Daily Archives: 13 September, 2012

Religion, Lies Part 2 (and THAT film.)

Posted on by
Reply

It was really not easy, yesterday, to find the ‘film’.

First I had to find the name of the ‘film’. Before that I had to find the ‘writer/director’ of the film. I looked all over the place. eventually I found the name of the guy and, from that, the name of the film.

Actually, it wasn’t a film but, supposedly, the trailer for a film. The film being The Innocence of Muslims directed and written by Sam Bacile.

People are upset. People have died.

Because of this ‘trailer’.

I read it had a budget of $5 million.

But, having watched the trailer, I don’t see how that is possible. Low-budget doesn’t even begin to describe it.

But the problem is not that it was low-budget, nor even that the ‘actors’ are more wodden than trees, nor that the ‘actors’ are, quite obviously NOT in a desert but floating some way above it, nor that the ‘actors’ voices seem to have been dubbed, nor that it is a ‘shitty little film’.

For it is all of those things and more. The fact that you can post a film or trailer on YouTube doesn’t make it good. In fact, that’s the whole point. You can put any old crap up there (and this trailer is most certainly that).

Nor is the problem that the story is, most certainly, a complete load of bollocks.

No, the problem is that there is any story about this at all. Worse, that people (who may have never seen it) have been incited to kill people who almost certainly never watched it and, certainly, had nothing to do with it.

And, the real story may be that it was made with the specific intention of causing this problem, of inciting this murder.

And, if the reports are true, by a group of people who are supposed to be religious. Again!

These so-called religious people are Coptic Chirstians – but not Coptic Christians in the actual country but ex-pat Coptic Christians who don’t live in Egypt and won’t have to suffer any of the problems that, almost certainly, the REAL Coptic Christians will now suffer on behalf of a film they had nothing to do with!

Intolerance of others is unacceptable. Inciting hatred is despicable.

Religion should be banned.

p.s. since I wrote this I found the ‘full?’ 15-minute film. As is normal, the trailer showed the ‘best bits’. The film is not only dire and a load of old crap but really shouldn’t even be called a film at all. Terrible, terrible, terrible.

Religion, Lies Part 1 (and THAT newspaper.)

Posted on by
Reply

The DailyHateMail is at it again.

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister of the UK, apparently, in a speech that was issued (but not actually made), called the people opposing the right of marriage for gay people, bigots.

Today, the headline in the DM says I apologise for my gay marriage ‘bigot’ slur, says Clegg as he tries to limit fallout caused by remark

Clegg wrote a letter which, apparently, says:

‘Those extracts were neither written or approved by me. They do not represent my views, which is why they were subsequently withdrawn.

‘While I am a committed advocate of equal marriage, I would never refer to people who oppose it in this way. Indeed, I know people myself who do not support equal marriage and, although I disagree with them, clearly I do not think they are bigots. Nor do I think it is acceptable they, or anyone else, are insulted in this way.

‘My views on this issue are no secret, but I respect the fact that some people feel differently to me about marriage, often because of their religious beliefs.

‘I hope this explanation helps clarify what happened yesterday as well as my position, and I hope that the serious error that occurred will not cause lasting offence.’

Well, a couple of things here.

1. Clegg didn’t make the speech. And, in any event, these people don’t actually write their speeches. So, someone (but NOT Clegg) wrote the speech which was issued ahead of the event at which Clegg was going to speak. The to-do that occurred as a result meant that the words were changed (or, perhaps it really WAS a mistake).

2. The letter that Clegg subsequently wrote does not apologise for something that he didn’t say in the first place.

3. The definition of a bigot, namely a person having or revealing an obstinate belief in the superiority of their own opinions and a prejudiced intolerance of the opinions of others, seems to fit quite well. That’s religion for you.