Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician notorious for making an anti-Muslim film called Fitna which was essentially a montage of all the worst stereotypes of violent Muslims, has been banned from entering the UK to attend a showing of his film at the House of Lords. Even after hearing that he was to be banned, he got on his flight to Heathrow only to be taken aside by two British immigration officials and sent back a couple of hours later. This incident has provoked a controversy about freedom of speech, not for the first time in this country given the government’s reaction to the 2001 and 2005 terrorist atrocities.
To be fair, this film was a low-profile showing in a high-security venue, so its potential as a security threat is limited. The decision is, however, consistent with the history of this country which keeps people out on the grounds of not being “conducive to the public good”. They kept Louis Farrakhan out, quite rightly, as well as Yusuf al-Qaradawi, whose threat to public order is considerably less severe than Farrakhan’s or Wilders’. We can do without letting any more of this particular breed of mendacious, malevolent liberal bigot that the Netherlands have been producing a lot lately, particularly when the economy is in difficulty, which has typically been what allows extremists to flourish.
All this talk of freedom of speech is hypocrisy. This country has passed a number of laws since 2005 which restrict free speech, notably the ban on “glorifying terrorism” passed to stop the vexatious “Magnificent 19” press conferences given by al-Muhajiroun, which were vexatious only because the media made them into a scandal in order to sell papers. In the UK, “breach of the peace” laws already criminalised swearing in public, and there is also a law which makes it a crime to advocate replacing the monarchy with a republic (passed at a time when the French Republic was in turmoil). The UK has no constitution, which means that the legislature can pass laws restricting freedom of expression without much hindrance, unlike in most other democratic countries, even if we do not have the same laws banning specific ideas, particularly Holocaust denial, that exist in many countries in Europe.
To be honest, I was surprised that Wilders made a bee-line for Heathrow after being told he was not welcome in the UK. Any fool knows that if you find the front door locked, or you’re told it’s locked, you go round the back way. There are plenty of back ways into the UK; if you don’t succeed when trying Norwich airport or the ferry from France or Belgium, there’s always the various unguarded road crossings from the Irish republic. Perhaps none of these options would have got him here in time for his film showing at the Lords, if that couldn’t be put off by a couple of days. Did he intend to make a spectacle of his deportation, or was he just too thick to try the alternatives? Perhaps his refusal was justified on the grounds that he might forget how to put one foot in front of the other, and end up requiring hospital treatment, or breaking a paving stone, either way costing the taxpayer.
It’s also disappointing, but not surprising, that the Quilliam Foundation support allowing this man into the country on their usual “let’s have a debate” grounds (some unknown from “British Muslims for Secular Democracy” appeared on Channel 4 News earlier spouting a similar line). People who spout this nonsense should get wise to the fact that bigots are liars, and if you prove them wrong, they will simply repeat their lies as soon as they have a new audience. There is no debate to be had with these people. Fitna is widely available on the internet; its author has no need of a foreign parliament to show it. Free speech is not a valid argument, since if restrictions on free speech are acceptable for Muslim bigots, they are acceptable for Wilders and other anti-Muslim bigots.
Possibly Related Posts:
- Spectator forced to apologise to Islam Expo
- France niqaab ban “not meant to help women”
- Let in immigrants, get extremists
- Let them eat halaal meat
- Christina Patterson again: London’s human zoo
X FACTOR - Get Famous for your views on Islam
Based on your article on Hassan Butt and now on Wilders, I was thinking that perhaps we ought to have a tv channel that hosts a special kind of X FACTOR. It could be for all those people out there who find it too energetic to work hard and earn an honest living. They could go on this special tv show and tell us all about their experiences as ex-jihadi’s or about their hatred of Islam & Muslims or even about their “knowledge” as experts on the matter. We could then judge them with live votes and propel them to fame - at least that way they can have their 9 months of fame and then fade away again just like the wannabe teen popstars of our generation.
Sarcasm aside, it is quite offensive when lazy people who have no skills get paid a fortune and are propelled into fame for fabricating their experiences based on the going story of our times. Whether it is some bigot or some other unholy con-artist donning a beard or even some one else claiming to be an expert, I really put my hope in the fact that all people are inspired to see these so called celebrities for the lazy unskilled wannabe’s they are.
Did he intend to make a spectacle of his deportation…?
Of course! No self-aggrandizing politician worth his or her salt would ever think of not making a spectacle of him or herself for political gains, especially when he/she could then position him/herself as a martyr to the cause. That was obvious the other day when he said, “Let them put me in handcuffs.” That was exactly what he wanted the UK immigration officers to do.
Quilliam want to let him in yet the Home Office banned him? hmmm let me see, aren’t Quilliam funded by the Home Office?
Maybe I am a cynic, but that looks suspiciously like a ploy to dupe is into thinking that they don’t take orders from the Home Office.
Wilders symbolizes the amalgamation of Neo-Nazi and Zionist interests, with their shared hatred of Islam. Seriously how many western politicians spend years on an illegal “israel” settlement and confess to visiting the local “israel” embassy once a month? Wilders is just another shabbos goy.
DrM
Is Islam really what the “Eurabia” paranoiacs are concerned about, or are they just biological racists?
They remind me strongly of Jean-Raspail, author of The Camp of the Saints. In that novel the West’s nemesis was a flood of immigrants - not Muslims, but Hindu Indians.
(By the way, I believe that Geert Wilders is a racist, unlike the non-racist Islamophobe Pim Fortuyn.)
Wilders is a Zionist populist.
Fitna is full of errors and factual inaccuracies.
George, I think its a combination of both. They often cite demographics as their main bone of contention with Muslims. You’re right that Wilders is a racist, but he pretends not to be. He openly states his hatred of Islam but then claims he bears no malice towards Muslims, which is laughable ply not to run afoul hate crime laws.
Salaams, Wilders is an attention-junkie. He isn’t happy unless his ugly mug is on at least half a dozen front pages. UmmahPulse has a good post on this issue. Worth a read. http://www.ummahpulse.com/inde.....Itemid=130
Wilders is in no way a racist. He simply takes issue with those verses of the Koran that Muslims use to justify acts of terrorism and depravity.
Wrong as usual, pRickler. Wilders is indeed a racist, and he’s made it clear several times. You’d have to be living under a rock to ignore all the rubbish he’s uttered over the years. The only reason you would defend this neo-Nazi charaltan is b/c of your hatred for all things Islamic. His amateur film project can be easily refuted by any one with an IQ higher then room temperature. Speaking of terrorism, and depravity you’re the one who has giddily supported terrorism against the peoples of Iraq and Palestine? What’s your excuse? Trying to get a free BNP badge, perhaps?
What is strange about Quilliam is that on this issue they have yet again demonstrated their ipse-dixitisms! Quilliam Foundation backed the banning of Qaradawi yet do not support the banning of Wilders arguing that Wilders should be allowed in to “debate”!? So the arbitrary lines which the Quilliam Foundation draw and re-arrange at the drop of a hat are again observed. Such a carte blanche approach to who should and should not be banned is not a matter which the Quilliam Foundation should hold the reins of among the Muslim community in the UK.
Quilliam Foundation also seems to be the only Muslim group that backs the ‘Contest 2’ policy proposals on who is an extremist. This fits in well with their view of Wilders!:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/poli.....gy-muslims
• They advocate a caliphate, a pan-Islamic state encompassing many countries. • They promote Sharia law. • They believe in jihad, or armed resistance, anywhere in the world. This would include armed resistance by Palestinians against the Israeli military. • They argue that Islam bans homosexuality and that it is a sin against Allah. • They fail to condemn the killing of British soldiers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
Ed Husain, of the Quilliam Foundation thinktank, said the root causes of terrorism were extremist views, even if those advocating the views did not call for violence. Husain, once an extremist himself, said: “Violent extremism is produced by Islamist extremism and it’s only right to get into the root causes.”