Wilders' movie "Fitna" released

[Cincinnatus]

Nothing new to me accept the dutch part.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=aa7_1206470031

^ does he have a point?

 

[Oliver]

No, please Oliver, be my guest. What is he propagating that's wrong?

Wilders assumption [distortion] is completely wrong. Basically he reminds me to the type of guy who's running with a "End of the World is near" sign up and down the street.

But to make a long story short: I completely agree with the Governments factual statements:

Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende:


'On behalf of the Dutch government, I would like to respond to the online film by Mr Wilders.

The film shows images of violent acts and holds Islam and the Koran responsible for them. The government condemns such acts and those who commit them.

The film equates Islam with violence. We reject this interpretation. The vast majority of Muslims reject extremism and violence. In fact, the victims are often also Muslims. We therefore regret that Mr Wilders has released this film. We believe it serves no purpose other than to cause offence. But feeling offended must never be used as an excuse for aggression and threats. The government is heartened by the initial restrained reactions of Dutch Muslim organisations ... [snip]



Full press release: http://www.government.nl/News/Press...8/March/Government_s_reaction_to_Wilders_film

And concerning factual errors:

• When referring to the murder of Theo van Gogh, instead of showing the murderer (Mohammed Bouyeri)'s face, a picture of the Dutch rapper Salah Edin is displayed.[18][19]
• The film assumes ties between the Hofstad Network and the bombings in Madrid despite never proven ties.[20][clarify]
  
  Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitna_(film)#Factual_errors

And as a funny side-node: Some Nazi-Internet-Provider did shut down the documentaries Website:
US Web Provider Pulls Dutch Lawmaker's Site Promoting Anti-Islam Film

 

[mrbaracuda]

Wilders assumption [distortion] is completely wrong.

Show us why.
Is this just now really my naive-self asking Oliver to support his claim? Oh, it's gonna get interesting!

As for Balkenende:

The government is heartened by the initial restrained reactions of Dutch Muslim organisations.

Oh, how nice that those Dutch Muslim Organisations didn't call to arms over 15 minutes of muslim clerics and other prominent figures calling for the death of [insert group here] among other things! We better thank them properly that they haven't cut up any infidels yet! How dare this Wilders release this film! Let's build a mosque somewhere! Yaay!

ETA About Salah Edin and Muhammad Bouyeri, Wikipedia offers this:

When referring to the murder of Theo van Gogh, instead of showing the murderer (Mohammed Bouyeri)'s face, a picture of the Dutch rapper Salah Edin is displayed.[20][21] The picture was shot for the rapper's album 'Nederlands Grootste Nachtmerrie' (Netherlands' Worst Nightmare), which according to the singer's website, was shot to be 'exactly like the mugshot of convicted killer Mohamed B'.[22] A 2007 article by Dutch newspaper De Dag had captioned an article about the killer with the shot. On that occasion, Salah Edin's received an out-of-court a libel settlement for the publication. The photo was said by the rapper to be intended to depict "the way the average white Dutch citizen sees me, as a young Moroccan Muslim radical. That's why I chose to do this picture and use it for the front cover of my album. It is no in way supporting the deeds of Mohamed B".

Comparison Muhammad Bouyeri and Salah Edin:

So, in correlation to my previous thoughts about this, I'd like to add this and say: In my opinion you don't photograph yourself like a Muslim who murdered a critic of your religion and declare you're all about "reconciliation" and don't want to radicalise your listeners and such while mimicking the mugshot of, like ddt said, the most notorious Dutch murderer of the past 5 years and have it as one of your album's cover. But maybe that's just me.

 

[ddt]

Yet another one pissed because his material has been used

From Dutch news site nu.nl (translated):

Radio maker Robbie Muntz also visits his attorney on Friday. Muntz is angry at Geert Wilders because he uses an audio fragment of his in the movie Fitna. "Pure theft. He could at least have told me he was going to do that".

In the movie, Muntz' voice can be heard during images of Theo van Gogh. The fragment, according to the radio maker, comes from a radio interview he did with Theo van Gogh. Van Gogh told Muntz he was not afraid to be murdered.

Muntz: "He makes good appearance with my interview. And for the rest, the movie is trivial. Plain copy and paste and nick job."

Well, I wonder who else is going to step up with such claims? Most of the material in the movie is copyrighted. He does acknowledge the sources in the credits, but from the reactions thus far, it is fair to presume that he has not asked for permission to use any of them. That's very unprofessional.

Who is next? CNN? Or the orchestra performing Aase's Death? Yes , Grieg may be long dead and the notes out of copyright, but the performers still have a copyright on their performance!

 

[mrbaracuda]

From Dutch news site nu.nl (translated):



Well, I wonder who else is going to step up with such claims? Most of the material in the movie is copyrighted. He does acknowledge the sources in the credits, but from the reactions thus far, it is fair to presume that he has not asked for permission to use any of them. That's very unprofessional.

Who is next? CNN? Or the orchestra performing Aase's Death? Yes , Grieg may be long dead and the notes out of copyright, but the performers still have a copyright on their performance!

I think we got it now, ddt.

 

[kosai]

Wow... this was really a disappointment. The amount of research done seems to be equal to typing "muslims bad" on YouTube. Sad it will probably cost him his life for something so boring and which added nothing to the conversation.

 

[Oliver]

Wow... this was really a disappointment. The amount of research done seems to be equal to typing "muslims bad" on YouTube. Sad it will probably cost him his life for something so boring and which added nothing to the conversation.

That made me curious: ...

!Warning! : Strong language, very graphic content, NS4W, extreme violence. Viewer discretion is advised!
http://youtube.com/results?search_query="muslims+bad"&search_type=

 

[RandFan]

My thanks for posting this video. This is a real problem. More and more Muslims are demanding the right to live under Sharia. Perhaps more importantly, the moderates are not standing up to the rising voice of intolerance that has silenced liberals and allowed the suppression of free speech.

Here is a podcast from point of Inquiry with Austin Dacey. He discuses the rising tide and that it is being ignored for fear of offending Muslims.

Of course there is also Infidel by Ayan Hirse Alli.

 

[Pardalis]

This is odd, the first post seems to refute the idea of the second one.

Do you think that his life is in danger somehow?

Oliver, you didn't answer my question.

Your second post seems to say that this movie is just propaganda, yet your first post seems to say that the man behind the film will be killed for making it, which infers that what this movie says about extreme Islam is correct.

Doesn't it strike you as contradictory?

 

[dudalb]

My thanks for posting this video. This is a real problem. More and more Muslims are demanding the right to live under Sharia. Perhaps more importantly, the moderates are not standing up to the rising voice of intolerance that has silenced liberals and allowed the suppression of free speech.

Here is a podcast from point of Inquiry with Austin Dacey. He discuses the rising tide and that it is being ignored for fear of offending Muslims.

Of course there is also Infidel by Ayan Hirse Alli.

What is scarier is certain Non Muslims are also supporting Sharia.
Some people...primary on the left...are so afraid of being labelled "Islamophobes" that they will support and defend anything a Muslim say or do.
I thought 9/11 would be enough to make people take Muslim fundementalism seriously but I Guess not.

The film seems pretty stupid, but Wilders has a right to make it and show it without having his life threatened.

 

[ddt]

But you can hear him throughout the video, can't you? Even if Wilders is not shown all the time, he's heard and takes up a prominent place in the video if I'm not mistaken. I think I also heard something about Nazis and then the scene with the dog barking at the prostrating muslim while having Wilders talk in the background again.

I played the video again, and there are four other voices in the video:

1. In the beginning, while Wilders' image is shown on TV, the newsreader talking about some terrorism threat.
2. Pim Fortuyn saying (in Dutch) that Islam is the biggest threat to world peace.
3. a voice I didn't recognize
4. At the end, Ayaan Hirsi Ali saying she has sympathy for Salah Edin.

The name Wilders is at no time mentioned in the clip.

 

[mrbaracuda]

Pim Fortuyn saying (in Dutch) that Islam is the biggest threat to world peace.

What happened to Mr. Fortuyn again?

The name Wilders is at no time mentioned in the clip.

Which doesn't matter, since every muslim probably knows him already because of his PR stunts.

Interesting though that Hirsi Ali has sympathy for him.

 

[mrbaracuda]

My thanks for posting this video. This is a real problem. More and more Muslims are demanding the right to live under Sharia. Perhaps more importantly, the moderates are not standing up to the rising voice of intolerance that has silenced liberals and allowed the suppression of free speech.

I wholeheartedly agree with you. I don't know whether the moderates are either ignorant about the subject or just don't care. In the case of my sister I'd say it's the former, but I'm engaging her in discussions and also showed her Fitna yesterday. Sadly, she's a bit, well I don't know how to say it. She seriously asked me "What should I do? Get more radical?"

Hmm, more radical.

They got a real problem though with the established radicals.

Here is a podcast from point of Inquiry with Austin Dacey. He discuses the rising tide and that it is being ignored for fear of offending Muslims.

Of course there is also Infidel by Ayan Hirse Alli.

Have you read "Infidel"? Your Podcast-Audio, both the download and the embedded Quicktime-audio don't work for me; maybe you can upload this Podcast somewhere like rapidshare?

What is scarier is certain Non Muslims are also supporting Sharia.
Some people...primary on the left...are so afraid of being labelled "Islamophobes" that they will support and defend anything a Muslim say or do.
I thought 9/11 would be enough to make people take Muslim fundementalism seriously but I Guess not.

Yes, it looks like it. Especially throughout Europe I think there are almost no (right-wing) politicians that (would) tackle this problem like Wilders does. Even if they do, they get really bad feedback in the press.

The film seems pretty stupid, but Wilders has a right to make it and show it without having his life threatened.

What do you think is stupid about the movie? I thought it was good; just that there was nothing new in it for me. I should watch it again though. What I really liked though was the end about how the Muslims themselves should tackle the problem and that it wasn't for people like Wilders. I think that's somewhat of a concession of Wilders heh.

 

[jsiv]

What bothers me about this is not really Wilders's movie, which doesn't really interest me much, and from what I've heard sounds more like something a kid would post on Youtube than a serious production.

No, what makes me feel uneasy (you know?) is the way several governments have reacted, and particularily his own. Not just to this, but also to several other similar incidents. Is it really their place to "condemn" or even comment on the video at all? And try to intimidate a person into keeping his mouth shut?

Yes, I realize that Wilders is a public figure, but that changes nothing.

Now, I don't deny that his video may very well break some law, but isn't that for the courts to decide? Shouldn't the government do its utmost to protect rather than condemn him, until a court passes its judgement?

 

[dudalb]

What do you think is stupid about the movie? I thought it was good; just that there was nothing new in it for me.

It appears to be badly made, and some of the evidence he uses seems questionable.
I think there is enough we know about Moselm Extremism to condemn it without using bad evidence.

 

[ddt]

About Salah Edin:

about this, I'd like to add this and say: In my opinion you don't photograph yourself like a Muslim who murdered a critic of your religion and declare you're all about "reconciliation" and don't want to radicalise your listeners and such while mimicking the mugshot of, like ddt said, the most notorious Dutch murderer of the past 5 years and have it as one of your album's cover. But maybe that's just me.

The wiki-page already gives the reason why he did so. It surely is provocative indeed, whether it's wise is debatable. I wouldn't have done it either.

The fact that his picture already had been used instead of Mohammed Bouyeri's makes the error extra foolish on Wilders' part.

In other news, the Dutch Journalist Union NVJ will ask on behalf of Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard that Wilders edit the movie. Muntz, the interviewer of Van Gogh, also has contacted the NVJ.

ETA: Salah Edin said tonight in talk show Pauw en Witteman that his lawyer has asked Geert Wilders to edit the movie; if he doesn't get an answer on Monday, he'll sue.

 

[ddt]

No, what makes me feel uneasy (you know?) is the way several governments have reacted, and particularily his own. Not just to this, but also to several other similar incidents. Is it really their place to "condemn" or even comment on the video at all? And try to intimidate a person into keeping his mouth shut?

Yes, I realize that Wilders is a public figure, but that changes nothing.

Not just a public figure, he is a MP. I think the reaction of the Dutch government after publication of the movie was very well reasoned. They don't approve of the content, and they wanted to make clear it was not their opinion, only that of Wilders'.

Now, I don't deny that his video may very well break some law, but isn't that for the courts to decide? Shouldn't the government do its utmost to protect rather than condemn him, until a court passes its judgement?

You're completely right, and the Dutch Justice Minister also stressed that we don't have a priori censorship. I don't think the Dutch government ever tried to forbid Wilders publishing his movie. They have urged him to think about the consequences. The Dutch government also has a responsibility towards its embassies, its ex-pats and Dutch trade interests -- our pork export might be at stake .

On the other hand, Wilders seemed to be not interested at all in such issues. Not just by publishing the movie, but more importantly, by all brouhaha since he announced to be making the movie last November.

That being said, I don't think the Dutch government has handled the whole incident particularly well before release of the movie, and that they have by times overreacted. But hindsight is 20/20.

 

[mrbaracuda]

So apparently Muslims want to kill liveleak-staff members.

They removed the video and issued this reasonable statement by inserting a new movie in its place; protecting their staff members (which is a shame this has happened):

Following threats to our staff of a very serious nature, and some ill informed reports from certain corners of the British media that could directly lead to the harm of some of our staff, Liveleak.com has been left with no other choice but to remove Fitna from our servers.

This is a sad day for freedom of speech on the net but we have to place the safety and well being of our staff above all else. We would like to thank the thousands of people, from all backgrounds and religions, who gave us their support. They realised LiveLeak.com is a vehicle for many opinions and not just for the support of one.

Perhaps there is still hope that this situation may produce a discussion that could benefit and educate all of us as to how we can accept one anothers culture.

We stood for what we believe in, the ability to be heard, but in the end the price was too high.

Let's count the days it takes the "moderate majority" of Muslims to call for Fitna to be put on it again and condemn those who threatened the liveleak-staff!

But it's on Google now! Who knows how long it takes for the threats to come in there.

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

What bothers me about this is not really Wilders's movie, which doesn't really interest me much, and from what I've heard sounds more like something a kid would post on Youtube than a serious production.

No, what makes me feel uneasy (you know?) is the way several governments have reacted, and particularily his own. Not just to this, but also to several other similar incidents. Is it really their place to "condemn" or even comment on the video at all? And try to intimidate a person into keeping his mouth shut?

Yes, I realize that Wilders is a public figure, but that changes nothing.

Now, I don't deny that his video may very well break some law, but isn't that for the courts to decide? Shouldn't the government do its utmost to protect rather than condemn him, until a court passes its judgement?

Yus. I was very confused to hear form the Slovenian PM (I think) on the news all of a sudden, calling the movie hate speech or something like that.

It appears to be badly made, and some of the evidence he uses seems questionable.
I think there is enough we know about Moselm Extremism to condemn it without using bad evidence.

I agree. Yet to introduce someone to the subject with no knowledge in 15 minutes would be too hard and thus I think it does an ok-job for what it is.

 

[kosai]

So apparently Muslims want to kill liveleak-staff members.

They removed the video and issued this reasonable statement by inserting a new movie in its place; protecting their staff members (which is a shame this has happened):

Haha, That's great.. So in the end Fitna made it's point in another unexpected way (and maybe the only way such a contentless movie could have.) Now people who go to LiveLeak can't even watch the unconvincing crappy film. The muslims (and please save your breath telling me it wasn't them) who sent in the death threats are simply proving once again their stupidity, this seems much worse than anything the lame movie said. In the end, even after the movie comes out and everyone said it's without purpose and boring muslims still found a way to make themselves look terrible. Gotta love religion!

 

[ddt]

But it's on Google now! Who knows how long it takes for the threats to come in there.

It's everywhere now. See my post above. Or this page from a Dutch newspaper with 9 mirrors.