Disgrace: Dutch government exploring ways to ban Wilders’s anti-Islam film? Update: YouTube pulls anti-Islam videos to appease Pakistan
posted at 11:00 am on March 3, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Until now most of the intimidation has been of the “soft” kind, with the Dutch PM nudging Wilders to kindly remind him that if some savage beheads someone over his film, it’s his fault. Now, the inevitable:
The Dutch government is looking into whether it can stop a politician from releasing an anti-Koran film, fearing attacks on its citizens and businesses, a newspaper reported on Monday.
Government lawyers are looking into whether there are legal grounds to ban the film by anti-immigration lawmaker Geert Wilders, who has likened the Koran to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf, the Telegraaf reported, citing sources close to the cabinet…
The newspaper said the coalition government was divided on the film with the Christian Democrats more in favour of a ban while Labour was pushing freedom of expression and calling on Muslim countries to prevent violence against the Netherlands.
I like the suggestion of a split over whether they should ask Muslims not to kill them. The legal strategy here is a sort of expanded Pentagon Papers defense: The film presents a threat to national security and thus must be suppressed, even though (a) it’s not the film that presents a threat, of course, it’s the barbarians who are willing to slit throats to stifle it, and (b) instead of revealing government secrets, Wilders is purporting to reveal “secrets” about … Islam. In fact, it’s a step more absurd than that — follow the link to Dutch News and you’ll see that the main concern is for, um, heavily armed NATO forces in Afghanistan. That’s not the first time the troops have been used to try to cow Wilders into backing down, so I’ll ask you again what I asked you then: Precisely how much speech are they willing to ban at home to make occupation abroad easier?
Update: Michelle noted this last week, I think, but it fits so well with this post that I’ll lay it in front of you in case you missed it. What’s a free-thinkin’ Internet behemoth to do when it’s banned for letting its users engage in a bit too much free expression? Why, roll back their freedom of expression, of course.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Yeah, this from the same government that allows murderers like Joran Van Der Sloot to peacock around even after giving taped verbal confessions seen around the world. Sounds like it’s high time to boycott the Netherlands.
pilamaye on March 3, 2008 at 11:08 AM
Jan Balkanende is an out & out spineless coward. If I was a Dutchwoman I’d be ashamed of him & the rest of the government for kowtowing to these sadistic fanatics.
More than ever I fear for my friends in the Netherlands.
Abigail Adams on March 3, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Does anybody really think that appeasement is a solution?
Speakup on March 3, 2008 at 11:11 AM
Why don’t they hold an emergency meeting, convert to Islam and behead him?
Simple. Clean.
It’s coming anyway.
drjohn on March 3, 2008 at 11:15 AM
The ironic thing about all of this is that people in DEMOCRATIC nations look at this and see an obvious reason why people should not put out stuff to offend others. They say that a ban on speech like this because of intimidation and threats to the community as a whole are acceptable.
HOWEVER, if you took it out to its logical conclusion, what is to keep these people from saying that if you vote for a certain person in office it is ‘offensive to Islam’, and therefore they threaten to kill, destroy, and tear down everything if a certain person is elected.
This type of politics needs to be off limits in a democracy. The concept of ‘if I don’t get my way I’ll riot and kill justifiably’ throws any sense of ‘democracy’ out the window.
In such a case, democracy becomes the victim of intimidation and no matter who wins the vote, the government won’t have any power.
I’m rambling now and I apologize. But threats to ‘art’ are not very different than threats to ‘votes’. This type of activity is not acceptable in a modern society.
ThackerAgency on March 3, 2008 at 11:20 AM
From Sugiero, you’ve got to watch this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhN6CG1zCRc
drjohn on March 3, 2008 at 11:25 AM
This is almost too much to get my brain around. Let’s see if I can get this right:
The government wants to ban a film that portrays Islamists are intolerant, blood-thirsty savages because once Isalmists see the film they will prove by their actions that they are intolerant, blood-thirsty savages?
Is that right? Did I get it?
Seems to me that if you’re locked in a cage with a lion, he’s going to eat you sooner or later no matter how quietly you cower in the corner stammering that he’s a nice kitty cat over and over.
Rod on March 3, 2008 at 11:28 AM
I guess the PM didn’t get the memo on The Religion of Peace.
fogw on March 3, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Machiavelli certainly had a keen sense of human nature. Something completely lost on the Left.
DerKrieger on March 3, 2008 at 11:37 AM
It’s a shame that the Dutch government doesn’t find the Islamic extremists as big a threat as they do Geert Wilders.
TooTall on March 3, 2008 at 11:40 AM
Great reference and quote.
Uh, no. We should look at this and see the obvious reasons why people should not be *afraid* to put out stuff that offends others. What part of “freedom of speech” did you not get? Do you suppose that we (in the US) have put up for years with NeoNazis, skinheads, KKK, Black Panthers and numerous other hate groups marching in our streets just so we could skewer ourselves and our freedoms for this particular hate-group? Every democratic nation on earth should see this as **exactly** the reason why freedoms have to be guaranteed. Obviously, Muslims are not prepared (able?) to live within a democratic society if they cannot abide by the freedoms that we deem incontrovertible. If persons of Muslim faith cannot abide by the laws of the land they immigrate to, they need to be (forcefully, if necessary) be removed from that land, just like we remove criminals from society. Otherwise, you might as well assimilate into their culture and adopt their laws and religion.
Exit question: What do you suppose is demanded of persons visiting or immigrating to Islamic lands? Should lands that are Christian based and democratic demand anything less than total adherence to their laws?
Geministorm on March 3, 2008 at 11:42 AM
This type of Appeasement is going to get the PM voted out of office in the next election. Wilders is very popular due to his shedding of the PC-rhetoric and ceasing to ignore that the emperor has no clothes (Religion of Peace, my ass!).
Just keep driving in the coffin nails Balkenende, you and your group of spineless gamma males will soon be irrelevant.
Geministorm on March 3, 2008 at 11:48 AM
The permission of the Dutch government seems irrelevant to distribution, so long as wealthy men share with Wilders the resources he needs for distribution. It’s difficult to see how the film can be stopped, if it’s made available on film media, DVD, and internet sites.
The value of Wilders’s publicly confronting his muslim and governmental opponents seems to be that his opponents are making the same point his film is reported to make, that muslims rule through intimidation and violence.
Kralizec on March 3, 2008 at 11:49 AM
Wilders said this months ago: if the film never see the light of day, the Muslims will have proven his point already that Islam is violent, oppressive, and intolerant.
Wilders 1; Religion of Peace 0.
fourstringfuror on March 3, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Machiavelli is bracing, isn’t he?
Kralizec on March 3, 2008 at 11:53 AM
Beyond satire. The future is laughing at us.
The spineless cretins who run Appeasement Tube would be ashamed of themselves if they had a conscience. Google snuggles up to the ChiComs while its subsidiaries kowtow to Islamist thugs. “Don’t Be Evil” my a**.
Of course none of this will matter. Fitna will get out. All of us will see it, one way or another. It will be available for the world. And yes, people will be killed by mobs of illiterate zombie fanatics.
Life has become a bad movie.
Vote Sauron 08 on March 3, 2008 at 11:53 AM
his hair remains AWESOME
tlynch001 on March 3, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Freedom of Speech is rather pointless if it only protects speech everyone thinks is acceptable.
It would be like having a law declaring that puppies and kittens are cute.
Asher on March 3, 2008 at 12:03 PM
How does proof work? If muslims try to rule Wilders, the Dutch, and the rest through intimidation and violence, and they succeed, it seems Wilders’s point will not even have been made, and therefore not proven. It seems their intimidation and violence proves Wilders’s point only as often as Wilders succeeds in making his point despite their intimidation and violence.
Kralizec on March 3, 2008 at 12:06 PM
I have a friend who lives in east Germany. She’s been accepted to go to university in the UK. Once upon a time, I might have thought that getting out of Germany to England was a step up, but not anymore.
I am glad though that she’s not taking a step DOWN to the Netherlands…
Vatican Watcher on March 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM
The biggest worry that I have in the war with Islam is not leftist treason, but Christian treason. I fear that the Christians will wish to pretend that we are not at war for two reasons. The first reason is that they can continue with their rhetoric that any faith is useful–no matter what the content of that faith. The second reason is that they believe that somehow God will make it work out. We have seen the the first reason in the statement of Archbishop of Canterbury that some degree of Sharia would be good for the UK and we’ve seen it in every prounouncement made by George W about Islam. The Archbishop of Canterbury and George W are on opposite ends of liberal/conservative spectrum in Christianity, but both would rather put discussion of the evil of Islam out of bounds rather than risk a discussion of the value of Chrisitianity. I’m an atheist, and I can assure everyone that Christianity has little to lose in practical terms in such a conversation.
Let’s next consider a Christian belief that God will provide a miracle so we don’t have to fight back against Islam. We do well to recall that some of the first Christian areas are now located in the countries of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, and Morocco. The Christians, who the muslims didn’t kill, became non-Christian by virtue of the sword or torture or threats of slavery. Christianity mounted a tepid, inept defense in the Crusades, but otherwise fought back little. Now the few Christians left in these lands are horribly oppressed; for example the Coptic Christians in Egypt. Why would we think that God who didn’t defend Middle East Christians is going to save us if we don’t fight back?
thuja on March 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM
It seems one must prepare and maintain diverse means, so as to avoid dependency on another.
Kralizec on March 3, 2008 at 12:10 PM
The world is gearing up for another hot round in the War Against Jihad. Hamas uses Iranian weapons to attack Israel proper. The IDF is prepping for a full-scale invasion of Gaza, as Ed’s posts are documenting. Wilders’ film Fitna is sure to set off a global hissy-fit of murder and arson among the islamist/rage boy crowds. Iranian rhetoric is ever-increasingly bellicose. Pakistan teeters. The Spring Offensive begins soon.
Vote Sauron 08 on March 3, 2008 at 12:12 PM
When Sharia law kicks in, I wonder if it will still be legal to stick your finger in the dikes?
Hening on March 3, 2008 at 12:12 PM
He perhaps doesn’t even have or even need a film. Just the idea of it’s existence is making the government react like the cowards they are and the Muslim creatures are frothing as predicted.
I hope this boil swells and festers for some time yet.
BL@KBIRD on March 3, 2008 at 12:20 PM
I can’t imagine that the Dutch government would follow through and ban the film. In the end, any publicity is good publicity and this controversy will probably double the number of people who’ll want to see it.
Hollowpoint on March 3, 2008 at 12:37 PM
I’m not surprised. Google (which owns YouTube) bent over backwards to help the Red China thugs corral freedom in that prison-state.
jgapinoy on March 3, 2008 at 12:41 PM
…and soon after Google hindered US from finding terrorists via internet searches.
jgapinoy on March 3, 2008 at 12:42 PM
(that’s why I never use Google)
jgapinoy on March 3, 2008 at 12:43 PM
Red Pill on March 3, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Vote Sauron 08 on March 3, 2008 at 12:12 PM
Add Hugo’s drug induced stupidity and Ahmadinejad’s quest for a date with the 12th Imam to the mix and yessiree folks its time to cue up Drowning Pools classic…. Bodies
dmann on March 3, 2008 at 4:11 PM
Comment pages: