7 ms·

Afghanistan bans YouTube over anti-Islam film | The Australian

31 points by jnazario 14y ago

eslachance 14y ago
I finally was able to hunt down the actual clip they're talking about, "Innocence of the Muslims". There is a 5-minute trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWkq2HPgoM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWkq2HPgoM I'm absolutely appalled that this thing supposedly cost $5M to produce, though. If the trailers are any indication, this is the worst piece of garbage (quality-wise) that I've ever laid my eyes on. I've seen $20,000 movies that looked better than this thing. I'm not talking about the contents, I'm talking about the quality! I mean come on, the sound is lame, the bluescreen scenes are absolutely horrible... I could probably do just as well in my back yard with about $5000 worth of equipment and a few friends! Well, if I had 59 friends...
- ceejayoz 14y ago
  Sounds like they had some donors they could soak with unreasonable expenses.
  - yread 14y ago
    One of them seems to be the infamous Terry Jones http://www.tampabay.com/news/world/gainesville-pastor-terry-jones-promoted-film-that-sparked-unrest-in-libya/1251112 http://www.tampabay.com/news/world/gainesville-pastor-terry-...
- pruman 14y ago
  Well, I would recommend you don't make a better version of a film that inspires murderous religious zealots to randomly take life. Stick to stuff that just makes snobby film critics spew their lattes in disgust.
- gojomo 14y ago
  $10,000 in production costs, $4,990,000 million in post-production security. I watched a 13m51s 'trailer' that was linked from one of the NYTimes stories. It's hilariously awful, and further: some of the most-likely-to-offend, specifically anti-Muhammad/anti-Islam lines are clumsily dubbed in with different voices than the main actors. Thus I suspect there's a chance that even the actors didn't know completely how their performances would be used: they might have thought it was some other period drama, that then via redubbing it had its offensiveness "turned up to 11".
  - eslachance 14y ago
    Your suspicion turned out to be correct. At least one of the actresses in the movie spoke out about the fact that they were actually cast for "Desert Warrior", a movie with absolutely nothing to do with Muhammad. They never even spoke the name! Everything was, as we can clearly see, dubbed in post-production. At least one source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/anti-islam-film/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/anti-islam-film/index.ht...
tokenadult 14y ago
As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speech throughout their country, on any subject, or whether any American or Dutch person or other person accustomed to free speech who happens to be within reach of attack by a crazy foreign person has to prepare for war just to continue to exercise free speech. On my part, I'm going to continue to comment on public policy based on verifiable facts and reason and logic, even if that seems offensive. I am not going to shrink from saying that people in backward, poorly governed countries that could never have invented the Internet have no right to kill and destroy just because someone in a free country laughs or scorns at their delusions. The people who are destroying diplomatic buildings and killing diplomats are declining to use thoughtful discussion to show that they are anything other than blights on humankind. AFTER EDIT: Reporting by the New York Times, citing other news organizations, on the origin of the video and how viewers became aware of it: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/obscure-film-mocking-muslim-prophet-sparks-anti-u-s-protests-in-egypt-and-libya/ http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/obscure-film-moc...
w1ntermute 14y ago
These sorts of incidents make me wonder why we even care about "democratizing" these countries. It's clear that they're stuck in the Middle Ages, and I don't think any amount of intervention is going to change that. You can't forcibly change an entire culture by throwing money and soldiers at it. Seems to me the right thing to do is to make it as easy and seamless as possible for those who share our views to leave their countries and come to America. It's not like we have any shortage of space in this country, and as long as the people we bring are contributing to the economy and have a modern value system, it can only be a good thing for us too.
- RyanMcGreal 14y ago
  Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s. It has devolved into a paranoid backwater after decades of attacks, occupation and other meddling by external powers - first the USSR and then the USA. Let's recall that the Taliban were formed out of the [terrorists|freedom fighters] that were trained by the Pakistani ISI and financed by the CIA to undermine the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
  - w1ntermute 14y ago
    > Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s. As was Iran. But they didn't get there because of Western intervention back then, and there's no reason to think that it would work now.
  - tokenadult 14y ago
    Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s. I am old enough to remember the 1960s, and accounts from people who traveled to Afghanistan in the 1960s, and I would like to see more evidence for this extraordinary claim. Until I see the evidence you kindly provide, I will be hard put to believe that "modern, progressive" is as appropriate a designation for Afghanistan at any time in the last 500 years as it has been for, say, Denmark all that while. AFTER EDIT: Thanks for the first reply from new user gongador linking to a photo essay I remember seeing not too long ago. I had that photo essay in mind as I described "Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s" as an extraordinary claim, as I think the photo essay shows by concentrating its description of Afghanistan only on the largest urban center of the country, rather than the rural countryside seen by other travelers. The majority of the population of Afghanistan have never lived in Kabul, and illiteracy has always been high there, especially among girls and women.
rabidsnail 14y ago
This is a sad day for Afghan internet users. I'm sure they're both furious.
mindstab 14y ago
I don't even know what to say or do about the top comments here: "The people ... are declining to use thoughtful discussion to show that they are anything other than blights on humankind." " It's clear that they're stuck in the Middle Ages, and I don't think any amount of intervention is going to change that." And plenty more This kind of sad attitude is exactly what maintains the status quo. This "we invented the internet so we are endlessly right and better than you" attitude. People are mad because "they/we"[?] created like the most offensive video in a bit (I'm sure if I made a $5 budget video of jesus eating babies there are plenty of people in the Bible belt of the states who'd like to kill me) and just wantonly posted it online and then use the reaction to say that those people are degenerate and inferior and always were and always will be. Do you have any idea of the greater context? I mean lets start with American meddling in the whole middle east region? Drone strikes on families and funnels and weddings killing entire families. And then downhill from there. I think people forget to begin with there is some pretty bad american sentiment out there. Top it with leaked pictures of depraved sexual torture from american POW camps and more desecration of holy books and it suddenly looks like America is working over time to piss people off. So yes, you take a historically poor, starving and undereducated people and do this to them, and they are going to get violently mad. But to maintain such disdain towards them just feeds the problem. We desperately need to engage them, to understand them, to win them over, to promote education and health and food [probably in reverse order]. This kind of arrogant hubris makes me really sad that this supposedly smart community can be so stupid with issues out side of machines and dealing with tolerance and the world as a whole and different societies. Such narrow mindedness is just... well it shows us up to be no better than those we are maligning despite all our supposed advantages :(
- icelancer 14y ago
  Why the hell do "we" have to do anything? How about withdrawing all troops, aid, and support - since it's clear that when we meddle in their shit, it gets worse?
  - wapper 14y ago
    What about members of that culture living in America ? Is it racism to "point out the spade" ? It is beyond obvious that this hateful islamic culture is not going to stay contained, whatever Americans' thoughts on the issue. It is painful to see that the only "moderate" reaction is a few tweets. Everybody seems to be too afraid of these backward muslim morons to point out that they are backward islamic morons. I'd love to live in a world where live and let live works, but that's not this world. Islam started with massacring Jews, atheists and Christians by the thousands, and the only advancement since has been increasing numbers. And please keep in mind that 10th century Egypt was >95% Christian, when evaluating their "tolerance" (and frankly a reading of either Egyptian or Spanish archives from during the relevant periods easily reveals that muslims were not, at all, tolerant during those periods).

31 points by jnazario 14y ago

I finally was able to hunt down the actual clip they're talking about, "Innocence of the Muslims". There is a 5-minute trailer here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWkq2HPgoM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWkq2HPgoM I'm absolutely appalled that this thing supposedly cost $5M to produce, though. If the trailers are any indication, this is the worst piece of garbage (quality-wise) that I've ever laid my eyes on. I've seen $20,000 movies that looked better than this thing. I'm not talking about the contents, I'm talking about the quality! I mean come on, the sound is lame, the bluescreen scenes are absolutely horrible... I could probably do just as well in my back yard with about $5000 worth of equipment and a few friends! Well, if I had 59 friends...

ceejayoz 14y ago
Sounds like they had some donors they could soak with unreasonable expenses.
- yread 14y ago
  One of them seems to be the infamous Terry Jones http://www.tampabay.com/news/world/gainesville-pastor-terry-jones-promoted-film-that-sparked-unrest-in-libya/1251112 http://www.tampabay.com/news/world/gainesville-pastor-terry-...
pruman 14y ago
Well, I would recommend you don't make a better version of a film that inspires murderous religious zealots to randomly take life. Stick to stuff that just makes snobby film critics spew their lattes in disgust.
gojomo 14y ago
$10,000 in production costs, $4,990,000 million in post-production security. I watched a 13m51s 'trailer' that was linked from one of the NYTimes stories. It's hilariously awful, and further: some of the most-likely-to-offend, specifically anti-Muhammad/anti-Islam lines are clumsily dubbed in with different voices than the main actors. Thus I suspect there's a chance that even the actors didn't know completely how their performances would be used: they might have thought it was some other period drama, that then via redubbing it had its offensiveness "turned up to 11".
- eslachance 14y ago
  Your suspicion turned out to be correct. At least one of the actresses in the movie spoke out about the fact that they were actually cast for "Desert Warrior", a movie with absolutely nothing to do with Muhammad. They never even spoke the name! Everything was, as we can clearly see, dubbed in post-production. At least one source: http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/anti-islam-film/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/anti-islam-film/index.ht...

tokenadult 14y ago

As we read news reports about violent responses to the video, from people who seem to be quite confused about who produced the video, it's important for all of us to remember the basic issue here. The basic issue is whether people in free countries, like most readers of Hacker News, are going to be able to enjoy the right of free speech throughout their country, on any subject, or whether any American or Dutch person or other person accustomed to free speech who happens to be within reach of attack by a crazy foreign person has to prepare for war just to continue to exercise free speech. On my part, I'm going to continue to comment on public policy based on verifiable facts and reason and logic, even if that seems offensive. I am not going to shrink from saying that people in backward, poorly governed countries that could never have invented the Internet have no right to kill and destroy just because someone in a free country laughs or scorns at their delusions. The people who are destroying diplomatic buildings and killing diplomats are declining to use thoughtful discussion to show that they are anything other than blights on humankind. AFTER EDIT: Reporting by the New York Times, citing other news organizations, on the origin of the video and how viewers became aware of it: http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/obscure-film-mocking-muslim-prophet-sparks-anti-u-s-protests-in-egypt-and-libya/ http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/obscure-film-moc...

w1ntermute 14y ago

These sorts of incidents make me wonder why we even care about "democratizing" these countries. It's clear that they're stuck in the Middle Ages, and I don't think any amount of intervention is going to change that. You can't forcibly change an entire culture by throwing money and soldiers at it. Seems to me the right thing to do is to make it as easy and seamless as possible for those who share our views to leave their countries and come to America. It's not like we have any shortage of space in this country, and as long as the people we bring are contributing to the economy and have a modern value system, it can only be a good thing for us too.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago
Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s. It has devolved into a paranoid backwater after decades of attacks, occupation and other meddling by external powers - first the USSR and then the USA. Let's recall that the Taliban were formed out of the [terrorists|freedom fighters] that were trained by the Pakistani ISI and financed by the CIA to undermine the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.
- w1ntermute 14y ago
  > Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s. As was Iran. But they didn't get there because of Western intervention back then, and there's no reason to think that it would work now.
- tokenadult 14y ago
  Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s. I am old enough to remember the 1960s, and accounts from people who traveled to Afghanistan in the 1960s, and I would like to see more evidence for this extraordinary claim. Until I see the evidence you kindly provide, I will be hard put to believe that "modern, progressive" is as appropriate a designation for Afghanistan at any time in the last 500 years as it has been for, say, Denmark all that while. AFTER EDIT: Thanks for the first reply from new user gongador linking to a photo essay I remember seeing not too long ago. I had that photo essay in mind as I described "Afghanistan was a modern, progressive country in the 1960s" as an extraordinary claim, as I think the photo essay shows by concentrating its description of Afghanistan only on the largest urban center of the country, rather than the rural countryside seen by other travelers. The majority of the population of Afghanistan have never lived in Kabul, and illiteracy has always been high there, especially among girls and women.

rabidsnail 14y ago

This is a sad day for Afghan internet users. I'm sure they're both furious.

mindstab 14y ago

I don't even know what to say or do about the top comments here: "The people ... are declining to use thoughtful discussion to show that they are anything other than blights on humankind." " It's clear that they're stuck in the Middle Ages, and I don't think any amount of intervention is going to change that." And plenty more This kind of sad attitude is exactly what maintains the status quo. This "we invented the internet so we are endlessly right and better than you" attitude. People are mad because "they/we"[?] created like the most offensive video in a bit (I'm sure if I made a $5 budget video of jesus eating babies there are plenty of people in the Bible belt of the states who'd like to kill me) and just wantonly posted it online and then use the reaction to say that those people are degenerate and inferior and always were and always will be. Do you have any idea of the greater context? I mean lets start with American meddling in the whole middle east region? Drone strikes on families and funnels and weddings killing entire families. And then downhill from there. I think people forget to begin with there is some pretty bad american sentiment out there. Top it with leaked pictures of depraved sexual torture from american POW camps and more desecration of holy books and it suddenly looks like America is working over time to piss people off. So yes, you take a historically poor, starving and undereducated people and do this to them, and they are going to get violently mad. But to maintain such disdain towards them just feeds the problem. We desperately need to engage them, to understand them, to win them over, to promote education and health and food [probably in reverse order]. This kind of arrogant hubris makes me really sad that this supposedly smart community can be so stupid with issues out side of machines and dealing with tolerance and the world as a whole and different societies. Such narrow mindedness is just... well it shows us up to be no better than those we are maligning despite all our supposed advantages :(

icelancer 14y ago
Why the hell do "we" have to do anything? How about withdrawing all troops, aid, and support - since it's clear that when we meddle in their shit, it gets worse?
- wapper 14y ago
  What about members of that culture living in America ? Is it racism to "point out the spade" ? It is beyond obvious that this hateful islamic culture is not going to stay contained, whatever Americans' thoughts on the issue. It is painful to see that the only "moderate" reaction is a few tweets. Everybody seems to be too afraid of these backward muslim morons to point out that they are backward islamic morons. I'd love to live in a world where live and let live works, but that's not this world. Islam started with massacring Jews, atheists and Christians by the thousands, and the only advancement since has been increasing numbers. And please keep in mind that 10th century Egypt was >95% Christian, when evaluating their "tolerance" (and frankly a reading of either Egyptian or Spanish archives from during the relevant periods easily reveals that muslims were not, at all, tolerant during those periods).