THE STARK IRONY OF “INNOCENCE OF MUSLIMS”

THE STARK IRONY OF “INNOCENCE OF MUSLIMS”

That the controversial anti-Muhammad movie “Innocence of Muslims” has been generally denounced all over the Islamic world and elsewhere is no longer news. That our Muslim brothers and sisters should have paid more attention to the timeless value of the culture of non-violence and forbearance in protesting the irreligious portrayal of Islam and the Prophet is a position I tenaciously hold. That there are a lot of lessons we can still learn from the current messy and chaotic situation is to say the obvious. However, that the world is presently looking at the stark irony that surrounds the ‘facts’ and ‘fictions’ emerging from the production of the infamous film is what I do not know yet.

The said movie depicts Muhammad as a fraud and impostor and portrays his followers as fools. But then, if what I read from the casting notice of the film on the internet sometime in mid-2011 or so is anything to go by, it was most probably cast and shot as “Desert Warrior”, with the duo of Sam Bassiel and Alan Roberts as the producer and director respectively. This then implies that deceit and deception reigned supreme ab initio from the time the casting calls were publicized by the producer, making him the worst and most dubious fraud in the ongoing drama. In fact, to say the least, it is culpably fraudulent to have sent out casting notice for a movie camouflaged as “Desert Warrior”, whereas what he really had in mind was actually “Innocence of Muslims”. Surely, this was purposively done with intent to deliberately and criminally mislead the potential cast and crew. This viewpoint is further reinforced by the fact that the work was originally introduced to the internet world as “an HD 24P historical Arabian Desert adventure film.”

Moreover, when the disjointed story lines being ‘paraded’ by some of the cast in the movie are juxtaposed with the final product that has now caused so much acrimony that threatens the present fragile peace in the Arab nations that have been experiencing political uprisings in recent times, one is inclined to think that there was some unscrupulous script rewriting and unethical editing after the movie had been shot, which is evident, for instance, in the smart but noticeable voice superimposition in some of the drama scene. No matter the excuse of the production personnel, I believe this is absolutely unprofessional and grossly unfair to the ‘innocent’ actors, actresses and others who were ‘lured’ into taking part in the film. Again, this makes the producer the worst and most despicable and callous fraudster.

Furthermore, the story now surfacing describes the man Sam Bassiel (Bacile) as a real estate developer. Looking at the crudity of the ultimate production (at least, as seen in the clips on YouTube), I have no doubt that he only disguised as an expert in film making, making him the worst impostor, who knows next to nothing about making reputable movies that could withstand professional scrutiny and stand the test of time. Indeed, going by what the US authorities and independent investigators are presently unearthing about the producer’s real identity, I make bold to say that all the aforementioned negative qualifications are not atypical of this man’s unwholesome antecedent reputation. Thus, it is incredible and pathetically ironical that this kind of film is emanating from him: the pot calling the kettle black!

Finally, this little write-up would fall short of its scope and objective if it fails to say something substantial about the “innocence” of the participants in the production of the film. It is unfortunate and leaves much to be desired for the producer to have successfully bamboozled the entire actors, actresses and other crew members like Cindy Lee Garcia, Tim Dax and Jimmy Israel – since what they are now telling the whole world in their belated joint statement issued to voice out their ‘culpable innocence’ and denounce the final product “Innocence of Muslims” is that they were deceived by him. How could they all have been so cheaply fooled? Or rather, so ‘expensively’ fooled, because he must have paid them so heavily for the production of the $5 million project! At any rate, as the Bible says, “the love of money is the root of all evil”; their love of money might have turned them into the worst and most gullible fools!

“INNOCENCE OF MUSLIMS” AND THE CULTURE OF NON-VIOLENCE AND FORBEARANCE

“INNOCENCE OF MUSLIMS” AND THE CULTURE OF NON-VIOLENCE AND FORBEARANCE

These few days (especially from the day the 11^th anniversary of 9/11 was celebrated) have been regrettably chaotic in most of the Muslim world, with the crisis now spreading to London, Sydney, and elsewhere around the world. The imbroglio is the byproduct of a newly released anti-Islamic movie “Innocence of Muslims”, which is widely considered a grievous insult to Prophet Muhammad and Islam. Without any fear of contradiction, I believe anyone who knows what religion and religious identity mean would most probably condemn in the strongest term possible deliberate efforts to disrespect and rubbish a people's religion and sacrilegiously insult its founder, or its foremost prophet, or its supreme leader – admittedly, and without being apologetic, with series of anti-Christ movies and anti-papal or anti-sacerdotal films in the West and Africa (even in the young Nigerian Nollywood movie industry), Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular have received more than their fair shares in this regard.

Be that as it may, while the violent conflicts generated by the infamous anti-Muhammad film appear to be mere coincidence with the 9/11 anniversary, the ongoing scenario is repugnantly symbolic, giving us another opportunity to assess (or if you like, re-assess) the Islamic religion vis-à-vis the behaviour of its adherents all over the world.

Recently, I decided to further my study on the relationship between religion, social justice and violence in my quest to better understand the sectarian movement 'Boko Haram' in Nigeria. Inter alia, the debate on the nature of the interaction between religion and violence is very interestingly germane. While some people hold that there is a necessary connection between the duo, others argue that they are only contingently related. These positions invariably lead to a somewhat subtle distinction between what is ideologically enshrined in the tenets of a religion and what is empirically verifiable in the history of the religion.

Zeroed in on Islam, on the one hand, some (Islamic) scholars contend that the religion does not 'ideologically' prescribe violence, but 'conditionally' approves it – 'conditionally' because some Qur'anic passages unambiguously highlight when violence could be used in pursuance of 'noble' or 'just' causes, which sometimes compare with the Christian views about the controversial Medieval-developed 'just war' theory. On the other hand, it has been advanced that what is (not) 'ideologically' stipulated should be distinguished from what is 'empirically' observable: history 'empirically' testifies to the fact that most of the violence that has presented religion in the most pathetic light in the lengthy drama of humanity is painfully linked to (some) Islamic faithful. I feel, and strongly too, that this is rather unfortunate and disturbing, since it re-echoes the fundamental question that many a people have asked over and over again about the nature of the relationship between religion and violence.

At this stage of the history of our common humanity, it is thus my candid opinion that it is high time our Muslim brothers and sisters demolished the barrier between the ideological understanding of Islam and the empirical practice of Islam: they expediently need to honestly go beyond the 'fanciful' etymology and 'theoretical' ideology of Islam, critically re-evaluate their empirical behaviour in relation to violence as Islamic adherents and followers of Prophet Mohammad, and imbibe the culture of non-violence in protesting infringements upon their interests and making their grievances known to the world – the culture of non-violence and forbearance so much preached in words and deeds by the trio of the 20^th century apostles of peace (the non-Christian Mahatma Gandhi, the black American Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Catholic Blessed Pope John Paul II) remains ever invaluable for all peoples, cultures, religions, and epochs.

So, I unequivocally submit that some 'behavioural' reformation in the light of the culture of non-violence and forbearance is urgently necessary among the Muslim faithful if the position that Islam is a religion of peace is to be logically and realistically sustained in a simple manner that makes sense to the ordinary, illiterate market woman who does not understand the nuances of the difference between what is (not) 'ideologically' prescribed and what is 'empirically' observable around her. Just like the Second Vatican Council reformation brought so much freshness to the Catholic world, a well-focused 'behavioural' reformation promises to re-invigorate the global Muslim community, endear the Islamic followers to everyone, and ultimately attract and change both their perceived and real enemies to true friends.