UN: Fitna is Hate Speech
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon described Fitna as "offensively anti-Islamic" and issued the press release that follows (via memeorandum):
I condemn, in the strongest terms, the airing of Geert Wilders’ offensively anti-Islamic film. There is no justification for hate speech or incitement to violence. The right of free expression is not at stake here. I acknowledge the efforts of the Government of the Netherlands to stop the broadcast of this film, and appeal for calm to those understandably offended by it. Freedom must always be accompanied by social responsibility.
The United Nations is the centre of the world’s efforts to advance mutual respect, understanding and dialogue. We must also recognize that the real fault line is not between Muslim and Western societies, as some would have us believe, but between small minorities of extremists on different sides with a vested interest in stirring hostility and conflict.
Where are the "different sides", Mr. Secretary? Who else is fighting but the Islamic extremists? Would Iraq not be a relatively peaceful, relatively democratic nation today if not for them? And Afghanistan? And Pakistan?
The notion that there are different sides implies the existence of a reality in which there is a relative equivalency between opposing forces and views. That reality does not exist. There is no equivalency, no reasonable basis for comparing western democracy to Islamic terrorism.
Freedom, sir, may, on occasion, be limited by social responsibility. But freedom also defines the meaning of social responsibility. In the conflict between terrorists and civilians, Mr. Secretary - as in all things - the foremost responsibility is to speak the truth, regardless of the offense it may cause.
Is Fitna anti-Islamic? Certainly. But is it a lie? No.
Which matters more, Mr. Secretary?
Re: "Different sides" this moral equivalence tactic is rendered even more ridiculous when you see who makes the argument. In general it’s progressives, who would be FIRST up on the execution lists, whose ideals (social liberalism, gender equality etc.) are the utter opposite of those endorsed by the extremists themselves.
I happen to be fairly certain that in those who lean left there is also a "moderate majority" who doesn’t buy into this idiocy. Yes the people of Jesus Camp are insane, but I’d rather have 5 Jesus Camps living next door to me than one Extremist Mosque. The distance between what qualifies as an "extremist" in Christianity and what is the same in Islam is so vast that it is rendered meaningless.
By the way Ban-Ki, I never heard from you all those times adolescent girls have been murdered for not conforming to the tiny worldviews of their male relatives. When Islamist leaders call for the crushing of the infidels, jews, US etc. I can’t recall you objecting. Could it be because you consider the West to be inhabited by adults who wont violently lash out when offended? You consider the Islamic world childish and immature, you betray your own views through your supposed "tolerance" (read: Fear).
To compare Christians and radical muslims is ridiculous — or Jews and muslims — or any religion and muslims. How many peaceful Buddhists have been murdered by these savages? Or how many Christians, and Jews and Hindus, etc. have been murdered by them? And yes, even atheists have been butchered by them. These violent savages are NOT a minority. If they were, you’d see muslims marching in the streets in protest — but all that is ever protested is cartoons of mohammed or rioting for the death of a teacher who allowed a child to name a teddy bear mohammed. It’s beyond disgusting. Everyone in the entire western world need to watch this film. It’s nothing that anyone who has watched current events is not aware of already but maybe it will open the eyes of the blind, mass-media hypnotized idiot who only cares about what Britney Spears ate for breakfast.
Can someone tell me exactly where Wilders incited anyone to violence in his movie? The only inciting I see are the Imams and political figures inciting people to violence against Jews and other assorted infidels.
Wilder also doesn’t use any words of his own in the movie except for the disclaimer at the beginning. Is Moon saying that the Koran and the sermons of Muslim Imams is "hate speech"?
I’m trying to figure out exactly what Moon is trying to say here.
Yo, "Infidel" (OMG such brazen bravery), the US was the main actor behind the sanctions against Iraq, which were not justified from a defense standpoint and killed ca half a mil Iraqi children. To me that is essentially comparable to killing them because they are non-christians (which wasn’t factor in the decision, I am aware of that) since the sanctions were completely useless and injustifiable.
In both cases we are talking about the murder of untold people because they fall under one category or because one couldn’t bother to prevent the suffering of civilians.
On so many occasions innocents have died because the US population didn’t bother to demand tolerable actions from their governments. On so many occasions US actions that have caused suffering and death among civilians have not even been justified by the logic of self-defense. They are responsible for more deaths than some, if not most, Islamist warlords
The issue of the day is not whether or not sanctions kill children. No potential trading partner can be held responsible for not trading goods with a tyrant state. The same for Israel: why the hell should they allow any trade with the bloodthirsty "Palestinians", a politically fabricated people intent on one thing, destroying the Jewish state. The billions they have received in handouts has amounted to nothing. But it is not Israel’s fault.
Anyway, Iraq and sanctions and the deaths of children (which is hardly substantiated here, just asserted, blurted) has little to do with whether Fitna incites hate. It clearly does not. Ban Ki Moon , Louise Arbour and the like at the UN, plus the dhimmi Dutch PM, are in no way fit to be doing the jobs they are entrusted to do. They are all afraid. Cowering, whimpering, to see who can condemn Wilders - the unsubstantiated "far right" MP - the most. They are licking the arse of the Muslim lobby, and this is a disgrace. It is disgusting behaviour. It is idiotic - it is just assumed that Islam could not possibly hold the ideological seeds of the thousands of terror acts committed since 9/11 - and it is morally repugnant. Get rid of them all. Support Wilders, arm ourselves with knowledge of Islam, of the doctrine (the Qur’an, ahadith and sira), the history (dhimmitude, the Arab slave trade etc), the current situation with creeping shari’a. No. No. No. Stand up for free speech. Not-being-offended is not a right.