In case that you spent the last two weeks on one of Jupiter's moons, the issue at hand is the fact that a short while ago, Lord Pearson, a member of the House of Lords, invited Geert Wilders, the Dutch MP for the Freedom Party, to show his 15-minute movie "Fitna" before the British Parliament. A muslim member of the House of Lords, Lord Nazir Ahmed, then threatened to gather 10,000 muslims to deny Wilders access to the Parliament's buildings. At first, the UK's MPs backed down. In Pakistan, his native country, Nazir Ahmed proclaimed that his undoing of the showing was a "victory for the muslim community". Perhaps in a rare flash of shame for having put down their pants so quickly, British Parliamentarians again allowed the showing of Fitna inside Parliament's premises. However, upon Wilders stating he would present the movie in person, he received the above letter, which effectively barred him from setting foot on the British Isles.
|THIS MAN IS NOT WELCOME IN THE UK.||THESE WOMEN ARE WELCOME IN THE UK.|
Over at Gates of Vienna, there is a magnificent op-ed from British author Paul Weston, titled "Wilders in Wonderland". You got to read it all. Here are some exerpts:
"When Alice fell down a rabbit hole and embarked on her adventures in Wonderland, she discovered a thoroughly surreal environment in which the White Queen was able to advise the Mad Hatter that… “quite often subjects are punished before they commit a crime, rather than after, and sometimes they do not even commit it at all.”
Welcome to Wonderland, Mr Wilders, where Holland’s sober lawmakers appear intent on out-fantasizing Lewis Carroll on acid. The fact that they are hell-bent on subjecting Geert Wilders to a criminal prosecution is more than just absurd. It is insane. Totally, utterly and mind-bendingly insane.
Take a look at a criminal photo-file log book. The faces glowering out at you are uniformly suited to violence and mayhem; the close set eyes, the curious haircuts and the ubiquitous facial tattoos sympathetically framing the studded visage.
Mr Wilders does not look like such a criminal to me. I suppose he could possibly be a white-collar embezzler but he lacks the lean and hungry look of the rapacious city banker, (many of whom, I understand, are still at large).
If one uses one’s imagination it is not entirely impossible to picture an ancestral Wilders doppelganger storming up a Kent beach with his fellow Vikings, blond mane flowing over his animal-skinned jerkin, battle-axe at the ready, his mind aflame with rape, pillage and destruction.
But the 2009 version of Geert Wilders is not intent on taking over a foreign land. Today, he is simply defending his own land against a new generation of foreign destroyers, pillagers and rapists. And for this he is smeared as a criminal by his very own countrymen.
Islam, by dint of being a minority religion is a protected interest, whilst Mr Wilders, despite being one in a million, is the majority of one, and therefore an unprotected interest. In his own country. Dear God, what has the liberal/left come to?
Geert Wilders is our modern day Winston Churchill, he who railed at the deaf and blind politicians of the late ’20s and early ’30s as to the swelling danger one particular “ism” posed to Europe, just as Wilders does today.
There is one crucial difference however. The ’30s politicians were not on Hitler’s side, they did not actively seek to colonise their country with Nazi followers and nor did they attempt to imprison Churchill.
Can one compare Churchill and Nazism with Wilders and Islamism? Liberals would probably disagree, but liberals need a few basic lessons in reality. Islam is war with Europe. Right now. Today.
It is easy to tell if you are at war. The leaders of the other side encourage their foot soldiers to invade you, kill you, take your territory, impose their religion and culture upon you and rape your women.
It is equally easy to tell if you are losing a war. The other side succeeds in invading you, killing you, taking your territory, imposing their religion and culture upon you, raping your women, and most importantly, seizing control of the political apparatus to advance their cause whilst denying resistance.
Which is why Wilders is being criminalised for pointing this out.
When Churchill toured the country during the Blitz, his tin hat was not there to ward off attacks from crazed air-raid wardens, Methodists or Mancunians; but Geert Wilders’ metaphorical tin hat, aka his 24 hour security, is absolutely necessary to defend himself against Islamic assassins.
It is a sobering thought that Wilders, in ostensibly a time of peace, is more exposed to assassination than Churchill in a time of war, but with previous Dutch critics of Islam permanently silenced, we really are only ostensibly at peace.
There are plenty of Dutchmen who understand this. The Perth property market in Australia is virtually reliant on them. Faced with their purported leaders’ casual acceptance of Sharia Law for Holland in the not too distant future, Dutchmen are flying out. It is estimated that a full 4% of middle class Dutch aged 25-45 are legging it every year.
Within 20 years they will have all left, and they are the tax paying backbone of Holland. Their replacement? The jubilant Jihadists, if they get their way, which seems likely if only by demographic growth, a scenario most demographers project.
When the Germans finally began Blitzkrieging their way across Europe, everyone got behind Churchill. In Holland, faced with Islamic defeat — which is what Piet Hein Donner’s acceptance of Sharia Law actually means — the leaders attempt to silence resistance.
The idea that fellow Europeans, indeed fellow Dutchmen, have deliberately imported and protected an alien and totally unassimilable culture whose core ideology is the antithesis of the liberal democracy that is Holland, would have Alice in need of Prozac rather than a nice cup of tea, such is the manifest insanity of it all.
To take it one stage further, to admit our future is Islamic and to then enact a lunatic law whose sole intention is shut down the freedom of expression of Geert Wilders, and others like him, in order to muzzle their warnings of an ideology that threatens the total and utter destruction of our way of life, is not just normal liberal lunacy. These politicians are guilty of treason.
If the prosecution team find Wilders guilty, it will be a massive victory for those who wish to destroy us. Without freedom of speech it becomes infinitely harder, especially in Europe, to advance a serious resistance. And not just with regard to Islam, but anything, literally anything you may believe in, that our rulers would rather you did not.
It is imperative that everyone does something, no matter how little, to ensure the traitors’ class who currently run Europe are made to realise they are not just up against one lone man, albeit with a Samsonesque head of hair, but thousands upon thousands of ideologically similar people who stand full square behind him.
Geert Wilders is not the criminal here. It is our criminal, quisling, treacherous rulers who deserve such a mantle. Indeed they deserve a great deal more. The treason laws and treason penalties were enacted for a reason, something our rulers should bear in mind when they view the ever-growing public anger they seem intent on stoking."
It is possible that you are still reeling from me qualifying Jacqui Smith as a dhimmi whore. But then it's about time you wake up, for good manners won't do you any good when the muezzin wakes you up at five in the morning and bearded assholes call YOUR DAUGHTER what I call Jacqui Smith. Ladies and gentlemen, the time to mince our words in the interest of civilized discourse has passed. In its place has come the time to yell loud and bang on the table. If we let the ludicrous assortment of castrated or otherwise impotent traitors who represent us have their way, it won't be long before the only right you will have is the right to shut up and pay jizya. Again, remember "Mrs." Smith's reasoning in denying Geert Wilders entry to the UK: "...that the Dutch politician’s “[…] presence in the UK would pose a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society...” and remember that this is the country that for fifteen years or more has allowed the likes of Abu Hamza al-Masri and Yusuf al-Qaradawi to enter. But then, what can you expect from a woman who has said:
“Terrorism has no place in Is-lamic thought, teaching or tradition. It is the opposite of everything that Is-lam stands for: Peace, Tolerance and Obedience to God.
“The ideology promoted by terrorists is a perverse rewriting of history and politics, and a misreading of a great religion.”
Saner words can be found at that other beacon of hope in a continent going insane as we speak, The Brussels Journal, where A. Millar writes that "... Britain’s intelligence service has identified 2,000 terrorist suspects inside the country. However, such men apparently pose a far lower security risk than that of the cultured, mild-mannered, coiffed, Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who has been informed that he will likely be refused entry to the UK should he try." Tomorrow, Mr. Wilders will board a plane to Heathrow in direct defiance of an absurd and scandalous dictum. More than three hundred years ago, in 1672, a great Dutchman, William, Prince of Orange, set foot on British soil to become King William III. Under his reign, the British acquired a constitutional document of the same magnitude as the Magna Charta, the Bill of Rights. Britain would do well - Britain would do very well - to give yet another great Dutchman free passage, for the message he brings is of paramount importance to the rights included in that Bill. Jacqui Smith who knows that Islam stands for Peace, Tolerance and Obedience to God may have forgotten - indeed never have known - what the Bill of Rights stood for, but possibly enough Brits still do. Give Wilders tomorrow the welcome he DESERVES... or eternal shame will be upon you.