Recently, a Dutch politician, Geert Wilders (who’s a bit of a firebrand on that little issue of the islamization of Europe and the west in general), was denied entry to the UK to meet with the House of Lords. The official reasoning behind his not being allowed to enter the UK was that his statements (and particularly a film he made) about Muslims/the Koran (he says it’s fascist and should be banned…ha!) “threaten community harmony and therefore public safety.” (From the Home Office.)
Can it really be that the leadership in Britain doesn’t comprehend what such logic implies? Or do they understand it and simply not care? They are indeed betraying their own mistrust of the Muslim minority in their own country. They are also demonstrating their sincere lack of faith in the possibility of the existence of reasonable, peace-loving Muslims in their country. The sad thing is that it is possible (although unlikely) that they are right. But, if that’s the case, the proper response is not to squelch all thought that could be offensive to the unstable minority. Rather, the appropriate response, if the British leaders really believe what they appear to be admitting to, would be to swiftly round up and deport all of the oppressive, violent imminent lawbreakers and have them deported. Indeed, if they knew that simply by living in a society that has such (classically) liberal policies as free speech, a particular type of person would be driven uncontrollably to violence and they knew who these people were, would it not be the state’s responsibility to protect everyone from them by having them deported posthaste?
Such a proposition is quite obviously absurd, but if that isn’t the action taken, then the government across the pond can’t actually believe that speech that casts Islam in a negative light is so certain to “threaten community harmony and therefore public safety” by inciting violence among the local Muslims. And if they don’t really believe that, then what was their motivation for restricting Geert Wilders’ entry? Could they be limiting free speech in order to make a particular bloc of voters feel warm and fuzzy as if “their guys” in the government are somehow specially looking them out for them? And if it’s possible that some leaders in a government would “sell” such a fundamental freedom as free speech for votes, what ever could be next?
In any case, if I were a Muslim in Britain (or anywhere) I’d be more offended that the official policy in Britain is to assume I was a psychotic terrorist who would lash out in violence at the first sign of any disagreement with my beliefs than I would be by the comments and efforts of one man who could easily be dismissed as a quack. Cheers.