UK: Dutch MP Geert Wilders refused entry to UK

Is it any wonder that people feel that the U.K. government is hellbent on destroying Britain as a Christian nation?

I don't feel that. If anything, "Britain" itself is doing a pretty good job in that respect, without any government help.

If you know of any radical Muslims doing this, Paul, then there is redress under the law.  No-one says that incitement is freedom of speech.


Vicky

Is it any wonder that people feel that the U.K. government is hellbent on destroying Britain as a Christian nation?

You're not a practicing Christian though, right? 

Did I miss something?   

I don't think so.  But JM seemed to have missed The Reformation.

I don't feel that. If anything, "Britain" itself is doing a pretty good job in that respect, without any government help.

Well, I'd have to agree with that to an extent, but it doesn't alter the fact that the "establishment" from central government, through to local councils, to the police, to social services, etc. all seem to fall over themselves to promote "diversity" when it comes to appeasing Muslims, yet don't seem to be so eager to provide similar support and protection for others.

Well, I'd have to agree with that to an extent, but it doesn't alter the fact that the "establishment" from central government, through to local councils, to the police, to social services, etc. all seem to fall over themselves to promote "diversity" when it comes to appeasing Muslims, yet don't seem to be so eager to provide similar support and protection for others.

But minorities tend to need more protection from majorities than the other way around.

You're not a practicing Christian though, right? 

I count myself as a Christian, yes.

If you know of any radical Muslims doing this, Paul, then there is redress under the law.  No-one says that incitement is freedom of speech.

Vicky,

Have you forgotten the marches through London just a short while ago?  Hundreds of Muslims were parading around with placards saying "Behead those who insult Islam" and chanting "Death to the infidels" etc. yet nothing was done to stop it, until there was so much public outcry afterward that the police/CPS were effectively forced into pressing charges against a few.

And let's not forget the other ways in which the system seems to be deliberately appeasing the more outspoken Muslims.  Which city was it last year in which the police refused permission for a St. George's Day parade on the grounds that it would pass through an area with a substantial Muslim population where there had been riots before?  So instead of telling those few violent Muslims that if they caused trouble they would be arrested, they instead penalize all the peaceful citizens of the town who had every right to hold their parade.   

If we went to the police and objected to proposals for Muslims to hold a parade through our streets, you can bet we'd be told that we have to be tolerant, and probably get a lecture about "diversity" and warnings about "hate crimes" as well.

But minorities tend to need more protection from majorities than the other way around.

Minorities are entitled to exactly the same rights and protection under the law as everybody else.  It's the preferential treatment they are being given which is what's fueling the problem.

I believe one of the reasons he was refused entry, and has caused such a stir and prosecution in the Netherlands is that he is addressing a very real, and raw problem facing countries that operate under democracy and the principles of freedom of speech, and they have yet to decide how to handle the issue.

Bill Moyers and The Economist have covered the issue of Islam and democracy in the West in the last year, and with the continuting influx of global immigration, it is going to become a massive issue that is going to hit at the heart of Western democracy. If Western democracies follow their guiding principles of freedom of religion and speech, they could potentially in the future allow for the rule if Sharia law and the dismantling of democracy.

Perhaps this is a bit far fetched, but Wahabisim is alive and well in the world, and countries that hold themselves to the principles of democracy need to carefully consider the impact.

Have you forgotten the marches through London just a short while ago?  Hundreds of Muslims were parading around with placards saying "Behead those who insult Islam" and chanting "Death to the infidels" etc. yet nothing was done to stop it, until there was so much public outcry afterward that the police/CPS were effectively forced into pressing charges against a few.

So, when complaints were made, charges were brought.  Sounds like a good process to me!

Vicky

We have radical Muslims openly advocating physical violence against "non-believers" and the Islamic takeover of Britain by force, and apparently that's freedom of speech.  Yet when somebody simply publicizes this fact and criticizes those radicals, he's "inciting hatred."

This is interesting....when I was in London in 2006 as a tourist just trying to see the sights, I was caught up in a MASSIVE protest against Israel and I was absolutely terrified. It wasn't 'peaceful' and the types of hateful things they were allowed to spew against Britain was very scary. I think it's wrong that a person exercising his freedom of speech is denied access into a democratic country.

...hateful things they were allowed to spew against Britain was very scary.

I think it's wrong that a person exercising his freedom of speech is denied access into a democratic country.

So, anti-Israel="spewing hate", and anti-Islam="free speech"?

Heheheh!  Good spot!


Vicky

So, anti-Israel="spewing hate", and anti-Islam="free speech"?

Contrex, how in the world did you jump to your conclusion based on my quote below? How does 'spewing hate against Britain' become anti-Israel=spewing hate, and anti-Islam=free speech? I think that free speech=free speech.

Btw, had it only been a peaceful protest, I wouldn't have been scared. The scary part was the mob of thousands and the violent fights that were breaking out all around me. Oh yeah, it was also scary being warned by the tour bus driver to 'not give away that you're American' and to avoid the area around the American embassy, as there were mobs protesting outside of it. One more scary aspect was the seeming lack of police trying to control the situation in the area I was in. I could go into things I witnessed and the 'death to Americans, British, and Israelis' chants as well, but somehow I think there would be the 'freedom of speech' argument for it all. My answer is that this Dutch gentleman is entitled to the same freedom in a democratic society.

It wasn't 'peaceful' and the types of hateful things they were allowed to spew against Britain was very scary. I think it's wrong that a person exercising his freedom of speech is denied access into a democratic country.
/quote]

I think it's wrong that a person exercising his freedom of speech is denied access into a democratic country.

But his idea of free speech is to advocate banning a book - rather ironic wouldn't you say?

But his idea of free speech is to advocate banning a book - rather ironic wouldn't you say?

He should have the right of free speech to advocate the banning of the book, so not ironic at all.