Slashdot Mirror
A Gaming War Between Islam and the West?
The Washington Post has up an article looking at a burgeoning venue for political expression: gaming. Between 'The Quest for Bush', Counter-Strike mods, and more serious titles with a political slant, the political arena is quickly claiming gamers for their own. It's not just politics either; there are some excellent titles being released that attempt some truly insightful social commentary. From the article: "'UnderAsh,' released by Afkar Media in 2002, views the first intifada from the eyes of Ahmad, a Palestinian teenager resisting the Israeli occupation. Last year a sequel was released. A teaser to 'UnderSiege,' which tells the stories of five Palestinian families during the second intifada, shows a Palestinian teenager being shot on the street; an Israeli soldier appears to pound him with a concrete block seconds later. 'Our games are not propaganda,' Kasmiya says. 'Our games are a reflection of our history -- past or present. The fact is, most movies, most TV shows, most video games put Muslims in a bad light, so we have to try to tell our side of the story.'" Commentary from GamePolitics is also available.
We'd totally pwn them on their Commodore-64's.
" 'Our games are not propaganda,' Kasmiya says. 'Our games are a reflection of our history -- past or present."
This coming from the guys whose history includes the "fact" that the Holocaust did not happen.
Where were you when the voynix came?
The fact is, most movies, most TV shows, most video games put Muslims in a bad light, so we have to try to tell our side of the story.
Someone needs to explain to these people (and Fox News, while you're at it) that trying to cancel out a raving lunatic by adding a raving lunatic from the "other side" does not "balance out", you just have two raving lunatics.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
Just in case the article writer (and the media) hadn't noticed, there are plenty of Muslims in the west too. Come to that most of the East is full of Chinese people, who on the whole are about as Muslim as a a beer flavour sausage wrapped in bacon.
Think of the Children; Sleep with your Sister
While they're guilty of holocaust denial, we're constantly guilty of "them swarthy people"ism.
Recognizing the Palestinians' side of things is not the same as hating Israel.
I cheered for Israel when they went to get their kidnapped soldiers back, but I also feel Palestine should have their own territory, and be treated under the same rules of conduct as every other country.
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Insightful and humourous.
The Israelis haven't been angels by any means, but I haven't heard of their soldiers pounding teenagers with concrete blocks after they've been shot.
"'Our games are a reflection of our history -- past or present. The fact is, most movies, most TV shows, most video games put Muslims in a bad light, so we have to try to tell our side of the story.'"
Here is one example of how they do this: "Armed with a rifle, a shotgun or a grenade launcher, players navigate various missions that include "Jihad Growing Up," "Americans' Hell" and "Bush Hunted Like a Rat." In the final stage, you fight Bush.". So tell me, does this defy stereotypes at all? How is it a "good light" to make games in which Muslims are presented as violent commandos... the only difference being that they are the "first person" in the shooter and not the armed enemies for once? Or the other game in which "The goal is to kill"?
The game creators seem to think that it is a positive portrayal of Muslims to change them from being terrorists who are shot at to terrorists who are shooting.
Where were you when the voynix came?
"Our games are not propaganda"
Right up there with the other great lies.
"I am not a crook!"
"I did not have sex with that woman."
"I'm from the government and I'm here to help."
If ya have to say "Our games are not propaganda" odds are it IS propaganda. From the description it certainly sounds like a recruiting tool for the terrorists.
Yes, ye unwashed hordes of pro PLO slashdot kids, the terrorists. Islamic terrorists. Doesn't make s damned bit of difference if they are 'Palestinian' Islamic terrorists from either Fatah or Hamas, Lebanese Hezbolah Islamic terrorists, straight up Iranian Islamic terrorists, AlQaeda Islamic terrorists, etc. Those who use terror against civilian populations must be hunted down and exterminated, period full stop. And since the end of IRA[1] terrorism, just about all terrorism these days is Islamic terrorism.
[1] Which ended with a few years of the end of the Cold War. But those who said most of it was Soviet agitataion to destabilise the West were tinfoil hat types seeing a Red under every bed. And of course we should also forget who originally taught Arafat his trade in death and who he served.
And back on topic, we of course know a pro terrorist game would never be banned. Nay, it will probably be widely available. "Kill all the eeevil joooos!" is free speech and any attempt to censor it would just not be permitted. Now imagine the politically correct howls if a 'kill all the diaper heads' game were created. Seems some censorship is more permissable than others.
Democrat delenda est
The fact is, most movies, most TV shows, most video games put Muslims in a bad light, so we have to try to tell our side of the story.
Most movie producing nations have a problem with Islamic fundamentalist terrorism, so it's not really all that suprising that they cast Muslims as the baddies. If you're concerned with the way you're portrayed how about you stop blowing us up?
http://twitter.com/onion2k
"Is it a Halal beef sausage wrapped in Turkey Bacon?"
I'm not sure it is Turkey Bacon. However, chances are it is less than 6 degrees removed from Turkey Bacon in the recipe book (using connections of common ingredients).
Where were you when the voynix came?
Do they have a Rachel Corrie skin?
I need virtual activism like I need a real whole in the head. Spare me.
If it's a good game, I'll play it. If you deign to interrupt my game with a preachy spiel about the plight of the Trashcanistani people, or the blue-crested spotted warbler crane, or the terror of global warming, or whatever, I will shut it off and remember that you wanted to bore, rather than entertain, me with your 'game'.
Canthros
"This is a great idea! I've seen way too many Russian-accented actors out on the street because all the terrorist roles are full."
Those are really just actors? I had one come up to me once and demand to know where they kept the "nuclear wessels". I got kind of scared.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Maybe it's just that my parents grew up in the 60's but the other night I was watching some PBS special on folk music in the 60's and I got to thinking that if there was one beautiful thing to come out of the last century, it was the civil rights movement.
Part of the civil rights movement was the marches and the confrontations but, in my view, a bigger part of the civil rights movement was the individual struggles. People like my parents wrestled with the issue of racism and segregation as individuals and came to the conclusion that it is wrong.
As I see it, the Middle East needs and "individual" civil rights movement. People in the Middle East need to fight a battle within themselves to reject ethnic prejudice and embrace individual freedom. Rather than dividing up into ethnic groups and trying to carve the region up into ethnic homelands, they need to assert the freedom of the individual to live and work and travel anywhere in the Middle East (and the world) regardless of race or ethnicity or culture or religion.
I don't know if a game about violence can help people reject their racial/ethnic prejudice or not. It might be able to show the futility of conflict but it will be more difficult for such a game to show the power of kindness and inclusiveness.
I may be sounding like Dr. Phil here but one thing that really strikes me about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that no one takes ownership. It's all "they need to be nicer to us" rather than "we need to be nicer to them". That's not to say anyone has to accept ethnic prejudice but a good place to start is to not engage it in oneself.
It is impossible to prove weather or not any description of a historical event is accurate. The best we can do is conjecture based on the information available, and we are unable to prevent any conjecture from being influenced by personal and cultural bias.
I'm sorry, but if someone is talented enough and has the time enough to make a videogame worth playing, that person is either wealthy enough to spend that time rather than working or they are funded. Either way, that's fairly serious monopoly money doing some talking. To me, at that point it's more than just "telling your side of the story", it's someone with power launching a clever marketing stunt for their cause.
My sense is that the real problem is Palestinian poverty. If those poor people were allowed by their crappy governments to get a taste of that rich Israeli economy, they'd be doing too well to throw stones or strap on explosive belts. Desperation is driving that kind of action, and Israel are the scapegoats for their failings as a society.
How long can the backwards thinking of governments like Palestine's last in the face of the advances the rest of the world is making? When we're all living like zillionaires flying around in our air cars, and surfing the 3d internet, are we still going to see the pathetic images of grubby looking Palestinian kids throwing concrete chunks at Israeli mechs?
For that matter, when is Islam going to hit a crossroads? What direction is Mecca when you want to pray from Mars or another solar system? Down?! Has anyone asked the obvious question, "C'mon, isn't it just a little silly to pray towards a city?"
I think all this talk of the 13th imam betrays the helplessness that some Muslims might be feeling - the west continues the furious march towards the future and rather than suck up their pride and jump on the bandwagon, they have to try and end it all before it's too late with some firey armaggedeon.
As a vegetarian, I insist that all references to 'Halal beef' must be replaced with 'Ethically Killed Tofurkey'
an Israeli soldier appears to pound him with a concrete block seconds later
Therefore, the Palistinian can now strap on explosives and slaughter people in a coffee shop who had nothing to do with the event.
Mmmmmm... nope. Still not seeing it.
The Arab side is finally getting some smart people. They've been fighting dumb for decades, but at long last, the opposition is getting a clue. Read "A Hezbollah Upon All of Thee!", by the War Nerd, a cynical and insightful commentator.
For the last decade or so, Israel and the US have been kicking around Arafat's people, who have ineffective tactics, the Taliban, which has no resources, and Saddam Hussein, one of the worst military leaders of the last century. But now the opposition is getting tougher. Hezbollah has the right weapons and the right tactics to put a dent in Israeli armor. They have an effective TV operation, al-Manar, which stays up despite Israeli bombing attacks. The Iraqui insurgency knows how to attack US troops, something Saddam never figured out: let them move in and act like they own the place, then start nibbling away. They'll retreat to overprotected firebases, at which point they're ineffective at controlling the country.
Hezbollah has a certain style. Throughout the Israeli attacks, their TV news crews stayed on the air, reporting the battles. Their leader appeared, calm and unruffled. After they won (and yes, they did), they started the business of repairing the damage to Lebanon. Damaged areas were marked off with yellow police tape preprinted with victory slogans.
It's the Internet generation. Islamic education is nearly useless; at the elementary level, it's memorizing the Koran; at the graduate level, over 90% of Saudi doctorates are in theology, But between cell phones, satellite TV, and Internet access, the Islamic world is starting to get some information about how to get things done. Games are a good way to get your message across, especially in countries where most people are young people. And they do teach some useful skills.
Yes, the Islamic world is stuck with a nutcase religion that holds them back, but so is Bush's base.
I don't see how those points, valid as they are sometimes, have anything to do with me pointing out that stereotypes concerning violent Muslims are not helped by the games described in the message you responded to. Perhaps you meant to hit "Reply" to the top level news item instead?
Where were you when the voynix came?
That's a great list of, to put very lightly, embarassments of US involvement in Iraq. What's it got to do with the current discussion? The point was that a positive portrayal of Muslims in media doesn't start with Bush as an end-boss. I missed the game from the West where you're challenged to build the highest "butt pyramid".
Having said that... your other off-topic points...
Good idea. However, very Western. Such behavior would simply fan the flames of the fundimentalists who would see this kind of thing as further proof of Western ideals eroding their culture. Which in turn becomes part of the reason to fight the west. And the next piece of recruitment propoganda.
Agreed. Even if we're not required to follow the Geneva Convention in these cases... it would be the right thing to do. A pity that proper behavior is overshadowed by cases of savagery. We might as well hand over propoganda to the fundimentalists.
Again - the right thing to do. Whether it really gets the US any milage or not would be debatable. The US is involved with a lot of humanitarian efforts. Yet it constantly gets shot at. Kind deeds only go so far.
The USSR crumbled not because of propoganda but because of economics. Yeah - I agree that freedom is a good thing. We should try to convince that part of the world this. But this is too easily wrapped up in the "West destroys our culture" meme.
That would be very cool. I would completely agree with this. And... in this day and age where survival may be linked to oil... one could justify the expense of removing ourselves from oil dependancy.
All these games just represent different sides of the same coin.
Glorifying violence is glorifying violence, period. There is no such thing as "good" killing. Violence in self-defense may sometimes be necessary, but it is never "good". Games like Battlefield 2 and SOCOM and Call of Duty that make it fun to kill dozens or hundreds of people are morally equivalent to Jihad games that do the same.
In this day and age more than ever, people need to understand that killing is not a way to solve problems in the long term. The situation in the middle east should be proof enough of that.
The Amish have the right idea. People need to learn to forgive and seek nonviolent methods to work out their differences. I am truly saddened at the thought of parents, in any country and of any faith buying, video-games that glorify the taking of human life as presents for children.
a) Offer muslim women a way out of their shitty little misogynistic surroundings and reprehensible oppressive cult that treats them as a giant vagina instead of a person, and get them educated.
b) Treat anyone who qualifies under the geneva conventions by the geneva conventions. That doesn't include barbaric assholes who aren't part of a military, don't wear arms openly, don't wear uniforms, and take hostages and behead them for fun while making snuff films of it so the muslims in the other parts of "The Ummah" and "Dar Al-Harb" can jerk off to watching the infidel get beheaded.
c) Oh, I agree. And if they come up with a "But don't think this changes our attitude" press release? Fuck them.
d) We do that now.
e) I'd love to see it. Can your environmental wack-job friends and dumbasses like Jimmy "The Gullible Jackass" Carter give up protesting so we can build real, renewable nuclear power reactors and recycling reactors to turn the "nuclear waste" back into fuel instead of having to bury it?
Ugh... you don't get it man. Alright yes yes, you're angry at the US. You hate Bush, the administration, possibly government. Right right. We hear you, we get you, that is to say we understand what you're saying. Maybe I hate them too, maybe not, thats not what we're talking about here.
What the Johnny's post before you was trying to point out was that the game makers response was "The fact is, most movies, most TV shows, most video games put Muslims in a bad light, so we have to try to tell our side of the story." Then went on to create a game where you what, I dunno I didn't read the article, but kill Israelis, destory Bush, yada yada, basically acting violently. The poster was just trying to point out that how is that not a bad light as well?
Now, keep in mind America has what basically the same kind of games right? Lets go kill Nazis. Lets I dunno, stop the terrorists, whatever those kids are playing nowadays. AND if some American game manufactuer came out and said "Everyone thinks Americans are so violent, so we wanted a chance to tell our side," while promoting a game about, what did you say, raping Iraqi women, and dragging people out, don't you think that'd be pretty idiotic of that gaming company?
>> A Manhattan project-sized push for alternative energy in the West
Are you saying that if we don't need any oil, Iran wont have a market? I guess this extends to removing Iran 'legitimate' reason for needing nuclear power, cos now they've got all this spare oil hanging around to run their power stations.
"Yeah, and niggers are good at basketball, Jews carry a bag of gold around their neck everywhere they go, and all Germans are Nazis."
Thanks, Dr. Godwin. The last one brings us back on topic, to a nation where a majority of the people insist as an important goal the extermination of another nation. By coincidence, the reason for the wanted extermination is because the targettted people happen to be Jewish.
Where were you when the voynix came?
It's all "accurate depictions" this, and "history" that.
They forget what's not important to them. They forget that the "evil" Israelis attacked them in the 60s because Egypt was riling up all the Muslim nations to "push Israel into the Mediterranean". Nope it's Israel's aggressive attacks.
They'll forget about a suicide bomber killing 10-30 Israeli citizens except to call him a Martyr in their war, but the victims no matter where they come from are infidels, even the tourists, but god forbid Israeli troops enter into the strip to stop this type of attack and injure one person (radical or innocent).
Then they'll elect a government (over another who is working with Israel on a peaceful solution) The new government will take Israeli troops, claim they don't recognize Israel, and push for more terrorist attacks rather then working for a solution to these problems because it's easier to blame Israel then work hard and solve the problems.
Yeah it's never propaganda, it's always something with them. The sad thing is the world still listens to them and still believes them at times.
"In the final stage, you fight Bush."
Until you're dead. Everybody knows Bush has godmode.
My only regret... is that I have... bonitis..
wow, you really don't get it. Why are you criticising them when your Government(s) all do the same things? what moral high ground do you have to do this? oh and all this whining about "israel shouldn't exist" is hypocitical in light of how Palestine was first wiped off the map in 1948-1949. How about "Israel should have done to them what was done to Palestine"? Is that more even anded?
I hope you realize that Hezbollah operatives kidnapped those men hoping to trade them for several Lebanese citizens who had been kidnapped before them. That side of the story is ostensibly missing from most of the U.S. news coverage on the events that led up to Israel's attack against Lebanon. It was if the entire narrative of violence, attack, and counterattack in the Middle East had somehow started with the kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers--never mind anything that Israel had done to precipitate it.
You know, prisoner for prisoner exchanges are not uncommon. The Lebanese (perhaps over-optimistically) believed that since their own people had been wrongfully kidnapped, they could in turn abduct the Israelis and swap them out--no harm, no foul. It's happened before. What Israel did instead was unconscionable. They killed thousands of innocent Lebanese people and turned the infrastructure of Beirut to rubble.
Why do you think Israel agreed to a ceasefire, even though the Israeli soldiers were not returned? It's because the soldiers didn't matter worth a spit--they just served as a convenient pretext to destroy most of Lebanon. It was a disgusting and disgraceful thing to do. While the pro-Israeli American news outlets tell you half the story, the rest of the world is aware of the other half. The United Nations censored Israel for its unprovoked attack on Lebanon. Kofi Anan himself was visibly angry when two U.N. observers were killed by the Israelis under very suspicious circumstances.
Why you Americans remain so willfully ignorant of the circumstances surrounding international conflicts is beyond me.
"oh and all this whining about "israel shouldn't exist"
So we should accept a demand for genocide against an entire nation? I need to learn to not respond to antisemitic AC's.
Where were you when the voynix came?
He can walk through walls, too! OMG
I'm not even sure what you just said!
We're going to start aborting the palestinians? What?!
No can do, I'm getting married soon.
Really, is it just me, or does this sound like a Leisure Suit Larry title?
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
The problem is that the Palestinians don't accept that.
Do you have sources for this? It's a rhetorical question, of course, because how could you have reliable sources for something you just made up? The fact is, Palestinians (regardless of their party) have always wanted back that which was taken from them. It's neither an unreasonable nor extreme request.
There is a saying that goes "to the victor go the spoils." And that is exactly what happened in Palestine after WWII. The Jews transformed American and British sympathy after the Holocaust into a greedy land grab. They didn't ask for part of the land that is holy to three different major religions. They didn't ask for sanctuary in a land that is holy to three different major religions. No, they took it all and displaced the native people who had been living there.
No matter how hard you try, you can't unmake history and injustice with rhetoric. In case the history of the last century escapes you, there once was a sovereign nation called Palestine. Then the U.N. passed a resolution, and Palestine was magically turned into Israel. And all the people who once lived there were herded up and sent to slums and refugee camps, where they have remained for three generations and counting--their land, their homes, and their property all stolen from them, their situation grim.
And you have the balls to label these people "extremists"?
Funny, I thought those two things had huge amounts of overlap.
There's a war brewing between christianity(1),(ALL kinds), and Islam (ALL kinds).* Grab a map, and plot the movements of various religions over time, especially within the past five years.
*There may be neutrals now, but that 's going to quickly change for the majority.
(1) Judaism is going to be the axle to this wheel.
"In case the history of the last century escapes you, there once was a sovereign nation called Palestine" Earth to BeeBeard, there never was a nation called palestine. The was the transjordan and palestine area which was part of the ottoman empire.
How is it a "good light" to make games in which Muslims are presented as violent commandos... the only difference being that they are the "first person" in the shooter and not the armed enemies for once?
I think you missed the (unintentional) irony. The fact that doesn't seem to have been mentioned is that Night of Bush's Capturing is not an original game. It's a mod for an US game, 'Quest for Saddam', where players playing US marines (with oddly Bush-like skins) mow down muslim soldiers and bin-laden lookalikes and drink coke in an attack on Iraq, culminating in fighting Saddam on the final map. The Islamist version of the game does not even change the levels - the game is completely the same with only the skins changed, e.g. swapping the player character's skin with the generic enemy terrorist skin.
http://www.gameology.org/node/1269
The game, while not rather culturally edifying, is in fact the very definition of a mirrored viewpoint.
"I need virtual activism like I need a real whole in the head. Spare me."
Look Here and here. Game are about being more than just entertained. Remember Doom Marine?
That's a pretty reductive way of looking at the situation. Consider this for a moment. The displaced, post-Holocaust Jews could have found safe haven in most of Europe, the United States...the Bahamas...hell, anywhere they wanted to go. Instead, they asked the U.N. to un-make an entire, separate nation and to settle there. This was done knowing full well that it would destabilize the Middle East, and that it would invite the ire of no less than 13 other nations in the region that were different from the Jews culturally, religiously, and ethnically. This was made possible only through U.S. military support. (note: To this day, the Israelis kill Palestinian refugees throwing rocks at their U.S.-made tanks by using their tanks--just because you didn't see it on CNN doesn't mean it doesn't happen).
It may seem a little cynical to claim that perpetuating violence in the Middle East was the goal of the U.N. in creating the artificial nation of Israel decades ago. No, there was a legitimate hope that the millions of displaced Palestinians would be "absorbed" by neighboring nations (the talks that took place prior to the formation of Israel provide ample evidence of this). They really did believe and hope that these people who once had a nation of their own would just take the U.N.'s emergency aid and eventually just move away to Jordan or Syria or Egypt to die--that over the years, the situation would settle down and that these people would just fold and accept their fate.
Every time another bomb goes off in Israel it's a testament to how well that plan has worked. Let me pose this hypothetical question: If somebody stole everything you had from you--your way of life, your property, even your nation--how would you respond? Personally, the very least I would do is grab an AK-47 and start making some demands. How about you?
Oh come now, arguing that it was "just a territory" is to argue semantics in lieu of the point.
These people organized themselves into a loose governmental structure long before the British got involved. They had names for their towns, for their roads. They thrived--please don't try to morally justify expelling them based on their lack of flag.
You can point to how the area has been passed around like a hooker at the Republican National Convention, but that doesn't extinguish the right the Palestinians had to the land, and more importantly to their culture and way of life--both of which have been dramatically changed now that the last three generations of Palestinians have grown up in refugee camps in Israel, Lebanon, and other places. In the camps, they are afforded no political rights (can't become citizens, can't own land, etc.) and very few human rights. It's an untenable situation, and one that the U.N., the U.S., and Israel must answer for.
According to this, Palestine existed as a nation governed by the British for decades.
Also? Fuck the Native Americans in the U.S. They didn't live in a "real" country, so Americans were perfectly justified to take their land.
I don't see how your reply is in any way informative, insightful, funny, or any other adjective that a mod could use to describe it. It's just an empty, typo-ridden one-off statement that does nothing to advance any discussion about what's to become of these people. Here is my reply to someone else who made the same vapid observation, presumably hoping that it would undermine anything I have to say:
link
I fully expect to be modded down myself, what with my voicing a dissenting opinion and all. Plus, you're not even factually right about this, for god's sake. I checked the Wikipedia article that AC posted.
Me: "These people were unjustly displaced and sent to slums and refugee camps."
You: "Earth to you! Earth to you! They didn't live in a country."
Bravo.
Are you kidding? Your situation has nothing in common with that of a Palestinian refugee's. You have the freedom to have your own life in your own town. You have citizenship and political rights, as well as many human rights that refugees don't have either. Imagine if you weren't allowed to be a U.S. citizen because of your grandfather's affiliations. Imagine you were not allowed to own property, vote, or have anything but the most menial of jobs (nations such as Lebanon maintain long lists of different jobs such as doctor, lawyer, etc. that Palestinians are forbidden to have). Imagine that the grandchildren of other confederate sympathizers were murdered and terrorized wherever they went.
I'm no defender of violent Palestinian attacks, only someone who actually has a clue as to why they happen. You have a lot of gall to suggest that you're in the same boat as a Palestinian and adopt the "Why can't they just get along?" cop-out. Your situations are not even remotely the same.
There is a perpetual scam carried out by speakers of Arabic. English is widely spoken in Arabic speaking countries and so English media are well known in the Arabic speaking world. On the other hand, you can publish what you like in the Arabic speaking world, and be offensive as you like about Jews, Christians and others, and there will be very little publicity outside of the Arabic speaking world.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
No. Rather, they don't want to be the minority race/religion in their country.
I'm a real-life Jew myself (and a lawyer no less, yeah I know..insert joke here), and I would be lying if said that I felt comfortable voicing my opinions on this subject in anything but the most anonymous of ways.
I like the way you argue. If you astutely noticed that I've omitted a few key details that would weaken my position and then also emphasized those details that would strengthen it, then, yeah...welcome to the world of rhetoric ;
To answer you more qualitatively, sure, most of the Middle East was arbitrarily created by European powers. Boundary lines were drawn often with little respect for cultural and ethnic similarities. But you're forgetting your time line: Most of those nations did exist before the creation of the Israeli nation-state. It's just a moot point, anyway. Even if you don't already consider the powers in the region religiously or ethnically unified rather than disparate, their universal hatred of Israel has provided the common enemy that they need to feel as brothers, at least with respect to this one issue.
I also don't think you're giving religious minorities their due here. For example, the minority Maronite Christians in Lebanon (a made-up nation created by the French, if you're keeping score...) were and still are key players in Lebanese politics for years, having much of the money and therefore influence in what was a young and untested political environment. Even after the Lebanese Civil War, it could be claimed that the Maronites still had a stranglehold on Lebanese politics.
I would like to think that I would have been one of the Jews going "You know, this just sounds like a bad idea..." when Israel was created. But alas, I wasn't alive then, and besides, I probably would have been on board with the idea at first anyway. As I pointed out earlier, genuine malice wasn't the goal in the creation of Israel. Of course it wasn't. Everyone thought that the Middle East situation would smooth out over time and that the Palestinians would find a place among the people with whom they shared a faith. Of course, that hasn't happened. I guess we could still be hopeful.
I much prefer real war. I'd also prefer the combatants consist only of people who claim to give a shit, and that they fight their battles in an arena where innocents can't get hurt.
Armies are nothing but a great Ponzi scheme.
You mean this isn't based on the best movie to ever be put out by the worst Hollywood martial arts "actor" ever seen?
(The best of a well-fought (early on), well-actioned (early on again), horribly-acted (all of them) bunch...)
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
Peace in our time.
-- Neville Chamberlain
MOD PARENT UP
"Palestine should have their own territory, and be treated under the same rules of conduct as every other country."
"The problem is that the Palestinians don't accept that."
Please have respect for people with different abilities, especially children.
"most video games put Muslims in a bad light,"
Hell, I'd love the chance to portay radical Muslims in a good light.
How many candlepower are there in a megaton?
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
It seems rather biased to me to say that we can have America's Army and (the original) Counter-Strike but they can't make their own games that put them in a good light instead of us. If you don't like what they're "saying" in the game, don't play it.
Besides, I'd rather them kill American soldiers and presidents in a video game than in real life.
Melissa
"Screw Sun, cross-platform will never work. Let's move on and steal the Java language." - Visual J++ Product Manager
... when the main social ill of Palestinian youth is their predilection for virtual violence.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
I think this is one thing that's being missed. It's not a question of the Muslim's being portrayed in a good light, since lord know America's Army doesn't paint a nice picture of Americans, what with the guns and hunting down of towelheads and whatnot.
What this allows, though, is for Muslims to identify with the protagonist, and for that protagonist to be empowered. The Black Panthers and Malcolm X were never the terrorists Al Qaida and Hezbollah are, but the same effect is very similar, because they expressed a willingness to fight back, with violence if necessary. It's a question of a whole bunch of people who've been feeling oppressed for a long time, and they've decided that they're sick of it. On an abstract level, it's much the same. You can talk about the Muslims being the aggressors, but when you take a look at the shit the average Muslim over there has to put up with, and how comfortable the supposed "victims" are, you have to realize the bullshit.
The American people should be very, very frightened about a game like this, because the last thing they're going to want is for Muslims at large to realize how satisfying it might be to fight back. Granted, this hunting for Bush thing is ridiculously simplified, but so are many Hollywood movies about Arab terrorists. Wait until it develops the sophistication that much of today's propaganda holds, such as Patriot Games (a fantastic piece of nonsense that appeals directly to neo-con self-image) or other films. It's when it hits this subtle level that it has a chance to really take hold long-term.
The sad thing is nothing one says in arguments like changes the "kill 'em all" attitude of people on either side - not even what some slashdot readers think about the situation. Yeah I know people get angry when someone they love, or genrally care about in some way, gets killed by someone from the other side who is proclaiming he is doing his side proud by being a cowardly pig. The problem comes when people from the supposedly "civilized" parts of the world start propagating the doctorine of 'kill if anyone raises the flag we hate, blow up the building that has the poster we hate, bomb the city/village in the country we hate, nuke the bastards who worship the same religion as the morons we hate'
How different are YOU actually from the people you say are the worst scum of the society ?
Politicians and Pedophiles: Two groups of exploitive bastards who are most dangerous when they're thinking of children.
Hollywood, the US games industry and unfortunately, even your head of state, have been using the "raghead==evil" formula for years now and suddenly when the positions are reversed, you feel agrieved? Give me a break. You do EXACTLY the same things. Utter hypocracy.
"Al-Awadhi specifically suggested a game in which the player "slaughters the Jews and liberates the Al-Aqsa Mosque." "
Perhaps they could team up with Borat and create "Throw The Jew Down The Well: The Game"?
blah lbah labh lahb
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
"And to you "pro-lifers" out there: "Safe, legal and rare" IS a compromise"
How can you call it "safe" when one person is killed every time? Why must there be compromise with those who seek to kill young children. The only difference between legal and illegal abortion is that if it is legal, there are a lot more of them. Illegalizing abortion saves lives, period. No one is forcing anyone to go to back alleys for illegal abortions. The "pro-life" label for those who think abortion is a bad idea is quite applicable. By seeking to reduce abortions, they favor the choice of life. The only problem is that too many "pro-life" favor the death penalty. On the abortion issue, at least, they are pro-life.
In any case, the valid comparison here is between the Palestinian government (kill the Jews) and the pro-abortion side (kill the children). The analogy is strengthened even more when we look at the fact that it is illegal to kill Jews, so Palestinians risk their lives and sometimes die in suicide bombings.... just like those hell-bent to kill children sometimes die in illegal abortions. I'm sure we can cut down the rate of Palestinians dying from Jew-killing attempts if we legalize it and have publicly-funded safe gas chambers set up.
Why must unjustifiable acts of violence be made "safe"? Why must there be compromise with those who make entirely unreasonable demands???
"Israel has UN resolutions against them for what amounts to war-crimes"
The main "crime" for which they are condemned is existing. Much of the others have to do with condemning Israel for fighting back when attacked and condemning Israel for legally occupying countries after these countries attack it and refuse to call off the attacks. The characterization of the UN being "antisemitic" is accurate. That is the root of these "resolutions". Why does Syria invade Lebanon and do far worse, but it's Israel that gets the resolutions against it? The resolutions reflect hypocritical hatred of a nation and its people. Also, when several of the worst antisemitic resolutions passed, an actual card-carrying Nazi (Kurt Waldheim) ran the UN. This is no mere Godwin invocation: Waldheim belonged to Hitler's actual organization.
You claim not to be antisemitic, but you nicely bring up the "media influence" (codeword for "Jews control the media"). Further on you say "people are generally as likeable as anyone else and often a bit smarter" as if this attempt at positive racism (one ethnic group more intelligent than the other???) is any good. Actually, it fits in with well-troden stereotypes of the cunningly intelligent, evil, conniving Jew.
"That holocast (which did happen of course, but was much smaller in scope than is advertised)"
There is a very strong correlation between those who lie about the Holocaust and claim it did not occur or was much less than it actually was (as you just did) with people who are antisemitic. This, along with your claim that Jews caused the Holocaust that you falsely claim was small, is indeed "HATEFUL TO JEWISH PEOPLE"
So here we have false claims about Israel in order to bash Jews, and false claims about the Holocaust in order to bash Jews. I don't "call you antisemitic". You identify yourself as such with the irrational Jew-bashing and smearing Jews with hatred. Not surprising that you post as an AC.
Where were you when the voynix came?
"I really think that Israel is wrong in most of the things they do with Palestinian people, and them invading Lebanon"
Why is it OK then for Lebanon to invade Israel, but not for Israel to fight back? That is what happened here. I'm glad to see you have backed away from the claim that the holocaust was smaller than it actually was and that Jews created and ran it.
Where were you when the voynix came?
That's history.
In any case, what the grandparent poster probably meant was that there is a solution to the Israeli/Palestinian problem known as the "two state solution". That solution is accepted by more or less all of the western world, Israel, and the moderate parts of the Palestinian society. Unfortunately, the Palestinian people elected a party that rejects this idea (they can't allow Israel to exist), thus plunging the Palestinian nation into a state of eternal war.
Btw, did you ever try to think of why the Jews needed Israel in the first place? Did you ever think of why Zionism became so popular after the holocaust? Oh, what am I saying, of course you didn't. All you can see is a "greedy land grab".
"Ridiculous bias" indeed.
About Palestine: http://youtube.com/watch?v=eCL6WdnuNp4 http://youtube.com/watch?v=mo2HW4T7wK4&mode=relate d&search=
About Jews against Zionism:
http://www.amazon.com/Zionist-connection-What-pric e-peace/dp/0396075649
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/
People can be against Israel and extremo-zionism without being antisemetic, unless of course you somehow think jews against zionism are antisemetic? Your Godwin dogma doesn't work so well on jews, does it?
About Zionist agendas in WWII and other weird stuff: http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/righitpix.html http://christianparty.net/hitlerfounderisrael.htm http://christianparty.net/nazi.htm
"About Zionist agendas in WWII and other weird stuff: http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/righitpix.html [ku.edu] http://christianparty.net/hitlerfounderisrael.htm [christianparty.net] http://christianparty.net/nazi.htm [christianparty.net]"
You are most helpful. I really did want to know what the KKK had to say about it.
Where were you when the voynix came?
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/hol ocaust/gedalyaliebermann.cfm
Call the Jews against Zionism who wrote this antisemetic.
They fired the first shot by drawing cartoons, you know.
Where were you when the voynix came?
Seriously, Krell, you zionist spin-doctor, that was a ridiculous thing you said. Everyone knows that you shouldn't sling the word "antisemite" around because it is a very dirty word (it is a form of juxtapositioning with a mass murderer). My guess is you aren't actually Jewish, Krell. You are probably Indian or Philippino. Clearly, you are working here (not just trolling), and since no self-respecting zionist would spend so much time doing something so boring (and unprofitable) as calling everyone antisemite just to keep spin tilted in the right way, you must be contracted work (they want it done but the work is beneath them). Since it is well known that India and Philippines have some of the cheapest English language contracting services in the world, it is likely that you are from one of those places (after all, gotta save a buck where you can, right?).
Am I Right? Or am I wrong and I am actually talking to a Neanderthal living in some settlement in the middle of occupied Palestine or something?
>>The game creators seem to think that it is a positive portrayal of Muslims to change them from being terrorists who are shot at to terrorists who are shooting.
Lets look at how things are viewed from this side of the sea shall we ? (and i mean north america)
When is the last time a media has made the muslims look good ?
Movies, books, News, video games.
As far as I can recall, the last time must have been somewhere during 30s where muslims were more depicted as rich individuals and being envied by us for being allowed to have more than one wife.
It was not any better before but especially since 09-2001 we no longer look at Asian people or russian people to be the iconic bad guy (Rambo/Rocky anyone ?). Now any kind of war movie HAS to be somewhere in the desert with some american trying to fix this things up.
I'm not saying muslims are perfect, they have their bad apples just as much as we do but you know, they also got a bunch of good apples in the tree.
Seriously, think about it, how would the average american feel if suddenly all foreign medias would start using the U.S. "fabled" marines as the bad guys - corrupted by money and power, hungered for domination. and not only in movies, *everywhere*. Before long that idea would get stuck in the europeans head, and asian, muslims, russians..well... anyone not in N. America.
You need to look with both eyes opened, they have terrorist and so do we. they have nice people and so do we. It not because the Bush administration chooses to show only the muslims as bad people that suddenly they are actually all bad.
When the original author talks about "their side of the story" he means the story of the average muslims that is not a terrorist. He talks about that mom who lost a son due to collateral damage. He talks about that son who lost his parents because they were suspected of terrorist activity (almost like catholic inquisition...), he talks about the average muslims being frustrated because suddenly some US president decided it was ok to track Ben laden by all means necessary (which he hasnt caught yet btw) and that in the mean time would be a good time to switch hussein with his own dictator to facilitate oil control.
I mean, I'm just rambling here but I think the muslims have got all the rights to be angry, not that it justifies all the violence over there but i certainly understand what he means when he says "our side of the story".
If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
You've utterly missed the point.
It's interesting you say that because most of them are in Lebanon. Does that count?
Did you even see that movie? It certainly wasn't pro-war. It was a rather interesting and provocative movie, unlike its pro-war, much dumbed down sequel movie which gave us "Rambo the pop culture and political icon".
Where were you when the voynix came?