Harry's Place

I am gob-smacked. Miliband condemns a film he hasn’t even seen?

We must have vigorous debate on the Quran, its literal interpretation and whether or not Muslims regard it is a civil and foreign policy document for the 21st century.

The comparrison with The Satanic Verses is strangely timely and instructive. Thatcher stood up to militant Islam, as embodied by the Iranian regime. Brown and Miliband craven roll over in the face of mooted Islamic thuggery, fanned on my their peer Lord Ahmed. Nice. We finally have a government that makes Mrs T appear liberal, or at least more supportive of essential liberal values like free speech!

Jaqui Smith and Milliband are a sick joke, The political class piss their collective pant’s at the mention of the dread word Islam, This situation will only get worse as muslim number’s grow, The UK is over.

If David Milliband thinks Fitna contains ‘extreme anti-Muslim hate’ then maybe it’d be better if he actually saw it before commenting on it. Unless, of course, he’s coming from the same line of reasoning that Jaqui Smith used when she described Islamic Extremist as ‘Anti-Islamic Activity’.

Knickers, twist, in, a.

A new low.

I am absolutely shocked, shocked that someone should have the temerity to condemn the film Fitna without seeing it. Now, a play like Caryl Churchill’s Seven Jewish Children is quite different of course. Anyone can condemn it without seeing it or reading it.

Utterly, utterly depressing. Even the poll on labourhome shows 98% support for wilders being allowed in

Says Instapundit, “If his supporters were more violent, this wouldn’t have happened.”

I would have liked to have seen him debate Quilliam. Seriously. There are verses in the Quran that are shocking. But what is in doubt is how decent Muslims like Quilliam understand them. That is a question I would like an answer to.

Smith and Miliband are a disgrace. They have strengthened the hands of the Islamo-fascists. They have removed Quilliam’s opportunity to defend Islam.

“no freedom to stir up hate, religious and racial hatred, according to the laws of the land”
So how exactly does Mr. Milliband explain away the events of the past few weeks?
Nazi imagery relating to Zionism, attacks on places of worship and buisnesses thought to be Jewish, calls for boycotts, government officials promoting ‘Zionist control’ theories, physical attacks on Jewish people and the list continues.
Go on Mr. M. – explain why all that is different.

“Multiculti England will tolerate any intolerance, except the guy who points out the intolerance. We can’t tolerate that.”

-Mark Steyn

Hi KB Player

I didnt know Caryl Churchill’s Seven Jewish Children available to view online?!

Great. Please post the link.

BBC 5Live News this evening:-

…. who’s film Fitna compares Islam to the Nazis (or it may have been Nazism)

Give it another few days and it will become:-

“Who’s film Fitna calls for the killing of all Muslims”…

This is not a freedom of speech issue, it’s a freedom of movement issue. Quite frankly it’s ludicrous to talk of it as a freedom of speech issue when this film, which is free to watch, has just been debated, live on the free to view state broadcaster, by members of the house of Lords and journalists. Wilders has been on TV more times today than he has been in his entire career.

If you want to talk about the Government being able to stop people they don’t like coming into the country then go ahead. But this is not a freedom of speech issue.

Also note that the SAME Wilders who made the SAME film Fitna who has the SAME views – was in the UK two weeks ago.

It is clear that the threat from Lord Ahmed to mobilise 10,000 Muslims has caused this banning.

So Milliband, this country’s Foreign Secretary, has been in the national press all day stating a film he hasn’t seen (but can easily see if he takes 10 minutes) contains ‘extreme anti-Muslim hate and we have very clear laws in this country’.

This is apparently the same as some people (commenters on a blog) who having read the script of Churchills play do not like it.

Billingtons review in The Guardian of said play seemed to suggest that most people here’s concerns were spot on.

After all, Billington has learnt, as a result of seeing the play, that

“Jewish children are bred to believe in the “otherness” of Palestinians and how, for generations to come, they stand to reap the bitter harvest of the military assault on Hamas.”

Oh dear Rosie. Perhaps he just didn’t get it eh ;-)

It is clear that the threat from Lord Ahmed to mobilise 10,000 Muslims has caused this banning

Good to see that mob rule trumps the settled democratic will of the nation.

Thatcher stood up to militant Islam. Brown & Co meekly appease it’s thuggish little brother by banning the entry to the UK of a man who made a film that is freely viewable on the internet. The Channel 4 report about ’screening the film…’ is therefore completely ludicrous as the film can be viewed with no more than two mouse-clicks!

“a play like Caryl Churchill’s Seven Jewish Children is quite different of course. Anyone can condemn it without seeing it or reading it.”

KB Player: Place your finger under the first word of this response and move it very slowly along with the words while saying them out loud to yourself:

We all read every word of Billington’s review of 7Jewish Children. We took issue with the language of Billington’s review of 7 Jewish Children.

I’m not convinced Wilders is ‘far right’ or that he seriously wants Muslim deportation, but the Netherlands does have a huge problem with ‘no go’ areas for whites, and it is possibly the more criminal element which does not integrate into Dutch society and which spouts hate and separatism that he wishes to go.

Attacks on whites don’t make the news so here’s one.

In 2000 (before 9/11) a student of mine at a UK university was beaten up and kicked in the head by a North African mob in a district of Amsterdam whilst on holiday. He suffered serious head injuries and had to pull out of university for over a year. When he returned he didn’t last longer than the first term. His head injuries sustained in this vicious racist kicking were such that his concentration was badly affected and he suffered from severe headaches if he attempted to read for more than twenty minutes.

He had no idea why he was attacked, but he had been alone at the time and had not known that he had wondered into a ‘Muslim’ area where whites were not welcome.

Nobody had told him there were such problems in Amsterdam. He had thought it was a tolerant place.

He had been vaguely aware that there was a strong ethnic presence in that area and had been attracted by this, out of open-hearted and sympathetic curiosity to go there.

This attack has destroyed this young man’s life, as his job prospects are severely limited by his inability to do desk work, though of high intelligence.

He bore no ill will towards his attackers. He was just puzzled over why they did it.

Fitna?

Good to see that mob rule trumps the settled democratic will of the nation.

He was invited by appointed peers and banned by an elected MP.

Wilders has called Gordon Brown the ‘biggest Coward in Europe’ and indeed he is.

This is a huge PR coup for Wilders – confirmation of his worldview that the UK sits idly by while extremism foments in its own backyard.

Fitna is a pitiable collage of quotes and images – as non-contextualised as the antisemitic literature available in Muslim bookstores. The fear that this execrable piece engenders is ridiculous.

Is it not possible to bring to the attention of news presenters the invitation by Ahmed to Israel Shamir, with a link to his rants? So that every single interview with Ahmed, Milliband makes them face up to the challenge of the invitation to Shamir? I have never once heard it mentioned?

On the subject of the post – I’m sure Milliband has better things to do than watch this film (don’t we all). But given that he was thrust onto the BBC to defend the decision to ban Wilders from coming to Britain, and did such a half arsed job of it, maybe he would better have spent the 15 minutes before the interview watching it.

devorgilla:

I’m from Amsterdam. It is no longer safe to wear a Kippah in large parts of Amsterdam West, East, Osdorp and Slotervaart. The local Rabbis have indicated that it is safer to take it off. I know several people assaulted, spat on and verbally abused – all by Moroccan youth.

We Jews have lived in Holland for over 400 years. We are now targets for nihilist racists. I’ve left and will never go back. They destroyed my co-religionists life in the city we used to call the Jerusalem of the North. When my uncle leaves, it will be the last member of my family stretching back 13 generations.

The comments by Meir may just indicate that Holland has a serious problem that we haven’t yet grasped

But, hold on… When asked by the interviewer if he had actually watched Fitna he responded that he had not and didn’t need to as he already knew what was in it!

Just take a look through that telescope, Galileo said to the catholic imams on his rooftop terrace that night.

No thanks, no need for evidence.

God planned a geocentric universe.

There it is.

Prachtig gedaan, Geert.

Wonder if the conservatives will use this in the next election

Have they made any comment yet?

I’m from Amsterdam. It is no longer safe to wear a Kippah in large parts of Amsterdam West, East, Osdorp and Slotervaart. The local Rabbis have indicated that it is safer to take it off. I know several people assaulted, spat on and verbally abused – all by Moroccan youth.

Meir

Damn, yes: we’ve had the “hamas, hamas, jews to the gas” chanted during holocaust memorial services.

“Mokum” judenfrei, except for the jewish mayor, a tradition, & traditionally pc.

Good luck, wherever you go, Meir!

Wilders complains when Fitna gets banned, but he is the one that wants to ban the Koran. His commitment to freedom of speech is part-time.

I’m sorry to hear this Meir, but it echoes my student’s terrible experience. Plumstupid, you are right.

Wilders has a flamboyant style, he likes to be controversial, but he does so, I am convinced, to shock, because the Netherlands has become so deeply mired in denial about the extent of this problem.

We finally have a government that makes Mrs T appear liberal, or at least more supportive of essential liberal values like free speech!

What on earth is suprising about that ?

The Dutch government’s commitment is part time too because they banned Mien Kampf. Wilders position as i understand it is that if you can ban one hate filled fascist screed you can ban them all.

Their are far worse people than Geert Wilders in this world, as for the Galloway comparison you surely jest, by refusing to listen to Wilder’s you just clear the way for other’s you will like even less.

Bedankt Rens,

I still love Mokum, always will.

I`m in Vancouver now and I love it as does my family. No place is without problems, but North America does ìntegration`a bit better IMO. Immigrants here are largely aspirational and motivated.

KBPlayer (et al),

The text of the play is readily available on the Internet. Here’s one link…

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2009/02/entire-text-of-seven-jewish-children.html

‘democratic-left perspective’ is it ? Thats what it says ?
Wonder if the conservatives will use this in the next election

I think that’s very unlikely (or any serious version of it ) for the same reason immigration and crime are not given greater prominence . This issues play as negativity and whilst they shore up the core vote they actually alienate the swing voter . The Cameron stance is not an accident obviously .A great deal of thought and research was put into how to win and how to take the Party . He gets no credit , its almost un-noticed .Perfect.

What I find confusing about this site is that while there is a great appetite for showing up the armchair Hamas supporters and a Spectator-ish view of Islam it claims , so I read ,to be centre left ?
Well ‘centre left’ are exactly the people who made it impossible to raise the subject of immigration , Islamic threat, the non equivalence of Israel and Hamas , the lack of profiling , the over reward of women and the selling out of English working class men and women by the left .The people that are responsible for the scourge of multiculturalism “Political correctness “ in its many forms aside from the gross imposition on Liberty of increasing the tax take so much in ten years that with 97 levels we wouid pay no income tax ( well was until recently ).
Then there`s the imposition of hopelessly expensive Employment rights which have destroyed Small business . The bankrupting of the country on a new rentier class of community art through face paint idiots and …well I could go on …in fact I will, The liars who have duplicitously removed democracy from the English and transported it to Brussles avoiding a referendum on the basis they would lose it ,and sustained their rickety constituency on double counted Scottish votes and delaying the boundary commission. And I could go on but I wont`t this time

You know what , I rather resent a lot of limp New Labour ‘sighs ’ saying anything sensible but some brilliant stuff here and I have agreed with everything I have read so far . How odd

Miliband is just one of a bunch of decidedly second-rate ministers on the front bench. So lame, you’d almost think they were the opposition.

Our politicians – picture them if you will for a moment: the boys Milliband, Cameron and Hune – have no “bottom”, they’re running scared. The only “beast” left is Clarke, but remember – his generation of politicians and the ones before them were responsible for concocting this glorious powder keg. Their heirs are wholly incapable of dealing with the consequences – few of them have any experience of life outside their narrow, carefully cultivated career paths. Meanwhile they’ve got an economic tsunami on one hand, and hard-faced fascists on the other whose experience of life, literally and philosophically, is utterly different.

Frankly, a few more tilts and its Weimar all over.

“Wilders complains when Fitna gets banned, but he is the one that wants to ban the Koran. His commitment to freedom of speech is part-time.”

Chas, dear boy, part of the ‘freedom of speech’ package is to allow for such contradictions. Duh!

Great PR job! In just 48 hours, Smith & Miliband Corporate Communications have achieved greater publicity for the Dutchman with the dyed hair and his poorly-made amateur flick than he could reasonably have hoped for from a top-notch Madison Avenue outfit — and all for the price of a return ticket to Heathrow!

I think when Millibrand said, “He also said that ‘there is no freedom to stir up hate, religious and racial hatred, according to the laws of the land’.” he really meant “He also said that ‘there is no freedom to stir up unjustified hate, unjustified religious and racial hatred, according to the laws of the land’.” Clearly, to judge from the official silence concerning that example of modern British literature, Seven Jewish Children, that hate is perfectly justified. See, everything’s easy once you figure out the correct way to look at things.

“Is it really so much to ask that our political overlords bother to watch a film before condemning it and supporting its creator being barred from the country? ”

Yes it is too much. Politicians who are lying always have to maintain the option of plausible deniability. Knowledge is power, but only so long as you can keep up a facade of ignorance.

Question 1) does any person here think that Monty Python could make a movie about, the life of a, unnamed person, from a unmentionable religion and that after making this movie, there would be peaceful demonstrations against said movie, made by people of a certain religious and/or political persuasion or would there be carnage and death.
Question 2) if the answer to question 1 is no, they could not make a movie of the unnamed person, in the UK, in the 21st century, as the banning of wilders entry into the UK would seem to indicate, by that I mean that any criticism or ridicule of the unnamed religion is now verboten, do any of you really think this is progressive? inclusive? socialist? liberal? good for the community? because if you do, then you are, in my view, seriously fucking deranged and are in need of quite radical and intense therapy.
Sorry about the ‘fucking’ but in this instance I really don’t think there is a more appropriate word I could have used.

Now now now. Mr Milliband is quite a good foreign secretary in my view. Jacqui Smith is ok. Entirely inoffensive. Her decision in this instance may or may not be the right one (I lean towards it not being), but Milliband’s argument for banning fitna is very poor. Of course, Mr Wilders does indeed exhibit “extreme anti-muslim hatred”, but not so much in fitna. There’s some dodgy population graphs and a “you draw the dots” nudge nudge wink wink, but Milliband’s description is not entirely accurate.

Now, he was in the country two weeks ago and we’ve pissed off the Dutch government. I don’t think we probably should have done that. It grates that that buffoon Lord Ahmed (an utter disgrace to the progressive values of the Labour Party) can claim a victory for “community pressure” or whatever, which is essentially a form of blackmail.

So I see why Edmund Standing talks of echoes of the satanic verses. But lets not get carried away. The difference is that the Verses was an entirely unobjectionable piece of fictional literature, whilst Geert Wilders advocates deporting all Europe’s muslims. There is a difference here, you know. Can’t quite put my finger on it…

David T has been sizzlin’ on this matter in his recent posts. If we’re going to ban Wilders then we should definitely ban all the Islamists who see fit to come here and preach hatred whilst laughing in the face of our societal values at least as much as Mr Wilders does.

I do wish the government would be a little firmer on these issues, but you must remember that many of the party’s members are utterly useless and clueless as soon as differing skin pigmentation becomes a factor. You’d've though that a decade of Blairism would have driven most of the muppets away, but they’re quite hardy.

That was quite a long way of walking undeviatingly down the middle of the issue wasn’t it? Bottom line – I find it impossible to get het up about some racist twat being banned from the UK, but I get very het up about the way such measures are not automatically applied to his Islamist equivalents.

Wilders complains when Fitna gets banned, but he is the one that wants to ban the Koran.

Damn your eyes man! That’s not the issue here…

considering that over 30 million internet viewers have seen Fitna already ,as the poorly produced short movie has been around for almost two years, it is unlikely that even milliband would believe that he was blocking it by Wilder’s exclusion. But the image that would be sent to the Saudis who are funding our depression and our banks to the tune of BILLIONS would be very dark indeed if it were broadcast in the house of Lords
The roots are purely financial and milliband and smith are merely doing what they have been told to do by their superiors.(even if they are indeed spineless dhimmies)
No doubt we will soon be seeing some desperate ‘cap in hand ‘ trips to the Gulf states! Perhaps Lord Achmed will tag along.
In the meantime the outrage caused is beeing cynically exploited to divert attention from Gordon’s huge financial woes

Fitna is a pitiable collage of quotes and images – as non-contextualised as the antisemitic literature available in Muslim bookstores. The fear that this execrable piece engenders is ridiculous.

The irony is that Fitna most closely resembles not anti-Muslim propaganda, but propaganda produced by militant Muslims, also available with a few mouse clicks.

In intellectual terms Wilders and Islamists are on the same page. Apart from the tearing of a page (from a phone book but never mind) Fitna could have been a movie made by Islamists. To be fair to them some have said that they don’t find it offensive at all, indeed Omar Bakri made the precise point that I’m making.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020494.php

So if this is some 21st century “Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion”, it seems that we have a bit a slight difference in that Islamist Muslims are saying “fair comment”. What now for the cookie cutter analogies?

Has it occurred that maybe someone trustworthy in the Foreign Office has watched Fitna, and has told David Miliband what it contains?

The end of English democracy is nigh unless Britain wakes up from its slumber as its culture is yet again assaulted by misguided multiculturalism. Shame on Miliband for his ignorant spinelessness.

Salma Yaqoob is on Question Time right now

On the subject of the post – I’m sure Milliband has better things to do than watch this film (don’t we all).

Actually no, considering it’s brevity, he doesn’t have better things to do than actually watching it if he wishes to speak in support of a ban on the basis of it. I wouldn’t think much of a BBFC censor who took a similar position.

Brilliant. The Sun editor is against the ban, Salma is generally against the ban on grounds of freedom of speech!

*political editor, I believe

Apologies. The Sun political editor supports the ban; Salma is against.

Chas:

“Wilders complains when Fitna gets banned, but he is the one that wants to ban the Koran. His commitment to freedom of speech is part-time.”

He is defending a film which simply sets out undisputed exhortations to murder and mayhem in the quran, and the common use of those passages by muslims justifying violence.

At no point in that film does Wilders condone or encourage hostility or violence. He is exposing the incitement in that book, and demonstrating how effectively it works.

One thing, the quran, incites violence. The other thing, fitna, exposes the first to public scrutiny. Why don’t you understand that?

Boothroyd:

“Has it occurred that maybe someone trustworthy in the Foreign Office”

Are you seriously implying that there is anyone trustworthy in the FO?

My point may be rather tangential to the subject, but I don’t really know how much serious thought has been given to the problem of “no go areas”. There’s more to it than racism or raw power. Those who control the borders of a place can, up to a point, control its demography. It’s not for nothing that even the most “moderate” Palestinians want to control Israel’s borders through their so-called “right to return”. If this is granted, they will determine in the end who can and cannot be an Israeli and, thus, achieve quickly a majority there.

Now, the point of the European no go areas, I think, is the following: a reasonable, maybe even a large number, of the immigrants are likely there illegaly. I fancy that no go areas are actually sanctuaries for illegal immigrants, and with the lack of control of the country’s border (except for Dutch MPs) and no possibility of checking who is living illegaly in the country, well, some among the essential mechanisms that make a country sovereign and independent seem to be missing. Is your government doing anything about this?

Is all this wackiness in the UK recently somehow connected with the economic mess there?

Maybe the bad times are encouraging racist and violent tendencies as well as strange responses from the authorities.

For goodness sakes chaps!
It’s a very useful storm in a teacup on the same day as Mr Brune got questioned by a committee of careerist sychophants – it could have gone horribly wrong, he may have wet his pants, he may have told the truth, he may have screwed up and lost his temper…. who knows what MIGHT have happened.
An airport kafuffle about some tossy film by a bloke with a hardon for expansionist Islam was always bound to squeeze the space available on the front pages and airwaves.
And the film itself? I lovveedd the dance sequences, brilliant, Slumdog Mill, Mama Mia eat yr heart out gurrrlll!

That was quite a long way of walking undeviatingly down the middle of the issue wasn’t it? Bottom line – I find it impossible to get het up about some racist twat being banned from the UK, but I get very het up about the way such measures are not automatically applied to his Islamist equivalents.

Wilders may be ten times more anti-Muslim than Ian Paisley is anti-Catholic, but in fact there is no real evidence that he is a racist. In fact, that’s largely the friggin point of his irl troll antics.

By calling him a racist you have in fact been utterly trolled. That’s what he wants people to call him, in order to make them look like fools. He understands that perfectly.

Newsnight tonight was A-1 brilliant. Kirsty Young actually leapt out of her chair in disbelieving mirth at Keith Vaz’ disclosure that he too, had been pontificating about The Film without actually seeing it! I had other things to do, Kirsty, he blustered. A fifteen minute film, she spluttered, on your computer!

The Quilliam man was brilliant. He said both the Islamists and Wilders had bought into the Al Quaida interpretation of Islam and that Vaz and co had deprived Quilliam of the opportunity to debate him. Vaz kept saying Quilliam man was perfectly free to get on a plane and debate it in Holland. Quilliam man kept retorting Why should I have to leave my own country to debate it- what does that tell you about the state of my country that I am not allowed to debate it in my own country. I loved him taking ownership of his place in this country.

The Christian priest said he debates the same 5 suras in the film every week in Hyde park.

Kirsty kept saying, admit it, Mr Vaz, had this been an anti Christian film, the maker would not have been banned. She asked why the Hezbollah man had been allowed in the country- good- maybe someone will mention Israel Shamir one day. Vaz response: Each case is decided on its merits. Kirsty: Oh so Hizbollah is OK then.

If you want to debate (ie have free speech) fly to Holland
Keith Vaz newsnight

Kirsty kept saying, admit it, Mr Vaz, had this been an anti Christian film, the maker would not have been banned.

Of course. The reason he is banned is become his supporters do not represent latent, ready violence.

“become” should read: “because”

“Has it occurred that maybe someone trustworthy in the Foreign Office has watched Fitna, and has told David Miliband what it contains?”

Rowan Laxton?

In this country, we should be able to say anything, no matter how insulting, or scurrilous, so long as we do not incite other people to break the law.

Incitement to hatred doesn’t make sense as an offence- because hating people is not an offence. And reporting truthfully about what someone has done, even if it makes people loathe him, is not incitement. If it was, every reporter and editor in the country would be in jail. All the time.

We need strong, clear and rigorous principles to govern what is legal, and what is not. Either we have absolute freedom of speech, or we implement rational objective criteria. Much like the criteria we have had, for many years. All we needed to do was scrap the blasphemy law, and leave in place the proscriptions against incitement.

ami – true. Majiid Nawaz was very good – on free speech and on reclaiming Islam from Al Qaeda.

Bartok, very funny!

At no point in that film does Wilders condone or encourage hostility or violence.

Except it does when he conflates terrorism with Muslim immigration. Violence no, hostility towards Muslims certainly.

Either we have absolute freedom of speech, or we implement rational objective criteria

Obviously we have “rational objective criteria”; that being the absence of incitement to actual violence.

Actual violence is incited in the quran. No violence is incited by Wilders, or his film.

So why is he banned, yet the quran is not?

‘In this country, we should be able to say anything, no matter how insulting, or scurrilous, so long as we do not incite other people to break the law.’
Monty, I’d like to share your absolutist commitment to free speech, but I fear it is something we have now lost forever. As (I recall) Anatol Lieven pointed out a couple of years ago, drawing on the example of independent India, it is well nigh impossible for untrammelled free speech to flourish in a democracy that is also multi ethnic and multi faith. America used to be the shining exception to this rule, and although the constitutional right to free speech remains in the private sphere (what you can see, hear, or broadcast on the internet, for instance), circumspection and language codes prevail in much of the public sphere (eg at work, or on campus).In the new multicultural millenium scurrilousness (of the sort practiced by the late Theo Van Gogh, for instance)has few defenders, and restraint, veering towards self censorship on ’sensitive’ issues, must be observed.

So why is he banned, yet the quran is not?

I think Davidka answered that question at 10:17 pm. It’s part of the price that HM Government is paying for our creditors to roll over our debt.

Mark:

Well in that case, we have lost forever the only criterion that could ever make rational sense. And why did we lose it?

“Miliband states that Fitna contains ‘extreme anti-Muslim hate and we have very clear laws in this country’.”

Did he learn this from Rowan Laxton, his Jew hating advisor?

Thank you Ami – that Newsnight debate is superb. The Quilliam guy gives one of the best performances I’ve ever seen on that programme. The less said about the Rev and the Vaz the better!

Short Order Cook –

Yes, Milliband probably has got better things to do:

1. How to prevent a mad Mullah regime in Iran becoming a nuclear power.

2. How to win a war in Afghanistan against militant Taliban who are prepared to use suicide bombing, acid attacks on schoolgirls, and political assassination.

3. How to secure peace in Israel-Palestine given the fact that an Islamist movement is determined to take the conflict to a genocidal solution.

4. How to keep Pakistan, a seething mass of conflict and potential civil war from breaking up or allowing the Taliban to get hold of its nuclear weapons.

5. How to convince Syria to pursue a policy of peace and stop its programme of political murder in Lebanon.

6. How to stop Sudan from continued persecution of Black Darfurians, using rape and pillage as political weapons.

7. How to deal with piracy backed by Islamists in Somalia.

8. How to prevent further attacks on India emanating from Pakistan which might lead to war between those two SW Asian giants.

9. How to respond to the embarrassing news that the CIA thinks British Pakistanis are the mostly likely source of a 9-11 style terrorist attack.

10. How to prevent further 7-7 style attacks within the UK .

Yep, no point in watching that video is there?

Saw Miliband on tv, here in Canada; what a f—ing disgrace.
Clean cut, well spoken, and stupid/stunned/out to lunch.
If that’s the best you can do, you U.K.’ers, it’s over, over there.

Saw Miliband on tv, here in Canada; what a f—ing disgrace.
Clean cut, well spoken, and stupid/stunned/out to lunch.
If that’s the best you can do, you U.K.’ers, it’s over, over there.

Scarf –

I’m not surprised you posted twice.

It was a stupendously stupid performance.

Isn’t it interesting that not one of the people accusing Wilders of hate speech is able to give a single quote from the film that backs up their claim.

And yet there are probably a hundred quotable passages in the film demonstrating hatred of many Muslims for Kufrs.

I hope Wilders gets back into the country clandestinely very soon and makes some underground speeches in the UK which can be put on to the web to the utter embarrassment of the Dhimmi government of the UK.

How about this angle?

Wilders cannot be called a “racist” or “inciter” outside Holland because his statements about the Muslim population relates to his own country and the problems they have there. We cannot determine what level of debate there is in Holland the the boundaries of acceptability. If Wilders represents a reasonable view in Holland then surely he may articulate it.

Whatever he says or advocates ONLY applies to HIS country. In a sense we are interfering in the politics of Holland by labelling him personna non grata.

Second, Milliband talks of the hatred in his film. Isn’t the film just a mirror of Islamist Terrorist hatred? Is Milliband saying that its showing and debate about it is an exposure of violence from an Islamic perspective that the non-Muslims would find is an incitement against THEM?

Radical Islam is violent and feeds off the Koran. If there were no hate to be found in the Koran then there would be no hate preachers who quote from it.

Just watched BBC 24-hour news. Baroness Cox and a bloke from Quilliam Foundation in the studio. Presenter spoke to Cox, and then turned to Quilliam bloke and said “And Mr X, why do you object to Mr Wilders’ visit?” (or paraphrase). He was clearly under the impression that because the bloke was a Muslim, he was opposed to Wilders’ coming here”.

Good point PlumStupid: “There would be no hate preachers if there were no hate in the Koran”. Must make note of that for future use.

A comment in the germen left blog ‘achse des guten’ says all :

Bananenmonarchie Großbritannien

Milliband:

Miliband defended the decision. “A hate-filled film designed to stir up religious and racial hatred in this country is contrary to our laws,” he told the BBC….

Presumably he means the people in the film and not the film maker who simply used public domain footage and quotes from a 1400 year old book. I figure that if you read from the Koran before beheading an infidel, surround yourself with verses from The Koran and if AQ regularly quote from the Koran then The Koran may have something to do with it.

They say that everything is out of context. What they mean is “this is highly embarrassing”!

Isn’t Milliband making Wilders point?

unlike millband, i watched fitna last night. absolutely no incitement to commit any kind of crime at all. he calls for an end to islamisation and (rightly)compares violent islam with nazism and communism.
we are apparently not even allowed to debate this subject now.

if we are to ban wilders for making a polemic film then surely we must ban michael moore?

Another case of mixed up prioities -
after an attack on a Jewish club at York University, Toronto, police demanded that the club be closed down.
‘Jewish Canadian student threatened’
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3671094,00.html

The banana Milibum was holding at the Labour Party conference last autumn is probably lodged in his rectum (Milirectum?).

After all there has to be an explanation for his pained expression as well as the absence of any form of rational thought known to humanity.

What with that extraordinary story plus the “Human Rights Commission” stuff Canada seems to be a less attractive place nowadays…

“How is Miliband any better than Muslims who screamed about The Satanic Verses without bothering to read it?”

He isn’t. He’s a creep with an eye on what he thinks is the main chance.

Plumstupid good posts, Miliband has made Wilders’ point, but I believe that there’s a synergy between

* the hatred of the Other in the Koran;

* the Islamic injunction that kufr are not to be trusted, that Muslims’ chief loyalty must be to other Muslims;

* the active and often punitive discouragement of critical thinking in Muslim education

all of which can predispose to radicalisation. In addition Tarek Heggy, the Egyptian philosopher, sets out the components of what he calls the Arab mindset (which is also applicable to Muslims of the sort we are describing):

Heggy suggested that these negative attitudes arise from three main sources: the repressive climate which prevails throughout Arab societies, a backward educational system which lags behind modern educational systems, and a mass-media operated by those responsible for the climate of oppression to serve their own interests.

Heggy listed 20 main defects of the Arab mind, and he said that the list was not exhaustive. Among them are:

A lack of intellectual hospitality;

It is steeped in a culture that encourages conformity and
discourages diversity;

Limited tolerance for criticism and the virtual absence of
self-criticism;

The adoption of stands not on the basis of their coherence,
validity or intrinsic value but on the basis of tribal or religious
affiliations;

A tendency to indulge in excessive self-praise and to glorify
past achievements as a way of escaping dismal reality;

The prevalence of what Heggy calls the “big-talk culture”, in which
overblown rhetoric is used to compensate for the appalling lack of
concrete achievements;

An aversion to the notion of compromise, which is deemed to be
a form of capitulation and defeat;

Lack of respect for women

Setting great store by the conspiracy theory and believing
that the Arabs are always the victims of heinous plots hatched against them by their enemies (My comment: because their prophet believed that people were always plotting against him?)

The spread of the personality cult phenomenon in Arab
societies, where the relationship with the ruler is based not on
mutual respect and accountability but on the excessive adulation, not to say deification, of the ruler (My comment: or the Imam)

The prevalence of an insular culture that knows next to
nothing about the outside world and the real balance of power by which it is governed, let alone the science or culture of others

The prescription for action here is to undermine that synergy.

Has it occurred that maybe someone trustworthy in the Foreign Office has watched Fitna, and has told David Miliband what it contains?

“Someone trustworthy in the Foreign Office?? An oxymoron surely.

Thanks for that, Mitnaged. Surely another prescription for action should be the compulsory teaching of critical thinking in all schools, and particularly in madrassas in the UK.

Miliband was quoted as saying in regard to the ban on Wilders: “there is no freedom to cry ‘fire’ in a crowded theatre”

Indeed not. But many people are beginning to think here that the Government has reason to allow some people in the UK to set fire to the theatre without shouting any warning first.

Mitnaged at 12:47, your list is a bit on the short side, isn’t it? Remember “Why Arabs Lose Wars” from a few years back? Don’t ask any student a question unless you’re sure he can answer it correctly … And the bit about the tank crews’ instruction manual, when the Arabic translation finally arrived …

http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/AD_Issues/amdipl_17/articles/deatkine_arabs1.html

Just as businessmen think of little else but money, so politicians think of little else but votes.

Labour has made the calculation that it can’t win the next general election without the Muslim vote.

And it’s prepared to buy it – and f*** freedom of speech.

CAN we please stop referring to Geert Wilders as “extreme right”, “fascist” and all the rest.

Read the following. It seems to me that Wilders simply has a good understanding (a) of what a political community is and what citizenship means and (b) what Islam is all about (and aggressive totalitarian movement).

Geert Wilders, the controversial Dutch politician, says that the Koran should be banned but his film attacking it must be seen. He makes his case to Douglas Murray

Debate about Geert Wilders and his anti-Koran film Fitna is everywhere in Holland. Newspapers, television shows and private conversations are awash with apprehension.

Since the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, and the hounding into exile of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Wilders is the most prominent critic of Islam in Holland. With his shock of blond hair and startlingly frank language, the MP and leader of the Dutch Party for Freedom is instantly recognisable.

But what about Fitna — the movie that no one has seen, but everyone, including the Dutch government, has already condemned for being likely to kick off the next round in the violent confrontation between radical Islam and European liberalism?

A few days before I saw Wilders last week, Holland’s Prime Minister, Jan Peter Balkenende, held a press conference calling for the film to be halted. Others have followed suit. ‘The government leaked that the movie was coming,’ says Wilders. ‘Our foreign minister went to Syria and said what they said to every diplomat all over the world… Listen, there is a movie, we are fully against this movie… So they created a huge thing, almost a self-fulfilling prophecy because, thanks to the government, it was now known from Timbuktu to Afghanistan that there will be a movie.’

The government has tried legal threats, financial and moral blackmail — including the claim that the movie will make Dutch troops in Afghanistan a target — to persuade Wilders to pull the movie. For their part, al-Qa’eda has issued a fatwa calling on all Muslims everywhere to try to kill Wilders. Even for a man who has been under 24-hour security protection for three and a half years (‘It’s something that you don’t wish for your worst enemy’) this is a new order of threat.

And while the death threats flood in, so do the kind of petty threats from the home-side which can rankle even more. Fear of terrorist attacks in response to the film mean the government is threatening to close the streets around the parliament. Shopkeepers are already presenting pre-emptive claims for lost earnings to Wilders.

‘[We] have such a coward of a Prime Minister,’ he says. ‘They are trying to get fear in the heads of the people of the Netherlands. ‘If something happens they want to say afterwards, this guy was to blame.’

And will he not be at all? Wilders is adamant: ‘I’m not bound to any Afghan or Sufi or Pakistani law. I am bound to the Dutch law and I’m sure that my movie will be within all the boundaries of the Dutch law. You can like the text or dislike the text, like the message or dislike the message, but I’m not doing anything that will be an incitement of hatred or things like that.’ So what is his aim?

‘I really believe that the Koran is a fascist book and Islam — which is more ideology, according to me, than religion — is something that is at least very bad for our values and our society. I’m not a cultural relativist. I believe that we should be proud of our culture. Our culture is far better than the more retarded Islamic culture. So this is why last year in an article I wrote, I said, well, we should ban the Koran. I initiated a big debate with the Prime Minister in the Dutch parliament about it and talked about how it would be good if there could be a new Koran like a New Testament and all the hatred and incitement and intolerance — get rid of that.’ The sole limit to freedom of speech that Wilders recognises is incitement. And this is the problem he has with the Koran.

‘Big parts of the Koran today are still used… to do the most terrible things. And I believe a lot of people don’t know that and I hope it will open their eyes and we will get a discussion going about the real nature of Islam. We should stop this process of Islamisation and we should protect not only our identity but also our freedom more. With the growing amount of Islamisation of both our countries and our societies we will lose our freedoms. At the end of the day Islam will kill our democracy and our society, and I know it will not happen tomorrow or the day after tomorrow but there is a process going on and there is a total lack of urgency of people who really feel that it is a threat.’

And what is his main message to the non-Muslims who see his film?

‘Stop being a cultural relativist and be proud of who you are, and fight for it especially if, you know, I mean these people are not Buddhist. I wrote an article a few weeks ago that said, imagine if I would have said last year that I wanted to burn the Bible, that I want to make a movie to show the fascist character of Christianity. Would there be extra meetings of the government? Would there be evacuation plans of our embassies in Rome, Berlin and Brussels? Would there be bishops like grand muftis who say there would be bloodshed?… The answer of course is “no”. So it proves my point already. All the reactions of the Islamic world, even unfortunately from the Dutch government, show that Islam is something different, has to be treated differently, as something entirely beside our own culture and values.’

And why did he choose the title he did? Because ‘Islam is our challenge — our fitna. Every day, a few times every Muslim if he sees a woman walking in a short skirt or somebody with a picture or drawing of Mohammed, all the time they have fitnas… A Muslim knows from the age of five what fitna means, every Muslim and, well — Islam is the fitna of our society. Will we survive the challenge of this terrible ideology? Will we be able to stop it or to give it the place that it will not kill our democratic society and values that we share in the West?’

I leave Wilders and head back to Amsterdam. Before flying off I see Sooreh Hera, a young Iranian-exile photographer. She is now in her third month in hiding. Late last year her work attracted condemnation from Muslim extremists in Holland who threatened her life. The gallery where her work was most recently meant to be shown has cancelled the display after the curator received death threats and had to go under protection himself.

Though Fitna looks set to have loud consequences, perhaps the price of silence is already too high. When the limits of freedom of speech are dictated from outside you may not feel it today or tomorrow. But the day after, or some day soon, you will.

Wilders sums it up defiantly: ‘If I surrender, they will win. And they will never win. They have to lose, and they will lose.’

Ami – yes, Newsnight was great – I really cheered that Quillam man. He made mincemeat out of Vaz. Also, great that they had the Quillam man instead of someone from the MCB to drone on about offence etc.

The Quilliam chap was good on Newsnight. He was confident in asserting he could demolish Wilders in debate. Which is good – much better than subjecting him to a fatwa (he is subject to a death fatwa).

However, I have never read any Islamic apologist put up a convincing case on the net. I followed quite a few debates on Ali Sina’s Faithfreedom site. As soon as you get on to Mohammed’s proclivities, defence of slavery etc etc you find your Muslim debater either changes the subject or hotfoots it out of the forum.

I would very much like to hear what the Quilliam chap would have to say in response to Wilders.

Well I’ve had a look at the Quilliam site and it seems the usual question-dodging.

“What is your definition of Islamism?

The modernist attempt to claim that political sovereignty belongs to God, that the Shari’ah equates to state law, and it is a religious duty on all Muslims to create a political entity that reflects the above. ”

I think all the four major schools teach the above as standard. To suggest that Islamism is departing from orthodox Islam in proposing the same is absurd.

They suggest that Islamism started with the Muslim Brotherhood in the 1920s. Of course, it is no surprise the movement emerged then – because the Caliphate had just been abolished. Prior to that Islamism was the official ideology of the core Islamic world.

In terms of the West we would want to know why Islam subjected us to relentless attacks for 1400 years between 600AD and 1800AD and that it has returned to attacking the West since it escaped the bonds of colonialism. Hindus could ask similar questions, as could Black African Christians and pagans – indeed anyone who happens to find themselves on the borders of Islam.

Utterly, utterly depressing. Even the poll on labourhome shows 98% support for wilders being allowed in

The BNP will make a lot of hay out of this as they’re ( unfortunately) about the only people willing to speak about islam’s assault on British culture.

Pakistan is falling apart, and the guy who built the country’s first nuclear bomb acqwuired his education in Britian. He abused the country’s hospitality and your confidence, and when he had the technologies he need he headed back to Pakistan and set about building warheads which, if they fall in the hands of raidcals, could well be used to annihilate London.

Many Muslim radicals attending western faculties of physcis, chemistry and engineering have used that knowledge for nothing else than bomb making.

And yet, it is Wilders we ban.

The fact there will be bloodshed in Europe is now inescapable, but there is still the possibility, given that more politicians display Wilder’s courage, to keep that bloodshed to a managable level.

People have mentioned Quilliam, but Quilliam is useless. Islam is a violent ideology headquartered in a religious-apartheid county that still practices slavery and which is probably world’s biggest human rights abuser.

Ther are no moves afoot to cleanse islam’s core texts of its violent passages and nor are they any voices calling for Saudi Arabia to reform its atrocious rights record, yet all musims, radiclas and ‘moderates’ alike, continue to perform their haj as though nothing were amiss.

Perhaps for those radicals and ‘moderates’ nothing is…

John P. –

I generally agree with the points you make, although it is too much to ask any Muslim to remove parts of the Koran – even de-recognition for many of the Hadith would be a tall order.

All we really need though is radical reinterpretation. Human beings are capable of reinterpreting anything. Christians have reinterpreted the New Testament as being positive about sex – that was a pretty tall order. Marxists have reinterpreted Karl Marx as being in favour of market economics. All things are possible.

But, yes, Quilliam seem pretty useless, even though their front men are smooth operators.

All we really need though is radical reinterpretation. Human beings are capable of reinterpreting anything. Christians have reinterpreted the New Testament as being positive about sex – that was a pretty tall order. Marxists have reinterpreted Karl Marx as being in favour of market economics. All things are possible.

I might just believe that when someone makes a case for Mein Kampf being thoroughly pro-Jewish.

JP,

I didn’t realize that you were so expert on the Pakistani nuclear programme?

please could you inform us as to where, precisely, they got the know-how to build a nuclear bomb from and under what circumstances?

Pakistan is falling apart, and the guy who built the country’s first nuclear bomb acqwuired his education in Britian. He abused the country’s hospitality and your confidence, and when he had the technologies he need he headed back to Pakistan and set about building warheads which, if they fall in the hands of raidcals, could well be used to annihilate London.

Who was that? Not Abdul Qadeer Khan, aka Photochor, who did his filching in the Netherlands.

Field, “…Human beings are capable of reinterpreting anything. ”

You missed out “Almost all…” at the beginning of your sentence. You are correct of course that what is needed is a radical reinterpretation, but that would involve critical thinking and the capability to be creative, particularly about what the Koran means rather than taking it literally, and no Muslim is allowed to do that. Muslim schooling does not encourage critical thinking either.

Even to attempt it would cause Muslims much discomfort, because they are so cognitively rigid, that I doubt that they could do so.

The BNP will make a lot of hay out of this as they’re ( unfortunately) about the only people willing to speak about islam’s assault on British culture.

Couldn’t agree more. I first joined the LP in the 70s, I am a member today, but logically if someone was worried about islamism, they have little choice but to support the BNP.

Gordon “the biggest coward in Europe” Brown and his government have shamed us all and the Tories have been just as bad by their silence.

I Apologise. It was the netherlands where khan worked, but the lab in which he worked was partly funded by the UK.

Anyways, Pakistan is a clearing house for jihadists the world over, and it’s only a question of time until they get their hands on a few bombs.

It’s a far FAR more dangerous place than Iran.

there was a lengthy, in-depth article about this in the N.Y. Times last month. I posted a link to it on one of threads, but can’t remember which one.remember

Gordon “the biggest coward in Europe” Brown and his government have shamed us all and the Tories have been just as bad by their silence.

Well, from this side of the puddle the UK DOES come out of this looking somewhat ‘diminished’ and your entire political class delegitimised

Are your foreign policies vis a vis the islamic world now going to be approved by the mob before being applied?

I suggest people here read Sam Harris’ article “Losing our spines to save our asses” that appear several months ago.

According to the official Dutch Parliament website, Wilders received a gift from the publishers “Boom”;

Mill over de vrijheid (waarde €18,50)

Pity they didn’t send when to Smith

shit, “send one “

Jp,

I do hope that your grasp of religious matters is better than your outlandish statements about Khan and Co.

key technology came from China, it was NOT stolen from the UK, Khan did take some blueprints, but it was CHINA that provided the essential help.

maybe next time, it would be better if you’ll ease off ranting on these topics and do a bit more reading?

<i.maybe next time, it would be better if you’ll ease off ranting on these topics and do a bit more reading?

Yes, I ‘rant’, but I also have the generosity of mind to apologise when what I’ve said is shown to be wrong.

Can’t say the same for some others…

That said, there IS a probleme with jihadists and/or their sympathisers flooding the hard science faculties of western universities in an effort to obtain the technologies necessary for WMDs

Once such individual, who had attended M.I.T., was nabbed last year after she’d been found helping jihadists groups with the developement of chemical weapons.

JP,

maybe you should ask your Priest about the various sins? particularly pride and anger?

in your original comment you stated ” the guy who built the country’s first nuclear bomb acqwuired his education in Britian. He abused the country’s hospitality and your confidence, and when he had the technologies he need he headed back to Pakistan and set about building warheads which, if they fall in the hands of raidcals, could well be used to annihilate London.

Many Muslim radicals attending western faculties of physcis, chemistry and engineering have used that knowledge for nothing else than bomb making.”

the inference being that because in your erroneous view Khan “…abused the country’s hospitality and your confidence, “ that there is some wider lessons to be learnt? and that should be applied to existing students from aboard?

JP, really? is that what you are getting at?

if so, then maybe you should look in at your own heart, asking what darkness dwells there and why you have a habit of using such sweeping judgements, from faulty premises

if so, then maybe you should look in at your own heart, asking what darkness dwells there and why you have a habit of using such sweeping judgements, from faulty premises

You really do enjoy scolding me.

Have you ever sought employment as a dominatrix?

On other threads and in months past, when you’ve been caught spouting inaccuracies, and I don’t recall you having ever apologised.

And yes, radical Muslims who’ve attended western science faculties HAVE been nabbed aiding jihadis build WMDs.

Are you not aware of that?

And by the way, the Turn-the-other-cheek aspect of Christianity is overplayed.

I’ll only turn mine, but only for a Roman Centurian.

if so, then maybe you should look in at your own heart, asking what darkness dwells there and why you have a habit of using such sweeping judgements, from faulty premises

You really do enjoy scolding me.

Have you ever sought employment as a dominatrix?

On other threads and in months past, when you’ve been caught spouting inaccuracies, and I don’t recall you having ever apologised.

And yes, radical Muslims who’ve attended western science faculties HAVE been nabbed aiding jihadis build WMDs.

Are you not aware of that?

And by the way, the Turn-the-other-cheek aspect of Christianity is overplayed.

I’ll only turn mine, but only for a Roman Centurian.

JP,

again, you didn’t deal with the original point, which is you make an incorrect allegation, THEN you try to use that against foreign students as you wrote:

“attending western faculties of physcis, chemistry and engineering have used that knowledge for nothing else than bomb making.”

so would you like all foreign science students rounded up and deported? or just send to a (new) gitmo on your say so?

go on be honest