Protesting “Fitna”
Filed under: General News — Michael van der Galien, Editor-in-Chief on March 31, 2008 @ 6:00 pm CEST
Since “Fitna” could have been produced by Al Qaeda, one wonders when those - ironically often fundamentalist - Muslims who are protesting against the movie, and calling on business and countries to boycott all products originating from the Netherlands, will protest against Muslim extremists.
“Fitna” distorts Islam. It cherrypicks from the Koran, and ignores verses that are peaceful, as I’ve documented in my review of this movie produced by Dutch MP Geert Wilders. It certainly does.
But why in the world would Muslims boycott Dutch products? And what, in the world, should Muslims living in the Netherlands do according to Mahathir Mohamad? Should one boycott one’s own country? Is that even possible?
If “Fitna” distorts what Islam is truly about - and it most certainly does - why in the world am I the only one trying to tell people the truth? Most other analysts either endorse what Wilders has to say (they’re wrong obviously) or they’re explaining that it’s a horrible movie, that Wilders is a preacher of hate, and so on.
Perhaps people should explain why Wilders is wrong and stop pretending that Wilders speaks for Dutch society as a whole. Unlike what they’ve got in Malaysia we actually have something called the freedom of speech and individual responsibility. This means that no one speak for Dutch society as a whole - well, only the PM and the Queen do. An MP can say whatever he wants to, but he doesn’t speak for society as a whole. He speaks for himself (and then hopes that people will vote for him).
Boycotting Dutch products isn’t just ludicrous, it also makes those who may agree with your view (that “Fitna” distorts Islam) your enemies. If Malaysia and other so-called Muslim countries want to boycott Dutch products, well, why don’t we, the Dutch, do the exact same thing? Lets stop producing in those countries. Lets stop helping those countries out financially. Lets isolate them.
Because we’re a whole lot richer and better connected than the countries now threatening to boycott us. We’re small, but we’ve got influence and money. Lots of it.
Unlike the countries that now want to boycott us.
1 Mark Smith
March 31, 2008 @ 9:37 pm CESTHi
A few points:
1) You say "’Fitna’ distorts Islam. It cherrypicks from the Koran"
You do realise that Muslims believe in the doctrine of abrogation?
That means if the Quran gives contradictory revelations, the later revelation stands. And it is the case, that the Median suras (the war-like suras) came later than the Meccan suras (the peaceful suras). Sura 9 is said to be penutimate sura revealed to Muhammad and all non-Muslims should read it. Sura 9:5 is said to abrogate 124 peaceful verses (ayas).
2) Everyone should ask themselves whether Muhammad was an Islamist or jihadist or salafist. And if the answer is "yes he was", how do you expect moderateness to ever arise of Islam? And the answer is "yes he was", the moment he consolidated his power base at Medina.
3) I dont see that Fitna distorts Islam. The first 4 Caliphs after Muhammads death were Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman & Ali. They were men who having lived in the time of Muhammad, could not possibly misunderstood him. Yet in their time, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Morocco, Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Sicily were invaded, plundered, non-Muslim women raped and the population put to the sword. That was their understanding of Islam. And shortly after France was invaded and Spain was subjected to Muslim rule for 800 years. The Christian Crusades, a response to this lasted a maximum of 197 years. In contrast, there were repeated raids by Muslims on Europe for at least 1081 years. Europeans have forgotten this. They need to remember.
The film Fitna is consistent with Muhammads later messages after Medina, consistent with Hadiths from Salih Bukhari and Salih Muslim, consistent with Ibn Ishaks Sirat, consistent with history (particularly in the time of the first four Caliphs) and consistent with the 4 schools of Islamic jurisprudence.
I would invite you to look at the following Hadith by Salih Muslim:
Book 019, Number 4294:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/019.smt.html
and note that if non-Muslims do not wish to become Muslims not pay a tax to Muslims (jizya), then it commands Muslims to "If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah’s help and fight them"
So your analysis is faulty. You see what you want to see.
It is like Neville Chamberlain in 1938. A study of the Quran, Hadiths, Sirat and history will confirm that Islam is totalitarian and I mean Islam not Islamism. The fact that many Muslims are decent human beings is because they are not following their religion.
Mark Smith
2 Michael van der Galien
March 31, 2008 @ 9:39 pm CESTMark. Read my review.
3 Caspar ter Horst
April 2, 2008 @ 10:24 am CESTThe trouble is that there is no visual statement against the fitna. If fitna is the word for polarisation, individualism, not understanding, then nofitna shall be the word for understanding, cooperation even peace. With NOFITNA you can show you have your heart on the right place. It is not about politic or religion just about a personal statement. I felt the need to say something.Caspar