Thousands have protested across the Middle
East and North Africa against a film made in the
US that depicts the Prophet Muhammad. What is
in the film and why it has enraged so many
people? How did the film come to public attention? The video was first posted online on 1 July without
attracting much attention. It was later picked up by
various Arab TV stations, with religious Egyptian TV
channel al-Nas's presenter Sheikh Khalad Abdalla
broadcasting scenes on 8 September. A clip from
his show, dubbed into Arabic, was posted online and within days had been viewed by hundreds of
thousands of people. The Afghan government says it has blocked
YouTube to prevent people from watching it. White House officials have asked YouTube to
consider whether the film breaches its own guidelines. These guidelines include the stipulation: "We encourage free speech and defend
everyone's right to express unpopular points of
view. But we do not permit hate speech..." Google, which owns YouTube, said in a statement
that the video was "clearly within our guidelines
and so will stay on YouTube", but added that
"given the very difficult situation in Libya and
Egypt" it had restricted access to the video in both
countries. What does the film show? The video, a trailer for a longer film entitled
Innocence of Muslims, appears to depict Islam as a
religion of violence and hate, and its Prophet
Muhammad as a foolish and power-hungry man. It opens with a scene in which a Coptic family in a
newly radicalised Islamic Egypt is attacked by a
group of Muslims while police look on without
intervening. The father tells his daughters that
Muslims want to kill all Christians and that the
Islamic state is hiding their crimes. It then shows the Prophet Muhammad and his life
with his family and his followers in the desert. He is
shown having sex with his wife Khadija and other
women. The video implies Khadija is behind the creation of
the Koran, which is described as a combination of
subversions of the Torah and the New Testament. The trailer depicts Muhammad and his followers as
killers, looters and extortionists. In one scene the
Prophet sanctions the sexual abuse of children; in
another, he says he is gay. Why is it so offensive? Depicting the Prophet Muhammad in any way
already defies Islamic belief, let alone satirising him.
His wife Khadija and his earliest companions are
also revered in their own right in Islam, and so
mocking these individuals is also considered
serious blasphemy. The founding principle of Islam is that the Koran is
the direct word of God, revealed to Muhammad in
order that he impart it to humankind. Depicting
Khadija as planning to concoct a holy book out of
the Old and New Testament defies an intrinsic
Islamic belief. Other references to Muhammad's affairs with
women, his greed and violence would clearly be
insulting in any context. What do we know about how it was put
together? The entire film is thought to be around an hour
long, although most have only seen a 14-minute
trailer which has now been widely circulated on the
internet in English and Arabic. The fuller version had a showing in a small Los
Angeles cinema, the Vine Theatre, in June, where its
title was The Innocence of Bin Laden. It was clearly put together on a budget, with a
cheaply made set, amateur actors and poor
production standards. It was shot over five days at
a California film studio in August last year, with a
cast of around 50, together with a large production
crew. The most offensive parts of the film appear not to
have been in the original, but dubbed over the
soundtrack at a later date. Who is Nakoula Basseley Nakoula? The now infamous trailer for the film was posted
through a Youtube account linked to the name
'sambacile' - originally reported as an Israeli-born
Jewish estate agent who had raised $5m (£3.1m)
from Jewish donors in the US to make the film. But
this person did not exist. US authorities now say they have identified
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, an Egyptian-born
Coptic Christian living in California, as the man who
made the film. Mr Nakoula, who was found guilty of fraud in 2010
and ordered to pay more than $790,000 in
restitution, is thought to have used the pseudonym
"Sam Bacile" to hide his identity. He denies the
allegations. What do the actors say about it? They say they were misled about the film entirely,
claiming that the original film had nothing to do
with Islam or Muhammad, and that all references to
him and insults to the religion were added post-
production. Cindy Lee Garcia, who had a small role in the film,
told Gawker.com that she and others were given a script for a film called Desert Warriors, and that it
would be a historical drama set in the Middle East.
Ms Garcia also said she had seen Mr Nakoula on set. Who else appears to have been involved in the
making of the film? An American right-wing extremist called Steve
Klein, linked with various anti-Islamic groups in
California, has said he promoted the film but does
not know the identity of the director. According to Salon, Mr Klein cultivated links with Californian Coptic Christian Joseph Nasralla, who
has been identified as president and CEO of Media
for Christ, the organisation alleged to have
produced the film. Media for Christ is based in Duarte, California, and
advertises its mission as promoting Christian values. Pastor Terry Jones, from Florida, who gained
notoriety after threatening to burn a copy of the
Koran over plans to build an Islamic cultural centre
near the site of the World Trade Center, has said he
was in touch with a Mr Bacile over promotion of the
film, but did not meet him and could not identify him. According to Gawker.com, soft-porn director Alan Roberts was brought in to work on the film by
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula. The site says he too
may not have been aware what he was actually
working on. Is there something more going on here than
protests about a film? As was evident after Danish cartoons of Muhammad
were published in 2006, politicians and religious
leaders in the region used perceived insults to
Islam to rally public support. Protests began to spread from Egypt to other
countries - spurred on perhaps by local media -
because of a long-standing mistrust and anger at
the West, something a number of groups have
been able to capitalise upon. Middle East analyst Magdi Abdelhadi says that
although the film will have caused genuine offence
among many Muslims, groups like Al Qaeda, whose
black flag has been seen at some of the protests,
have seized the opportunity to stir up unrest. Disillusionment, lack of opportunity and anger at
the establishment is also feeding into the protests,
analysts say.t