After getting banned from Britain and faced with prosecution in the Netherlands for a film he made that is critical of Islam, Dutch MP Geert Wilders showed his film to some US lawmakers.
WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. Jon Kyl is hosting a film screening at the Capitol building on Thursday for a far-right Dutch lawmaker who claims that Islam inspires terrorism.
Kyl is sponsoring the event for Geert Wilders, who was denied entry to London earlier this month because British authorities said he posed a threat to public order.
Newsweek is, er, ambivalent about Wilders and sees his highly critical film about Islam, Fitna, as "incendiary". Geez, you mean it burns down skyscrapers?
Here's a speech Wilders just gave in Rome. The government of the Netherlands is treating Wilders as a criminal.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would not qualify myself as a free man. Four and a half years ago I lost my freedom. Since then I am under 24-hour police protection. As if that is not enough, the most radical Dutch Imam claimed 55.000 euros in compensation for his hurt feelings because of ‘Fitna’. The State of Jordan is possibly going to issue a request for my extradition to stand trial in Amman. The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ordered my criminal prosecution for making ‘Fitna’ and for my political views on Islam. And last week the British government refused my entrance into the United Kingdom because me showing ‘Fitna’ in the British House of Lords at the invitation of a British parliamentarian would be a threat to British public security. This is the alarming state of freedom of speech in today’s Europe: Criticizing Islam has become a dangerous activity, criticizing Islam has apparently become a criminal act.
But as Wilders argues, his film Fitna is really presenting Islam as a substantial chunk of Muslims see it. So shouldn't they be prosecuted too?
You just saw ‘Fitna’. My name is on the credit roll, but like you have seen, ‘Fitna’ is actually not made by me, but is made by radical Muslims, the Koran and Islam itself. If ‘Fitna’ is considered to be hate speech, then what is the Koran? If I am considered to be a threat to public security, then what is Islam?
He sees the Dutch court that wants him prosecuted and the British government as useful idiots for Islam.
The Court’s decision and my ban by the British government are two major victories for Islam. Both institutions have sided with Islam. The first Soviet leader, Lenin, once labelled ignorant people that unknowingly aided his cause as ‘useful idiots’. Well, the Court and the British government are the ‘useful idiots’ of today, and I think they are even proud of it.
When Lord Ahmed, who organized opposition to keep Wilders out of Britain, learned that Salman Rushdie was to get a knighthood Ahmed accused Rushdie of having blood on his hands. If Ahmed is the moderate face of Islam then moderate Islam is incompatible with Western institutions and values.
In London, Lord Ahmed, Britain's first Muslim peer, said he had been appalled by the award to a man he accused of having 'blood on his hands'.
Think that Muslims who advocate terrorism are extremists and not part of Muslim governments? When Rushdie was given his knighthood the Pakistani religious affairs minister justified suicide bombing in response to Rushdie's knighthood.
As Pakistani MPs issued a demand for the award to be immediately withdrawn, the religious affairs minister, Mohammad Ejaz-ul-Haq, said: "The West always wonders about the root cause of terrorism. Such actions [giving Sir Salman a knighthood] are the root cause of it.
"If someone commits suicide bombing to protect the honour of the Prophet Mohammad, his act is justified."
|Share |||By Randall Parker at 2009 February 23 06:16 PM Civilizations Clash Of|