For The Love Of Hate: The Prosecution Of Geert Wilders
Print View
FOR THE LOVE OF HATE: The Prosecution of Geert Wilders
"And you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." [John 8:32].
There
is a belief that permeates our legal system. It is the idea that the
truth is an absolute defense in all things. Well, it turns out this old
judicial truth may not be true after all. "The times they are a
changin," and not for the better! The greatest test Western
Civilization will face is happening now in the Netherlands as the truth
is actually on trial. The mere fact that this trial is happening is a
great victory for all those who oppose freedom, let alone what the
consequences will be for the outcome...
Islam film Dutch MP to be charged (BBC News)
A
Dutch court has ordered prosecutors to put a right-wing politician on
trial for making anti-Islamic statements. Freedom Party leader Geert
Wilders made a controversial film last year equating Islam with
violence and has likened the Koran to Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf.
"In
a democratic system, hate speech is considered so serious that it is in
the general interest to... draw a clear line," the court in Amsterdam
said.
Mr Wilders said
the judgement was an "attack on the freedom of expression.
Participation in the public debate has become a dangerous activity. If
you give your opinion, you risk being prosecuted," he said. Not only
he, but all Dutch citizens opposed to the "Islamisation" of their
country would be on trial, Mr Wilders warned. "Who will stand up for
our culture if I am silenced?" he added.
Who indeed? In
March of 2008 Geert Wilders posted a short film that he made called
"Fitna." Fitna is an Islamic term meaning "strife." Predictably this
film was called an abomination and an offense to Islam even though
there is not one false statement presented. The film featured quotes
from the Qu'ran dubbed over video of actual scenes of these verses
being brought to their full and violent fruition. Mr Wilders even had
the audacity to compare the Qu'ran to Hitler's famous book "Mein Kampf"
and likened Islam to Nazism. Gee, I wonder where he got that idea...
“Muslims
responded to the call of Muslim leaders and joined our side because of
their hatred of our joint Jewish-English-Bolshevik enemies, and because
of their belief and respect for, above all — Our Fuehrer.” - Heinrich Himmler
“…a
religion that believed in spreading the faith by the sword and
subjugating all nations to that faith. Such a creed was perfectly
suited to the Germanic temperament. The Mohammedan
religion…would have been much more compatible to us than
Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and
flabbiness?” - Adolf Hitler
That truth stuff sure
does get in the way of a good hate crimes prosecution doesn't it? One
might even call it..."inconvenient!" The two leading Nazi's of the
Third Reich are not only endorsing Islam with all of its Jew-hating
consistencies with their own regime, but also, as clearly pointed out
by Himmler, noting the fact that Islamic nations did ally themselves
with the Nazi cause. So how are they going to prosecute Mr. Wilders for
telling the truth? Well, obviously there has to be a higher authority.
Something, or someone, whose interests outweigh the value of spreading
TRUE information throughout a society. Reckon what that could be?
The
three judges said that they had weighed Mr Wilders's "one-sided
generalisations...which can amount to inciting hatred" against his
right to free speech, and ruled that he had gone beyond the normal
leeway granted to politicians. The Amsterdam appeals court has ordered
the prosecution of member of parliament Geert Wilders for inciting
hatred and discrimination, based on comments by him in various media on
Muslims and their beliefs."
The
court also considers appropriate criminal prosecution for insulting
Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism made
by Wilders," it added.
"This is a happy day for all followers of Islam who do not want to be tossed on the garbage dump of Nazism" - Gerard Spong, lawyer
So
there you have it. "Offensive" speech is now a prosecutable offense.
Never mind that the offending speech is all true or the offended are
all guilty. The complaint alleges it is "one sided," and of course, it
just happens to be the provably true side. Nevertheless Muslims have
been offended and everything must be done to ease their inability to
handle the truth. Offensive speech a.k.a. "hate speech" is the natural
and necessary by-product of the foolish concept known as a hate crime.
The idea of punishing people for "insulting" religious beliefs is
exactly what Islamic countries have been practicing within their own
societies and have long been clamouring for similar laws in the West.
They desire that Western nations adopt blasphemy laws and stop the
"defamation" of Islam. Defamation being defined as saying anything they
decide they don't like, which can and often does, include the simple
act of repeating their own words.
There are, of course, limits
to free speech, such as calls for violence but one doesn't have to
agree with Mr. Wilders to realize that he hasn't even approached that
line. In fact, he is only guilty of reporting the violent actions of
Muslims. Some Muslims say they are outraged by his statements, but why
are they not equally outraged by the violence done in the name of
Islam? It seems their outrage would be better spent persecuting the
actions of their own people rather than wasting it on the righteous
condemnation of those act by others. They make a controversial issue
about the speech while ignoring the action that is the subject of that
speech. Nonetheless, if freedom of speech has any meaning, it must
apply to the freedom of controversial speech. Non-controversial speech
needs no protection. Without the right of free speech, all the other
freedoms we cherish will soon perish.
For his part, Geert Wilders is convinced he has already been convicted and will go to prison:
"The
decision of the court today was so strong that there is a real chance
unfortunately that there will be a guilty verdict. In fact, it was so
bluntly motivated that it already looks like a verdict instead of just
ordering the public prosecutor to start a trial. I lost my freedom
already four and a half years ago in October 2004, when my 24-hour
police protection started because of threats by Muslims in Holland and
abroad to kill me. So of course I don't want to go to jail as a
criminal, but I don't fear losing my freedom since I already lost my
freedom in 2004." - Geert Wilders
And yet, this is not an isolated incident:
Vienna - Austrian
far-right parliamentarian Susanne Winter was convicted Thursday of
incitement because of her anti-Muslim statements, including the claim
that Islam's prophet Mohammed was a paedophile. A court in Winter's
home town of Graz also found the 51-year-old politician guilty of
humiliating a religion. She was sentenced to a fine of 24,000 euros
(31,000 dollars) euros and a suspended prison term of three months,
Austrian news agency APA reported.
The
politician, who took a seat in parliament last fall for the Freedom
Party (FPOe), made the anti-Islamic remarks in January 2008. She also
proposed in a discussion with students that Muslim men should commit
bestiality rather than making "indecent advances" on girls. The
politician had pleaded innocent Thursday, claiming that she "did not
want to insult anyone, but only to point out problems." The verdict is
not yet legally binding.
Once
again the truth was not allowed to be a defense. Muhammad's
consummation of his marriage with his wife Aisha is in the Hadith
collection, Bukhari, several times. Of course you will remember that
the girl was NINE YEARS OLD at the time of this consummation. Muslims
consider Muhammad to be their "perfect example" and take emulating his
behavior very seriously. How seriously you ask? Well consider the case
of the infamous Ayatollah Khomeini. The leader of the Islamic
Revolution in Iran married a ten year old girl when he was twenty
eight. Of course he didn't call it pedophilia. No, he referred to it as
a "Divine Blessing."
“Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” - Ayatolla Khomeini
It
will probably come as no surprise to learn that the the legal age for
marriage in Iran is nine for girls and fourteen for boys. Where do you
suppose that magic number of nine years old came from? One could call
Iran a pedophiles paradise. Certainly a Westerner speaking in a Western
country should not be convicted of "incitement" for pointing out that
the values of Islamic civilization are in conflict with the values of
our own, especially when the "incitement" consists of citing examples
from Islam's own accepted traditional writings. Yet here it stands as
another example of Western culture bending over and grabbing our ankles. Is our only response always going to be the
infamous Kevin Bacon line from the Animal House movie? (Thank you sir,
may I have another)
You are probably thinking to yourselves that
this could never happen here. Perhaps President Obama would even be
willing to grant Geert Wilders political asylum in America. After all,
do we in America not have an absolute right to free speech as granted
by the first amendment to the Constitution? Well don't be so sure about
that. Our new president is a "sensitive" sort of fellow to the feelings
of certain groups of people, particularly those who like to fabricate
the illusion of their own victim-hood, as is evidenced by the official
White House website:
President
Obama and Vice President Biden will strengthen federal hate crimes
legislation, expand hate crimes protection by passing the Matthew
Shepard Act, and reinvigorate enforcement at the Department of
Justice's Criminal Section.
Uh oh. There are those words
again. Hate Crimes. As if there are any other kind. This is the kind of
nonsense that leads to "incitement" laws prohibiting offensive speech.
Slowly but surely, every group of people who perceives themselves as
having been aggrieved by someone else seeks to have themselves added to
the list of those "protected" classes of citizens who shall not be
offended. You might as well call them "blasphemy laws" because Muslims
will use them to stifle all criticism of their religion just as surely
as the homosexuals will use them to repulse the condemnation of their
deviant lifestyle. However you can be certain that speech offending
Christians and Jews will somehow find a way to be excluded from such
protections. We wouldn't want to stifle all the "artistic creativity"
in Hollywood now would we? Their freedom to mock all things decent,
traditional and Judeo-Christian must not be infringed!
How is it
you can be charged with offending someone's beliefs, even as those very
beliefs insult you and everything you stand for? Whenever we hear the
words 'human rights' in connection with Islam, we are repeatedly
confronted with ugly opportunism that spits in the face of real and
genuine human rights and insults everyone's intelligence. They get away
with saying one thing to us while saying something entirely different
and considerably more unsavory amongst themselves. We should not be
expected to respect an ideology that doesn't respect us. Be very clear
about this: Islam respects nobody. It claims the right to dominate. Our
portion is OBEDIANCE. They have not been shy about making that clear:
"Islam
isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become
dominant. The Qur'an should be the highest authority in America, and
Islam the only accepted religion on earth" - Omar Ahmed, Chairman of the Board of CAIR (Council of American Islamic Relations)
It
could be fairly said that I have a somewhat biased view on the issues
of free/hate speech. After all, I am guilty of exactly the same crime
as Geert Wilders. The Babylon Mystery Orchestra CD essentially does the
same thing as Mr. Wilders movie Fitna. There are direct quotes from
Muslims and the Qu'ran and an intentional linking of Muslim words to
violent Muslim actions. I even went as far as to construct the lyrics
of one song, God Given Right, entirely out of very offensive statements
made by very offensive Muslims. However if Fitna or BMO's "Axis Of
Evil" are to be considered "hate speech" and guilty of the crime of
"incitement," might the same also be said of the Qu'ran itself or
Muslim clerics like Omar Ahmed? Isn't it amusing how much you can get
away with if you simply claim yourself to be oppressed?
It does
worry me that the first major interview our new President has done was
with Al Arabiya, where he went out of his way to pacify the
sensitivities of the Islamic world. It makes me wonder how far he is
willing to go to placate them. These are dark days for the West if we
don't stand against Islam's desire to remain beyond criticism.
"Tolerance" and "multiculturalism" may seem like noble pursuits to some
people but there is one group of people who have never and will never
acquiesce to such ideas...Muslims. They can't. Although the very act of
saying that may soon be a prosecutable offense here too! Incitement
crimes are coming to America! Still don't believe me? Observe this:
The
National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 mandates the establishment of
“national emergency centers” to be located on military
installations for the purpose of to providing “temporary housing,
medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families
dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to
the bill. The legislation also states that the camps will be used to
“provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of
preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private,
and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations.”
Ominously,
the bill also states that the camps can be used to “meet other
appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland
Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the
forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread
rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse. Many
credible forecasters have predicted riots and rebellions in America
that will dwarf those already witnessed in countries like Iceland and
Greece.
With active
duty military personnel already being stationed inside the U.S. under
Northcom, partly for purposes of “crowd control,” fears
that Americans could be incarcerated in detainment camps are all too
real. (PrisonPlanet.com)
There is coming a time when
Americans will be locking away people who say things that incite others
in the name of "crowd control." Freedom of speech is a dying principle.
Such "emergency centers" are an ideal place to locate the incorrigible
dissenters who fail to quietly follow the edicts of this, or any,
administration. Dissent, which we were told was patriotic when Bush was
President can now be seen as "incitement." A wonderful method for
making sure that everyone accedes to the will of the new Socialist
Godhead that is Messiah Obama. It begins by failing to uphold the right
of someone to offend someone else with simple words. It ends with the
incarceration, or worse, of all those who dare oppose the all powerful
state. What is happening to Geert Wilders in The Netherlands is going
to come here.
Perhaps there is a place being prepared for me
in one of President Obama's new gulags. Guantonemo Bay may not be
closed down after all. We will just change the kind of people we
incarcerate there! If we do not act to restrain the coming speech codes
soon, there are going to be a lot of you in there with me. But hey, at
least we will get to meet Rush Limbaugh! The President has actually
went so far as mentioning him by name. How long will it be before he
decides he has to do something about all of us who won't go along with
his social engineering ideas. Hate speech and incitement laws are a
fine way to get rid of us.



