam a bad name.

[stillcool]

17. and Americans can really differentiate..

It's all kind of humorous, considering how many Muslims there are in the world. The one thing Americans are really good at is hate.

[masmdu]

20. Well...I'm American and I can differenciate

[Tallison]

31. Think about seeing it through a different lens

like that of someone with a more provincial outlook and sheltered life experience - yes, that of a more 'typical' American.

[Hissyspit]

18. I understand, and I mentioned that...

but I'm talking about the overall effect of the film and how it fits into the larger context.

[Lex]

9. Maybe next week will get the one about the growing threat of Radical Christians

blowing up abortion clinics and federal buildings

wanting to change our Constitution

abusing children in their radical 'compounds' in Texas


Ya think?

[masmdu]

12. And I would watch it and be just as alrmed. However, I want to know why this DVD is considered raci

racist.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

10. Because, compared to the threat of unilateralism by global corporacrats,...

,...it is an overblown representation of relatively MINOR threats to the lives of human beings on this earth.

Make sense? :shrug:

[masmdu]

19. "Make sense"...No, b/c I don't see how you can call it a MINOR threat

There are some 1billion Muslims...Radicals maybe 5-20% (who knows for sure) But the point is that the Radical are exerting increasing control over non-radical Muslims and are a treat to "the west" (ie: critical thinking, rational thought, freedom).

The goal of the radicals is to spread radical islam and to roll back the west by violent means.

[cliffordu]

11. Well......

[mmonk]

13. It's a neocon film to give license to neocon foreign policy.

Fear and guilt by association as it relates to Islam and terrorism.

[uppityperson]

15. Thank you. Well put. nt

[masmdu]

16. So the threat of the Radicals presented is innacurate?

The people shown are Jihadist willing to die in large numbers to spread radical islam and stop the west.

Death over Life in service of Allah.

Suicide bombers.

Indoctrination of children for same.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

21. Compared to the threat posed by neocon ideology, it's threat is miniscule.

Indoctrination of children that WAR and MASS DESTRUCTION is okay to go out and get a relative handful of bad people is far more destructive.

It is ALL relative. Is that a concept beyond your perception?

[masmdu]

26. I don't see it...

What indoctrination of children?

However, I do see examples of exactly that in the DVD with regards to radical islam.

Mass Destruction. I'll assume you mean war. Right, it is wrong. However, something must happen to defuse the radical's impulse to destroy the west as it is entirely conceivable that more deadly weapons will come into use to meet their stated goals and then there will indeed be Mass Destruction.

Relativity is not a concept beyond my perception (thanks for the dig) I just think that your "handful of bad people" is already huge, dedicated/fanatical, growing and growing more sophisticated.

[liberal1973]

43. WTF?

If you don't see it then you're a idiot.

The propaganda is racist and a tool of far right types in elections. This kind of crap tells how much these republicans hate America.

[masmdu]

45. Ok, you can call it racist...now care to explain why?

[grahamhgreen]

102. Here's the Deal - The Bush's and Neo-cons best freinds are the Islamic terrorists!

They support them, they fostered them, they hired Bin Laden, Bush's brother sells "Ignite!" the software used in the madras's to teach hatred.

Essentially, the neo-cons/Christianists, and the Saudi royal family/Islamisists are one in the same group of evil war-whoring cretins who have been creating and exploiting war-for-profit for generations.

[Sebastian Doyle]

Watch "Jesus Camp" sometime

Now THERE's a flock of hateful religious jihadists. And one of them is running for Vice President right now......

[masmdu]

62. I've watched it and don't remember any suicide bombers....

[Sebastian Doyle]

65. Well, maybe this might refresh your memory....

The work of "Christian" terrorist Tim McVeigh.

The point of "Jesus Camp" is to raise a whole generation of "God Warriors" just as fucked in the head as McVeigh was.

[masmdu]

76. Well, that wasn't in Jesus Camp now was it...

BTW, I find all radical religious groups abhorrent.

[INDIA]

100. That's total Bullshit. McVeigh was anti-government, not some kind of...

Christian Warrior/Terrorist.

I love how people on this site bend over backwards and stretch the truth to try and equivocate Muslim radicals with Christian Radicals. Its complete bullshit.

The only reason for this crap is that Christians vote for Republicans. Other than a couple abortion clinic bombings in which around 12 people died, there has been no terrorist activity within Christian Fundamentalism. Just today, all over the world, dozens (maybe even around a hundred) of people will be blown up or beheaded or murdered in the name of extremist Islam.

So yeah, you're full of shit.

[LynnTheDem]

103. Other than the on-going "radical christian" slaughter in Iraq and Afghanistan

[INDIA]

107. This war is about oil and power, not religion.

Nice try though.

This war was started for false and stupid SECULAR reasons. To imply anything else is bullshit.

There are jews, muslims, and atheists fighting on the US side over there, not just Christian soldiers with crosses on their Humvees. Give me a break.

Edit: Are we burning down mosques and building churches? Are we converting muslims to Christianity? Are we establishing Christian missionaries in Baghdad? No, no, no. It's my understanding that the military has been ordered to respect mosques and the muslim faith in order to not piss off our remaining allies.

[treestar]

92. That argument deliberately overlooks the fact that much more

damage can be done by an organized military than by suicide bombers.

True we don't have suicide bombers, but we don't need them. Our radicals are not somehow morally superior, they just have bigger weapons. They'd resort to suicide bombing if they had to, perhaps.

That's why the threat is overblown. The threat to them is much greater. In fact, the whole problem exists because the West inserts itself into the middle east for its own interests.

Years ago, people were worried about rich Saudis buying out Beverly Hills. That's nothing compared to the incursions we've made on their countries. If they did equally as much here, and had an army to back it up, while we didnt't, we'd probably act pretty much as they are now.

It's like an elephant complaining that an ant gets a bite in now and then. Way out of perspective.

[leftynyc]

97. I don't remember anyone here bitching

about that movie. Why are there people whose knickers are in a knot over this one?

[msongs]

22. tobacco use kills 400,000 americans EVERY year but those ads appear in newspapers lol nt

[Sebastian Doyle]

37. Careful now....

You don't want the embedded Philip Morris lobbyists hijacking this thread, do you?

Whoops... I said "hijacking" in a thread about fictional terrorists. Should I expect a visit from the CIA now? :scared:

[The Straight Story]

58. Is that like saying we don't want planned parenthood embedded lobbyists hijacking a thread?

Just because you agree with someone does not mean you work for them.

I am pro-choice - I think people can make their own choices over their own bodies, does that make me an embedded lobbyist for someone??

[INDIA]

111. "fictional" terrorists? It's fair to say the threat is overblown but terrorism...

most certainly isn't "fictional." A US embassy was attacked just today in Yemen, 10 people died.

It's real and it is a threat. Not the most important thing in the world as the Repukes would have you believe, but it worth our attention.

[The Straight Story]

55. One is a choice people make (and I thought we were pro choice) and the other

is something other people want to force on people (ie, anti-choice).

[Donald Ian Rankin]

23. Left-wingers tend to dislike attacks on radical Islam, because they're totemic of the right.

It's simple tribalism, just like supporting a sports team.

Attacking radical Islam is one of the totems of the right, like wearing a New York Jets sweater.

That makes it "of the enemy", and so left-wingers tend to come out with spurious justifications as to why its a bad thing to do.

[Hissyspit]

25. Um, proof of spuriousness, please.

It's a crappy DVD, I watched some of it. Weak scholarship. Learn something about media literacy. Muslim demagoguery porn is a big part of the right's efforts.

[masmdu]

30. "Muslim demagoguery"...?..It's about Radical Islam // "weak scholarship"...So I'm not seeing what I

think I am?

Look, there are videos of hoards of jihadist chanting death to America. Clerics promoting suicide bombing. Children shows brainwashing kids for the same.

If you were to see christians doing the same. Broadly promoting and preparing to do violence and then carrying it out would you not be alarmed by the threat?

[Hissyspit]

33. None of that is new. I've seen all of that before, multiple times. Why is it being repeated and

repeated again. What is the point of sending it out in newspapers before the election? What is it you are NOT seeing?

I've been alarmed by radical Islam for 18 years now. I've also been alarmed at radical Christianists for as long.

[masmdu]

42. Well just b/c it's old news to you doesn't mean it is to everybody. I fully granted in the OP that

it is being used to try and influence the election.

What I am still trying to determine is why there is so much immediate dismissal of information in the DVD. Especially by those who have not watched it or have only see a bit. If it were indeed racist I would dismiss it too. I found it informative and alarming.

Yes, radical ANY religion is dangerous. But, I don't see radical christians doing the jihadist thing to spread the word...

[JNelson6563]

98. Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Aside from the sick stuff like Jesus Camp the "west" doesn't really formally train the youth to fight/kill under the auspices of religion, there is no need.

We have the military machine and all the pull we need on the world stage to get a green light to go blow up any nation we choose. Of course we don't need that approval but it does give a nice glow of legitimacy to such endeavors. Kind of the same thing as sparkling white tunics with bright red crosses on 'em like the crusades.

We have the military and a mighty weapon in the form of corporate media (in bed w/military industrial complex) to do the indoctrination of our youth and, more importantly, the parents who swallow it all whole and regurgitate it back to feed the youth, like birds feeding their young.

So yeah, children learning hate and radical thought is alarmig but it pales in comparison to our far more effective system. Our particular method allows for a sitting Senator and Presidential candidate to sing a little ditty about bombing an entire country into oblivion and many just laugh.

While it is admirable to approach the DVD with objectivity it is intellectually dishonest and counter-productive to an effective dialogue to disregard what radical Islam is a reaction to. It's like a high school student who read a book on a topic and attempting an in depth discussion on that topic with a PhD (with the high schooler thinking they know everything on the matter).

Julie

[masmdu]

108. Hey, I am only a bit over-weight. Is a personal attack really necessary?

[OneGrassRoot]

87. Having watched the video, what would you like done to ....

combat the threat you see to American citizens? What would you like both citizens and governments (ours and others) to do to decrease the threat of violence?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

91. The fact that almost none of the posts in this thread allege inaccuracy.

What nearly all of the objections amount to is "this may be happening, but we don't want you to talk about it".

Yes, the evil of Islamic fundamentalism receives more attention from the American right than other problems, because it's one of their pet causes. Exactly the same thing is true of the evil of the American Christian right and the American left, but that doesn't mean they should shut up about it.

[masmdu]

94. Right.

[masmdu]

27. Ahh....Making some headway here...thanks

[Marrah_G]

90. Excellent explaination! n/t

[AlCzervik]

24. Islam in this country has been demonized and many of our Fellow Merikans lump it all

together.

[Zhade]

28. "Christian Terror", "Jewish Terror"

Still don't get it?

[masmdu]

32. Nope...Still waiting for a decent explaination...care to try?

[fascisthunter]

48. It's a Generalization That Denegrates all those who practice Islam

For example, by calling it "Christian Terror", one would be denegrating a whole religion, not just extremists within that religion. Kinda the same as saying "white terror", or "Irish Terror", or "enter ethnic, religious, race here".... by not being specific, you confuse a whole group with a negative connotation. And it works on ignorant people who do not anyone belonging to this group of people.


Oooops, and you chose to call it Islam Terror....? That wasn't it's title?

[masmdu]

53. You'll note I specifically said in the OP that it is call the "Islam Terror" DVD HERE and then follo

followed with the actual title. "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West"

I never said "Islam terror" in part for the very reasons you state.

[fascisthunter]

57. you didn't respond to my MAIN POINT

[masmdu]

63. See post #60 below

[fascisthunter]

64. stop playing games... You Didn't Respond to my Main Point

the DVD, it's title denegrates a whole damn religion and everyone in it. See the post at the end of this thread by Douglas Carpenter. If you REALLY don't get it, which I sincerely doubt, you can read a much better, much more thorough explanation as to WHY this DVD is Racist and aims at demonizing a LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE.

[masmdu]

77. Please read my reply to D.Carpenter below and I don;t mean to be thick but what was your point?

I didn't give the title to the DVD nor did I define how it has been being refered to on DU.

[The Straight Story]

39. No, still don't get it

If someone starts a thread about Christians, do other people jump in talking about islam, et al?

The OP was talking about a specific topic outside of other ones.

If you (and I for that matter) see specific threats from fundies here wanting to change laws, etc, to forward their beliefs and we don't like it then we can separate that from other groups who have a different way of wanting to bring about their view of the world (whether it be 'jewish terror' and fear of them having control of things like entertainment and news, or 'islamic terror' and wanting to use physical attacks).

Different groups use different methods - the OP was wondering why a particular show about a particular group was considered 'racist' and such.

[masmdu]

50. Thanks

[Zhade]

70. Yeah, you sure didn't get it.

NT!

[OneGrassRoot]

29. Curious -- has anyone determined which regions this was distributed in?

That may or may not help answer the OP's question.

For example, here in NC -- where it was distributed -- I am surrounded by people who believe ANYONE from the Middle East, with ties to the Middle East, with a name which brings the Middle East to mind, etc., etc., is a terrorist. A radical Islamist.

No differentiation.

This type of film would simply reinforce their mindset.

And, as I've expressed before, I believe the "Obama is a muslim" argument really, fundamentally (LOL, can't say or type that word now without laughing about McCain) comes down to racism. White power (white fear).

We all need to be aware of what is going on in the world, and radical Islam is out there, but it has been focused upon so heavily in the last seven years that a subset of our population (i.e. McCain's base) believe that is the ONLY threat to America and therefore IT MUST BE WIPED OUT.

I haven't seen this DVD, but it seems to play into the latter.

If the intention is to educate, why not include other extremist religions and show how dangerous they ALL potentially may be? Weapons of mass destruction have the potentially of being acquired by any terrorists, right? Not just Islamic?

[Starry Messenger]

85. swing states:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erik-ose/pro-mccain-group-dumping_b_125969.html

MPK

[Sebastian Doyle]

34. If you believe the "islamofascism" BULLSHIT

Then perhaps you took a wrong turn at the meth lab looking for RimJob's house?

[masmdu]

36. So your saying what?...that you haven't watched the DVD either?

[Sebastian Doyle]

46. I'm saying that the movie is a steaming pile of David Whoreowitz funded Likudist warmongering SHIT

Is that clear enough for you, freeper?

[masmdu]

59. Not with out some type of rational explaination...not clear...btw, hardly a feeper...DU since 2002

[ColbertWatcher]

35. Question for the OP: The which DVD now? n/t

[masmdu]

38. Link in OP to YouTube of DVD

[ColbertWatcher]

40. But, YOU called it something. Which words did YOU use to describe it? n/t

[masmdu]

44. "Islam Terror" is the name used for it here. he title is, "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against th

"Islam Terror" is the name used for it here. The title is, "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West"

[ColbertWatcher]

49. All I knew about it was that it was sent in newspapers. You could have called it ...

... that DVD sent in the newspapers.

But, you chose to call it "Islam Terror" DVD. I think you answered your own question.

[OneGrassRoot]

51. ....

very astute. ;-)

[ColbertWatcher]

56. Thank you. n/t

[masmdu]

60. Actually, you are wrong..."Islam Terror" is in quotes (See them?) as this the how the DVD is refered

to elsewhere on DU

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3492731

[Gwendolyn]

41. It went to all the swing states and the message is...

"The threat of radical islam is real.

Democrats will not keep you safe.

We will, as we have for 8 years.

Vote Repugtilian."

:puke:

[Hugabear]

47. Because it blatantly feeds on the fears and prejudices many Americans have

Too many Americans have this notion that most (if not all) Muslims are somehow "radicals". We've been taught to mistrust Arabs and Muslims by our very own government, to keep an eye on them, to report any "suspicious" activity that we see. This has lead to Muslims being harassed simply for praying on airplanes.

Radical Islam is not a serious threat in this country, yet many alarmists want us to believe that there is a terrorist sleeper cell inside every mosque, in every Muslim community.

What IS a much more dangerous threat is that posed by Christian Dominionists and Reconstructionists. These people are actively infiltrating our own government, hoping to influence American foreign policy to help bring about the "End Times".

[and-justice-for-all]

52. Where is the Chistofascist DVD? nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

54. If there was a DVD about "Jewish deceitfulness:", would you consider that anti-Semitic?

Even if it opened with a disclaimer that they are not saying all or most Jews are necessarily deceitful?

If there was a film about blacks raping white woman and focused on several examples, but still managed to throw in a disclaimer that most blacks don't rape white woman, would it still be racist?

Anyway, here is what I once tried to explain to someone:


"If someone were to say, "Jack Abramoff is a crooked Jew" would we not ALL agree that would be a blatantly anti-Semitic statement? I certainly would. And I would condemn such a statement.

But perhaps one who said such a thing might protest such censure and argue:

1. But the evidence is overwhelming that Jack Abramoff is a crook

2. There is certainly no denying that Jack Abramoff is in fact a Jew

3. The statement in no way whatsoever says that ALL Jews are crooks -- -- only one person who just happens to be Jewish - Jack Abramoff

4. In fact this particular statement does not even - in and of itself attack Jewish culture or the Jewish faith

In fact the simple statement, "Jack Abramoff is a crooked Jew" is pretty much a true and factual statement and does not directly attack Jews in general at all. So what's the problem?

BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT!

Such a statements like "Jack Abramoff is a crooked Jew", or "O.J. Simpson is black savage," or "the Palestinians have a culture of death" are said in way to tie in a crass racist stereotype to a whole people they seek to demean, berate, dehumanize, demonize and marginalize as a people.

I would agree that it is not racist in and of itself to critically examine a culture, religion or political arrangement. And I would have to agree that large parts (but by no means all) of the Arab world are still somewhat tribal. I've lived in it a good deal of my life. I should know.

But when cultural critique is rooted in deep disrespect and carried out with a political agenda and in total disregard of how cultural difference are perceived from the inside - this is racist, no matter how some sophist try to spin it. When emotionally charged language of established racist stereotypes are employed in a manner that inspires people to reject a rationally based understanding of grievances and perceived grievances of the victims of these stereotypes - this is racist.

When people are unwilling or unable to subject their own cultures to the same level of self-scrutiny that they insist on imposing on others - this is at least ignorant and quite possibly - racist.

When the conclusions of the critique are already well established before the critique even begins - this is at least prejudice (pre-judicial) and likely racist.

I would suggest a very simple rule of thumb in determining whether or not something is legitimate critique or a racialist or bigoted comment --try substituting the group under scrutiny with another group and see how it sounds. If it sounds racist. It probably is racist.

When ones' sole interest in another culture is to use bits and pieces of twisted half-truths and established stereotypes as a weapon of attack against a people as a people -- that is certainly racist.

And finally when comments totally disregard how the "other" actually thinks and relies exclusively on what one presumes the other thinks.. . without even attempting to find out where they are really coming from -that is indeed both racist and ignorant.

It is simply ludicrous to suggest that a little disclaimer that one is not talking about the genetics - only the culture - makes blatant and obvious racism into non-racism. If Goebbels had opened his propaganda with that disclaimer, would his propaganda have been any less racist? In fact David Duke pretty much gives that disclaimer too. Does that make David Duke any less racist?"

[toddGA]

61. very nicely said.

that should about wrap it up...

[OneGrassRoot]

67. Indeed. Nice job...eloquent, clear. :) n/t

[fascisthunter]

66. Great Post.... for all others to READ

[Celeborn Skywalker]

68. Since when

did Islam become an ethnic group? Islam, Christianity, and Judaism are all equally dangerous and should receive no special treatment. Someone's religion is not off limits.

[Douglas Carpenter]

71. the fact is most of the language used to attack Muslims as a people is racist language

and is usually attached to whole ethnic groups.

Muslim people are usually identified (frequently incorrectly) on the basis of their ethnicity.

Even so, even if the more correct term is "bigotry" as opposed to racism - the point is the same.

[Celeborn Skywalker]

72. I agree that they have been

scapegoated in this country to the point of extreme bigotry. I'm just saying that I don't see a danger in pointing out the looniness that can be present in ALL religions. I wish they would do one about the Christofascists we have running things in this country.

[masmdu]

75. I couldn't agree more...bravo!

[VOX]

84. Look at DVD's graphics: It's about FEAR of a dark-skinned, turbaned and decidedly *foreign* enemy.

Something faceless and menacing, less than human, looming over the ruins of the WTC.



True, there are Caucasian and Asian Muslims as well -- but the specific intent of this DVD is to stir up fear and anger against dark-skinned Middle Easterners.

As the late George Carlin said:

If you're Brown, You're Goin Down!

Especially if your country is full of brown people. Oh, we like that, don't
we? That's our hobby now. But it's also our new job in the world: bombing
brown people. Iraq, Panama, Grenada, Libya. You got some brown people in
your country? Tell 'em to watch the fuck out, or we'll goddamn bomb them!

Well, who were the last white people you can remember that we bombed? In
fact, can you remember any white people we ever bombed? The Germans! That's
it! Those are the only ones. And that was only because they were tryin' to
cut in on our action. They wanted to dominate the world.

Bullshit! That's our job. That's our fuckin' job.

[Gwendolyn]

69. Hmmm... guess in that case we should just refer to honor killings

as domestic violence... to avoid putting a cultural slant on it and possibly insulting people.

What you say is all fine, coming from the comfort of your living room. I think if you lived in the UK or France, the Netherlands, or Norway, you'd have a different opinion. There is a distinct culture clash happening in those countries, and their refusal to address it AS a cultural problem, putting a name to it, has created an abyss of problems.

[Douglas Carpenter]

73. the "comfort of my living room" right at this moment happens to be in the Middle East

It think I know a bit more about this than you do.

And I would not stereotype the people of the UK or France, the Netherlands, or Norway as all a bunch of bigots. Besides anti-Semitism was wide spread in the 1930's in all those countries as well as the United States - but that didn't make it right. And the language of anti-Arab and Muslim bigotry is almost EXACTLY the same at the the language of Nazi-style anti-Semitism of the 1930's Europe; the shifty, suspicious, dangerous, and demonized "other". A people who don't look quite the same, worship a different way, are buying up businesses and properties left and right, pose a dangerous economic threat and are "out to take over the world". Even if some of them seem nice enough, they can't be trusted.

Are there more cases of Muslims practicing honor killing there are cases of blacks raping white woman? I highly doubt it.

Are there more cases of Muslims practicing honor killing then there are cases of Jewish people engaging in dishonest business practices? I highly doubt it.

Are there more cases of Muslims practicing honour killing then there are cases of white American men beating their wives or children to death? I am absolutely certain, that is not the case.

I think honor killing is a terrible thing and it is becoming far, far less common as time goes on. But it is simply not something that happens any more often than any other shocking behavior that occurs in other societies.

When people in the western world bring up honor killing, it only rarely is done because they share a concern about woman in the Islamic world. Their racism and bigotry is almost always just as deep against Muslim woman as it is against Muslim men. It is disingenuous to claim otherwise.

[Gwendolyn]

78. Not knowing exactly where your living room happens to be...

and what you're doing there, I do hope it's somewhere where you are out of harm's way.

There is a difference between "free agent" crime, and violence that is committed and approved of by a community, or people of like values.

I do understand what you're saying, and I picked honor killings out of a myriad of the cultural probs westernized countries are faced with, when a large influx of immigrants appear on their borders with completely different views on virtually everything.

You say you know more than I do, which is likely true, although you're also writing from a Middle Eastern country where those values that clash with Western ones are the norm.

I've spent a lot of time in the UK and France, and have heard many of the frustrations, too long to list here. But I think people mostly fear that bending over backwards to accommodate values and customs that are so foreign to us, has caused the pendulum to swing too far the other way. The resulting protest is then viewed as "racism."

Sweden and Norway have an inordinately high rate of violent crime against women, but it is unlawful to print the nationality of criminals. You can be damn sure that if someone rapes a woman in the US, we'll read in the papers whether he was black, Jewish, Mormon, Nazi, whatever. If a Jew murdered a public figure in the name of Judaism, it'd be in the news for months.

As a woman, it pains me every time I've seen women in Burkas walking the streets, for reasons that I hope you understand. We fought so hard for our Western freedoms and it isn't wrong to want to keep them intact and feel sad for those who don't share them. Is it then racism to say "no, you can't work as a bank teller, or a nurse, or a school teacher if you must wear one?" Should people of other faiths practice their own brand of law because there are enough of them to form a community? Women always suffer under these faith-based codes of law. These are all issues that we don't really have to worry about in our US comfortable living rooms. And so we can blithely call anyone who points it out as racist.

[Douglas Carpenter]

82. If the concern is REALLY about Muslim woman being discriminated against for being woman

than there are lots of organizations of Muslim woman working very hard to change that - I'm sure those who share these concerns would be welcomed to help in their efforts.

[Binka]

88. You've Seen Women Walking The Street In Burkas? I Don't Think So

Where pray tell? Outside of radical Afghanistan where the burka is most seen, most Muslim women wear abayas NOT burkas. The abaya (Arabic عباءة, plural abayat عباءات) is an overgarment worn by women in parts of the Islamic world. It is the traditional form of hijab.

It is black, not blue like the traditional burka, and does not cover the entire body like a tent. I spent three years living in Europe and saw many women in abayas. NOT ONE in a burka. I spent two years living in the Middle East and saw most women in abayas. NOT ONE in a burka.

Your screed is ignorant at best. You fought hard for your "Western freedoms?" Good grief my seven year old is more intelligent than you and more progressive and open minded. BTW the years I spent in the ME were the safest and most joyful of my life. PLONK. Sorry Gwen your dog don't hunt and welcome to ignore.

[Douglas Carpenter]

89. THANK YOU!! There is NO place in the whole world where Western people are safer and

treated with more respect and deference than in the Middle East. I suppose that is probably not the case in Iraq - But everywhere else I have been - including places that have every right to feel a great deal of political animosity toward America - the people are so kindly and respectful and the environment is so safe. Whenever I am in the States or Europe, I have to remind myself again that people being rude is normal and the frighteningly high rate of violent crime - requires extraordinary precautions - very, very different than the Middle East.

[masmdu]

93. Japan

[Gwendolyn]

110. No, they were definitely burhkas...

but it's true that I have no idea if these people were traveling, as I was, or not.

But my point was not to veer the discussion in this direction, and do find the spreading of that DVD the worst form of fearmongering. It was to say that criticizing a group of people is not necessarily racism, in answer to someone's post. Everyone refers to "Christian Fundies" even here, when protesting "their" agenda, ideology, whatever you'd like to call it, even though these people are all individual human beings. I don't believe people are being "racist" in doing so.

I also DO think our freedoms are hard won, but we can disagree on that. Why are women aghast at the idea of Palin getting so close to the oval office, if not at least partly because the right too choose may soon be endangered? I think that right was hard won, and wouldn't like to see it go.

[masmdu]

74. Thank you for the considered reply. I agree with alot of what you say in broad terms. However,

here (in the DVD) they show examples of the actual growing radical islamist movement calling for jihad, training to be sucide bombers, teaching children the same.

If the documentary you proposed on the "Jewish Deceitfulness" then showed radical Jews calling for all Jew to be deceitful, teaching their children to do the same, and being willing to die to achieve the goal then NO I wouldn't consider such a doc. anti-semetic....I'd be alarmed at the radical group just as I am with the radical Islamist.

Same with the black rape of white women example. If the video showed an organized group of black rapists calling for all blacks to rape, teaching their children to do the same, and willing to die to achieve the goal then NO I wouldn't consider such a doc. racist...I'd be alarmed at the radical group just as I am with the radical Islamist.

After your Jack Abramoff example you write:
"BUT THAT'S NOT THE POINT!

Such a statements like "Jack Abramoff is a crooked Jew", or "O.J. Simpson is black savage," or "the Palestinians have a culture of death" are said in way to tie in a crass racist stereotype to a whole people they seek to demean, berate, dehumanize, demonize and marginalize as a people."


But, the DVD doesn't do as you suggest and make 2nd hand statements like "Jack Abramoff is a crooked Jew" it shows actual clerics calling for the death of the US by any means, suicide bombers preparing to die to promote radical islam...That is to say the video evidence presented in the DVD is first hand/ actual and not claims about somebody.

You go on to say:
"But when cultural critique is rooted in deep disrespect and carried out with a political agenda and in total disregard of how cultural difference are perceived from the inside - this is racist, no matter how some sophist try to spin it."

Again, the weight of the evidence of what is actually shown makes this hard to accept. Where is the deep disrespect in the face of radicalism? By this route couldn't you then say that condemnation of the KKK is racist? And where in the DVD is the "emotionally charged language of established racist stereotypes"? Further, people are inspired to reject a rationally based understanding of grievances and perceived grievances of the victims as soon as violence is used. Is there really any victimization here that warrants the call for death to america, uk, or rejectors of radical islam.

Then you write:
"I would suggest a very simple rule of thumb in determining whether or not something is legitimate critique or a racialist or bigoted comment --try substituting the group under scrutiny with another group and see how it sounds. If it sounds racist. It probably is racist." Again, see my comments above about your "deceitful jew" documentary.

Then:
"When ones' sole interest in another culture is to use bits and pieces of twisted half-truths and established stereotypes as a weapon of attack against a people as a people -- that is certainly racist"
What you say is true, but that is not what is going on in the DVD. How is actual footage of radical islamist wanting to die in service to radical islam by killing non-believers either a half-truth or stereotype.?

Finally, you said:
"And finally when comments totally disregard how the "other" actually thinks and relies exclusively on what one presumes the other thinks.. . without even attempting to find out where they are really coming from -that is indeed both racist and ignorant."

Again, true but not applicable here. The DVD doesn't disregard how the "other" thinks and only presume to know...on the contrary, it let's him speak his own mind and he makes it very clear that radical islam want to destroy the US and non-believers, and that they will use suicide bombs to do so, and the will raise the next generation to do the same.

The disclaimer exist not to have an out on the racism call rather it stands as a marked contrast to the actual footage shown of the real and growing threat of radicalism.

[Douglas Carpenter]

79. Imagine for a moment if America and the West had been under a century of Islamic dominance

Just imagine for a moment that the power relationships of the world were the other way around. Imagine if a powerful Islamic state and their allies decided where I borders were, what governments in Europe and North American were legitimate and which were illegitimate. Imagine the armed forces of these powerful states totally surrounded us on all sides to insure that our raw materials were devoted to satisfying their demands.

Would there not be an opposition to this world order?

Thomas Jefferson once said that he wished he could sink the whole Island of Great Britain into the sea. Extreme conditions produces extremism.

The REAL threat of Islamic extremism is aided and abetted by policies that cannot possibly have any other outcome than the promotion of more and more Islamic extremism.

Thirty years ago almost all political opposition throughout the Middle East and the Islamic world was expressed by secular movements; both nationalist and leftist; political Islam was a small marginal and fringe movement.

Political Islam grew in currency and strength when secularist movements failed - and I might add they grew in currency and strength with the active encouragement of the United States.

Every bomb that lands on the land or house of some poor farmer, every person who is hassled at some remote checkpoint, every expansion of every settlement and expropriation of every piece of land - every intrusion that no one of ANY race creed or colour would EVER find acceptable recruits more and more Islamic extremist.

And every bit of propaganda that makes Western people less and less sensitive to the people of the Islamic world - Every word and policy that encourages an even more belligerent and confrontational policy - does NOT fight Islamic extremism, it creates conditions to promote it. And frankly, I am quite certain that they know that.

If the promoters of this video are assuming people will make the connection of Islamic extremism to Barack Obama - someone who is not a Muslim at all - it is a bit of a stretch to imagine that they are not assuming that people will equate Islamic extremism to ordinary Muslims who really are Muslims.

[masmdu]

81. Thank you again for taking the time to respond in an intelligent and well thought out manner...

I certainly see all the points you make and they are valid.

Violence begets violence. It is never ending, is it.

I am tired and going to bed so I will say good-nite.

[Starry Messenger]

86. This DVD was sent only to swing states.

afaik: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erik-ose/pro-mccain-group-dumping_b_125969.html

food for thought

[fascisthunter]

95. The DVD is Definitely Bigotry to Spread Hate and Fear

[masmdu]

99. Ok...you made a claim....now, support your argument if you don't mind

[Starry Messenger]

109. Oh, most definitely.

I've got some links in my journal. I've been following this story closely all week. :)

edit: typo in sub line

[UndertheOcean]

96. Bravo ! Hit the nail on the proverbial head!

[moriah]

80. I'm only through part 3 of 10 and what I find interesting ...

... is that most of the clips are from AFTER 9/11.

It goes to show that war in Iraq is not stopping terrorism, but encouraging it.

[dorkulon]

101. Let's make a DVD about how the GOP has robbed taxpayers blind

and bankrupted the country--AND fanned the flames of radical Islam. Two can play this game.

[LynnTheDem]

104. Be afraid!!!11! Muslims = BAD!!!11!

Maybe "5% - 20%" are evil!!!11!

The CD worked on you.

[grahamhgreen]

105. It fails to mention - The Bushies and Neo-cons ARE the Islamic terrorists

They support them, they fostered them, they hired Bin Laden, Bush's brother sells "Ignite!" the software used in the madras's to teach hatred.

Essentially, the neo-cons/Christianists, and the Saudi royal family/Islamisists are one in the same group of evil war-whoring cretins who have been creating and exploiting war-for-profit for generations.

[bunkerbuster1]

106. The timing's the thing.

Assuming this is as down-the-middle and neutral as you claim (I haven’t seen it), do you not find the timing for this mass mailing to be a tad curious?

You know, six weeks out from an election wherein one of the participants is a black man with a Muslim-sounding name? Who has had to fend off ridiculous rumors about where he was born, and what religion his family practices?