I'm pretty sure it's just about stopping a "Riot". The problem is that if people protest about their particular religion being picked on and they get all too emotional (like they usually do), then they would claim that any repercussions for their own inability to maintain civility would be an attack on their religion, even when it's "Just keeping the Peace". Perhaps if it went ahead, trouble makers should just be automatically Deported if they happen to be an Immigrant. ( I know this will raise complaints in regards to those that have moved here, however if they've come here just to upset the legal system and this countries way of life, then they should be deport.) (Btw SAM, I already know how you'll respond about Briton's being in other countries etc, so you don't have to worry about trying to Educate me. After all it's not like I'm personally picketing the Cabal.)
I would expect the UK to do the same for anyone spreading hate for any group. Yeah, I know, else how would they deport the BNP? Btw, many of the "agitated" Muslims are born in Britain. Where would you deport them to?
"'Blowing people up is quite cool' Young Muslims are easy prey, Qadir told CNN, because they believe the British government crackdown has scapegoated them because of their religious beliefs. The youth also can empathize with those who castigate the Bush administration. There are some who believe "blowing people up is quite cool," Qadir said. Qadir asked them why that was justified. "The answers that I got back is: When a bomb goes off in Baghdad or in Afghanistan and innocent women and children are killed over there, who cares for them? So if a bomb goes off in America or in London, what's wrong with that?" he said." "They're into all kinds of vices -- street crime, gun crime, drugs, car theft, credit card fraud. But then now you've got another threat," Qadir said. "The new threat is radicalism. It's a cause. Every young man wants a cause." http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/01/17/warwithin.overview/
So they've bought into "collateral damages"? Why is that a surprise? The UK is "liberating" Iraq and Afganistan isn't it? I recall reading a piece by Hamas, where they were surprised that suicide bombing was considered a crime against humanity. Really? They said. It matters if its from an airplane or tied around the waist? Technology changes a crime to a "not crime"? What do you think?
I think: usually the intollerant are blamed, especially governments. Today those governments(Ours, the europeans) tolerating such behavior should be blamed. In such cases we should drop much of the "tolerance" or "non-discrimination" rethoric.
Well, when faced with that logic, why doesn't Hamas just visit maternity wards and slice the throats of newborns if they really want to justify a means to an end.
LOL So a society that puffs itself up with pride for bravely standing up to "religions" finds it can only be "brave" by mocking and criticizing a faith of people who turn their cheeks and loves their enemies. But when they come to a religion this is blood thirsty and brutal and with adherents who are willing to kill and die in the process if their religion is mocked or attacked, Then they end up showing what a bunch of gutless scumbags of the earth they are. Ohhh Noooo the big bad muslims will riot and kill us if we poke fun at them lets all stop attacking islam and be nice to them so we can be safe..... Gutless scumbags. You bluff has been called, your decadent weak liberal society has just bowed its head to a culture that fully intends to destroy it. You’re finished. All Praise The Ancient Of Days
Why doesn't the US? Why starve the children? Why bomb them from 10,000 feet and pretend its not criminal to do so? Why not just slit their throats?
Go to court. In The Netherlands, it is not allowed to incite hate or to provoke violence. I'm not quite sure Wilders is actually guilty of that, although I do think he is cutting it awfully close. Luckily, there is a fairly objective justice system in place to examine that in depth. Let both sides be heard, and let the judges make an informed decision based on that. Welcome to the free world. I'd rather take the risk of "destabilization" every now and then, than to ban every piece of information which may cause it (may it be some holy scripture, a controversial movie or a scientific publication).
That only works if the court is fair and unprejudiced. Welcome to the world of "antisemitism". edit: It would seem the Dutch court has reversed an earlier decision: http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2009/01/21/europe/EU-Netherlands-Hate-Speech.php So, if his film had been about Jews, would he have been prosecuted? I recall an earlier film called "The Evil Jew" released during WWII. Is it considered as hate speech?
I can't claim the Dutch courts are exactly that... but it is the best our society has to offer. If you feel Wilders went too far, this is the place to go.
I don't know the Dutch criteria for "hate speech". What are their previous prosecutions in this regard?
So, there will be a trial. One I'd be following with interest. In theory, the subject of the movie makes no difference. It would be interesting to see what would happen if Muslims made a similar movie about Christianity. I do not know the content of "The Evil Jew", so I can't comment on it. The title seems awfully suggestive though, and based on that alone I would guess it would be a firm candidate for being considered as hate speech.
Neither do I. Well, at least not to the letter. That's why I think the trial would be rather an interesting one. It is bound to generate a lot of debate in the public domain, and I, for one, would be interested to see what comes out of that.
Just checked it. Its not Evil Jew, its The Eternal Jew. I thought Ewige meant Evil, lol It was a Nazi propaganda film http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Eternal_Jew
The Eternal Jew basically equates Jews to rats. In present day, such a movie would most likely be banned, yes. But you can't possibly compare that with Fitna, can you? Fitna targets the Quran and those who preach the violent bits from it. Wilders, as far as I can see, does not seem to make a racial classification of any kind.
Have you seen Fitna? If thats not inciting racial hatred, I don't know what is. Its equivalent to projecting Geert Wilders speeches as the point of view of the Dutch people. In fact, I know many Muslims who think this is the opinion of the Dutch people about Muslims.
In fact, I have. Nothing in it seems to suggest racial hatred to me. Would you mind pointing out the bits where it does? It does put Islam, a global religion, in a negative light. No racial prejudice there. Whether he incites hate towards those followers, I do not know. Personally, I'm inclined to say that Fitna does not. That's not to say Wilders never crossed the line. The trial will determine that. On a side note, the day after Fitna, I awoke in a country that wasn't much different than before its release. No riots, no uprisings, no violence. Most Dutch Muslims seemed to find the movie rather mild and didn't care too much about it... which, in my opinion, was a very rational response to the whole affair. Here you can find the relevant BBC news article about it. I do hope that most understand that within the Netherlands people can and do have different opinions. Many agree with Wilders, and many do not. They'd be wrong.
Perhaps religious bigotry would be a better word, although the end results are similar. You need a trial to tell you if Geert Wilders promotes hatred? Maybe the Netherlands is not the place to gauge reactions to the Dutch. Perhaps places where Dutch troops are spreading democracy by military force with NATO might be more educational. http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2008/04/18/48527.html I've often wondered if the Dutch see any cognitive dissonance in expecting immigrants to assimilate to their culture, while sending troops to enforce their culture on other peoples. Lets hope the Dutch have similar realisations about Muslims.