I just watched Dutch right-winger, Geert Wilders' film, Fitna, The Movie. He had promised it to be too shocking, too frightening, too disturbing and much of the world was holding its breath in morbid, anxious, wait for its release. The media feared rabid violence by those Muslims.
My initial reaction is a yawn. No surprise, of course. The soundtrack is Tchaikovsky's mellow classical piece called "Arab Dance." Quick tip to future demagogues: when trying to incite riots, try not to use musical pieces that are based on Georgian lullabies. Quick tip to future Islamophobes: when trying to demonize Islam, try not to use elements of Western culture that are inspired by Arabs and Muslims as that reveals that Muslims have something positive to contribute to the world.
Anyone who has seen terrorist propaganda films is familiar with most of the scenes and most of the disgusting conflations of the Quran with acts of violence, murder, kidnapping and anti-Semitism. Such behavior has been condemned resoundingly among Muslims. Those that use the Quran for illegitimate and criminal ends should be punished by the fullest extent of the law.
What I'm really wondering: is Wilders' protesting against Islam or the monopoly extremists already have over grainy, low-budget, YouTube videos? The only difference I see is that Wilders plays the best of Western classical music -- an insult to the legacy of Tchaikovsky -- than death chants. I guess the thing he can be credited with is upping the sound quality. Also the transubstantiation of "Fitna" into "Fin" at the end was pretty cool.
The rest of the film is a mixture of conflating the most painful and heart-wrenching images from terror-strikes with extremist imams, in an effort to turn the entirety of Islam into a demonic edifice. This is neither new, nor interesting. It is a facile trick for facile minds. Cartoons show more a more subtle grasp of the human condition.
What the film really shows to me is that when it comes to challenging Islamism, Wilders is completely lost. He reminds me of those socially awkward, marginalized, introverted children in a school-yard whose solution to persecution at the hands of a bully is to write the bully's name in his notebook and then rip up the page.
If Wilders really wanted to expose Islamism -- the entire legacy of 20th century ideological Islam -- he would start with how the French Suez Canal Company funded the Muslim Brotherhood's first mosque. That fact is casually mentioned in Hasan al-Banna's autobiography (which I am certain Wilders bothered to consult). Or Wilders would have tried to begin some criminal proceeding in the international criminal courts against those men who came up with the genius idea of encouraging disaffected Arab youth into going into Afghanistan and then gave them $1 billion in machine guns, bombs and stinger missiles to play with. Or Wilders could have expressed some outrage over the drafters of the new Iraqi constitution -- drafted in consultation with Western lawyers -- which makes Sharia the law of the land (a fact bemoaned by Iraqi feminists).
But Wilders isn't actually serious about challenging Islamism. He is concerned only about multiplying the number of times his name is pinged on Google. Couldn't he have taken solace in the fact that his name is pinged more than mine?
I can't be sure how the Islamist demagogues will spin this film. Presumably some of them will consider this a kind of frontal assault against their idiocy -- idiots recognize one another -- and begin agitations which the media will be too happy to cover. However, the fact is, a majority of Muslims are going to react to this film with the same kind of casual shrug of the shoulders that it deserves. If there are Muslims who wish to protest -- and I really don't see why its even necessary -- my advice for them is to emulate Hossein Nouri. He is the paraplegic painter who, during the Danish Cartoon Fiasco, painted a portrait of the Virgin Mary in front of the Danish embassy. Here is a picture of his marvelous work.
In terms of sheer originality, though, the best response to this film came from a friend of mine who watched the film -- and calling it a film is to abuse both the English language and the legacy of cinema -- on my computer with me.
"I could have masturbated in that time."
Follow Ali Eteraz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/eteraz
Many sites have taken it down (due to death threats by devout Muslims) but it can be viewed at www.faithfreedom.org.
View it and decide for yourself!
Wilder took Quranic quotes out of context or isolated quotes and manipulated them against violent images involving Muslims.
I could pull quotes from the Torah and the Bible and place them against videos of Israel soldiers using an 11 year old Palestinian girl as a human shield (this happened and there's video of it) and videos of nut job Christians blowing up clinics, shooting doctors or spewing hate on the MSM.
You're asnine questions are disingenuous and you're not interested in having a real conversation with anyone otherwise you wouldn't post one comment after another with your own ignorance and paranoia and Islamophobia.
There are 1.4 BILLION Muslims, ruminate on that for awhile and don't post again until your mind opens and some intelligence gets in.
I don't blame you. The world is rife with meatheads who don't "get it". The world has plenty of people who know exactly what and who you are. Luckily, they are in the minority. With any luck, the individual will prevail.
The Dutch president himself called Wilders an instigator and a menace to his own nation; Wilder has caused two riots now and the Dutch just want him gone. You can not attack a group repeatedly and then wonder why they react and the Dutch gov't is aware of that Wilder is in large part responsible for the violence and tension.
Only the facists and nazis like him give his hate any credence.
Wilders is such a self hating racist that he even bleaches his hair blonde/orange which is originally brown to look more aryan.
All the hatefull, paranoid Americans gravitate towards him like flies on sh*t.
{7:159}Among the followers of Moses there are those who guide in accordance with the truth, and the truth renders them righteous
there are many chapters in the Quran that says nice things about Jews and christians too , and it does not talk about killing them because of thier faith but it says to kill anyone in self Defense only .
NO you have it wrong , the Quran does not talk about suicide bombing , NOR genital mutiliation , nor Honor Killing either . Yes those things are found in Islamic (and NON islamic communities too ) but no where to be found in the HOly book . Shikhs and Hindus do honor killings , the Japanase and the Khmer rouges did the suicide bombings , many Chritians in Jordan and egypt still do the honor killing too , and many Christian African nations also do the Genital mutiliation (not found in Algeria , Morocco, Lebanon , Syria , yemen , Oman , Bahrain , saudi Arabia etc.. ) it is an african tradition .
"I could have masturbated in that time."
===
Has he considered running for governor of New York?
Islam is an ideology that flies in the face of universal human rights. There is no disguising the fact that Islam seeks to supress women, kill Jews and gays, and kill followers who decide to leave. On top of that this is a 'culture' that practises genital mutilation, honour killing, and suicide bombing. The freedoms we enjoy in the West are not a 'default condition'. They were hard won by the lives of our forebears. Islam is the opposite of freedom. That 's why we are at war.
Here are some facts big guy:
In the past several years along, more people have been killed by America then all Muslim acts of terrorism combined.
The criminals in the white house responsible for deaths of almost 1 million people are Zionists, both Christian and Jewish: Bush, Condi, Chertoff, Wolfowitz etc.
Genital mutilation is an African tribal practice, nothing to do with Islam.
Honour killings are disgusting however, more women are murdered in the USA by their spouses every year then in honour killings. Domestic violence is domestic violence and transcends all religions and political spheres.
"Islam is the opposite of freedom. That's why we are at war"
Wow. So you're at war with 1.4 billion people? You're in a religious war?
You are most clearly a religious fanatic yourself and most obviously a Christian Zionist Evangelical extremist.
Your' comments are disgusting and offensive, ignorant and just more hate and fear mongering.
"You are most clearly a religious fanatic yourself and most obviously a Christian Zionist Evangelical extremist."
Sorry to disappoint you but I'm actually an atheist. So back off Boobaloo..
The shrill noise you make misses another crucial point: islamophobia (fear of islam... I won't accept the cod-analytical game of re-casting it as 'hatred') is a perfectly rational stance.
I seriously doubt he needs three bodyguards 24 hours around tthe clock. I know he has them but I wonder if the threat is substantial. Afshin Ellian is a more outspoken critic of Islam (with far better arguments) and he needs no police protection at all. As far as I know he gives lectures at Leiden without problems,
I assume you haven't read and heard all of Wilders statements by comparing him to Monty Python. It is like comparing apples with bananas. MP was funny, witty, sarcastic and intelligent. GW is just an angry and paranoid man who lies. He has said nobody will show his film while it was him who refused to show it beforehand to the TV stations or to go into debate. The film has been shown now on all Dutch media with people debating its arguments. Also his film is not satirical, his intentionis are very clear: Muslims can only be part of the Dutch society if they become atheists or Christians, otherwise they cannot enjoy any of our freedoms, even if they are law-abiding citizens. I do not accept that.
I was not comparing Wilders to the Monty Python team in any way other than that they have both been accused of offending religoius sensibilities. Plenty of recent critiques (and insults) of Christianity have been published or displayed, and none have resulted in death threats or the need for police protection. That you can name one critic of islam who apparently needs no protection is not the point: I doubt that naming him would have provided much comfort to Rushdie, or to the family of Theo van Gogh. Who threatened Rushdie? Who killed van Gogh?
His point is not the one you want it to be. It is this: muslims are welcome to enjoy any of the freedoms of the West, as long as they do not seek to curtail them. It is interesting that muslims have greater freedom in the West (and in Israel) than in any muslim country in the world - yet are ready to abuse that freedom by threatening those who utter words they don't want to hear.
Wow, racists will do anything to avoid admiting what they are: hateful racists.
By definition fear is IRRATIONAL.
Nobody talks about why wasn't the film broadcasted on Dutch TV. Any TV station would ask to see your film before airing it and Wilders-looser refused to show it to the producers beforehand. Even the Muslim public broadcaster offered to show it on their air time if Wilders was to appear afterwards in a debate and HE REFUSED. Basically they offered him a space to excercise his freedom of speech but he doesn't like Muslims...
Now, about the film, it is just a poorly done pamphlet. And it has blunders:
- The use of the Danish cartoon was not authorized by the cartoonist. Kurt Westergaard just called Wilders a thief in an interview on Dutch TV.
- Wilders changed some words on the verses ( I believe soerat 8, vers 60 does not say 'terrorize')
- The image he uses of Van Gogh's killer is actually a Moroccan raper. Proof that xenophobes think that all Muslims look and act the same?
Now, I am an atheist but this film really insults my intelligence: it is not about the Quran, I mean it is a huge book and the film only shows all the videos we all know from the news! Really lame.