“..calling it a film is to abuse both the English language and the legacy of cinema”

Yesterday, a friend sent an internet link to Mr Wilders’ crappy excuse of a “film”. It was so silly, distastefully offensive that I felt pity at Wilders’ utter lack of talent and skill. By according more attention than the idiotic film, the Muslims will only make him more popular and a rallying point for Islamophobia disguised as freedom of expression. Wilders has to be ignored and all peaceful protest against Islamophobia should continue.

As always, my dear friend Ali Eteraz is on top of things – by way of his intelligence and wit evident from this excellent article.

What I’m really wondering: is Wilders’ protesting against Islam or the monopoly extremists already have over grainy, low-budget, YouTube videos? …….

The rest of the film is a mixture of conflating the most painful and heart-wrenching images from terror-strikes with extremist imams, in an effort to turn the entirety of Islam into a demonic edifice. This is neither new, nor interesting. It is a facile trick for facile minds….

What the film really shows to me is that when it comes to challenging Islamism, Wilders is completely lost. He reminds me of those socially awkward, marginalized, introverted children in a school-yard whose solution to persecution at the hands of a bully is to write the bully’s name in his notebook and then rip up the page.

If Wilders really wanted to expose Islamism — the entire legacy of 20th century ideological Islam — he would start with how the French Suez Canal Company funded the Muslim Brotherhood’s first mosque. That fact is casually mentioned in Hasan al-Banna’s autobiography (which I am certain Wilders bothered to consult). Or Wilders would have tried to begin some criminal proceeding in the international criminal courts against those men who came up with the genius idea of encouraging disaffected Arab youth into going into Afghanistan and then gave them $1 billion in machine guns, bombs and stinger missiles to play with. Or Wilders could have expressed some outrage over the drafters of the new Iraqi constitution — drafted in consultation with Western lawyers — which makes Sharia the law of the land (a fact bemoaned by Iraqi feminists).

But Wilders isn’t actually serious about challenging Islamism. He is concerned only about multiplying the number of times his name is pinged on Google…..”

To access the full article, click here. The conclusion is the best, though not recommeded for the weak-kneed.