When the racist Dutch politicians, Geert Wilders released his anti-Islam polemic, Andrew Bolt, the Herald Sun's resident clown, decided to poke the bear and put Wilders' video on the Hun web pages.
Yes we do have free-ish speech in this country, but why would Bolt decide to prove it by publishing this extremely dangerous video?
Wilders, like Bolt, and like the radical Muslims, have an very similar ability to de-contextualise the Koran to prove a point. Wilders and Bolt cherry pick sections to "prove" Islam is not a religion of peace, while radical Muslims take tiny snippets of the book to justify violent actions or anti-Christian/Jewish attitudes.
Both groups (radical Islam and extreme conservatism/racism) use similar methods to attract followers, and their support is based on ignorance, suspicion, and identity politics. Fear is their tool, and sensible debate is their enemy.
Where would Bolt be if his followers actually read the Koran and had the ability to interpret it? Where would radical imams be if their followers had a sensible religious framework to understand the text rather than having random violent sections rammed down their throat?
Anyone could cherry pick sections of the Bible and declare that Christianity is a fundamentally violent religion. Sure this would be intellectually childish, and this sort of debate would be understandably condemned, but when it comes to the Koran, our extremist commentators just go for it.
Geert's greatest recruiting officer is Osama bin Laden and OBL would be absolutely thrilled that the Dutch MP has released the film. If Bolt understood this fact, he would not have rebroadcasted the film, and he would not have opened up his blog to ignorant people expressing ignorant opinions.
Like "Islam merely wants to kill all Jews and christians!" Great, and you wonder why some Muslims feel a little bit concerned in this country.
It is a profound lack of knowledge, much of it spread by the likes of Bolt, Wilders, Jones et al, that encourages situations like Camden and Cronulla. This of course provides ample "evidence of persecution" for alienated Muslims, that encourages further radicalisation. It's the extremists vicious circle.
I just hope most people see this film for what it is: A dangerous political tool for non-Muslim and Muslim radicals.
Friday, March 28, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

1 comments:
...why would Bolt decide to prove it by publishing this extremely dangerous video?
Do you have a newsletter that outlines all the videos you characterize as "extremely dangerous?" Is "Welcome Back Kotter" on the list?
Wilders and Bolt cherry pick sections to "prove" Islam is not a religion of peace, while radical Muslims take tiny snippets of the book to justify violent actions...
Yes, Wilders et al and some muslims agree that islam is not a religion of peace and an even smaller minority of muslims are willing to murder to prove it.
As far as I know, Wilders and Bolt haven't murdered or even advocated for the murder of anyone.
he would not have opened up his blog to ignorant people expressing ignorant opinions
You should consider that the answer to bad free speech is more free speech not less.
I just hope most people see this film for what it is:
Yet you want no one to see it.
I think this bears repeating : the answer to bad free speech is more free speech not less.
Post a Comment