Two Reviews of “Fitna”
Below follow two reviews of Geert Wilders’ anti-Islam film, “Fitna.” One is written by PoliGazette’s Claudia, the other by Michael van der Galien.
The two reviews you will read below have been written independently of each other. I have not seen Michael’s review before writing mine and likewise he wrote his without knowing mine. We have not discussed our thoughts on the film, so no attempts have been made to balance the reviews. This is intentional, to make them truly independent of one another.
REVIEW BY CLAUDIA
I started with this film with a surprise. I had thought it would be a full length feature, not a short 15 minute film. Two reactions came instantly to mind. First was “All this fuss, heightened terror alert, official diplomatic protests etc. etc. for 15 lousy minutes?!” After that was “There is no WAY you can cover the complexity of the issue in so little time”.
In fact the film clearly has no wish to delve into complexity of any sort, academics; historical, theological or geopolitical. It is 100% an appeal to emotion. That does not mean it isn’t powerful. It’s basically a montage of some of the most shocking, gruesome and tragic images and sounds caused by Islamic terrorism, with very violent passages from the Koran every so often. The conversation of a woman in the towers with a 911 operator “I’m going to die, I know I am”. A woman in 
s a second explosion occurs, followed by mangled images of the Madrid victims, images that even I as a Spaniard had never seen. On to tiny children calling Jews “pigs” or marching in military formation, on and on.
I’d be lying if I said it didn’t affect me, I don’t think almost anyone could remain indifferent. The film is basically an infomercial against Islam. The message is that Islam is violent by nature, it demands absolute submission, and it does and will use any means necessary to dominate others.
My problem is that I think that the argument of Islam being inherently violent is not convincing. They take some verses that are very vicious yes. Want vicious?
“And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.”
“Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.”
Both these gems, as you can imagine, are from the Bible. Yet somehow Christians and Jews are not ordinarily associated with unspeakable violence of that nature. As a nonbeliever, much more important than what your holy text SAYS is how your faithful ACT.
Herein lays the problem. Islamic extremism is real. Islam is different from Christianity and Judaism in that the extreme wing is far more numerous, does much more harm, and finds much more comfort in the authorities of the religion. Discounting Islamic terrorists as mere crazies who are not “true Muslims” ignores the problem that DOES exist mainly within the Muslim world. Islamic extremism is real, as those horrible images so starkly remind us.
Wilders ruins his message by trying to make you believe that all Muslims, in their hearts, are extremists. This is pure bigotry, as vile as any the extremists themselves can dish out. In fact, the film itself doesn’t send any new messages, only reinforces the old; Islamic extremism is anathema to our way of life, to our values, and it must be fought. In fact the film doesn’t accomplish that half as well as the enormous fuss that has surrounded its production and release. I didn’t learn anything new from the film, but did learn from the events surrounding it. Only Wilders himself knows if that was actually the point all along.
REVIEW BY MICHAEL VAN DER GALIEN
When I heard on the Dutch news that Geert Wilders had put his film “Fitna” online, I ran to my computer in an attempt to find it; I was overly curious. A lot had been said about “Fitna” before it was even made. Once Wilders started working on it in honest, Muslim organizations and Dutch government officials warned that Wilders’ movie could result in riots, and bloodshed.
Even though nobody had seen the movie yet. They only knew what Wilders told them: that he was going to make a short film in which he would attempt to prove that Islam is an inherently violent religion.
So I ran to my computer and watched “Fina.”
And was disappointed tremendously.
Why was I disappointed? Well, firstly it was less controversial than the controversy surrounding it, that’s one. Of course this part is good; Wilders didn’t go too far. Which is also why there will not be any riots in the Netherlands, which is also a good thing.
More importantly, though, I was disappointed because although the movie is quite powerful in so far that Wilders knows how to express his view on Islam, “Fitna” is a gross distortion of what Islam truly is all about, and what it truly teaches.
In “Fitna,” Wilders constantly refers to the Koran. He has an imam quote violent passages of it, and then shows extremists Muslims carrying out terrorist attacks, or extremists Imams calling on the believers to fight the ‘infidels.’
However, Wilders basically makes the same mistake Osama Bin Laden et al. make.
What do I mean by that? Well, simple. Wilders and OBL do exactly the same thing: they read 10% of the Koran, and use it to ‘prove’ that the Koran can be used to excuse terrorism, and conveniently ignore the other 90% of Islam’s Holy Book. For instance, Wilders quotes verses from a particular Sura that says that Muslims should kill the unbelievers, who are the enemies of Islam / the Muslims.
That’s violent alright.
But he conveniently forgets to quote the verses before these violent verses. These verses before it say:
[8.56] Those with whom you make an agreement, then they break their agreement every time and they do not guard (against punishment).
[8.57] Therefore if you overtake them in fighting, then scatter by (making an example of) them those who are in their rear, that they may be mindful.
[8.58] And if you fear treachery on the part of a people, then throw back to them on terms of equality; surely Allah does not love the treacherous.
And then come the verses right after Sura 8 verse 60:
[8.61] But if the enemy incline towards peace, do you (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is the One that hears and knows (all things).
In other words: live in peace with non-Muslims, but when they attack you, fight back. Sure, that’s not quite the same as “turn the other cheek,” but it’s quite different than “kill infidels!” as well. In fact I dare say that this message is one we can all believe in: live in peace with everyone else, but when they attack you or your society, fight back. Isn’t that what we all do, and isn’t that what the war on terrorism is all about?
As said, it’s a political manifesto: Wilders wants to convince the viewer that Islam itself poses a threat to the West. Sadly for him, however, he can only make that case by ignoring the peaceful verses of Islam, and Islam’s long, peaceful and intellectual history.
Let me give another example: Wilders quotes certain Muslims saying bad things about Jews. That’s horrible to listen to. But he forgets to point out that the clash between early Muslims and Jews was just that: a clash. It was about a particular battle. More importantly: when Jews were persecuted and forced to convert in Europe, they were living safely in Muslim countries where they were free to practice their faith. If Wilders would have been honest about Islam, he would have mentioned this. That he didn’t tells us all we need to know about his intentions.
What “Fitna” does prove, or show, is that there is a serious extremist problem in the Muslim world. We already knew that, of course, but “Fitna” does show how the Koran is abused by extremists; how they defend their extremism and terrorism, and how some Imams in Muslim countries try to turn believers into haters.
The short interview of the young Palestinian girl is and will always be shocking: she’s completely indoctrinated. She has been taught to hate Jews, again based on a distorted and hateful version of Islam and the Koran.
Wilders could have used that interview, then, to point out how some Palestinians are indoctrinating their children. That quite a lot of people truly hate the West; not because Islam teaches such hatred, but because their leaders are copying and pasting from the Koran.
But that’s not what Wilders tries to do in “Fitna.” He doesn’t try to show that extremists form a very serious problem and danger and that they have to be fought no matter what, he tries to show that Islam forms a very serious problem and danger.
All in all, Wilders should be paid by Osama Bin Laden for helping him to spread his propaganda. Wilders does exactly what Bin Laden does and wants: to convince all Muslims that if they want to be good Muslims they have to be terrorists. The fact that he has to distort what Islam truly teaches and what the Koran truly says is irrelevant to Bin Laden and his ilk.
“Fitna” won’t convince anyone that Islam is inherently violent who wasn’t convinced of that already. Wilders’ case is weak. The film is so terribly one-sided, that even OBL himself couldn’t make a better propaganda film calling on Muslims to commit terrorism in the name of Islam.
So what “Fitna” proves isn’t that Islam and Western Democracy and freedom are polar opposites. It only proves that Wilders is dishonest and / or that he doesn’t know what Islam truly teaches.
As said: a disappointment.
Am not a moslem nor a christian. We are all not to belittle anyone’s belief. That’s extremely wrong. The casualties is abundance with any other party. Ask yourself who suffer. Because of that stupid movie, the people of Holland suffers. Isn’t it unfair?
Dear C Stanley,
If you can refer to the bible, please refer to Mathew 5:17 which says that Jesus did not caome to abolish the law, in fact He was the fullfulment of the Law!
Federico,
If that’s meant to rebut my point, then you obviously take a different interpretation of that scriptural quote than I do.
I’d like to tell all the people who are meaning to seperate extremist muslims from moderate muslim something I am investigating out of amusement and curiosity. I am an indian and brown skinned, but am an semi aethist semi christian, who was brought up as a staunch catholic. In the first week that I landed on western soil, when taking taxis etc. or just bumping into brown/muslim people they would immediately identify or want to think that I was a fellow muslim and sometimes I would play along just to know how they would treat a fellow muslim. This is one particular incident that happened in a cab. The driver asked me my name and since it could be interpreted as a muslim name he conveniently assumed that I was muslim and started talking at lengths how the american people are hypocrites, unethical, unlawful bigots and should be wiped away. He said it was upto younger generation like mine to carry out this work and work towards the spread of Islam in the west. He also thought that americans are weak and let "us" muslims easily carry out our mission cause their tolerance and freedom will bite them back one day. Well, after that I thought that maybe the taxi driver was an "extremist" and didnt dwell on that matter so much. I dont usually make friends or talk to people based on their religious identity. So, I went about making friends with muslims who consider themselves moderate and good. I learned slowly and passively from discussions with them that there are muslims, for instance osama bin laden who vile Islam and paint it in negative light. But at the same time, it was interesting to note that my very friends held similar ideas that if went unchecked would create terrorists in my own community. Given the power and weapons, I could imagine my very friends could turn into terrorists and wouldnt hesitate to kill me as well if i spoke against their religious ideas. One friend at such instance started swearing and calling hateful things about me even though I said I am sorry if I had offended him. The point I want to bring about here is that Wilders was right that there is something in the core of Islam that teaches its followers or inculcates in them different shades of violence towards western ideologies. People we will call moderate muslims are actually decieving the whole of the western world. They are just silently waiting till all their members are given power and authority in politics. The day will come when if there were elections and if an extremist muslim had to come to power, these very moderate and silent muslims will vote for them. And the rest of the tolerant world will be aghast by how these events will unfold. I understand what Wilders is trying to do… to make the west aware of what is sure to happen if they keep defending and being tolerant to muslims as they dont want to hurt their sentiments and want them to feel welcomed when they land as immigrants on their soil. I dont know if my comments came across the way I intended them to, but everyone who took the patience to understand my sometimes broken english and incorrect phrasing will understand what I am trying to say. In no way am i against Islam in any way, but I am begining to identify by experiences and discussions with "moderate" muslims that there is something inherent in the quran that lets terrorists and extremist muslims get away with what they are doing.
Your statement about Jews living in Muslim lands is simply not accurate. There was no one ‘clash’ involved.
Jews in Islamic countries were never more than ‘dhimmis’ - second class citizens with no legal rights whatsoever.
Islam calls upon its followers to kill Jews; indeed, it presents this course of action as a moral imperative. So your attempt to dismiss this is really quite astonishing.
There are hardly any ‘peaceful’ parts to the Quran. And while of course there are many moderate Muslims, where are their public protests against Islamic terrorism? Have you seen any?
I haven’t.
you all need to see this:
http://jibreelk.blogspot.com/2008/07/rebbuttal-to-fitnah-movie-must-watch.html
islam is not that bad…. and dont forget muslims are humans too, we want to live in peace. peace out.