The birthplace of Islam is in Arabia. In Arabic, this word, Fitna , is said to be difficult to translate – but Wikipedia (not the end-all for learning, but an awesome place to start) explains is as “all-encompassing word referring to schism, secession, upheaval and anarchy at once”. It also notes that ‘First Fitna‘ and ‘Second Fitna’ are terms used to describe the first and second ‘civil wars’ within Islam itself.
Even though many people are not aware of this, the most populous Muslim country is Indonesia. In Indonesian, the term ‘Fitnah’ means ‘defamation, slander, libel’…
Is it not fitting, then, that Geert Wilders chose this word as the name for his very controversial documentary movie? It may be his 15 minutes of fame (that is the duration of the movie), but it has certainly created a bit of an uproar.
Even prior to the movie’s release, individual Dutch people made little videos, to put onto YouTube, apologizing to the Muslim ummah (world family) and begging them to please not kill them because of it. Really. But, it would not be long and others would post ‘apologies‘ that are somewhat more imbued with deeper meanings…
But that is not all – Network Solutions, the company which was going to host the movie, even before the movie came out, pulled the site. Sorry, decied to ‘investigate it’! And all before the movie even came out! And when the movie finally DID come out, it was quickly pulled, because of threats of violence against the employees of Liveleak.com, the company that hosted it.
So, WHAT is so horrible about Fitna, the movie? Don’t let anybody tell you – see it for yourselves: Part 1, Part 2.
And what is the POINT of it, anyway?
In my never-humble-opinion, the name of the movie says it all. There is a war of ideas WITHIN Islam. The Umma is being torn apart by very powerful forces. And this movie, it is meant to be an exposition for the moderate Muslims, who wish to live in harmony with the rest of us, a wake up call to them: these violent people, who themselves believe they are following the teachings of the Qur’an, they are the ones who bear false witness to your faith!!! And you are the only ones who can set it right.
It is not, nor do I think it was ever meant to be, an indictment of all Muslims. Not even a little bit. Yet, it is meant to show how some Muslims are abusing their holy book, taking verses out of context (which they do in order to justify the violence), and how they are perverting their religion. It is no coincidence that so many violent riots happened on Friday afternoons, after some men pretending to be religious men, and acting as Imams, used their perverted version of Islam to inflame hatred in their worshippers.
That is why, at the end of the movie, the filmmaker asks all ‘real’ Muslims to please reclaim their good and peaceful religion from these violent people who consider themselves to also be Muslims!
Christians have had the same problem, and, to a great degree, they HAVE taken their religion away from the violent people who used it to make war and oppress people. The filmmaker made this movie to show proper Muslims what is being done in the name of THEIR religion, and to ask THEM to do them same with Islam.
Or, do you think I am really off the mark?
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 
April 8, 2008 at 01:17
Well, I guess the way he asked all real moslems to reclaim their good and peaceful religion from those violent people, as you said, is unacceptable. As a matter of fact, he’s amplifying hatred from those few people to the rest of Moslems, most of the intelectual ones cope with it peacefully though.
When we want to put forward a opinion about something, we have to know all about the issue, not a bit of it nor even a half of it, and Wilders DOESN’T.
Thanks
April 8, 2008 at 12:59
‘Unacceptable’?
In what sense?
In the sense that ‘too bad that he feels threatened by the radicalized minority of Muslims’?
Or in the sense that ‘he ought to be censored’?
Because just as differring beliefs (yes, even religious ones) HAVE TO be acceptable, does is freedom of expression. And, as long as Wilders limits his actions to speaking, writing, making movies – in other words, as long as he stays within the secular law, his actions ARE and MUST REMAIN acceptable.
Thouhg, I agree. It is unacceptable that the actions of a few frighten so many.
January 22, 2009 at 13:32
[…] In defense of Free Speech: Geert Wilders January 22, 2009 — xanthippa This is NOT about Geert Wilders, or about his movie Fitna. […]