Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN), whose recent Hajj was paid for by a Muslim Brotherhood front group, is unhappy that Senator John Kyl (R-AZ) sponsored a showing of Geert Wilders’s film Fitna at The Capitol yesterday. Yet he does not, of course, explain how anything in the film is inaccurate. And he cannot, because the film is accurate.
“Ellison Expresses Concern and Disappointment with Decision to Screen Anti-Islamic Film: Takes Issue with sponsorship of film by Senator Kyl,” from Common Dreams, February 26 (thanks to Twostellas):
WASHINGTON – February 26 – Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN) took issue with the screening of a film by the controversial Dutch Parliamentarian, Geert Wilders, in the United States Capitol. The film being screened, “Fitna”, is said to compare Islamic terrorism to Nazism. The screening is sponsored by Senator John Kyl (R-AZ).
Yes, Islamic terrorism is much more cuddly than Nazism, eh? Aside from this absurdity there is the nagging problem that neither Ellison nor anyone else who is upset about Fitna ever addresses: the fact that it depicts only the Qur’an and the words of Islamic jihadists themselves. If it is hateful, it is because they are hateful.
“I am a strong an advocate of First Amendment free speech. However, this is not about free speech, but rather an issue of propriety, timing and venue,” Ellison said. “Senator Kyl has every right to host anyone he chooses, however it becomes a question of propriety to use the United States Capitol as a venue for the condemnation of an entire religion,” Ellison said.
Then it is about free speech after all, isn’t it? In the first place, Fitna doesn’t condemn “an entire religion,” but even if it did, why isn’t Senator Kyl free to show such a piece in any venue he chooses?
Mr. Wilders was denied entry by the British government because of his extremist views. A British Home Office spokesman stated: “The government opposes extremism in all its forms.” The Dutch government has disavowed Mr. Wilders visit to this country and believes the release of this film “serves no purpose other than to cause offence.”
Now if only the Dutch government would say the same thing about the jihadists in the Netherlands.
According to the London Telegraph, Wilders has stated that the Qu’ran should be banned.
This is the most common charge made against Wilders — that he is inconsistent. Here is a full answer.
Ellison further stated, “At a time when President Obama has said to the Muslim world, “˜We are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest,’ the showing of a film that denigrates the faith of 1.4 billion of the world’s citizens does not foster mutual respect or mutual interest.
Then let the Islamic jihadists stop denigrating their own faith by acting in the way the film depicts — and when has Ellison expressed the same kind of indignation about that as he directs here against Wilders?