LiveLeak had removed Fitna from their servers, according to them, due to threats they have received.
Twenty years ago, Muslims rioted after a Muslim insulted Islam. Two years ago Muslim rioted after a non-Muslim insulted Islam. Today, Muslims riot if a non-Muslim might say something that would insult Islam.
I don't agree with everything Wilders says or does, but it's scary when we get down to pre-censorship or preemptive censorship (two words I didn't know existed a week ago).
Should censorship exist? Of course. I do believe that there are limits to freedom of speech. Inciting hate and murder are two examples of problematic issues when it comes to freedom of speech. Voicing your opinion on the problems of immigration and the dangers of fanatic religiosity don't fall into that category.
For me, Fitna exemplifies how much freedom of speech had eroded in the past few years in Western countries. The Dutch gov't considered banning a movie they've never seen. A US company banned it before it came out after receiving complaints, and a British company removed it from their servers after receiving threats. Wilders had made his point just by announcing he wanted to make a movie, an enviable position for any politician.
I have not yet seen the movie in full. I don't usually watch movies with disturbing pictures, not even when they appear on the news.
Is it insulting to Islam? Are beheadings, stonings, female genital mutilations, honor killings and other such things done in the name of Islam insulting to Islam? I would think they would be insulting to any civilized person. But Wilders is not the one responsible for that.