Fitna: a movie critical about Islamisation

[BlackFalcoN]

As most of you probably are aware of, Dutch politician Geert Wilders has recently released his movie 'Fitna' on the Internet.
The movie offers a critical view on Islam and Islamisation, based on footage from Islamic media, excerpts from the Quran and the daily effects of Islam on Dutch society.
It has already caused anger and frustrations among many Muslims around the globe.

'Fitna' was originally released on LiveLeak, but has already been deleted after the LiveLeak staff and their families were severely threatened by an anonymous Muslim group.

For the moment the video can still be found on YouTube; but we know very well that YouTube is not the biggest supporter of free speech and will eventually bow to all Muslim protest and ultimately delete the movie from it's servers due to some obscure violation against their policy.

The movie can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2TxP-SOA0_0
( also watch the second part, since YouTube only allows movies to be 10 minutes max. )

Watch it while you still can ;)

[ EDIT: I have uploaded a copy of the movie in DivX format to the FTP; it can be found in /UPLOAD/BlackFalcoN/ aprox. 70 MB ]

It is recommend to read a bit about the history and controversy around the movie on the (now locked) wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitna_%28film%29


How do you personally feel about the movie ?

What are your thoughts about the ongoing Islamisation of Europe (and America!)

[Bugger]

Those Muslims should convert to something else, even Atheism, if they feel they do not fit in! Perhaps they are afraid to, because the Quran requires that apostates be murdered, usually by stoning to death, with a free trip to Paradise with 72 virgins for whoever does it. No Muslim country - by which I mean dictatorial theocracies which usually have Muslim symbols on their flags, like Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Maldives, etc - has anything like the First Amendment in its Constitution. A kooky religion, frankly.

[mil&co]

I was surprised that the best Wilders could come up with, after months of production, was a ctrl-C ctrl-V video.

More interesting than the video itsself were the reactions from Dutch, Iranian and Egyptian politicians prior to its release.

Our president immediately went on the ass-kissing tour, apologizing for the video in advance. Both the president of Iran and Egypt announced they would boycot Holland if the movie would come out.
All of these reactions were given before anyone had ever even seen a fragment of the movie.

I think that proves a point more than the entire 15-minute copy-paste movie does about (extremist) Islam.

This link won't die anytime soon, I don't think "they" would dare to threat someone who can make ANFO better than they can.:D
http://pyroforum.nl/fitna/

[Corona]

That link on your page where it sez "download". Is that for the English language version?

[mil&co]

Just checked, and it's the Dutch version.

But it's possible to capture the Enlish video from the online stream on the site, just like you would do with youtube.

[Charles Owlen Picket]

I came from a different generation. I really have had seen grief on many different faces but the expressions all look the same. I really can't understand why anyone would want to spread grief, pain, & woe. I will never be an Islamic apologist; I will not be someone who rationalizes or intellectualizes the pain that is spread. I don't do that with my own fucking government - I sure as hell won't do it with some foreign entity.

[Hirudinea]

And English version of Fitna is on YouTube.

[BlackFalcoN]

The English DivX version is also on the FTP.

( avoids the crappy quality multi-part YouTube movie ;) )

[neetje]

I must be honest, I really don't like religion. It's the most used excuse for unnecessary killing/mass murder. I'm not talking about a religion in particular, I'm talking about any religion.

But the way Geert Wilders is treating Muslims is going too far for me. The Dutch constitution gives the people the right to say whatever they like. It gives you the feeling of freedom, but it also clears a path for people like mr. Wilders, to say whatever they like, just to diminish a group of people without actually proving they are bad for society.

I've seen some of his interviews about the movie before it was released to the public and it made me refuse to watch Fitna. I haven't watched it yet and I'm not going to either. The way he talks about Muslims in general is like he's talking about street scum. I don't think that's the right way of being a politician, but I guess it's his way of gaining favor amongst the public.

This is what Hitler did. He burned his Reichstag and blamed the communists, starting a kind of inquisition against them. Wilders is using the public fear of Muslims to try and get them deported. I feel like someone has to stop him, but there seems to be no legal way of doing that :(

I don't even care about Iran/Egypt boycotting Dutch products, it's not like they are the only ones who are buying our exports :)

Nouja, wij Nederlanders maken er wel weer het beste van ;)

[megalomania]

Hmm, have we become so politically correct that we are forced to tolerate anything? Oh dear me, we can't say anything bad about the muslims because they will get offended. When it kills like a duck, and terrorizes like a duck...

Hitler was so beloved by the rest of the world that neither the British nor the Americans ever said anything bad about him... In the US we gave all those Japanese a nice comfortable cage to live in. Why, didn't Churchill consider Hitler a close personal friend and even wept when he heard the news of Hitler's death?

Face it, muslims are bad people, they want to kill us all, and they will stoop to no low to do it. They hide behind their religion as an excuse to commit unspeakable violence, they manipulate the liberal media to not dare offend the muslims, not because they will pronounce jihad on the journalists and their families, but because it is wrong to hurt the terrorists feelings. Bullshit!

There should be flags depicting mohammad taking it up the ass flying from every home in the Netherlands. When your enemy is angry, anger him, don't kneel down and lick his boots. What's more important to you, your sense of political correctness or your life?

Wait until some airplanes crash into a few buildings in your country, then you will all be bitching the politicans didn't do enough to get rid of the terrorists.

[Charles Owlen Picket]

The Netherlands has generally been a nation enjoying freedom of expression. With that comes sometimes a clash of heart felt ideas. Some people deeply believe that the Islamic characteristics expressed in the Qaran such as the societal place of women and the need to subjugate the non-Islamic population are reason enough to marginalize that group of people. When someone actually believes that they are doing "God's will" by killing and maiming children and non-combatants, I suppose they may just have a point.....no?

I have quoted the Qaran several times in posts here and no one familiar with the Holy Book said that I had mis-spoke....because I had NOT. The Book is filled with as much violence as the Bible but it is directed at the non-believer. I have a serious problem with someone, anyone, wanting to do me harm because I do not believe as they do.

I do not know anyone who is a Muslim. I suppose if I did I would ask them quite a few things, especially if they would do me harm simply for not believing..... But my point here is that I have NO reason to have any compassion for anyone who has no compassion for me. I'm not a fucking rug, to be stepped upon by the multitudes. I'm a human being who deserves as much respect as any Muslim who screams in the street about a cartoon. Why the fuck is it acceptable to defend Muslim interests and not the non-Muslim?

[bobo]

Muslims kill muslims despite the holy texts that forbid it, what religious adherence is that. The taliban: pashtun taliban muslims kill hazara muslims. In africa, sudanese arab muslims kill black arab muslims. Morrocan muslims treat african muslims like they are cockroaches. There are no worse racists in history than muslims. The muslim brotherhood doesn't even blink over this, while they cry over some cartoons and movies.

Geert correctly pictured Islam as very dangerous and responsible for a lot of misdeeds. He failed to show islam for the pure evil it is, exceeding nazism in many ways and embracing parts of nazism here and there. Fitna was way to mild, but perhaps this is left for Fitna II?

Should the western nations ever embrace islam, then the ethics of islam will also replace human rights and general niceness of the modern western people. What do those arabs think, the USA takes on islam and all americans become even nicer to arabs? More likely the aryan neo-muslims with their newfound islamic ethics might not consider arabs worthy of life at all, and enslave them or kill them.

[LibertyOrDeath]

I'm not here to defend Islam, because as a white (agnostic) Westerner, I have no use for that religion or the culture surrounding it. My attitude is that there are radicals in every religion, including Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. But I need to point out that the main reason Geert Wilders is so anti-Muslim is not because he cares about the fate of the West, but because of his strong loyalty to Jews. He is practically an Israeli agent:

In the past twenty five years Geert Wilders has visited Israel about forty times[16], where he has, according to his own sayings, met Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert personally. [16]

Originally, Wilders wanted to move to the Jewish state because he thought one could, as opposed to the Netherlands, 'work for your own money'.[16] Wilders worked in bread factories and a moshav.[17] With the money he earned, he traveled through Israel and some near countries. He started to love Israel, or as he states it in his own words in 2003: "The past years I have visited many interesting countries, from Tunisia to Turkey and from Cyprus to Iran, but nowhere I have that special feeling of solidarity that I always get if I set foot on the Israeli Ben Gurion Airport." [16]

Wilders has, in the eight years he has served in the Dutch Parliament, always supported Israel and attacked countries he perceives as enemies of Israel.[16]

Furthermore, Wilders has made some proposals in the Dutch Parliament inspired by Israel. For example, in 2005 Wilders proposed implementing Israel's administrative detention in the Netherlands, a practice heavily criticized by human rights group Amnesty International. Also, at the time Wilders was member of the People's Party for Freedom and Democracy, he had an employee who directly came from the Israeli Embassy. [16]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders#Israel

Wilders is thus much like the Jewish supremacists who have taken over BOTH major parties in the US (and the media). McCain, Clinton, and Obama kiss ass to the Israel lobby (this was recently in the news) because the 2.5% of the population who is Jewish is also the wealthiest and most powerful ethnic group in America by far. The neocon GOP, firmly under the influence of pro-Israel Jews and their shabbos goyim, constantly stumps for wars against Israel's enemies. The Democrats have a long tradition of pushing the domestic Jewish agenda of multiculturalism, hate speech laws, gun control, and mass immigration (including Muslims):

A congruent opinion is expressed by prominent Jewish social scientist and political activist Earl Raab who remarks very positively on the success of American immigration policy in altering the ethnic composition of the United States since 1965. Raab notes that the Jewish community has taken a leadership role in changing the Northwestern European bias of American immigration policy (1993a, p. 17), and he has also maintained that one factor inhibiting anti-Semitism in the contemporary United States is that “(a)n increasing ethnic heterogeneity, as a result of immigration, has made it even more difficult for a political party or mass movement of bigotry to develop” (1995, p. 91). Or more colorfully:

The Census Bureau has just reported that about half of the American population will soon be non-white or non-European. And they will all be American citizens. We have tipped beyond the point where a Nazi-Aryan party will be able to prevail in this country. We [i.e., Jews] have been nourishing the American climate of opposition to bigotry for about half a century. That climate has not yet been perfected, but the heterogeneous nature of our population tends to make it irreversible— and makes our constitutional constraints against bigotry more practical than ever. (Raab 1993b, p. 23).

Indeed, the “primary objective” of Jewish political activity after 1945 “was . . . to prevent the emergence of an anti-Semitic reactionary mass movement in the United States” (Svonkin 1997, 8). Charles Silberman (1985, 350) notes that “American Jews are committed to cultural tolerance because of their belief— one firmly rooted in history— that Jews are safe only in a society acceptant of a wide range of attitudes and behaviors, as well as a diversity of religious and ethnic groups. It is this belief, for example, not approval of homosexuality, that leads an overwhelming majority of American Jews to endorse ‘gay rights’ and to take a liberal stance on most other so-called ‘social’ issues.”3

The above is from "Jewish Involvement in Shaping American Immigration Policy, 1881-1965: A Historical Review" by Kevin MacDonald.
http://www.csulb.edu/~kmacd/ABERNET3.PDF

Are radical Muslims a threat? Sure, in any country in which they live in large numbers. So are the Jewish extremists who have subverted the US government and media and are milking our country dry. These are merely two different kinds of theats. Read as many of the threads as you can in "Neo-Con Watch" over at Original Dissent if you want to take the red pill but haven't already done so:

http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10

Not all Jews are Jewish supremacists, and not all Muslims are murderers. I've met decent people in both categories. But ultimately I think different ethnic groups are always going to organize along ethnic lines and push for their own group interests. Thus, multiculturalism should be abandoned as the foolish mistake it is and replaced with segregation of the different ethnic groups into relatively homogeneous nations. Why is it that any mention of a white nation elicits shrieks about "hate speech" from the same Jews who support Israel as a Jewish state? Why isn't diversity Israel's strength?

[TheSavageHyena]

Both your research and your smarts identify a very 'sensitive' subject. In many regards to your post, the first few sentences would draw cries of 'anti-semitism'. I am neither muslim, jew, christian, etc. Religion is still a very powerful tool used by governments to persuade the sheeple. I am against all major religions which call for a political agenda and use script as a reference. Now in a dictatorship/commie country, citizens must conform to the government or suffer the grave consequences. However in a free country, one should identify key problems (media, monopolies, outsourcing, immigration etc) and deal with them accordingly. In Canada we have the same problem, yet many fear to identify and spend too much time thinking about it. We are just thankful we have 'free' healthcare, pay 15% tax on income in and income out, and scratch our heads as to why the middle class is geting lower and lower....A little venting sorry, and gun control here is more prevalent than herpes on a hooker. Everyday it feels like freedom is getting choked harder and harder :confused:

[sbovisjb1]

The Netherlands has generally been a nation enjoying freedom of expression. With that comes sometimes a clash of heart felt ideas. Some people deeply believe that the Islamic characteristics expressed in the Qaran such as the societal place of women and the need to subjugate the non-Islamic population are reason enough to marginalize that group of people. When someone actually believes that they are doing "God's will" by killing and maiming children and non-combatants, I suppose they may just have a point.....no?

I have quoted the Qaran several times in posts here and no one familiar with the Holy Book said that I had mis-spoke....because I had NOT. The Book is filled with as much violence as the Bible but it is directed at the non-believer. I have a serious problem with someone, anyone, wanting to do me harm because I do not believe as they do.

I do not know anyone who is a Muslim. I suppose if I did I would ask them quite a few things, especially if they would do me harm simply for not believing..... But my point here is that I have NO reason to have any compassion for anyone who has no compassion for me. I'm not a fucking rug, to be stepped upon by the multitudes. I'm a human being who deserves as much respect as any Muslim who screams in the street about a cartoon. Why the fuck is it acceptable to defend Muslim interests and not the non-Muslim?

The Dutch accept tolerance as long as no lines are crossed and Muslims as a majority are and expecting special treatment. I am tolerant of everyone and most things, but once people are hurt, protection of the rest is a must.

[Logic Probe]

Most folks, especialy our more liberal and libertarian bretheren, tend to lump Islam in with all other religions; that is to say, a sometimes annoying but mostly harmless delusion that can usually be dealt with by humoring the adherents. So, they fail to understand that Islam isn't just a minor delusion, it's an all-encompassing psychosis, a meme much like a mental virus that has killed or enslaved billions of people. (This thought is not original, BTW, see Churchill's quote on "mohammedanism" in my next post.)

Therefore, I was disappointed in that Fitna didn't go far enough by half. True, it did show Muslims behaving badly, along with the Koranic "justification" for it, but it left out the worst of Islam. I didn't see any explanation that lying to infidels (taqqiya) about Islam, especially to help Jihad, is expected, or that it's OK to make a false truce (hudna) with infidels (or kuffar) in order to gain the advantage. I don't remember anything of Islams acceptance of slavery or sex with children, and I can't remember if it talked about the goal of world domination ( the kalifayah).

Taqqiya and hudna are the aspects of Islam that need to get the most publicity, IMO. Once you know that nothing Muslims say or do can be trusted, and that global domination is their goal, it tends to inspire more research. If more isn't done to expose the terrifying insanity that is Islam, soon all who survive will have a nice callus on their foreheads (zebibah) from banging their heads on the floor five times a day, celebrating the permanent and total death of freedom.

[Logic Probe]

Winston Churchill said of Islam,

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries!
Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy.

Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement, the next of its dignity and sanctity.

The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die.

But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.

Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

Food for thought.

[Charles Owlen Picket]

Unfortunately evangelical enterprises exist profoundly within the Christian faith. Evangelicalism or the proselytizing of Islam are the elements I find distasteful. If a faith does not exist on it's merits to attract it's adherents; but has to convince the multitudes of it's worth; such a thing becomes a challenge of marketing & salesmanship.

I find it fascinating that Churchill recognized that Christianity struggled (vainly) against science yet in a choice between the two (Islam & Christianity) he would side with one or the other. If situationally & culturally reversed, might he say the same about Islam, looking back from the time of the eleventh century and it's inroads into mathematics & science?

Cultural perspectives are too invested in nationalism [for me] to embrace sweeping statements as total truths. That's not to say that I would not defend my nation nor my way of life. But to exclude another - so long as it does not threaten to destroy my own would be a type of malignant narcissism on a political scale.

[Logic Probe]

I have no use for any religion, and I am little swayed by nationalism; I just want to be left to live my life as I see fit, so long as I don't harm others in doing so. However, our friends the Saudis are spending billions to actively proselytize on behalf of a brand of Sunni Islam (Wahhabists, or as they call themselves, Salafists) that mandates every facet of every life it touches, from how you blow your nose in the morning to how you wipe your ass at night and everything in between. As I pointed out in entry #16 above, it most assuredly does threaten you and your way of life, IF you are not presently a Muslim.

BTW, when you talk to Muslims, or their apologists, and they quote Koranic passages enjoining peace, bear this foremost in mind: Muhammad gave all sorts of conflicting scriptures, depending on what would gain him the most at the moment. The way Islamic scholars work out the kinks in his commandments is called the doctrine of abrogation. Whatever the latest pronouncement was is the only valid rule (bearing also in mind that the Koran is not written in chronological order.). So, in the last of his orders on violence against unbelievers, called the Surah of the Sword, Muhammad negates 27 other verses that advise peaceful ways, saying, "slay the idolaters wherever you find them" (unless they accept Islam and all its laws). Since that was, literally, the last word on the subject, it is the law, forever.

So, you see that my post wasn't a nationalistic response, or a religious one, it is simply meant to aid in preserving my liberty and yours.

</soapbox mode off>

[Charles Owlen Picket]

NO, I understand and agree quite deeply. I was pointing out that historically a perspective could be reversed as the viewpoint (Churchill's) was based upon a premise that was inherent within the 20th century.

I love freedom & individualization of benign self expression so deeply (as well as my country & it's Constitution) that I could never consider being attracted to Communism or National Socialism. I see those as being politicizations of Religion Of The State (& deeply distasteful). I see a deep division between love of one's country (or religion: if we want to go there) & the belief that one's country (or religion) is in some manner "better" [for anyone other than oneself].

</soapbox mode off, also>

[akinrog]

Winston Churchill said of Islam.

Actually my dear friends, anybody who is talking in favor or against Islam is falling prey to balkanization (i.e. divide and conquer) politics of globalist imperialists.

You are quoting from Winston Churchill, but you (or more properly your sources) avoid mentioning it was British who cut a deal with Mecca Sherif to fight against (relatively) non-Fundamentalist Moslem Ottomans, which laid ground for the most fundamentalist country of the world, i.e. Saudi Arabia.

What I mean while he was (appearing to be) attacking Islam, he was actually and underhandedly giving blowjobs to Islamic Fundamentalist Arab Sheikhs so they can get a hold of oil in the Arab Peninsula.

So what he said is meaningless (in practical and historical aspects). They must be deemed as ploys of a lone wolf politician.

You should see the pattern (of balkanization and political control ruse) here.

While some part of Westerners gives the appearance that they are anti-Moslem, anti-Fundamentalist, anti-whatever and seemingly in a relentless fight against Moslems, the other part is doing everything in their power to keep those regimes in place.

This is actually just like 60s - 70s of USA: While FBI was giving appearance that they were fighting against drugs, it was other three lettered organization who is turning his head away (in some cases even actively facilitating and participating in) that morphine and heroin (of high purity) was being produced in Laos under the auspices of Black Ops, so Viet Cong Trail used by North can be cleaned by some Laotian (sp?) contra-guerilla who are producing, selling, trafficking tons of heroin per annum under the protection of that three lettered agency. Some folks even claim that official vehicles of that three lettered agency were being used in transportation of the heroin produced.

Similarly today, benefactors of World Islamic Fundamentalism are oil rich Arab sheikhs and they are definitely protected by WESTERNERS. Period.

For example, do you ever hear any human right violations from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, or other anal bitches of Western world, who happen to be Islamic Fundamentalists?

Maybe the reason for why you don't hear is they are well behaving Islamic Fundamentalists. I bet if today Iranian Oil fields were being run by western companies (i.e. Iranian rulers were as well behaving dictators as Arab sheikhs, you will not see or hear anything about people being executed in Iran too. This is actually a pathetic hypocrisy.

In SA, at least a few executions are taking place every week. The suspects are supposed to prove that they are innocent not the other way around, as supposed to be in a modern legal system. And non-capital and / or non-brutal sentences are very little.

If someone claims in SA that you blasphemed Allah and you fail to prove you did not, you are simply beheaded. And all those freedom loving media and freedom loving intellectuals never say a word about it.

Due to this protection handed over by WESTERNERS, non-Arab Moslems who are much more moderate in comparison with Wahhabi Arabs are becoming Islamic fundamentalist too. Which Moslem does not want to be a Wahhabi, given the fact that Wahhabis do everything they want, they are rich, they are cool, they are untouchable and they are hit.

These people having trillions of dollars are spreading their poison entire world. Every country who has Moslem population is becoming Islamic Fundamentalist country and or now has a core cadre of future mujaheeden warriors. Google "Rabita Trust" and understand what I mean. (You will also find strange connections with Rabita Trust and some forces who are supposed to be fighting against terrorism.)

Majority of the believers of a certain religion are actually normal people, i.e. cultural believers (e.g. cultural Moslems, cultural Christians, cultural Judaists), they are no fanatics.

However, if a group of fanatics with trillions of dollars and protection extended by the most powerful intelligence organization of the world, then even those cultural believers shall become fanatic believers.

If today western people wonders why the hell Islamic Fundamentalism is do widespread, you must ask that question the Darwin Award Candidate Geniuses of that three lettered agency working under Reagan Administration who came up with the BRILLIANT (!!!) idea that they shall use Islam to defeat communists.

During this course of pro-Mujahedeen era, they also noticed that Islamic fundamentalists make good pro-western dictators too. So even after fall and collapse of communism, they still support them and do everything to keep them in power.

Their brilliant (!!!) idea is behind the very fundamentalism you westerners keep whining and bitching about. :mad:

If you want the Islamic fundamentalism go away, you should do something about those officials (who even happened to be presidents) who were, are and most probably shall be supporting these fundamentalist for the sake of defeating reds and of getting oil.

However, instead you are attacking and / or advocating Islam, which is what exactly globalist imperialists want you to do so.

Islamic fundamentalism was never about Islam or any religion, but it was about controlling a large mass of mostly uneducated even ignorant population for the benefit of a few (not ordinary but extremely wealthy) westerners who are using and steering ordinary and honest western citizens for their own profit, by playing in both fronts as friend and foe at the same time. Regards.