The question of ethics will remain present and pressing before any work whose author claims it is creative while it offends the other and distorts his image in people’s eyes. If the director of the film (Fitna), the Dutchman Geert Wilders, and those who agreed with and supported him, plead the exercise of freedom in their artistic works, then we set before their eyes an innate truth in which all human beings without exception believe; and this truth is: what is the ethical way out for attacking others and their beliefs through distortion and mockery?.. .
Western society has not been without engagement with the question of ethics across its works of discovery and invention; this question still presses upon new works and acts, given that there is another party in any equation—and even if the other party is not present, the self and the soul deserve to be respected...
In the waves against Islam, in their various forms, that take place in the West, we find that all the values in which the proponents of this claim believe fade away and dissipate so long as the other party is Islam or the Muslims. But if you put the Jews, for example, as the other party, you will not be entitled even to a scholarly historical discussion of the burning of the Jews (the Holocaust), because, quite simply, you will face prosecution in those very Western countries...
I do not think we need much effort to prove the Western bias among many of their politicians, thinkers and artists; this is a matter whose features are clear, whose intentions are evident, and whose aims are known.
Let us leave all that aside... and come with me to the film (Fitna), which the Dutchman Wilders directed in an attempt to show Islam—and the Qurʾan specifically—in an image savage in features, coarse in temperament and violent in practice, which provoked reactions against this work in many countries of the world...
Such a work—I do not think we can approach it with serious criticism of its contents, for it is a superficial work in every sense of the word. Perhaps it comes in the context of shaping public opinion in the West through outward effects; it is most like administering a canned dose of ideas to manufacture a stance—not against Muslims, with their different considerations and their varied characteristics in understanding, between strictness and tolerance, but against the Qurʾan as the reference book on which all Muslims rely in their lives. With this work the director wants to cut off at the root every voice calling for dialogue with the moderate forces among the Muslims, for he accuses the root, represented by the Noble Qurʾan, and what results from that is eternal enmity toward all Muslims.
When I came to the film, I took my paper and pen to record its contents and then analyze them, with the aim of examining the reasons that led the director to form that understanding, then pausing at his aims, so that one could come away with a comprehensive view of the work. But I was surprised by the superficiality of this short film: it was a compilation of clips of world events that are full of political and intellectual complexities, interspersed with excerpts of Quranic verses cut off from their contexts...
In other words, the tool the director resorted to in order to shape European public opinion is the tool of quick influence through the moving image, and only one who has no acquaintance with knowledge is influenced by this tool; for it is culture and knowledge that shape views through evidence and proofs. The director’s handling of the European mind in this work is thus a belittling of the European mind itself, and rational voices ought to have condemned this work from an epistemic standpoint, for the belittlement and mockery it represents—not of the Qurʾan, but of the mind of the recipient...
How, then, does he want to convince people about the Quranic discourse by cutting up the verses and joining them to a collection of shifting events here or there?.. You even find some laughable things in the mass of images that he considers related to the verses he presents: sometimes he cites verses that came in the context of war and refer to those who commit aggression against the Muslims, and the images that follow portray them as though they refer to everyone who does not believe in the religion; and he shows scenes of the death penalty as retribution as though Islam alone had sanctioned it, and in the midst of that he brings scenes that have no connection whatsoever to this reality...
Despite that, the director acknowledges that Islam is in constant growth in the West: he shows scenes of veiled women walking in Western streets, then brings a chart showing the growth of the proportion of Muslims in the West from the year 1995 CE to the year 2007 CE... In this he refutes himself, since all those trivializing works were of no use in curbing the Muslims and reducing their proportion in the world, because real change is built only on the basis of knowledge. Perhaps the director of the film (Fitna) is indirectly inviting Westerners to look into the Noble Qurʾan to find out about the claim; and we believe that many of those who look into the Noble Qurʾan without the influences of the surrounding atmosphere or other influences will appreciate the values to which the Noble Qurʾan calls, and will say: “Indeed we heard a wonderful Quran, which guides to rectitude...” (Qurʾan 72:1–2)... And indeed, some time after this film came out, news reached us of many Westerners flocking to buy a copy of the Noble Qurʾan (in translation)...
While following the books report issued by the Al Arabiya.net website, it caught my attention that the book (Lost History) by its author Michael Morgan, which was published last year, is going to be reprinted. This book does the opposite of what the film (Fitna) does, because it presents the history of the Muslims in a neutral way and makes Westerners aware that this civilizational progress they live in came about only through an active and fundamental contribution of the scholars of Islam. Quoting the report of (Al Arabiya.net): (The author says that the early achievements of the Muslims in culture and science were the cornerstone of the Renaissance in Europe, and then of the Enlightenment era and modern Western society. He speaks of the “golden ages” of Islam, which begin with the Messenger (s), and the echo of these ages remains even today”. He mentions by name Ibn Sina, Ibn al-Haytham, al-Tusi, al-Khwarizmi and ʿUmar al-Khayyam, and says that these men brought about a revolution in astronomy, medicine and mathematics and opened the way for Newton, Copernicus and other scientists in the West.
He adds that the Prophet Muhammad was an inspiration to many leaders in the West who spoke about justice, religious tolerance, and support for the sciences and the arts).
It seems that the director of the film (Fitna) in the Netherlands and the cartoonist of the offensive cartoons in Denmark ought to read this last paragraph, so that they may know that the Prophet Muhammad (s) is the one who taught humanity the values of justice and tolerance.
As for their method, the words of Allah the Exalted concerning the policy of the hypocrites apply to it: “They certainly sought to cause sedition earlier, and upset the matters for you, until the truth came and Allah’s command prevailed, much as they were averse” (Qurʾan 9:48).
