Should Bollywood continue to engage with Pakistani artistes?

[Alam_dar]

5 hours ago, MechEng said:

You're living in a utopian world. Reality is not so pretty.

Unfortunately it is true. Reality is not always so pretty. 

Nevertheless, we must not be so much negative about the life. Sometimes indeed it turns pretty too.  

 

The message of LOVE is Eternal/Universal.

It may be that under the religious brain washing people forget the message of love, but indeed LOVE does attract all (especially the Youth). 

 

 

[nikred]

The only problem I had with PK was they chickened out showing PK taking the wine bottles inside the mosque.

They show the mosque and we see PK going off screen and then being chased by Muslims.

It does not matter if it criticized Hinduism 95% or 99%. It's just that when it had to attack Hinduism it did not pull it's punches. But the only time it gets to criticize Islam it handles the scene with kid gloves.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

[Singh bling]

19 hours ago, Gollum said:

Unnecessary targeting of one religion while Islam/Christianity were let off rather mildly. While exposing fraud babas was legit, making Shivji run around in a bathroom like a joker or mocking idol worship and Hindu pilgrimages was uncalled for, movies could have focused more on how people misuse religion for personal gains rather than mocking the faith. Other religions have been let off very lightly but in case of Hinduism even the smallest issue has been blown out of proportion, sorry I have visited 100s of temples in my youth and never have my chappals/shoes ever been stolen, likewise praying to different Gods isn't dialing wrong number, this is a frontal attack on my faith. I am short of time to write a long detailed post but the article here ( https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/sorry-aamir-despite-all-the-denials-pk-has-an-anti-hindu-undertone-2041285.html) reflects why many Hindus feel PK has anti Hindu tone. 

 

Worst part is PK came in a time where 3 other movies targeting Sikhism, Christianity and Islam were released but the censor board (under Leela Samson) ordered many cuts in those 3 movies while PK was left unscathed in spite of recommendations by many Hindu scholars.

Which was the movie that targeted Sikh religion??

[Detonator]

People who have no clue about history are doomed to become liberals and pseudo secularism.

[MechEng]

3 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

Unfortunately it is true. Reality is not always so pretty. 

Nevertheless, we must not be so much negative about the life. Sometimes indeed it turns pretty too.  

 

The message of LOVE is Eternal/Universal.

It may be that under the religious brain washing people forget the message of love, but indeed LOVE does attract all (especially the Youth). 

 

 

I admire your mindset sir. 

[Alam_dar]

4 hours ago, nikred said:

The only problem I had with PK was they chickened out showing PK taking the wine bottles inside the mosque.

They show the mosque and we see PK going off screen and then being chased by Muslims.

It does not matter if it criticized Hinduism 95% or 99%. It's just that when it had to attack Hinduism it did not pull it's punches. But the only time it gets to criticize Islam it handles the scene with kid gloves.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
 

On this point I agree with you. 

This behaviour should change and Islam must get it's due share of criticism. It is a blunder to come under pressure from the Muslims. 

 

 

[Gollum]

3 hours ago, Singh bling said:

Which was the movie that targeted Sikh religion??

MSG, woh Gurmeet Ram Rahim wallah. That movie supposedly hurt Sikh sentiments so Leela Samson ordered many cuts.

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

MSG, woh Gurmeet Ram Rahim wallah. That movie supposedly hurt Sikh sentiments so Leela Samson ordered many cuts.

His cult had more hindu followers than sikh.

[Gollum]

10 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

His cult had more hindu followers than sikh.

May be but he pissed off Sikhs IIRC, he insulted one of their Gurus or something along those lines. Huge controversy during that time, even spurts of violence between Sikhs and Rahim's followers.

[maniac]

11 hours ago, nikred said:

The only problem I had with PK was they chickened out showing PK taking the wine bottles inside the mosque.

They show the mosque and we see PK going off screen and then being chased by Muslims.

It does not matter if it criticized Hinduism 95% or 99%. It's just that when it had to attack Hinduism it did not pull it's punches. But the only time it gets to criticize Islam it handles the scene with kid gloves.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
 

This is how it works...If they criticize the evils of Hinduism......what the terrifying  Hindu “extremists” will do is that a bunch of unemployed idiots will get together and burn a few posters and effigies,  Worst case scenario they will beat up or bully an another unemployed idiot  in an isolated incident.

 

then the  “liberal” “filmmakers” and “artists can start pointing out Hindu terror and intolerance and show their bravado and condemn the horrific acts of burining effigies and posters.

 

This will show their brave and liberal virtues, get them on talk shows and debates, help sell tickets to their movies or art.

 

I don’t even want to go down that path and discuss  what happens when unemployed idiots take up extremism in other cultures. That is usually well renowned across the world.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 10, 2018 by maniac

[KeyboardWarrior]

Fawad Khan receives an award for Best Cinema Icon Pakistan/India at Filmfare Dubai 2018

 

 

 

 

 

[Gollum]

17 hours ago, nikred said:

The only problem I had with PK was they chickened out showing PK taking the wine bottles inside the mosque.

They show the mosque and we see PK going off screen and then being chased by Muslims.

It does not matter if it criticized Hinduism 95% or 99%. It's just that when it had to attack Hinduism it did not pull it's punches. But the only time it gets to criticize Islam it handles the scene with kid gloves.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk
 

Not just Islam, PK also let off Christians lightly. Christians aren't prone to large scale violence like Muslims yet they are treated with kid gloves. Remember Da Vinci code was banned in India in most parts of the country because of the Mary Magdalene plot line. Even during release of PK, another movie Kamaal Dhamaal Maalamal was forced to cut a few scenes where a Catholic pastor was shown as corrupt or something along those lines, I remember the CBFC chief Leela Samson (dynasty bootlicker) facing criticism over her interference back then. A play 'Agnes of God' wasn't allowed to be staged in Mumbai because of pressure by certain Catholic groups. I find the hesitancy to criticize Christians even more amusing because they are a chilled out community and generally more educated than the rest. 

[Alam_dar]

Conclusion:

========
 

(1) Preaching and criticism goes hand in hand. If you wish complete freedom of preaching, then you should also be ready to give complete freedom of criticism. 

 

(2) Criticism should be allowed in case of Islam and Christianity too, and not the other way (i.e. stop criticism of Hinduism while criticism of Islam/Christianity is not allowed). 

 

(3) Right of criticism should not be seized in name of "respect" and "blasphemy". 

[KeyboardWarrior]

@Alam_dar

I have observed your posts, you spout too much of nonsense about Islam. if you are an athiest, it doesnt mean you have right to insult any religion. you dont like it. thn dont follow it. you dont have right to Insult the religion of 2 Billion people. 

[Muloghonto]

44 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

@Alam_dar

I have observed your posts, you spout too much of nonsense about Islam. if you are an athiest, it doesnt mean you have right to insult any religion. you dont like it. thn dont follow it. you dont have right to Insult the religion of 2 Billion people. 

Ofcourse he has the right to insult ANY religion. See, this is why muslim world is so backwards. They think books, innanimate objects and ideas are beyond criticism and a human's view comes below rights of the said book/idea.

Any idea can be criticized and insulted. An idea that cannot stand up to being criticized or insults, is not an idea with integrity or truth on its side. Always remember - its lies, that need protection from various thoughts and critiques. Truth, simply is. And truth does not change if it is ignored, insulted or disparaged. Lies cannot withstand that. By putting thought & speech control over religion, it simply bolsters the concept that religion is a lie, which needs protection to survive .

[KeyboardWarrior]

21 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Ofcourse he has the right to insult ANY religion. See, this is why muslim world is so backwards. They think books, innanimate objects and ideas are beyond criticism and a human's view comes below rights of the said book/idea.

Any idea can be criticized and insulted. An idea that cannot stand up to being criticized or insults, is not an idea with integrity or truth on its side. Always remember - its lies, that need protection from various thoughts and critiques. Truth, simply is. And truth does not change if it is ignored, insulted or disparaged. Lies cannot withstand that. By putting thought & speech control over religion, it simply bolsters the concept that religion is a lie, which needs protection to survive .

Ofcourse, you can, but in the end you will get Zero fuks. 

[Muloghonto]

10 minutes ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

Ofcourse, you can, but in the end you will get Zero fuks. 

Except most muslim nations protect the lie that is Islam, by severely sanctioning any criticism of Islam, Mo and that book of his. 

Btw, thank you for backtracking that he has no right to criticize a religion and then admitting that he has the right.

[Stradlater]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Ofcourse he has the right to insult ANY religion. See, this is why muslim world is so backwards. They think books, innanimate objects and ideas are beyond criticism and a human's view comes below rights of the said book/idea.

Any idea can be criticized and insulted. An idea that cannot stand up to being criticized or insults, is not an idea with integrity or truth on its side. Always remember - its lies, that need protection from various thoughts and critiques. Truth, simply is. And truth does not change if it is ignored, insulted or disparaged. Lies cannot withstand that. By putting thought & speech control over religion, it simply bolsters the concept that religion is a lie, which needs protection to survive .

Well said Brother.

Dissent should be welcomed and not to be frowned upon. I say embrace the hate and criticism. This is how it should be.

 

[Alam_dar]

22 hours ago, KeyboardWarrior said:

@Alam_dar

I have observed your posts, you spout too much of nonsense about Islam. if you are an athiest, it doesnt mean you have right to insult any religion. you dont like it. thn dont follow it.  

I criticized Islam along with proofs. If such criticism is really a nonsense, then Quran and holy Prophet Muhammad uttered this dozens of times more against the idols of the people of Mecca. 

 

Even worse, Quran and holy Prophet "abused" the opponents 

 

Quran used word "Bastard" for the opponent, compared them to the animals, gave worse names to people like "Abu Jahl" and "Abu Lahab", and Sunnah of Prophet is to legitimize the worst kind of abusive language (Sucking the clitoris of lady Goddess of Kuffar). 

 

I have not used a 1% of this language. 

 

For example, here is where Quran using the word bastard (Arabic: Zaneem) for the opponent:

 

Q. 68; Verses 10-13:
 

But yield not to the man of oaths, a despicable person,
Defamer, going about with slander,
Hinderer of the good, transgressor, criminal,
Harsh--beside this, impure by birth (Bastard),

 

Abu Bakr uttering most ugly Words of "Go and suck the clitoris of Laat (female goddess of Kuffar)" and Prophet Muhammad making it part of Sharia by accepting this 

When ambassador of Kuffar of Mecca came to Muhammad, then Abu Bakr abused him worst possible way in the presence of Muhammad who supported Abu Bakr by keeping quite and thus making it part of Sharia (known as Hadith-e-Taqreeri in Sharia). 

 

Hadith of Sahih Bukhari:

باب الشروط في الجهاد والمصالحة مع أهل الحرب وكتابة الشروط

فقال له أبو بكر امصص بظر اللات، أنحن نفر عنه وندعه فقال من ذا قالوا أبو بكر‏.....‏....

 

Link to Arabic Hadith of Sahih Bukhari

This is a long hadith where Abu Bakr is telling the ambassador of Kuffar: امصص بظر اللات  which means:  : "Go and suck the clitoris of Laat (the female Goddess of Kuffar)" 

(See full Urdu Translation of this Hadith here)

 

I could not imagine that there could be any abusive language which could be more dirty than this one. 

 

And Muslims deduced 2 Rulings from it:

 

(1) It is allowed to abuse the Kuffar and their gods in order to humiliate them. 

(2) Oral Sex is allowed in Islam 

 

See Muslim response for use of this abusive language and permission of oral sex here:

https://www.proz.com/kudoz/arabic_to_english/religion/4689958-أمصص.html 

 

 

Quote

you dont have right to Insult the religion of 2 Billion people. 

According to the rules of Humanity, it does not matter if a religion is of 2 Billion people or of 1 person, but "Same Standards" should be applied. 

 

Unfortunately it is not the case with Islam, which claims to be a Divine Religion and Allah being "Adil" (i.e. Just) 

 

In Islam, if you even criticize Prophet Muhammad or wrong things in Islam a little, then your punishment is "Death" while you committed "Blasphemy".

 

On the other hand, Muslims are totally allowed to even use the worst abusive language for the opponents and their gods, but there is no punishment for it. In fact it is desirable to humiliate others and their gods. 

 

Bro, 

 

I only ask you to please come out of this Religious Brainwashing and follow the Humanity in you. 
Believe me, this Humanity in you is never going to mislead you. It will tell you clearly that Islam is playing Double Standards and this could never be a divine religion. 

Edited April 12, 2018 by Alam_dar