Sunday, January 20, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Violence fear over Islam film

by Jason Burke

Reposted from:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2243805,00.html

Counter-terrorism alert as a Dutch right-winger launches a movie that will denounce the Koran

The Dutch government is bracing itself for violent protests following the scheduled broadcast this week of a provocative anti-Muslim film by a radical right-wing politician who has threatened to broadcast images of the Koran being torn up and otherwise desecrated.

Cabinet ministers and officials, fearing a repetition of the crisis sparked by the publication of cartoons of Muhammad in a Danish newspaper two years ago, have held a series of crisis meetings and ordered counter-terrorist services to draw up security plans. Dutch nationals overseas have been asked to register with their embassies and local mayors in the Netherlands have been put on standby.

Geert Wilders, one of nine members of the extremist VVD (Freedom) party in the 150-seat Dutch lower house, has promised that his film will be broadcast - on television or on the internet - whatever the pressure may be. It will, he claims, reveal the Koran as 'source of inspiration for intolerance, murder and terror'.
Dutch diplomats are already trying to pre-empt international reaction. 'It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,' said Maxime Verhagen, the Foreign Minister, who was in Madrid to attend the Alliance of Civilisations, an international forum aimed at reducing tensions between the Islamic world and the West. In Amsterdam, Rotterdam and other towns with large Muslim populations, imams say they have needed to 'calm down' growing anger in their communities.

Government officials hope that no mainstream media organisation will agree to show the film, although one publicly funded channel, Nova, initially agreed before pulling out. 'A broadcast on a public channel could imply that the government supported the project,' said an Interior Ministry spokesman.

Demonstrations are also expected from those opposed to Wilders beyond Holland's Muslim community - a number of left-wing activists have already been arrested - and from his supporters. Members of a group calling itself Stop Islamisation of Europe are planning to travel to Amsterdam. 'Geert Wilders is an elected politician who has made a film, and that he is under armed guard as a result is absolutely outrageous,' said Stephen Gash, a UK-based member, yesterday. 'It is all about free speech.'

In November 2004, anger and violence followed the stabbing and shooting by a Dutch teenager of Moroccan parentage of the controversial film-maker Theo Van Gogh, a distant relative of the artist.

The attacker said the killing was in response to a film about Islam and domestic violence that Van Gogh had made with the Somalian-born activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali, then an MP, which showed images of naked veiled women with lines from the Koran projected over them.

From her self-imposed exile in Washington, Hirsi Ali last week criticised the new film as 'provocation' and called on the major Dutch political parties to restart a debate on immigration that has split Dutch society in recent years, rather than leave the field to extremists.

Wilders announced his plans last November, saying he was making a film to show the violent and fascist elements of the Muslim faith. The maverick politician's remarks about Islam have become increasingly radical. In February last year he said that if Muslims wanted to stay in the Netherlands, they should tear out half of the Koran and throw it away. In parliament he then called for the Koran and Hitler's Mein Kampf to be banned, a proposal that was rejected.

Job Cohen, the left-wing mayor of Amsterdam, echoed Hirsi Ali's words and called for a debate 'so that the moderates can make themselves heard'.

During a visit to the European Parliament in Strasbourg last week, Ahmad Badr al-Din Hassoun, the Grand Mufti of Syria, said that, were Wilders was seen to tear up or burn a Koran in his film, 'this will simply mean he is inciting wars and bloodshed ... It is the responsibility of the Dutch people to stop him.'

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Sunday, January 20, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 50 of 79 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #113595 by Radesq on January 20, 2008 at 6:34 am

I started to cut and paste all the sections of this article that I have a problem with and it was essentially repeating the article. All sides are wrong about something in this confrontation. However, the bottom line is that Islam cannot be allowed to remain above criticism simply out of fear of reprisals.

Other Comments by Radesq

2. Comment #113597 by Titus on January 20, 2008 at 6:39 am

'...but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,'

Of course it bloody well does!
What it doesn't mean is the right to incite violence; something muslim extremists are very fond of.
As Stephen Fry so eloquently put it, 'Anyone who says they're offended is just having a bit of a whine. Oh I'm offended...so fucking what!'

Other Comments by Titus

3. Comment #113598 by Konradius on January 20, 2008 at 6:41 am

I like the fact that Ayaan is labelled here as a moderate.
I would also like to point out that Wilders has in fact split from the VVD party just like mrs. Verdonk. Both have their own setup for a party and are rating quite high in polls.

Even though I quite hate these right wing near fascists, I also quite dislike mr. Balkenende, the current prime minister. He in response said dutch traditions did not support Wilders to needlessly hurt the muslims feelings. What he should have said is that Wilders has every right to do so, even though it might not be constructive. Having a right does not mean you have to use it.
My personal feeling is that this right of criticizing is under attack by the whole of Dutch and European politics, and therefore I support this movie. Even though, knowing Wilders past, I suspect it will be full of errors, it will be far weaker than it could have been, and will discredit all other criticism of islam.

(edited for accuracy)

Other Comments by Konradius

4. Comment #113602 by Szymanowski on January 20, 2008 at 6:48 am

"freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend"

Oh yes it bloody well does!

But Wilders is being an idiot (pending viewing of the video) - there's nothing to be gained from burning a copy of the Koran unless you're freezing on a mountain top.

Other Comments by Szymanowski

5. Comment #113607 by Peacebeuponme on January 20, 2008 at 6:57 am

nothing to be gained from burning a copy of the Koran unless you're freezing on a mountain top.

Apart from yet again highlighting that Islam is not a peaceful cult.

Its like flag burning, pointless, but nothing to get wound up about.

You can burn a tree, but turn it into paper, add ink and burn that and watch idiots complain.

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

6. Comment #113611 by Steve Zara on January 20, 2008 at 7:09 am

but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,

It certainly should. But there are two sides to this. Freedom of expression also includes the right to feel offended, and to state that clearly, and to attempt to persuade those offending you to stop doing it.

I do occasionally see the point of view expressed that any criticism of the offensive material is an attempt at censorship. I disagree. Freedom of expression should be about allowing a full and even fierce discussion.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

7. Comment #113613 by Peacebeuponme on January 20, 2008 at 7:19 am

I do occasionally see the point of view expressed that any criticism of the offensive material is an attempt at censorship.

Yes, of course criticism should be allowed, so long no attempt is made to ban. After all, we have paid art, film and music critics.

There is still room for consideration. You can have a t-shirt slogan. Somebody may say "that slogan makes me uncomfortable". You then have to decide whether the displaying the statement or consideration is more important. The key is that only you can decide. People are then free to decide whether they consider you a good person, or an arse.

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

8. Comment #113614 by liberalartist on January 20, 2008 at 7:22 am

If we all used our expressions except in the possibility of "offending" someone, we would have little to say.

And I find it incredibly hypocrital that this guy would on the one hand demand his right to express himself in this movie and at the same time try to ban books.

Other Comments by liberalartist

9. Comment #113617 by Steve Zara on January 20, 2008 at 7:26 am

There is still room for consideration. You can have a t-shirt slogan. Somebody may say "that slogan makes me uncomfortable". You then have to decide whether the displaying the statement or consideration is more important. The key is that only you can decide. People are then free to decide whether they consider you a good person, or an arse.

Very well put. Just as you have every right to offend others, they have every right to call you an inconsiderate talentless jerk without you screaming "censorship"!

Other Comments by Steve Zara

10. Comment #113618 by aquilacane on January 20, 2008 at 7:28 am

"It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,"

If this is true, should not the Koran and every religious book be band? Does not the Koran offend every single intelligent human who reads it? Surely if the Koran is permitted, then any offensive material is permitted. An offense for an offense. Seems fine by me.

Other Comments by aquilacane

11. Comment #113623 by Joost Snijder on January 20, 2008 at 8:03 am

A few corrections and comments:
- Wilders is not member of VVD, but of PVV.(VVD is much more moderate)
- The channel they name is not a channel but a show about politics and society.
- Maxime Verhagen, the foreign minister cited about freedom of speech not beeing freedom to offend, is member of political party CDA. In "CDA", "C" stands for "Christian".
- Wilders did not suggest to ban Hitler's "Mein Kampf", he only suggested to ban the koran. He didn't have to suggest to ban Hitler's "Mein Kampf" since it already is banned.(that's just how tolerant and liberal The Netherlands are :P)

Don't you just hate bad reporting???

Other Comments by Joost Snijder

12. Comment #113627 by Ed-words on January 20, 2008 at 8:09 am

Good thing George Carlin

and Bill Maher don't

live in Holland.

(and Limbaugh and O'Reilly)

Other Comments by Ed-words

13. Comment #113630 by Nighttripper on January 20, 2008 at 8:16 am

Aside from the just remarks that Joost Snijder made in post 113623, I think this article catches the situation much more truthfully then some previous articles about Wilders, in which he was portrayed as some sort of heroic freedom fighter. But as liberalartist said in his post; the guy is a complete hypocrit and only out for self-gain. Making increasingly idiosyncratic remarks about burning and tearing up Korans on the one hand but praising our Christian-Judean society on the other. Unfortunately, the media is loving it and so every blurb he utters is evening news. It is only defiling the debate. Not doing anything to solve anything.

Having said that I think it's BS to already forbid a film which hasn't even been seen by anyone. Although I doubt it will help in any way and knowing Wilders oversimplified views it will not convince any Muslim about thinking critically about their faith. Much to the contrary I expect.

If some conservative faithhead would make a movie about atheism and try to refute it using arguments which are over the top and evidently hypocritical (like they usually are by the way...). Calling out for the burning of atheist books, because atheism will destroy the world... I would have stopped listening after the first few seconds. I would probably be even more convinced of my atheist conviction seeing that my opponents have resorted to such desperate measures.

But supposing some respected atheist would plead for the need for some sort of spirituality in life, although maybe not in a religious sense, I would be inclined to at least listen to what he is saying. That is why I have much more confidence in secular muslims like Ahmed Abuthaleb and Ahmed Marcouch then someone like Geert Wilders to promote secularism and keep radical islam in check.

Other Comments by Nighttripper

14. Comment #113639 by Peacebeuponme on January 20, 2008 at 8:47 am

I should have also added in my post #113607 above, that there should be a difference between justified offence and what I would call conditioned offence. For example, if someone walks around with a t-shirt with a picture of your other half on it, along with the slogan "This person is a fucktard", then I think any offence would be justified. The other type would be conditioned offence to the word "cunt" for example.

Not suggesting either type be treated differently in law, except that the distinction should be in mind when deciding how to react as the "offender".

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

15. Comment #113641 by kraut on January 20, 2008 at 8:59 am

"reveal the Koran as 'source of inspiration for intolerance, murder and terror'."

and what about the bible? Remember the crusades, the thirty year war, the inquisition, the concordate between rome and berlin etc. etc. ad infinitum (almost)
Those guys of the "freedom party" - and I have read some of their statements - are just a bunch of christian hypocrits and white supremacists.

Be careful who you support.

Other Comments by kraut

16. Comment #113651 by JemyM on January 20, 2008 at 9:46 am

"It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend"
Yes, it does actually. Even more so when what's attacked is nothing more than opinions.

I would personally adress the problem with religion as a whole instead of beginning with the Quaran though. The releationship between a moderate muslim and the Quaran is no different from the relationship between a moderate christian an the Bible. The content is just the same and the only reason there's more fundamentalists within Islam is due to several theocracies who serves as a reminder what Religion can do to a nation.

Other Comments by JemyM

17. Comment #113655 by robotaholic on January 20, 2008 at 9:54 am

I have the right to say that I'm sick to death of islamic anything!!!

Other Comments by robotaholic

18. Comment #113656 by Vinelectric on January 20, 2008 at 9:57 am
Can't they think of any other way to engage muslims other than the "burn this or get the hell out of here" approach?

BBC's Hard Talk would occasionally invite a muslim leader and grill them over hardline views (especially so when Tim Sebastian was around). If the Dutch emulate such government-sponsored debates that may prove much more effective than the letting the irresponsible freedom-to-offend junkies to continue to pour oil on the fire.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

19. Comment #113661 by Fanusi Khiyal on January 20, 2008 at 10:02 am

Geert Wilders, one of nine members of the extremist VVD (Freedom)

I love this: On the one side, we have an "extremist" who wants people to live in freedom, and on the other hand we have "extremists" who want us all enslaved under Shariah law. But they're both "extremist" and therefore morally equivalent! Geddit?

JemyM :

would personally adress the problem with religion as a whole instead of beginning with the Quaran though.

The 'religion as a whole' begins and ends with the Qur'an, making a detour through Hadith, Tafsir, Sira, etc. etc. first.

The releationship between a moderate muslim and the Quaran is no different from the relationship between a moderate christian an the Bible

Wrong! The relationship between even a 'moderate' Muslim and the Qur'an is usually even more fanatical than that of a Christian fundie.

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

20. Comment #113669 by Geoff on January 20, 2008 at 10:15 am
I still suspect, admittedly without seeing the film, of course, that it will contain no criticisms that would be considered offensive by any other organisation than a religious one. Yet another example of the freedom from criticism that religion enjoys, IMO.

Other Comments by Geoff

21. Comment #113676 by Mitchell Gilks on January 20, 2008 at 10:21 am
This pisses me off. I am all for freedom of everything that doesn't infringe on other's freedoms. I would even never suggest forcing people to stop being total douche bags. He can be a douche bag if he wants.

I am still angry that this douche bag is simply going to show and inflammatory movie just to piss violent people off that could very possibly result in deaths. I am not saying hold of criticism, them not being criticized hurts the world more. This, however, is not criticism, merely inflammatory rubbish.

I am also appalled the douche bag's appeal to freedom of speach and expression, while using that freedom to destory a book, that he failed to get banned.

This douche bag is definitely part of the problem, not the solution. What he really means is "free expression for me, not for you."

They should be attempting to ban stuff that limits freedoms, like arranged marriages and burkas. Work on those honour killings and wife beatings a little more.

This douche bag is just stirring shit with no purpose other than to stir shit.

Other Comments by Mitchell Gilks

22. Comment #113677 by dialector on January 20, 2008 at 10:23 am
"who has threatened to broadcast images of the Koran being torn up and otherwise desecrated."

This is just peevish, infantile stupidity. You do not desecrate a religious book by tearing it up. That is desecrating wood pulp. A book is not the pages it is printed on, it is the meaning of the words on the pages. You desecrate a religious book by exposing it to the light of reason. And at that point you are not really desecrating a religious book, you are helping a religious people to be free of ignorance.

Other Comments by dialector

23. Comment #113706 by Arcturus on January 20, 2008 at 11:26 am
The Grand Mufti of Syria says: 'this will simply mean he is inciting wars and bloodshed ... It is the responsibility of the Dutch people to stop him.'

I find this ironic. He's a big hypocrite. If what he says is true, then it is the responsibility of Muslims to stop Bin Laden and his suicidal pals. He cannot require the Dutch people to silence this guy, and in the same time tolerate suicidal terrorist elements in Islam.

How is it going to be mr Hassoun?

Other Comments by Arcturus

24. Comment #113707 by Pieter on January 20, 2008 at 11:28 am
The VVD is not an extremist party! Wilders isn't even a member of VVD anymore. The VVD is the Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie- People's party for freedom and democracy (essential a socially and economically liberal party). Wilders has his own party, Partij voor de Vrijheid, it's similarly named but he's running it. and even his party is hardly an extremist party. dutch politics is incredibly banal, but people should still get their parties right.

plus the country is so damn socialist that it's small wonder you get idiots like foreign minister maxime verhagen who fundamentally misunderstand the nature of liberalism. i'd sooner call that socialist boob an extremist than Wilders.

Other Comments by Pieter

25. Comment #113708 by clunkclickeverytrip on January 20, 2008 at 11:28 am
Wilders is a very brave person - I take my hat off to him.

Other Comments by clunkclickeverytrip

26. Comment #113711 by AllanW on January 20, 2008 at 11:32 am
Am I missing something? What's with the italics?

Other Comments by AllanW

27. Comment #113716 by Peacebeuponme on January 20, 2008 at 11:43 am
I blame robotaholic - it started with him!

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

28. Comment #113718 by Fanusi Khiyal on January 20, 2008 at 11:45 am

In parliament he then called for the Koran and Hitler's Mein Kampf to be banned, a proposal that was rejected.

No, sillies, Mein Kampf is already banned in Holland. He's just pointing out that, of the two of them, the Koran has done more harm, and therefore there's a good case for banning the damn thing to.

I am utterly unsurprised - though I wish I wasn't - to see the usual suspects come out of the woodwork to complain about the tastelessness of the film

Other Comments by Fanusi Khiyal

29. Comment #113719 by AllanW on January 20, 2008 at 11:45 am
Nah. It started with Vinelectric on my screen.

Hey, Vinelectric! Stop screwing around with my screen!

Other Comments by AllanW

30. Comment #113720 by Steve Zara on January 20, 2008 at 11:48 am

Fixed.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

31. Comment #113721 by AllanW on January 20, 2008 at 11:50 am

Thanks Steve. You know, if I was of a believing type of mind I'd be tempted to worship you :)

After all, isn't that what personal experience and revelations is all about?

Other Comments by AllanW

32. Comment #113723 by Geoff on January 20, 2008 at 11:52 am

Yep, definitely vinelectric!

Unless it's the vinrouge I'm currently quaffing...

Other Comments by Geoff

33. Comment #113724 by Peacebeuponme on January 20, 2008 at 11:53 am

Fixed - how?

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

34. Comment #113736 by Ducklike on January 20, 2008 at 12:18 pm

Steve fixed the italics with a little HTML magic. It seems Robotaholic left out the "i" in his closing tag. When Steve added an extra closing tag for italics to his comment,... problem solved.

Thanks Steve

Other Comments by Ducklike

35. Comment #113743 by Goldy on January 20, 2008 at 12:31 pm

Hullo, thought I, an article mildly critical of Islam. Wonder what paper....ahhh, the Guardian (or Observer - they are the same now, eh?).
Something about eh British press that has a constant dig at Islam. Yesterday's Telegraph had this
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nsharia_120.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox
No wonder they are all angry :-)

Other Comments by Goldy

36. Comment #113748 by Sam Slater on January 20, 2008 at 12:40 pm

Has anyone noticed that when referring to Gert Wilders and the VVD party, they use the word 'extremist', but they never used it once when referring to the Muslims who may call for beheadings and death?

Hypocrisy and biased journolism. (and I take the Guardian & Observer)

Other Comments by Sam Slater

37. Comment #113760 by Pass the Dutchy on January 20, 2008 at 1:16 pm

Just to get the records straight: Nobody, except for Geert Wilders, knows what will be in this movie. The only remark he has made so far is that it will contain many "still" images. A lot of us here in Holland think that it may well be that there is no movie at all (like the donor show we had some time ago). Wilders is smart enough to get a lot of free advertisement for his party this way and all he has to do now is to let us know by the end of the week that there is no movie at all: point made . He thus showed us how goverment, police, mayors, etc etc depend their behaviour on religeous threat.
We will see.

Other Comments by Pass the Dutchy

38. Comment #113763 by Henri Bergson on January 20, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Great, and about time.

Bring on the truth, and show the film on this site!

Other Comments by Henri Bergson

39. Comment #113772 by BAEOZ on January 20, 2008 at 1:42 pm

I think Steve got it about right. Freedom of expression means that no one has the right not to be offended. But that they can express their offense and argue their case.

Check this out:
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2008/01/18/piety/

Other Comments by BAEOZ

40. Comment #113775 by Steve Zara on January 20, 2008 at 1:50 pm

Fixed - how?

HTML formatting tags start like this [b] (bold), [i] italic etc. They should be closed like this: [/b], [/i] etc. All I did was start my post with [/i].

Of course, I have used square brackets where angle brackets should be used, to illustrate the point.

What is often done on sites is like is some checking of the text supplied in a post to ensure that all tags that are opened are closed. This can be quickly done using either hand-written code or libraries for parsing HTML.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

41. Comment #113780 by Vinelectric on January 20, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Thanks Steve, that italics glitch was driving me nuts AND I was blamed for it..! Tell you the truth I was offended but I noticed that everyone's posts were becoming difficult to follow including Duke Nukem's.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

42. Comment #113783 by Steve Zara on January 20, 2008 at 2:35 pm

Vinelectric:

If you want to find out who is guilty, take a look at the web page source (on Firefox View/Page Source, on IE7 Page/View Source). Although "guilt" is not appropriate, as posts should really be checked by the site software, and send back for user edit if there is a problem.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

43. Comment #113792 by IanG on January 20, 2008 at 3:14 pm

This weblink may be of interest in the discussion of religion's inclination to demand special status related to respect and offence.

http://stephenlaw.blogspot.com/search?q=secularism+test

It suggests the simple test of substituting the word "political" for the word "religious" and then noting how outrageous the demand becomes.

Other Comments by IanG

44. Comment #113794 by IanG on January 20, 2008 at 3:18 pm

Sorry, it seems to have dropped the last bit off the address.

If you use the link, go to the top left hand search box on the page, type secularism test

Then press enter.

Other Comments by IanG

45. Comment #113827 by LorienRyan on January 20, 2008 at 5:13 pm

People can, and do, what they want. I'm with Christopher Hitchens on this one.

Other Comments by LorienRyan

46. Comment #113861 by dragonfirematrix on January 20, 2008 at 7:38 pm

I think it is clear that any time someone is critical of any of those little black books, reprisals are threatened, or violence is attempted.

"Holiday trees, teddy bear names..."

However, if we want a free planet, I feel we must continue to challenge everything, including beliefs in those little black books. If we give in to the religious, intolerance and destruction will prevail.

Well, that is my opinion anyway...

Other Comments by dragonfirematrix

47. Comment #113892 by Boukeb on January 20, 2008 at 11:52 pm

To me, Wilders' criticism of islam is as irrational as islam itself. There would be a different response here in The Netherlands if he criticized all religions with islamic faith as the most irrational and thin-skinned one.

Other Comments by Boukeb

48. Comment #113905 by Roland_F on January 21, 2008 at 1:31 am

22. Comment #113677 by dialector about burning the Koran

You do not desecrate a religious book by tearing it up. That is desecrating wood pulp. A book is not the pages it is printed on, it is the meaning of the words on the pages.

Sorry wrong atheist view: The Muslim understanding of the Koran is that even the paper the word of God is printed on, is holy. So there is no paper recycling possible in Islamic countries as a single Koran page might be ending up in the tons of re-pulping of recycling paper.
That's why the worst offence (like US troops did in Iraq) is the usage of Koran as toilet paper.

Last week I read an article in the German Online newspaper (Spiegel) about the speech of an Austrian right wing politician. She called the prophet Mohamed (be peace upon him) a child molester because of his (be peace upon him) marriage with a 9 years old girl. Of course this insulting the holy prophet (be peace upon him) in Austria is punishable with up to 2 years in jail, according to this article.

The main problem is that this Islam criticism is high jacked from the fascists, because the moderate mainstream politicians are busy with appeasement. Like Swiss Police force should abstain from eating in public during Ramadan, all naming of the holy prophet (be peace upon him) in newspapers has to be added with the phrase 'be peace upon him' in several European countries …etc… and things like this. Some commentator called it the preventive surrender of the free world, free press and freedom of speech to the radical Muslims to avoid 'hurting their feelings'.

Other Comments by Roland_F

49. Comment #113910 by lesferdinand on January 21, 2008 at 1:50 am

Geert Wilders is an idiot. But unfortunately he's an idiot with a lot of voters behind him. Personally, I think he is a xenophobe and only uses Islam because it's discriminatory and futile to attack immigrants based on their ethnicity.

It would be better if the media ignored him unless there's some real news to report. The amount of attention that this unreleased movie has received is ridiculous. The attention and importance given to this unknown movie almost 'legitimises' an outbreak of violence upon its release.

Other Comments by lesferdinand

50. Comment #113913 by Vinelectric on January 21, 2008 at 2:03 am

Roland_F

I don't know what you're getting at but if you ask ex-muslims, myself included, I doubt that you'd come across anyone who felt a change of heart by watching right wing nutters tear up a book that once occupied a special place in their lives.

All you'll ever achieve is triggering the predictable knee jerk whereby muslims automatically recoil further into their irrationality. You know there's an emotional element to religious attachment but you don't seem to know how to manipulate that to your advantage.

Why can't we approach the muslim community through rational and mature dialogue instead? It works, "believe" me!

Other Comments by Vinelectric