The Thinking 

“Innocence of Muslims”

September 14, 2012


DANIEL S. writes:

I had time to watch the video “trailer” of Innocence of Muslims (I am not sure if there is an actual full length version), and found it stupid, juvenile, and poorly produced. Supposedly $5 million was spent on it, though it doesn’t show. The content is deliberately inflammatory toward Muslims, depicting Muhammad as a homosexual, a violent buffoon, and womanizer. The alleged producer is an Egyptian Copt with a dubious background, supposedly he was convicted at some point of bank fraud. The actors in the movie were allegedly misled, being told that the movie was to be about a man in Egypt 2,000 years ago named “Master George,” with the actors’ dialogue later being dubbed over to make the film about Muhammad. One can make what they will of that information in judging the intention of those behind the film. (Another important question to ask is when does proper criticism and warning of the danger of Islam become overshadowed by ‘ressentiment’?)

Of course, the trailer would have never seen the light of day in the West, it would have been lost among the flood of other silly and banal videos that populate sites like Youtube. Of course, somehow, a radical Muslim cleric in Egypt with a satellite station acquired the clip, dubbed it over in Arabic, and aired it, claiming that the film was a product of the American government and part of a wider Jewish conspiracy against Islam. Of course, it fits into a wider pattern of obscure “anti-Islam” quotes or images by Westerners being used as a pretext by Muslims to riot and murder (think of the Danish cartoons, the Newsweek Koran flushing story, Pope Benedict’s negative characterization of Muhammad, and Terry Jones’ Koran burning). As such this is nothing new, or even note worthy on its own at this point.

The more important part of this event is that an American ambassador was so ruthlessly murdered by the same Muslim militants that the U.S. had overthrow Qaddafi to help bring into power. Why do few find it so troublesome that America is willing to fund, arm, and empower the allies of the same men that attacked New York eleven years ago in Libya, Syria, and elsewhere?

Is it not also a strange coincidence that the ambassador met his demise in a manner similar to that of the Libyan dictator he had helped dethrone? St. Paul warned that whatever a man sows is what he will later reap. What has the U.S. sown in Libya and elsewhere in the Middle East?

—— Comments —–

Jane writes (not Jane S.):

The 18-minute clip I saw of Innocence of Muslims was so contrived and agenda-driven it played out as a comedy and a sick perverted comedy at that.

A reader writes:

The trailer might be bad but a movie about the actual life of Muhammad would be violent porn.

Share:Email this to someoneShare on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterPin on Pinterest0Share on Google+0