Can't believe this happened in Amsterdam

[JE Gonzalez]

Wall Street Journal article

The latest twist in the clash between Western values and the Muslim world took place yesterday in the Netherlands, where a court ordered the prosecution of lawmaker and provocateur Geert Wilders for inciting violence. The Dutch MP and leader of the Freedom Party, which opposes Muslim immigration into Holland, will stand trial soon for his harsh criticism of Islam.

Mr. Wilders made world news last year with the short film "Fitna." In the 15-minute video, he juxtaposes Koranic verses calling for jihad with clips of Islamic hate preachers and terror attacks. He has compared the Koran to Hitler's "Mein Kampf" and urged Muslims to tear out "hate-filled" verses from their scripture. This is a frontal assault on Islam -- but, as Mr. Wilders points out, he's targeting the religion, not its followers. "Fitna," in fact, sparked a refreshing debate between moderate Muslims and non-Muslims in the Netherlands, and beyond.
The Opinion Journal Widget

Download Opinion Journal's widget and link to the most important editorials and op-eds of the day from your blog or Web page.

There are of course limits to free speech, such as calls for violence. But one doesn't need to agree with Mr. Wilders to acknowledge that he hasn't crossed that line. Some Muslims say they are outraged by his statements. But if freedom of speech means anything, it means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection.

This is exactly what Dutch prosecutors said in June when they rejected the complaints against Mr. Wilders. "That comments are hurtful and offensive for a large number of Muslims does not mean that they are punishable," the prosecutors said in a statement. "Freedom of expression fulfills an essential role in public debate in a democratic society. That means that offensive comments can be made in a political debate."

The court yesterday overruled this decision, arguing that the lawmaker should be prosecuted for "inciting hatred and discrimination" and also "for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism." This is no small victory for Islamic regimes seeking to export their censorship laws to wherever Muslims reside. But the successful integration of Muslims in Europe will require that immigrants adapt to Western norms, not vice versa. Limiting the Dutch debate of Islam to standards acceptable in, say, Saudi Arabia, will only shore up support for Mr. Wilders's argument that Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties.

Silencing Islam's Critics - WSJ.com

[aelle]

Which part is surprising to you? The Muslim hate? The Netherlands have seen in the last decades, like quite a few other Western European countries, a come back of extreme right movements - this is sadly not an isolated incident. The judgment? I'm not surprised the outraged comments on limitation of free speech come from an American journalist - read the local press, the BBC coverage for example, and you will see nothing of the sort. Europe tends to be much harsher towards hate speech than America (and much more lenient on other topics, like displays of sexuality or criticism of establishment).

[Xanafax]

It's was hardly hate speak - the thing they are charging him on.

Geert Wilder produced a video called Fitna, and it (rightfully) compared Islam with violence, and I believe the idea that it is similar to Nazism is quite justified, considering the fundamental teachings of Islam say that all none-believers should be killed, women should be treated like animals, children are game for killing if they disrespect Islam(even in ignorance) etc...etc...

The fact is Geert Wilder did something so many politicians are afraid to do - speak the truth.

Britain as a largely secular country should not stand back and let this injustice go one.

Islam is a problem, and it doesn't help when people get prosecuted for simply hurting some feelings, how ridiculously unquantifiable that is.

[ssandra]

I for one am happy that somebody is finally doing something about this guy.

If it concerns the law... you have freedom of speech, but no right to call for hate. And that is what he has done.

The islam (and Catholics, Protestants and any other major religion that I know off) is a religion made by people.

People also interpret the Islam in different ways. (just like Catholics, Protestants etc). If you must judge; judge the action, judge the person, but do not blame an entire people based on the believes off some...

Wilders (in my opinion) is somebody who is willing to call for hate, to resort to discrimination and to blame one or two groups of people for all the problems that exist at the moment. (doesn't that make you think of a certain time period...).

I believe this is wrong. If there is a problem, deal with it. Deal with the cause of it, don't blame it on others and expect other people to fix it.

Who’s Responsible?

I could write 100s of page about this subject, but in short: if you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem... What are you?

Liefs,

Sandra
(Dutch nationality in case anybody was wondering).

[lifetimelearner]

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully when they do it from a religious conviction "-Blaise Pascal

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by lifetimelearner

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully when they do it from a religious conviction "-Blaise Pascal

“There are many scapegoats for our blunders, but the most popular one is Providence”
-Mark Twain

[Dan.Linehan]

Without God, murder is forbidden by human law; it is only for those acting on behalf of God, that everything is permitted.

- Jonathan Wallace

[Xanafax]

A lot of people are afraid to admit Islam is a problem in the west.

At a stretch Islamic Fundamentalists are used - but they aren't like the peaceful, calm, wife-beating, child-mutilating, law defying multitude of Muslims

So it's ok...

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

A lot of people are afraid to admit Islam is a problem in the west.

At a stretch Islamic Fundamentalists are used - but they aren't like the peaceful, calm, wife-beating, child-mutilating, law defying multitude of Muslims

So it's ok...

As a Muslim, I find that pretty insulting.
Glad to know that I, as one of the "multitude", am a wife-beater, child-mutilator, and law-defier.

[Xanafax]

I am not attacking you Thoughtaddict. I am attacking the belief system you follow.

When you look at all the horrors commited in the name of Islam, the forcing of Sharia Law, the banning of criticism at the UN, the sick and twisted punishments thought up by patriarchal bigots who fear individuality, how can you possibly - as a conscious human being - follow such a barbaric and medievil philosophy?

[WanderingOak]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

When you look at all the horrors commited in the name of Islam, the forcing of Sharia Law, the banning of criticism at the UN, the sick and twisted punishments thought up by patriarchal bigots who fear individuality, how can you possibly - as a conscious human being - follow such a barbaric and medievil philosophy?

The same arguments that you put forth could be made towards Christianity during the various Crusades and Inquisitions throughout history. Would you want somebody telling you to rip out pages from the Old Testament because they were deemed to be 'too violent'?

What most people don't realize is that 'Islamic terrorism' is political, not religious in nature. Yes, Islam is used to organize the terrorists, but their main goals and motivations are political. A bit closer to home, surely you don't think that the IRA is a 'Catholic terrorist' organization, do you? Of course the media is spinning the emphasis of Islam on terrorism, but you do have to wonder why. I know here in America, we have Christian Fundamentalists who insist that all Muslims are Heretics and that they should all be either be killed or converted by the sword. Personally, I think that attacking their religion and linking it directly to terrorism is a means of drumming up support for the next oil war.

[Xanafax]

The fact is Christians are just as bad as Muslims when it comes down to it both have very nasty attributes.

Islamic terrorism is entirely to do with religion.

Islamists hate the west for our freedom to insult beliefs, they hate that Allah is not feared, and they hate that it is not acceptable to commit unspeakable things in the name of him and his prophet.

The fact is the Koran and the Bible are both interesting works of fiction, good horror stories to be honest, but when you take the literally then you are no better than someone who believes in Harry Potter. Except your also much more dangerous.

[Parthon]

They are all wrong!

Islamist extremists are wrong for killing and terrorism. For their extreme views that go against human decency and moral standings. But that's okay, because they'll get what's coming to them.

Wilder is wrong for being so antagnistic with his work. He could have said the same message without the insults, and the comparisons. What he said had merit, but the way he said it did not.

The Legal System is wrong, for jumping to a conclusion based on knee jerk politics, rather than look at the whole problem and do what's right from a basis of justice. I would like to see proper adherence to laws, rather than this biased, opinionated silliness.

You are all wrong for believing that this is about two groups of people out there somewhere in the world, and aren't bringing it back in to yourself, to find out where you can grow and improve from this experience. What can you do to bring more peace and harmony to the world from this?

And I'm wrong, because I'm human, and it's my right to be wrong.

[vMike]

Originally Posted by aelle

Which part is surprising to you? The Muslim hate? The Netherlands have seen in the last decades, like quite a few other Western European countries, a come back of extreme right movements - this is sadly not an isolated incident.

I'm curious what is causing that. I don't recall any terror attacks in any dutch countries?

I've visited most of the big cities in Europe and I've seen much fewer Muslims in Amsterdam than in London, Paris and other cities.

[aelle]

Originally Posted by vMike

I'm curious what is causing that. I don't recall any terror attacks in any dutch countries?

I've visited most of the big cities in Europe and I've seen much fewer Muslims in Amsterdam than in London, Paris and other cities.

If by Muslim you mean of Arab descent, true, there aren't as many in the Netherlands - most of their Muslim residents come from Indonesia.
And as to why, most rich countries tend to hate on their large groups of migrants, unfortunately. In the US you see racism against people of Mexican origin, in Japan, against Korean and Chinese, and the same goes for European countries with large muslim populations.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

I am not attacking you Thoughtaddict. I am attacking the belief system you follow.

You separate the two, as though telling me that I believe in wife-beating, child-mutilating, and law-defying is less insulting.
I live my beliefs. So your prejudice is not about some small isolated part of me. It is about all of me. It is about how I look at the sun as it rises, how I think of the air I breathe, how I act toward the world. If you really think my "belief system" is full of wife-beating, child-mutilating, and law-defying, you should ask why it does not show in my actions.

And yes, I am still quite insulted.

When you look at all the horrors commited in the name of Islam, the forcing of Sharia Law, the banning of criticism at the UN, the sick and twisted punishments thought up by patriarchal bigots who fear individuality, how can you possibly - as a conscious human being - follow such a barbaric and medievil philosophy?

See, cuz that isn't Islam.
When you see all the evil committed in this world by greed, the deprivation of rights of indigenous folks, the spoiling of ecosystems, the immense poverty and human suffering when the solutions would just take a small act of kindness, the violence of man against man over material possessions, the crushing of alternative, less profitable viewpoints, how can you be a capitalist? How can you - as a conscientious human being - follow such a barbaric and cold philosophy?

See, cuz that's not capitalism, either.

I look at Islam and I see kindness. I see devotion. I see moderation of vice and guidance for how to best wake up everyday with happiness and joy. I see the face of an old woman being helped out to her car by a younger Muslim girl. I see people giving food and inviting hungry strangers to eat. I see a community that fosters reason and enlightenment.
I look at capitalism and I see productivity. I see hard work being rewarded and dreams being fulfilled. I see efficiency and innovation. The marvels of electricity being molded to use, of miracles becoming common place, of lives being saves by new medical devices.

I could look at either and see pain, bloodshed, and violence. We are not so superior to ourselves to have ascended beyond negative emotions and negative actions. Whether Jew or Muslim or Christian or atheist, none of us holds a monopoly on enlightenment.
So you ask how I could follow the barbarism you see. I question your vision. That decay you see is your decay. That violence you see is your violence. And before you deign to insult me and the beliefs that drive my life again, I ask you to check your vision, and see if perhaps you're judging an entire puzzle by a myopic stare at a single piece.

Two men looked out through prison bars. One saw mud; the other saw stars.

[Xanafax]

I look at Islam and I see kindness. I see devotion. I see moderation of vice and guidance for how to best wake up everyday with happiness and joy. I see the face of an old woman being helped out to her car by a younger Muslim girl. I see people giving food and inviting hungry strangers to eat. I see a community that fosters reason and enlightenment.

This is more like one of those statements where it says everything opposite of the truth.

I look at Islam and I see kindness. I see devotion.

Islamists the world over hate those who do not acquiesce to their ever growing list of offences, including daring to insult their beliefs in any way, shape or form.

I see moderation of vice and guidance for how to best wake up everyday with happiness and joy.

All the pleasures of Earth are prohibited (except of course polygamy, despite it's illegality, and forced marriages, sometimes with girls as young as 10) and women, children, gays, non-believers within Islam run states wake up fearing their oppressive male leaders.

I see the face of an old woman being helped out to her car by a younger Muslim girl.

This only happens because many men consider women subordinate in Islam. Only the daughter could help the old woman, it would be wrong for the man to do it. It is in fact taught in the Koran.

I see people giving food and inviting hungry strangers to eat. I see a community that fosters reason and enlightenment.

I can't say I know whether food is offered or not, but I did laugh out loud when I read "reason and enlightenment" if it was preceded by the Antithesis of Islamic culture is... then I would likely believe it. All the evidence we have of Islam on a large scale shows us that Islam is anti reason, preferring violence and threats over discussion, and preferring ignorance and medieval methods to avoid the masses becoming too smart.


I am sorry, I expected something more profound, but all I hear is the same rehashed brain washing every religious type has. All the available evidence tells me quite clearly that Islam is a bad thing, it is something to be avoided in a free, democratic and secular society. It fosters hatred, divisiveness and just plain stupidity.

It is an outdated, outmoded, obselete, impractical, useless, archaic belief system that offers only one thing. Hate.

[ThoughtAddict]

You've missed the entire point of what I said. You look at something and see only what is bad. This is not because what you see is, itself, bad. Rather, your focus is on the bad. The evil you see and the good you miss is due to perspective.

Really, I should just end there, but there are some misconceptions that I'll clear up, as I've done times before in other threads, for the benefit of those who look with open eyes and seek with open hearts.

Originally Posted by Xanafax

All the pleasures of Earth are prohibited

. . .

This only happens because many men consider women subordinate in Islam. Only the daughter could help the old woman, it would be wrong for the man to do it. It is in fact taught in the Koran.

Show me where all pleasures of Earth are prohibited. The Quran, in fact, says the exact opposite. One should avoid intoxication, promiscuity, and unclean flesh. All else is fair game.
Helping an old woman is forbidden in the Quran? Please, if that's something I've missed in my study of the book, I'd be very happy if you informed me of the ayat that forbids it. The case I mentioned was a Muslim girl. I could've just as easily mentioned the times I, a Muslim man, did the same.

Cite your sources.

All the evidence we have of Islam on a large scale shows us that Islam is anti reason, preferring violence and threats over discussion, and preferring ignorance and medieval methods to avoid the masses becoming too smart.

This is laughable. The Muslim contributions to knowledge are in common use today, including the concept of zero, algebra, algebraic calculus, various medical advances including work in pharmacology, the development of surgery (Kitab al-Tasrif was used in European medical scholarship for centuries), large advances in astronomy... really, the list can go on and on and on.

All the pleasures of Earth are prohibited (except of course polygamy, despite it's illegality, and forced marriages, sometimes with girls as young as 10)

Marriage in Islam is forbidden unless the girl agrees to marry the guy. The Islamic jurisprudence on this is extensive. See, generally, Kitab Al-Nikah, Book 11, Number 2091. Not only is forced marriage automatically void in Islam, a wife can divorce her husband at any time.

[vMike]

ThoughtAddict, would you say the majority of Muslims around the world feel the same, or are they maybe less peaceful?

Why do we so rarely hear moderate Muslim leaders condemning terror attacks and organizations and calling for peace, but rather the ones who call for armed resistance?
Where are you located btw, in a Muslim country or US/Europe.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by vMike

ThoughtAddict, would you say the majority of Muslims around the world feel the same, or are they maybe less peaceful?

Why do we so rarely hear moderate Muslim leaders condemning terror attacks and organizations and calling for peace, but rather the ones who call for armed resistance?
Where are you located btw, in a Muslim country or US/Europe.

I would say the majority feel the same. The majority of all people want peace and happiness.

Moderate Muslims are in a difficult place. On the one side, there is a base of folks with varying degrees of anger toward Islam who do not distinguish between Islam and the acts of a small population of Muslims. Witness, as a stark example, the beatings and violence just after 9/11 against Muslims, Hindus, and Sikhs. As a less graphic example, consider the multiple stories of citizens refused flights due to speaking Arabic, praying, or wearing clothes with Arabic on them. As a more common example, how do you think it feels to have your way of life, your way of thought, described as barbaric, violent, ignorant, or a threat in nearly every conversation someone starts with you about it?
On the other side, there is a base of Muslims with varying degrees of anger about marginalization, violence, and war toward Muslims. As a stark example, witness the zealots who commit random acts of violence. As a less graphic example, consider the imam who calls for Israeli soldiers in Gaza to died. As a more common example, consider the Muslim girl who, otherwise peaceful, gets into shouting matches when people talk about the marginalized role she plays in her own culture (despite wearing top designer fashion and living a fantastic, empowered life).

In between, moderate Muslims are squeezed. A call for peace is ignored by one side and seen as varying degrees of capitulation by the other. Those who view the world as polar... good/evil, Muslim/West... instantly shun the Muslim who calls for peace. To zealots on one side, he is a betrayer. To the zealots on the other, a wolf trying to put on sheep's clothing.

Yet, there are still calls for peace. The Muslim Public Affairs Committee in London was vocal in this. Bhutto based a politically successful campaign on peace. Queen Rania has spoken out eloquently for peace and understanding. There are numerous groups including the World Congress of Imams and Rabbis for Peace, Christians and Muslims for Peace (CAMP), and the Muslim Students Association who made very vocal attempts to foster peace.
But peace isn't flashy, or showy, or memorable compared to violence. Violence can grab national headlines... peace gets a passing mention.

I am a Muslim revert in the Bible Belt of the US.

[newmark]

ThoughtAddict; I've read, that according to the koran (and islam believes the koran to be literally the word of god) that any unbeliever, can quite legitimately be killed by a muslim. In fact it might even be considered a virtuous act. , How can any religion accept this kind of thought. Any non-islamic person: man, woman or child is therefore a legitimate target for any 'believer' to kill. How is this not bigoted?

[Brutha]

ThoughtAddict; I've read, that according to the koran (and islam believes the koran to be literally the word of god) that any unbeliever, can quite legitimately be killed by a muslim.

In the Koran there is a passage where some nonbelievers raided a Muslim city (or some similar act).
Afterwards Mohamed says something like: Kill those nonbelievers.

Moderate Muslims read the passage as allowing people to defend their own community against violent invaders.

Any non-islamic person

Non-islamic doesn't mean the same as nonbeliever in the Koran.

In fact it might even be considered a virtuous act. , How can any religion accept this kind of thought.

The bible allowed the jewish to do genocide to conquer Israel.
You don't have any problem with reading the bible in a way that allows Israel at the moment to do genoicde in Gaza because they are God's choosen people.

[JMan]

Originally Posted by Brutha

In the Koran there is a passage where some nonbelievers raided a Muslim city (or some similar act).
Afterwards Mohamed says something like: Kill those nonbelievers.

Moderate Muslims read the passage as allowing people to defend their own community against violent invaders.
Non-islamic doesn't mean the same as nonbeliever in the Koran.
The bible allowed the jewish to do genocide to conquer Israel.
You don't have any problem with reading the bible in a way that allows Israel at the moment to do genoicde in Gaza because they are God's choosen people.

Here's just a few verses: Untitled Document

[newmark]

Actually I do have quite a few problems with what the bible says (if taken literally). And I do have a problem with what Israel is doing in Gaza. And with what America and Britain did in Iraq.
I do not have a problem with moderate Christians or moderate Muslims. But there is one difference. If I criticize a passage in the bible Christians might be angry & possibly even rightly so, but if I criticize a passage in the Koran there will, quite possibly, be Muslims somewhere who would want to kill me for it.

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by newmark

ThoughtAddict; I've read, that according to the koran (and islam believes the koran to be literally the word of god) that any unbeliever, can quite legitimately be killed by a muslim. In fact it might even be considered a virtuous act. , How can any religion accept this kind of thought. Any non-islamic person: man, woman or child is therefore a legitimate target for any 'believer' to kill. How is this not bigoted?

Salaam, newmark. The Quran differentiates between monotheists and those who are not monotheists. Christian, Jew, and Muslim are all "people of a revelation" who are destined for heaven if they follow these beliefs to doing good work. I am in a growing minority who interpret various Ayat and Hadith as providing the insight that Islam is an action-focused religion, with belief being secondary to good acts...

The majority view is that all "people of a revelation" are to be treated as brothers. Those who fall outside this group are unbelievers, and the main difference is that a Muslim is enjoined from alliances with unbelievers that negatively affect other believers.

The only time killing is allowed in the Quran is when self-defense of yourself or your homeland calls for it. There are stories in the Quran of battles where, in the face of invading armies, believers were instructed to battle fiercely with no quarter against the unbelievers who were attacking them. Often those ayats are taken out of context (by Muslims and non-Muslims) as a sign that Islam calls for violence. It absolutely doesn't. In fact, Muslims are urged to forgive those who have harmed them out of kindness, even when they would bear no moral fault from retaliating.

Without a specific ayat (verse) to refer to, I'm not sure how to further answer your question.

[Brutha]

Here's just a few verses: Untitled Document

You can draw any meaning you want from a book like the Koran by selectively quoting the passages that you need to back up your opinion.

The thing that matters is how Muslims interpret their own book and which passage they find important.

If I criticize a passage in the bible Christians might be angry & possibly even rightly so, but if I criticize a passage in the Koran there will, quite possibly, be Muslims somewhere who would want to kill me for it.

Some time ago Christians also had a lot of fun with burning heretics.
We got rid of those extremists by not taking religion as seriously anymore.

[vMike]

Originally Posted by Brutha

The bible allowed the jewish to do genocide to conquer Israel.

Do you mean the one your fellow countrymen did to the Jews in WW2 or when the Arab states refused to recognize the UN partition decision and opened war on Israel in 1948 which resulted in 1% population of Israel killed?

[Brutha]

Do you mean the one your fellow countrymen did to the Jews in WW2 or when the Arab states refused to recognize the UN partition decision and opened war on Israel in 1948 which resulted in 1% population of Israel killed?

The old testament describes how God commanded the Jewish to kill everyone who lived in Israel before they first arrived there.