FITNA a film by Geert Wilders and Scarlet Pimpernel

Here

I strongly disagree with three statements that the writer of the Wall Street journal article that follows made:

"Reasonable men in free societies regard Geert Wilders's anti-Muslim rhetoric, and films like 'Fitna,' as disrespectful of the religious sensitivities of members of the Islamic faith."

COMMENT: This is so so much bullsht and appeasement of Islamics. Islamics are disrespectful of the religious sensitivities of members of any faith but the ideology known as Islam.

"The film . . . reportedly includes images of a Quran being burned"

COMMENT: The film contains no such thing. It does not insult the koran, it only reproduces its words and accompanies them with images of the results of carrying out these words.

"I do not defend the right of Geert Wilders to air his film because I agree with it. I expect I will not. (I have not yet seen the film)."

COMMENT: There is nothing here to disagree with. The words are from the koran, the images from acts sanctioned by the koran. Nothing more. An excellent, moving film.

AND in this I strongly agree with Mr. Hoekstra:

"While efforts to create parallel Islamic societies have been mostly peaceful, they may actually be a jihadist 'waiting game,' based on the assumption that the Islamic populations of many European states will become the majority over the next 25-50 years due to higher Muslim birth rates and immigration."

All in all this is an excellent article, except for the portions commented on above, which are based on anticipation of inflammatory material as screamed about by Moslems, not in the film itself.

Islam and Free Speech
By PETER HOEKSTRA
The Wall Street Journal, March 26, 2008; Page A15
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120649269618764219.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

The Netherlands is bracing for a new round of violence at home and against its embassies in the Middle East. The storm would be caused by "Fitna," a short film that is scheduled to be released this week. The film, which reportedly includes images of a Quran being burned, was produced by Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch parliament and leader of the Freedom Party. Mr. Wilders has called for banning the Quran -- which he has compared to Hitler's "Mein Kampf" -- from the Netherlands.

After concern about the film led Mr. Wilders's Internet service provider to take down his Web site, Mr. Wilders issued a statement this week that he will personally distribute DVDs "On the Dam" if he has to. That may not be necessary, as the Czech National Party has reportedly agreed to host the video on its Web site.

Reasonable men in free societies regard Geert Wilders's anti-Muslim rhetoric, and films like "Fitna," as disrespectful of the religious sensitivities of members of the Islamic faith. But free societies also hold freedom of speech to be a fundamental human right. We don't silence, jail or kill people with whom we disagree just because their ideas are offensive or disturbing. We believe that when such ideas are openly debated, they sink of their own weight and attract few followers.

Our country allows fringe groups like the American Nazi Party to demonstrate, as long as they are peaceful. Americans are permitted to burn the national flag. In 1989, when so-called artist Andres Serrano displayed his work "Piss Christ" -- a photo of a crucifix immersed in a bottle of urine -- Americans protested peacefully and moved to cut off the federal funding that supported Mr. Serrano. There were no bombings of museums. No one was killed over this work that was deeply offensive to Christians.

Criticism of Islam, however, has led to violence and murder world-wide. Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa calling for Muslims to kill Salman Rushdie over his 1988 book, "The Satanic Verses." Although Mr. Rushdie has survived, two people associated with the book were stabbed, one fatally. The 2005 Danish editorial cartoons lampooning the prophet Muhammad led to numerous deaths. Dutch director Theodoor van Gogh was killed in 2004, several months after he made the film "Submission," which described violence against women in Islamic societies. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch member of parliament who wrote the script for "Submission," received death threats over the film and fled the country for the United States.

The violence Dutch officials are anticipating now is part of a broad and determined effort by the radical jihadist movement to reject the basic values of modern civilization and replace them with an extreme form of Shariah. Shariah, the legal code of Islam, governed the Muslim world in medieval times and is used to varying degrees in many nations today, especially in Saudi Arabia.

Radical jihadists are prepared to use violence against individuals to stop them from exercising their free speech rights. In some countries, converting a Muslim to another faith is a crime punishable by death. While Muslim clerics are free to preach and proselytize in the West, some Muslim nations severely restrict or forbid other faiths to do so. In addition, moderate Muslims around the world have been deemed apostates and enemies by radical jihadists.

Radical jihadists believe representative government is un-Islamic, and urge Muslims who live in democracies not to exercise their right to vote. The reason is not hard to understand: When given a choice, most Muslims reject the extreme approach to Islam. This was recently demonstrated in Iraq's Anbar Province, which went from an al-Qaeda stronghold to an area supporting the U.S.-led coalition. This happened because the populace came to intensely dislike the fanatical ways of the radicals, which included cutting off fingers of anyone caught smoking a cigarette, 4 p.m. curfews, beatings and beheadings. There also were forced marriages between foreign-born al Qaeda fighters and local Sunni women.

There may be a direct relationship between the radical jihadists' opposition to democracy and their systematic abuse of women. Women have virtually no rights in this radical world: They must conceal themselves, cannot hold jobs, and have been subjected to honor killings. Would most women in Muslim countries vote for a candidate for public office who supported such oppressive rules?

Not all of these radicals are using violence to supplant democratic society with an extreme form of Shariah. Some in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark are attempting to create parallel Islamic societies with separate courts for Muslims. According to recent press reports, British officials are investigating the cases of 30 British Muslim school-age girls who "disappeared" for probable forced marriages.

While efforts to create parallel Islamic societies have been mostly peaceful, they may actually be a jihadist "waiting game," based on the assumption that the Islamic populations of many European states will become the majority over the next 25-50 years due to higher Muslim birth rates and immigration. [Emphasis added and note: This is precisely what happened in Lebanon]

What is particularly disturbing about these assaults against modern society is how the West has reacted with appeasement, willful ignorance, and a lack of journalistic criticism. Last year PBS tried to suppress "Islam vs. Islamists: Voices from the Muslim Center," a hard-hitting documentary that contained criticism of radical jihadists. Fortunately, Fox News agreed to air the film.

Even if the new Wilders film proves newsworthy, it is likely that few members of the Western media will air it, perhaps because they have been intimidated by radical jihadist threats. The only major U.S. newspaper to reprint any of the controversial 2005 Danish cartoons was Denver's Rocky Mountain News. You can be sure that if these cartoons had mocked Christianity or Judaism, major American newspapers would not have hesitated to print them.

European officials have been similarly cautious. A German court ruled last year that a German Muslim man had the right to beat his wife, as this was permitted under Shariah [emphasis added]. Britain's Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, stated last month that the implementation of some measure of Shariah in Britain was "unavoidable" and British Muslims should have the choice to use Shariah in marital and financial matters.

I do not defend the right of Geert Wilders to air his film because I agree with it. I expect I will not. (I have not yet seen the film). I defend the right of Mr. Wilders and the media to air this film because free speech is a fundamental right that is the foundation of modern society. Western governments and media outlets cannot allow themselves to be bullied into giving up this precious right due to threats of violence. We must not fool ourselves into believing that we can appease the radical jihadist movement by allowing them to set up parallel societies and separate legal systems, or by granting them special protection from criticism.

A central premise of the American experiment are these words from the Declaration of Independence: "All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." There are similar statements in the U.S. Constitution, British Common Law, the Napoleonic Code and the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights. As a result, hundreds of millions in the U.S. and around the world enjoy freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and many other rights.

These liberties have been won through centuries of debate, conflict and bloodshed. Radical jihadists want to sacrifice all we have learned by returning to a primitive and intolerant world. While modern society invites such radicals to peacefully exercise their faith, we cannot and will not sacrifice our fundamental freedoms.

Mr. Hoekstra, who was born in the Netherlands, is ranking Republican on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACT for America
P.O. Box 6884
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
www.actforamerica.org

On March 19th, an email sent out by our sister organization, American Congress for Truth, carried a story detailing a proposal made at the recent meeting of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC). The proposal calls for a “robust political engagement,” including developing a legal strategy, to stop what the OIC calls “defamation” of Islam.

Our note prefacing the story included the following commentary:

“If leaders of the Muslim nations of the world proceed ahead with such a plan to muzzle any critique or criticism of Islam they deem offensive or defamatory, it is reasonable for freedom-loving people and societies to ask: Can Islam be compatible with freedom? Can freedom-loving societies hope to successfully co-exist with a religious and political ideology that demands that freedom of speech be subordinated to its demands – or else?”

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal carried the op-ed below, authored by respected Member of Congress Peter Hoekstra. One point he makes is well worth quoting here:

“…free speech is a fundamental right that is the foundation of modern society. Western governments and media outlets cannot allow themselves to be bullied into giving up this precious right due to threats of violence. We must not fool ourselves into believing that we can appease the radical jihadist movement by allowing them to set up parallel societies and separate legal systems, or by granting them special protection from criticism.”

The right to practice one’s faith in a free society does not and cannot include the right to silence other people who disagree with and/or criticize tenets of that faith. For any religious faith to demand that in a free society is tantamount to demanding the beginning of the end of freedom in that society. Which is precisely why ACT! for America’s mission includes rising in defense of our liberty.

ANOTHER VENUE

Fitna, the censored movie by Geert Wilders that aims to energize the West into fighting back against its mortal enemy.

The movie, which shows the Western world some of the aims and means of its latest mortal enemy, extremist Islam, was banned first by the internet registrar Network Solutions and LiveLeak. The full version can now be seen in full on Arutz Sheva. Arutz Sheva provides this service in order educate the Western world as to the dangers facing non-Muslims and Western democracies all around the world.

The movie ends with a call for Europe to defeat Islamic ideology, just as it defeated the threats of Nazism and Communism in the past.