You have to give it to the anti-freedom leaders; they stick to their agenda no matter how ludicrous. It’s hard to blame them, though, when they seem to get away with making the same insane moves over and over. On January 19th, filmmaker and author, Geert Wilders, took to Breitbart News to comment on the U.K.’s attempt to “ban” Donald Trump from their country.
The movement began in December after Mr. Trump declared that the U.S. should prevent further Muslim immigration due to security issues. Labour Party leaders such as Jack Dromney have been getting pummeled in the media for hypocrisy after successfully demanding a formal Parliament determination on the subject.
Mr. Wilders, however, has a rather unique perspective on the subject considering he is a victim of the same radical leftist banning –successful in his case. Like Mr. Trump, Mr. Wilders fell victim to the hideous crime of speaking negatively about Muslims.
As he writes in his piece on Brietbart, “On February 12, 2009, two highly respected members of the British House of Lords, Lady Caroline Cox and Lord Malcolm Pearson, had invited me to show my 2008 documentary Fitna to members of the House. Fitna is a movie,” Mr. Wilders continues, “juxtaposing Koranic versed calling for violence with footage of terrorist attacks and other violent deeds these verses inspired.”
You can see where this is going.
Mr. Wilders’s documentary has gotten him on the death lists of Al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Taliban. Evidentially, the Brits thought those guys are respectable teammates in the war on freedom terrorism. It seems in Britain, Muslims enjoy special protection from criticism superseding the right to free expression.
The English government is perpetually wringing its hands that something, anything, might “pose a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society”, as they claimed about Mr. Wilders and now Donald Trump. Apparently, all the Islamic inspired rapes, murders and terrorism occurring all over Europe and America don’t seem to qualify.
The good news, of course, is that the Donald avoided his ban (I’m sure it was keeping him up at night) and Geert Wilders got his banning overturned by a special tribunal. The bad news is that since when, in an ostensibly free and citizen- directed country, does the State get to determine what is and isn’t conducive to “the fundamental interests of society”?
I get that a few hundred thousand people put their names on a petition. The mark of a free society is expressing an opinion but the mark of a regressing, centralized, people is then demanding that an opinion be formally mandated as an act of government policy while simultaneously empowering the State to dictate what’s “good” for everyone. I think 21st century Britain needs a lesson in it’s own history; specifically why the Magna Charta is still relevant to their government’s ongoing hypocrisy.
