J for jihad, I for Islam, S for Shari'a
It looks like Spielberg's Munich now has a worthy successor, as we discover in an advance review of V for Vendetta, which is certainly telling as to what kind of ideologies the filmmakers really believe in (Hat tip: Oraculations): Islamic jihad, Shari'a law, and even nazism (so it could also be called N for nazism). From the review:
That aside, let me see if I have this correct: the Koran features "beautiful imagery", does it? Would that include also the following passage?
And one more thing from me to accompany the reviewer's own argument: I've read the Jewish bible myself, and it also contains beautiful imagery. But if even that doesn't get a shout-out or an endorsement in this movie, that won't be too surprising either, perhaps for the same reasons as given above regarding the Christian bible.
The film is said to be coming out in either February or March. With that in mind, ditto the content of the movie, one can only wonder if, in the end, it'll ever be released at all. I sure hope not. Whitewashing/glorifying bad "religions" and ideologies as is done in this adaptation of V for Vendetta, is simply unacceptable, and the would-be filmmakers who put together this atrocity do not deserve to make money off of it.
With this, there's one more clue why Alan Moore opted out of all this.
2. Christians are evil; Islamists are poetic.Not quite. After reading the review of Munich on the same website, where another reviewer who'd watched that monstrosity, surprisingly enough, failed to comprehend what could make a movie like that the scum that it really is, and seeing said reviewer imply that conservatives "cried wolf" upon it, I think that should come as a good enough warning that even conservatives aren't saints. (Yes, I was pissed when I found that dumb review; thanks a lot, Libertas.)
In the askew world of “V” and the Liberal imagination, all Christians are hateful, perverted, and cruel. The evil fascist government is itself implied to be “Christian” (their party flag has a “double” cross emblem on it), and the one religious Man of Faith we meet - who is in the pocket of the ruling party - is a Catholic priest who likes little girls to dress up like Little Bo-Peep before he has his way with them. I find it completely hypocritical that every time a Hollywood plot has to have a bad Islamic terrorists (which is a rarity in today’s movies anyway), it has to be balanced by a good Islamist. Not so for Christians apparently. There’s not a decent one in the entire world of “V". Talk about hateful and propagandistic. Score another one for the tolerant and sensitive Left.
Adding insult to injury, in “V” we meet a character (seemingly the only level-headed person in the film) who, it turns out, is a rebel who keeps a secret museum of banned items. One of these items is a banner comprised of the American flag, the British flag, and a Nazi Swastika overlaid on top of them with the slogan “Coalition of the Willing.”
He also keeps a copy of the Koran under glass. When Natalie Portman’s uber-naive Evey asks why he has it, he says something along the lines of “because of its beautiful imagery.” I’m no Christian, but I’ve read the Bible and it has just as much beautiful imagery. But does it get a shout-out or an endorsement? No. Because in the paranoid fever dream of the Left, anything associated with Christianity must be vile and worthless. But surely, I must be mistaken because the sensitive Left never stereotypes, right?
That aside, let me see if I have this correct: the Koran features "beautiful imagery", does it? Would that include also the following passage?
Dhimmitude is the status that Islamic law, the Sharia, mandates for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis, "protected people," are free to practice their religion in a Sharia regime, but are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur'an's command that they "feel themselves subdued" (Sura 9:29).If it weren't for the seriousness of the whole issue, that the filmmakers are advocating what they say the religious right is stooping to, might've been funny. But it's not. It's just...tragic. (For more on what passages the Koran contains, see here, here, here and here.)
And one more thing from me to accompany the reviewer's own argument: I've read the Jewish bible myself, and it also contains beautiful imagery. But if even that doesn't get a shout-out or an endorsement in this movie, that won't be too surprising either, perhaps for the same reasons as given above regarding the Christian bible.
The film is said to be coming out in either February or March. With that in mind, ditto the content of the movie, one can only wonder if, in the end, it'll ever be released at all. I sure hope not. Whitewashing/glorifying bad "religions" and ideologies as is done in this adaptation of V for Vendetta, is simply unacceptable, and the would-be filmmakers who put together this atrocity do not deserve to make money off of it.
With this, there's one more clue why Alan Moore opted out of all this.
Labels: islam and jihad, terrorism
