[Archived] Geert Wilders

[gillibrand]

Read the title and please don't try to be provocative.

[leftfooter]

If you want to have a look at violence what about Christianity? Rhys Jones, innocent child shot dead, you condone that don't you?

The violence in Manchester after the UEFA cup final, where not only one policeman but more were battered? Do you accept that? Is there place for that in this country?

What happened in London was evil as you said, why was it? Becasue innocent people were killed weren't they?

So that brings it back to Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine, why is it not classed as evil when innocent people are killed in these countries?

I don't believe anyone would condone the shooting of Ryhs Jones nor the violence in Manchester, rather the opposite. There is nothing to defend. Both, particularly the former, were despicable acts of thuggery and the perpetrators deserve punishment.

I don't know what point you are trying to make.

Absent a straight answer, I'll take your silence in response to my previous question as a no (if so, shame on you!). Namely: are you prepared to concede that there is a clear bright line between British and NATO forces fighting in Afghanistan under a UN Mandate and with Security Council authorisation with those British Moslems that carried out the attacks on the London transport system against their fellow citizens and those Al-Queda trained fanatics that perpetrated 9/11? Yes or No?

I'm off to the match.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

Due to one idiotic attack in London, Muslims do not respect the laws of this country?

What violent in the streets is this? I haven't seen any.

Look at the bigger picture, don't only look at Britain, look worldwide then maybe you will see the likes of the Jews disrespecting the laws of other countries.

What have the Jews got to do with a right-wing Dutch MP? For your information Palestine isn’t even a nation. If you mean UN resolution 242 then yes- They are breaking an Internationally agreed act, but that is an argument for another day , on a different Internet site.

Back to the original discussion. No-one has yet to answer the question as to why a democratically European MP is not allowed entry to the UK; yet several key players in the Hezbollah political elite have been allowed entry.

[Paul]

Back to the original discussion. No-one has yet to answer the question as to why a democratically European MP is not allowed entry to the UK; yet several key players in the Hezbollah political elite have been allowed entry.

IMV because Wilders' opponents threatened to protest on the streets while those opposing the Hezbollah would not. The government made aserious mistake in this decision. Free speech is at the foundations of our society.

[yoda]

IMV because Wilders' opponents threatened to protest on the streets while those opposing the Hezbollah would not. The government made aserious mistake in this decision. Free speech is at the foundations of our society.

"Free speech is at the foundations of our society."

Not any more it seems, makes government critisism's of places like China a bit hollow!

[thenodrog]

Free speech is at the foundations of our society.

'was' Paul. How can you possibly think that after the idiotic hoo-hah with the Prince Harry and Carole Thatcher issues. Never mind the word 'Paki' people are so conditioned nowadays that they even lower their voices and look around furtively whenever they mention the word Pakistani in public.

Crikey......... We're no longer allowed freedom of speech on here.

[Bazzanotsogreat]

IMV because Wilders' opponents threatened to protest on the streets while those opposing the Hezbollah would not. The government made aserious mistake in this decision. Free speech is at the foundations of our society.

So this goes to illustrate how powerful the Islamic lobby must be?

It sadly appears that Freedom of speech has died under the tenure of Labour. It is deemed Okay to shout ‘Death to Israel‘, Jewish pigs and other anti-Semitic vitriol at an anti-Jewish march ( veiled as a pro-Palestine march) yet a democratically elected European MP is not even allowed entry to this country; that was once the bastion of liberty, democracy and ultimately political variety.

Its all very sad, and just goes to show that the liberal-left is just as stiffling & prejudice as the supposed extremist views it is so adherently against.

[Paul]

'was' Paul. How can you possibly think that after the idiotic hoo-hah with the Prince Harry and Carole Thatcher issues. Never mind the word 'Paki' people are so conditioned nowadays that they even lower their voices and look around furtively whenever they mention the word Pakistani in public.

Crikey......... We're no longer allowed freedom of speech on here.

No freedom of speech still exists in this country, what has become too entrenched is the belief people should not be allowed to speak for fear of offending others. That one person my be offended by another's views is irrelevant, the freedom to express those views is more important.

What is found unacceptable by many is the use of terms which the majority find offensive - there is a huge difference between holding views others find offensive and using derogatory expressions connected to race - no matter how much some protest it is everyday descriptive language.

To take each of your examples in turn; Prince Harry probably meant no harm in calling his colleague "our little Paki" but it betrays his upbringing and attitudes which still exist in certain strata of our society. That he, and presumably his peers, find "our little Paki" acceptable language shows their protected lifestyles and lack of appreciation of modern Britain. Thatcher and the Golliwog episode should not be in the public eye as it was apparently a private remark, as was Harry's I presume, but it shows her for what she is. As for the general use of the word Paki, I have nevr heard it used in anything other than a derogatory manner accept by people perhaps 20 years my senior who do not understand what it has come to mean.

As for using Pakistani in hushed tones, that's just stupid. I'd suggest anyone who finds this necessary has a problem.

So this goes to illustrate how powerful the Islamic lobby must be?

No it means the Islamic lobby is more likely to protest on the street while other groups are less likely to.

[yoda]

No freedom of speech still exists in this country, what has become too entrenched is the belief people should not be allowed to speak for fear of offending others. That one person my be offended by another's views is irrelevant, the freedom to express those views is more important.

What is found unacceptable by many is the use of terms which the majority find offensive - there is a huge difference between holding views others find offensive and using derogatory expressions connected to race - no matter how much some protest it is everyday descriptive language.

To take each of your examples in turn; Prince Harry probably meant no harm in calling his colleague "our little Paki" but it betrays his upbringing and attitudes which still exist in certain strata of our society. That he, and presumably his peers, find "our little Paki" acceptable language shows their protected lifestyles and lack of appreciation of modern Britain. Thatcher and the Golliwog episode should not be in the public eye as it was apparently a private remark, as was Harry's I presume, but it shows her for what she is. As for the general use of the word Paki, I have nevr heard it used in anything other than a derogatory manner accept by people perhaps 20 years my senior who do not understand what it has come to mean.

As for using Pakistani in hushed tones, that's just stupid. I'd suggest anyone who finds this necessary has a problem.

No it means the Islamic lobby is more likely to protest on the street while other groups are less likely to.

you mean the silent majority, which have been itimidated to say nothing for fear of being labeled with whatever the protesters come up with

[colin]

you mean the silent majority, which have been itimidated to say nothing for fear of being labeled with whatever the protesters come up with

Perhaps you don't see the irony of speaking up on behalf of the "silent majority."

Ssssshhhhhh

That Dutch idiot is no different from loads of Christians who have, over history, killed Muslims & Jews. No different from Muslims who have killed Christians & Jews. No different from Jews who are currently slaughtering thousands of Muslims.

These Abramamic religions are a toot aren't they?

Morons the lot of them.

[Paul]

you mean the silent majority, which have been itimidated to say nothing for fear of being labeled with whatever the protesters come up with

No it has nothing to do with fear and everything to do with "can't be arsed." I object to the views expressed by both Wilders and Hezbollah but don't have the energy or committment to protest on the streets. Much the same, I imagine, as the majority of people in the UK including those who suggest what they see as the liberal left are responsible for destroying their right to call Pakistanis Pakis. The "silent majority" (i.e. ordinary right thinking people) have never protested on the streets and it has nothing to do with fear.

[yoda]

Perhaps you don't see the irony of speaking up on behalf of the "silent majority."

Ssssshhhhhh

That Dutch idiot is no different from loads of Christians who have, over history, killed Muslims & Jews. No different from Muslims who have killed Christians & Jews. No different from Jews who are currently slaughtering thousands of Muslims.

These Abramamic religions are a toot aren't they?

Morons the lot of them.

Like I posted before I think religion should be banned

[thenodrog]

That Dutch idiot is no different from loads of Christians who have, over history, killed Muslims & Jews. No different from Muslims who have killed Christians & Jews. No different from Jews who are currently slaughtering thousands of Muslims.

Really Colin? ........ how many has he killed?

[gillibrand]

Whilst I may not agree with everything Geert Wilders says, he is saying what a large part of the silent majority are thinking, but like Geert if they dare say anything out loud they are called idiots or racist, or what ever the section of people who want to distance themselves from such out spoken views for fear of reprisal come up with. He was stopped from saying what a lot of people in the UK would like politicians in Parliament to say on their behalf, the likes of the so called Lord Ahmed seems more than ready to shout anyone down who dares to disagree with the teachings of the Muslim way, so why can't we have someone who wants to speak on our behalf!

[leftfooter]

Just to put the ban on Wilders in to perspective there is by coincidence a Panorama report to be aired on BBC1 this evening regarding existing government policy toward the radicalisation of Moslems in Britain.

Apparently this policy is called 'Preventing Violent Extremism'. According to the BBC report it is "…focused on those promoting violence. Investigate them, place them under surveillance, prosecute or deport them, cut out the cancer of extremism and the threat will subside…"

The idea is that for fear of alienating Moslems the bar of what was "unacceptable" was set very high. Only those at the far end of the extremist spectrum were to be challenged.

The equation of this (and I quote) is quite astonishing:

"…those who denounced violence but who promoted intolerance and held offensive, anti-British views were tolerated. More than this, some radicals were even courted as part of our counter-terrorism strategy. The idea was that so long as they denounced terror, other views would be ignored. This was seen as the lesser of two evils - backing certain radicals even if they preached intolerance of homosexuals or women's rights was seen as a way of protecting Britain (emphasis added)…"

Even allowing for the sanitised language that characterises BBC reporting in these matters, the report appears to suggest is that the Government has been and still is colluding with those that do promote violence and at the very least incite hatred against other minority communities.

Just to make one thing clear; I hold no brief for some of Wilders' views (such as his ludicrous call for the Quran to be banned) but this is an application of double standards on stilts!

It's also in a way quite institutionally racist in that pejorative language (to say the least) is acceptable by the Government from certain ethnic communities but not in the form of the white European Wilders. Thus Wilders is held to account whilst radical elements predominately from ethnic communities are to be indulged.

Here is the link:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_pa...000/7891612.stm

[gillibrand]

There is one good thing to come out of this stupid decision, membership of Geert Wilders PVV party has increased by a large amount, which would equate to them gaining several more seats in the Dutch Parliament!

[thenodrog]

There is one good thing to come out of this stupid decision, membership of Geert Wilders PVV party has increased by a large amount, which would equate to them gaining several more seats in the Dutch Parliament!

I guess Jaquie Smith will be receiving a thank you letter and a big bunch of flowers soon. Not sure to whose house though.

[gillibrand]

Last week Geert Wilders film Fitna was screened in the USA, and afterwards it received a standing ovation, one reporter said Wilders is on the verge of becoming big in the political arena, the PVV is now the largest supported party in the Netherlands after a recent poll!

[thenodrog]

Last week Geert Wilders film Fitna was screened in the USA, and afterwards it received a standing ovation, one reporter said Wilders is on the verge of becoming big in the political arena, the PVV is now the largest supported party in the Netherlands after a recent poll!

Thats mighty odd! The perfect opportunity for Brown to decry and condemn the septics for screening and praising such racist material and he's never said a word! Not one cheep have we heard from him on that subject. Maybe he should have taken Jaqui Smith with him.

http://news.aol.co.uk/congress-must-seize-...004519391297478

[blue phil]

FREEDOM OF SPEECH the Islamic way .

Perhaps Wilders had a point about the enemy in our midst .

Unlike the Islamist vermin , though , he wasn't allowed to express his view .......

Go figure .

[Bazzanotsogreat]

FREEDOM OF SPEECH the Islamic way .

Perhaps Wilders had a point about the enemy in our midst .

Unlike the Islamist vermin , though , he wasn't allowed to express his view .......

Go figure .

An absolute disgrace. Can the government not see by allowing these vexatious “protests” and banning Wilders: they are playing straight into the far-rights hands?

Nick Griffin must be rubbing his hands together at the sight of Muslims spitting, and hurling obscenities at British soldiers on British soil.

[gillibrand]

Every time something like this or any other Muslim problem in England occurs it is always described that it is only a small minority, now according to the pacifist Brown it has shrunk to a Tiny Minority, what next a complete denial it ever happened?

[thenodrog]

Orange boiler suits and a one way ticket to Cuba imo.

[gillibrand]

Several Moroccan Muslims have been arrested in Amsterdam, trying to plant explosives in shops and supermarkets! Not been much coverage on the UK TV channels.

[blue phil]

Maybe ity's just as well Wilders was banned by the freedom haters over here - it sounds like his message needs to be heard back in his homeland at the moment ..........(if it can still be described as his homeland )