Wilders is condemning Islam as a racist hate-filled ideology, and he has described it as a work of hate, and it’,s a description I find accurate having first read it some 35 years ago.

He’s not attacking Muslims, but rather the violent ideology they mistakenly feel is a religion. Once again neither Islam nor Muslims constitue a race in any sense of the term.

Gilders has had a very good go at the islamist ideology, and has critcised it the way we would communism or stalinism. In doing so has done something good. His prosecution will serve to bring the more repugnant aspects of Islam to light and to educate the public about it free of the spin-doctoring and fluffy-bunny approach that Islamists have always used.

The islamists only defence is to chirp the word “context”, a tactic which is now worn thread-bare.

The Koran is replete with passages urging violence against non-Muslims, and i think that there is a close connection between the penchant of SOME Muslims to engage in violence based on those passages.

Another observation supporting this assertion is that the more an individual practices the Islamic faith to the letter, the more likely they are to sympathise with jihadists or to become jihadists themselves.

Two ex-muslims in my entourage told me they left Islam the moment they read the koran in their native tongues and realised just how vulgar and violence-ridden parts of it were.

Oh dear. Yet another dhimwit.

*plonk*

Also, we should bear in mind that Wilder’s is not verbally attacking Muslims. He is verbally criticizing Islam as an ideology – so I’m not sure how such behaviour can be compared to racism. Islam is not a race. It’s an ideology like Marxism or Nazism.

A follower of Judaism is a Judaist. An ethnic Jew, who may or may not be Judaistic, is Jewish.

This might help alleviate accusations of anti-semitism in some cases if the intent is to criticize the religion and not the race of people.

You don’t need to change the meaning of words in order to object to the fear people like me have of religious fanatics.

I am not trying to change the meaning of racism, I am merely suggesting the Geert Wilders’s treatment of Muslims is more similar to racism than to a fear of religious fanatics. This is not to say that all people who attack/criticise Islam are doing so in a manner akin to racism. But he is.

Edmund Standing made the point that we would probably be afraid if racist parents across Europe were having more children than non-racists. This analogy which suggests that all Muslims are a cohesive block with unpleasant views – akin to racists – is a foul one and one unworthy of a contributor to HP.

Furthermore, with the exception of clear racists concerned about the implications of non-white people living in Britian, people do not worry about the demographic threat of any other group. Reason’s possible exception of orthodox haredim in Israel is interesting. I do not know enough about their position in Israel to comment properly on this matter, but if somebody in London were to make a comment like Geert Wilder’s about the presence of orthodox haredim in London and the demographic threat they present to British ways of life then I would condemn them for anti-semitism. That’s to say, racism.

My main reasons for thinking that Geert Wilders’s treatment of Muslims is more akin to the easily recognisable anti-skincolour racism than to any kind of intellectual disagreement with Islam:

1) Muslims are all treated as though they are the same and that at least some of the characteristics they share are negative and a Muslim baby is assumed to inevitably inherit the unpleasant characteristics of his/her unpleasant parents.

2) The demographics are assumed to speak for themselves. This is much more similar to the anti-skincolour racism (“they should not be here”) than it is to a non-racist discussion of the topic of immigration.

You’re dreaming. A Dutch Muslim politician, who has always been feted by the dutch establishment as a moderate and as an example for the young, recently demanded that a whole section of Amsterdam be reserved exclusively for Muslims. He is asking that a part of Amsterdam be surrendered to Islam. He sees nothing outrageous in the demand and, in fact, feels Holland’s Muslims are entitled to it.

Yet, Mr Cohen is critcising those would would resist such moves.

This is about territory, about expanding Islam. These aggressions, these takeovers, whether they involve mere schedules at swimming pools or demands for gigantic mosques with 200 metre high minarets, are all about claiming territory.

This is an invasion, but it is a smiling invasion (for now), and one in which a fascist, hate-filled ideology, one which would see us enslaved or rendered second class, sets up shop under cover of religion and multiculturalism. And it sets up shop largely at our expense.

I’m also unsure as what the answer to this is, but it certainly doesn’t lie in the hatred and mass deportation ’solutions’ of extremists like the BNP who absolutely ARE using Islam as a trojan horse issue to bring in their racist agenda.

For get about the BNP and ‘deportations’. In any case, the BNP wants to pay them to leave.

This is an invasion, the latest attempt by Islam to conquer Europe, except through mass immigration and the establishment of Saudi-funded networks of extremism

You repell invaders and invasions, you ‘deport’ illegals.

What people don’t understand is that the probleme is getting so serious that people are beginning to take concrete action and, in fact, are light-years ahead of the mainstream pols. Wilders represents a threat to the mainstream, but if the entrenched mainstream prosecutes him, and if it is found that they were goaded into doing so by radical Islamists, then I think public anger will be such that Wilder’s support will skyrocket.

If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons. – Winston Whurchill

If he hasn’t, they will be giving him a national platform on which to air his views – making things worse for everyone.

If he has, they will be crippling freedom of expression – making things worse for everyone.

http://www.lettersfromatory.com