Fitna - see it here.

Fitna - the Dutch film by MP Geert Wilders. Warning this film contains graphic images. The film considers Islamism to be abhorrent to modern liberal democracies, and considers it as malignant as Nazism and Communism.

The House of Lords saw it last night. This film is the excuse given by the British government, supported by the so called Liberal Democrats, to ban Geert Wilders from promoting it in the UK - because he was branded an "extremist" and "peddling hate". Of course he was peddling hate - hatred of Islamism, not Muslims.

PART ONE



PART TWO



Maybe Muslims who are offended by this film might spend time focusing on attacking those who they say are damaging their religion, they might wage war against those they know who incite violence and hatred - and stop wondering why the rest of the world is scared when a segment of Islam so openly seeks to wage war on us all.

Tragic family doesn't get it

Pihema Cameron shouldn’t have been a vandal. Bruce Emery was trying to defend his private property, but went too far and stabbed the boy, which killed him. Rightfully, Bruce Emery deserves punishment for a disproportionate response, but as Cactus Kate points out, where was the slightest bit of remorse from Cameron’s family for the boy being a vandal? None, at all. The loving mother was absent, not even in the country at the time.

What’s more disturbing is if you watch this NZ Herald video of the family after the trial. At just after 2:00 a rather dopey looking girl (she looks stoned to be honest) to the right of the mother (left on screen) appears to threaten Emery saying “(unclear) is after you cunt”. Like some gang threat against the guy when he comes out?

This family, which doesn’t teach respect for others or their property. Leanne Cameron said “maybe one of his should die then maybe he could get “over it”", before quickly realising how bad that sounded and said “not saying we’d do it, we wouldn’t do it”. She’d only be happy if Emery had “three months to live”. One of them said “the law sucked”. Well clearly that’s what Pihema Cameron thought when he was breaking it. Although grieving brings out strong emotions, can one at least hope a bit of thinking would see them realise - damned Pihema doing no good, why did he get up to that? Why NOT say "Pihema shouldn't have been doing what he was doing"?

What’s bizarre is the Police saying they were concerned, in prosecuting, about the message of people carrying knives in the street. What the hell is the context here? Young people roaming the streets with knives are nothing like a man bringing a knife from his kitchen on his own property to chase a vandal (who appears to have confronted him instead of run away). Have the Police got a damned clue?

Yes it is sad the boy died, but the best thing his mother could do for his memory is to damned well make sure none of the rest of her kids are criminals, and inculcate values of respecting other people's property. A culture of treating others and their property as if they are fair game to do whatever you like has to end.

Maiden speech: Catherine Delahunty: Addict of compulsory collectivism

Before I catch up with the ones from late last year, there is Catherine Delahunty, who presented her maiden speech yesterday.

I previously called Delahunty our newest enemy of reason. She hates democracy, believes Maori crime is due to racism, and thinks of everyone as members of groups. Collectivist par excellence.

Her maiden speech said it all. Countless mysticism, references to tribalism, and even anthropormophising inanimate objects. She has demonstrated exactly what I foretold, an enemy of reason and individualism.

For starters, she thinks that those New Zealanders not born of Maori descent are enjoying “colonial privilege”. What does this mean? That it could be taken away from us?

“We are citizens of the nation of Aotearoa New Zealand and we are Pakeha. I’ve been told one meaning of Pakeha is "of a different breath". We enjoy ongoing colonial privilege, but we have an opportunity to take responsibility for this and work for a justice-based peace. This justice is desperately needed from Ruatoki to Gaza.”

Justice based peace? What does she want taken from you? What about Gaza Catherine? Palestinians control it, but their government used it to attack Israel. Was that ok Catherine?

However I didn’t need to know when she lost her virginity “I embrace this new chapter with all the illusions of a maiden. Last time I was a maiden was 40 years ago. It’s refreshing to revisit that time of passionate conviction, when it was our unique duty to resist the system while wearing a lot of black clothing.” What? Duty imposed by whom? Ah the sacred collective you want us to live under perhaps?

She antropormorphises a mountain and a river, which explains why she is with the Greens who sometimes prefers inanimate objects to human beings:

“When I left this cold city, at 17, I went to live with a mountain” Lunatic!
“In the 1990s, thanks to Gordon and Greenpeace I met a river.” No that's called drowning, it interferes with oxygen to the brain.

She goes on about beneficiary rights. Talks of Pakeha as racist wine drinkers,.She thinks of prisons as places where victims of capitalism go – not people who steal, assault, rape and murder. Maori are the victims, Pakeha are the wealthy thieving colonialists. A simple world for a simple woman.

However, it’s near the end that her real hatred for individual achievement and judging people on what they do, not who they are, comes out.

She says “For Leo and every tiny person starting out in life, you deserve something so much more precious than individualism.” What is MORE than that? What is more than realizing your full potential, enjoying life and being yourself? Well if you’re Catherine, you pigeonhole as a matter of course. Individuals make life too complicated if you spend your life stereotyping men and women. You need to belong to a collective approved by her to fight science, pollution, production, technology, culture or whatever else is part of her list. She fought nuclear weapons as a child allegedly.

Then she says:

“In a healthy group the individual can thrive, it is not a war between nanny state and the free market, the real struggle is between earth-based collective well-being versus a polluted globalised greed”

No it isn’t Catherine. It is between respecting individual rights and extending private property rights over the world, which provides a way to address pollution. It is about adults interacting voluntarily versus the statist collectivist anti-reason violence promoters like the Green Party.

It ends on the most bizarre linkage "The international financial crisis is inextricably linked to climate change and if we can’t work the linkage out then Papatuanuku will spell it out for us."

Yep, you stick with that Catherine, go back to living with your mountain and meeting rivers - another MP who cares so much about the planet, but who seems to spend so little time on it - except that she prefers the planet to meeting individuals.

Be grateful the Greens are in Opposition now.

Britain bans anti-Islam Dutch MP

Today according to CNN, Dutch citizen and MP Geert Wilders was stopped from entering the UK at Heathrow Airport. Why? Because the UK government thinks a man who simply states he hates Islam (not Muslims), and that he wants an end to Muslim immigration to the Netherlands is spreading "hate".

Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary said his opinions "would threaten community security and therefore public security" in the UK according to the Daily Telegraph.

Since when do opinions threaten community security? That's the language that you hear from North Korea, China, Burma, Iran or Saudi Arabia.

What fucking country is this Jacqui Smith? Since when are YOU the arbiter of "opinions"? Oh and how do you cope with the thousands of Islamists in the country? How do you control yourself with the BNP? No - a Dutchman who criticises a religion is fair game.

Wilders was entering the UK (bear in mind that there is meant to be freedom of movement within the EU) to promote his film - Fitna, which criticises Islam.

So apparently, you can't enter the UK if you criticise a religion?

Ah but isn't Wilders some racist fascist? From the far right? No. Put down the Guardian (which calls him far right) and stop believing the nonsense that everyone who isn't a leftwing post-modernist "all opinions are valid" halfwit is a fascist. Wilders is closer to being libertarian.

Wikipedia has his political platform, which is essentially shrink the state, tough on crime and migration. He also wants to ban additional Muslim migrants and have the state pay for existing ones to leave (though not forcibly deport).

He has, of course, upset a lot of Muslims. While he appears libertarian, calling for banning the Koran erodes that, but he notes that Mein Kampf is banned and he treats the Koran as similar. However, he is clear that he hates Islam, NOT Muslims. He says the Koran contains terrible things, is a fascist book that incites hatred and that Mohammed would today be hunted down as a terrorist (let alone a pedophile).

So yes he is radical, and no I don’t agree with all his policies. However, he is no fascist, he is not promoting hate of people, he is promoting hatred of a religion – and one that is entirely justified.

As usual, Muslims in Britain are getting offended by his views. Which is their right, and tough. Live with it. Britain was a free country, where people can express openly opinions on politics and religion, and put up with whether or not it offends others. I'm an atheist, I find there is something in all religions I know that I despise, and I'd rather children were not raised under any religion. In a free society I can have that view and people can agree, disagree, be offended or ignore it.

There is NO evidence that he would incite violence against Muslims, NO evidence that he would incite hatred through hating Islam. It is like saying that hating the North Korean government means hating Koreans, or hating the Chinese government is anti-Chinese.

Wilders describes Gordon Brown "Europe's biggest coward". He's right.

Freedom has slipped back another notch in the UK today. If you wanted further proof that the Gordon Brown Labour government is uninterested in defending the values of this country from the fear and hatred spread by Islamists, you can see it plain and simple.

And sadly, it just adds fuel to the likes of the British National Party – a party of explicit bigotry, racism and knuckle dragging losers – who will ask why Islamists are appeased, but those vehemently against them are banned.

UPDATE: Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat MP has proven clearly that the Lib Dems are no party of freedom. Brainless git.

Israel votes for security

Well despite Tzipi Livni’s claim of victory, it is unlikely she can form a coalition government, as without the Likud party she can’t get a majority together (assuming those parties more conservative than the Likud reject her). It is more likely that Binjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Party will form a coalition with the conservative and religious parties. It is a damning indictment of the Labor Party to slip into fourth.

However, why did Israelis move to the right? Well it is about security. The rocket attacks from Gaza tired many, and they damned Labor for its incompetence, although Kadima got credit for confronting Hamas directly. There is also the Obama factor.

With Obama talking of change and talking to Iran (which has called for Israel’s destruction), Israelis fear insecurity and the US pushing for concessions to Israel’s enemies. So they vote for the parties most willing to take a hardline against the Palestinian political parties and Israel’s enemies.

Parties like Yisrael Beitenu, which calls for the boundaries of Israel to be redrawn to effectively evict most Israeli Arab citizens and include Jews in West Bank settlements. Shas wants Israel governed by Jewish religious law.

So the challenge for the Obama Administration is how to deal with Netanyahu, who has called for an “economic peace” before a political peace. In others words, encouraging Palestinian economic activity, trade and development, ahead of deciding the political status of the occupied territories. This was to give Palestinians a better life and a stake in peace, before negotiating peace. However, he also supports expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank – which is hardly going to engender support among Palestinians who see Netanyahu as a man who has in the past supported a Greater Israel, and opposition to any Palestinian state.

The sad tension of Israel is that it is a country based on ethnicity, targeted by religious fundamentalist Arabs, and needs security from them. Meanwhile its own religious fundamentalist Jews gleefully treat Palestinian and Israeli Arabs as second class citizens. The more secular Israel can be the better it will be for Israel and for the Palestinians.

However, one thing that Israel can claim, over its neighbours - even Iraq with its embryonic democracy - Israelis can choose their leaders, have a vigorous vibrant liberal democracy and they can criticise their leaders.

That is a freedom that should spread throughout the Middle East, and it is the honest beautiful truth about Israel that its leftwing worldwide opponents ignore - just as they ignore the dictatorships, absolute monarchies and tyrannies that exist in virtually all Arab states.