Fitna is, or should be, merely a first installment.
It is important to keep going, not to let this be a one-time business, but to fill in, to expand, the knowledge of Infidel viewers as to the contents of Qur’an, Hadith, and Sira. The political and media elites of the Western world will not do so. Some do not know, and do not want to know. Some know, but haven’t any idea how to deal, in practical policies, with that knowledge, and so they don’t want you to know.
It need not be limited to the verses depicted in the film. Many others in the Qur’an which support the same points could be assembled, as was done by those who produced the Qur’an Calcutta Petition. And still other passages, from the Hadith and Sira, might be given, in a ready-reference form.
There is plenty more in the Qur’an. Geert Wilders did not touch Sura 9. There are the Hadith. There is the Sira, and the details of Muhammad’s life.
Fitna, whatever else it provokes, should provoke thought. And perhaps for those who might wish to have in their hands for reading and re-reading the passages that appear on-screen, there should be made available a downloadable text.
This fifteen-minute film must immediately be provided with versions dubbed in French, Spanish, Italian, Russian, German, and another two dozen languages, not forgetting Hindi, Urdu, Chinese, Korean, Japanese, and various versions of Bahasa. No time to waste.
It has been one of the most difficult movies ever to make, and to show. But now it has appeared. And the sky has not fallen. And it won’t fall, because Muslims are keenly aware, at this very moment, that they had better not do anything quite as dramatic as they did with the Danish cartoons. For now, no murder and mayhem is, as one Dutch Muslim says, “our strategy.”
For the initial reaction to it has been milder than one might have expected just a month ago. The word must surely have gone out to cool it, the Infidels are watching.
From a news report:
“‘This film is a direct attempt to incite violence from Muslims and help fan the flames of Islamophobia,’ Arsalan Iftikhar, a contributor to Washington-based Islamica Magazine, told CNN on Thursday. ‘Any reasonable person can see this is meant to spit in the face of Muslims and insult our religion.’
“However, he called on Muslim leaders to react peacefully: ‘Calmer heads should prevail.’
“Iftikhar said he doubted the film would spark the same type of violence that followed the caricature of Mohammed, adding, ‘We in the global community learned a lot from the Danish cartoon controversy … I don’t think it will be anything remotely like that.'”
Yes, “we in the global community [he means the Umma, the commmunity of Islam] learned a lot from the Danish cartoon controversy.” And it is not, I think, that some Muslims would not like to riot, would not delightedly see one of their number eliminate Geert Wilders, and no doubt while they were at it Magdi Allam as well, but that Muslim leaders in the West realize that this would do damage to Islam’s “image.” And right now — and only for now — they can’t afford that.
This was predicted.
Less predictable, however, will be the primitive masses of Muslims, less worried about the “image” of Islam, and more about seeing Islamic justice done. We have already seen rumblings from them in Pakistan and Indonesia. But whether they are kept under control, or not, the real fury underneath remains. And the real fury also remains on the part of Infidels who are becoming better informed despite the best efforts of their craven elites (see Jan Balkenende) to keep them uninformed. And hence they are now much more wary, and much angrier.
And in the Netherlands: “‘Our call to Muslims abroad is follow our strategy and don’t frustrate it with any violent incidents,’ Mohammed Rabbae, a senior Dutch Muslim leader, told a news conference in a mosque in an Amsterdam suburb that is home to many Muslims.”
“Our strategy.”
“Our call to Muslims abroad is follow our strategy.”
Not what we would do if we could do without harm to Muslim interests. Not if death threats and economic boycotts and riots everywhere and threats of permanent mayhem and murder worked. But right now, just now, these things would not be in our interests. Nothing moral about our choice. It’s “our strategy.”
But the goal remains the same as that of the Danish Muslims who urged Muslims elsewhere to engage in economic boycotts, recall of ambassadors, and riots in Muslim lands and threats of permanent mayhem and murder.
It is just that right now, here again out of calculation and not any moral qualms or any sense of decency, the Dutch Muslims have decided to urge calm.
Because it’s “our strategy.”
Not unlike other Muslims, such as the Slow Jihadists of Fatah, who tell the Americans — who are not appalled, because they are not comprehending — that “we choose peace as a strategic option.”
“A strategic option.”
“Our strategy.”
We who both know and want others to know must stand for policies that can adequately deal with the situation. We must call upon our governing officials to shed whatever sentimentalism that may inhibit them, and to work to defend, if not themselves (for so many are so disaffected, deplore so much that surrounds them), then the civilizational legacy that was created by others, over a long time, and that they and we, those present inheritors, have a duty to protect from Islamic Jihad and its bearers. For our legal and political institutions and ideas on what constitutes political legitimacy, our social freedoms, our modes of artistic expression, our encouragement of free and skeptical inquiry, either are flatly contradicted by the Shari’a, or are otherwise regarded as inimical to the spirit of Islam as it has been traditionally understood.