We knew this was coming. The assault on freedom of thought and speech has been growing in Europe and Canada, with the United States one or two steps behind (so far). Now Geert Wilders faces a criminal trial for exercising his critical thinking abilities with respect to Islam and its impact in the Netherlands, Europe, and Western Civilization. This legal attack (there is no other term) is on a man living under police protection because of death threats made against him.
This is happening in the Netherlands. Pim Fortuyn assassinated. Theo van Gogh murdered. Ayaan Hirsi Ali flees for her life. This in a country once famous for freedom of speech and support for critical thought, no matter where it led or who was insulted.
That was before the Left won. Before they started their oppressive policies designed to kill Western Civilization.
For the Left’s elite, any criticism of their multicultural project will not be tolerated. So Wilders must be punished and expelled from the public sphere. The effort was already underway, but had been feckless thus far. Now the Left has escalated.
This is appalling. This cannot stand. Now is the time to wake up to creeping shari’a. Now is the time to support our liberties. Now is the time to resist those who would take them from us. Now is the time to support Geert Wilders.
The excellent Bruce Bawer has a commentary from City Journal here.
And here is Pat Condell’s overview:
Yesterday, Nat Hentoff’s editorial “A free speech killer: UN warns: Don’t defame religions, especially Islam,” ran in the Washington Times. To see the full piece go to http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/02/a-free-speech-killer/. The op-ed centers on the Dec. UNGA nonbinding resolution condemning the defamation of religions. “Only Islam and Muslims are specifically named in this resolution against religious defamation.”
Those in support of this resolution assure us that “they do not want to limit free speech but do intend to stop such expressions as the 2005 Danish cartoons disrespecting the Prophet Muhammad that ignited violent protests by Muslims around the world.” One might ask what the difference is between free speech and “such expressions”. Perhaps the OIC, which introduced this resolution, quite literally intends that only verbal speech should be allowed and all other mediums are off limits. I imagine that if this is the case they will soon introduce another resolution on oral utterances.
Moreover, a disturbing (the understatement of the year) consequence of such a resolution would be, as First Amendment lawyer Marc Stern pointed out, “If this approach to “defamation of religion” were to become a crime under international law (under the impetus of the U.N. resolution), “nations would be able to seek extradition and trial abroad of persons who make statements critical or offensive to one or all faiths anywhere in the world.”
“Already, for example, as Reuters reported last June, Jordan prosecutor Hassan Abdullat subpoenaed “11 Danes for drawing and reprinting” cartoons that offend Islam. The Danes were charged – in Jordan – with “threatening the national peace.” Under Jordanian law, Reuters reported, “reproducing images of the Prophet Muhammad inside – or even outside – the country is illegal under the Jordanian Justice Act.”
Certainly, any unbiased observer can see that A.) this resolution is not aimed at protecting religions per se but at protecting Islamic ideology which seeks dominance over the West, B.) it is ridiculous to claim that a resolution aimed at stemming any criticism of religion is not intended to curtail freedom of speech (religion has been, if not the most discussed topic –at least one of the most important – in the public sphere for thousands of years), and C.) some of the most important progress of civilization has been a direct result of criticizing religion (think the heliocentric system or the Protestant Revolution), so this can only hamper the progress of mankind.
It is sad that this abomination against liberty has not been better reported. Kudos to Hentoff!