Jump to content

Dude, I Am Not A Muslim Vs. Dude, I Am Not A Terrorist


Jaginder88
 Share

Recommended Posts

Greetings to all,

My name is Jaginder Singh and I am an independent film maker based in Perth, Western Australia.
Post 9/11, there have been many hate crimes (retaliatory) attacks on Muslims and persons that are assumed to be Muslims.
I now hate flying as they "randomly" make me jump the hoops to get through security (not that I am saying security if unimportant) but, I know that the inconvenience that I face is nothing compared to what some others may have to endure on a regular basis just because they are Muslims or even look like a Muslim. This thought has always been in my mind but I when I read about the massacre in Wisconsin I felt extremely distraught. I remember feeling the same way during the attacks on 9/11. A sinking feeling of disgust and indescribably hurt. Don't let my name or my words fool you, I am not even remotely religious but I felt I was attacked too. I feel the need to document this controversial issue but I had other projects then. Now a year later, I am about to embark on my latest project, a documentary about mistaken identity and racial profiling.
I do however, have a dilemma on what would be the most apt tittle for my documentary.
This where I need your insight as a community/sangat.
Should I call it *Dude, I am not a Muslim* or *Dude, I am not a terrorist*
What's in the name you may ask? A lot.
If we were to call it the former, one may be accused of alienating Muslims though the intention is to shed light on the fact that you not all colored people are Muslims and not all Muslims are colored people. Focus will fall on the turbaned Sikhs as they have the uncanny resemblance to terrorism's most famous poster boy, Osama bin Laden (at least to a layman). It would be controversial and intriguing hence more bums on the seat hence may possible attract more investors, something every indie film maker struggles with. Of course, there would be a segment about peace loving Muslims as well for it is not my intention to portray Muslim as terrorist.
The latter may be more politically correct and the focus would be that not all Muslims are terrorist and also the subject above which is not all colored people are Muslims. We would still do segments of turbaned Sikhs and attacks on non Muslims and Muslims alike.
I hope I am making sense and that everyone can freely voice the opinion or even disgust (?).

I have created 2 FB pages for this reason, feel free to drop by and check them out too.

https://www.facebook.com/dudeiamnot

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Dude-I-am-not-a-Muslim/690950187585172

Jinder
Perth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

'Dude, I Am Not a Terrorist' sounds much better and is a more accurate reflection of the aims of your documentary. The controversial, intriguing title of 'Dude, I am not a Muslim' may get you more bums on seats, but you will also face a lot of backlash from the Muslim community and you will alienate them even further causing them to boycott your documentary. And that is not what you want to achieve. 'Dude, I am not a Muslim' implies that all Muslims are terrorists, which we all know is not true, just as all terrorists are not Muslim. So using the umbrella term of 'Terrorist' is better as it does not discriminate against any religion/race and will be appealing to a more universal audience. If executed well and with good research, acting, writing, advertising and a good trailer I don't think you will have to worry about about bums on seats, so best of luck. It sounds like a really interesting project.

Thanks Mkaur for taking the time to share your thought. You points are very valid indeed.

Below is a very good point contributed by some one else in another forum

I'd go with 'Dude, I am not a Muslim', that way you'll kill two birds with one stone: People will be aware that Sikhs are not Muslims, and once that realization settles in, we'll no longer be suspected of being Islamist terrorists.

If you were to go for the latter title, the more Islamophobic elements will likely refuse to watch it, as the distinction will not have been made between Sikhs and Muslims. The first title is more likely to peak their curiosity.

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call it 'Dude I'm not a Muslim'.

If the shoe was on the other foot and Sikhs were doing all the bombings and muslims were being targetted, I can guarantee you that they would call the film 'Dude I'm not a Sikh'

Who cares if we alienate the muslim community, the same community that tries to groom our girls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about calling it "Dude, I am a Sikh"

Thanks for you thought Jonny101,

If I may speak bluntly a network or any distribution platform will not be 'moved' with a topic like "I am a Sikh" simply because majority of the population don't know about Sikhs and especially because the is very little in the current psyche that would generate enough interest to want to watch it a film about "I am a Sikh". This where we need to use a different approach to introduce the same subject matter. A word like terrorist or Muslim is recognizable. Image whether good or bad is still publicity. I learned this after making "Antim Ardas" in 2011. Its does not create enough intrigue if non-Punjabi speakers do not understand the meaning of Antim Ardas.

I am currently writing a feature (90 minutes) version of Antim Ardas and I might possibly call it "The Last Ardas", ''The Journeyer" or something else that would be relevant to story.

That is why my thought is to use either 'terrorist' or 'Muslim' which are by happenstance very relevant in this subject. Hope that made sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good initiative, in fact to do my little bit, I've been contemplating printing tshirts with a similar title. As I agree with pros and cons of both titles, why not replace Muslim and Terrorist with Al-Qaeda? Majority of the World through media has been brainwashed to think that anyone resembling Bin Laden is Al-Qaeda, aka Muslim/Terrorist. This way you are not offending all Muslims just the fanatics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a good initiative, in fact to do my little bit, I've been contemplating printing tshirts with a similar title. As I agree with pros and cons of both titles, why not replace Muslim and Terrorist with Al-Qaeda? Majority of the World through media has been brainwashed to think that anyone resembling Bin Laden is Al-Qaeda, aka Muslim/Terrorist. This way you are not offending all Muslims just the fanatics.

Thank you IderjitS Ji,

To be honest I have been thinking of the Al-Qeada tittle for last couple of days but Hezbollah, PLO and others are infamous too.

I am thinking on moving on with research and work. Perhaps some inspiration may come during that.

I also thinking on starting a dialogue locally and hear what they have to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you IderjitS Ji,

To be honest I have been thinking of the Al-Qeada tittle for last couple of days but Hezbollah, PLO and others are infamous too.

I am thinking on moving on with research and work. Perhaps some inspiration may come during that.

I also thinking on starting a dialogue locally and hear what they have to say.

Hezbollah, PLO aren't that well-known. I agree with the brother above.

Go with "Dude, I am not Al Qaeda!" ...In this way, you'll be able to tell people that difference b/w Sikhs and Al Qaeda....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Stop talking about caste. That is anti-sikh of u to say " a rajput sikh has double duty". No, we are all Sikh and have the same duty as one body. I only included that because people wrongly assosciate being a Tarkhan with having a starched pagh. I am actually fully Jatt (I said Rajput cos my Massirji is one so my family has them too, all of which use starch). That's actually disgraceful to say that any one caste has more martial responsibility than the others and tells me you don't know much about Sikhi at all. And the only rlly famous Rajput Sikh I know of was Milkha Singh ji, who also wore a starched turban as you can see from his pictures. (shahi paggs are king based like rajputs, dumallas are the warrior ones like the soldiers. Since rajputs are both kings and warriors, they can easily fit into either but I'm actually jatt so this don't rlly concern me tbf)
    • Is that from Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj/Sikh Rehat Maryada? Cos if not then it doesn't apply to me (I'm a Sikh of the Guru and nobody else). Bro don't be stupid 'standing up will hurt your head'? Sachi? It's position of my shoulder blades when tying. Dumalla is very entry level turban (not hard to tie) but to pooni, pinch and accurately place larrhs on a Punjabi Style pagg like mine takes a long time for most. Dumalla is not a real pagg it is a DASTAR (Warrior style). A pagg is double patti stitched turban (short for Pagrri, a common man's turban style). But Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj said "tie your turban layer by layer" but he didn't say it has to be each day i don't think. Starched turbans are tied once and then hold shape to be worn again without retying for about a few weeks to a few months depending on how much mawa you use.  YES THEY GAVE THEIR LIFE FOR A TURBAN. I WOULD TOO. I HAVE ONE, I TIE ONE AND I EVEN TAKE THE EXTRA STEP OF STARCHING IT. A STARCHED TURBAN IS NO LESS A TURBAN THAN ONE TIED EVERY DAY.   Also I've read your content you like to act like a warrior and all so how about this: in today's world, nobody has swords on the street. An attack on a Singh today is likely gonna be a racist trying to remove ur pagg.  If it gets knocked off or unwound then ur screwed. But a starch turban can be called a "warrior turban" imo cos they prolly won't fall off but if they do then you can just put it on again. Same if you witness an assault or stn outside ur house at night you can put the pagg on and run to help (like a sant sipahi) instead of going out Nanga Sirf in the night  
    • THIS QUESTION IS ABOUT UNARMED COMBAT, NOT SHASTAR VIDIYA (the science of WEAPONS). But let's pretend you didn't fail the first step of answering a question (to read it carefully): 1) Bro if that's not from Gurbani I don't wanna hear it. I ONLY accept hukam from the 10 Gurus of Sikhism and Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj. Not Bhindranwale, not anyone else and defo not 'Rattan Singh Bagghu' who lived in the 1700s wayy after Guru attained Joti Jot at Nanded (he's a historian). 2) Shastar Vidhaya actually means 'the science of weapons', but today ppl view it as literally the form of Nihang combat we see today. 'Preserve shastar vidiya' could just mean preserving the martial culture (which we do).
    • I know a Rajput Uncle who is a councillor and he wears the regular panjabi pagh. I wouldn't know he is a rajput because coul easily fit into any panjabi sikh or jatt background. But I can tell from his surname.  However when I look at proper Rajputs they were warriors and kings with those kind of paghs, similar to wearing dumallas or shahi turbans, some looked like Nihang Singhs! And Rajput background sikhs were involved in shastarvidiya training with Guru Hargobind and Guru Gobind Singh, as well as becoming their sikhs.    A rajput background sikh has double responsibilities to maintain turban and also training shastar. I think a Nihang Singh type look is more suitable for a sikh from Rajput background than any patiala shahi or average panjabi pagh
    • "Preserve Shastar Vidiya any way you can."(Rattan Singh Bhangu, Siri Guru Panth Parkash, ed. Dr Balwant Singh Dhillon, 36)
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use