Top of this document
Go directly to navigation
Go directly to page content

Fitna the Movie

We’re tired of waiting. So, let’s do it ourselves! Sorry!

There is this not-so-intelligent Dutch politician that attracts attention by doing populist provocations. His name is Wilders. Geert Wilders.

He is scared of aliens and especially of muslim aliens. He attracts votes of people that are scared of Islam too. To get more votes, he tries to scare more people. And now he's suggesting to release a movie called “Fitna” that's radically critical towards islam. This hits an open nerve in Dutch media of course. We all remember how our favourite asshole cinematographer Theo was slaughtered like a pig in the street after making “Submission” with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Only by implication, this artificially blonde embarrassment claims death defying heroism! It is sooo embarrassing to be Dutch some times. I’m sorry.

So here's what we do: We all make our own “Fitna” movies. As many as possible. (see also: Fitna.nu

Why? Well we can't stop Wilders. He has a right to freedom of expression and he is smart enough to stay within the boundaries of Dutch law. Actually, we do not want to stop his movie because we cherish our freedom of expression. Even stupid populist politicians have fundamental rights. Especially they!

We can compete for attention however. And we can produce disinformation. So we are going to make Movies called “Fitna” in which we apologise for Geert Wilders embarrassing behaviour. We will make so many of them that it will be hard to find the movie by Wilders without finding lots of movies apologising for it.

Just to let the world (and ourselves) know that allowing confused people to speak does not mean that we agree with what they say. Sorry.

So if you want to join in; just make your own Fitna movie and put it on line. Put on a blonde wig, look cross eyed and say you’re sorry. Film it with you telephone or camera. Then, publish it on line as many times as you can, Youtube, Hyves, Myspace any place. Call it Fitna by Geert Wilders. Add any statement that you like to. Link to your movie and to other movies you like from your blogs and websites. Sorry!

Let’s smother this Wilders in our apologies. If we work hard enough, no one will be able to find his crap among all the noise we produce. And the world knows how we feel about Wilders and his opportunism.

WE’RE SORRY!

And we are proud to live in a country where we have all inherited freedom of speech. Lets cherish it. Let's defend Wilders' rights to his opinions and to his ways of making politics! Remember that Bento Spinoza, one of earliest of the great thinkers about religion and free speech, was ousted by his community of religious immigrants. His zealot family was tolerated here in the Low Lands and Spinoza was tolerated here too. More than 3 centuries of preciously negotiated tolerance. That is a very big treasure!


Go to YouTube and get inspired by several "Fitna" movies!


Sorry... this film was removed by YouTube 'due to terms of use violation'. Copyright on the portrait? Therefore, don't use the real portrait of Wilders but make up your own. And have a look at the film anyway click here!

Contributions 
Comments (20)

WELDONE Edwin de Nies !

I completely support views of Edwin de Nies;
And for those who oppose, i.e. Thomas, Bastiaan Brak, Hans van Wijk, Bob Newhart, Drew Alexander and Especially John Lockhard: I am not even sorry to say it but you guys are completely Narrow Minded, Stupid and BrainWashed!!!
Instead of educating yourself through various and independant resources, including the websites for newly converted muslims, and complete reading of the Holly Koran, where you can understand the principles of Islam, which have nothing to do with violence or terror!
You simply zombified yourself with anti Islamic propaganda from jihadwatch and similar perverted medias!!!

,
8 Dec 2010,5:35

Great Article

Hm, probably no one will read here anymore - but anyways:
richarddawkins.net/article,2531,Losing-Our-Spines-to-Save-Our-Necks,Sam-Harris

This analysis by Sam Harris just brings it to the point.
"The position of the Muslim community in the face of all provocations seems to be: Islam is a religion of peace, and if you say that it isn't, we will kill you."

Thomas
,
10 May 2008,16:26

Dissent does NOT require an apology

Why apologise?

How can I apologise for an act over which I had no control and no responsibility? Muslim scholars who condemned atrocities committed in Islam's name have almost always been ignored categorically by the news sources that are readily available (i.e the free newspapers that are being distributed in the public transport system) to the vox populi. It is only through discussions on Internet fora that I became aware of these statements. However, I haven't seen any statement made by Muslim scholars go so far as to apologise for terrorism in the name of Islam. I do not have the desire to demand such an apology as it is of no pragmatic use and intellectually a firm and clear condemnation is of much higher value.

It is my stern believe no such initiative would have arisen had Christianity been attacked in this way. This begs the question if there is perhaps a connection between the proven eagerness to use violence by elements of the side addressed in Fitna and the response this invokes in some of it’s potential victims. In other words, should this not be classified under the ‘Stockholm syndrome’ umbrella?

These 'Sorry' videos have to be regarded as mere wishy-washy empty vessels failing to address both the shortcomings of and the real issues that underlie the Fitna movie.

www.flickr.com/photos/tico_bassie/2387933499/

Bastiaan Brak
,
6 Apr 2008,15:58

Stupid!

Its so stupid to say sorry for a politician! I don't see moslims saying sorry for Osama or any other terrorist, politician or whatever.

This is democracy welcome to it. You don't have to agree with him but saying sorry for a dodgy movie is a little bit sad if you ask me...
Just don't vote for the guy that's your right.. hopefully he will never end up being a prime minister.

Hans van Wijk
,
31 Mar 2008,19:10

Stupid!

Its so stupid to say sorry for a politician! I don't see moslims saying sorry for Osama or any other terrorist, politician or whatever.

This is democracy welcome to it. You don't have to agree with him but saying sorry for a dodgy movie is a little bit sad if you ask me...
Just don't vote for the guy that's your right.. hopefully he will never end up being a prime minister.

Hans van Wijk
,
31 Mar 2008,19:08

Ever think?

"Why is it, that anti-Muslims always base their arguments on quotes from the Koran? "

...!

Mambo Bananapatch
,
29 Mar 2008,0:30

Reply on your mail

Dear John Lockhart,

You’re welcome. :)
I do feel concerned about the extremist exponents of the Islam, mind you. But I also feel we’re only feeding those emotions by condemning the Islam and the Islamic community as a whole.
I myself refuse to give up my humanity. I refuse to become aggressive as long as my own life and beliefs are not in danger.
As for Mr. de Ruyter, I have not put any research into him, but as I have understood he (like many other Dutch ‘heroes’) has fought most of his fights far from home. Christians in general have a long tradition of ‘liberating’ the world by force themselves. In that respect Christians are no better (nor worse, mind you) than Muslims. They have spread all over the world to bring enlightenment and they haven’t hesitated using violence to do so. I assume that I don’t have to point out the situation in Northern Ireland.
This is another reason for my rejection of the three religions (Christianity, Islam and Judaism): they all propagate peace, yet throughout history people have murdered each other without regret in the name of god.

From what I have gathered, Jihad is one of the most controversial concepts of the Islam. It can be interpreted in many ways and moderate Muslims consider it to be the battle against evil within. So, rather than fighting other people, it is the fight against the bad thoughts and emotions any human being has.

Again, the Bible too envisions a social framework which is out of date. The Bible too can be read as propagating the suppression of women. In fact, there a re plenty of Christian communities (even political parties in the Netherlands) where women are not allowed to participate.

Edwin de Nies
,
27 Mar 2008,10:09

Why hate and fear at all?

Dear Mr. Lockhart,

Why is it, that anti-Muslims always base their arguments on quotes from the Koran? Quotes that have been taken completely out of their context. Why is it ok to interpret thoughts that have been put in writing centuries ago as if they should be read literally?
Anyone who takes some time can find evenly violent phrases in the Bible. But no, we, we Christians are civilized, aren’t we? When judging Christians we use different criteria, we don't attack Christianity based on just a few quotes from the Bible.
Again, I don’t deny the fact that there are religious lunatics out there. And I condemn terrorism just as much as you do. I don’t deny that there are cultural differences.
But rather than basing my opinion on phrases like the ones you quote, I prefer to look at reality. And reality in my experience is much more differentiated than those literal texts. In reality I myself have never met a fundamentalist Muslim. On the contrary, the Muslims I have met are humans just like me. And of course, there are nice Muslims and there are pain in the bud Muslims. Like there are nice Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists, etc.
Any act of terror or violence should be prosecuted and punished. Let there be no doubt about that. But in a civilized country (which we claim to be) an entire religious movement should not be blamed for the actions of a couple of mad individuals.

As for your plea in support of Wilders. To you it may seem as if he is only pointing out certain aspects of the Koran. The fact is, that Mr Wilders is on a crusade. Like already stated above, one can find violent phrases in any holy book. Hell, there are plenty of books propagating voilence. Mr Wilders is not a literal critic, he is a politician. If he wants to criticize books, he should take on a different profession.

I am prejudiced towards any religion, Mr Lockhart. Religions try to tell me how and what to think and personally I rather think for myself. But I don’t deny anyone the right to follow some religion, as long as I don’t suffer from it. An truth is, that I have not suffered from the Islam or any other religion in the Netherlands.
Honest information? Pure, objective information is a utopia. Why should I value www.jihadwatch.org higher than www.alislam.org/? To me they both are just sources of information.

Last, I cherish the right to freedom of speech as much as I cherish the first article of the Dutch constitution. So no, I am not in favour of preventing the movie to be shown. But that doesn’t mean I like Mr Wilders’ ideas.

Edwin de Nies
,
27 Mar 2008,9:43

@ Edwin

Edwin de Nies wrote: Typical “bushist”-replies: if you’re against Wilders than you must be for radical Muslims.

I wonder who said that - I don't see it here. Perhaps I've overread it. But how you should understand it: If you want to prevent this movie from showing, before you even know whats in it, then you are for cencorship. I can not take your side on that.

We have to ask why you do it. One reason that we can read here, is that it might get Dutch or Europeans in danger. But IMO thats the price we have to pay for our freedom. If we back down, then their tactics of intimidation and violence worked.

The second argument you see a lot is that he is insulting religion. IMO most religions have to at least allowed to be thouroughly evaluated and argumented against. Especially if so much violence comes from it. Christians obviously can deal with that evaluation much better - so why create a double standard for the extremist Muslims? Their violent reaction to things like mere carricatures is ridicules: stupid and barbarian.

The last argument I've seen is that Wilders movie is something like Hate-Speech and Nazi Propaganda. Things like that are forbidden - and Wilders said that movie would not break a law. And judging from what I heard from him so far, I think we can believe him. But first of all: It's not even out yet, so you can't and should not judge it before you seen it. Sounds obvious to me.

Btw: Thanks Drew :)

Thomas
,
26 Mar 2008,22:13

Mr. de Nies and prejudice

Mr. de Nies has communicated privately with me, describing his researches on Islam. I retract the assertion that he personally is "pre-judging" Islam without investigation. However, his research has not led him to the correct conclusions, and the fate of Holland depends on who is right. My vehemence is due, not to hatred of Muslims, but affection for Holland. It is agonizing to watch you announce to the world your eagerness for slavery.

John Lockhard
,
26 Mar 2008,17:49

hating and fearing Islam vs. hating and fearing Muslims

Mr. de Nies said:

"It is one thing to stand up to extremists. It is a completely other thing to sow fear and hatred against an entire religion. And that is exactly what Wilders is doing. Wilders wants us to believe that every Muslim is basically violent, dangerous and wrong. While truth is, that the vast majority of the Muslims (especially those living in the Netherlands) wants just the same as any other: living in peace and prosperity."

Pointing out that a religion teaches hatred and violence is not the same thing as asserting that every individual member of a religion is hateful and violent. It's an important distinction to remember. Mr. de Nies denies that Wilders makes that distinction; in the speeches I've read, he does. So do I. We don't hate Muslims. We just don't like watching Europe commit suicide.

You liberals are prejudiced. You pre-judge Islam as peaceful and refuse to allow any investigation, or you only read "experts" who are either fellow liberals (e.g. Armstrong) or Saudi stooges (e.g. Esposito). Saudi has so much money they can buy universities, media, and politicians. You have to read pre-WWII scholars or Robert Spencer at www.jihadwatch.org for honest information on Islam.

Religions have a content. All religions do not teach the same thing. Islam teaches the use of persuasion, fraud, and force to subjugate the whole world to Allah. Pick up a Koran. Every page of it breathes hatred, curses and threats against anyone who doesn't obey Muhammed. Read the authentic Hadith (www.jihadwatch.org can point you towards them) in which Muhammad murders critics, beheads enemies, raids enemy caravans during truces, and rapes captured women after killing their husbands. That's Muslims' perfect man, their moral exemplar. Because Muhammed did it, it's good.

Obviously, not every member of a religion obeys its teachings. Lots of Muslims can't understand the Arabic of the Koran and don't know the horrible things Muhammed did in the Hadith and just believe in God and pray and that's it. But what happens when someone points out the actual commandments of Islam? Or has children who decide to obey their religion? People can suddenly take their religion seriously. Look up Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar for an example.

In any case those "moderate" -- really just lukewarm -- Muslims will not lift a finger to prevent violence against non-Muslims. If they do, they'll be condemned to death for heresy, just like the Sudanese reformer Tana (actually executed) and the Egyptian-Italian journalist Allam (under police protection for the last five years). Look them up, Holland, look them up.

Islam is not a suicide pact. If the infidel is stronger, Muslims are divinely commanded to lie and deceive. They are commanded to pretend to renounce their religion to save their own lives, if necessary. So your Muslim friends in Holland are still free to enjoy seeking peace and prosperity and ignore their duty to wage jihad. Once the Muslims are a little stronger, their imams will remind them of their religious duty to subjugate you.

Jihad is a collective duty. The Muslim community as a whole is commanded to conquer the entire world for Allah. Not every individual Muslim is required to fight. Islam is currently conquering Europe without a fight, via immigration and higher birthrates. Your peace-and-prosperity-seeking Muslim friends are already contributing to the Slow Jihad. If pious, they might be contributing money to Islamic charities that support Palestinian suicide bombings; that counts too. Poor Muslims immigrate to the West, rich Muslims pay for jihadis, a handful of idealists actually commit the violence.

Western Europe has three choices, in my opinion. Wake up now, reassert control of your borders and your societies, and start sending the Muslims home, while non-Muslims still have control of the situation. Wait twenty years -- when almost half of the twenty-year-old men in Europe will be Muslims, and Muslims will have been recruited in great numbers into the police and army, and probably some Muslim states will have nuclear missiles capable of reaching Europe -- and then fight, desperately, for survival, when the Muslims start a jihad against you for some imagined "provocation." Or surrender to Islam: goodbye freedom, goodbye liberty, goodbye equality before the law, goodbye art, goodbye music, goodbye cathedrals, goodbye beer gardens, goodbye Europe. All blown to smithereens like the Buddha statues in Afghanistan.

Wake up now, Holland.

"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!"

John Lockhard
,
26 Mar 2008,16:31

Koran propagates peace?

With all due respect to Mr de Nies, he's wrong.

The Koran and, more importantly, the Hadith exhort the Muslims to kill and subjugate non-Muslims.

9:5 Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.
9:29 Fight the unbelievers... including the People of the Book (i.e. Jews and Christians)... until they feel themselves humiliated and pay the tax.
9:111 Kill and be killed in Allah's cause (i.e. Jihad)

The pleasant verses that your Muslim friends quote to you, like, "There is no compulsion in religion," were all revealed early, while Muhammad was in Mecca, the powerless leader of a small group. The verses exhorting Muslims to violence were revealed later, in Medina, when Muhammad was a successful warlord.

Unfortunately for us, according to traditional Muslim exegesis, later-revealed verses abrogate earlier-revealed verses. Surah 9, quoted above, is just about the last revealed. The Koran's final word on relationships with non-Muslims is: "Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them." The Hadith and the Sira confirm this.

Muslims have a divine command to subjugate all non-Muslims by whatever means necessary: persuasion, fraud, or force. Their entire history shows them following it. Nothing has changed; the Koran, the Hadith, the Sira are all still the same. Why are you betting the very existence of Holland on the HOPE that Holland's current nihilistic hedonism is so attractive that all the Muslim immigrants will betray their religion for it in a permanent way? Osama bin Laden was quite a hedonist back in his youth in Beirut; but then he started taking Islam seriously.

You liberals pride yourself on being open-minded and inquisitive and not believing things on authority or prejudice. Your liberal prejudices -- and, I suspect, fear -- are pushing you to believe something about Islam that just isn't true. Why don't you research it yourself? Start with "www.jihadwatch.org."

I've been to the Netherlands a couple of times. I like the place. I don't want to see it turn into Nederlandistan. But if most Dutch people are as blinded by prejudice as you "liberals," then Holland is doomed.

There is an ethical and humane solution. There is only one I can think of. Separate from them. Muslims can't assimilate into liberal Western societies. We can't reform Islam. It's the kindest thing for the Muslims, as well. Only if the infidels are obviously too strong for them are they allowed to relax and not try to conquer the world.

Yours,
John Lockhard

John Lockhard
,
26 Mar 2008,14:53

@ Drew Alexander and Bob Newhart

Typical “bushist”-replies: if you’re against Wilders than you must be for radical Muslims. Did it ever strike your mind that there might be Dutch people who are able to differentiate? Or maybe it’s your mind that was so open, your brains fell out?
Those of us opposing Wilders are not, and I stress and repeat NOT, in favour of radical Islamists. It’s not a matter of either one or the other.
I strongly condemn Bin Laden, Mohammed B. and the likes. No religion justifies murder and terror. And in fact, the Koran propagates peace. So those fundamentalists can hardly be referred to as true Muslims. Mind you, I am not religious myself at all.
It is one thing to stand up to extremists. It is a completely other thing to sow fear and hatred against an entire religion. And that is exactly what Wilders is doing. Wilders wants us to believe that every Muslim is basically violent, dangerous and wrong. While truth is, that the vast majority of the Muslims (especially those living in the Netherlands) wants just the same as any other: living in peace and prosperity.
Has it ever struck your (so open) minds that Wilders is doing exactly the same as what Hitler did some 70 years ago?
I suggest you rethink your replies. If you’re against extremism, than you’re against Wilders just as much as you are against Bin Laden and the likes.

Edwin de Nies
,
25 Mar 2008,16:03

Doesn't take a genius

www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22geert+wilders%22+fitna+-sorry&btnG=Google+Search&meta=

The whole 'sorry' anti-campaign is about as robust as a wobbly jelly. As a viral interceptor it has great merit, whether right or wrong, but it fails at the first hurdle.

I'm not going to pass comment on the video either way, just thought I'd comment on your tactics.

geert wilder
,
23 Mar 2008,17:41

You guys should be apologizing, just not for Wilders.

Yeah, I am sorry too. Sorry that there are pathetic cowards out there like you who feel the need to apologize to murderous barbarians. Your ridiculous insinuations that Theo van Gogh deserved his death clearly illustrate how craven you really are. You simpering whiners should be apologizing to the community at large; not because of Geert Wilders, but because you lack a back bone, and are a stain on your country. You spineless, yellow-bellied wimps truly are embarrasing examples of "Dutchness", much moreso than the object of your laughable attempts at mockery. What a joke.

The Dutch: so open-minded, their brains fell out.

Bob Newhart
,
21 Mar 2008,19:34

You lost me.

Sorry, you lost me. Wilders is making a movie that is critical of radical Islam. He is critical of Islam because it: relegates women to second class status; punishes women for associating with men who are not related to them by stoning; kills gays; considers free speech an anathema, to list only a few of its proclivities. And you are against him . . . why? Surely you don't agree with the positions that radical Islam takes in these matters--no, surely you agree with Wilders. So you lost me. Why exactly is it that would you defend radical Islam against Wilders critique, by doing your best to sabotage his critique?

He's afraid that if too many of these radical Islamists come into your country that they will institute these practices, and destroy the liberal society that you currently enjoy. Aren't newspapers in Europe already afraid to publish cartoons that lampoon Mohammed? So you've already given ground in the free speech area. Maybe next they'll go after billboards with women in bikinis. You'll give ground there too, I expect--you know, it's a cultural thing. By the time you finally decide it's time to draw the line--I won't hold my breath for that; after all, such line-drawing is soooo unsophisticated--you know, right over here, wrong over there, how plebian--isn't it possible that it will be too late? Maybe a little Stockholm Syndrome at work here? In the meantime, "Making some fun and doing something is better than doing nothing." Why don't you take up knitting? At least it's something--and a lot more constructive.

Oh, and being against radical Islam cannot be racist, because Islam embraces every race in the human family. So I recommend "xenophobic" as your next term of ostracism.

Props to Thomas, 20 Mar 08, 18:19 "I don't see why we should side with people that want to destroy it." [free speech]

Drew Alexander
,
21 Mar 2008,5:00

Freedom of speech?

Honestly - this will just give his movie even more attention. But even if we assume this would work... why do it? I think he should have the right to say his opinion. He can even offend religions, I don't see why that would be wrong. Christians get offended all the time, but somehow the majority can just live fine with it (just look at South Park - they make fun of Christians and Jews all the time).

I obviously havn't seen the movie, nor do I care much about Geert Wilders. But I do care about the right of free speach - and I don't see why we should side with people that want to destroy it.

Thomas
,
20 Mar 2008,18:19

Doing something

"Slappe Zuigvis" is correct, these movies will never swamp a search using google. What might help is a really well made video that gets a lot of hits / but then it might still only come lower on the list.

However this initiative is fantastic! Making some fun and doing something is better than doing nothing. The most I've seen any Dutch people do.

I wish "Wilders" was discredited more by the press and by Dutch thinkers. I mean not to play games nor to censor, but that the press would really show what he is doing rather than support his racist actions with their populist headlines. I'd argue that not conteracting Wilders is in fact an insult to the diversity of Dutch culture.

but... I am a "nieuw nederlander" (a term Verdonk and others use for those with Dutch passports who speak Dutch as a second language) and when I raise such issues with native Dutch people I am told that I don't understand because I am not born here. I realise it is not a valid argument to kill the conversation (and the Netherlands is a nation built on its history of immigrant intergration) but it is hard to argue around this when I see so few native Dutch citizens taking on such issues. So thanks for this initiative. Hope it makes some waves.

Sonja van Kerkhoff
,
20 Mar 2008,11:22

Broodnodig wetsvoorstelletje

Het staat ieder vrij te geloven in elk al dan niet tastbaar ding of fenomeen, mits zij of hij daar anderen niet mee lastigvalt.
Het staat ieder vrij bepaalde leefregels, geboden en verboden in ere te houden volgens zijn of haar levensovertuiging, geloof of visie, mits zij of hij daar anderen niet mee lastigvalt, anderen die probeert op te leggen en ze niet in strijd zijn met de wet.
Het staat ieder vrij in woord, beeld of geschrift de spot te drijven met andermans levensovertuiging, geloof of visie, en die door middel van openbaarmaking in woord beeld of geschrift aan te vechten dan wel te verwerpen.

Otto Maanzaad
,
18 Mar 2008,15:01

Too offensive specs though.

Noise, ok.
But why not a clown nose?

The White Room
,
18 Mar 2008,13:57
Comments (20)