Greg

I bought that DVD from Quixotic Media via Amazon several months back. Why do you say that it'll be out on July 17? Does that mean one can get it on Blockbuster or Netflix?

Also, are you thinking of any sequel? Maybe something more content rich, along the lines of Obsession?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 27, 2007 1:22 AM

oops wife attack.. she says the muslims worship same god as u and me and all that shit,, bt

Posted by: Madduck at May 27, 2007 2:18 AM

Might as well ask,

Is there any posters here who ever actually ended up seeing the film or even any segments of it? Did any of the so called anti-islamism muslims in the documentary have anything to say about what they can do, or what we can do to help, to stop the hordes of muslim youth who increasingly believe what they hear from al jazeerah, and saudi backed mosques, believing Al Qaeda and Muslim Brother hood to be martyrs and s**t? Did they have any methods on convincing muslims in the West they're not, and never will be entitled, to propagate classic shariah laws in the U.S?

How can they convince muslims that they don't have any more right to enforce their lifestyles on Americans anymore than immigrants from Jamacia, China, India, Thailand, Latin America, Mexico or Vietnam do, and in many cases even more so considering how inherently barbarian and at odds with Western principles they are? Can they convince Western muslims of the Jews' right to have and defend their own nation just like any other peoples on earth, and stop trying to coerce the west into adopting anit-israle policies out of insincere and taqiya-based *symapthy for palestinian suffering*? Can they help muslims understand basic concepts about Islamic groups, i.e. that Al Qaeda, Mulsim Brotherhood, Hamas and Hezbollah are not freedom fighters, they're sociopathic, genocidal jihadists with lower moral standards than the Bolsheviks, the Nazis or the Italian fascists?

If anyone saw this so-called ant-islamist movie, any answers to these questions would be great.

Posted by: maxwell46&2 at May 27, 2007 2:22 AM

Infidel Pride wrote:

Greg,...I bought that DVD from Quixotic Media via Amazon several months back. Why do you say that it'll be out on July 17?

I'm wondering the same thing, Infidel Pride. I have the DVD that Robert Spencer has been advertising on Jihad Watch for months, and found it superb. I did hear something somewhere about the DVD being picked up by a bigger publisher, but I wonder if that means the DVD will be different in some way, and if it will now appear in Blockbuster, etc. I look forward to anything Greg Davis will produce on this subject, as I enjoyed both this DVD and his book.

Posted by: traeh at May 27, 2007 2:49 AM

Maxwell

I have the DVD, and saw it several times. The outline of the documentary divvies up the presentation into 6 parts

1. ‘There is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet’:
   Our interviewees affirm their belief that Islamic violence is entirely orthodox behavior for Muslims and stems directly from the teachings and example of the Prophet Muhammad and the commands of the Koran. We learn that the example of Muhammad is one of a violent warlord who killed numerous people. The Koran – the verbatim words of Allah – prescribes violence against non-Muslims and Muhammad is the perfect example of the Koran in action.
   
2. The Struggle: We learn that jihad, while literally meaning 'struggle', in fact denotes war fought against non-Muslims in order to bring the rule of Islamic law to the world. Violent death in jihad is, according to the Koran, the only assurance of salvation.
   
3. Expansion: Following the death of Muhammad, his 'rightly-guided' successors carried his wars to three continents, fighting, enslaving, and massacring countless Christians, Jews, Zoroastrians, Hindus, and others. Islam did not spread through evangelism or through its natural appeal, but through aggressive wars of conquest. The Crusades were largely a belated response on the part of Christian Europe to rescue Christians in the Holy Land suffering under Muslim oppression. The Muslim world today, while no longer the unified empire of the Caliphs, is exceptional for being responsible for the vast majority of conflicts around the world and for almost all of international terrorism.
   
4. ‘War is Deceit’: A great problem with Western efforts to understand Islam is due to the Islamic principle of 'religious deception', which enjoins Muslims to deceive non-Muslims in order to advance the cause of Islam. Muslim groups today in the West employ deception and omission to give the impression that 'Islam is a religion of peace', an utter fiction.
   
5. More than a Religion: The most important characteristic of Islam not understood by the West is that it is more a system of government than a personal religion. Throughout its history, Islam has never recognized a distinction between the religious and the secular/political. Islamic law governs every aspect of religious, political, and personal action, which amounts to a form of totalitarianism that is divinely enjoined to dominate the world, analogous in many ways to Communism.
   
6. The House of War: Islamic theology divides the world into two spheres locked in perpetual combat, dar al-Islam (House of Islam - where Islamic law predominates), and dar al-harb (House of War - the rest of the world). It is incumbent on dar al-Islam to fight and conquer dar al-harb and permanently assimilate it. Muslims in Western nations are called to subvert the secular regimes in which they now live in accordance with Allah's command. Due to political correctness and general government and media irresponsibility, the danger posed by observant Muslims in the West remains largely unappreciated.
   

It's reasonably well made, although I believe that they could have had more illustrations, and drawn more connections between Quranic verses and the behavior of Muslims worldwide. Each chapter is introduced by a quotation about Islam from leaders like Bush, Blair, Rice, Harry Reid and a State Department spokesman (forget his name); only problem is that there isn't a clear linkage between the introductory quote and the chapter itself, except that both are re: Islam. It features Robert, Srdja Trifkovic, Walid Shoebat, Bat Yeor and Abdullah al Araby (I didn't think much of al Araby - thought that Greg and Bryan might have done well to go with just the 4, or substitute al Araby with, say, Ali Sina (maybe voice only, if Sina isn't one who chooses to appear on video.) For a documentary, I personally thought that Walid Shoebat stole the show and became the star of the piece, overshadowing even Robert and Srjda - when he rattles off original Quranic verses in Arabic and explains it, describes his Jihadi days in Fatah, pinpoints problematic areas in the Quran in a very compelling way (like his illustrations of 5:32-33, and 9:5) - lending the documentary all of its flamboyance.

I think that once someone sees this documentary and accepts the points laid out in it, one would not make the classic mistake of equating immigration from Mexico, China, India, Vietnam, et al with Muslim immigration. After all, most people associate Terror with Muslims, despite the best efforts of the MSM, and the only thing they don't do is identify Islam as the source of Muslim terror.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 27, 2007 3:06 AM

Maxwell

The whole thing seems to be up on Youtube

Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 27, 2007 3:24 AM

As Infidel Pride supplies a very detailed outline of the video, it gives me an opportunity to ask a big-picture kind of question I have been pondering. I am interested in your opinions.

There was a book a few years back, called Beyond Belief, by V.S. Naipaul. He travelled through four majority-Muslim but non-Arab countries, emphasizing the theme, commonly repeated by JW posters, that Islam is, among other things, a vehicle for Arab cultural imperialism. That thesis is quite poignant for me as I see black students in my college, born in America, dressed in the hijab, abaya, chador, and sometimes even the niqab. (Incidentally, a black friend of mine expressed her sickness at the popularity of Islam among American blacks, considering the ongoing slavery and genocide by Muslims against blacks in Africa.)

My recent realization is that Arab cultural imperialism took place not only outside the Arab League countries, but even within them. As a rank amateur, it seems to me that originally, at least, Arabs are the natives of the center of the Arabian peninsula. They swept out of that area in the 7th century and imposed the Arabic language and cultural identity on numerous peoples of northern Africa and western Asia, who were mostly Christian. In NW Africa, they were Berber; NCentral Africa, Tuareg; NE Africa, Coptic; farther up the Nile, Amharic; some race whose name I forgot dwelt in the southern tip of Arabia (modern Yemen); Assyrians in Mesopotamia; and non-Semitic peoples like the Kurds, Phoenicians and Philistines (I read that the latter two might be related to the ancient Greeks - correct?).

The point is that the Muslim conquest destroyed many cultures even within the Arab League countries, and that the Arab League is anything but. Constrast this with the British Empire, which never made Indians English, and the Soviet Union, which never made Caucasians or central Asians Russian. Even within the United Kingdom, there is an awareness of Northern Irishness, of Scottishness, and of Welshness (the Cornish branch of the Celtic people seems to have assimilated).

So - what are the chances of a cultural restoration, what effects would it have, and how could it be brought about? Egypt, for example, is the most populous "Arab" country (and home of Al-Azhar University, the intellectual center of the Arab world), but ethnically, it is Coptic. (I am fascinated, by the way, by the fact that what some call "The Fifth Gospel", the Gospel of Thomas, survives in its most complete form in a Coptic manuscript, not Greek. Of course, this is only more testimony to the Mediterranean basin's Christian nature prior to Muhamad.) Would a Christian revival precede or follow a Coptic revival? How would either affect the global situation (what I call the War Against Militant Islam)? Would we benefit from such a change? Is there anything we could do to bring it about?

Your thoughts?

Posted by: Surak at May 27, 2007 12:18 PM

Surak:

This is off the top of my head ...

-- Bad news

None of the even partly successful large-scale revivalist movements, as for example Zionism, the revival of Gaellic culture in Ireland, or the secular separatist movements that gain real traction, such as the we're-French types in Quebeq, have involved a change of religion.

Religion, on the contrary seems to be a unifying factor, without which these movements tend to founder.

Not surprising really. Most of the world gets their philosophy of life and their ethics/morals from their religion. And it is indeed, shared morality that forms the core of nearly any social group with real cohesion.

-- Good news

There are smaller scale movements that have caught on, at least temporarily that have involved religious change.

Obvious among these are the American movements.

The Black Muslims, a dramatic and still living example, coupled a racial nationalism to the importation of an alternative religion.

There were also many Christian movements in American life, from the colonial times to the current day, Shakers, Quakers and all the rest, that got real traction in their time, and colored the culture as a whole.

One caveat here is that the American Christian groups were formed against a pre-existing Protestant background -- and a cultural impetus to personal independence.

------

Much will depend, in the cases that you cite, on having significant unifying factors that differentiate those peoples from the arabs.

Chief among these are intact cultural traditions and language, especially a written language with at least some literature and literary history.

Much will also depend on the physical safety of the people involved. I'd hate to be a member of a Zoroastrian revival in the middle of Khomeinist Persia. But, history has many heroes and martyrs of exactly that sort.

------

The Chrisitans have a pretty accomplished track record for evangelism and the Mormons are still coming on strong in South America.

In any case, you've got a nice idea.

:-)

Posted by: joeblough at May 27, 2007 2:09 PM

Surak

I haven't read Naipaul, so can't comment.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 28, 2007 1:15 AM

At least this way some people who are up very late, and who might otherwise be stuck watching info-mercials about making your fortune hawking kitsch or exercising with devices that would have made Torquemada smile, could switch over to the wee-hours PBS Islam Show and learn something by accident.

This strategy could backfire.

Posted by: profitsbeard at May 28, 2007 7:31 PM

test

Posted by: duh_swami at May 28, 2007 9:23 PM

We can tape the program on a vcr and then show it to others at a more reasonable hour....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at May 29, 2007 7:16 AM