Pursuing Holiness

The Dutch government is considering whether or not to go to the secondary crime scene. Many crimes take place in two locations. For example, a kidnapping begins at the primary crime scene where you are actually abducted. The secondary crime scene is where you are held hostage, and where your kidnapper can torture, rape or murder you in privacy and at his leisure because you’re under his control. That’s the entire point of going there; to bring you further under his control. Islamic attacks on free speech are an attempted kidnapping of western civilization. Compliance with those attacks represents going to the secondary crime scene.

Via Dhimmi Watch: Dutch government may ban Wilders’ Qur’an film, Netherlands politician Geert Wilders has made a short film which criticizes Islam. According to the Guardian, the government is considering banning the film for fear of fanning Islamic sentiment against the Netherlands - and probably the riots that will almost certainly ensue.

According to Wilders,

The core of the problem is fascistic Islam, the sick ideology of Allah and Muhammad as it is set out in the Islamic Mein Kampf: the Koran,” he wrote in a comment piece for the Volksrant newspaper last year….

Whether you agree or disagree with that statement, Robert Spencer aptly summarizes the decision making process for banning the film -

And the core of the problem is whether anything he says gives anyone else a license to destroy and kill, and whether Western governments should abet that mindset.

Marisol at Dhimmi Watch notes,

The movie threatens the nation, you see. Not the irrational rage and grievance culture found in Muslim populations at home and abroad. Not the texts and teachings of Islam that mandate violence against uppity dhimmis and other unbelievers. Therefore, Wilders is to blame for people who react to his film with said irrational rage and violence.

and quotes from an AP article which indicates that the reaction will include both soft and violent jihad -

Wilders said the film would demonstrate how the Koran incites violence and intolerance of women and homosexuals.

Muslim groups in the Netherlands say they will file hate-speech charges against Wilders for previous statements, such as his description of Islam as a “retarded” religion. The Grand Mufti of Syria has warned of “bloodshed” if the film is released.

When they are this bold now, what makes anyone think this is going to improve if we stay silent in the face of such oppression? And to complete the trifecta of Dhimmi watch links, here’s Hugh’s take on the long-term consequences of banning this movie:

This suppression, by the Western world, of free speech, will have grave and long-lasting consequences. For if this movie is suppressed, one assumes that all other such movies will be suppressed. And the demands, by Muslims inside and outside of Europe for still more to be censored, including the written word, will only increase, with that well-known triumphalism that feeds each new demand, as Muslims demand more and more concessions to ensure that they will never feel offended, neither within their own lands, nor within the historic heart of the free and advanced West. For if they are offended, the consequences will be greater than what the West wishes to pay. It need not be soldiers in Afghanistan. It could be, say, a threat to blow up one of the Oxford colleges, or the Louvre, or the Alte Pinakothek, or the Uffizi or the Vatican. Oh, it could be any number of things. Do what we want, submit to our Diktat….or else!

The stand has to be taken now. Not later. Later will be too late.

Once you get to the secondary crime scene, it’s too late to fight back. That was the whole point of taking you there - to limit your ability to fight back against your attacker. If we’re ever going to fight, now is the time.

[And yes, I do seem to be harping on the "secondary crime scene" topic today. Here's my earlier post on it. I didn't plan this; it's in response to other posts of interest and the news.]

written by Laura