Daily Times

Without wasting our time and effort to go into the worthless details of Eric Allen Bell (the director of the film), Nakoula Basseley Nakoula (the producer, who is a Coptic Christian immigrant from Egypt and and not a Jewish American) and the imbecile Terry Jones ( advertiser and supporter ), let us conclude something. That there is a unanimous opinion across the globe that it is a film of questionable artistic merit, backed by a group of bitter bigots whose only agenda was to incite hatred and violence by smearing the character of our beloved Holy Prophet Mohammed (PBUH). Mohammed (PBUH), who not only was, is and will remain one of the most influential and revered figures in the planet’s history, but also a messenger of compassion, peace, harmony, justice, humanity, brotherhood, empathy and love. His teachings and personality are held more dear by approximately 1.6 billion humans on the globe than their own lives. Along with Allah, Mohammed (PBUH) is the name that unites Muslims across the length and breadth of world, irrespective of their class, creed , nationality or sect. Any attempt under the veil of satire or freedom of speech to undermine, ridicule or mock the Holy Prophet (PBUH) will be considered as a direct offence and attack on the sanctity of Islam and a reckless inflicting of severe emotional distress to its followers, which will create hysteria and a threat to world peace. Period.

It is understandable that the film was dubbed into Arabic to be brought to the attention of the Arabic-speaking world by a Coptic Christian blogger, Morris Sadek, with malicious intent, but what service to Islam was done by broadcasting it on September 8 by Sheikh Khalad Abdualla, a televangelist on Al-Nas, an Egyptian television station? Sheikh and Al-Nas should be held as much responsible for fanning the hatred and perpetuating violence as Basseley, Bell and Jones. The video link of this esoteric movie on YouTube, which would have died its own death and could not even have found 200 viewers got more than 20 million hits in a matter of three days. It is now a rage on the Internet having more than 1,000 links and is being dubbed in more than 20 languages with footnotes, all thanks to relentless marketing done by a channel and a televangelist in the country ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood struggling for political gains against its rival forces. The world would have been a better place if it had never been marketed or shown as one just wonders about the merits of airing such a trailer on their TV channel. They were cognizant of the fact that it would only result in fanning hatred and instigating global violence as the film has no social value and is far beneath any reasonable standard of movie making even if we dismiss all religious connotations. It does not include a single artistically redeemable aspect with atrocious directing, terrible sets and acting consisting of ‘blank eyes and strained line readings’. The way Al Nas televised the reprehensible video gives you an idea of the depths TV channels would swoop to to get eyeballs, however appalling and deplorable the content be. But unfortunately, its role has been completely ignored by the academics or mainstream media, highlighting the reaction of the Muslim world but turning a blind eye to the role of this channel that is highly condemnable as well as punishable.

As for the filmmakers, they enjoy full immunity as per the First Amendment as under US law it is unconstitutional to censor or punish such expressions even as contemptible and loathsome as this film. Freedom of speech in short means freedom to express the most despicable views. The US government cannot pick and choose which expressions to authorise and which to prevent. Therefore, whomever will be churning out such videos in future, which I am sure would already be lined up as angry birds to be unleashed on the media because the kind of hype and reaction such content creates will definitely ensure quick bucks. It will have full protection under US law and one should assume that the practice will flourish unabated not only in the US but Europe as well. Charlie Hebdo’s publication of the caricatures of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) is just the first among equals.

What the general public in the west has failed to understand is that their freedom of expression is being abused by such people indulging in such disgraceful acts and all those defending such acts are either naive, irrational or ignorant. In contrast, the violent reactions by Muslims against this ‘freedom of expression’ are sharply condemned by western media and termed as a calamitous activity, depicting Muslims as extremists and perpetrators of violence while completely turning a blind eye towards the ignorance and intolerance purveyed by their own. For brevity, the less one writes about the reaction and fallout of this video in the Muslim world the better it is as it is for all to see it 24/7 on all TV channels. We do not condone violence but one cannot expect sanity to prevail in the societies of 57 Muslim countries having less than 600 universities combined when the same is not prevalent in the societies that are considered developed, enlightened, moderate and educated. Why these societies have to protect desecration of the most revered figure in the world’s fastest growing religion in the garb of freedom of speech or expression is anyone’s guess. What is the need when you can have a trillion other subjects that do not cause aggravation and vexation to a quarter of the planet’s population to indulge in such provocative measures and then expect the world to be at peace? These are exactly the kind of acts that provide popular logic and hiring grounds to organisations like al Qaeda and the Taliban to procreate hate in minds that are already volatile. The western world is not helping the cause either.

Why the western world cannot make an amendment to their laws of freedom of expressing such notions that result in worldwide mayhem is a question any normal person would ask. Having read debates in the leading western journals and publications, the conclusive common argument is that they do condemn such acts as they are in bad taste, but their freedom to question comparative faiths and ideologies will become passive and redundant if such infringements on their liberties would be put into action. Any campaign to limit their freedom will have an unprecedented opposition that no western government will be willing to take on. Civil society in the west will not comply with any such clampdown as they consider it an intimidation of their right to freedom of expression. What the west fails to realise is that we share the same ecology, regardless of ideology, and to be considerate to other’s faith should not be viewed as a threat to their freedom. We as a Muslim society would be as tolerant to the west’s freedom of expression and as considerate as they would be to our sanctity and reverence to faith, and for every Muslim in the world, Abul Qasim Mohammed Ibn-e-Abdullah (PBUH) is faith personified.

Whether sanity prevails in the west and saner heads make the general public understand and maintain a fine balance remains to be seen. Otherwise, we are merely hoping against hope. We do believe that a right to condemn is not a right to violence but it is easier said than done. Condoning such heinous acts in the garb of freedom of expression would certainly be an ignorant thing to do if people in the west love their children too.

The writer is a businessman and a social activist based in Lahore. He can be reached at mujahidkmir@gmail.com and on Twitter at @Mujahidkmir