Islamic icon omitted from '2012'

[Al-Indunisiy]

The upcoming disaster movie "2012" lays waste to many political, cultural and religious buildings and landmarks. But one Islamic icon was too sensitive to touch: the Kaaba, the cube-shaped building in the heart of Mecca, one of the holiest sites in Islam.

Director Roland Emmerich told SCI FI Wire that he wanted to include the religious site in the film, but was talked out of it. "My co-writer Harald [Kloser] said I will not have a fatwa on my head because of a movie. And he was right," he explained.
A fatwa in the Islamic faith is a religious opinion by scholar on a legal, civil, or religious matter. The term gained meaning in the Western world in 1989 when Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for the death of author Salman Rushdie, whom he accused of blasphemy.
Another well-known and deadly fatwa was issued by Osama bin Laden in 1998 and called for Muslims to execute Americans and their allies, according to the Columbia Encyclopedia .

Emmerich went on to say, "We have to all in the Western world think about this. You can actually let Christian symbols fall apart, but if you would do this with [an] Arab symbol, you would have a fatwa, and that sounds a little bit like what the state of this world is.

"So it's just something which I kind of didn't [think] was [an] important element, anyway, in the film, so I kind of left it out."

Emmerich has made other popular disaster movies, including "Independence Day" (1996), "Godzilla" (1998) and "The Day After Tomorrow" (2004). These films were also filled with familiar landmarks being destroyed.

----- SPOILER ALERT -----

In "2012" the destruction includes the White House being overwhelmed by a huge tidal wave carrying an aircraft carrier; the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican splitting between Adam and God touching fingers; St. Peter's Basilica in the Vatican falling on worshipper's heads; and the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro toppling off its peak.

A Himalayan Buddhist temple is also destroyed.

In a recent interview, Yahoo! Movies asked the director, "Why do you like killing the world?" Emmerich responded, "It makes for a good story."

The movie blog Cinematical asked readers if they thought it was "hypocritical of Emmerich to stomp all over other religions, but give Islam a pass?" The comments were mostly on his side, noting that it was not worth the risk to offend Islam. "Man's just afraid he'd be painting a bullseye on his forehead and he's probably right. Remember what happened in Denmark over some stupid cartoons."
In 2006 a Pakistani cleric announced a $1 million bounty for killing a cartoonist who drew the Prophet Muhammad caricatures in a Danish newspaper.

 

[Al-Indunisiy]

I know it's somewhat insignificant but......................oh well.

 

[Fטлку]

^ lol
I'm glad I have popcorn around.. the vatican part sounds dramatic opcorn:

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

The upcoming disaster movie "2012" lays waste to many political, cultural and religious buildings and landmarks. But one Islamic icon was too sensitive to touch: the Kaaba, the cube-shaped building in the heart of Mecca, one of the holiest sites in Islam.

what a load of non sense aimed to defame Muslims and Islam. typical rubbish from an islamaphobic airhead. i bet he is Israeli/Jewish/Zionist. though, for an air head, i'll give him credit of having the intelligence to know his limits which is quite rare for people like that. they should have used their common sense and done some research before launching such attacks. the maker of "the message" asked for the ka3bah to be included in the movie, but respectfully accepted when they were refused to. how is it Islams fault that people lack respect? weird.
and yep, we sure issue fatwas against people who defame our Prophet. maybe it's because they don't hold their leaders/beliefs in high respects which is why they find it so strange that we do. :shade:

Islamic icon omitted from '2012'

thank god for that. Islam doesn't deserve to be associated with utter bs.

 

[titus]

i bet he is Israeli/Jewish/Zionist.

Very insightful commentary. Those Jews are just evil, and even if he is not a Jew himself he is most assuredly being controlled by them.

I do know he is German, and homosexual. That is almost as bad as being a Jew.

and yep, we sure issue fatwas against people who defame our Prophet. maybe it's because they don't hold their leaders/beliefs in high respects which is why they find it so strange that we do

Yes, and the best way to show proper respect is to threaten anyone that says anything you consider offensive. That's the way to take the moral high ground! That'll show them who they are messing with!

 

[aamirsaab]

Unfortunately, some muslims, with very short fuses [no pun intended] are a little crazy right now, so it's a good call to not put the Kabah in that movie. I myself wouldn't be offended if it was given that it's a disaster movie showing disasters (!), but some would definitely completely miss the point and go absolutely nuts over it.

So, yeah good call (even though I do think it's unfortunate)

 

[Fishman]

I don't really know how the Kaaba could collapse/be destroyed in a symbolic/dramatic way anyway. I mean, it's just a cube, what could go wrong?

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Yes, and the best way to show proper respect is to threaten anyone that says anything you consider offensive. That's the way to take the moral high ground! That'll show them who they are messing with!

^o):rollseyes

*cough*

I think I need a glass of water..

 

[Fishman]

Yes, and the best way to show proper respect is to threaten anyone that says anything you consider offensive. That's the way to take the moral high ground! That'll show them who they are messing with!

I agree with you. I find these types of remarks very disgusting and offensive. Saying ''like us or we'll kill you'' is pretty darn close to pure evil, I would say.

^o)

*cough*

I think I need a glass of water..

 

[جوري]

I think his comment about the 'fatwa on his head' is nothing more to gain popularity to his movie..
if you want vast appeal, all but you are to do is whisper Islam and Muslims in a negative light and the sheep come flocking..

The movie doesn't seem particularly interesting anyway.. there are a few out already of this genre (end of world/apocalyptic) sort.. it gets tired after a while..

 

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

Looks refreshing lol.

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

Yes, and the best way to show proper respect is to threaten anyone that says anything you consider offensive.

misunderstood. and you bet! as i said, maybe its becuase they dont hold their leaders/beliefs in high respects that they find it odd that we take action when we do.

That's the way to take the moral high ground! That'll show them who they are messing with!

since you are supposedly on morally high ground, please tell me why and at who that Iraqi show thrower got put in prison and tortured. please tell me why, when a police officer/person in authority, etc gets murdered/assaulted, etc it is considered more of a severe crime, then when an ordinary citizen does?

Very insightful commentary.

thanks.

Those Jews are just evil, and even if he is not a Jew himself he is most assuredly being controlled by them.

@ the bolded part: in all honesty, im just used to seeing such comments from Jews who want Palestine and therefore have this drive to insult anyone or anything who opposes-Muslims/Islam. i take my comments back and apologize if it isnt the case.

I do know he is German, and homosexual. That is almost as bad as being a Jew.

i didnt say that.

I agree with you. I find these types of remarks very disgusting and offensive. Saying ''like us or we'll kill you'' is pretty darn close to pure evil, I would say.

insulting Islam is series crime. even if a Muslim was to, he'd be considered as an apostate.
its a bit deeper than ''like us or we'll kill you'' those comments that were made were nothing short of a defamation of Islam.




btw, my previous comments were aimed at the content of the article in the first post, not the movie itself. though if the movie did contain Islamic symbols being destroyed with the intent of defaming it, then my comments still apply.

 

[titus]

since you are supposedly on morally high ground, please tell me why and at who that Iraqi show thrower got put in prison and tortured. please tell me why, when a police officer/person in authority, etc gets murdered/assaulted, etc it is considered more of a severe crime, then when an ordinary citizen does?

Trust me, I abhor the fact that the man was tortured. I don't believe in torture, especially in a case where the man was simply attempting to insult someone, not to actually cause great physical harm. If justice was to be served then the men who beat him would be spending time behind bars themselves.

As for the reason that the sentence was greater because it was the leader of another nation, then all I can say is that it is because the harm can be great to the relations of two countries. At that point it is no longer a simple matter between two people, but begins to involve politics and diplomacy. The harm could go far beyond a simple shoe toss, therefore there are harsher punishments for such instances.

as i said, maybe its becuase they dont hold their leaders/beliefs in high respects that they find it odd that we take action when we do.

You have to realize, though, that when you make those threats then you are representing Islam (whether accurately or not). Are you really showing respect to your Prophet or to Allah by threatening people with violence for such things? Do you think Christians don't respect Jesus simply because they don't issue rulings calling for the death of people that insult him? They most certainly do respect and honor him, but it is out of respect for him that they don't resort to violence.

To non-Muslims the image of Islam will be whatever image Muslims portray. By threatening people who insult your beliefs you portray Islam as a violent religion, especially if you put those threats in a religious decree.

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

As for the reason that the sentence was greater because it was the leader of another nation, then all I can say is that it is because the harm can be great to the relations of two countries. At that point it is no longer a simple matter between two people, but begins to involve politics and diplomacy. The harm could go far beyond a simple shoe toss, therefore there are harsher punishments for such instances.

what if it isnt a leader of a another nation? and why is there harsher punishments for such instances? you seemed to have missed my point. what im getting at, is that when people are in a higher postion/authority (such as a police man) that a more stricter punsiment is served to the perpetrator who murdered/assaulted, then if that perpetrator had murdered an ordinary citizen. why? becuase he is in a position of authority which calls for a higher respect hence a severe punishment.

what would happen if a well respected and revered person in society (leader, police man, perhaps even a celebrity) did get murdered/assaulted, etc.
wouldn't the general public abhor that person more, and wouldn't be there a more outrage towards the death of this respected person, if say an ordinary citizen was murdered?

people who say that Muslims are violent and are intolerable, need to only look in their own societies becuase quite frankly, what they accuse us of, is rampant in their own.

You have to realize, though, that when you make those threats then you are representing Islam (whether accurately or not).
Are you really showing respect to your Prophet or to Allah by threatening people with violence for such things?

with due respect, your question is slightly misplaced. you have isolated the argument here and dressed in such a way wherein which one is expected to say only one thing, without properly analyzing the reasoning behind it.

1) it depends on your definition of violence? why do people go straight for the jugular and say we are violent, etc whilst completely ignoring what it is that may drive us towards what we may do?
also, the question goes begging: why is it of anyone concern to insult our prophet/beliefs? why do it? what is their agenda towards us that they need to stir our anger up? why cant they just bugger off and leave us alone? seriously, we are quite calm, cool and collected people. we just get annoyed when people annoy us.


2) Can you expect people to NOT to get angry over something they hold dear, in this case, their faith? would any normal person NOT get angry when their, (for eg) say their parents, families, ways of life, etc being insulted. same sort of concept applies here. why do you think the "coalition of the willing" are in Iraq, etc right now? because so called terrorists (i believe its an inside job, hence "so-called") were apparently against Western civilization and therefore felt the need to do what they did on 9/11
why then, is the as a result of 9/11 (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc) called heroism, and us getting angry over our religion being insulted called violence?
the smell of double standards is rather revolting +o( :exhausted

Do you think Christians don't respect Jesus simply because they don't issue rulings calling for the death of people that insult him?

you shouldn't compare Christians/people of other faiths with Muslims/Islam. they aren't any more better then us if they choose not to say anything. if Christians dont want to say anything, that's their own problem. that's their own standards. dont paint people with the same brush.its not fair to imply "oh look at you violent Muslims you. when Christians have their faith insulted, do you see them causing an uproar. geez haven't you considered that maybe your a little extreme." give us some credit will you.

To non-Muslims the image of Islam will be whatever image Muslims portray. By threatening people who insult your beliefs you portray Islam as a violent religion, especially if you put those threats in a religious decree

that's sometimes the problem. alot non-Muslims dont care for what Muslims have to say for themselves or what we are really like and hence they let them selves be brainwashed by the media. perhaps a comment far-fetched, but i do wonder what the opinions of these non-Muslims would have of Muslims if the meida worded their reports a little differently and not isolated the situation and make it look one-sided...the media can be quite vicious and see anything associated with Islam and Muslims as "hot topic"
so my point is, sometimes it depends on the individual themselves as well...

 

[titus]

what im getting at, is that when people are in a higher postion/authority (such as a police man) that a more stricter punsiment is served to the perpetrator who murdered/assaulted, then if that perpetrator had murdered an ordinary citizen.

why do you think the "coalition of the willing" are in Iraq, etc right now? because so called terrorists (i believe its an inside job, hence "so-called") were apparently against Western civilization and therefore felt the need to do what they did on 9/11
why then, is the as a result of 9/11 (Iraq, Afghanistan, etc) called heroism, and us getting angry over our religion being insulted called violence?

In both the instances you mention they are examples of physical actions being punished with physical action. What you are implying, though, is that a verbal or visual insult should be met with physical action, so I fail to see a double standard.

you shouldn't compare Christians/people of other faiths with Muslims/Islam.

Why not? Should there be a different set of standards for Muslims than there are for other faiths? How can I not look at the way that different people of different faiths react to situations and not make a judgment based on it?

I don't see how you can say that the followers of the different faiths cannot be compared when you had earlier stated that the reason that other groups do not react violently is because they don't hold their beliefs in high respect. You invited the comparison.

that's sometimes the problem. alot non-Muslims dont care for what Muslims have to say for themselves or what we are really like and hence they let them selves be brainwashed by the media.

But what about when the media accurately portrays Muslim reactions? Especially when the Muslim actions only further harm their cause?

Take for instance the whole cartoon issue of the recent past. If no Muslims has said voiced their disapproval of the cartoons then hardly anyone would have ever seen the cartoons, much less remembered them to this day. The silence of Muslims on this issue would have made the issue disappear. Instead, by their vocal and violent reaction, some Muslims advertised these insults to the whole world. I know that I would never have seen them if it hadn't of been for the uproar.

And the image of Islam and Muslims that came out of that incident? We got to see dozens of Muslims die in riots. We saw Muslim leaders calling for the death of those who printed the cartoons. We saw buildings burned and people who had nothing to do with the cartoons threatened. These actions did not earn respect for Muslims or Islam, they did exactly the opposite. These actions played right into the hands of the people that want to portray Muslims and Islam as inherently violent. After seeing Muslims rioting and destroying property and calling for peoples death it was hard to argue with them.

So, again, I wonder at people who call for physical retaliation for insults. Why the retaliation when silence would anger the insulters more than anything else. Do you think the reaction to the Danish cartoons has reduced the number of people insulting Islam or your Prophet? No, in fact it probably did quite the opposite as other groups jumped on the bandwagon after that incident and published their own versions of such insults.

I ask you, what is the purpose of calling for violent action against those that insult your beliefs? Do you believe that it is showing respect for Islam by doing so? Or do you believe that you are somehow defending Islam?

 

[Supreme]

It's a rubbish movie anyway, although seeing they they didn't destroy the holiest site in Christianity, that being the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (second holiest is Church of Nativity), I don't see what the big deal is amongst Christians. It's a fictuous effort, and a rather rubbish one at that.

 

[Fishman]

insulting Islam is series crime. even if a Muslim was to, he'd be considered as an apostate.

Is it a crime worth death threats and violence? Actions speak louder than words, and turning the other cheek when somebody tries to hurt you is one of the loudest actions there is. If you don't want people to 'defame Islam', don't give them a reason!

its a bit deeper than ''like us or we'll kill you''

I don't see how.

 

[OurIslamic]

Awesome, I'm glad that we didn't have to see the Kabah being destroyed (even if it is fake).

 

[Woodrow]

I guess each generation gets it's share of "Disaster" films. Some old ones I remember. "When world's Collide" "Earthquake" "Twister" "Towering Inferno"

Also remember an old joke from the 1980s I believe:

"There is going to be a remake of "Earthquake" and "Towering Inferno" but this time they are going to combine them into one long movie and call it "Shake & Bake"

 

[Ummu Sufyaan]

In both the instances you mention they are examples of physical actions being punished with physical action. What you are implying, though, is that a verbal or visual insult should be met with physical action, so I fail to see a double standard.

you have failed to see the double standards because you missed my point again. in both instances i mentioned that our ways of life/beliefs were at threat hence the drive for both of us to react the way we did/do, and yet amazingly we (Muslims) are seen as violent and they are seen as hero's when, what both parties are doing, is the same thing in essence.

Why not? Should there be a different set of standards for Muslims than there are for other faiths? How can I not look at the way that different people of different faiths react to situations and not make a judgment based on it?

read the whole paragraph that you based your reply on, dont just isolate statements.

I don't see how you can say that the followers of the different faiths cannot be compared when you had earlier stated that the reason that other groups do not react violently is because they don't hold their beliefs in high respect.

i didn't mention it was "the reason." i do recall though inserting the word "maybe" i.e that it is a possibility, not that it is. close, but no cigar. sorry.

You invited the comparison.

and you're the one twisting my words. whats your point?

But what about when the media accurately portrays Muslim reactions? Especially when the Muslim actions only further harm their cause?

what wasn't my question.

Take for instance the whole cartoon issue of the recent past. If no Muslims has said voiced their disapproval of the cartoons then hardly anyone would have ever seen the cartoons, much less remembered them to this day. The silence of Muslims on this issue would have made the issue disappear.

the question still goes begging: what is their agenda with us that they have the need to stir our anger? it says more about them then it does about us.
why aren't such issues addressed first?

even under secular laws, correct me if im wrong, it is illegal to defame anyone's religion anyway so im not too sure why we are getting the full blame here.

These actions played right into the hands of the people that want to portray Muslims and Islam as inherently violent. After seeing Muslims rioting and destroying property and calling for peoples death it was hard to argue with them. So, again, I wonder at people who call for physical retaliation for insults. Why the retaliation when silence would anger the insulters more than anything else. Do you think the reaction to the Danish cartoons has reduced the number of people insulting Islam or your Prophet? No, in fact it probably did quite the opposite as other groups jumped on the bandwagon after that incident and published their own versions of such insults.
I ask you, what is the purpose of calling for violent action against those that insult your beliefs? Do you believe that it is showing respect for Islam by doing so? Or do you believe that you are somehow defending Islam?

*sighs*seems like you didn't read my previous post. did you?

Is it a crime worth death threats and violence?
Actions speak louder than words, and turning the other cheek when somebody tries to hurt you is one of the loudest actions there is.

akhee i understand that but 1)sometimes that doesn't really help because you know, you can go to extents if you really wanted to grind against someones nerves. 2)what about the businesses that lost profit when we decided to boycott them? so acting does sometimes help and 3) is this really about us? what i mean is that direct comments, (i,e ones intended to insult Islam, not ones that are intended to insult Muslims) are made etc hence, is it really our honor for us to ignore.

If you don't want people to 'defame Islam', don't give them a reason!

when someone gets slapped in the face, is the blame fairly and squarely theirs for reacting?

I don't see how.

because we have accepted people being different and diverse over the last 1400 yrs, without the need to threaten/kill them?