Wilders film "Fitna" released
Thursday March 27, 2008
Categories: Islamic terrorism
Well, here we go. Geert Wilders has released his anti-Koran film "Fitna" on the Internet. You can watch it here. Warning: there are some very strong images of burned and mutilated bodies, victims of Islamic terror attacks. And there is...
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Advertisement
Advertisement
Search This Blog
Recent Posts
About Crunchy Con
Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.
Subscribe
Archives
Blogs Worth Reading
- Front Porch Republic
- The American Conservative
- Patrick Deneen
- Conventional Folly
- The American Scene
- First Things
- Andrew Sullivan
- The Plank
- Eunomia
- Get Religion
- Postmodern Conservative
- Alex Massie
- The Corner
- Contentions
- Sharon Astyk
- Barry Ritholtz
- The Oil Drum
- Mere Comments
- First Principles (ISI)
- Brian Kaller
Something tells me we're going to be bailing out Europe, for the third time, in the not so distant future.
Yes, "Fitna" is necessary - for our allies as much as for us.
Have you ever seen Alain Resnais' NIGHT AND FOG (1955)? Criterion Collection DVD, 31 minutes, Color and Black & White, French w/English subtitles.
"Ten years after the liberation of the Nazi concentration camps, filmmaker Alain Resnais documented the abandoned grounds of Auschwitz and Majdanek."
Its 31 minutes is more effective than SCHINDLER'S LIST's 3 hours 16 minutes.
(Warning: Some of the images in NIGHT AND FOG may make you physically ill; nothing in FITNA comes close. Resnais combines color footage of the serene and green regrown grounds of the concentration camps with Nazi films of the atrocities and footage the Allies took upon their liberation of the camps.)
FITNA is certainly not in the same league as NIGHT AND FOG, but if people wake up and smell the coffee, they might be able to prevent another film like NIGHT AND FOG having to be made.
Yikes. The heresies of modernism and Islam are doing a number on Europe. Yes, Islam is an ideology that must be defeated.
If you're talking to me, Eric W, no I haven't seen "Night and Fog". I do have a copy of, "Memory of the Camps" though, which probably shares some of the same footage. ("M of the C" is a British documentary made in the immediate aftermath of the liberation. It is especially powerful due to the indignant footage of German commanders being forced to "clean up" their mess as British soldiers (and German citizens!) looked on.)
I was actually speaking to Rod - we were probably composing our comments at the same time. I haven't seen "Memory of the Camps."
Spielberg's THE LAST DAYS is also grim.
I was speaking to Rod - but we were probably composing our comments at the same time. I haven't seen "Memory of the Camps."
Spielberg's THE LAST DAYS is also grim.
Maybe Fitna was necessary, I just wish that it was not done so clumsy and amateuristic.
If the film causes introspection among Muslims (highly unlikely) or among Europeans (on their rampant secularization and neo-paganism) maybe it will do some good. I doubt it though and it seems to be very much "preaching to the converted."
As a Christian, I must say that you could make a similarly tendentious film about Christians or Jews (admittedly there is no video of the burning alive of Miguel Servetus or the massacre of Deir Yassin). It is easy to cherry pick wacky/scary chapter and verse and match them to the extreme action of individuals and organizations.
The fact is that most of the 1 billion plus Muslims DON"T go around cutting people's heads off or blowing things up. If they did, if even 1 percent did, we would be in big trouble. As someone who has spent a very long time in Muslim countries, the whole premise of the film is kind of silly - of course there are extremists in Islam and that has been a growing concern since the political bankruptcy of socialist/nationalist liberation regimes since the 1960s and 70s. Of course this is a reason for major concern but not for hysteria.
There are some disgusting verses in the Old Testament about exterminating entire people - including women and children - but one has to really extrapolate to tie those verses with, say, ethnic cleansing committed by the state of Israel to a general racist theory that "the Jews are racist murderers." So it is with Islam. The fact that some mad dog killers are motivated by a specific analysis about Islam and its meaning doesn't mean that one can generalize about an entire religion.
It is the difference between thinking that one knows about something or someone - like Muslims - and actually knowing Muslims. They are that different from the rest of us, Man is fallen and some people are consumed by evil and use whatever - faith, politics, science, WMDs for their crimes - what a surprise!
Wilders' film may be crude but it's definitely brilliant propaganda. It scared the hell out of me. His call for Muslims who care about freedom and have a respect for human life to deal with the extremist element in their midst makes sense, because they will also be harmed and suffer if the radicals vision of Islam becomes the norm. Not only is it in the best interests of Westerners but it's in the best interests of Muslims to deal with this threat and to deal with it now. Don't think the radicals vision of Islam can't happen? Just look at what happened in Afghanistan with the Taliban. I used to regard this whole issue as a clash of civilzations but the more I think about it, it's a question of civilization and how precarious that concept is.
Very interesting film. As others have said, a bit crude and amateurish, but if that's what it takes to grab people's attention to what's happening in Europe, then so be it. My only hope is that it forces Muslims to look at themselves and Islam, and not just use this as another example of "See! I told you so! The West is trying to kill you and destroy Islam!" And you KNOW that the page-tearing scene will be blown (hopefully not literally) way out of proportion by angry Muslims.
And Eric W., in high school my AP Euro History teacher showed us Night and Fog. When she turned the lights back on, I think every person in the room looked like they'd been gut-punched.
It's fair, and not nearly as crude as much of Islam. The 9/11 sequence, the girl talking about being cooked alive on the 100th floor, really hit home.And while I'm somehow now nonplussed by the plane, knowing that I'm seeing the murder of a dear friend and several neighbors, we have not been shown the people jumping often enough. You can never watch than and not be heartbroken.The other scenes that were tough was the honor killing guy and the bleeding Arab children; how does any culture produce that and think it's normal and acceptable?
Well done, Mr. Wilders. It's past time for the West to understand fully what it's facing.
Yes, the film is necessary. The average European will not have either read or been persuaded by Ibn Warraq, Robert Spencer, Bat Ye'or, Hirsi Ali, Christoph Luxenberg, Bernard Lewis, et al. Perhaps fear is the only motive that persuades fools. Despite the violence of the Mohammedans' words and deeds depicted in the film, the most frightening image in it was the histogram of exponentially increasing immigration over several years. And the wave of Turkish incursions will not begin in earnest until Turkey is admitted to the EU.
No, Islam cannot be defeated. But it might be converted. Spengler's comments on the baptism of Magdi Allam to the effect that the Moslems will hardly replace the spiritual void of their faith with the sewer of Dutch hedonism is precisely on target. But the Dutch will continue down their road to perdition until every Hollander is allowed to marry his pet Schapendoes, either ante-mortem or post -- depending on the skill of the local taxidermist. Welkom in Nadirland!
I guess the main question I have is how many votes Geert Wilders will get or will lose based on this. I don't think this is meant to lead Muslims to reflect at all, but rather to create responses that will help Wilders get electoral support.
Is he is popular as Le Pen is in France?
"As popular" - sorry!
I wouldn't expect this film to change many minds, because this information has already been available. The people who already agree will praise it, those who have refused to face reality will continue to do so, and the people who insist that all discussion of Islamism be off-limits will accuse Wilders of fomenting hate. Been there, done that.
But the fact that it was made at all could be a turning point of sorts. The Islamists and multicultural sensitivitists together have declared that any discussion of Islam is out of bounds, especially in Europe. Well-known people have been killed for doing so. This throws down the gauntlet to them, and says that at least some people aren't going to bow to that PC commandment. Will they have Wilders killed, or back down? If he's killed, will he be seen as a martyr who inspires others to follow his lead, or a fool who got what he deserved? If nothing happens, will that convince others to settle back into complacency, thinking there's no threat after all, or will it make them bolder?
"I would call this film propaganda, certainly, but it doesn't operate on hate. It operates on fear, which is a different thing."
Alas, have we learned nothing from master Yoda? -Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
Sorry I couldn't resist.
I don't think it's logical or reasonable to say that the necessity of an act is to be determined by the response to the act.
Manfred:
Please educate me, as I am just a poor Catholic, American of Sicilian ancestry, and southerner living in the U.S, and tell me when have you seen a Catholic, for example, screaming Glory be to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirt, while simultaneously blowing themselves up along with others. Or, perhaps some Protestant evangelical stating "Accept Jesus into your heart" while doing the same thing. Please, give me evidence, so this poor ignorant guy down in the southern U.S. can understand.
IMO, your views are strikingly similar to the secular-leftist multiculturalist types in Europe, and U.S., who will go at every length to not challenge Islam and appease it, when no such laws are in place for Christianity, and nor should they be, as I believe that Christianity wins on the merits of the truths it proposes, and does not need the state to back it.
Islam, does not convince anyone out of love and reason, and the fact that "fear", i.e. threat of murder if a Muslim converts to Christianity, or the threat of a non-muslime being killed if he/she dare criticize Islam tells you that it fundamentally is flawed.
Regards, and God Bless
Sophie: I don't think it's logical or reasonable to say that the necessity of an act is to be determined by the response to the act.
My point was that if Muslims in Europe react violently to this film, it will only serve to prove Wilders' point. If they don't, then it's not unreasonable to conclude that he's wrong.
The WW2 propaganda movies had no problem in calling a Nip a Nip and a Kraut a Kraut, and quite emphatically recommended killing them all. By their standard, Fitna is mere dandelion tea. But then we're still in the twilight war phase.
But I have to admit seeing the people jumping out to escape being burned alive inspired in me very abusive thoughts towards the adherents of that religion, which I will not express here.
Sophie: I don't think it's logical or reasonable to say that the necessity of an act is to be determined by the response to the act.
Rod: My point was that if Muslims in Europe react violently to this film, it will only serve to prove Wilders' point. If they don't, then it's not unreasonable to conclude that he's wrong.
Actually, that reduces Wilders to a mere agent provocateur, which I think trivializes his accurate portrayal of Islam as an existential threat to the West as founded upon the exhortations of Islam's basic texts and the historical reality of its depredations of formerly Christian lands. Whether or not another nun is murdered or church burned or mob riots in the wake of the film says nothing about the danger of this more portentous "spectre haunting Europe."
Rod, you said:
"Can one licitly fight a mortal threat to one's culture by telling a partial truth, a distorted truth, or even a lie?"
That strikes me as the crucial question, and it is a very good one. Now, I haven't seen the film -- I'm reluctant to watch it at work, even with headphones. However, I think the answer to Rod's question has to be an emphatic "No."
To the extent that propaganda oversimplifies in service of its particular message, I wouldn't call that a distortion. However, I believe as soon as propaganda distorts the truth (rather than merely simplifying it) it seems to me that it those distorted truths are destined to lead to tragic results if the people take action on the basis of those distortions.
For instance, if I believe anti-Semitic lies I may not protest when my fellow citizens are herded off to concentration camps, because those fellows are Jewish. Or, if I believe the U.S. government created AIDS in order to commit genocide against African-Americans, I may not take personal responsibity for my health -- I may not get tested, I may not practice safe sex. Why bother, if there is a conspiracy?
I just watched the film. As others have noted, it's mild compared to "Night and Fog." I wouldn't call the film propaganda; rather it's a pictorial opinion piece (and not a particularly novel one at that). The disturbing question it does raise is whether we (meaning the West) are in a skirmish with fanatics at the very fringe of Islam or are we in a conflict with Islam itself? I fear that the latter is the case.
There were millions of moderate Germans, yet Europe was completely devastated by an active minority because when Germany pushed, Europe backed away. It rings hollow for people to ask moderate Muslims to stand up to the radicals because the radicals do not attack moderate Muslims, they attack infidels. If the infidels are willing to put up with it, why should moderate Muslims risk their necks?
Where to start, St. Domenic?
I am Catholic too and I can think all sorts of heinous crimes committed by Catholics - from gangsters to death squad leaders in Latin America killing nuns and even an Archbishop in a church (Romero) to the IRA to priests raping children. But your point would be that they didn't do these things, as Catholics, this using religion as a cover so then it is ok, whereas terrorists inspired by political Islam somehow must represent the absolutely true face of Islam because WE say so.
Just as I am not willing to part with Christianity because of a long centuries old litany of dirty crimes committed in the shadow (and justification) of the cross, I refuse to be so blithe about a billion people. Nothing wrong with challenging Islam as a religion in the open space (which is much much greater in the West) of ideas - I am all for that - but this "Islam as evil empire" is a little tiresome, and also inaccurate. It wasn't even true in the 11th century and its not true today.
And "Islam doesn't convince anyone out of love and reason"? That is a pretty categorical and sweeping statement. So Islam is one of most rapidly growing religions in the world because of, what, procreation and fear? Somehow one becomes a Muslim and then becomes this Al-Q'ida automaton animated only by thoughts of martyrdom and paradise. How comfortable it must be to see the world in such simple terms.
There is value to this film only if there is continued films/books/newspaper articles of a somewhat similar bent. Most Muslims arent chopping off heads but an awful lot are at least passively condoning radical Islam. We need to get past the point where talking about Islam in a negative way leads to death threats. Living in western countries means living within its rules of conduct. A big part of that is free discourse, even when it offends ones religious sensibilities. My gut feeling is that this is not offensive enough to generate a strong response from either side.
A whole series of these, interspersed with films offering dialogue by people offering solutions or discussions with moderate Muslims willing to go on film (if any) would have been more effective.
Steve
Just loaded it once to watch. Went to run again at normal speed and the site had just taken it down because of threats to its staff. They essentially said that they believed in free speech but were too afraid to leave it up.
If you believe in free speech, be very afraid.
And, it's gone! Threats to their life made them take it down. Ah well. Maybe someone will put it up on Youtube.
I just read the "LiveLeak" statement. Freedom of speech is truly endangered. This film might have been extreme, but the threats against this website are far more extreme.
A few weeks ago, Rod posted a link to a Paul Berman piece, "Who's Afraid of Tariq Ramadan?"
Here is his conclusion:
"The Rushdies of today find themselves under criticism, compared unfavorably in the press with the Islamist philosopher who writes prefaces for the collected fatwas of Sheik al-Qaradawi, the theologian of the human bomb. Today the menace to society is declared to be Hirsi Ali and people of similar minds, of whom there are quite a few: John Stuart Mill's Muslim admirers, who are said to be just as fanatical as the fanatics. During the Rushdie affair, courage was saluted. Today it is likened to fascism.
How did this happen? The equanimity on the part of some well-known intellectuals and journalists in the face of Islamist death threats so numerous as to constitute a campaign; the equanimity in regard to stoning women to death; the journalistic inability even to acknowledge that women's rights have been at stake in the debates over Islamism; the inability to recall the problems faced by Muslim women in European hospitals; the inability to acknowledge how large has been the role of a revived anti-Semitism; the striking number of errors of understanding and even of fact that have entered into the journalistic presentations of Tariq Ramadan and his ideas; the refusal to discuss with any frankness the role of Ramadan's family over the years; the accidental endorsement in the Guardian of the great-uncle who finds something admirable in the September 11 attacks--what can possibly account for this string of bumbles, timidities, gaffes, omissions, miscomprehensions, and slanders?
Two developments account for it. The first development is the unimaginable rise of Islamism since the time of the Rushdie fatwa. The second is terrorism."
Fitna is all over youtube now, I saw it there.
Manfred:
Again, your answer proves my point. None of those "crimes" you mentioned were done in the defense of "Catholicism" or to promote "Catholicism", as the actions you cited are what we call "Sin", a word that quasi-Catholics have seem to have forgotten (and I for one admit I have my struggles with sin). Again, Catholic Doctrine clearly defines, dogmatically, those actions you documented as being gravely sinful. The killing of Abp. Romero was not done to promote Catholicism, the IRA was not motivated by Catholicism, and was condemned by Catholics all over the world, even the Pope himself, as being against Christianity. Furthemore, the IRA's philosophy was rooted in atheistic Marxism. Raping children, who the hell is for that? And again, most were post adolescent young men, which leads me to conclude there was something else going on in the so called "Priestly pedophilia" scandal. However, I don't want to get into that debate here as it has been debated before
Well, I think you need to read history again and this idea that the Christian/Islamic issues began in the 11th century suggest to me that you have bought into this secularlist decontructionist framework. Question, when did Islam arrive on the seen?, well it wasn't in the 11th century. Question, what happened to all the great cities of the old Roman empire, both Latin and Greek, that spread from Asia minor through North Africa, that were great Christian civilizations. How did they become Islamic. Did the Muslims go to Spain and say, dear Christian Brothers?, would you like to read the Koran?
There is no concept of "Just War" in Islam, and there is no Muslim society where non-muslims have the same rights as non-muslims. As I have stated previously on this site, I am in my 40's and thank God I live in the Southern U.S. where the 2nd amendment is taken seriously and even if I am 80 years old and the Mohammadens, God forbid, take over parts of the US, I, along with my fellow Southern Americans will be joining the partisans rather than submitting to Shiria law.
Pax Domine Christi Sit Semper Vobiscum
"Question: Was "Fitna" necessary? ..."
I saw the following quote attributed to Winston Churchill today. I can't verify its authenticity, but it seems appropriate.
"If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."
The fact that our tradition and practice of freedom of expression (purchased by sacrifice of our forebears) has choked on this issue is all the answer I think one needs. If we are intimidated out of being able to watch Fitna, without a "fight," are we still a free people?
Mr. Wilders' courage makes it easier for the rest of us to take heart. Indeed, he reminds us of the need to do so.
Freedom is a use-it or lose-it thing. I think we need to remember Wilders' words at the end of his film:
Verdedig onze vrijheid.
Defend our freedom.
St. Domenic - Actually, it is you who need to hit the history books: the Muslims were invited into Visigothic Spain by a Christian prince seeking to replace a usurping King. Many of the Eastern Christians welcomed the Islamic conquest to get away from the fierce persecution of the Orthodox Church against "Monophysite" Syrian and Coptic Orthodox believers. Jews fled to the Ottoman Empire and to Muslim North Africa to escape Christian persecution.
Do you even know any Muslims? Have you ever been to or lived in A Muslim country? I have lived half my life in that region, attended a Catholic Church in Syria for three years and I can tell you you have no idea what you talking about. Do you know how few Muslim countries actually have Sharia law?
You seem to be quite eager to accept Al-Qa'ida's motivation: because THEY say that they are motivated solely by Islam, you accept this and they are either "true Muslims" or represent some kind of imaginary mainstream of religious extremists inherent in this religion. Again, you are demonizing a billion people based on the vile actions of a real, dangerous but tiny portion of that polity.
Romans 1: 16-17
"Alas, have we learned nothing from master Yoda?"
Did you know that Miss Piggy is Yoda in drag?
Manfrede:
Well, you are referring to the events in the year 710 AD, when King Witiza of Spain died. In the Visigoth tradition, succession of kingships were not based on hereditary norms, but based on the election of Nobles and elders. Thus, when King Witza's sons were passed over in favor of a strong milatary general, the sons appealed to a Count, named Julian, who was associated with the King's court. The Kings sons seemed to have encouraged Count Julian to "Treason" as he went to meet the Mohamaden Musa and convince him to "Attack Spain". And of course, those friendly Muslims after taking over Spain decided decided to send peaceful missionaries to France shortly after, correct. While those friendly Muslims were "peacefully converting Spain", they were simultaneously trying to "peacefully convert" the borders of China in 712 AD, do the same in India has Muhammed Son of Qasim led the first Muslim army into INdia where he personally killed the King of India and gained control of what is today modern Pakistan(Hmmmmmmmmmm). In 715, the first Muslim armies were "peacefully laying siege to Constantinopile".
So, it is you who need to read history my friend. It seems to be a reasonable hypothesis that you are a "National Catholic Reporter" Catholic and filled with the "Spirit of Vatican II", or should I dare say should be properly interpreted as "Spirits of Vatican II", which seem clearly opposed to the Holy Spirit. As Pope Benedict pointed out, too many in the Post Conciliar CHurch have forced an interpretation of the Council as "hermaneutic of discontinuity".
With respect to "persons who practice" Islam, I said nothing. Again, there is a Dogma of Holy Mother CHurch called "Original Sin", which, in case you forgot, Vatican II did not reject. The Readers Digest summary of this doctine is that "all humanity" is fallen and falls short of the way God created us. Thus, for this reason, Christ became incarnate and out of love and through the paschal mystery, reconciled us back to God. As G.K Chesterton once said, the Doctrine of Original Sin is the one Catholic Dogma that can be "empirically verified". How true that statement is. So, do I believe Christians have sinned individually or collectively, of course, it would be "heretical to assert" otherwise.
What I was saying is that Christianity, and Catholicism in particular, because of its ability to be "self-critical" and its willingness to engage in philosophy and thus reason (e.g., St. Augustine used Plato; St. Thomas Aquinas used Aristotle), and the concept of "the Development of Doctrine" allows Christianity to be self-reflective. Islam, on the other hand, at least as I see it, does not have this ability. Perhaps Pope Benedict's Regensburg speech will give Muslims the framework to reconcile their faith with reason, and non-muslims. I can only hope so.
Still, while on technical note, all Muslim countries may not codifiy Shiria law into their countries laws, all Muslim countries defacto apply the principles of Shiria law nevertheless. I don't have to go to a Muslim country to find this out. Again, tell me in what Muslim country do "non-muslims" have the same rights as Muslims". You want to hold up Turkey, well Patriarch Bartholemew can't even open a seminary for the Orthodox Church in that country. You mention Syria, a country that finances "hizboallah", give me a break!!!. Are you telling me that if a muslim in Syria converts to Christianity, there are not state imposed consequences?????????
So, I will freely acknowledge that I am no PC-Lefty/multiculturalist/ self-hating American of Italian ancestry who hates Christianity and Western Civilization. I don't see all cultures as equal and thus, I do believe that Christianity and Western Civilization are the best hope for the world.
Sorry to tell you, St. Domenic but a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. Yes, Syria supports their pro-Iranian surrogate Hizbullah and the good old USA supports a government in Iraq made up of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI, now ISCI), the Dawa Party which actually practiced terrorism against the US (including attacking the US Embassy in Kuwait) and the Iraqi Islamic Party (IIP) which is the Muslim Brotherhood in Iraq. We are arming and supporting these folks - your tax dollars at work.
And yes, in Syria there is no state sanction for people converting to Christianity (their own families do object to it). It is US-puppet Afghanistan that sentences converts to death.
As for "PC-Lefty/multiculturalist/self hating American of Italian ancestry" - is this a subtle insult? Are you painting a skewed vision of yourself? It can't be me because I am not of Italian origin and don't hate Christianity and Western civilization. But I also don't hate Islam and "Eastern" civilization.
Well, Manfrede, I have a little knowledge about Syria, and you say there are no state sanctions, well so be it. I still have my doubts, but if families committ "honor killings" and the state does nothing to punish family members who kill other family members, is the state not complicit?????. Furthermore, if I have a little knowledge of Syria, the last post you made about the Muslim conquest of Spain in the early 8th century showed you know less of that period history. So, I would say in the grand scheme of things, you are on the shorter end of that one.
My "subtle insult" was a criticism of secular leftist who have got the West into much of this mess. I was not implying you were of Italian ancestry as I had defined myself as an American of Italian ancestry in an earlier post. My point was that many in the West are suffering from self-hatred, do to largely marxist constructs.
So, yes, I do have a problem with the Islamic Faith, not human beings who practice that faith, as those individuals are always persons entitiled to dignity as being created by God. Still, Islam, as a Faith and ideology that seeks to impose its will on all aspects of civil, criminal, economic and social laws, etc, is something that needs to be debated. Mr. Magdi Allam's quote about his conversion (see asiatimes 26 March 2008) front page story I think illustrates the philosophical problems of Islam:
“The miracle of the Resurrection of Christ has reverberated through my soul, liberating if from the darkness of a tendency where hate and intorance in before the “other”, condemning it uncritically as an “enemy”, and ascending to love and respect for one’s “neighbor”, who is always and in any case a person; thus my mind has been released from the obscurantism of an idelogy which legitimizes lying and dissumulation, the violent death that leads to homicide and suicide, blind submission to tyranny—permitting me to adhere to the authentic religion of truth, of life, and freedom. Upon my first Easter as a Christian I have not only discovered Jesus, but I have discovered for the first time the ture and only God, which is the God of Faith and the God of Reason”
Prais be to God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, as it seems seems both Pope John Paul II, of Blessed memory, through his encyclical “Faith and Reason”, which is a philosophical encyclical, and Pope Benedict’s Regensberg lecture, a serious Theological lecture, both influenced Mr. Magdi Allam.
God bless Mr. Allam and God Bless Pope Benedict
Well, I have no problem with the last three paragraphs of your last post, St. Domenic.
I'll practice some Christian charity and let the rest go.
Odd that "Fitna" seems to strike so many like a bolt from the blue when "Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam" played repeatedly on Fox News a few months back and is still readily available on YouTube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKt7J1U1Cs8&feature=related
It's much longer and, yup, a hell of a lot scarier than "Fitna."
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.