Today’s Wilders Round-up

30 01 2009

You know the drill.

Anglican Mainstream – when the West sides with its enemies:

In times of universal crisis, there is a great need for great men and great women to stand up and be counted. For example, when the Cold War was at its peak, it seems that three world leaders were providently raised up to withstand the menace of Soviet imperialism. Thus Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II together helped to bring an end to this global threat.

Fortunately other heroes seem to come on the scene in times of national emergency or international challenges. When universal deceit prevails, such brave men and women act as prophetic voices. With the twin challenges of militant Islam and a West that seems hell-bent on bowing in subservience to it, a number of fearless individuals have risen to the occasion.

One of them is Dutch politician Geert Wilders. The 46-year-old Dutchman has been a tireless and outspoken critic of Islamism and the cowardice of the West. He has courageously spoken out on the dangers we face, not only from militants without, but appeasers within.

He even produced a short film last year called Fitna. It minces no words in exposing the radical agenda of the Islamists, and how the heart of Islam (the Koran, the hadith, and the life and example of Muhammad) all feed into the Islamist practices and objectives.

And for his troubles he has been a hunted man. But it is not just the angry Muslim world that wants his scalp. Western appeasers are also after him. Indeed, last week a Dutch court ordered the criminal prosecution of Wilders because of his “hate speech”.  The Amsterdam Court of Appeals has said his statements are “insulting,” and that they “substantially harm the religious esteem” of Muslims.

I will leave it for others to determine whether his film is indeed hate speech. But his recent speeches have certainly been clear-cut as to how he regards the Islamist threat. A few paragraphs from various recent speeches are worth reproducing here. Consider his thoughts on how Europe is faring:

Calvin College – Refusing to be silenced

Rebel Radius – no he’s not, I am Geert Wilders

Sense of Life Objectivists – “I’m Geert Wilders”

The Infidel Bloggers Alliance – A Practical Way To Support Freedom Of Speech, Stop Islam’s Relentless Encroachment, And Help a Good Man :

THE FOLLOWING is a message from an excellent activist organization, somewhat like Amnesty International but specifically aimed at stopping Islam’s relentless encroachment. It is called SITA. Here is their latest cause, which we would all do well to participate in:

Geert “Winston” Wilders, the Dutch Parliment member (and leader of the Party of Freedom) is fighting Islamic supremacism. He is one of the few politicians in the world who is speaking honestly about Islam. (See more about Geert Wilders here.)

Wilders is being prosecuted by dhimmis (a dhimmi is someone who accepts Islam’s dominance) because he warned the European people about Islamic supremacism with his movie Fitna (watch the video here). The dhimmis harassing him obviously have a defective memory.

Let’s remember that both Winston Churchill and Adolf Hitler had the same opinion about Islam: It is a totalitarian and violent religion. Churchill denounced and warned about that ideology while Hitler admired it.

The Walton Tribune – the right of people not to listen

FrontPage mag – The seeds of liberalism

Christian Today – when the west sides with its enemies

Vlad Tepes – clip from Dutch TV on the charges against Geert, and more on how Holland has become totalitarian

Covenant Zone – Caroline Glick on Geert Wilders: Europe’s last man standing?

Jihad Watch – Muslim Lord cows House of Lords into submission for daring to want to invite Geert Wilders

Gates of Vienna – Mayor Bloomberg Supports Wilders

Atlas Shrugs – Why Wilders matters to us here

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank




6 responses

30 01 2009

Good site here.

Does anyone know anything about SITA?

Those of us who DO see an issue here which needs to be dealt with need to organise and get together. But I am not sure if the SITA people have another agenda – for instance – what is their position on the EU, America, Middle East situation?

I realise fully that we are not all on the same page as regards every policy area. That’s fine with me. As long as I am not engaging with racist parties or organisations who have some great fear of a NWO encroaching on us. I really haven’t time for such conspiracy theorists.

My blog, with recent entry on Geert Wilders, is here:

30 01 2009
walker morrow

Hmm….that’s actually a very good question, about SITA. I’m not quite sure what they’re all about, to be completely honest. I’ve sort of seen them mentioned in a few of the blogs in my travels, but I have yet to completely look through their manifesto to see why it is that they’re supporting Geert.

1 02 2009

Personally, I am only familiar with ‘Sita’ in the theological sense…not as an organization (though, I do think I heard of a hi-tech thing that sounds just like the name of the Goddess…). I’ll take a peek around.

The greater issue is, of course, much more difficult.

There are many people – both individuals and organizations – who wish to preserve Freedom of Speech. Some are doing it because they believe in the principle, others are doing it because they are some of the ones whom the current ‘regimes’ are trying to shut up – but who would, if given chance, shut up their own opponents.

Yet, the ‘pro Free Speech’ movement is not a homogeneous, coherent group of people who share a particular world view, philosophy or dogma. That is unrealistic. And, yes, by having this significant variety in views, opinions (and integrity – as well as sanity level) among the different voices calling for ‘Freedom of Speech’, the whole movement is open to being ‘tarred’ by pointing to some of the voices…

But, the vast majority of the ‘voices’ here are genuine. (Perhaps I am naive, but I truly think so.) It is our responsibility to demonstrate that this very ‘variety’ of voices – from all sides, from all directions, without censure or censorship….even of the more loony voices… PROVES that this is a GENUINE grass roots movement – and that we practice what we preach, so to speak.

That is important.

I suppose what I am saying is that the very fact that we do not censor – or shut up, shun, persecute – the crazy voices among us proves our integrity and honesty. It is, after all, the price of Freedom of Expression!

1 02 2009

Yes, I would at one time have been a touch – only a touch – in favour of some sort of censorship in certain areas. But now, mainly because I feel that those who in many cases wish to turn our freedoms against us, and wish to do our liberal societies harm, I find myself back 100% in the FREE SPEECH fold.

The reason? Whether we like it or not absolute freedom of speech is something we worked hard for in inclusive western democracies. No-one here suffers any kind of corporal, even capital punishment for saying what they think.

But this charge against Wilders is demonstrably ANTI-FREE speech. It plays into the hands of those who would destroy free speech, but mean to use it on their destructive journey. The same applies to their attitude to democracy. The Dutch court’s response confirms their belief that there is something “untouchable” about Islam. That’s patent rubbish.

One of the saddest things I have found recently is that people who otherwise are with me on many of the issues arising out of fundamentalism are against letting Wilders speak out. In other words they support the Dutch court’s move against him. They think he should not be insulting our Islamic “allies” by saying what he thinks about Islam!

I know, it’s hard to credit.

If nothing else, perhaps this has now started a debate on what we REALLY mean by “Free Speech”.

2 02 2009
walker morrow

Well said, Xanthippa. Hear hear.

2 02 2009
walker morrow

Tonyblair – yes, it’s kind of ironic sometimes. People say they’re for free speech….within respectable limits, or within tolerant limits, or whatever. It’s like they just don’t get the point. They try and limit things to feelings, instead of realizing that if they give up certain liberties, such as freedom to speak, then everybody’s feelings are going to get hurt, and eventually, no one will even be able to speak up about it…

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: