Fitna
The film Fitna depicting 9/11
(Image from Wikipedia)
I've just watched the short anti-Qur'anic film Fitna by Geert Wilders, which one can find online at various places, such as LiveLeak.com, Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch, Charles Johnson's Little Green Footballs, and . . . well, you can just Google the word "Fitna" along with the name "Geert Wilders" and find multiple sites online. Update: LiveLeak.com has removed Fitna, but the film has already 'gone viral' at Gates of Vienna.
Though some of the images are graphic and disturbing -- a jumper from the burning World Trade Center, Jack Hensley being decapitated -- the film itself is relatively tame. From the hype beforehand, I was expecting images and words more incendiary toward Islam.
Instead, we see and hear incendiary images and words from Islam.
The technique employed is rather simple. The film shows a violent quote from the Qur'an in both English and the original Arabic, reads it in Arabic, then follows the reading with images of Islamist atrocities accompanied by statements by radical Muslims. This sort of sequence is repeated about five times.
At the end, a hand is shown turning a page of the Qur'an, followed by a blank screen and a ripping sound, as though that page were being torn out, then by a caption stating that "The sound you just heard was a page being torn from the telephone book."
Why a phone book?
No deep message there, I think. Just a way of emphasizing that non-Muslims don't bear responsibility for removing violent verses from the Qur'an. Muslims do.
What's the film's aim? I doubt that Wilders expects Muslims to edit the Qur'an. I think that he instead aims to put Muslims into a bind by depicting Islam as an inherently violent religion and thereby dare them to prove him wrong by responding with reason rather than reacting with threats.
What's the bind?
If they respond with reason, then they have to begin engaging with non-Muslim deconstructions of the Qur'an. If they react with violence, then they serve only to demonstrate his point.
For the committed Muslim who prefers neither horn of the dilemma, pious silence would be the best strategy.
I don't think that we'll enjoy very much of that.
Labels: Geert Wilders, Islam, Islamism, Qur'an
posted by Horace Jeffery Hodges @ 4:22 AM
19 comments
19 Comments:
If they respond with reason, then they have to begin engaging with non-Muslim deconstructions of the Qur'an. If they react with violence, then they serve only to demonstrate his point.
For the committed Muslim who prefers neither horn of the dilemma, pious silence would be the best strategy.
I don't think that we'll enjoy very much of that.
It appears that the latter has already happened. Liveleaks has removed the video because of serious threats to its staff.
It seems like the Dutch are taking the leading in challenging Muslims on the Quran and the teachings of Islam.
S.
Liveleak hosted the video, and all the other websites linked to it, so it appears to be off the internet for now. A victory for Islamofascists.
S.
I've updated, for I found multiple links via Gates of Vienna.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Besides the viral links in your update, I found this one and watched it there before returning to your blog:
http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/191989.php
I didn't have the stomach to watch the beheading, which appeared to have been muted. I think the juxtaposition of violence in the name of Islam with passages from the Quran is fair. However, he veers into cultural intolerance with headlines declaring schools closed for Muslim holidays and the legality of hijab. How are accommodations to Islamic traditions that do not violate anyone's human rights a threat to the West?
S.
By "muted," I meant visually, not auditorily. The dying man's screams can be heard very clearly.
S.
Legal conditions differ in European countries, so we'd have to understand those conditions to know for sure on some points concerning rights. France, for instance, requires schools to be completely secular.
But we shouldn't accomodate so much. That would be impractical. Does every religion deserve a legal holiday? Would we have to close schools for the entire month of Ramadan?
Incidently, I didn't want to watch the beheading either, so I was glad that the scene itself was not shown.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
France, for instance, requires schools to be completely secular.
US public schools are also secular. By "completely," I presume you mean that the wearing of any religious gear like crucifixes, yarmulkes, or headscarves is forbidden. Such stiff and unnecessary regulations only serve to alienate French Muslims.
But we shouldn't accomodate so much. That would be impractical. Does every religion deserve a legal holiday? Would we have to close schools for the entire month of Ramadan?
Accommodation depends on the make-up of the community. A few Muslims or other religious minorities can be accommodated individually with excused absences or personal days for religious holidays. Larger communities may require more formal adaptation. Dearborn, Michigan, probably has the largest concentration of Arabs and of Muslims in the US. Its public schools offer Arabic dual-immersion programs, girls play interscholastic sports in hijab with the blessing of Michigan's high school athletic association, and during Ramadan, observant students spend the lunch period in another room, rather than the cafeteria.
My school, like many other public schools, has prayer-in-disguise, known as a moment of silence, a sop to the Christian right that has been politically influential since the 80s. It is the biggest waste of two minutes. I have never seen a kid doing anything that looked remotely like praying. They all squirm quietly in their seats, waiting for the announcements to come back on the intercom.
And I won't get into the misuse of federal money for failed abstinence-only sex education programs in public schools or the denial of funds to family planning programs that violate the religious beliefs of conservative Christians. Oh, yeah, and then there are all those state and Congressional legislators who want save the family by passing amendments outlawing gay marriage.
Accommodation, indeed.
You probably aren't familiar with Michael Moore's The Awful Truth, which enjoyed a brief run on US television back in the 90s. This particular episode does a nice job exposing the insincerity of some members of Congress who appeal to Christian voters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3MSi3uf8GA
I respect your Christian faith, Jeffery, but as a non-Christian in the US, I see the issue of religious accommodation differently than you do.
The examples that you give demonstrate the folly of accomodating religion in schools. I am against prayer in schools, and I also don't support much of what some Christians push for the government to enforce.
Besides, I still maintain that accomodation is impractical.
A chador is not especially problematic if it is freely chosen, but a veil is clearly a problem. One need only think of ID cards that require a photo, for example.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
The examples that you give demonstrate the folly of accomodating religion in schools.
Look carefully at the examples. They are not all the same. In the case of Dearborn, a religious minority is accomodated without infringing upon the rights of the majority. In the cases of moments of silence or abstinence-only sex ed, everyone is forced to play along.
A chador is not especially problematic if it is freely chosen, but a veil is clearly a problem. One need only think of ID cards that require a photo, for example.
You are probably familiar with the case of the British school employee who was fighting for the right to wear a veil in her job. Safety and security issues always outweigh religious considerations. The Michigan high school athletic association reviews religious accomodation requests on a case by case basis and reserves the right to refuse any request that impedes the safety of participants. It stated in its Dearborn ruling that all headscarves and other covering must be securely fastened.
I would have no problem if a Muslim employee of my school wanted to wear a big black chador, but I would draw the line at face veils.
S.
For me personally, I believe that any religious observance, ritual, adornment should be no part of any public schools purview. Oh how best to phrase it?
Separation of Church and State fully extended?
JK
Sorry, Sonagi, in my rush to reply before fixing lunch, I missed part of your comment.
Some (though perhaps not all) religious expressions that are not imposed or favored by the state and that do not interfere with learning are acceptable.
If Christians want to read a Bible together during recess, or if Muslims want to read a Qur'an, that's fine.
I'm less sure about the chador because it's often imposed upon girls who actually wish to dress like other kids. But in the American system, I don't see that this can be restricted (except in schools with uniforms or dress codes).
I also worry about homeschooling that is used to shut girls away from society -- as is happening with some Muslim families in Lodi, California.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
The thing about dress as an accommodation is "much ado about nothing." Here if the schools require a uniform the girls just match the color scarf and slacks they wear under the skirt to the uniform. If they work in fast food the uniform shirt just goes over the chador. It has been no big deal when Muslim women work or go to public school. The kids are not outcast and they manage to find ways to have their flavor of jeans be seen, even if it is only 2 inches above those fabulous sneakers.
If Muslims were so strict women wouldn't be working or going to school, I see them make some accommodations themselves to live in American.
Scarves don't create problems and women who wear veils, I would assume they wouldn't need ID because they wouldn't drive or ever be with out an escort. I imagine that some ID is acceptable with a picture, because they wouldn't be able to travel.
In order to work, mostly you only need your SS card and your birth certificate. Now, everybody has to prove they are legal, so pix IDs aren't enough.
Hathor, if a private school is willing to accomodate the chador, then that's the business of that school, I suppose.
As for the veil, it works if the woman wishes to isolate herself entirely, but I suppose that veiled woman aren't interested in integrating themselves.
I think that a social problem lurks there if Islamism expands . . . as we may be seeing in Europe.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
I'm less sure about the chador because it's often imposed upon girls who actually wish to dress like other kids. But in the American system, I don't see that this can be restricted (except in schools with uniforms or dress codes).
Parents impose their wills upon their reluctant children in many ways from eating to playing sports to music lessons. I was forced to attend a Catholic school for five years so my mom could feel like a pious Catholic. I hated every moment of it, not because of the religious aspect, but because the school was very small, and most of the kids were upper middle-class while my working poor family got a tuition break. It was hard for me to make friends and feel accepted. Making matters worse was the fact that I was the top student academically and often the object of teacher praise. I would come home in tears after being made fun of and begged to go to the public school, but my pleas fell on deaf ears. My SPED brother, however, got a pass. Thank goodness, the school topped out at 6th grade, and I was free to attend public secondary schools, where I was able to find friends like me.
I am a public school teacher, Jeffery, and trust me, there are a lot worse things parents do to their kids than make them cover up. When kids turn 18, they can choose their own paths.
I also worry about homeschooling that is used to shut girls away from society -- as is happening with some Muslim families in Lodi, California.
All the more reason to accommodate religious requirements. In France, Muslim girls were pulled out of school after the ban on headscarves. Most troubling are parents who send their daugthers back to their home countries to be married to local men, a violation not only of the woman's basic human rights but also her Islamic right to enter into marriage freely.
S.
See I guess living in an urban environment where there has been large numbers of member of the Nation of Islam, and many other varieties of home grown Islam, with increase numbers of immigrant Eastern European Muslims, seeing scarves or hijabs doesn't cause much reaction. There are even several sects of Christians that have more modest style of dress. It may be that in a world where many girls want to dress as if they are in a hip hop video, with their belly ring and thong hanging out, a scarf or chador just doesn't phase you.
I thought that wearing a cross, yarmulke, turban or a dot on your fore head in a public institution did not have anything to do with violating the separation of church and state.
In my last comment I was speaking of public school. Many public schools and some charter schools (state supported) require uniforms.
I think if anyone thinks that restricting what Muslims wear is going to make them any less religious or somehow make them more European and therefore less radical is mistaken. Funny thing, it isn't the girls and women who are the main perpetrators of violent acts. I am sure the mothers of these men aren't thrilled with their son's martyrdom. Other than a cry for revenge, I think women are only trying to find some solace, when they express pride in their sons death in war.
Thanks, Sonagi, for the details. What's a "SPED brother"?
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Good points, Hathor, and you're right about the Church and State principle not banning religious clothing or accoutrements.
France has a different system, of course, one in which schools must be secular, and that means -- in a French context -- banning religious symbols. The system was originally intended to weaken the presence of the Catholic Church in the schools, but it's now used to weaken the presence of Islam there.
I don't know that this works.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
SPED means special education. My brother was LD (learning disabled). You would not believe the number of acronyms used in education. At my previous school, our principal gave us teachers a pop quiz on education acronyms.
S.
Sonagi, thanks for the explanation.
Jeffery Hodges
* * *
Post a Comment
<< Home