Muzzling Anti-Muslims

So long as we’re talking about Muslims, let’s peek in on Geert Wilders, a controversial outspoken anti-Islamist and member of the Dutch Parliament, who was recently sent home from England as a threat to security.

LONDON – A Dutch member of Parliament who has compared the Koran to “Mein Kampf” and blamed Islamic texts for inciting the 9/11 attacks was detained by immigration officials at Heathrow Airport on Thursday and forced to board the next flight back to the Netherlands. His deportation had been ordered by Britain‘s home secretary on the grounds that his presence in Britain endangered public safety.

please-mind-the-gagThe lawmaker, Geert Wilders, had been invited to the House of Lords for a screening of his film “Fitna,” which caused outrage in the Muslim world after it appeared on the Internet last year. It juxtaposes images of the Koran with reports of the 9/11 attacks, as well as gruesome images of the Madrid bombings in 2004, the London transit attacks in 2005 and other atrocities. It also suggests that parts of the Koran have contributed to provoking violence by Muslim extremists.

“This is something you’d expect from Saudi Arabia, not Britain,” he said before his [return] flight.– NY Times

Fascinating that a hate monger and agent provocateur like Wilders should have a better grasp on the meaning of freedom than the British government.  Despite his legitimate claim as a visiting dignitary from a neighboring nation, the Brits ousted his ass out of fear of spooking the population. Basically, Wilders was tossed out because what he has to say is unpopular.

Lord Pearson, an Eton-educated former insurance executive, said the invitation to Mr. Wilders offered him a platform to provoke “violence and hatred” against Muslims in Britain, the vast majority of whom disavowed terrorism. He said Mr. Wilders’s insistence on free speech masked the fact that he was “a provocateur and publicity seeker” with contempt for what Lord Ahmed described as “the great majority of Muslims who want to have the freedom to practice their religion without being insulted and threatened.”

Classic liberalism, steeped in Earl Grey.  Protect minorities by prohibiting their offense, even if it comes at the cost of silencing free expression.  In this country, it’s called “political correctness,” foisted on the larger population by eye-rolling liberal fanatics with roots in the ivory tower.  It’s as wrong as wrong can be.  It turns us into them, using them as a pretext.

Let’s give the last word to the British press, eloquently deploring their government’s action:

For all the obvious hollowness of Mr Wilders’ credentials as a defender of free speech, the cause is a good one. It is a common notion that the right to free speech must be held in balance with the requirement to avoid needless offence. That is a mistake. The right to oppose, mock, deride and even insult people’s beliefs is essential to a society where bad ideas are superseded by better ones. There is no right to have one’s emotional sensibilities protected, for it is no business of government to legislate for people’s feelings. Mr Wilders’ views are obnoxious, and (not but) his freedom to express them must be defended. It is regrettable that Mr Wilders faces not just ostracism but prosecution in the Netherlands because of his comments about Islam.  — Times of London

This entry was posted in NIMBY. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Muzzling Anti-Muslims

  1. ya'gotta'guessit says:

    Good for you, Squatty!

    This is what’s meant when liberals are observed to be the *true* fascists – they’re oh so quick on the official trigger when it comes to dealing with “inappropriate” behavior – that is, anything done or said that could hurt someone’s feeeeeeeeeelings.

    I wish a 200 lb chimpanzee on every one of them.

  2. Ms Calabaza says:

    Squatty:

    Amen.

    I love this line “It’s as wrong as wrong can be. It turns us into them, using them as a pretext.”

  3. Dead 200 pound chimp says:

    Too bad I won’t be around to sign the NEXT deportation order.

  4. Fearless Frank says:

    Wilders is on record as saying he doesn’t hate Muslims, he hates “their book” (the Koran) and Muslim ideology. The sin not the sinner kind of logic. That splits hairs, in my opinion. Sounds like a hate mongerer to me.

    But I wonder how many anti-Christian speakers would be denied entry. My guess is none. It’s a double standard here.

  5. Barbara Ganousch says:

    Maybe somebody can noodle this out for me.

    You’re faulting “liberals” for their squeamishness regarding this racist’s hate mongering. Fine. You’re applauding the Times of London, which certainly is Britain’s established “mainstream media,” for its opposing stance.

    But if the MSM are liberals as they are said to be in this country, how can you have this opposition?

    And where are the “conservatives” on this? Do they approve of hate speech generally and this clod in particular?

  6. Ray Ed Gneck says:

    Freedom of speech we all love it. Funny how merchants of hate, flag burners, and pornographers seem to love it most of all.

  7. Ruh Roh says:

    So what’s your point, Ray Ed? That maybe some people, because of what they say or do, don’t have the same Constitutional freedoms that others enjoy? That maybe somebody like you or a judge somewhere gets to decide who has freedom of speech and who doesn’t?

    Everybody approves of POPULAR speech. It’s the nasty stuff that needs protection from those who would silence us.

  8. Red White & Blue says:

    As far as I’m concerned he should be not only allowed to speak but encouraged to. The more people with the balls to stand up to terrorist cowards, the less happy ragheads will be about setting car bombs in the name of Allah.

  9. Agustin R. Farinas says:

    Squatty,
    Wilders is saying what no one wants to say for fear of offending the Islamists in Holland and in Europe . Europe is turning into Eurabia at very fast pace. England is already implementing the law of sharia in financials dealings with Muslims. Holland has now over 500 mosques in a country that is mostly Christian for hundreds of years. By the year 2020 the majority of the Italian students in grammar school will be of the Islamic faith in a country that was traditionally Chatholic and has been the home of the Catholic faith. England and France have now neighborhoods in London and Paris where British non-Muslims would not dare venture, and non-Muslim French citizens do not wander into these areas out of fear. Even the police in each of those do not enter these areas.
    Last year both Holland and Norway experienced an outbreak of serial rapes and physical abuses against non-Muslims women in Paris and Oslo. Islamic c women jihadists have boldy said: “We will win the war against the infidels using our uterus to conquer all of Europe” and they may be on to something here. Their birth rate is three or four times as high as that of the Europeans which were already experiencing a very low birth rate in every country of Western Europe.
    What exactly does this means to the Europeans? Knowing what we know about Islamic rule where it has been implemented in the world, all non-Muslims and Christians will be abused, mistreated and severe harm will come to them when these folks are in charge.
    The documentation available on record about how Christians have been treated and how they have fared under Islamic regimes does not bode well for them. These are undeniable facts but very hard for people to admit. It is easier to hide you head in the sand and pretend this is not happening. It is high time for you get your head out of the sand and confront these facts head on. Your own survival and that of your family may be at stake here. These folks are for real and they mean business.

  10. Squathole says:

    Auggie: I’m not ready to sign on to all of this, and much of it uncomfortably reminds me of what people used to say in this country about Black Americans, and still say about Mexicans.

    My point in singling this incident out is that government censorship in the name of protecting its citizens neither protects the citizens nor serves the government well. The actual message of the speaker, which in this case appears to be inflammatory bias, doesn’t matter. Give him his stage and let the audience evaluate him.

    The Muslims I know personally present no threat to Christians, as far as I can see, so I’m reluctant to condemn the entire religion and all its practitioners because of the words and actions of some dangerous high-profile and influential lunatics. Who, I agree, need to be, um, neutralized.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s