The makers of the propamentary that was screened for NYPD recruits and officers titled The Third Jihad, are giddy over all the the attention the New York Times is giving them and are now making it available to watch for free online.
The DVD can still be purchased for those looking to expand their home (hatred) film collection. Although the producer says it’s not anti-Islam, it’s anti-Islamic extremist, that’s total bullshit,
otherwise Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, who is featured in it, wouldn’t have apologized. But don’t take my word for it, watch it for yourself.
Nothing in this film is erroneous as far as I can tell. Sure it's provocative, but it's not anti-Muslim, just anti-extremist.
Wow, I watched this whole thing to see if you were right…and, I must say, I really don't agree with you. This is all really going on and it is something to be aware of. I know so many Middle Eastern people from both religions and even they see it. People like you make it impossible to say anything b/c it always ends up requiring an apology that then clouds the initial meaning/intent. I really just don't see it as you do…are you Muslim and offended or can you explain what you saw as attaching all Muslims?
So video is locked and asks you to sign in to your Vimeo account to access the link to it. Brilliantly, they link you to a log in and then do not link you back to the unlocked url of the video once you DO sign in.
Here's the direct link for anyone who doesn't want to spend the time checking to make sure you're watching the correct one out of scores of videos on vimeo entitled "The Third Jihad": http://vimeo.com/21017806
I think any criticism of this video that would be worthwhile would be to address the question, was it made responsibly? I think the answer to that question is yes. To me, that's the bottom line.
Having said that, it IS fair to say that this film was clearly edited and directed to dramatically evoke a sinister feel, very similar to films like that low-budg "9/11 was an inside job" film that was posted on youtube years ago. But the facts mentioned in this movie ARE sinister, and downright wrong, so, in my opinion, the dramatic tone is used responsibly.
I'm sure the New York Times would have preferred this movie to be made without the dramatic music, dark lighting, slowed, grainy footage and other tricks used by the editors to enhance the impact of the movie's clear statement. The documentary itself would definitely appear to be more "objective" had it been done that way. But it's also fair to point out that such dramatic music/editing is consistently used in other objective, fact-based documentaries of great acclaim that are politically universally accepted (the somber, solo violin playing over footage of Nazi concentration camps.)
The bit about the "Islamization of Europe" definitely seemed to be a bit reactionary. I do agree that the sentiment that I perceived in that bit was laughable and somewhat irresponsible. But that was the only truly over-the-top segment in the film (leaving aside, of course, the corny family montage at the end.)
We’re a bunch of volunteers and starting a brand new scheme in our community. Your web site provided us with useful information to work on. You’ve done a formidable job and our whole neighborhood can be thankful to you.
test comment
test comment 2
test comment 3
test comment 4
This will be a excellent website, would you be involved in doing an interview regarding just how you created it? If so e-mail me!