Thread:جعفر أمل/@comment-31674709-20180710190717/@comment-31674709-20180724135632

There is a sultan in both stories, Jafar is the name given to the sultan in the movide adaptation.

And yes, the movie has some differences, but how relevant are they to become a conspiracy theory against the shias? None, there are also many different adaptations of another tales, no one can deny this, an Aladdin's differences are too irrelevant for it.

And yes, it was made during hot stuff in the Middle East, but that's like saying everything made during WW2 will be related to it, which is not. And it was pointless to make propaganda during 1992 because the economy was going bad and more military intervention was unnecessary.

I am not refusing to open my eye, i'm just closing my eye to avoid the blatlant ignorance that you are typing right there.

Could you imagine how ineffective was a 1992 animated cartoon to brainwash the population into thinking that another military intervention would be cool? Was it really popular the idea of that?

The movie was a success in adaptation, it received great reviews, yet there is no propaganda behind it, unless of course you like taking everything as propaganda, you judge things for merely trying to be subliminal in your eyes, but they're not.

I don't know who the heck teached you about Aladdin being propaganda, but let me tell you, it's not.

Talk 13:56, July 24, 2018 (UTC)