Not letting the true history of the event get in the way Hollywood churned out another crass demonisation of Muslims and Arab culture. 1975 was not a point where Muslims were some unknown entity in a wide unexplored world so there is no way this can be excused. I don't know how they can release this tripe on DVD, should be consigned to the bin with other outdated racist junk from the past.
share[deleted]
"Kill the Democrats!! Kill the Left!! Kill the Socialists!! Kill the Persians!! Kill the Arabs!! Kill everyone except the ones like me!!!!"
I love your 'merican sense of humour
That post was satirising bloodthirsty insane western hypocrites wasn't it?
"Kill the Democrats!! Kill the Left!! Kill the Socialists!! Kill the Persians!! Kill the Arabs!! Kill everyone except the ones like me!!!!"
I have read billhack's post twice and I seem to have missed where he wrote to kill anyone. Very odd that you would take his words to infer he wanted anyone killed. Why is that? Oh, let me guess, this is what you believe anyone who doesn't believe as you do believes, correct? Now that is funny.
Amusing to read the thoughts of those with so-called progressive minds. They are the same throughout the world, seeing the world through small, narrow eyes.
Let me help you out there
It might require nuking Mecca, Teheran, Medina, Damascus. No great loss.
so we might use the breakdown to perform a Final Solution to all the Left, and otherwise make a Eugenic sweep of the stupidity and evil that drips from Socialism.
My sides! 😅
shareI have read billhack's post twice and I seem to have missed where he wrote to kill anyone.
billhack is my hero!
F-U libs, your time in power will go down in history as a blight on civilization.
I have to say, I admire the irony of a man calling out the savagery of radical Islam while simultaneously calling for the death of hundreds of millions of people. I guess it's ok to kill a couple hundred million people if they're not white christian conservatives. Cuz, you know, that's so much different than ISIS.
shareI have to agree with you. This has been one of my favorite movies of all time for about 40 years now, but that doesn't mean I don't understand what John Milius, a real old-fashioned man's man (unlike the p*ssy d*cks*ck*r wannabes posting upstream on this thread ) was trying to say in making this movie. The Arabs (or Berbers, as the case may be) are just different, and mostly they just left people alone for most of their history until somebody from the outside came in and started trying to lord over them and take what was theirs. Then they reacted in a way that is not terribly different than how an average, say, Texan, might respond to that kind of provocation. Live with it, or, if you can't be intelligent enough to do that much, at least save your inane commentary for your next John Birch Society or Klan meeting.
shareIt's a movie. It's make believe. It's drama. Everyone knew about Islam and the middle east in 1975. We just thought you were all nuts.
We still think that.
And, FYI, this film gets the ethnicities right as well as the political power structure. AND, the muslims turn out to be the heroes in the end.
What on Earth were you expecting?
[deleted]
From Wikipedia:
"The film has also gained considerable recognition in the Islamic world for its accurate, detailed, and sympathetic depiction of Berber and Islamic culture."
Have you seen this film? You think many Muslims would take it as a sympathetic depiction of Islamic culture? Not surprisingly there was no source referenced for the bit on wikipedia you quoted. Trust me the Islamic World would not thank Hollywood for yet another unjustified smear attack or at least presentation of harmful ignorant stereotyping. Like the way Qataris in Transformers (2007) were transformed into primitive hut dwellers, a grateful Islamic World cheered in unison.
share[deleted]
The news? Of course. That's where, along with Hollywood, the simple folk get their ignorant stereotyping of a billion people based on the actions of a few.
In case you hadn't noticed the west screwed up the Islamic world starting with the partition and colonisation of the Ottoman empire, the installation of un-natural leaders only capable of ruling with an iron fist, more recently the "war on [of] terror", not least the funding and arming of ISIS by most accounts. Light the touch paper and run. What on the news is a surprise in the circumstances?
The Qataris got their money from fossil fuels, something wrong with that? From which more noble source did you get yours? So that you weren't born in a hut. What is your country and i'll let you know some of your thieving colonialist history.
I think you had better go back to the history books and re-study the Ottoman Empire, that is, if you have ever actually studied it in the first place.
The Ottomans were the last recognized Caliphate, that is, the accepted hereditary government on Earth of the prophet Muhammed. It was founded in 1299 by the Turks under Osman I. It reached its zenith in the latter half of the 16th Century and first half of the 17th Century. After losing the Battle of Vienna in 1683 the Muslim presence in Europe went into decline. The foray of the Ottomans into Europe is the reason that all three post-Judaic western religions are present adjacent to one another in the Balkans. The various peoples of the Balkans also sub-divide into Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Muslim religions.
The decay of the Ottoman Empire continued because they lost one of their major sources of income. The European "Age of Exploration" had come and it was followed by the "Age of Colonialism" or "Age of Imperialism," whichever you want to call it. The Europeans had discovered sea routes to East Asia, so that the trade caravans no longer went by land through the territory of the Ottomans. That caused them hugely because their were no more tariffs to collect for safe transit.
The British, French, and Spanish all allied with the Ottomans (Turkey) against the Russian Empire in the Crimean War of 1853 - 1856. With their European allies, the Ottomans were victorious.
The Ottoman Empire continued to decline. You may have heard the term "Young Turks," It originates 1908 when a group of young Turkish leaders began pushing for reforms to change the absolute Turkish (Ottoman) monarchy into a constitutional monarch. This effort was successful, but the conflict further eroded the strength of the empire. By 1914 the Ottoman Empire was on its last legs. They were hemorrhaging money with nothing coming in and they had little in natural resources. When Germany and Austria went to war with France and Russia the Ottomans signed on. They thought that the Central Powers were sure to win. Unfortunately, they bet on the wrong horse. The Arabian tribes, not yet organized into nation states, went to war on the Ottomans. the Arabs did not recognize the Caliphate status of the Ottomans. The British took advantage of the animosity to lead the Arab tribes against the Turks.
During WW I the French and the British used the Arabs and made promises to the and to the Palestinian Jews that they could not keep. This led to conflicts later in the 20th Century between Arab nation states (some established by the British and the French, others established on their own) and between the Arab nations states and Israel. None of the European powers had anything to do with the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1923 or with the creation of the Turkish Republic in 1926. In essence, the Turks declared bankruptcy and reorganized.
No idea how your potted history of the Ottoman empire refutes what i said "the west screwed up the Islamic world starting with the partition and colonisation of the Ottoman empire"
Are you saying the Ottomans themselves partitioned and colonised their lands by western countries?
Military defeat of the Ottoman Empire. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_%28legal_instrument%29#Background
But in usual fashion history being written by the winners as though we did them a favour "The formal objective of the League of Nations Mandate system was to administer parts of the defunct Ottoman Empire, which had been in control of the Middle East since the 16th century, "until such time as they are able to stand alone." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_%28legal_instrument%29
Ha ha ha. Anyone who believes altruism was the main driving factor needs help.
The poor judgement in drawing borders and the insistence that secular leaders would be the only ones to back is what i am referring to in saying the west screwed up the islamic world
Yes, I am saying the Ottoman Empire carved itself up.
Besides, empires are empires. Empire is the root word of imperialist. Your empire does not have a God given right to exist; it exists because it used physical force to coerce other peoples into its sphere of influence. To whine and complain that democratic republics of free peoples kicked your butt and forced you to dissolve demonstrates your hostile, anti-democratic, fascist recidivism.
Go ahead and laugh, you are losing.
Just so you know how you appear to most Westerners (i.e. Europeans), as soon as you use the term "Zionist," you label yourself for most of us as an "Anti-Semite." You wouldn't have a religion if Judaism had not existed for Muhammed re-interpret. I won't take a position on the reality or accuracy of the revelations that God (Allah) made to Muhammed and I don't know how much credit that Islam gives to the Jews or the Christians. I also understand that Islam makes a specific recognition of "people of the Book." Here, I make the point that logically, if Islam existed at all it would have to be very different from what it is if the Jews had not been here first.
You further alienate Westerners by jumping on every issued as religiously based. You are not necessarily wrong. You will never be disappointed in searching for ignorance about other cultures and other religions among Americans in general. But you are never going to make much progress in educating people by starting off with demonstrating your own ignorance and prejudice.
you know to most switched on people as soon as someone equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism they look like a desperate hasbara "israeli" jew hiding behind a religious excuse so their secular run country can carry on killing innocent Palestinians and stealing their land without opposition.
no one buys it.
There are lots of jews against zionism. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=jews+against+zionism
Judaism does not theologically support zionism http://www.islam21c.com/politics/judaism-rejects-the-state-of-israel/
I stand by my statement. I don't know what you mean by "switched on," but it sounds to me like you mean "properly indoctrinated sheep."
The history speaks for itself and I won't waste my time repeating if for you.
Judaism is a religion and Zionism is an ideology as brutal as Islamism. It's got different ways of doing things, but the same ending - brutal killing.
shareI stand by my statement.
The history speaks for itself and I won't waste my time repeating if for you.
That is because what you believe is fiction. The Irgun, the Leho, the Hagganah, the Palmach are proof enough of what Zionism stands for. Its ideology is very much brutal and against any gentiles or non jew.
shareWhat I know is history. The Irgun, the ?Leho? (do you mean the Lehi?), the Hagganah, and the Palmach were brave guerrilla organizations that fought first against the British and later against several Arab states to establish an independent nation.
Zionism began, and continues as the position that the Jewish people have a right to a homeland and that it ought to reside in the land of their birth. That this does not set well with some of those Arabs does not make Zionism or Zioists wrong. You failed to stop Israel diplomatically. Then you failed to defeat Israel militarily, even though you outnumbered and outgunned her. Now, you seek to win through grossly deceptive propaganda, terrorism, and hypocritical politicking what you could not win the other ways.
What you believe is racist propaganda.
You sure are a zealot. Nope, I don't care about Israel or its existence. Its existence based on what ? A book of fairy tales ? You clearly are a delusional fella. The zionists butchered quite a few innocents. It's always racist for individuals like you who want to justify crimes in the name of a fairy tale book when faced with a different opinion based on facts.
shareThe Muslim world may have appreciated that "The Wind and the Lion" depicted that the conflict was not about religion, but about what boiled down to a family conflict over recognition. I don't remember all of the connections shown in the film, but one of the few tidbits of reality to creep into the movie was the relationship between Raisuli and the Sultan of Morocco. They were close relatives, cousins if not brothers. The real Perdicaris (a 64-years-old male expatriate American? (he had actually given up his American citizenship and travelled on a Greek passport) and his adult son) had been kidnapped by Raisuli in order to embarrass the Sultan.
I haven't seen "Transformers." That sort of dreck falls below my interest level. But it may help you feel better to know that Hollywood treats many non-American/European cultures the same way. My former wife, a native of Okinawa, Japan, was outraged when she saw "Karate Kid II." That movie depicted Okinawans as living in grass shacks and as having a primitive airport. I had flown into or out of that airport in Naha, Okinawa, Japan several times and can assure the world that it is entirely modern.
The Muslim world may have.....
I recall reading the passage that the poster you reference referenced. I have not sat among a group of Muslims and discussed the movie, so I don't know how accurate it is. I do know that Wikipedia entries are much more fluid than traditional print encyclopedias because it can be updated almost daily, rather than once every several years. I certainly don't think that I get anything out of discussing the movie with an intellectually blind, religiously bigoted, racist, hating Muslim xenophobe on these boards.
I can agree with one issue you suggested, but have not elaborated on enough. You are too busy spewing hatred to focus on what should be your main point. Modern mainstream Muslims, regardless of how one may interpret the history of the religion (none of the modern Western religions has a history without blemish), believe in peaceful co-existence. I think that those mainstream Muslims have been far more vocal in condemning the excesses of their violent extremist religious fundamentalists than most Americans and Europeans are aware. That is because the American media and probably the European media have not treated that information as important and relevant. It just is not sensational enough to sell more potato chips.
The good news is that you are thoughtful enough to argue about the issue. This makes it a lot less likely that you are going to build an IED.
Have you seen this film? You think many Muslims would take it as a sympathetic depiction of Islamic culture?
Zionists have a too much nerve pushing Israel as good guys,using black Americans as cannon fodder and lying about everything.
I agree with Thompson AAA.
Your comment is of a level of stupidity that is veritably galactic in proportion.
The fact is that this film honors the north african muslim culture. The 'demonization' is only in your uncultured, juvenile, inferiority-complex-plagued and self-absorbed mind.
What you're REALLY upset about is the fact that this film shows how very far the apple has fallen from the tree in this modern age.
You mean the film where the hero is a gallant Muslim nationalist fighting Western imperialists and their collaborators trying to carve up his country is Islamophobic? Huh?
I'm afraid that you underestimate the number of subjects in which I take an interest!
[deleted]