The Coolest online space for Muslim Youth!

[RHK]

The first 10 minute documentary has been uploaded about Post War Iraq on the Campaigns section.

http://www.muslimyouth.net/campaigns?id=1&art=56

What do you guys think of it?

[tigger]

yep deffo i like it, but im thinking im not too sure of what those guys are saying, who are just a lil bit didgy. The scots are really funny tho! love em! lol

[Baby S]

Heavvvvvvy man!

[rasheed]

I don't know if I ought to laugh or cry.

[silenced]

^LOL...why? I haven't watched it, and dont think i will.....but whats wrong with it?

[rasheed]

^LOL...why? I haven't watched it, and dont think i will.....but whats wrong with it?

It just seemed so heavily polarised to me, and though I admit it does send a definite message I question whether or not it’s one that I’d like to be subjected to. I can’t say whether or not it was intentional, but it seems as though it was edited in a way that lends to a more Brit-centric, almost apologetic version of Islaam.

I can’t for one moment say that they didn’t give opposing views similar amounts of air time, but one has to wonder if the way the video is constructed was chosen as it would lead people, subliminally, to the conclusion that I fear many might draw from it. On the one hand we have to bold, proud Brit, the paradigm of social acceptability, indeed a poster boy for the progressives, merrily chatting away on the streets of Scotland whilst affirming that he holds his maroon passport in higher regard than his Imaan. No, there is nothing wrong allowing this type of person to share their views; in fact, one might come to expect it! I do however take issue with the way in which this was contracted with the more firebrand opinions of the chosen ‘hardliner’. We see this black, hooded young man skulking around in the dank semi-darkness of what I can only imagine to be council accommodation, amongst his similarly shadowy companions – I can’t help but think that these people are a terror cell in the making. I, in the spirit of not wishing to be an agent provocateur, will stop short of questioning the veracity of these ‘interviews’ and ask you to watch them yourself. I do find it quite laughable that from 2:58 to around 3:10 we find that Mr Ghetto searching for the words that he feels are wanted to be heard.

I think the contrast that these two views are thrown into is simply shambolic and indicative of an agenda that I find wholly unaccpeptable. It also gives those watching an ultimatum ‘Be British first, and Muslim thereafter if you wish to succeed; spend too long thinking about your Islaam or those around you, and you’ll find yourself having gone for a long walk down a short plank balanced precariously above the pool that holds the stratum of society we should seek to escape.

A précis: The eloquent apologist versus the backward foreign terrorist sympathizer, interspersed by the most inane ramblings of Ms Ridley; how disgustingly quaint and puerile.

Of course, I have commented rather selectively on the video, however, that is the theme that I found most apparent within it.

[Mahmud]

I'm not sure what you're unhappy about Rasheed. It seems clear to me the message is to get active and involved in solving problems? Are you surprised that the people who don't believe you can get your voice heard peacefully come across as bad communicators?

[rasheed]

I'm not sure what you're unhappy about Rasheed. It seems clear to me the message is to get active and involved in solving problems? Are you surprised that the people who don't believe you can get your voice heard peacefully come across as bad communicators?

It would seem that you find yourself unable to communicate, having missed the point of my post. As an aside, one might argue that indiscriminate acts of violence and use of explosives is actively pursuing a solution to any percieved problems, no? I hasten to add that that's not an opinion I hold personally, though I do have to say that it's an opinion that might well be held.

I might add that there are those that feel as though the 'peaceful path' is one which has expired that are perfectly eloquent in their expression; surely it's the silky rhetoric of the more prominant amongst them that serves to trammel up the likes of those found in the video?

Take from it what you will, but I suggest that you don't spend too long troubling yourself over what I take issue with it; if it hasn't been made apparent already my point obviously lays a little outside the remit of your understanding.

Excuse my pointed reply, I may or may not return later today to make another, grandiloquent, lengthy post - perhaps we'll do some verbal waltzing?

[Mahmud]

Excuse my pointed reply

You are excused. However, saying the video doesn't find eloquent enough proponents of views you claim you do not hold isn't a meaningful critique.

Do you think this might be why they don't have a smartly dressed, silver tongued apologist for terrorism, because everyone who says they want to hear such a speech go on to say they do not personally hold those views?

But on your aside comments, I think there is a difference between being 'balanced' and objective. It's the duty of a journalist to be objective, not just balanced. They don't have a duty to give equal weight to the perspective of psychopaths, just as they don't have a duty to give equal weight in a documentary about maths to people who say 2 times 2 equals15.

[rasheed]

You are excused. However, saying the video doesn't find eloquent enough proponents of views you claim you do not hold isn't a meaningful critique.

Do you think this might be why they don't have a smartly dressed, silver tongued apologist for terrorism, because everyone who says they want to hear such a speech go on to say they do not personally hold those views?

But on your aside comments, I think there is a difference between being 'balanced' and objective. It's the duty of a journalist to be objective, not just balanced. They don't have a duty to give equal weight to the perspective of psychopaths, just as they don't have a duty to give equal weight in a documentary about maths to people who say 2 times 2 equals15.

Now just what on Earth defines a reasonable critique, and by those same standards does your response hold any merit?

No, that is most certainly not why I think they’ve chosen the participants they have, and edited in the way that they did; for the record, should I have shared his views I’d be brilliantly vocal about it – I don’t have much time for mincing my words. The truth, in fact, is that I hold such views to be at best distasteful and at worse a reprehensible indicator of mental illness! Why then do I take issue with the way in which this poor excuse for a documentary happened to be flung together? Quite simply because I find it telling of the sly agenda that they’re peddling ever so pseudo-surreptitiously! A conspiracy theorist? (Yes, I read minds) No not really, rather, I simply find myself at odds with anyone that should seek to ‘benefit’ our youth by producing something that is nothing short of propaganda; the irony of it is delicious, given that that’s usually the tactic of those they seek to rebuke – fighting fire with fire perhaps?

Of course, it is the duty of a journalist to be objective, that’s something we agree on! That said, I think you might have confused the act of being objective, and merely trying to achieve your objectives. Is there not a point where such a piece stops being a documentary and is reduced to an mere advert? Oh, and since I can only help but think you’re being facetious in your little foray into the wonderful world of mathematics, I think it poignant to point out that two squared can quite easily equal fifteen - I must say I like the cut of your jib though.