"Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
PhatPhungus
Posts: 321
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 5:40 pm UTC
Contact:

"Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby PhatPhungus » Thu Feb 12, 2009 8:59 pm UTC

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7885918.stm

Dutch MP refused entry to Britain because he wrote a book claiming that the Koran was fascist, and he related Islam to terrorism.

I very much disagree with him, but punishing him for saying that is ridiculous. Also, I can't help but notice that if he had said similar things about Christianity, it wouldn't have caused him nearly as much trouble.
__________
_____
__
_

User avatar
Chfan
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:26 pm UTC
Location: American East Coast

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Chfan » Thu Feb 12, 2009 10:08 pm UTC

Ah, Geert Wilders. The ignorant buffoon.

I think it goes beyond "relating"- he seems bent on saying that Islam is terrorism and that all who practice it are evil. Didn't he make a documentary about it or something?
Just FYI, the guy isn't avatar isn't me. But he seems pretty cool.

User avatar
TheStranger
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:39 pm UTC
Location: The Void which Binds

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby TheStranger » Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:45 am UTC

There is this little thing called "freedom of speech"... as much as we may disagree with the things that others say we cannot simply refuse to listen to what they have to say.

The presence of such laws in Europe has always seemed, to me at least, to be something of a black mark against them. Banning the ideas of people who disagree with you does not seem like the best way to foster debate.
"To bow before the pressure of the ignorant is weakness."
Azalin Rex, Wizard-King of Darkon

User avatar
cypherspace
Posts: 2733
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:48 pm UTC
Location: Londonia

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby cypherspace » Fri Feb 13, 2009 1:59 am UTC

Banning the ideas of people who disagree with you does not seem like the best way to foster debate.
Forgive me for being crass, but no shit, dude. Whoever said the purpose of the law was to foster debate? It seems quite clear that it's intended to stamp it out in certain areas, such as the Holocaust-denying law in Austria. I can't say I actually disagree with the idea of telling people to shut up about certain issues, but the idea of having complete freedom of speech is to prevent any encroachment of the laws on further civil liberties, which I do agree with, so in essence I have a bit of cognitive dissonance on this issue.

PhatPhungus - I vaguely agree, but people have been deported for similar, alternatively directed sentiments. If this is anything, it's consistent.
Last edited by cypherspace on Fri Feb 13, 2009 3:05 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"It was like five in the morning and he said he'd show me his hamster"

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Dream » Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:43 am UTC

TheStranger wrote:There is this little thing called "freedom of speech"... as much as we may disagree with the things that others say we cannot simply refuse to listen to what they have to say.
I thought it was more that we didn't have to listen, but we don't stop them from talking.
The presence of such laws in Europe has always seemed, to me at least, to be something of a black mark against them. Banning the ideas of people who disagree with you does not seem like the best way to foster debate.

We had this little hiccup in the thirties where half the place went fascist. It wasn't just Germany, but Italy, Spain and Portugal among others had Fascist governments, and extreme or very right wing parties gained support in Britain, Scandinavia, Hungary, Ireland and many other places. It was pathetic demagoguery from the leaders of these parties, but it worked, and the price of not being vigilant against it was very, very high.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Diadem » Fri Feb 13, 2009 4:06 am UTC

A bit more background to this story.

The politician in question is Geert Wilders. He originally was a member of our liberal (in the European meaning of the word, ie: rightwing) party, but he left them (or was kicked out, not quite sure) because of his much tougher anti-immigration ideas. He then started his own party, and he currently holds 9 out of 150 seats in parliament. His party is expected to approximately double in the next elections, making him a major player.

He's a bit of demagogue, his views often seem to lack internal consistency. For example he proclaims that freedom of speech is vitally important, yet at the same time he's said that he'd like to ban the koran. Nevertheless I don't think he should be underestimated. He is speaking out on issues that many politicians are still afraid to talk about. Islam does have some nasty sides, and the massive immigration in recent decades has created some nasty problems. Geert Wilders' analysis of the situation is too one-sided, and so are his solutions, but he is still acknowledging problems that other politicians simply refuse to admit exist. I think this explains his popularity.

Anyway, recently a trial was started against him for hate speech. A really strange turn of events. Several groups had filed lawsuits against them, but the DA's office had basically said "we don't see any crime in this" and declined to take the case to court. Now the courts have decided that they have to take the case to court anyway. Really strange. We're going to see an interesting trial where the judges have already made up while the prosecution thinks he's innocent. Well at least it will be entertaining.

Anyway, Geert Wilders made a movie about Islam some time ago (titled Fitna, you should be able to see find it online). It's basically a compilation of crimes commited in the name of Islam, which quotes from the koran justifying them. Several members of the House of Lords had invited him to show this movie in England. But now the English government has denied him access. By EU treaty they are not officially allowed to do this, except in case of major national security issues. Which I guess they claim this is.

Personally, I think the English government is insane. They are blatantly violating the right of free speech not only of Geert Wilders, but also of their own MPs who invited him over.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Dhes
Posts: 125
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 11:27 am UTC
Location: Netherlands
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Dhes » Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:07 am UTC

Diadem wrote:Personally, I think the English government is insane.....

I wouldn’t call them insane, just a bit stupid. By denying him entry they are playing right into his hands. This guy doesn’t want to sit there and show people a movie anyone that knows how to spell Google can find on the internet. Being denied entry worked out perfectly for him, now he can fly down to London and get a lot of media attention because they stopped him at the border.

They should have just had him over, let him do his little hate speech look at a badly made movie (really it looks like it was made by a 5 year old with a Youtube ripper en windows movie maker). Then when he left, they could’ve just shook there heads and thanked God that the idiot lives on the other side of the North Sea and not in England.

Just look at the guy’s hair, anybody with hair like that craves attention.

I live in the Netherlands and I really really don’t like this guy, but we should listen to him.
People like him only have one-liners, the more they talk the less consistent they become and end-up digging there own grave

Diadem wrote:He then started his own party, and he currently holds 9 out of 150 seats in parliament. His party is expected to approximately double in the next elections, making him a major player.


When push comes to shove, people know that there is more to running a government then hating Muslims.
At least I hope so... :roll:
I’m dyslexic, so I tent tot pull things way out of contacts.
Image

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Diadem » Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:16 pm UTC

Dhes wrote:
Diadem wrote:Personally, I think the English government is insane.....

I wouldn’t call them insane, just a bit stupid. By denying him entry they are playing right into his hands.


Whether they play into his hands or not is (or at least should be) completely irrelevant. This is about freedom of speech, freedom of movement even. Great Brittain is taking yet another step on the road towards tyranny. It is worrisome.

Just look at the guy’s hair, anybody with hair like that craves attention.

Because somebody's hairstyle is completely relevant for his political ideas... It's interesting how you accuse Wilders of hate speech yet don't pass the level of cheap ad hominem attacks yourself.

Diadem wrote:He then started his own party, and he currently holds 9 out of 150 seats in parliament. His party is expected to approximately double in the next elections, making him a major player.


When push comes to shove, people know that there is more to running a government then hating Muslims.
At least I hope so... :roll:

I thought he was the one who was reducing complex issues to one-liners, but I see you are pretty good at it as well :wink:

Anyway, he can't possibly do worse than the current coalition. That certainly explains part of his popularity.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Moo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:31 pm UTC

There have been muslim clerics in the UK that have stood in public spaces and openly advocated terrorism. There is a genuine problem with young muslims in this country getting swept up by extremist elements. The UK has introduced a policy to deny entry to people who have a hugely negative effect on this society, its coherence and its safety.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander; you cannot deny a stay here to people who advocate hate due to Islam and let in people who advocate hate toward Islam, surely?

The Article wrote:But Mr Wilders, who faces trial in his own country for inciting hatred...
Freedom of speech should not be so far reaching as to protect hate speech in my opinion. In South Africa our constitution explicitly gaurantees your right to freedom of speech UNLESS it amounts to hate speech or inciting violence. It is embarrassing that he was invited, perhaps there should have been some consultation, but I think it's a good thing that laws don't seem to only apply to people of selected faiths/nationalities.
Last edited by Moo on Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:38 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

psyck0
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:58 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby psyck0 » Fri Feb 13, 2009 6:37 pm UTC

Diadem wrote:Anyway, he can't possibly do worse than the current coalition. That certainly explains part of his popularity.
Reading his quotes, he is at least as racist as the segregationists and white power movement. How the fuck could he not be worse? I hope he has a heart attack and dies soon, and his followers along with him.

User avatar
Lóng the Dragon
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:10 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Lóng the Dragon » Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:06 pm UTC

- "De kern van het probleem is de fascistische islam, de zieke ideologie van Allah en Mohammed zoals neergelegd in de islamitische Mein Kampf: de Koran."

Spoiler:
The root of the problem is the fascist Islam, the sick ideology of Allah and Muhammed, as described in the Islamic Mein Kampf: the Koran."


In my opinion, this justifies him being prosecuted. This is quite literally getting people to hate the Islam. Which is not something that deserves to be protected. It does not add anything to anything.


However, what the British government did is comparable* to torture: taking someone's rights away because he has done something wrong.

* Not equatable
I'm just being bilingually redundant.

User avatar
slow2learn
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:35 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby slow2learn » Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:21 pm UTC

Lóng the Dragon wrote:
- "De kern van het probleem is de fascistische islam, de zieke ideologie van Allah en Mohammed zoals neergelegd in de islamitische Mein Kampf: de Koran."

Spoiler:
The root of the problem is the fascist Islam, the sick ideology of Allah and Muhammed, as described in the Islamic Mein Kampf: the Koran."


In my opinion, this justifies him being prosecuted. This is quite literally getting people to hate the Islam. Which is not something that deserves to be protected. It does not add anything to anything.


However, what the British government did is comparable* to torture: taking someone's rights away because he has done something wrong.

* Not equatable


So we should prosecute people from speaking things that can cause hate, but admit that this is torture?

I'm so lost, please clarify.
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger,
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

User avatar
Lóng the Dragon
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:10 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Lóng the Dragon » Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:29 pm UTC

slow2learn wrote:
Lóng the Dragon wrote:
- "De kern van het probleem is de fascistische islam, de zieke ideologie van Allah en Mohammed zoals neergelegd in de islamitische Mein Kampf: de Koran."

Spoiler:
The root of the problem is the fascist Islam, the sick ideology of Allah and Muhammed, as described in the Islamic Mein Kampf: the Koran."


In my opinion, this justifies him being prosecuted. This is quite literally getting people to hate the Islam. Which is not something that deserves to be protected. It does not add anything to anything.


However, what the British government did is comparable* to torture: taking someone's rights away because he has done something wrong.

* Not equatable


So we should prosecute people from speaking things that can cause hate, but admit that this is torture?

I'm so lost, please clarify.


This is why I said "not equatable". You can't take a person's rights away because they did something illegal, that is the problem with torture too. However, he should be prosecuted for what he said, because this is past free speech, this is just inciting hate.
I'm just being bilingually redundant.

User avatar
slow2learn
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:35 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby slow2learn » Fri Feb 13, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Lóng the Dragon wrote:This is why I said "not equatable". You can't take a person's rights away because they did
something illegal, that is the problem with torture too. However, he should be prosecuted for what he said, because this is past free speech, this is just inciting hate.


I thought you were confused. Now i know you are. Of course you can take peoples rights away when they do something illegal. Are you argueing that we shouldn't have jails, nor penatlies, nor fines?

Dont be silly.

I personally dont think there is much you can do against hate speech. Its much easier to punish for actions than words.
And in the end, its the actions that we care about.

Finally comparing this to torture does nothing but throw emotions into it. Its not a good comparision.
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger,
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Moo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:11 pm UTC

Speaking is an action; it affects someone when you call them a derogatory name. Perhaps not in the same way as say being violent towards them but it is not a non-event.
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
Lóng the Dragon
Posts: 58
Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2008 8:10 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Lóng the Dragon » Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:33 pm UTC

You're right, I am confused. :| I have no idea what I was getting at any more. (This seems to happen a lot at xkcd)
I'm just being bilingually redundant.

User avatar
slow2learn
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:35 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby slow2learn » Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:37 pm UTC

Moo wrote:Speaking is an action; it affects someone when you call them a derogatory name. Perhaps not in the same way as say being violent towards them but it is not a non-event.


So we should prosecute speech? Dangerous lines to walk there, maam.

This just in. Two year old placed in jail under accusations of calling his friend a butt head.

What other appropriate response can be given to an absurd or rude word? The best reaction is zero. Hate words exchanged for hate words seem extremely circlular and non productive.
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger,
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

User avatar
Bluggo
Posts: 366
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 6:12 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Bluggo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:49 pm UTC

While he is clearly an ignorant, racist, bigoted buffoon, I still do not like at all the fact that his right to free speech was violated.

It would have been much better if they just let him say his piece, and then replied with a long, circumstantiated list of all the reasons why he is a moron.

Frankly, I think that he was hoping that it happened exactly what happened: in this way, he can play on the fact that he is being "persecuted by Islamofascism" (oooo!), and gather more support.
Mary Ellen Rudin wrote:Let X be a set. Call it Y.

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Moo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:03 pm UTC

Speaking is an action
prosecute speech
One of these things is not something I said. Can you tell which one?
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
slow2learn
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:35 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby slow2learn » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:06 pm UTC

Moo wrote:
Speaking is an action
prosecute speech
One of these things is not something I said. Can you tell which one?


Now that you've clearly made it certain that you arn't for the procecution of speech, yes its simple. Have a nice day.
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger,
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Moo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:14 pm UTC

The prosecution of speech isn't really on topic; what is though is the following point I was trying to make:
Generally letting anything slide with the excuse "it's only words, not actions" is something I disagree with (for example, hate speech).
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
slow2learn
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 9:35 pm UTC

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby slow2learn » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:18 pm UTC

Moo wrote:The prosecution of speech isn't really on topic; what is though is the following point I was trying to make:
Generally letting anything slide with the excuse "it's only words, not actions" is something I disagree with (for example, hate speech).


Okay, with prosecution off the table what do we do besides let hate speech slide? What other responsible, just actions can be taken?

I dont condone hate speech, but, 'letting it slide' seems like the best option. When trolls realize their trolling is ignored, they stop trolling.
Make your choice, adventurous Stranger;
Strike the bell and bide the danger,
Or wonder, till it drives you mad,
What would have followed if you had.

User avatar
william
Not a Raptor. Honest.
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:02 pm UTC
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby william » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:27 pm UTC

slow2learn wrote:I dont condone hate speech, but, 'letting it slide' seems like the best option. When trolls realize their trolling is ignored, they stop trolling.

Or, they start fucking screaming.
SecondTalon wrote:A pile of shit can call itself a delicious pie, but that doesn't make it true.

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Moo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:29 pm UTC

slow2learn wrote:What other responsible, just actions can be taken?
I come from South Africa. With the past what it is and tensions what they are, in the interest of moving forward and getting on as a nation there are words there that are very not OK to say and ideas that are detrimental to express. When you do, you can get taken up in front of the Constitutional Court. Not usually individuals on the street, but politicians and public bodies do. Outcomes usually take the form of public apologies and the process serves to reinforce national unity and the ideals the country tries to stand for now.

Another thing one could do seems to be to not allow people who are known for spreading dissent and being loud and public about it, who want to enter the country for the sole purpose of doing so, in.
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
Arancaytar
Posts: 1642
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2007 12:54 am UTC
Location: 52.44°N, 13.55°E
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Arancaytar » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:38 pm UTC

Lóng the Dragon wrote:
- "De kern van het probleem is de fascistische islam, de zieke ideologie van Allah en Mohammed zoals neergelegd in de islamitische Mein Kampf: de Koran."

Spoiler:
The root of the problem is the fascist Islam, the sick ideology of Allah and Muhammed, as described in the Islamic Mein Kampf: the Koran."


In my opinion, this justifies him being prosecuted. This is quite literally getting people to hate the Islam. Which is not something that deserves to be protected. It does not add anything to anything.


Absolutely. Just try to substitute compare "Mein Kampf" to the Bible or the Torah, and see where it gets you. The first would make you persona non grata in America and the more Catholic parts of Europe - the latter would make you hostis humani generis. Given that none of these religions is without its faults, I don't see why there should be any double standard there. Either all religions are fair game, or we extend the same respect to all.
"You cannot dual-wield the sharks. One is enough." -Our DM.
Image

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby EsotericWombat » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:48 pm UTC

Dude... Iranian President Armored Dinner Jacket came to the US and spoke at Harvard. He called for the death of Israel, and unlike this other guy, actually controls such resources as to make that a cause for global concern. And yet, he was allowed into the country. Protected by federal agents

Diplomacy: IT WORKS EXACTLY THAT WAY.
Image

User avatar
Moo
Oh man! I'm going to be so rebellious! I'm gonna...
Posts: 6418
Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2007 3:15 pm UTC
Location: Beyond the goblin city
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Moo » Fri Feb 13, 2009 9:59 pm UTC

I have not made any comments about the morality of the issue; but the fact remains that laws have been introduced long before this to deny entry for people known to stir up hatred. My point is: I would be far more allarmed if this country only enforced such laws for people of one skin colour and faith, and not for others.
Proverbs 9:7-8 wrote:Anyone who rebukes a mocker will get an insult in return. Anyone who corrects the wicked will get hurt. So don't bother correcting mockers; they will only hate you.
Hawknc wrote:FFT: I didn't realise Proverbs 9:7-8 was the first recorded instance of "haters gonna hate"

User avatar
breintje
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:30 pm UTC
Location: Twente, The Netherlands

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby breintje » Fri Feb 13, 2009 11:16 pm UTC

What I have not seen here in this topic is the fact that this "Lord Achmed" guy threatened to mobilize 10.000 pakistani if Mr Wilders, an elected parlementarian in my country, were to be allowed to speak to the house of Lords and/or show "Fitna". And guess what: this commotion made Fitna rise to the most viewed on Google Video. If muslims think it nessecary to PREVENT debate then something must be rotten. Mr Wilders has been asking a lot of islamic imams and other leaders to debate, but they seem to be afraid of that. Why? I am not afraid to have a dialogue with someone about the Bible. There must be a reason for them to fear debate.
Still, even if they are afraid for no reason and the qur'an is all right, these actions prove Mr Wilders' point again, that muslims more often resort to violence, instead of dialogue. The situation is as if when muslims are told they are violent they answer with: "We are not violent! If you dare say that again we will hit/stab/shoot/bomb you!".

Perhaps you should check out this video. Although this person is quite one sided he does point out a few important points. We should not hate foreign people and religions but be open to other people and dialogue with them, we definately SHOULDN'T let our frog be boiled. I personally have no problems with muslims, jews, atheïsts or any other ethnic groups, but they should not be allowed to change our free democratic society of dialogue into one of suppression and violence.

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Dream » Sat Feb 14, 2009 12:49 am UTC

breintje wrote:Mr Wilders has been asking a lot of islamic imams and other leaders to debate, but they seem to be afraid of that. Why? I am not afraid to have a dialogue with someone about the Bible. There must be a reason for them to fear debate.

There would not be a dialogue in such a debate. But anyway, why do you think they are "afraid"? Why not "smart enough to stay out of a shit fight"?
breintje wrote:Still, even if they are afraid for no reason and the qur'an is all right, these actions prove Mr Wilders' point again, that muslims more often resort to violence, instead of dialogue.

That's stupid. You're stupid. Irish people more often resort to childish name calling instead of dialogue.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
TheStranger
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:39 pm UTC
Location: The Void which Binds

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby TheStranger » Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:14 am UTC

Dream wrote:We had this little hiccup in the thirties where half the place went fascist. It wasn't just Germany, but Italy, Spain and Portugal among others had Fascist governments, and extreme or very right wing parties gained support in Britain, Scandinavia, Hungary, Ireland and many other places. It was pathetic demagoguery from the leaders of these parties, but it worked, and the price of not being vigilant against it was very, very high.


I remember reading about that! There was this thing that those Fascist governments did with opinions that ran counter to to the orthodox position... something about arresting and prosecuting?

Yes, the guys opinions are bigoted... but when dealing with speech we have to hold the government to a very exacting standard regarding what can and cannot be said.
"To bow before the pressure of the ignorant is weakness."
Azalin Rex, Wizard-King of Darkon

User avatar
Dream
WINNING
Posts: 4338
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:20 pm UTC
Location: The Hollow Scene Epic

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Dream » Sat Feb 14, 2009 1:38 am UTC

Fascists are in the habit of oppressing, imprisoning or just killing people who criticise them. People like democrats or communists or whatever. Innocent people. That is far from what is happening here. Here, a person who is objectively harmful to society is being prevented from doing that harm. I don't agree with the manner in which that end was achieved, but difference between that and fascism is stark.
I knew a woman once, but she died soon after.

User avatar
breintje
Posts: 54
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 9:30 pm UTC
Location: Twente, The Netherlands

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby breintje » Sat Feb 14, 2009 10:08 am UTC

Dream wrote:
breintje wrote:Mr Wilders has been asking a lot of islamic imams and other leaders to debate, but they seem to be afraid of that. Why? I am not afraid to have a dialogue with someone about the Bible. There must be a reason for them to fear debate.

There would not be a dialogue in such a debate. But anyway, why do you think they are "afraid"? Why not "smart enough to stay out of a shit fight"?

Why would there not be a dialogue? There is no way to say that for you, or any other person, before having actually started this debate. I would find it most interesting to have a debate with a muslim about the Qur'an and the Bible. Or, at least see Mr Wilders debate with an Imam. Secondly, if they would be smart enough to prevent a shit fight they would have debated with him. Or, they could at least have let Mr Wilders show his film and talk before deciding whether or not to engage in dialogue. But no, they didn't even say politely "We do not want to debate with you (Mr Wilders) because we do not think it will yield something useful. (or insert any other reason)", no, they feared the government into blocking him at Heathrow. (Yes, a threat from 1 man (and possibly 10.000 more) overthrew a decision made by the government that was elected by, and represents, ALL OF BRITAIN.) And guess what: they upset half europe! Now THAT will become a shit fight.
Dream wrote:
breintje wrote:Still, even if they are afraid for no reason and the qur'an is all right, these actions prove Mr Wilders' point again, that muslims more often resort to violence, instead of dialogue.

That's stupid. You're stupid. Irish people more often resort to childish name calling instead of dialogue.

On what grounds do you declare me stupid? I would like to know. Also, I don't see what the Irish and name-calling have to do with this. Or do you want to point out that you are Irish?
Anyway, what I ment to say here was that Mr Wilders' main point is that the Qur'an and muslims tend to be violent. And that Lord Achmed only confirmed his point further by threathening the British government. Do not misunderstand me, I have no problems with muslims, and I do not intend to generalise but fact is that I more often hear about violence and/or threatening with violence from muslims than from other ethnic groups. And this action by Lord Achmed does certainly NOT improve their image with me.
Breintje

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Diadem » Sat Feb 14, 2009 3:34 pm UTC

Dream wrote:Fascists are in the habit of oppressing, imprisoning or just killing people who criticise them.

And restricting someone's movement and harassing him with trials is not opression?

Dream wrote:People like democrats or communists or whatever. Innocent people. That is far from what is happening here. Here, a person who is objectively harmful to society is being prevented from doing that harm.

Wait, objectively harmful? According to whom? I'm quite sure his supporters would disagree. There are probably tens of millions of people in Europe who agree with him.

The way you promote your own subjective opinion to objective fact (going as far as actually using the word objective) is scary. Scary. At first I wanted to type 'hysterically funny'. But this particular brand of insanity has cost too many lives to be funny.

According the the fascists of the thirties the communists and democrats were not innocent. And I'm sure they had their objective standards to proof this. Meanwhile, according the the communists both the fascists and the democrats were objectively harmful. And they too had their proofs.

And what constitues this 'objective harm' that according to you Geert Wilders is doing to society? Speaking his mind? Making a movie? You are really going to claim that this is more harmful to society than abolishing free speech and free movement?

Many years ago, before Wilders had even been born, a now forgotten Dutch politician once said: "The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascist". And indeed, time and time again we see downright fascistic actions being taken under the banner of anti-fascism, to fight supposedly dangerous right-wing politicians like Wilders. Wilders is not the first victim of this form of state-sanctioned fascism, nor will he be the last. But the very real danger is that one day the victims will be all of us will.
Last edited by Diadem on Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:16 pm UTC, edited 2 times in total.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
TheStranger
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 9:39 pm UTC
Location: The Void which Binds

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby TheStranger » Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:04 pm UTC

Dream wrote:That is far from what is happening here. Here, a person who is objectively harmful to society is being prevented from doing that harm. I don't agree with the manner in which that end was achieved, but difference between that and fascism is stark.


As has already been stated the harm he does is far from objective... doubly so when you hear what certain Imans have said that did not result in similar action against them by the government. When dealing with freedom it is in the best interests of the people that a government err on the side of protecting those freedoms, and with that in mind what the government of GB did was not correct. Nothing I have heard of him indicates that he has incited violence against Muslims in general, or any specific individual, and as such there is no reason to censor his speech / restrict his travel.
"To bow before the pressure of the ignorant is weakness."
Azalin Rex, Wizard-King of Darkon

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:19 pm UTC

Cabinet Office minister Liam Byrne said, on BBC One's Question Time: "This guy wasn't coming here to exercise his right of free speech. This guy was trying to come here in order to sow division between us in this country.

"Everything I've heard about this guy tells me he's a bigot and the right place for him is to stay at home."


See, in the US we have this group called the KKK. They, uh, hate black people. And Jews. And gays. They hate a lot of people. But unless one of them actually openly calls for violence, we leave them alone. Because we value the FUCK out of free speech.

My understanding is that this guy's film portrays Islam as a dangerous religion of hatred. He isn't wrong, exactly; the religious tenets are PART of the problem. The real cause of the problem is that people hold some tenets as absolute truth and delude others into following them in something that is Islam by particular letters but not in spirit. Correct me if wrong? This film does not openly advocate violence; does not say "go kill Muslims because their religion is stupid and hates you"?

It'd be bad enough if he were just some guy, but he's part of another country's government. Denying him entry is petty and ridiculous and Britain scares the shit out of me.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby EsotericWombat » Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:38 pm UTC

As far as part of the problem being basic tenets of Islam, I'd say that it's mostly the tendency towards theocracy. Aside from that, the problem with Islam is that it's a religion. When Christianity was around as young a religion as Islam is, it managed to be the motivation for a holy war even without systemic global oppression of its followers.
Image

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby bigglesworth » Sun Feb 15, 2009 7:41 pm UTC

Nougatrocity wrote:Because we value the FUCK out of free speech.


And we value preventing hate causing speech.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby EsotericWombat » Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:19 pm UTC

Good luck having a free society your way.
Image

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby Princess Marzipan » Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:29 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:And we value preventing hate causing speech.


The thing is, none of that CAUSES hate. NONE OF IT.

If your speech does not directly lead to the violation of another's rights, by actually calling for violence against a person a group, or directly disturbing the peace a'la the oft-mentioned yelling of fire in a theater, speak away.

I will defend to the death the right of Ku Klux Klan to tell me how worthless blacks, jews, and gays are, and even of the Christian church telling me that gay marriage will destroy society. The solution in a free society is not to silence your opposition, but to speak louder.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
william
Not a Raptor. Honest.
Posts: 2418
Joined: Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:02 pm UTC
Location: Chapel Hill, NC
Contact:

Re: "Dutch MP Refused Entry to Britain" (for saying things)

Postby william » Sun Feb 15, 2009 8:38 pm UTC

Nougatrocity wrote:The solution in a free society is not to silence your opposition, but to speak louder.

Honestly, that's not always possible.
SecondTalon wrote:A pile of shit can call itself a delicious pie, but that doesn't make it true.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests