As Expected: European Parliament Bans Wilders’ Movie
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Wed, 2008-12-17 12:38
A press release from Gerard Batten MEP:
SHOWING OF THE FILM FITNA BANNED BY ORDER OF THE CONFERENCE OF PRESIDENTS
It is with great regret that I have to announce the cancellation of the showing of the film Fitna at the meeting with Mr Geert Wilders MP today at 2pm.
I was informed of this decision today.
Nevertheless a press conference will take place at 2pm in room R 3.1 with Mr Wilders and myself.
The banning of this film is a direct attack on free speech. A parliament that constantly talks of freedom, democracy and tolerance has shown once again that these are empty words when it does not agree with what is being said.
On the same day that the European Parliament awards the Sakharov Prize to the Chinese freedom campaigner Hu Jia the Conference of Presidents deny free speech to one of its own members.
The press conference is open to MEPs and their assistants as well as accredited members of the press.
Anyone who wishes to view Fitna before the meeting can do so by going to www.liveleak.com/view?i=216_1207467783
Yours sincerely,
Gerard Batten MEP
UK Independence Party
See also:
More Chickens in the Barn, 10 March 2008
5to12
Submitted by kappert on Wed, 2008-12-17 20:07.
Writing an opinion letter and ending up in a mental asylum.
What a country.
Making a provocation film, calling to fight a war, travelling around and be a parlamentarian.
What a country.
The existence/nonexistence of the 'war' itself which is open to rational argumentation. You can logically convince anyone that slavery is a good thing.
What a country.
he won...yes and no
Submitted by marcfrans on Wed, 2008-12-17 18:27.
@ pvdh
He clearly did not "win" as far as you are concerned, since he did not convince you that there is a "war" going on.
Wilders is asserting that there is a war going on. Obviously, it is mostly not a conventional war with militaries facing each other on some particular battle field. ( Islamic leaders know that they cannot win such a war, so they will avoid such a course, at least for now.) But, rather, it is an unconventional war, that takes many forms(**) and takes place in many places at the same time. That is perhaps why not everybody is able to see the 'war' through the mist of numerous superficially-unrelated events. In addition, it is not only a matter of ability to see, but more a matter of willingness to see the 'war'. Because the recognition of an ongoing 'war' or struggle, would undermine some established dogmas that are dear to the current ruling orthodoxy in much of the West (including much of the European Parliament).
Given Wilders' belief (for which there is much supporting empirical evidence) that there is a war going on, his statement that we have to win the war or we will lose it, is simply a rethorical 'cry' to rally support among those who cannot yet see the ongoing 'war' or who are insufficiently alarmed by it.
So, you are sarcastically attacking the wrong statement. It is not the statement about 'we must win or we will lose' that is open to argument. But rather it is the existence/nonexistence of the 'war' itself which is open to rational argumentation.
(**) It would appear that an early major goal of islamic leaders is to ensure that Islam itself can be put beyond PUBLIC criticism in Western countries (it is already so in muslim or muslim-dominated countries). That is a very rational goal, since it is an essential prerequisite for (i) maintaining control over common muslims in the West and for (ii) preventing the rise of countervailing forces in Western polities. Also, via UN organs, islamic leaders are trying to extent this goal to other nonwestern (and non-muslimdominated) countries, with varying degrees of success.
@Marcfrans
Submitted by peter vanderheyden on Thu, 2008-12-18 17:53.
It’s a matter of grouping. E.g. A value dear to me, is the right to die when you want to (euthanasia). Obviously this right is not seen as a fundamental right by everybody. There is a war going on around this value. And I will fight that war, because it’s a value or a right I believe in. It’s probably a right you’re not adhering to. Yet there are a majority of values we will agree upon. I acknowledge that there are a large numbers of Islam-values and habits I don’t like at all. For each of the values where I believe the western one to be superior to theirs I will be happy to fight along your site for the preservation; on a human basis of course. This means by law; democracy; open discussion; persuasion… I refuse to fight Islam as a whole, and I refuse to see western values as an unchangeable “take it or leave it”.
Moreover: Until now I haven’t heard much valuable ideas about how to fight for our values from Wilders. Nor do I believe his grossly generalized remarks about “Islam” have persuaded even one Muslim to find our values superior. And ultimately that should be the gaol: Changing them to our way of life there were their way of life seems absolutely inadmissible to us.
he won
Submitted by peter vanderheyden on Wed, 2008-12-17 17:41.
"Wilders said: We have to win the war against Islam. If we dont ... we will lose"
It's hard to argue against such statement. He won, I give up.
we will lose ....
Submitted by Gilbert De Bruycker on Wed, 2008-12-17 18:31.
As expected European Parliament has banned Wilders’ movie!
Indeed: Our own leaders are the enemy; they are providing Islam with the means to defeat our Western democracies. - http://sioe.wordpress.com/2008/11/24/legend-of-hans-brinker
Actually, Wilders said. "We have to win the war against Islam. If we don't ... we will lose our cultural identity, our rule of law, our liberties and our freedom."
Sorry for the incorrect quotation.
It is five to twelve
Submitted by Gilbert De Bruycker on Wed, 2008-12-17 16:19.
Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders screened his film Fitna in Jerusalem on Sunday, calling on Europe to restrict immigration from backward Islamic countries and describing Islam as a totalitarian ideology full of hate, violence and submission. Europe is in the process of Islamization. We need to fight it, Wilders said. We have to win the war against Islam. If we dont ... we will lose
He concluded: “It is five to twelve. Freedom must win, we have to win and we will win.”
***
“If we are to survive, we must commit what the elites consider idolatry. We must love our own countries, our own culture, and yes, even ourselves and our own families more than we love those outside of our countries. To do so will place us in opposition not only against our political elites, but against many of our deluded leaders within our Christian churches.
If we are to win, then we must think and act like Mr. Wilders who states: “It is five to twelve. Freedom must win, we have to win and we will win.“ We must adopt this attitude if we are to survive.”
http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/012098.html
Let me tell you, I need not adopt this attitude because I have already this attitude. Although I have a tendency towards individualism, I am prone to feel outrage at people I consider morally blameworthy—consequently I have committed what the elites consider idolatry and acted in Mr. Wilders’ spirit ...to this day, and I intend to continue. I have expressed those views through letters to the editor of newspapers or magazines, even to the Prime Minister and his top political staff. In one of those letters I also have mentione that “It is five to twelve.”
The result?
I was sent to a mental asylum for six months, have been deliberately misdiagnosed with a psychic disorder (paranoid schizophrenia) and I was forced to swallow anti-psychotic meds to try to space myself out and no longer to pay attention nor to focus on the danger of Islamization!
"How to deal with gadflies, whistleblowers and all manner of muckraking citizens who dare to challenge the authorities? Dispatch them to the local psychiatric hospital."
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/12/08/asia/china.php
“I wish to place on record my wish that the profession of psychiatry be closed down and those who practice this false profession be allowed ONLY to practice it upon their fellow psychiatrists and psychologists” - Dr. Koloko