More Tolerance From The Religion Of Peace

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 23
Topic's author
#1
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
Muslims Protest ‘Provocative’ Film Depicting Mohammed’s Daughter
From early reading about this story it appears that the Sunni's and Sh'ite are in disagreement. 


The Lady of Heaven is a 2021 British epic historical drama film directed by Eli King in his directorial debut and written by the Twelver Shia Muslim Sheikh Yasser Al-Habib, the spiritual leader of The Mahdi Servants Union. Produced by Enlightened Kingdom, the film bills itself as the first movie on the life of the historical figure, Fatimah, during and after the era of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. In addition to 7th century Islamic history from the Twelver Shia perspective, the film links Islamic State in the 21st century and the origins of Islamic terrorism with historical figures revered in Sunni Islam.



Did the theatres showing this movie cave in?  If they haven't yet, it is my guess  they most certainly will eventually.



#2
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,683
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Stephen
excellent reporting
#3
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 566
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Stephen
To be fair, as a proud Brit I think yu'd oppose certain depictions of British royalty and/or heritage.

Islam is more than a religion to those protesters, it is their culture and way of life/being. We all know they are quite thin-skinned when it comes to media productions, so in my opinion this producer was truly asking for trouble.

They are not a religion of peace, however they are still there and to imagine they'd accept such a production is fairly ridiculous.
Topic's author
#4
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
@RM

Islam is more than a religion to those protesters, it is their culture and way of life/being.

Indeed and all founded on ,  and controlled by said religion; Islam.


 however they are still there and to imagine they'd accept such a production is fairly ridiculous.

Well you haven't really understood what this particular protest is about, have you.  It appears that it is a movie that according to one faction of Muslims goes against the beliefs of another faction of Muslims. Sunni V Shi'ite .  So it is not as ridiculous as you want it to be or wish it to be.

It is my guess that none of these protesters have even seen this film for themselves and it appear that it is the writer and the producer that these particular protesting Muslims have in the firing line. And it appears as per usual it is the local Imam stirring the community as it was in the case of Salman Rushdie back in 1988 and coincidently in the same English city of Bradford the same city as this film is/was being shown.  

 If you are as interested as you make out to be, when you have 10 minutes listen to Dr Sayed Ammar Nakshawani speaking about this film.


And I do wish you would stop your cowardly practice of unblocking me just to comment on my threads only to block me again immediately after. 
#5
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 566
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Stephen
You can @ someone while blocking them, as long as they didn't block you but I will unblock you for now.

I don't really care about the protests if I'm honest, I just think making any media about Islam that challenges or disrespects a sect's belief is asking for trouble. These are (as collectives, not accusing every individual) the most thin-skinned ethnicities and/or sects of believers out there, everybody knows how dangerous they can be when offended and how easily they get offended.

I would just steer clear of it, after all the really optimal way to make Islam wane over time (from a pragmatic perspective) in the West is to have barely any media making it seem interesting; let their protests work against them.
Topic's author
#6
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@RationalMadman
I just think making any media about Islam that challenges or disrespects a sect's belief is asking for trouble.

 It is by all accounts an "historical " movie made by Muslims.  How factual it is , is another matter. Here in the UK we have a series airing called The Crown. It's historicity is certainly questionable, but you won't catch me agitating and rousing my countrymen to harass the drama's writers , producers or actors. Or the TV station and their staff that are airing it. . We live in a free society here in the UK.



"The executive producer of a film cancelled in British cities has said it is "very normal" to portray the Prophet Muhammad in film and media.
The Lady of Heaven, depicting Lady Fatima, daughter of Prophet Muhammad, was due to hit cinema screens in parts of Britain.
But Cineworld cancelled all showings after cinemas were picketed by Muslim protesters.
The manager of Sheffield Cineworld announcing the film's cancellation was met with cries of "Allahu Akhbar".

The Lady of Heaven pulled from Bolton cinema | Executive producer of the film 



You can @ someone while blocking them, as long as they didn't block you but I will unblock you for now.

 Listen you arrogant twat. I prefer for you to have me on block. What I do object to is your sly, snide and cowardly practice of unblocking me to address me and my comments only to block me again immediately after you have had your say. 

I don't really care about the protests if I'm honest

 Then why are you even addressing me and posting on a thread and topic that you "don't care about" AND while you have me on block!!!!!? Hypocrite. You are no better than that other VEXATIOUS LITIGANT polystyrene witch. 
#7
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 566
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Stephen
I am freely engaging with your thread despite not caring much about the protests you mention and you get all hot and bothered. I unblock you after you get upset that I am blocking you and you insult me further.

This is the abusive pattern of behaviour that led me to block you in the first place. I will engage your content, but please work on your character. Or don't, I actually couldn't care less (just like I'm not gonna go to a bunch of offended Muslims and say 'hey guys I am here to tell you to toughen tf up'). You go around asking for trouble and that's fine, that's your freedom and I don't give a shit. Just know that you are forcing me to have beef with you if you continue to type that way to me.
#8
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,683
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Stephen
not all muslims are outraged

christians have killed just as many people (and probably more) than muslims have killed
Topic's author
#9
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL
not all muslims are outraged

 Which is what I pointed out to RM #4 after he unblocked me to make a post on a thread that he says he doesn't even care about only to block me again immediately after.
It appears to be a Sunni V Shi'ite  thing.
Topic's author
#10
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@RationalMadman
This is the abusive pattern of behaviour that led me to block you in the first place. 

  I am happy for you to keep me on permanent block.

How many times!?  It is your sly, snide and cowardly practice of unblocking me to address me and my comments only to block me again immediately after you have had your say that gets me annoyed. 

Just know that you are forcing me to have beef with you if you continue to type that way to me.

Nope. It wasn't me that unblocked me , was it, you clown. YOU came to me princess. On a thread that you say you" don't even care about". I forced you into nothing.
Now just let's leave it there, shall we?


#11
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,683
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Stephen
I forced you into nothing.
well stated
#12
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 566
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Stephen
I will explain one time for your precious brain to process:

You can @ people while blocking them without unblocking them as long as they haven't blocked you.

Now that I explained that, you can go straight back to the block list, you are truly insufferable.
Topic's author
#13
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@3RU7AL


One of the figures agitating for cinemas to cancel a film accused of “blasphemy” is the Government’s adviser on Islamophobia, The Telegraph can reveal......

.....

One of the figures agitating for cinemas to cancel a film accused of “blasphemy” is the Government’s adviser on Islamophobia, The Telegraph can reveal.
© Provided by The Telegraph Imam Qari Asim says the movie has “caused much pain and hurt to Muslims”Cinema chain Cineworld was forced to cancel screenings of The Lady of Heaven, about the Prophet Mohammed’s daughter, after venues showing the historical epic were picketed by hundreds of Muslim demonstrators.
It has emerged that one of the figures lobbying for screenings to be cancelled is Imam Qari Asim, an independent government advisor on Islamophobia, who has branded the film “derogatory”.
The Head Imam of the Makkah mosque in Leeds has backed those protesting against the film and asked cinemas to drop the £12million production, which has become the centre of a free speech row in the UK.
Amid widespread protests, Mr Asim posted an online statement critical of the Lady of Heaven, branding it a “disparaging movie” that has “caused much pain and hurt to Muslims”.

Should anyone really be surprised?


Topic's author
#14
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2

The Message.

"In July 1976, director-producer Moustapha Akkad was forced to change the name of his $17 million Islamic epic – from “Muhammad, Messenger of God” to simply “The Message” – just 72 hours before the London premier.

As will be obvious to anyone who has been following the saga of Cineworld and the "blasphemous" Islamic epic The Lady of Heaven (or the last year's events at Batley Grammar School in Yorkshire where a head teacher and his family are still in hiding and still under Police protection) the change came after protests – including threatening phone calls to one cinema – from conservative Muslims who wrongly believed the film would depict the Prophet Mohammed.

Among their demands was that the film be banned. "We want the picture out of the country," the group's leader declared. "Because it's a fairy tale, it's a joke… I'm Muslim and I'll die for my faith. It's a joke. It's misrepresenting the Muslim faith." In a siege that lasted 39 hours, a young radio reporter was killed and dozens more were injured."

Islam has come a long way over the last 47 years hasn't it 😒 
#15
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,583
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Stephen
There was a time when Christians were as steadfast in defending their faith as Muslims. Now if you walk down the street in London publicly insulting Jesus, you will get more opposition from Muslims than from White Brits
#16
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,683
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Dr.Franklin
There was a time when Christians were as steadfast in defending their faith as Muslims.
At the beginning of the 20th century, approximately one-sixth of the population of the United States was Roman Catholic.[44] Anti-Catholicism was widespread in the 1920s; anti-Catholics, including the Ku Klux Klan, believed that Catholicism was incompatible with democracy and that parochial schools encouraged separatism and kept Catholics from becoming loyal Americans. [**]
#17
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,583
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
I am absolutely aware of all that history. I fully understand how the Founding Fathers were anti-Catholic and originally created the Continental Congress because KG3 made an act protecting French Catholics in the colonies. I am aware how the upstate NY Loyalist Irish Catholics were allowed to join the British Army to defend their religion and King against the Founding Fathers. I am aware how the Mexican-American War was a war against Mexican Catholics and how Irish+German Catholics defected to the Mexican side because they couldn't stand the anti-Catholic massacres(St. Patrick's Battalion), I am aware of how the KKK waged war on Southern Catholics. I am aware of how the US Govt. sided with the communist Mexican government against the Cristeros, who simply wanted an end to the incredibly repressive anti-clerical practices. I am aware of how "Orangeism" revived during the 1960 presidential campaign among Northern Protestants to oppose JFK.

And yes, the standard argument against Catholics is that they threatened liberties. Cromwell argued that papists in the Royalist army were threatening the rights of Englishmen. The Founding fathers thought that the Quebec Act threatened their religious liberties. And, the KKK used the same argument.

And really it makes sense why they chose this argument. 19th century conservatives and royalists were all Catholic, and The Syllabus of Errors in 1864 issued by Pope Pius IX  strongly condemned classical liberalism. Because of the liberal society in America, the heresy of Americanism developed in European Catholic circles which denounced the heresies espoused by American liberalism:

"The long-term result was that the Irish Catholics who largely controlled the Catholic Church in the United States increasingly demonstrated total loyalty to the Pope, and suppressed traces of liberal thought in the Catholic colleges." From wikipedia

Furthermore, Catholics were too socially right-wing for the liberal American society. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood and in favor of contraception, said that the Papacy were a "dictatorship of celibates". Catholics have been the only major opponents of pornography, contraception, and other sexual vices, while Protestants were ok with divorce and pre-martial sex, they took a hard stance against alcohol which Catholics really didn't do.

I am a patriotic American, but every Catholic has to recognize this history. Why any Catholic would support someone like Thomas Jefferson is beyond me
Topic's author
#18
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Dr.Franklin
There was a time when Christians were as steadfast in defending their faith as Muslims. Now if you walk down the street in London publicly insulting Jesus, you will get more opposition from Muslims than from White Brits

I doubt that, but what I do know you will get if you walked down the street in Bradford or Rochdale yelling Jesus is the one and only true god, is  you run the risk of   of having your head removed.
Haven't you ever seen the reactions of Muslims towards Christian speakers in in Hyde Park?



'DISTURBING' Christian preacher Hatun Tash reveals horror at being stabbed while in Hebdo shirt as counter-terror cops investigate.

Ms Tash, a former Muslim who converted to Christianity, said that she has been verbally and physically attacked in the past while preaching at Speakers' Corner at the park.
Speakers' Corner is known for being a place where people can freely express their opinions.
She collapsed with blood running down her face after being stabbed at the weekend.
Ms Tash said: "I am upset and disturbed by what has happened to me. I am asking myself if have done anything wrong?


"I am convinced I have not broken any law or incited hate. All I did was question Islam and I wanted to debate discuss and to tell people about Jesus Christ.

#19
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,583
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Stephen
Again, Christians used to be like that. Have you seen our history with Jews? 
#20
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,583
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@3RU7AL
trust me, political philosophy is my specialty. It's something I know very well
Topic's author
#21
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Again, Christians used to be like that.

Trying to contextualise past deeds of  ancient and medieval Christianity with 21st century Muslim intolerant barbarity doesn't fly..
 Christianity reformed. And this isn't the thread to discuss it...

Tell me, should this cinema chain have caved in to threats ? 

"In the UK, protests were held in Bolton, Blackburn, Bradford, Sheffield and Birmingham. Eventually, Cineworld succumbed to the mounting pressures and pulled the films from all their cinemas. Many claimed that these protests were peaceful, but in one such protest in Birmingham, an attendee warned that there would be consequences from showing the film and that Muslims were trained from birth to defend their prophet’s honour.

Some might align those against showing the film with the modern-day march of intolerant progressivism, but this has longer roots within south Asia. In India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, it is common for religious minorities, secularists, atheists and others to be killed if they were perceived to have insulted Hinduism or Islam. And it will be over anything. In Pakistan, last year, a Sri Lankan manager was killed by his employees because he was deemed to have insulted Islam. His actual crime? He took down a poster that was inscribed with Islamic verses. He was dragged, beaten to death and burnt by a several-hundred-strong mob.
#22
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 566
Posts: 19,930
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Stephen
Just so you are aware, I fully agree with you on Islam, I am just weary to pick a fight with the most hostile, violent and easily offended ideology out there.

If you got doxxed I feel they'd be angrier, if I got doxxed, I feel they'd just go 'what a jackass' and let me be.

That's not a threat, I am stating a real, serious reason that I avoid discussing my 'true' views on Islam here too often and too explicitly. I don't appreciate the religion, I just don't want to be seen mocking it or directly threatening its spread and practise in any way. I agree with you that they rule by fear and cancel culture has become a weapon they abuse in Western countries but we cannot oppose it, their chokehold is too strong and the better thing to do is to convince them to change it into a more liberal Islam (which isn't possible if you know what Islam means but thankfully the liberal Muslims don't realise this).
Topic's author
#23
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,332
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
It appears that at least a little common sense has come from this story.

It appears that the Muslim adviser to the UK Government  on "Islamophobia" mentioned above here>
"One of the figures agitating for cinemas to cancel a film accused of “blasphemy” is the Government’s adviser on Islamophobia"#13 has been dismissed. 


"Qari Asim was told on Saturday evening that he had been dismissed from his official roles as independent adviser on Islamophobia and deputy chairman of the Anti-Muslim Hatred Working Group.
The move came after Mr Asim, the head imam at the Makkah mosque in Leeds, backed those protesting against The Lady of Heaven film and asked cinemas to drop the £12 million production, which has become the centre of a free speech row in the UK.
Amid widespread protests, Mr Asim issued a statement branding The Lady of Heaven a "disparaging movie" that has "caused much pain and hurt to Muslims".......

.......
In a letter to Mr Asim published on the Government website on Saturday, the Department of Levelling Up said: "We have no option but to withdraw the appointment and end your roles with Government with immediate effect.
"Your recent support for a campaign to limit free expression - a campaign which has itself encouraged communal tensions - means it is no longer appropriate for you to continue your work with Government in roles designed to promote community harmony," it said. 
The letter went on: "You will have no doubt seen reports of the scenes outside different cinema venues. These included deeply disturbing videos of sectarian chanting and anti-Shia hatred... which must be challenged at every opportunity as part of a wider effort to combat anti-Muslim hatred.
"We were disappointed to see that you failed to condemn some of the protests complicit in these behaviours."
Mr Asim's statement clashed with the views of Dame Sara Khan, the Government’s independent adviser on social cohesion and resilience, who criticised the failure of the authorities to stand up to protests which led to Cineworld pulling UK screenings of the film "to ensure the safety of our staff and customers".

, Mr Asim, who was appointed as Islamophobia adviser a day before Boris Johnson entered Downing Street in 2019, said that he had been ignored by No 10 and Michael Gove, the Levelling Up Secretary, since taking up the role.
The film’s release on June 3 sparked days of demonstrations at cinemas in Bradford, Bolton, Birmingham, Sheffield, London and Leeds, as protestors branded the film "offensive" and sectarian in its depiction of Islam’s history and early leaders.
Malik Shlibak, executive producer of The Lady of Heaven, blamed a radical group "trying to cause sectarian division" for the protests and cinemas were "crumbling to the pressure". 
Separately, Sajid Javid, the Health Secretary, said he was "very concerned about the growing cancel culture" in the UK.
"There's people out there who think they have a right not to be offended and of course, no one has that right," he said.
Mr Asim was contacted for comment. 




I suspect there to be further protests and demonstrations claiming unfair dismissal of  Imam Qari Asim and demands for his reinstatement  " or there will be repercussions"