Dutch Rally in Support of Geert Wilders while Muslims Protest and call for the death of Geert Wilders

Which do YOU support? Liberty or Xenophobia?

Pat Condell on Freedom of Speech and Islam

for video, click here

Help save Freedom of Speech in Finland -

Take action now. write to the Helsinki Court of Appeal in support of FREE SPEECH, THANKS, SITA INTERNATIONAL AND THE INTERNATIONAL FREE PRESS SOCIETY

FOR SUPPORTING EVIDENCE SEE THE PREVIOUS POSTING


Helsinki Court of Appeal
Radanrakentajantie 5
00521 Helsinki
Honorable Helsinki Court of Appeal!
In his blog (3.6.2008) Jussi Halla-aho, a member of the Helsinki city council, criticized the
incoherent interpretation of the law concerning defamation of religion. He also criticized the actions
of the state prosecutor, Mika Illmann, who specializes in the legislation of freedom of speech. Jussi
Halla-aho said: “The Prophet Muhammad was a pedophile and Islam sanctifies pedophilia as a
religion. Islam is a religion of pedophilia. Pedophilia is Allah’s will.” Halla-aho was subsequently
charged with defamation of religion. The judge of the Helsinki district court, Jussi Sippola, ruled
that Halla-aho acted with the intention to blaspheme and imposed a fine on him.
Islam allows child marriages and thus child molestation
Islam’s holy texts tell how the fifty-three-year-old prophet Muhammad “consummated the marriage”
- in other words, had sexual intercourse - with his bride Aisha when she was nine years old and still
played with dolls (Bukhari 7:62;88, Bukhari 7:62:64, Bukhari 7:62:65, Muslim 8:3310).1 The
researcher of Islam, Jaakko Hämeen-Anttila, writes in his handbook of Islam (Islamin käsikirja,
Otava, 2004, p.37, which received a meritorious award by the Finnish state): “The prophet had
never in his life acted solely according to the prevailing situation but at the same time he had
looked out for the future. The details of the prophet’s life were meant to be eternally imitated by the
Islamic community.” In addition Hämeen-Anttila emphasizes that the prophet Muhammad was
“insured against faults (ma sum), so in his behavior he did nothing wrong, nor ́ anything that would
not have been God’s (Allah’s) intention.” (Islam – taskusanakirja, Basam Books, 2001, p.28). Allah
proclaims in the Quran: “Certainly you have in the Messenger of Allah an excellent example”
(33:21).
According to present-day standards Muhammad was a pedophile in the neutral and medical sense
of the word (see Duodecim: http://www.terveyskirjasto.fi/). The tradition of Muhammad’s exemplary
way of living, also known as sunna, serves as one of the central sources for Islamic law; sharia.
Hämeen-Anttila (2001, p.26) states: “Because the sharia is a religious, holy law, it can not be
changed by people’s decision.” Furthermore, Hämeen-Anttila (2001, p.28) stresses: “The Sunna is
a conclusive example to the Muslims, and it is the responsibility of every devout Muslim to obey the
example of Muhammad”. Islamic law does not legislate a minimum age for matrimony. Hence it is
obvious that Islam truly sanctifies child molestation, so far as it happens inside matrimony or in its
shadow. According to the written pleading of the Helsinki district court, this should not be
concluded, because within religions “truth is relative” and “due to this, logic or rational reasoning do
not have true sense in discussion about religious matters.” If the district court’s pronounced
sentence on Halla-aho is to be the final judgment, it implies that criticizing Islam is illegal, even
when it is based on obvious facts which Muslims themselves hold to be true.
Because the prophet Muhammad’s exemplary
way of living “was meant to be eternally imitated
by the Islamic community”, the molestation of
baby girls sanctified by Allah is in many Muslim
countries nowadays a common phenomenon and
an institution that human and women’s rights
activists such as Ghada Jamshir have criticized in
the Arab media (http://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=2t3vfDhPTlk, 1:54-2:45, Al-Arabiya TV, Dubai/
Saudi-Arabia, 21.12.2005).

1 The information about the sunnas originates from the so-called hadith, which function as one of the sources of law of the sharia.
The essential collections of hadith is found here: http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/

Speaker Pelosi backs Senate Amendment to LIMIT Free Speech!!

SPEAKER PELOSI BACKS SENATE AMENDMENT TO LIMIT FREE SPEECH

Tell Congress Oppose Government Censorship of Talk Radio

FaxDC.com wants to send this urgent and personalized Blast Fax message to all 535 members of the House and Senate for YOU.

Alert: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told CNSNews.com on Thursday that she supports an amendment to a Senate bill that would force the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to “take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest.”

The amendment’s language is viewed by many media experts as a means to regulate conservative talk radio, particularly popular programs such as the Rush Limbaugh Show and the Sean Hannity Show, among many others.

House Conference Chairman Mike Pence (R-Ind.), a former radio broadcaster and one of Congress’ biggest opponents of the Fairness Doctrine -- an FCC regulation removed in 1987 that forced broadcasters to grant equal airtime to opposing political viewpoints -- told CNSNews.com that the amendment is a masked attempt to restore the Fairness Doctrine.

The amendment, sponsored by Senate Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and attached to a bill (S.160) that would grant Washington, D.C., a vote in the House of Representatives, was approved by the Senate last Thursday in a party line 57-41 vote.

When asked whether she supports Durbin’s amendment, Speaker Pelosi said, “Certainly, I support Mr. Durbin in most things.”

“Diversity in media ownership is very, very, important,” said Pelosi.

Minutes after the passage of the ‘Durbin amendment’ last Thursday a separate amendment that would ban the restoration of the Fairness Doctrine, which was proposed by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), was also attached to the same D.C. voting rights bill and passed by a vote of 87-11.

But Pence told CNSNews.com that Durbin’s amendment would mandate a “stealth Fairness Doctrine.”

“Its clear to me that Democrats, having failed in their frontal assault on talk radio in America through the Fairness Doctrine, are now shifting strategy to a form of regulation that is essentially the Fairness Doctrine by stealth,” Pence said. He added that he is not surprised Pelosi has endorsed Durbin’s plan.

“It should come as little surprise that Speaker Pelosi, who openly supports returning the Fairness Doctrine to the airwaves of American, would support a new version of it,” Pence told CNSNews.com.

But Durbin said last Thursday that his amendment should not be equated with the Fairness Doctrine.

"No one is suggesting that the law for the FCC says that you can give this license to a Republican and this one to a Democrat and this one to a liberal and this one to a conservative,” said Durbin at the time. “When we talk about diversity in media ownership, it relates primarily to gender, race and other characteristics of that nature."

Meanwhile, the amendment, which passed the Senate riding on the D.C. voting right’s bill, now goes to the House where Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said he thinks Republicans may be able to muster the votes to stop it.

“I think as we get into the appropriations process you will see us continue our effort to make sure the Fairness Doctrine is not put back into place,” Boehner told CNSNews.com at his weekly press conference on Thursday. “And I do believe the votes are in the Congress to make sure that happens.”

The primary text of the Durbin amendment reads:

SEC.9 FCC Authorities. (a) Clarification of General Powers. – Title III of the Communications Act of 1934 is amended by inserting after section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) the following new section:

SEC.303B. Clarification of General Powers. (a) Certain Affirmative Actions Required – The Commission shall take actions to encourage and promote diversity in communication media ownership and to ensure that broadcast station licenses are used in the public interest. …

The amendment is nearly identical to a policy position outlined by the White House that says:

“Encourage Diversity in Media Ownership: Encourage diversity in the ownership of broadcast media, promote the development of new media outlets for expression of diverse viewpoints, and clarify the public interest obligations of broadcasters who occupy the nation's spectrum.” (CNSNews.com)

DO NOT BE SILENCED BY ANYONE STAND UP! MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD!

TAKE ACTION: Send YOUR blast FAX to ALL 535 Congressman NOW!

To visit FaxDC.com, click here: http://faxdc.com/

To view Your Fax Message, click here: http://faxdc.com/freedom.htm

To Fax Blast Capitol Hill, click here: http://faxdc.com/freedom_order.htm

Be part of the FaxDC.com Army and subscribe to the Auto-Fax Program
$ 25.00 per month at: http://www.faxdc.com/friends.htm

Thank You Patriot! Your friends at FaxDC.com

NOTE: Be sure to send this Alert to EVERYONE you know who supports saving America and Protecting our Middle Class. Thank you!

We Support Responsible Email Compliance:

This email cannot be considered spam as long as we include: Contact information & remove instructions. This message is being sent to you in compliance with the current Federal legislation for commercial e-mail (H.R.4176 - SECTION 101Paragraph (e)(1)(A)) AND Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th U.S. Congress.

Not responsible for typographical errors. Further transmissions to you may be stopped at no cost to you by replying back with the word "REMOVE" in the subject line of the E-mail which was sent.

Contact Information: SE Administrator P.O. Box 1245 Orange, California 92856

Similarly, the Center for American Progress, headed by former Obama transition leader John Podesta, published a report that called for new “localism” and “ownership diversity” regulations to balance conservative talk radio with progressive talk radio.

###

If you wish not to receive future e-mails, click here:
http://64.128.117.202/pr/actgoldengate%40gmail.com

Geert Wilders in the U.S. Updates and more

Thanks go out to Lili for sending me the below about Geert Wilders and FREE SPEECH.

Video: Geert Wilders calls for an International First Amendment in NYCBy Adams • on February 25, 2009
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/025016.php#respond
February 25, 2009

Wilders: "Our enemies should know: we will never apologize for being free men, we will never bow for the combined forces of Mecca and the left"

Here is Geert Wilders' speech at the Four Seasons in New York on February 23:

Thank you. Thank you very much for inviting me. And – to the immigration authorities – thank you for letting me into this country. It is always a pleasure to cross a border without being sent back on the first plane.

Today, the dearest of our many freedoms is under attack all throughout Europe. Free speech is no longer a given. What we once considered a natural element of our existence, our birth right, is now something we once again have to battle for.

As you might know, I will be prosecuted, because of my film Fitna, my remarks regarding Islam, and my view concerning what some call a ‘religion of peace’. A few years from now, I might be a criminal.
Whether or not I end up in jail is not the most pressing issue; I gave up my freedom four years ago. I am under full-time police protection ever since. The real question is: will free speech be put behind bars? And the larger question for the West is: will we leave Europe’s children the values of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem, or the values of Mecca, Teheran and Gaza?

This is what video blogger Pat Condell said in one of his latest you tube appearances. He says: “If I talked about Muslims the way their holy book talks about me, I’d be arrested for hate speech.” Now, Mr Condell is a stand-up comedian, but in the video he is dead serious and the joke is on us. Hate speech will always be used against the people defending the West – in order to please and appease Muslims. They can say whatever they want: throw gays from apartment buildings, kill the Jews, slaughter the infidel, destroy Israel, jihad against the West. Whatever their book tells them.
Today, I come before you to warn of a great threat. It is called Islam. It poses as a religion, but its goals are very worldly: world domination, holy war, sharia law, the end of the separation of church and state, slavery of women, the end of democracy. It is NOT a religion, it is an political ideology. It demands your respect, but has no respect for you.

There might be moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. Islam will never change, because it is built on two rocks that are forever, two fundamental beliefs that will never change, and will never alter. First, there is the Quran, Allah’s personal word, uncreated, forever, with orders that need to be fulfilled regardless of place or time. And second, there is al-insal al-kamil, the perfect man, Muhammad the role model, whose deeds are to be imitated by all Muslims. And since Muhammad was a warlord and a conqueror we know what to expect. Islam means submission, so there cannot be any mistake about it’s goal. That’s a given. It’s fact.

This is Europe 2009. Muslim settlers calling for our destruction, and free speech on trial. All this is the outcome of a sick and evil ideology, the ideology that is weakening us, the surrender ideology of cultural relativism. It believes that all cultures are equal, and therefore Islam deserves an equal place in the West. It is their duty, the left thinks, to facilitate Islam. This way the cultural relativists paradise comes within reach and we will all be happy, and sing kumbaya.

The forces of Islam couldn’t agree more. Islam being facilitated by government is their agenda too. But they see it as jizya, the money dhimmis pay in order not to be killed or raped by their Muslim masters. Therefore, they happily accept the welfare cheque or the subsidies for their mosque or the money governments donate to their organizations.

This is just one example of cultural relativists and Muslim settlers having the same agenda. There is another. Islam considers itself a religion and therefore we are not permitted to criticize it. The left agrees. Although it hated Christianity for decades, now that Islam appears on the scene, they suddenly change course and demand ‘respect’ for something they call a religion.
Again we see the left and Islam having the same agenda: it is a religion, so shut up.

This all culminates in a third coming-together: nor the left nor Islam is in favor of criticism. In fact, given the opportunity, they would simply outlaw it. Multiculturalism is the left’s pet project. It is actually their religion. Their love of it is so great, if you oppose it, it must be hate. And if you say it, it is labeled hate speech. Now here is something the Islam can agree on.
This is the essence of my short introduction today: where the left and Islam come together, freedom will suffer.

My friends, make no mistake, my prosecution is a full-fledged attack by the left on freedom of speech in order to please Muslims. It was started by a member of the Dutch Labour party, and the entire legal proceeding is done by well-to-do liberals, the radical chic of Dutch society, the snobbish left. Too much money, too much time, too little love of liberty. If you read what the court of Amsterdam has written about me, you read the same texts that cultural relativists produce.

How low can we go in the Netherlands? About my prosecution, The Wall Street Journal noted: “this is no small victory for Islamic regimes seeking to export their censorship laws to wherever Muslims reside”. The Journal concluded that by The Netherlands accepting the free speech standards of, “Saudi-Arabia”, I stand correct in my observation that - I quote - “Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties”.

Now, if the Wall Street Journal has the moral clarity to see that my prosecution is the logical outcome of our disastrous, self-hating, multiculturalists immigration policies, then why can’t the European liberal establishment see the same thing? Why aren’t they getting at least a little bit scared by the latest news out of, for example, the UK. News that tells that the Muslim population in Britain is growing ten times as fast as the rest of society. Why don’t they care?

The answer is: they don’t care because they are blinded by their cultural relativism. Their disdain of the West is so much greater than the appreciation of our many liberties. And therefore, they are willing to sacrifice everything. The left once stood for women rights, gay rights, equality, democracy. Now, they favour immigration policies that will end all this. Many even lost their decency. Elite politicians have no problem to participate in or finance demonstrations where settlers shout “Death to the Jews”. Seventy years after Auschwitz they know of no shame.

Two weeks ago, I tried to get into Britain, a fellow EU country. I was invited to give a speech in Parliament. However, upon arrival at London airport, I was refused entry into the UK, and sent back on the first plane to Holland. I would have loved to have reminded the audience of a great man who once spoke in the House of Commons. In 1982 President Reagan gave a speech there very few people liked. Reagan called upon the West to reject communism and defend freedom. He introduced a phrase: ‘evil empire’. Reagan’s speech stands out as a clarion call to preserve our liberties. I quote: If history teaches anything, it teaches self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly. What Reagan meant is that you cannot run away from history, you cannot escape the dangers of ideologies that are out to destroy you. Denial is no option.

So, what should we do? Is this a good moment for freedom-loving people to give in or to change course? To all-of-a-sudden start singing praise of Islam, or proclaiming there is such a thing as a moderate Islam? Will we now accept the continuation of Muslim mass immigration to the West? Will we appease sharia and jihad? Should we sacrifice gay rights and women rights? Or democracy? Should we sell out Israel, our dearest ally, and a frontline state of Islam?
Well, my humble opinion is: No way, Jose!

I suggest to defend freedom in general and freedom of speech in particular. I propose the withdrawal of all hate speech legislation in Europe. I propose a European First Amendment. In Europe we should defend freedom of speech like you Americans do. In Europe freedom of speech should be extended, instead of restricted. Of course, calling for violence or unjustly yelling “fire” in a crowded theatre have to be punished, but the right to criticize ideologies or religions are necessary conditions for a vital democracry. As George Orwell once said: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”.Let us defend freedom of speech and let us gain strength and work hard to become even stronger. Millions think just like you and me. Millions think liberty is precious. That democracy is better than sharia. And after all, why should we be afraid? Our many freedoms and our prosperity are the result of centuries of endeavour. Centuries of hard work and sacrifice. We do not stand alone, and we stand on the shoulders of giants.

Late December 1944 the American army was suddenly faced with a last-ditch effort by the Germans. In the Ardennes, in the Battle of the Bulge, Hitler and his national-socialists fought for their last chance. And they were very successful. Americans faced defeat, and death.

In the darkest of winter, in the freezing cold, in a lonely forest with snow and ice as even fiercer enemies than the Nazi war machine itself, the American army was told to surrender. That might be their only chance to survive. But General McAuliffe thought otherwise. He gave the Germans a short message. This message contained just four letters. Four letters only, but never in the history of freedom was a desire for liberty and perseverance in the face of evil expressed more eloquently than in that message. It spelled N – U – T – S. “Nuts”.

My friends, the national-socialists got the message. Because it left no room for interpretation!

I suggest we walk in the tradition of giants like General McAuliffe and the American soldiers who fought and died for the freedom of my country and for a secular and democratic Europe, and we tell the enemies of freedom just that. NUTS! Because that’s all there is to it. No explanations. No beating around the bush. No caveats.
Our enemies should know: we will never apologize for being free men, we will never bow for the combined forces of Mecca and the left. And we will never surrender. We stand on the shoulders of giants. There is no stronger power than the force of free men fighting for the great cause of liberty. Because freedom is the birthright of all man.

++++++++++++
http://www.geertwilders.nl/
If you have not yet, please view FITNA - GREET WILDER'S Movie, which is considered a controversial one, for exposing Global Islamic overt practices.

Http://video.Google.com/videoplay?docid=3369102968312745410

Video: Fitna the Movie: Geert Wilders' film about the Quran (English) - Mar 27, 2008
Geert Wilders - mypetjawa.mu.nu
.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024898.php#respond


*Wilders coming to U.S., Newsweek in a snit

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123457003637386317.html?mod=djemEditorialPage
Held at Heathrow FEBRUARY 14, 2009
Geert Wilders is banned in Britain.

*By Bat Yeor -Geert Wilders and the Fight for Europe
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGVhOWZlNjk4N2E0NDk1NDgwYWRhNzlhMTdmNWZlNjI=

Does defending Western values constitute “inciting hatred”?


*Nonie Darwish - Prosecuted for Stating Truths
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=87668C51-09B4-4B5F-92DE-60D20897831F
FrontPageMagazine.com | Monday, January 26, 200

Muslim scholars agree with Geert Wilders.

*Dr. Sami Alrabaa Saturday, Prosecuting Geert Wilders, Islam, Koran, Hadeeth, Violence and hatred, Radical Muslims
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/8066

Wilders Prosecution is a Welcome Opportunity to Expose Islam
January 31, 2009

*Mayor Bloomberg Supports Wilders
By Baron Bodissey • on January 29, 2009
http://www.internationalfreepresssociety.org/2009/01/mayor-bloomberg-supports-wilders/*Phyllis Chesler February 23rd, 2009 6:15 pm
http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/02/23/a-dutch-hero-comes-to-warn-us-seek-our-support-the-incomparable-geert-wilders-mp-in-new-york-city/

A Dutch Hero Comes to Warn Us, Seek Our Support. The Incomparable Geert Wilders, MP, in New York City.

*Posted By Andrew Bostom On February 15, 2009
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/02/barring-wilders-killing-the-messenger.html
BARRING WILDERS: KILLING THE MESSENGER

Geert Wilders, Islamic Law in Britain, and Zaki Badawi, The Late Lionized “
--

Recommended book
"Fogs of War and Peace: A Midstream Analysis of World War III"
by Robert L. Dilworth and Shlomo Maital

http://www.amazon.com/Fogs-War-Peace-Midstream-Analysis/dp/0313360499

http://book-reviews-citadel.blogspot.com/2008/12/fogs-of-war-and-peace-midstream.html

--



Recommended book
"Fogs of War and Peace: A Midstream Analysis of World War III"
by Robert L. Dilworth and Shlomo Maital

http://www.amazon.com/Fogs-War-Peace-Midstream-Analysis/dp/0313360499

http://book-reviews-citadel.blogspot.com/2008/12/fogs-of-war-and-peace-midstream.html

CAIR looks to muscle in on Fitna screening

Thanks to Islam In Action for the below heads up!

On Monday Arizona Senator Jon Kyl announced that he will be holding a screening of the anti-Islam movie Fitna.
Of course once this was announced the Council on American Islamic Relations couldn't leave it alone. CAIR wants one of their representatives present so that they can present the "other side" of the argument. They also said that the film's creator Geert Wilders spewed hatred, but of course CAIR did not mention a word about the hate being spewed by the Muslims in the film. Nor did CAIR mention a word about the hate being spewed against Jews at these Muslim rallies.



Arizona Senator Asked to Invite Muslim Reps to Balance Anti-Islam Film


CAIR-AZ urges Sen. Kyl to recognize that there are 'Muslims in his own state'

PHOENIX, Feb. 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The Arizona chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-AZ) today called on one of that state's senators to invite Muslim representatives to offer a balancing perspective to a screening of an anti-Islam film he is hosting in Congress.

On Thursday, Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) will host a closed-door screening of a 15-minute film by Dutch lawmaker Geert Wilders. Wilders was recently denied entry to Britain because of his extreme anti-Muslim views, including urging that the Quran, Islam's revealed text, should be banned. One of the event's co-sponsors, the Center for Security Policy headed by Frank Gaffney, is linked to an anti-Islam group that has advocated prison terms in the U.S. for "adherence to Islam."

SEE: US Lawmaker Hosts Anti-Islamic Dutch Lawmaker (AP)

http://tinyurl.com/bc9dsj

"It seems that Senator Kyl is oblivious to the fact that there are Muslims in his own state who will take offense at this cheap anti-Islam publicity stunt designed to promote a person who is under indictment for inciting religious hatred," said CAIR-AZ Executive Director Ahmad Daniels. "Geert Wilders is just one of many self-promoting Islamophobes traveling the world in search of attention for their hate-filled views. We ask that Americans of all faiths ignore Mr. Wilders, thereby depriving him of the attention he so desperately seeks. Wilders has the right to spew his hate, but he does not have the right to a taxpayer-funded platform in the United States Congress."

Daniels urged Sen. Kyl to join the ongoing efforts to end partisan politics in Congress and to reach out to the Islamic world by inviting speakers with a differing viewpoint to that of Wilders.

He added that, following a request by CAIR's Los Angeles chapter, a California synagogue that screened a film claiming "confrontation between Islam and the Jews" agreed to invite a Muslim representative who could offer a balancing perspective of interfaith understanding.


From ACT Golden Gate: IMHO Interfaith Dialogues are nothing but an act of compromise on the part of us "filthy Kafirs". Why do we need a differening viewpoint at the film showing, which is real actions and words of the Quran and Mohammand and actions of his followers around the world! Dhimmis!! Special accommodations always cried for by the radical Islamists and has anyone listened to the FBI saying that CAIR is a radical islamist, terrorist supporting group???:? So why should THEY be involved???? Please Senator Kyl, don't be a dhimmi dummy!!!

Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ)
730 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-4521
Fax: (202) 224-2207

International SITA Action a Victory re: Geert Wilders

News of international action SITA in support of Wilders launched on January 22, 2009.
It is already a great success as at today February 9, 2008 for the following reasons:
1) We were relayed/promoted by great sites ... etc A Google research with Geert " Winston" und Geert " Charlie" Wilders will show you clearly that it is a media success on the Internet.

2) We have already counted more than 2000 visits for the 2 articles " Winston" and " Charlie" and if one can believe it, the famous Dutch daily newspaper De telegraaf, has reported about hundreds of letters (and also e-mails) coming from many countries which have arrived at the Court in Amsterdam as well as to the lawyer Spong, who has asked for police protection following the receipt of death threats. These threats are detrimental to our cause because they give ammunition to our enemies. All this makes a buzz around Wilders which was our intention.

...What do we do next?
The lawsuit brought against Geert Wilders will go on for months and we must do everything so that our action carries on. For this reason it is not necessary for an enormous quantity of mail to arrive every day. A letter from time to time addressed to the Dutch authorities, to the 3 judges, to lawyer Spong and his collaborators will be enough under the terms of the principle of the snowflake: a flake on a roof nothing happens, two flakes... 10 flakes nothing happens, a multitude of flakes nothing – but suddenly one flake more and the roof collapses. The letter that you will send or will have someone send will perhaps be the letter which will make these dhimmis crack!

Victory for activism on the web. A Norwegian activist prevents a recent law proposal to be voted:

http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2009/02/norway-bloggers-and-blasphemy.html

SITA action English link Here

Wilders appeals prosecution on Free speech grounds

Wilders appeals prosecution on free speech grounds

The battle to defend free speech against Islamic attempts to snuff it out is joined in the Netherlands. The outcome of this case will affect the whole world. "Anti-Islam lawmaker appeals hate speech charges," from The Associated Press, February...

Full article: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024696.php
AOL users: Click here


Source: www.jihadwatch.com

ACTION ITEM - Support Free Speech

If Geert Wilders falls, then Freedom of Speech is dead in Europe.

We are launching an extensive International Action SITA including two possible texts ; one comparing Wilders and Winston Churchill and another Wilders and Charlie Chaplin:


http://sitamnesty.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/i-support-democrat-geert-winston-wilders-against-islamic-fascism-and-its-dhimmis

http://sitamnesty.wordpress.com/2009/01/23/i-support-democrat-geert-charlie-wilders-against-islamic-fascism (Charlie)

To support Geert Wilders and our dearly acquired freedoms please participate to the 2 suggested actions and transmit this message to your friends owners of a website in order they publish it..

Another way to support Geert Wilders is to give some money. To donate: www.geertwilders.nl

A Sad and Dangerous Day! As the US participates in similar insanity!

Dear Friends, it's a sad and dangerous day!


In a stunning decision, a Dutch court has ruled that Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders has committed criminal “hate speech” due to his public criticisms of Islam, and should be prosecuted. (See the International Free Press Society release below).

When a court takes such a step in a country as “progressive” as the Netherlands, every person who cherishes liberty and the right of free speech should shudder.

Mr. Wilders has, at the risk of his own life, courageously spoken out against Islamofascism and everything that comes with it. The decision of the Amsterdam Court of Appeals is a crushing blow to free speech and a victory for radical Islamists who are bent on suppressing any public criticism of their ideology.

This is why we keep issuing warnings and action alerts to you about how politically correct governmental actions, in league with radical Islam, are moving us ever closer to the day where we cannot speak out against an evil that has produced 270 million deaths and caused untold suffering over the past 14 centuries.

This is why we must build a powerful, informed and organized citizen action network that will stand in unity against the evil of Islamofascism and the political correctness that aids and abets it. Whether we are Democrats, Independents or Republicans…conservatives, moderates or liberals…there is no choice. We cannot allow America to sink to a place where an American prosecutor would obtain an indictment against a Member of Congress for criticizing Islam.

If you would like to help us further this effort, whether by making a contribution or helping to start or get involved in a local chapter, please log on to www.actforamerica.org today.

While the Dutch court seeks to censor, through unjust criminal prosecution, the kind of political speech that has been the hallmark of free countries, it looks the other way when radical Muslims in its country call for the death of infidels and praise Hitler for what he did to the Jews.

The message is clear. It’s okay for a radical Muslim to call for your death, but don’t you dare criticize the Muslim for doing so.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The International Free Press Society
www.internationalfreepresssociety.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Defend Geert Wilders and Freedom of Speech
January 22, 2009 - Washington, DC and Copenhagen, Denmark: A Dutch court yesterday ordered the criminal prosecution of Geert Wilders, Dutch parliamentarian and leader of the Freedom Party (PVV), for his statements - written, spoken and filmed -regarding Islam. The Amsterdam Court of Appeals has deemed such statements "insulting," declaring that they "substantially harm the religious esteem" of Muslims.

Clearly, the effect of this Dutch court order is to set new limits to public debate in Dutch society, in this case about the highly controversial but nonetheless crucially important subject of Islam. This makes the prosecution of Geert Wilders an unacceptable breach of the sanctity of freedom of speech in Western society.

Having ordered a criminal prosecution for the opinions of a duly elected leader of a legitimate political party, Dutch authorities have dealt a devastating blow to political expression. While Dutch prosecutors prepare their indictment and Geert Wilders' future hangs in limbo, who in The Netherlands will dare discuss political and cultural matters related to Islam - Islamic law, Islamic integration, Islamic crime, Islamic policy - openly, freely and fearlessly? The chilling effect is instantaneous. If, indeed, Wilders is ultimately convicted, free speech will cease to exist in the heart of Europe.

The International Free Press Society believes this court-ordered prosecution against Geert Wilders, a central figure in the fight against the Islamization of the West, amounts to a dangerous concession to the strictures of Islamic law, which prohibits all criticism of Islam, over Western traditions of, and rights to robust and unfettered debate. As such, it is tantamount to a surrender to totalitarian influences that undermine all Western freedoms. And as such, it must be resisted.

It is important to recall recent history. Two Dutchmen, Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, have been murdered for their outspoken opposition to Islamization in The Netherlands. Another Dutch politician, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has been infamously forced into exile. Wilders alone now carries this debate over Islam in Dutch society forward - forcefully but logically, outspokenly but reasonably, and always peacefully. In order to do so, this member of Dutch parliament lives in a virtual prison, consigned to 24-hour guard by Islamic death threats against his life. Now, Dutch authorities have ordered him to be prosecuted for the Orwellian crime of committing "insulting" words.

As Wilders puts it, "If I have to stand trial, I will not stand trial alone, but also with the hundreds of thousands of Dutch people who reject the Islamization of The Netherlands." He will also stand trial with those in The Netherlands and beyond who reject government prosecutions of free speech. In recognition of this dire situation, the IFPS immediately calls on every supporter of free speech to come to the aid of Geert Wilders. To assist in this effort, the IFPS has launched an international campaign in defense of Geert Wilders and his freedom of speech.

To support these efforts, we urge you to contribute to the Geert Wilders Defense Fund. Donation information can be found at the IFPS website at http://www.internationalfreepresssociety.org.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ACT for America
P.O. Box 6884
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
www.actforamerica.org


*************************************************************************************

HATE CRIMES LEGISLATION in the United States

Hardhitting Patriot Preacher Warns Of Fresh Threat From New Congress



By John Tiffany

On Jan. 5, liberal Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee (DTexas) reintroduced so-called hate crimes legislation in Congress. The bill is numbered H.R. 254.Hate crimes laws the brainchild of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of Bnai Brith are found in states and locales across America, but this new measure in Congress would enact a federal hate crime statute.

Essentially, hate crimes laws would add additional criminal penalties upon anyone convicted of a crime against an individual when that crime, according to the proposed legislation, is motivated by the actual or PERCEIVED race, color, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or disability of the victim.

In short, although there are already laws against shooting someone and killing them it's called murder if a perpetrator is found to have committed that crime because of an ALLEGED bias against the victim, it would now be considered a federal crime because of that bias. There will be at least an additional 10 year federal penalty applied, even if for example someone only punched another person. If death results in the course of such a so-called hate crime being committed, a life sentence in prison is provided for under this federal legislation.

This is thought control legislation and a piece of police-state-style social engineering disguised in the mask of fighting hate. And it constitutes not just a toe in the door, but a veritable jackboot, for, in other countries where the ADL and its allied groups have forced the enactment of hate crimes laws, legislation outlawing even criticism of minorities has traditionally followed.

The new hate crimes measure is entitled The David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Actor, as it's being popularly called by its proponents, David's Law. The law is named in memory of a young man who was brutally murdered, sodomized with a lead pipe by his attacker who apparently committed the crime against Ray because Ray was a homosexual.

A hate crimes measure was approved by the House of Representatives in the previous Congress, despite the fact that Republicans were in control of the House at that time. And what many do not realize is that the single use of a racial pejorative, for example, such as the so-called "n" word, can be construed as evidence of a hate crime, even though nasty words are often traded by people engaged in simple fisticuffs.

Or, if a black youth, fighting in the street with a Latino schoolmate, used a racial slur offensive to Latinos, that black youth could be held responsible for a federal hate crime if he struck the Latino in the course of using the inappropriate slur.

Rev. Ted Pike, who has been spearheading opposition to the federal hate crimes laws and who has done so successfully in the past points out that, in other countries, socalled hate crimes legislation has been the toe in the doorway for additional thought control legislation aimed at limiting freedom of speech in general.

For example, if an individual, citing Biblical exhortations against homosexuality, is found to have offended the sensibilities of homosexuals, then that person may be punished for having done so. This is happening today in Canada, in France and in any number of other countries where antihate legislation is in force. Or, if someone criticizes the policies of the Anti-Defamation League or the state of Israel, they may be found to have offended Jewish supporters of Israel and therefore punished for having done so.

The fact that Arab-American organizations have repeatedly joined the ADL-led chorus demanding hate-crimes legislation in America is rather thought-provoking, considering the fact that Arab Americans who frequently criticize Israel would be among the first targeted by the kind of thought control legislation that has traditionally come in the wake of the kind of hate crimes legislation that the ADL is now trying to have enacted at the federal level in the United States.

Now, in the judgment of Pike, because the Democrats are in control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate, there will be an even greater push to get the legislation enacted.

That�s why Pike is urging those who oppose this insidious legislation to redouble their efforts to block H.R. 254 so that it never reaches the floor of the House. H.R. 254 has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee, and Pike suggests that people contact all members of the committee and urge that they oppose the legislation.

Pike suggests that you keep your message short and to the point: �Please don't vote for the David Ray Hate Crimes Prevention Act, H.R.254. Hate laws have taken away free speech in Canada and many European countries.

You can write all of the representatives in question (as well as your own representative and every member of the House) in care of the following general address: U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515. To telephone members of the House, you may use the regular number for the U.S. Capitol switchboard at 1-(202) 224-3121. Or there is a toll free number you may use: 1-877-851-6437.

(Issue #8, February 19, 2007)


Not Copyrighted. Readers can reprint and are free to redistribute - as long as full credit is given to American Free Press - 645 Pennsylvania Avenue SE, Suite 100 Washington, D.C. 20003

Defend Geert Wilders and Freedom of Speech

The International Free Press Society
www.internationalfreepresssociety.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Defend Geert Wilders and Freedom of Speech
For more information, contact:
Lars Hedegaard
President, IFPS
lhedegaard@freepressmonitor.com

Diana West
Vice President
dwest@freepressmonitor.com
(301) 466-0248
January 22, 2009 - Washington, DC and Copenhagen, Denmark: A Dutch court yesterday ordered the criminal prosecution of Geert Wilders, Dutch parliamentarian and leader of the Freedom Party (PVV), for his statements - written, spoken and filmed -regarding Islam. The Amsterdam Court of Appeals has deemed such statements "insulting," declaring that they "substantially harm the religious esteem" of Muslims.
Clearly, the effect of this Dutch court order is to set new limits to public debate in Dutch society, in this case about the highly controversial but nonetheless crucially important subject of Islam. This makes the prosecution of Geert Wilders an unacceptable breach of the sanctity of freedom of speech in Western society.
Having ordered a criminal prosecution for the opinions of a duly elected leader of a legitimate political party, Dutch authorities have dealt a devastating blow to political expression. While Dutch prosecutors prepare their indictment and Geert Wilders' future hangs in limbo, who in The Netherlands will dare discuss political and cultural matters related to Islam - Islamic law, Islamic integration, Islamic crime, Islamic policy - openly, freely and fearlessly? The chilling effect is instantaneous. If, indeed, Wilders is ultimately convicted, free speech will cease to exist in the heart of Europe.
The International Free Press Society believes this court-ordered prosecution against Geert Wilders, a central figure in the fight against the Islamization of the West, amounts to a dangerous concession to the strictures of Islamic law, which prohibits all criticism of Islam, over Western traditions of, and rights to robust and unfettered debate. As such, it is tantamount to a surrender to totalitarian influences that undermine all Western freedoms. And as such, it must be resisted.
It is important to recall recent history. Two Dutchmen, Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh, have been murdered for their outspoken opposition to Islamization in The Netherlands. Another Dutch politician, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, has been infamously forced into exile. Wilders alone now carries this debate over Islam in Dutch society forward - forcefully but logically, outspokenly but reasonably, and always peacefully. In order to do so, this member of Dutch parliament lives in a virtual prison, consigned to 24-hour guard by Islamic death threats against his life. Now, Dutch authorities have ordered him to be prosecuted for the Orwellian crime of committing "insulting" words.
As Wilders puts it, "If I have to stand trial, I will not stand trial alone, but also with the hundreds of thousands of Dutch people who reject the Islamization of The Netherlands." He will also stand trial with those in The Netherlands and beyond who reject government prosecutions of free speech. In recognition of this this dire situation, the IFPS immediately calls on every supporter of free speech to come to the aid of Geert Wilders.To assist in this effort, the IFPS has launched an international campaign in defense of Geert Wilders and his freedom of speech.
To support these efforts, we urge you to contribute to the Geert Wilders Defense Fund. Donation information can be found at the IFPS website at http://www.internationalfreepresssociety.org .
We also urge defenders of free speech to sign this letter of protest against the Dutch Government
http://www.petitiononline.com/wilders/petition.html
Lars Hedegaard
President of the IFPS
lhedegaard@freepressmonitor.com

Diana West
Vice President
dwest@freepressmonitor.com




* * *
The International Free Press Society was established on January 1, 2009.
Read our Policy Statement here
http://www.sappho.dk/the-international-free-press-society-policy-statement.htm
The IFPS Board of Advisors
Asger Aamund
Bat Ye'or
Stephen Coughlin
Rachel Ehrenfeld
David Harris
Ole Hasselbalch
Hans Jansen
Ehsan Jami
Ibn Warraq
Philippe Karsenty
Roger Kimball
Ezra Levant
Andrew C. McCarthy
Nidra Poller
Kathy Shaidle
Roger Scruton
Robert Spencer
Mark Steyn
Allen West
Geert Wilders
The IFPS Board of Directors
Lars Hedegaard, President
Diana West, Vice President
Christine Brim. Secretary
Bjorn Larsen, Treasurer
Edward May, Outreach Coordinator
Paul Belien, Sergeant at Arms

The Obama camp has been threatening television and radio stations to keep them from airing anti-Obama ads.

Obama Wants NRA Ads Banned

Saturday, September 27, 2008 8:10 PM

By: Newsmax staff


The Obama camp has been threatening television and radio stations to keep them from airing anti-Obama ads.


The latest target is the NRA and stations in Pennsylvania.


Earlier this week, the National Rifle Association's Political Victory Fund released a series of radio and television spots to educate gun owners and sportsmen about Barack Obama's longstanding anti-gun record. In response to the NRA-PVF ads, a clearly panicked Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) are doing everything they can to hide Obama's real record by mounting a coordinated assault on the First Amendment.


They have gone to desperate and outrageous lengths to try to silence your NRA by bullying media outlets with threats of lawsuits if they run NRA-PVF's ads.


The Obama camp is particularly angry with an NRA ad entitled "Hunter" which lays out Obama's record on gun control.


You can see the "Hunter" ad -- Go Here Now.


Other NRA ads include "Way of Life" and another focusing on Joe Biden's record, "Defend Freedom, Defeat Obama."


This week, Obama's campaign general counsel Bob Bauer wrote seeking to censor the ads at stations in Pennsylvania.


"Unlike federal candidates, independent political organizations do not have a 'right to command the use of broadcast facilities,'" Bauer writes. "Moreover, you have a duty 'to protect the public from false, misleading or deceptive advertising.'"


"This advertising is false, misleading, and deceptive," Bauer continued. "We request that you immediately cease airing this advertising."


The NRA says Obama's camp are sending out these "intimidating cease and desist letters" to cable operators and television stations, threatening their FCC licenses if they run the ads.


The NRA charged that "Obama and the DNC have been using strong-arm tactics reminiscent of Chicago machine politics to try and cover up the truth and silence NRA by forcing the stations to assist them in hiding Obama's radical anti-gun record."


And now, Obama and the DNC have opened a new front in their assault on your First Amendment rights by calling on their followers to contact these station managers to demand that the stations not run NRA-PVF's ads.


NRA stands behind the accuracy of these ads, and NRA attorneys have responded to the Obama campaign's despicable and abusive attempt to trample on the First Amendment by sending a thorough rebuttal to station managers. This rebuttal clearly and conclusively refutes the Obama campaign's fallacious claims that the ads are inaccurate.


The NRA has set up a web site detailing its position on Obama at www.gunbanobama.com.


A copy of the NRA's letter to station, written by its counsel Cleta Mitchell, follows below:


MEMORANDUM

CLIENT-MATTER NUMBER

999100-0130

TO: Station Managers


FROM: Cleta Mitchell, Esq.

Counsel to National Rifle Association


DATE: September 25, 2008


RE: Documentation for Advertising by National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund ("NRA-PVF")



This firm serves as counsel to the National Rifle Association (“NRA”) and the National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund ("NRA-PVF"), which is the federal political action committee of the NRA and the sponsor of certain advertising purchased and soon-to-be purchased on your station. It has come to my clients’ attention that the Obama for President campaign is engaging in an effort to prevent or stop the airing of certain ads by NRA-PVF, falsely alleging that the ads are ‘inaccurate’. The Obama presidential campaign apparently relies on an article appearing in the Washington Post on September 23, 2008 to support its contention hat the NRA-PVF ads should not be aired.



The Washington Post is hardly an objective news source on any subject related to the issues to which the NRA is dedicated, having spent decades attacking not only the NRA but also fighting against the legislation and policies NRA supports to protect the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, as well as supporting every conceivable government proposal or policy any officeholder or candidate suggests to weaken and disrupt the guarantees of the Second Amendment. It is therefore no surprise that the Washington Post would now attack the NRA for advertisements which truthfully disclose the anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment record of Barack Obama, the candidate supported by the Washington Post.



Attached please find the point-by-point refutation of the Washington Post’s article about the NRA-PVF ads regarding Obama’s record on the Second Amendment, as well as an article disclosing the bias of the decidedly not neutral “FactChecker” on which the Washington Post article is ostensibly based.



The NRA devotes 100% of its time and resources to protecting the Second Amendment and fighting for government policies and legislation furtherance of the rights of the American people to keep and bear arms.



The legislative and policy record of candidates and officeholders such as Barack Obama are well known and documented by the NRA on an ongoing basis. NRA-PVF’s advertising during the 2008 election cycle is based on that extensive research and documentation, which is being furnished to you with this Memorandum.



Accordingly, we respectfully request that your station disregard the shamefully false assertions from the Obama campaign and its attorneys regarding the NRA-PVF ads and that the ads run in accordance with the purchase(s) made by NRA-PVF in the media buy.









© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.