declined post does not contradict guidelines

That's interesting, because in that case, I would constitute that the IMDB rules and guidelines do not work. The review above that you quote informs me what I would have dearly liked to know before watching what is, truly, a hateful film. I would have really benefited from knowing that Dinesh Dsouza is an extremist and produces mulsim-hating films on a regular basis. I personally am not religious, but I prefer to avoid propaganda-type films. I wish that I had the opportunity to benefit from the warning before I watched the film. 

I do not understand why the Guidelines protect a person like Dinesh Dsouza, who clearly has a political-religious agenda, and censure intelligent watchers who understand what is going on. In my opinion, a film is for pleasure and enlightenment, on a wide variety of levels. 

PS - the film is described as Action, Adventure, Thriller, which is clearly  a very inadequate description.

While Dinesh D'Souza does take great care not to whitewash any terrible political situation antithetical to his special interest, he will exaggerate some things to the point of making false allegations, albeit unspecific of the identities of the supposed perpetrators (or motive bearers), effectively fear-mongering. He seems a bit more extreme about it than, say, Fox News.

Invariably there will be some places in the world in which a majority of crimes are committed by Muslims, but most civilized places in which Muslims make up a significant percentage of the ethnoreligious portion of the population, crimes committed by Muslims there are probably not disproportionate with the demographic composition there. That's merely a hypothesis on my, though. The actual situation could be better or worse.

Of the folks who harbor grievances against Muslims, I'm not sure what their focus on average is, but I focus more on criticizing Islam for its reverence of the tyrant Muhammad, while also criticizing the existence of draconian sovereign theocracies in the world, regardless of their espoused particular faith or lack thereof. I would prefer either that nobody subscribed to Islam or that Islam would be reformed so as to be less cruel toward outsiders and those unqualified for participation, less outdated concerning diet and hygiene, but I cannot and ought not force my way. Just to be clear, that's not to say that there is no merit at all in Islam. All of the major faiths have some merit. (Certain beliefs and customs about diet and hygiene are shared by Judaism, Catholicism and Islam alike, and many of the outdated practices could theoretically be key to healthy living in the event of yet another dark age occurring.) However, as I understand it, some Muslim communities embrace their subscription to Islam as if it was more of a cult than a faith, and this probably happens to a degree with all faith-oriented (or superstition-oriented) cultures, but Islamic civilizations do seem to be the very slowest to abandon barbaric institutions. I know that what I've expressed is probably going to offend somebody, but sometimes these things have to be expressed. Hopefully nobody would want to see my life ended over what I've expressed. Unfortunately that is a legitimate concern of anybody who criticizes Muhammad.

Throughout the past decade, I do remember observing news reports about law enforcement agencies neglecting to investigate but eventually busting "gangs" of Muslim men of Pakistani ethnicity/origin for raping young girls (or for grooming young girls to that effect, along with conspiracy) in the Rochdale and Huddersfield, in England. Some of these news reports used vague (perhaps politically-correct) descriptions of the offenders, in the sense of referring to them as "Asian men". That kind of stuff I do find very disappointing.

In the United States, the situation doesn't seem to involve "no go" zones, and a few incidents have been severe enough to get the attention of news outlets. There is no recognizable pattern beyond the offenders fitting the demographic profile of Muslim male refugee. Here I referred to offenders as "males" instead of specifically men, because there was an incident in Twin Falls, Idaho, whereby two boys under the age of fourteen years raped a five-year-old girl at knife point, while a third boy video-recorded it. Reportedly, two of the offenders are from Sudan, and one from Iraq. I've not been able to acquire followup information about that particular case, but my suspicion is that the oldest of the offenders influenced or outright coerced the participation of the two several-years-younger offenders, and regardless, it could be a signal of brainwashing, indoctrination or neglect on the part of the legal guardians or beyond. (There is no indication that any of the boys are orphans, so they were probably in the custody of biological relatives who would also be refugees.) Supposedly, the police and prosecutors stumbled in properly resolving the case, and city officials and journalists there were alleged to have tried to cover up the national origin of the offenders. However, the various news articles are somewhat conflicting, as some use the word "refugee" to describe the boys, whereas others use the word "immigrant". That is problematic because those words do not carry the same meaning, since a refugee is somebody intended only to be temporarily invited into a sanctuary/asylum, whereas an immigrant is somebody who is or intends to become a citizen of the nation inhabiting his or her new location. (I do suppose, however, that such a thing as a non-citizen immigrant could exist in a complicated federal-structured place like the United States.) The homicide committed by Mohamed Noor, who was a Minneapolis police officer at the time, and on-duty enforcing "the law", did gain some small amount of mass media attention. Due to the lack of extensive coverage, the two aforementioned incidents naturally seem to be isolated incidents, and as Americans know, people belonging to all kinds of demographics commit all sorts of crimes in the United States. The Federal Bureau of Investigation tracks or so tries to track statistics concerning violent crime throughout the United States. One of the thing that most interests me is how much more crime males commit than females do, all around the whole world, all throughout history.

Listen, we very much need to end this tangential conversation, since it starting to have nothing at all to do with the content of IMDb, not even particular movies produced by Dinesh D'Souza. As we can see, I seem to have completely gone off the rails here.

A clear example of double standards on the part of the person or people who accept / disprove reviews.

It looks to me like the person who approves / disapproves the posts is heavily biased and shows a very clear favouritism. That feels very unpleasant to me. 

Why would a moderator approve things like 'god bless america' and 'iran is a terrible country' etc and not approve a post i submitted stating that a film is biased in nature, and therefore fundamentally flawed. 

It is bizarre to me that such one-sided moderating exists. If this is any indication of how the site is moderated then I see little point in submitting reviews. 

@Karen_P 
Ha ;)
You are very patient, thank you for your diligent posting and answers. You (would) make a good forum moderator.

From what I see = you are surprised that I said I found the post which stated that "Dinesh Dsouza is an extremist and produces Muslim hating films on a regular basis" valuable, or informative. I do, actually, not to put a too fine point on it, value that information. Based on what I saw in the film, that is a true statement, as opposed to being 'propaganda'. If I had known that, I would not have had to watch what is, after, a very bad film.

I am not sure it matters whether or not I agree or disagree with that reviewer's statement. Any objective film watcher / critic would quickly surmise that the film is a one-sided story.  My point is that the 'review' is 'true' and thus a 'fact'.

I am surprised that you think I promote a cancel culture. In fact, it is Dsouza who is trying to 'cancel' an entire religion, of more than one billion people. That Dsouza is a propagandist  appears to be an accurate statement, although more people than him were involved in the film. I believe the statement Dsouza is a propagandist because I watched the film Infidel. I went into it thinking it was presumably a "good" film. About a third or half of the way through, it dawned on me that the film is extremely biased and has a very specific agenda, besides entertainment. When I watch an action thriller film i want to be entertained, not proselytized You probably haven't seen the film. I don't recommend that you do ;)

Perhaps this becomes a circular argument. But how would you otherwise propose alerting potential viewers of what they should arguably know. 

I completely agree with you that 'cancel' culture is short-sighted and teenage behavior at best.

Yes, absolutely. I admit that I had not really paused to consider. The complications which quickly ensued have left my head spinning. I would not have thought it so much of a reach to simply comment about something, let alone begin to dissect the structural shortcomings of a film. I was not expecting to be out-played by a moderator / gate-keeper who would deign my commentary insufficiently neutral, whilst waving flag-wavers on through a different gate. I must have bought the wrong pass.

My main frustration is simply that the problematic aspect is the ability to comment. And that the person or organisation making the decision displays such flagrant double-standards. That and the 'category' of the film. Let alone the contents of my response or opinion. I'm not so much an adherent to the 'shouting people down' school of thought.

The greatest irony for me here is that great films, alongside books, are one of the essential beacons of hope civilisation has to offer. They expose all types of essential truth, subvert power structures, etc. So that to be muzzled on a forum for films is confounding.

I suppose it was also naive to comment on the shortcomings of a mockumentary - as opposed to a science fiction film.

I do very much like your technically oriented solution. As if there were facts within facts.