I must admit that i'm surprised to see such a global outrage. Ofcourse you could suspect something like this from moslim countries. But that it would go up all the way to the UN-chief - no i didn't see that one coming.

Posted by: KillJoy at March 30, 2008 8:43 AM

The global outrage actually serves to show how low the West has sunk. On the other hand, Geert's courage might inspire others to "come out" and denounce the texts used by Muslims to suport terrorrism.

Posted by: Crusader at March 30, 2008 8:48 AM

Could it be because the non-Muslim political leadership knows in their hearts and that in the space of a week two men, one a former Muslim that got baptized into the Catholic Church and with Gert Wilders film "Fitna", that the TRUTH about Islam is now starting to come out?

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 30, 2008 8:53 AM

Well - you have to hand it to the islamic propagandists. The Western leaders, Ban Ki-Moon, the Western media and a huge number of Western people have now accepted their argument that being anti-Islam is = being racist.
Of course, nobody wants to be labelled a racist, so everybody better shut up in face of the truth, hadn't they.

There is just one snag: no scientist has as yet found a gene for Islam, or one for Christianity, or one for any other religion.
Religion is not something we inherit like skin colour, hair colour or gender.
If that were the case, then how would it be possible for people to renounce their religion, to convert, or to become atheists or agnostics?

I'm not sure if I should rather lament the weak-kneed submission to the agenda of Islam, or the astonishing lack of knowledge of even a simple biological fact.

Well - its best to lament both, I think.

Posted by: Calon Lan at March 30, 2008 9:09 AM

"...one a former Muslim that got baptized into the Catholic Church"

The Egyptian-Italian journalist had to dismiss the suggestion that his convesion might endanger innocent lives in the Muslim world. He knows that he endangered his own life. He would bear no responsibility for violence against other Catholics.

Posted by: CTYankee at March 30, 2008 9:43 AM

The big question that keeps coming up for me is how do these politicians see this video as an insult to Islam? There is no narrative with the exception of a few surahs that are reflecting what we see.

The behavior in the film is of Muslims and not actors, the hateful, and antisemitic rhetoric that is spoken are from real Muslims, the hateful signs that are being carried is by real Muslims,and the acts of violence are committed by real muslims. Who crashed airliners into the twin towers, real Muslims, who blew up buses and subways in London, real Muslims did, who blew up the train in Madrid, real Muslims did and on and on. The video is but a mirror of the hateful behavior of Muslims toward non Muslims throughout the entire world.

I believe most of thses criticisers have not really seen the film and if they did they would come up with much different conclusions.

How many of us have looked directly into a mirror and said: THAT'S NOT ME! I don't here a peep out of the so called moderate Muslims.

Posted by: Mackie at March 30, 2008 9:46 AM

In "Fitna" not a single word until the very end that was heard, or that was seen on screen, was spoken or written by a non-Muslim. Every passage displayed was from the Qur'an. Every speaker was a devout Muslim. The only words spoken by a non-Muslim are at the very end: the words that explain that the sound of the ripping page was of one not from the Qur'an, but from a phone book, because "it is not for" non-Muslims to rip a symbolic page -- the page of violence, hatred, jihad to subdue the Infidel and ensure the dominance of Islam and rule by Muslims -- from the Qur'an, as from the other implicated texts of Islam (Hadith, Sira), but for Muslims to metaphorically do so -- a challenge to them, a task for them.

And that's it. The rest is all from Islam and from Muslims.

For Foreign Minister Stephen Smith of Australia to denounce a text that is both an act of pedagogy, and an appeal, as hate-mongering, disgusts. That the same Foreign Minister appears to believe that an attempt to present certain undeniable -- but by Westerns such as himself, so nervously, so nearly hysterically, denied -- as "racism" when he knows perfectly well that an ideology is not a race, and that David Hicks, and Adam Gadahn, and John Walker Lindh, are every bit as malign and dangerous to Infidels as were Atta and his nineteen immediate collaborators, or those in Indonesia who murdered so many Australian tourists in Bali, shows a misguided attempt at the "pre-emptive cringe." Does Smith, do others in the Western world who utter this kind of thing really believe it?

Some, no doubt, are confused because they cannot believe that a billion people could possibly accept such malign doctrines. But that is not what the movie "Fitna" argues. It is not what it suggests. It attempts to show the most obvious truth: that tbe texts of Islam, those that are being, and have been in the past, since the beginning of Islam, taken to heart, are dangerous to Infidels. Muslims who do not take those passages -- in the Qur'an, the immutable and uncreated Word of God -- to heart, may not do so for a variety of reasons. They may be illiterate villagers, whose Islam consists only of the Five Pillars, and who somehow remained largely unaware of the rest, though they have always known that they were "Muslims," that this "Muslim" identity was the main thing in their lives, and that loyalty was owed to Islam and to the Umma, and that this tended -- look at all the accounts, over the centuries, by European travellers, by Hindu historians, by Christians who endured Muslim rule (Arakel of Tabriz, the celebrated Armenian whose chronicles have just been re-published in a scholarly translation), by Jews (see Maimonides' Epistle to the Yemen, see Benjamin of Tudela), and no doubt there are also Zoroastrians who have left their accounts.

What do they say, all those chroniclers and historians? Does Foreign Minister Smith know? Does he care to find out? What do the Western scholars of Islam say about the history of Islamic conquest, what prompted it, and what happened to the non-Muslims in the lands that were conquered, over the past 1350 years? Does he know that for a very long period, and especially in that century between roughly 1860 and 1960, before the Great Inhibition, all kinds of Western scholars, German and Dutch and Italian and Russian and English and American and Spanish, studied Islam and the history of Islamic conquest, and their works are not to be ignored nor denied, in the intolerable rush to embrace the assorted espositos and armstrongs, who have nothing like the learning of Schacht, Snouck Hurgronje, Jeffrey, Zwemer, Lammens, Dufourcq, and hundreds of others.

This kind of thing cannot be endured. It is not for this or that temporary placeholder in the Western world to decide, peremptorily, because he lacks the wit to figure out how to talk, intelligently, about the meaning and menace of Islam, in a way that cannot be denied, and lacks the wit to figure out the minimal measures that can be taken, if he is to fulfill the duty that high government officials in democracies all have, expressly or by implication, which is to both instruct and to protect those who, by electing them, or those who appointed them, have entrusted these officials with certain responsiblities, and expect moare than the kind of idiocy that Foreign Stephen thinks is acceptable, thinks will satisfy.

Posted by: Hugh at March 30, 2008 9:57 AM

""In Australia we believe in the right to freedom of expression but we don't believe in abusing that right to incite racial hatred."..."

Well doesn't that mean you don't believe in the right to freedom of expression.
Given that the film didn't actually incite anyone to do anything.
What have we come to, is this the end result of universal sufferage?
Criticising an intolerant, bigotted, vicious, and sexist ideology is now "incitement". If only Hitler were alive today.
I feel a backlash coming, a tsunami of biblically nasty proportions. The only people who will be surprised are witless idiots like this one.

Posted by: Ian at March 30, 2008 10:03 AM

Sadly, my beloved Australia has gone from having a centre-right government headed by a winner of the award for International Anti-Dhimmi of the year, to a left-wing government just full of dhimmis.

Smith is not MY Foreign Minister. He does not speak for me.

Unfortunately, the MSM in Australia are just as left-wing as in the US.

Posted by: John of South Australia at March 30, 2008 10:14 AM

What is the insult? Fitna was a mirror held up to islam and it's believers.

Are there no freedom loving people in the civilized world? Is there no one to say enough!?
I am afraid the majority will "go along to get along" until it is too late.

This must be the strong delusion spoken of in scripture. {Laugh if you must, but what is your answer to what is happening to otherwise intelligent people?}

Posted by: interestinconundrum at March 30, 2008 11:47 AM

"What race is islam?"

It's whatever race that is compelled to violence in the name of allah. Oh wait, that makes it more of an ideology instead of a race issue, doesn't it?

Also, if one is born muslim, but converts to another religion, then can't be race, because one can't convert to another race, can they?

Posted by: PorkFatRules at March 30, 2008 11:59 AM

while Mr. Smith called fitna racism it makes you wonder could Muslims be really be Australian?
this is the only religion that claims to be a race in a Muslims don't like what they saw in the film with other devout Muslims killing people waving swords and calling for the death other people or the attacks on 9/11 that had a lot of them dancing in joy in the streets they shouldn't be complaining so loudly as Shakespeare said methinks the man doth
protest too much and it seems like it's one of the things that Muslims are good at doing anytime they think someone is insulted Islam or the Koran or their beloved prophet Mohammed who in my opinion it is alive today would be locked up in the local funny Farm the criminally insane sexual predators
I'm almost tempted to post a video on you tube of a Koran being ripped into for real with the caption go ahead and prove your religion is not a religion of peace by threatening violence based on your religion

Posted by: crusader at March 30, 2008 12:23 PM

Yes, a mirror. For magistrates, and others.

Posted by: Hugh at March 30, 2008 12:23 PM

More pathetic hypocrisy. But when the government of Islamic countries support and finance blatant anti-Semitic crivel in their media, where is the howl of outrage. Meanwhile, how many people have the Sudanese murdered in the last 20 years thanks to sharia'h, the outrage against them is 1/20th the outratge against Fitna.

Posted by: Dumbo at March 30, 2008 12:41 PM

In Australia we believe in the right to freedom of expression but we don't believe in abusing that right to incite racial hatred."...

Are we sure this bloke is really from 'stralia? I doubt his opinion is shared by most Aussies.

Posted by: tanstaafl at March 30, 2008 12:45 PM

Let's change the text a little.

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith found Geert Wilders' film Fitna, and the factual content therein, "highly offensive".

There you go Stevie…fixed it for ya…

Posted by: raisethedrawbridge at March 30, 2008 12:47 PM

The familiar kneejerk "condemnation" of what they have obviously not viewed, and have no factual basis to judge, is laughable.

Just read the damned Koran.

A compact of intolerance and terror.

Sugar-coated with the meaningless word "compassion" at intervals to fool the superficial and unwary.

Of which the West is lavishly larded.

Posted by: profitsbeard at March 30, 2008 1:06 PM

What "race" is Islam?

The Disg race.

Posted by: profitsbeard at March 30, 2008 1:10 PM

The ignorance of history on the part of our “leaders” is the problem. “Radical Islam” is not something that arose recently in response to Western political or cultural imperialism. Throughout history, the success of Islam was dependent on the very same methods and ideology. The following is a summary of the history of the way in which Islam spread:

The following territories were conquered by Arab Muslims through jihad – war and terror:
Syria/Palestine between 633 and 640
Iraq 634 - 641
Egypt 640 - 646
Persia 640 - 651
Maghreb (NW Africa) 643 - 709
Sudan 651- 1500

The following were conquered after jihad waged by Arab Muslims and recently converted Persians:
Cent. Asia/Afghanistan 699 - 930
Western India/Sind 710 - 870

The following were conquered by Arab Muslims and Berber converts:
Spain 711 - 732
Sicily 827 - 902

Eastern/Central Anatolia was conquered by the Seljuk Turks between 1071 and 1240.

The Ottoman Turks waging a series of jihads conquered Western/Northern Anatolia between 1301 and 1461, and the Balkans/Central Europe between 1353 and 1526.

Most of India was conquered by Turks and Moguls via a long bloody series of jihads between 1001 and 1700.

The Crimea and Southern Russia were conquered by Mongol converts, the Golden Horde between 1313 and 1341.

Much of West Africa was brought under Muslim rule by Berbers using both Jihad conquest and trade, including the Slave trade between 1061 and 1893. The slave trade was also important in bringing the East African Coast under Muslim rule by Arab traders and missionaries between 850 and 1885.

Trade, missionary activity and jihad by Arabs, Persians and Turks brought Islam to Sinkiang between 750 and 1513. During the same period Muslim traders penetrated into the interior parts of China. Malaya and Indonesia were initially Islamized by Arabs and Indian Muslim traders and missionaries followed by a series of jihads between 1292 and 1800.

In almost every instance jihad was the means by which Islam spread. In a few instances Islam first attained a foothold through trade and missionary activity; but even here once local rulers were converted they found the ideology of jihad an extremely useful way of conquering their neighbors. Only in China, where the Chinese or Mongol authorities were in firm control, the isolated descendants of Muslim traders were unable to establish states and wage jihad. In this instance Muslims remained a small minority; an example of the very limited appeal that Islam held for civilized and sophisticated populations.

Islam’s appeal was always to primitive or nomadic populations, notably Arabs, Turks, Berbers etc. More civilized peoples only adopted Islam through coercive means. These were conquest, persecution, economic oppression including the jizya, uprooting of entire populations and enslavement including mass sexual slavery. In addition, initial Muslim conquests invariably opened up territories to even more primitive Muslim groups who violated the contract of dhimmitude and inflicted even more pain on civilized populations inducing further mass conversions. So it was in Anatolia, North Africa and India.

At this time Muslims are entering the West as immigrants. But as occurred in Southeast Asia and West Africa, once they have established large enclaves, more active forms of jihad are inevitable. We are witnessing the beginning stages of this process. I challenge anyone to refute this historical analysis.

Of course, Muslims and their apologists will use a “tu quoque” argument with respect to Christianity. But while Christians were pretty adept at waging war in violation of their scriptural imperatives; and while they were most efficient at persecuting non-believers and heretics once they attained state power; Christianity in its early years did not spread through violence. It was only after the counter-jihads known as the Crusades and Reconquista that Christians deliberately used warfare to spread the faith. At that time orders of Crusader knights, in imitation of their Muslim opponents conquered and converted pagan populations in northeast Europe. And Spanish conquistadors, in imitation of their erstwhile Muslim masters happily spread Christianity via warfare in the New World.

Posted by: RBLA at March 30, 2008 1:36 PM

The negative reaction to Fitna is downheartening. You'd expect it from muslims, but from our own?

And Al Gore thinks his truth is inconvenient. It's got nothing on the truth about islam.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at March 30, 2008 2:08 PM

The film is further supported by the very words and actions of Muslims themselves. Sorry, but there aren't enough film makers to cover it all.

You can view the film in real time simply by watching Muslims-B-Muslims.

Posted by: champ at March 30, 2008 2:40 PM

I think the Australian foreign ministers comments are political. He will judge a work of art, which a film is by definition, by political considerations. This sort of politically motivated review is not the sole province of the left, though they seem to be the ones to grab the megaphone lately.

Our conservative president also would probably side with the australian foreign minister, because the political ideology that both probably adhere to generally is globalization. Both would prefer that artists not incite recognition of cultural differences that could ameliorate the dream of a world community where the elites rule and dispose of the pie, slicing it however they like.

Personally, I feel that the globalization ideology is a delusion for most, and that the reality is that globalization frees some of the elites from inconvenient laws and mores that have evolved in the various cultures in the world.

Posted by: stickman at March 30, 2008 2:46 PM

Western leaders are not stupid. They have families and political interests and are naturally worried about reprisals. They are acting quite rationally.

Peace.

Posted by: SmartGrowthAdvocate at March 30, 2008 2:49 PM

The stupidity and ignorance of the Australians is reflected in the fact that they knew Rudd's agenda and they voted him in!

They deserve him.

Posted by: Armoured Passionfruit at March 30, 2008 3:27 PM

From above:

"They have families and political interests and are naturally worried about reprisals."

Most of us have families, interests and fear 'reprisals', but that doesn't mean that we need to crawl , lie and deny the obvious and make fools of ourselves.

Besides, if this Stephen Smith fellow is concerned about his family he should ensure that his kids have a future that's not Islamic.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at March 30, 2008 3:38 PM

Hugh,there is indeed much wisdom to be found in those authors you cite prior to "the Great Inhibition." It would truly be astonishing and delightful,not to mention essential for civilization's "Great Prolongation",to find the works of a Georges Vajda,St.Clair Tisdall, Joseph Schacht amongst others in a mainstream Borders or Barnes & Noble as opposed to a clerk's clueless expression.

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at March 30, 2008 3:39 PM

Stephen Smith is another brainless antipodean. Bring back Howard!

Posted by: johndoe at March 30, 2008 3:40 PM

Of course, Muslims and their apologists will use a “tu quoque” argument with respect to Christianity. But while Christians were pretty adept at waging war in violation of their scriptural imperatives; and while they were most efficient at persecuting non-believers and heretics once they attained state power; Christianity in its early years did not spread through violence. It was only after the counter-jihads known as the Crusades and Reconquista that Christians deliberately used warfare to spread the faith. At that time orders of Crusader knights, in imitation of their Muslim opponents conquered and converted pagan populations in northeast Europe. And Spanish conquistadors, in imitation of their erstwhile Muslim masters happily spread Christianity via warfare in the New World.
Posted by: RBLA

This is the lesson the West must learn once again, since it forgot its lessons learned centuries ago, that there is no co-existence with Islam anywhere, ever. Does this mean a new Crusades? No, mostly it means combatting Islamic encroachments upon our rights, something FM Smith seems to have either never learned, or forgotten. History is proof enough, from Spain and Sicily to India and Indonesia, that the barbaric cult of Mohammed can never make peace with our freedoms, not even with their own submitted ones, but offer only conflict, slavery, and war for all time to come. Their moral imperative to enslave the whole world for their idiot god Allah disgusts modern civilized sentiments. They have nothing to offer us, but much to take away. Beware of fools like FM Smith, because they do not understand how dangerous is this world domination Jihad ideology today, as it had been dangerous for the past 1400 years. If we forget our history, our descendants will curse us for this present mental lapse of intellect, and they will be the ones to regain their natural freedoms and human rights. We fail them if we do not stop Islamic world domination now. Fitna is our first real return fire. There must be more where this came from, and hit them again and again until they cower back into the black hole they came from. Freedom will win.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at March 30, 2008 3:49 PM

Right you are Sheik yer'mami,

The only "reprisals" Western leaders need be concerned with first and foremost,are those from their own constituency. The loyalty of the legions designated to protect the aristocrats was often unpredictable. No one is truly holding any elected officials hostage despite any wet dreams to the contrary. It's simply a matter of said officials desiring to appease a newly formed voting bloc. Such a scab won't fester forever.

Posted by: kafir world at March 30, 2008 3:50 PM

The Emperor's New Clothes

From Wikipedia, for Mr. Smith, who clearly hasn't read the tale:

An emperor who cares too much about clothes hires two swindlers who promise him the finest suit of clothes from the most beautiful cloth. This cloth, they tell him, is invisible to anyone who was either stupid or not fit for his position. The Emperor is nervous about being able to see the cloth himself so he sends his ministers to view it. They see nothing yet praise the cloth. When the swindlers report a suit of clothes has been fashioned, the Emperor allows himself to be dressed in their creation for a procession through town. During the course of the procession, a small child cries out, "But he has nothing on!" The crowd realizes the child is telling the truth and begins laughing. The Emperor, however, holds his head high and continues the procession.

Mr. Smith (aka "The Emperor") has played his role, proudly preening himself, dressed in multiculturalism, diversity, tolerance, etc. Now it is time for us to play our role, and point and laugh, then run the swindlers (the Islamist lobby who manipulated his vanity, self-righteousness and his greed) out of town.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 30, 2008 4:30 PM

Why do educated people from the West declare this movie to be anti-Islamic, racist, bigoted, unfair, hateful, offensive, blah-blah?

It's got images of what Islamists have done in the name of their religion;
It's got the texts from their holy book which they have used as justification for their acts.

The movie holds a mirror up to Islam: it reflects Islam's beliefs, its texts, and its behaviors. (And, not incidentally, it illuminates some of the -->ah, THAT must be where critics come up with those words

But the movie shows reality. Nobody fudged anything. It displays the truth.

It may be an unpleasant truth, as far as Muslims who want to ignore the barbarous history and texts of their religion. And I'm sure it's annoying to Western liberals who pretend to believe Islam is the moral equivalent of Judaism, or Christianity, or Buddhism. But that doesn't make the movie itself evil or hateful. However, I'm starting to believe that these name-callers who so steadfastly "hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil" in regard to Islam are engaging in mental gymnastics to avoid acknowledging that they are complicit with this enemy of civilization they refuse to notice, or identify, or denounce.

PS - buy Dutch!

PPS - very interesting article I found today - Islam as a memplex & how it replicates successfully
http://citizenwarrior2.blogspot.com/2007/10/terrifying-brilliance-of-islamic.html

Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at March 30, 2008 4:44 PM

Son-of-a-gun, some of my words got omitted:

The movie holds a mirror up to Islam: it reflects Islam's beliefs, its texts, and its behaviors. (And, not incidentally, it illuminates some of the -ah, THAT must be where critics come up with those words- offensive and hateful proclamations of Islam's religious teachers and preachers.)

Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse at March 30, 2008 4:49 PM

Hugh,

Thanks for that interesting list of authors.

I shall try looking a few of them up.

LIke others, I am sorry for Australia under her present Leftist Government. I hope they recover their past good sense before it is too late.

Elections in Oz come around pretty frequently. Maybe in just over 2 years Rudd will be gone. Here's hoping.

Posted by: david at March 30, 2008 4:54 PM

The movie holds a mirror up to Islam: it reflects Islam's beliefs, its texts, and its behaviors. (And, not incidentally, it illuminates some of the -ah, THAT must be where critics come up with those words- offensive and hateful proclamations of Islam's religious teachers and preachers.)
Posted by: A_Nonny_Mouse

It's even more intense than that. As I mentioned in my other post, http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/020500.php#c527058 , by holding up to Islam a mirror of itself Fitna forces them into retreat, so they must (in their typically sleazy Islamic way) divert attention from what the mirror clearly shows, their world domination supremacist ideology. The same thing happens for those of our leadership, such as FM Smith, who suddenly see the reality of Islam to become defensive and evasive, because their own agenda is now at stake and they themselves feel threatened by the mirror. For him to admit that the documentary Fitna is correct would necessitate he (and others like him) now take a stand against Islamic Jihad, but he is afraid to do that. Who wants to be in Islamic Jihad's cross-hairs, with commensurate threats to his life and that of his family? This would take a courage these pols do not have! They never assumed office thinking they would need to fight a war. Ditto for all those bureaucrats (dhimmis) of the EU, since they are ill equipped to fight a war, whether of ideas or for real, since they never imagined themselves, whether or not elected, in this position. What started initially as a war of intellect, such as we have here in JW/DW, has now morphed into a popular war at the gut level, such as Fitna hits right at the belt. This is why it is the first real return fire, because now everybody and anybody can see it, and in a few minutes understand exactly what the Islamic threat to our free way of life is about. So the defensive posture of these pols and bureaucrats is the easiest way out for them, since they are ill equipped to fight a war, and that is why they all condemn Fitna as "offensive and hateful".

Of course, it is offensive to see what Islam is up to, but it is not hateful in how it was depicted since the film uses their own words (in the same way Robert Spencer uses their own scriptural texts) except in how those words themselves are "offensive and hateful", as spoken by Islamists. The strategy should be, in order to confront Islamic ambitions of world domination, is to keep showing them to themselves, and in the process make it a popular sport to laugh at their idiotic violence, and show how primitively barbaric Mohammed's call to Allah dominating the world really is. They will then retreat into deceitful evasiveness, but we should not let up on them, and keep showing them the mirror. Either of two things will then happen: 1) they ratchet up their violence, to which we continue holding up the mirror of their own horror, or 2) they quiet down, in which case we are winning as they retreat further. Keep this up until there is mass defection out of Islam, and this war can be won without ever firing a shot. However, the likes of Smith and company only make the real war more likely, because they abrogate their social responsibility since they never envisioned themselves in this position. They are cowards, so are not up to the sport, and their cowardly condemnations only increases the likelihood of WW III with Islam. If the 'moderate' Muslims (who either are cowed by their own coreligionsits or quietly going about their non-Islamic business) would support critique of their world domination Mullahs ambitions, this future war can be averted. But they appear as cowardly as Smith and company, so not too optimistic on that front. Rather, it is up to us who understand our freedoms at stake to keep pushing them, and hold up the mirror at eye level so they can really see themselves as 7th century primitive violent barbarians, until they retreat into their evasive mode. But each such retreat is our victory. The Mullahs must be made to feel the heat of their own Jihad, which translates into the heat all Muslims feel for their clerics, and either disown them or pay the price. Freedom always wins, but how much do they really want this fight? Either way, we will win it. They're just primitives, deceitful and nasty, but primitives nevertheless. And if they resist, deport them.

Posted by: Battle_of_Tours at March 30, 2008 5:46 PM

Ladies and gentlemen

I have just sent off a stiff email letter to Minister Stephen Smith and given him a flea in the ear. I suggested, at the end of it, that a more honorable course of action would be to a. arrange for a viewing of 'Fitna' by all sitting parliamentarians in Australia b. contact the Dutch government and urge them to support Mr Wilders instead of disowning him c. to pay Mr Wilders for the right to publicly broadcast 'Fitna' on our national television station and d. to formally invite, and pay for, Mr Wilders to visit Australia and address our parliamentarians, state and federal. He won't do it - but if he gets 1000 letters saying the same, maybe he'll start to wonder.

He will get a letter in the post as well, making similar points, just to make sure he 'gets' it, within the week. Just for fun I think I will enclose with that, a copy of 'Fitna' on disk, complete with Mr Kurt Westergaard's splendid cartoon printed onto it by way of embellishment; and a nice print-out of a file I possess, entitled 'Muslim Texts of Terror' (much thanks to Mr Spencer and many other people on this site).

Please: all my fellow Australians reading or posting here, but also anyone else from other countires, who shares my dismay, do the same. Email! Ring! Write! Bury FM Stephen Smith under a mountain of correspondence defending Mr Wilders' right to freedom of speech - not to mention his right to 'diss' the Muslim mafia without getting killed.

Make the same points to the Shadow Foreign Minister - with any luck he'll screw up courage to challenge Smith on this one.

If anyone else here - Australian, or not Australian - wishes to do the same, here is the needful information:

Title: Minister for Foreign Affairs; Deputy Leader of the House.
Party: Australian Labor Party

Parliament House Contact:

PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Tel: (02) 6277 7500 [just add the code for Australia to the front of this number, if you are ringing from overseas].
Fax: (02) 6273 4112

Email: Stephen.Smith.MP@aph.gov.au

Within the email or letter the appropriate salutation, according to the helpful info on the Australian Parliament House website, is Dear Minister, and one signs off 'yours faithfully'.

Shoutout to sheikyermami and all my fellow Aussies reading and lurking here - it's high time we Aussies organised the mailout - or better, the personal presentation, by their constituents - of a copy of 'The Truth About Muhammad' and 'PIG to Islam and the Crusades' to every sitting parliamentarian in Australia, with copies of 'Fitna' and 'What the West Needs to Know' tucked inside the front cover for good measure.

I'd be happy to buy copies to give to the Federal Treasurer, who happens to be my Federal MP.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at March 30, 2008 8:52 PM

Foreign Minister Stephen Smith said Geert Wilders' film Fitna equated Islam with acts of terror and violence and was "highly offensive".

Well, Mr. Foreign Minister, you got the first part right. The film does, indeed, equate Islam with acts of terror and violence, just as we see being played out every day in the world. But we find YOUR willful ignorance to facts that are plainly evident to anyone with eyes to see to go beyond being "highly offensive" they are downright dangerous.

No doubt some Muslims might find themselves being offended by the film, but so what? This would all go away if Islam would simply clean its own house of the stench emanating from it instead of attacking neighbors who complain about the smell.

Posted by: Eastview at March 30, 2008 9:13 PM

Here are the contact details for the Australian Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Hon Andrew Robb, MP:

The Hon Andrew Robb AO, MP

Party: Liberal Party of Australia

Parliament House Contact

PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600

Tel: (02) 6277 2062
Fax: (02) 6277 8525

Email: Andrew.Robb.MP@aph.gov.au

Send him an email and a letter, too - and a copy of 'Fitna', and a heartfelt recommendation to read Robert Spencer's "The Truth About Muhammad".

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at March 30, 2008 9:51 PM

Australia is condemning FITNA? I thought at least they had some sense.

Posted by: PersonOfTheBook at March 30, 2008 11:08 PM

This government is infested with commies and marxists, so it's to be expected. The deputy prime-minster is a radical leftist, so, in short, we are stuffed.

Posted by: savitch at March 31, 2008 1:51 AM

According to FM Smith's office, he has not seen Fitna, but was told by advisers how to respond to this film.

Anyone who wishes to email him:

Stephen.Smith.MP@aph.gov.au

Posted by: carpediadem at March 31, 2008 1:58 AM

Whoops, sorry Dumbledore's army, I've duplicated the email.

Didn't read all the posts first.

Posted by: carpediadem at March 31, 2008 2:00 AM

My email to Stephen Smith at Stephen.Smith.MP@aph.gov.au

Dear Mr. Smith,

It is with some ire that I read in The Age that you found the short film produced by Mr Geert Wilders offensive. I wonder if you saw the same film that I did.

(link here: http://news.theage.com.au/australia-denounces-antiislam-film/20080330-22gl.html )

Mr Wilders had very little to say throughout the film; rather, the words and actions of some people spoke for themselves, and those people made themselves quite clear.

With respect to the film being "racist," as so many are claiming and you appear to support, I would ask you: what race are muslims? I would dearly appreciate finding that out one day, as those who follow islam tend to come from a range of ethnicities.

It is a sad day when Australians are not prepared to back the little bloke, and would rather back down from a fight than confront a situation head on, but I guess that's what happens when too much time is spent worrying about appearing to do the right thing.

I guess it's easier than doing what should be done - in this case, confronting jihadis head on and calling them on their own incendiary behaviour.

It is about time that those who take advantage of our Western civilisation (wherever they are in the world), were held accountable for their words and actions. If it means that they are upset and threaten violence over 16 minutes of quotes and television news clips, then so be it.

If they wish to claim that christians, and jews and buddhists and atheists are also as violent, let them produce their own films rather than rioting and killing people - and there will be murder for this, I have no doubt.

That is not the fault of Mr Wilders.

It is the fault of those who commit the murder and those who enable this to happen.

Please allow me to express my disgust at this spineless stance; it is well-documented that those who call themselves muslim and claim that they are acting in the name of Allah quote the quran and other sources of islamic jurisprudence.

Perhaps it is about time that our Foreign Ministers take a closer look at what is written in the words of Mohammed and those who chronicled his life and times and the example he set, rather than cowering before the rhetoric of a violent minority.

Our history of standing up to oppression is unparalleled in the world, and our forces are highly respected wherever they go, so there is no excuse to bow down because a minority of muslims believe that we should do things their way or else.

As Australians, we should be supporting Mr Wilders and his stance against criminal behaviour from a particular group in his society.

If we don't stand up to this sort of aggressive behaviour, and support those in other countries who likewise stand, then who will?

Yours sincerely,

Leigh Drummond.

Posted by: L.Drummond at March 31, 2008 2:23 AM

I've been lurking here for a few years now and learned heaps -- also have a very good library of R Spencer's works, inter alia, plus Fregosi, Bostom, Ibn Warraq etc. I've just emailed Foreign Minister SSmith and will be sending a follow-up letter to both him and Andrew Robb (Shadow) As has already been said here before, if enough of us do this, he'll have to have another look -- or a first look, at Fitna.

Posted by: jewcat at March 31, 2008 2:49 AM

Where was all this global outrage when three little Christian schoolgirls were beheaded on their way home from school in Indonesia a few years ago??

You'd think Geert Wilders had shot someone to death, slit their throat, and stabbed a note to their chest. Oh wait, no, that was done by yet another murderous Muslim filled with the peaceful messages of the Koran and other Islamic inspirations. isn't it odd how no one from other other religions seems to engage in that kind of barbarity today? Such a coincidence!

There's just something about Islam isn't there?

"What are you, some kind of Islamophobe?! Islam is no more violent than any other religion!"

Keep living in your make-believe bubble but it will burst soon enough.

Posted by: alexon at March 31, 2008 4:28 AM

dumbledores,

you can contact me anytime if you wish to connect...

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at March 31, 2008 10:40 AM

Smith just betrays his crass ignorance and his supine craven attitude. If Omar Bakri Mohammed could not find it offensive, why should Stephen Smith?

Wilders portrays Islam as it IS.

Western leaders portray themselves in reaction to it as they ARE - weak-kneed, self-serving, men of straw.

A perfect reflection in other words.

Posted by: devorgilla at March 31, 2008 10:40 AM

How's THIS for offensive: "I have been made victorious through terror--" al-lah tells Muhammad in the Kuran!

The passage exists. That's proof positive that Islam TEACHES people to commit terrorist attacks on non-Muslim targets.

One wonders why therefore Islam and the Kuran haven't been targeted by western authorities for sponsoring terrorism, which they actually do.

Posted by: pythagoras at March 31, 2008 2:24 PM

Aussie Foreign Minister: Fitna's connection of Islam with acts of violence "offensive"

Diaper change for Aussie Foreign Minister, STAT!

Posted by: RalphInfidel at March 31, 2008 3:59 PM

stephen smith its a shame gutless patehtic examples of decaying fungus like you exist to kneel down as a dhimmi to the moon god of muslims, Stephen Smith get a fricken education
and come to Jihadwatch and learn something
you and other pathetic spineless labour socialists are to blame for letting muzzies into australia in under jeff keating or whatever that asswipes name was in the first place
Look around you ol steve baby- smell the air after bali bombing, Beslans massacre of the kids???? smell the air after 911 did you?
it is pathetic and frankly your an embaressment to australia to dare to say islamis not violent
shows how dum assed you are, how non educated
I may be poor white trash mate but I am better educated about islam than you morons in government ever will be
Liberals kept them on a leash at least a while, labors too busy kissing ass to grow a back bone
wake up steve...grow up and show some backbone you gutless poor excuse for a human being aussie throwback to t he dark ages

Posted by: Reverend_Kelly_Kuffir at April 1, 2008 4:41 AM

I never voted for Ruddy darn fuddy and his dhimmi wits
I voted for Howard

Posted by: Reverend_Kelly_Kuffir at April 1, 2008 4:45 AM