I agree with the poster earlier that (paraphrasing here) taking the high road is better and living out the true nature of Islam (as one may see it) is a much better recourse than simply spitting back at the man that spit at you.

Overall however, I think the film would have been more effective had he kept his focus on the issue of language/Scriptures, and not branched out into trying to parallel the violence portrayed in Fitna. As crude, racist and downright obnoxious as Fitna is, it does address, on some crude, racist and obnoxious level, a prevailing trend in the world today–that people are dying in terror attacks propogated in the name of Islam nearly every day (quite a few in Iraq over the last week). When Schism tries to parallel Fitnas arguments about Islam=terror /violence with a Christian= terror/violence, if falls rather flat. Compare it to the Christianity of a couple hundred years ago? Absolutely. But really not so today. For example-the section with the unidentified soldiers beating up the unidentified rioters(?) Somehow, it pales in comparison to Fitnas’ centerpiece–9/11 or the recent use of the mentally retarded women to blow up a market in Iraq. The section with the kids is another good example. When you have seen photo after photo of children dressed up as suicide bombers, or heard the stories of children or the mentally retarded being used as suicide bombers… to try to offset that with a couple of children speaking about how they want to be part of the Army of G-d comes across as a bit ridiculous. Brainwashed? Arguably. Looking to convert people? Yes–try not to be rude to them when they shove the pamphlets in your face. Looking to blow up another Christian church whose theology they disagree with, or perhaps some nice big building in Dubai? No.

Or to put it even more simply: Korans and books on Islam can be freely purchased in virtually any major bookstore in any Western country.

http://www.stat.washington.edu/jobs/questions/

No problem. This is only a discussion.