« Conservative plans for the railways revealed | Main | Francis Maude pledges to change the culture of civil service recruitment »

Comments

It's behaviour like this from people like Grayling that are driving the massive resurgence in BNP support.

In the aftermath of the Euro elections, when we're looking for people to blame for what happened, I strongly suggest angry fingers be pointed at Grayling and anybody else that was involved in this hateful decision.

Freedom of speech or freedom of expression to be more accurate, is a matter which calls into question the essence of civil liberty in Britain and elsewhere. It appears some are quite inconsistent when seeking to liberate or liberalise whole populations by enforcing multiculturalism without any democratic mandate to do so, yet are the first to raise a red flag if people resent the trouble it brings. The recent expulsion from Britain of Dutch MP Geert Wilders, travelling no further than Heathrow under invitation of Lord Pearson and others who wished to discuss the subject of his film 'Fitna' which is freely available on the internet, begins to highlight the inequitable policies of the British Government which appears simply to ban the things they don't like.

It doesn't really matter whether you agree or disagree with what Geert Wilders says, but it matters whether we have a right to argue against policies which have no public mandate which some might think contradict their well being. No one could really argue that the activities of terrorists remain unlawful, or that the limits of free speech should not extend to those who seek to incite violence for they have indeed trangressed the limits of normal and reasonable levels of free of speech. Yet, Geert Wilders was surely unlikely to have incited members of the House of Lords to violence with the showing and explanation of his views on Islam. This was not ever going to fall under the public order act if he was within the confines of Westminster Palace was it?

The media are reporting Geert Wilders expulsion, and are at liberty to say what they like about him. The BBC has referred to him a a "far right" Dutch Politician, and basically fail to see the inconsistency here, when a government and the media can simply ban and undermine a guys views without telling us what they are or allowing him to explain them, and acting itself rather far right I would say?

Personally, I haven't watched the Fitna film but I've heard about it. I also understand that Geert Wilders is said to have called for the Koran to be banned. Firstly, it must be remembered that the society which he comes from has already banned Mein Kampf, so essentially Geert Wilders is doing nothing more than calling for what he sees as an 'equal' banning of another book which he apparently thinks is worthy of such a ban presumably by the same perceptions which exist in his own country over Mein Kampf. To call for a ban of the Koran is to him I guess, "okay" or pretty reasonable given what he believes it to contain.

Someone said "This wouldn't happen if someone wanted to ban the bible", so does that not tell the tale I expect Geert Wilders was said to refer to?

Since his expulsion, Geert Wilders has called Gordon Brown the "biggest coward in Europe", and on this issue I have to agree with him. For freedom of expression cannot be held against some and not others, and those who hold an alternate opinion, may just be the ones who actually prevent us being led off a cliff by someone who won't listen to any other views but his own.

If Grayling will not defend the right to free speech which does not encourage violence, then Grayling is a tool and will drop to the lowest ratings in the next survey.

Grayling's limp-wristed response is, unfortunately, all too predictable, the Tories should be ashamed of themselves. For every Muslim vote that Cameron hopes to glean he will lose two to UKIP.

"If Geert Wilders has expressed views that represent a threat to public security, then we support the ban."

How can "views" ever be a "threat to public safety"? If he's planning violence, or inciting others, then that's criminal, and presumably he can then be arrested and charged. Otherwise, as an EU citizen, he's free to come and go as he likes, even if it annoys socialists (and let's face it, socialism has caused more suffering in the world over the years than racism has, so if we're banning anything, we know who's ahead in the queue).

Pathetic response.
I am still awaiting the police to act on the Channel 4 programme on muslim preachers. I expect Grayling to at least demand their removal from this country.

I have changed my view of this banning of an elected parliamentarian and a NATO Ally. At first I was outreaged but because of the cack handed way the Government have handled things , Wilders has achieved massive publicity and now more people will know the threat the Islamic extemeism presents to all of us.

@HF:

You're absolutely right that he's acted like a tool by not defending free speech that does not encourage violence.

The questions remain unanswered though: (a) why has he done this, and (b) if David Cameron knew he was not up to the job of SHAHOS, why was he appointed?

To be fair, if I was being threatened by these islamist bullies I'd be a quivering cowardly wreck too.

I concur with 'Rude Tory', who described the statement from Grayling as "weak, weak, weak". Today has been a bad day for the leadership. Today is the day I actually questioned how different we really are from Labour. Not something DC should want the electorate to do in these times.

No wonder support for fringe parties has been rising. The current economic and political climate is a great time for a new party. You would think someone like UKIP would take the opportunity to rebrand/relaunch with a new charismatic leader.

"For every Muslim vote that Cameron hopes to glean he will lose two to UKIP."

Wishful thinking, it will probably be the BNP who gain from this. Politicians laugh at UKIP, they are scared of the BNP. Voters realise this and will vote accordingly.

I am very disappointed but not surprised at the official Conservative Leadership's response.

Thanks however to the Internet those who wish can see and hear the words of Geert Wilders whether our Home Secretary or David (Call me Dave)Cameron like it or not.

One wonders why the electorate seem convinced that "we" are all the same, when we have dreadful little New Labour apologists like Chris Grayling sitting on our front bench, claiming to speak for *us*.

It makes me furious.

Norm Brainer:
"I'm starting to worry that they would act the same as laboure if they were in power"
But they do, Norm, they always do. That's the point. I had a lot of time for Mrs T but it's a sad fact that even under her vigorous leadership, while the economy arose from its previous moribund Labour-induced state, the government still took huge amounts of money out of people's pockets, still enacted far too many laws that were often intrusive and oppressive, still had vastly too high a profile. This essential similarity between Labour and their own dear Tory Party seems to have come as a surprise to many here, but we can be glad about an ill wind blowing at least some good: the Wilders affair has demonstrated once again that both HMG and HM Loyal Opposition are united in impotent pusillanimity. All that ever separates them is a few percentage points on or off this tax, that kind of legislation...

Just posting a "Me too" in case anyone who can influence a rapid U-turn is taking note of the weight of numbers on here.

I had considerable respect for Grayling until today. The Tories' response to this disgraceful, hypocritical ban has been beneath contempt. There are plenty of ways to have reacted that would have defended free speech without offending decent Muslims. This spineless fence-sitting perversely offends all decent people and encourages extremists.

As a side issue it has also hamstrung the likes of Greening, who are now going to have to try and defend the indefensible in public.

Grayling will certainly get top marks from me. Agree with him 100%

Grayling = EPIC FAIL.

"Grayling will certainly get top marks from me. Agree with him 100%"

For giving into the threats of a potentially violent mob?

Wilders is not putting a gun to the head of these people and saying "riot"! If they choose to do so it is on their own free will and not at all his responsibility.

No Richard, and I suppose people like Quatada had nothing to do with those who planted suicide bombs in Afghanistan. Or is it that you just have double standards when it comes to bigots?

The odd word in Grayling's statement to me is "If".

Isn't he able to make up his mind? If he cannot be bothered to appraise himself of Mr Wilder's views, then doesn't the Tory Party pay some special adviser to find out that sort of thing and advise him.

I just don't get it. Either Mr Wilder's views are indeed a threat to public security, or they are not. There is no ruddy "If" or indeed 'iff' about it.

The Dhimmitude displayed by first the Home Secretary, and then the Government's loyal opposition speaks volumes.

OK, I speak as a UKIP press officer, but the calm, collected and thouroughly reasonable attitude of Lord Pearson over the whole firestorm has I would say been admirable.

When people over here in Europe talk about Britain what they often refer to is some mystical by-gone idea of a people who would stand up to tyranny. (Yes there are many even in the European Parliament who still hold that sort of view) Malcolm Pearson today has shown that those daydreams of their's are not entirely dead.

I hope and pray (am I allowed to say that in this virtual green room) that his example will prove that there is some hope left.

His visit amounted to an invitation to attend a "private discussion" and a "private screening" of his video with a number of Lords. The government has banned his attendance to speak at a place of government in "private".

There was no "public audience", no "public gathering", and none of his views were to be espoused in "public".

There is no public interest, no public demonstrations and no public protests. There is no risk to "public security", and no "incitement to hatred or violence". There are no grounds to ban him other than an arbitrary decision by a government minister which has inconsistent decision making when it comes to "permitting" all of the above to occur by those of his contentions in the name of "Allah".

Conservativism is nothing to do with banning liberty and freedom, and Grayling has it wrong.

I want to live in a country where the courts decide who breaks the law: not politicians. Innocent until proven guilty applies to this case as much as any other. And guilty is not decided by Gordon Brown, Chris Huhne or anyone in the House of Commons. When the law-makers become the law-enforcers we are on the road to Zimbabwe.

More PC from DC - that is why the Tories are really just BluLabour....

Geert Wilders has, on his return, branded Gordon Brown "the biggest coward in Europe". I don't agree, Labour is just following its usual atrocious policies. They know no better.

No, the biggest coward in Europe today is David Cameron. Here was his chance to "speak for England" (reference to May 1940) and he flunked it. Chris Grayling is a subordinate, and could not have spoken out unless permitted to.

This is the second time in two weeks that the Conservative party has failed to stand up for Britain (the other was the issue of mass shipping in of exclusively foreign workers). Why should any of us bother to go out and vote Conservative any more? The party is exposed as completely lacking principle and backbone.

The Tories may not want to offend muslims by their silence, but they are offending everyone else!

The British People believe in FREE SPEECH for everyone, isn't that why Jihadists are openly allowed to stay in the country.

If the Government are going to ban an EU politician for a 17 min movie which DOES PICK OUT THE EXTREMIST VIEW OF MUSLIMS, then they had better get tough on everyone!

These people ARE dangerous, if all muslims don't want to be tarred with the same brush, then they need to speak out against the Jihadists. All they seem to have the energy for is to complain about everything else!

Cowardly government, cowardly opposition.

Grow some balls Tories!

I fully understand and sympathize with the sentiment expressed in the postings above.

However, this is a minefield for our leadership. With the FSA/Crosby/Brown inquiry gathering momentum; with Brown's incompetence exceeded only by his profligacy with tax payers hard earned cash and the electorate are waking up to him - we have this situation.

So let's say we make a stand - giving a perfect diversion for New Labour and their 'right on' friends at the BBC.

I hate to say this but sometimes you have to pick your battles to win the war.

And believe me this is a war. I truly believe that Brown & the New Labour Socialists are as much a threat to our country as Hitler and the National Socialists ever were.

Think about it - sovereignty given to the a foreign power (EU), country flooded with immigrants, State snooping and ID cards, force fed the culture of multi cultural/PCism and the destruction of our economy.

We fought Adolf to preserve our liberty. Sometimes this meant doing stuff we didn't want to do. Same thing now.

Fitna

Freedom of Speech is important but it is not as important as racial harmony.This evil man as no right to come her and preach the politics of hate.

Posted by: Jack Stone | February 12, 2009 at 14:41


“It is true that liberty is precious - so precious that it must be rationed”

Vladimir Lenin

Fitna

Freedom of Speech is important but it is not as important as racial harmony.This evil man as no right to come her and preach the politics of hate.

Posted by: Jack Stone | February 12, 2009 at 14:41


“It is true that liberty is precious - so precious that it must be rationed”

Vladimir Lenin

Just think, the Labour Government missed a great opportunity to film, arrest and deport all those muslims that would have turned up with hate placards screaming death to all infidels!!!

Vladimir Lenin, this does nothing for racial harmony, what planet are you on?

@ Tim Montgomerie.

"It is The Times - not me - who used those adjectives Steevo.

"I don't know enough about his views to reach a conclusion but I'm certainly on the side of wanting to hear what he has to say."

I know its theirs. I think it can be assumed the video has only confirmed their use of such adjectives. I'll just tell you I've watched it and I think they're unnecessarily derogatory, overly sensitive and out of touch.

TomTom writes:

"I would prefer the Dutch to boycott the upcoming G20 Summit in London, for the Dutch to subject the Home Secretary to strip search if she enters Dutch territory, and for the Dutch public to form their own opinions on Londonistan."

Even better - they could simply ban any member of the Labour Party from entering The Netherlands on the grounds that they represent a threat to freedom of speech and democracy.

Incidentally, the BBC has been making its feelings known about Mr. Wilders. Even if the epithet was unplanned, the incident speaks volumes about Auntie Beeb's political leanings, as expressed through their choice of studio guest.

'Wanker is such a great word' - opined Radio 5's chat show interviewee. Inform, educate and entertain...

Apart from Chris Grayling’s mild statement, that our leadership have shown so little leadership and desire to defend freedom, is very very worrying. A democrat who opposes violence is banned, while, as Mr Grayling, and Douglas Murray also quoted in this post, pointed out, all sorts of terrorist representatives and preachers of hate who call for the murder of Jews, Hindus, homosexuals, apostates etc are let in.

Mr Wilders also apparently said the Koran should be banned. I wouldn’t agree with that but as a statement by Baroness Cox and Lord Pearson (quoted by Cranmer yesterday), asked, would this have happened if he had said the Bible should be banned? (Of course not).

The Government is quoted by Cranmer as saying Mr Wilders was banned because his views “threaten community harmony and therefore public security”. That is, appease whoever threatens trouble or violence, even if this means curtailing legitimate free speech.

Surely the threat (which some refer to as the latest form of fascism) we face should be stood up to and intimidation and bullying defied. Don’t we need Churchillian leadership. I suppose the difference from the 1930s is that the threat then was very clear and from a nation outside the UK, now much of it is within.

Nobody's going to read this far down but it is important to state one's position on a fundamental issue:

The Conservative Party is conniving at the destruction of centuries old freedoms, taking us down the road to civil war.

I am against the Conservative and Labour parties. I despise, fear and hate Gordon Brown and David Cameron and their supporters. I believe that free speech is the rock on which are law is built.

In the final analysis, I will fight.

“It is true that liberty is precious - so precious that it must be rationed”

Vladimir Lenin

I'd not actually heard that one before.

So I made a pic with it on Here

I feel as though my party has been hijacked by salesmen with no spine, no politics, no love for their country and a complete lack of feeling for the British people they hope will vote for them. Maybe they will, but that doesn't make it right.

Thrice now the leadership has turned its back on the main principles of government.

1 - Protecting Britain's workers.

2 - Protecting our liberty.

3 - Protecting our sovereignty.

After 34 years of voting Tory it is with a sad heart that my principles will never permit me to vote Conservative again.

"If Geert Wilders has expressed views that represent a threat to public security, then we support the ban."

Not "pathetic"! Actually rather a cleverly worded statement.

The key word is "IF"!

Excellent piece by Philip Johnston on the Wilders case is appearing in tomorrow's Telegraph

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/philipjohnston/4604985/Whatever-happened-to-free-speech.html

Watching question time this very second, and the Conservative MP on there BACKS THE GOVERMENTS BANNING OF GEERT WILDERS. This is a disgrace of the highest order. When will the spineless morons in parliament stand up for the British peoples fundamental liberties. The gradual erosion of our basic rights is one of the most troubling developments in recent political times. Ironically the only Muslim person on the panel is the one is arguing for freedom of speech - how bloody hilarious. Everyone is afraid it will offend them, and she's the only one saying his opinions should be heard - the only one with any sense, is the one the man in question should actually offend!

Watching question time this very second, and the Conservative MP on there BACKS THE GOVERMENTS BANNING OF GEERT WILDERS. This is a disgrace of the highest order.

...and the audience are clapping... and they're all having a go at the bankers saying bonuses shouldn't exist at all.

They've really crammed the place with communist labourites tonight.

If I was on the BBC today they'd probably call me a right wing extremist.
I'm sure I was normal yesterday. Is it me?

Justine Greene’s hand-wringing reply on Question Time to the question about Geert Wilders visit, and Chris Grayling’s earlier statement, (if this might transgress laws, we support the government action) shows why traditional Tories like me will never vote for this Cameron-led party.
You can tell from Grayling’s weasel words and Greene’s views that the party went into panic focus-group mode. Will this cost us votes in Muslim marginals? Will this make us look like the nasty party?
What’s wrong with a principled stand? Free speech is the point. Do we believe in it? Yes we do. So support Wilders and let the chips fall where they may. That’s what the party should have done.
What a pathetic Blue Labour party the Tories have become.

"and the Conservative MP on there BACKS THE GOVERNMENT'S BANNING OF GEERT WILDERS. "


Name and shame please.

"In the final analysis, I will fight."

me too

Justine Greening? I am very disappointed that she took this line.

Sally Roberts:
""If Geert Wilders has expressed views that represent a threat to public security, then we support the ban."
Not "pathetic"! Actually rather a cleverly worded statement."

Only if you believe circumspection, evasiveness, cynical pragmatism and ambiguity preferable to straight talking. It seems HM Loyal Opposition do.

If the leadership of our party really are treating this matter as solely a question of electoral advantage, rather than one of basic principle as they ought to, then perhaps they should consider the balance between how many Muslim votes might be lost by doing the right thing against how many non Muslim votes will be lost to the BNP if they continue to cravenly fail to robustly speak out in defense of free speech and against yet another example of Muslim bullying and anti democratic intimidation.

Mr Grayling's statement is clearly in keeping with Mr Cameron's overwhelming desire for Conservatives to be seen as "nice" people.
The leader does not want to be troubled with points of principle. Remember his previous career - Public Relations. The writing is on the wall - if the Labour Party is kicked out then we will change them for another bunch of unprincipled wasters.

I am glad that the Home Office has banned Geert Wilders.

By doing so, the UK government has publicly confirmed that the message of his movie is true and accurate.

When an elected politician of a friendly country is refused entry to this country - there is something wrong.

When a government ignores a threat by one of its 'ethnic' peers of the realm to organise a protest by 10,000 members of his creed against something he, the peer, does not like - there is something wrong.

When a government bends its knee to the will of a religious minority for fear of 'upsetting' said religious minority - there is something wrong.

When a government begins to decide someone's opinions would cause a threat - there is something wrong.

When a government can act and in so doing make me ashamed of my own country - there is something wrong.

Enoch Powell was right and the rivers of cowardly Britain are already foaming with blood. If the CONLIBLAB governments continue to behave more like Chamberlain than Churchill we are left with only one alternative. To vote British National Party.

Glad to see that bleeding heart liberal Kelvin Mackenzie supported the ban on Wilders wholeheartedly as did Justine Greening. Both were applauded by the audience, I think it's many on this board who are the ones who are out of touch.

Carpal tunnel syndrome and tumbrels:

I've just experienced a 'numb thumb' for about 20 minutes.

My wife looked it up on Google and found something called 'carpal tunnel syndrome', which relates to what I guess you'd called trapped or twisted nerves in the wrist.

To remedy this, I flung my arms around like a human windmill for 5 minutes and it went away. I feel it may have just been caused by my having idly rested my arm on the corner of my desk this morning whilst reading Richard's EU Referendum blog, and searching extensively for the definition of 'tumbrel', which he suggests may be required to deal with the recent fiasco of idiot politicians who chose to ban a Dutch MP from travelling to speak in private with a few lords, but are unready to ban others who travel here in order to preach to mass audiences that they should 'kill infidels'.

In Richards' blog he uses the word 'tumbrel' when suggesting it's time they were brought out. I'm a lover of words and this one was unfamiliar to me. Maybe Richard is more highly educated or just likes crosswords who knows. Anyway, in an effort to increase my own vocabulary, I began to lean on the edge of my desk whilst searching Google, where I found these two definitions of the word 'tum-brel' or 'tum-bril' :-

* A two-wheeled cart, especially a farmer's cart that can be tilted to dump a load.
* A crude cart used to carry condemned prisoners to their place of execution, as during the French Revolution.

I find both descriptions describe the perfect remedy for dealing with Richards 'numb head' politicians, and that my own remedy for dealing with a numb thumb is also helpful, which I note neither problem serves little or any useful purpose in politics, and nor does flaying your arms about like a windmill give an adequate and useful remedy to the a political question of having numb headed politicians, so I'd take care not to mix the medicine as neither will work for the opposite complaint.

I trust my own remedy coupled with Richards', gives some help to both sufferers of either problem of having a numb thumb or a numb head in politics, and is explicit in dealing with either problem by the application of entirely different remedies which are outlined above. I also thank Richard for increasing my vocabulary and for his interesting blog about the 'Double Dutch' being spoken by our numb headed politicians in regard to the banning of Dutch MP Geert Wilders, which I note also, ( like carpal tunnel syndrome ) this may be confused as stemming from a limp wrist problem.

Henry Mayhew

"I actually questioned how different we really are from Labour. Not something DC should want the electorate to do in these times."

Of course when push comes to shove, there are only skin deep differences between them. The Permanent civil service will be the same in both cases and their advice is still acted on 99% of the time. DC and co, are still playing dumb blond about their polices and even the Aims and objectives of the Conservatives are hardly clear. When you no longer need to come up with policies to get rid of a sitting unpopular government, the best thing or so it seems, is to stay mostly silent. British democracy has always been something of a joke based as it is on a first past the post stitchup, is it any surprise that the majority disengaged from politics decades ago.

Malcolm Stevas at 23:48 - It was not "circumspection, evasiveness, cynical pragmatism and ambiguity" Rather a measured response to the very real possibility of riots and civil disorder resulting from Mr Wilders' visit (and I have not changed from my original viewpoint that he should have been allowed to come and speak). Unfortunately Lord Ahmed virtually blackmailed the authorities by suggesting that there would be violent protests. We all remember the infamous "cartoons" protest outside the Danish Embassy and unfortunately as the recent Pro-Hamas demonstrations have proved, there are certain elements which seem incapable of holding a protest or a demonstration without violence and criminal damage ensuing.
Chris Grayling's use of the word "IF" leads it up to those reading or hearing his statement to determine in their own minds WHETHER it was right to deny Mr Wilders entry.

Sorry that should read "leaves" not "leads"!

I don't care if he's banned or not, as long as we ban the Islamic preachers of hate too.

Ban asside, this Dutch guy is up to no good. We all know that. Sadly too many people are sympathetic to Muslim bashing because it's easy. If he had a video about the Jews or the Torah, you'd all be up in arms. There'd be a ConservativeHome fatwa issued.

"If he had a video about the Jews or the Torah, you'd all be up in arms."

Indeed we would - but how many Jewish suicide bombers can you think of?

The Tories still have to demonstrate that they have principles if they wish to take government. If even long term supporters are left wondering what the party now stands for they will have more trouble than the opinion polls suggest.

We are witnessing the total surrender of this country to the socialist thought police. It is absolutely essential that the party stands tall against those who would have us live in fear. Now David.

there are certain elements which seem incapable of holding a protest or a demonstration without violence and criminal damage ensuing.

That's no excuse to ban him though, as long as he is against the violence.

It may be the cheapest and easiest way to deal with it, but the right thing to do is let him in and then deal with the consequences.

Oh for a return to free speech. Surely we should be braver than the Grayling statement.

Malc wrote:
"Glad to see that bleeding heart liberal Kelvin Mackenzie supported the ban on Wilders wholeheartedly as did Justine Greening"

..whereas the only muslim on the panel, Salma Yaqoob, opposed the ban.

"I think it's many on this board who are the ones who are out of touch"

Is she out of touch too Malcolm?

Or are you going to clam up again and go silent? Please don't attack me as a diversionary response, just answer the question.

"I think it's many on this board who are the ones who are out of touch."

Malcolm Dunn the most heartening interview/debate of the day was that done on Newsnight where a Muslim spokesman for The Quillian (I think) Foundation, (also notable in that Vaz got well and truly knobbled) who was emphatic that he didn't want some guilt ridden PC crowd speaking for him or trying to defend him for he was quite capable of doing it himself, and would have been very happy for Wilders to come here where he would debate the issue with him.

This episode shows the damage the bleeding hearts are doing, for in censoring and removing the debate from public discourse they remove the chance for moderate Muslims, like this chap, to lead a debate , instead concede the territory to the outraged extremists, to who they gift the victory.

May you always sit on the fence watching each side of it be never actually taking part.

It's sad to say that even the once-great Conservative Party has become gutless. This will do no more than turning people away from this party because it is now Conservative in name only and is trying to conserve nothing. A shame really!

"It's sad to say that even the once-great Conservative Party has become gutless"

Yes Dave has positioned and triangulated the Conservative party to a point where it has no values , no beliefs , and certainly nothing it would fight for.

"It's sad to say that even the once-great Conservative Party has become gutless."

That it seems is a fact.

"This will do no more than turning people away from this party"

Maybe not, it will appeal to the centralist labour supporters who don't want a "real" Conservative Government, but who want a continuation of Labours PC lunacy.

A shame really!

Like so much that the leadership of this party are doing now, it seems to be about not rocking the boat, and holding on to its lead in the polls. Brown is losing the next election, but so far we are winning only because there is no other workable alternative. D.C. & G.O. look awful smug but should be aware of just how quickly modern volatility could reverse the gains. Of course they do not need the party faithful, which is essentially a few thousand strong at best, to win the next general election.
Increasingly its looking like a choice between Daz & Omo, or any colour you like as long as its purple.

The next government will be conservative.

Even if they are not as principled as we the people deserve, at least they will not have their hands so deeply embeded in our wallets as labour.

The choice this time seems to be unprincipled bankrupcy of the country (labour) vs unprincipled stability of the country (tory).

The choice next time may include principled stability.

I don't approve of this state of affairs, but it seems to be all that is available.

"Increasingly its looking like a choice between Daz & Omo, or any colour you like as long as its purple."

It appears that the only time Cameron's Conservatives had any principle was when David Davis was there, for I believe he was the person to lead the charge against 90 day detention and ID Cards, for if memory serves Dave was reported to be of a mind to go along with Labour's plans.

"Daz & Omo"

Oh, you Sweet Old Fashioned Thing!!

What a surprise - Blue Labour takes the PC line. What a bunch of wimps.

So often when canvassing people say to me "Enoch Powell was right, you know". Will they in future be saying, "With hindsight, Geert Wilders tried to warn us - he was right, you know". He is alerting us to a lethal contagion which all those in authority are denying, and which will drag us all back to medieval poverty.

Chad, I was suprised to see the leader of Respect supporting allowing Wilders. She seemed a much more reasonable human being than Galloway. But I do not trust Respect at all. I'm sure that she would have been the first to complain if the leader of Hezbollah was banned when he visited this country as he should have been.
So she may not be out of touch but I do not trust her agenda at all.

Funnily enough, I see a big 'risk' from the anti-west preachings of the islamic terrorist supporters being the fact that they are delivered relatively covertly.

There is no real opportunity to challenge anti-west terrorist preachings because they are only presented in a forum for their supporters.

Contrasting this with Wilders high profile, open to all claims/views that can be openly seen, discussed and challenged.

In fact I support his production of his film, because it does just this - it presents anti-west islamic terrorism (from the mouths of the terrorists) to everyone for debate and comment.

In a way his views are irrelevant to the film -- the film presents the terrorist case for them so is a base on which to have a proper discussion.

Those that want to supress this discussion have to be questioned about their motives.

And people who have condemned the film without seeing it (it is only 17 minutes long) need their inteligence as well as their motives questioned.

Shouting fire in a theatre:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4dxE8hhNuA

It is craven and cowardly of the Tories, they should back freedom of speech and freedom of movement for those who are not promoting murder and genocide, and call for the useless Home Secretary to apply a consistent and reasonable line on exclusions. And deport the hate mongers festering in the mosques.

I've been a labour supporter all my life as have my parents before me. I can, with 100% certainty, say that I can no longer countenance voting for labour. Yesterday I witnessed the shameful episode of watching free speech die in this country in response to potential 'eventful' demonstrations by a certain unintegrated strata of our society.

Maybe I do draw the line of free speech for calls or incitement to violence (we already have well established laws for defamation/libel, etc.) but Geert Wilders does not incite to either hatred or violence... he merely warns us that the encroaching Islamisation of the west will lead to the death of the west - along with all those freedoms we have fought so hard for with the blood of millions (how their sacrifice has really been for nothing); freedoms such as freedom of speech. The irony. Though, of course there isn't a problem with televising the views of the genocidal Iranian president as an alternative to the Queen's speech. How let down and betrayed I feel. It is a sad time in British history and the name Jacqui Smith will from now on be synonymous with that of Chamberlain. Who to vote for now I wonder?

Are people aware that Ahmed is alleged to have said he would mobilise "10,000 Muslims" to prevent Wilders' entry? I am quite sure that this threat was instrumental in ensuring that both Government and Opposition supported the ban. I do not say it is right - but equally would it be right to have blood on the streets?

I think Cameron's opposition is insufficiently visceral.

He has not successfully nailed Brown on the economy, which is in my opinion a secondary issue, since it is cyclical.

The true function of government, to uphold the rule of law, and by extension, to protect the liberties of the citizen, has been utterly trashed by labour, and Cameron has rarely protested.

The present is the most despicable act yet and still there is no blood on the carpet.

I despair of Cameron, and wonder if he is really the right man for the job now.

I hope he is reading these posts and will appreciate the importance of protesting in the strongest terms, including questions on the house.

Where are Liberty on this? Presumably had this guy actually been an Islamist dedicated to destroying this country then fragrant Shami would be gracing our tv screens condemning this outrage. However, come a controversial politician with non pc (albeit slightly wacky)right wing views and they appear to be silent on the issue.

I consulted their site this morning and the issue is not even mentioned on their Free Speech and Protest section. I am not surprised of course. However, it is interesting to note.

The Tory leadership has misjudged the strength of feeling on this. If they maintain their silence, or attempt equivocation, then they risk losing a great deal of support.

Where is David Davis? Or can I have my money back for last years campaign?

The cure is in the hands of every poster on this topic, it costs £500 and is soon coming to a polling station near you.
My £500 is already earmarked, It's doing fcuk all good in the savings "bank".

Cameron is a cad and a coward. We might as well elect the ghost of Francis Pym for all the good that Dave and his bolus of spivs will do in office.

The BNP seem to be doing a good job of out-Conserving the Conservatives and out-Labouring the Labour party.

And all by doing nothing.

Geert Wilders makes clear the nature of islam by featuring its own scripture and the enactment of that scripture by its adherents. If islam were not inherently violent, Wilders would not be saying what he says, and what he says is supported by the facts.

The Tory leadership has misjudged the strength of feeling on this. If they maintain their silence, or attempt equivocation, then they risk losing a great deal of support.

By saying that "If Wilders is kept out, then so should the other thugs", the Tories are putting Mr Wilders, a brave man for whom every day alive is a bonus, and who cannot live a normal life because of the security threats his government cannot or will not manage, on a moral par with terrorists and Jihadists.

On one level, a deeply offensive and profoundly unjust comparison, but equally so absurd that nobody for a second believes it.

I've been through Dave's "big issues" list on the party website, and there's lots about schools and transport, blah, blah, blah.

Dave seems to forget that when a hostile foreign force has locked you in a prison of fear, and now holds a gun to your head, you couldn't give a toss about what's for tomorrow's breakfast.

The real problem is that everyone who has done their homework knows that Wilders is right. A number of arabs express open admiration for Adolf Hitler because islam is a fascist ideology masquerading as a religion.

If the tory party isn't going to stand up to the religious bullies and their 7th century bearded bigots club you need to let us know.

So we can vote for someone else!

I never ever saw myself voting BNP but this weeks events are proving to be a tipping point, things have gone too far.

The awful truth is that Cameron IS part of the government of a democracy. Sitting on the fence is not an option now and certainly not if he gets lucky at the next GE.

"The awful truth is that Cameron IS part of the government of a democracy"

Are congratulations due - have you some news that nobody else has heard?

Cameron’s strategy for Conservative Party victory is to drift into power. No waves, no rocking of the boat, just drift on the inevitable tide caused by too many years of Blair and Brown. The spineless fop. It probably will work, but I would get also get a certain amount of satisfaction from seeing him go down in flames. These times call for a Churchill (or Thatcher), not a Chanberlain.

"A number of Arabs express open admiration for Adolf Hitler because Islam is a fascist ideology masquerading as a religion"

In fact the Waffen SS had divisions made up of Islamic volunteers. Himmler was very proud of these division in his international SS.

Neville Chamberlain appeased the Third Reich, he did not collaborate with the Third Reich. Britain was hugely wounded; physically, emotionally and financially in the First World War and there was no appetite amongst the British people for another War. It was only the patient diplomacy of the Chamberlain administration, in the face of ever more outrageous demands by the Third Reich, which convinced the British people of the need for War. At Munich in 1938, Chamberlain left himself with a weak hand by not having progressed British rearmament fast enough and Chamberlain should take the moral blame for the surrendering of Czechoslovakia to the Nazis. However in the Sunmer of 1940, Neville Chamberlain's rearmament program did its stuff. Churchill gave the lion its roar but it was the Spitfires, Hurricanes and radar all developed under Neville Chamberlain's tenure as Prime Minister, which gave the lion teeth and claws. David Cameron is no Neville Chamberlain and the country in this hour of need is immensely poorer for that.

Adrian Wainer

Oh please keep your prejudices under control, Ross Warren. During WW2 there were many many times more Muslims serving in the British Indian Army, the King's African Rifles and the British officered Arab Legion than fought for the Germans. Are you really so ill informed that you were unaware of this?

I agree with Adrian Wainer concerning Neville Chamberlain. He was not cut out to be a great war leader but without his rearmament programme we certainly would have been overwhelmed. Compared to Neville Chamberlain, David Cameron is but an immature pipsqueak who has never done a real job of work in his life.

The issue of the banning of Mr Wilders from entering the UK, in a British context is mistakenly thought to be a freedom of speech issue, it is not. It is in fact a Defence of the Realm issue. If one lives in Britain, one does not live in a democracy, because Britain is not a democracy, it is a monarchy. Mr Wilders' freedom of expression or not, is most properly the concern of the Dutch Government, not Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second's Government. The issue and sole issue of importance, as concerns Britain, is that in denying Mr Wilders entry in to the United Kingdom, the Prime Minister and Home Secretary have acted to foment rebellion against the Crown and in concert with those who wish to do harm to the life and liberties of the subjects of the Queen, which is precisely the opposite of why the Home Secretary might have legitimately banned Mr Wilders, had there been a legitimate case for banning him, which there is not.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

Dear Ross Warren, I agree with you entirely that Nazi ideology has become an important aspect of Arab and Islamic culture, in the present day. I respect your opinion that Islam is a fascist ideology masquerading as a religion but I disagree with it. For example, there is a conservative traditionalist interpretation of Islam which can and does live happily with modern Western society. Unfortunately the conservative traditionalist interpretation of Islam is under massive attack by the Saudi Government financed Wahhabis. And what interpretation of Islam is defacto officially endorsed and supported by the present Labour Government, it is the Wahhabi interpretation, which holds for example, that at the very least, all territories which ever once were under Muslim control, are forever sovereign Muslim territory and therefor if for example Britain supplies aircraft to the Spanish Navy, that places Britain in the Dar al-Harb and legitimates defensive military actions such as 7/7 2005 London subway and bus bombings.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

I am just after doing a keyword search on the Conservative Party website for Wilders.

http://search.conservatives.com/search?q=wilders+&entqr=0&ud=1&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&output=xml_no_dtd&oe=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&client=conservatives&proxystylesheet=conservatives&site=conservatives

and this is the result I got

Quote

Your search - wilders - did not match any documents.
No pages were found containing "wilders ".

Suggestions:

* Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
* Try different keywords.
* Try more general keywords.

Unquote

A bloody disgrace in my opinion. On the other hand, take a look at the BNP website

http://bnp.org.uk/2009/01/parliament-caves-in-over-film-screening-after-threats-from-lord-ahmed/

I do not trust the BNP and I will regard them as unfit for holding senior position in relation to Governance of the UK, until they officially welcome non-white British citizens e.g. Afro-Caribbean Britons to be members of the BNP and stand as BNP candidates. That said, they are streets ahead of Cameron's Conservative Party on a whole host of issues, the banning of Mr Wilders being one of them.

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

source: Conservativehome

Quote

Maria Miller raises alarm over proposed anti-gay picket in her constituency by fundamentalist US Christians

"The fundamentalist US church notorious for picketing the funerals of dead soldiers plans to carry out its first protest in Britain this week, it has emerged. Followers of the virulently anti-gay Westboro Baptist Church have threatened to picket a sixth form college in Basingstoke, Hampshire during a staging of The Laramie Project, a play about an American youth murdered because of his sexuality... Maria Miller, Conservative MP for Basingstoke, said that she had contacted the Home Secretary to see what action the Government may be considering in relation to possible attempts by the Phelps family to enter the country. She condemned the church's "highly inflammatory language and behaviour" and said the young people who had worked on the play would not be intimidated by threats." - Daily Telegraph

Unquote

In relation to the right honorable Maria Miller MP Conservative, it is nice that people can get paid a very respectable salary in the United Kingdom and even be members of Parliament and be a complete waste of space. What is she afraid of, is it that the Reverend Phelps will borrow some of Lord Ahmed's ten thousand Muslim men, not now required because Mr Wilders got banned. Yes for sure, the Koran burning Reverend Phelps is certainly likely to be able to do that and Hallal pigs might fly!

http://www.godhatesfags.com/

In fairness to the Reverend Phelps, he does hate an awful lot of stuff, so he is hardly directing the wrath of God exclusively at Basingstoke, ( where's Basingstoke? ),. Like for example, he does not seem to be much of a fan of Baden Powell, check out Reverend Phelps' video, "Thank God for dead Boy Scouts"

http://www.signmovies.net/videos/news/index.html

In fact, Reverend Phelps is a first class advertisement in favor of treating homosexuals with respect, when one looks at characters like Phelps, who are against them. Of course having Phelps in Britain spewing his anti-gay mania, would be embarrassing to the likes of Lord Ahmed, the Labour Party, the Saudis and The Guardian reader, all known for their respect of the rights of homosexuals, except when they are being stoned to death in the name of Islam.

Check the USA's equivalent of BBC television's "Panorama" program, "Red State Update" as it investigates The Westboro Baptist Church.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mHQjY0MwLxY

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

[quote]
Qatada, once labelled Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe by a Spanish judge, was awarded 2,800 euros by the Strasbourg court, which will also rule on a final appeal against his deportation from Britain.[/quote]

Since the nice Mr Abu Qatada has got 2,800 Euros, I wonder did the Home Secretary offers to pay for the money and time she cost Mr Wilders by denying him entry to the UK

[url]http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090219/tuk-anger-in-britain-as-radical-cleric-w-a7ad41d.html[/url]

Best and Warm Regards
Adrian Wainer

the dutch conservative party pvv has been listed as the number one party in an official pole this week.
thanks to his ban in the uk, wich gave a sharp rise in vote's.
the uk conservative's are missing a great chance to win the next elections if they keep up their silence.
there also missing a chance to defend the freedom of speech, and other civil liberty's under attack by muslim fundamentalist's.

wake up people !


The comments to this entry are closed.

#####here####

Categories

ConHome on Twitter

    follow me on Twitter

    Conservative blogs

    Today's public spending saving

    New on other blogs

    • Receive our daily email
      Enter your details below:
      Name:
      Email:
      Subscribe    
      Unsubscribe 

    • Tracker 2
    • Extreme Tracker