Temple University to host Geert Wilders today October 20 2009
For those of you who may not remember, Geert Wilders is the Dutch politician who gained worldwide noteriety after producing the anti-Islamic film “Fitna”. You may recall that nobody wanted to touch “Fitna” with a ten foot pole, so Mr. Wilders posted it on YouTube. If you were quick enough, as I was, you were able to view this thought provoking film before the cowards at YouTube yanked it off several days after it’s original posting. In February this year, he was blocked from entering the UK to show this film:
He had tried to visit the UK in February 2009 to show his controversial film Fitna – roughly translated as “strife” in Arabic – which links the Koran to terrorism, but was turned back at Heathrow airport.
No TV company would broadcast the 17-minute film, which some Dutch politicians tried to ban before Mr Wilders posted it on the internet in March 2008.
Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen complained the furore over Fitna could endanger Dutch companies, soldiers and residents abroad.
That followed Denmark’s experience in 2006, when the publication of Danish cartoons satirising the Prophet Muhammad sparked protests across the Muslim world.
A student group called Temple University Purpose extended the invitation to Wilders to speak today; Temple is the first university in the United States that has allowed Wilders to address students.
As you can well imagine, this has caused all of the predicitable huffing and puffing from the university drones who have embraced political correctness at the cost of sacrificing free speech. Here are a few of such hyperventilations, courtesy the Phila Daily News:
Student Senate President Jeff Dempsey said he couldn’t support the decision to invite Wilders and hoped that the university would pull the plug on the program at the last minute.
“I’ve never been ashamed to be a Temple student,” Dempsey said, adding that university-sponsored dollars were not used to fund the event. “Our proud embrace of diversity and inclusion is tarnished by this man’s provocation of hate.”
Wilders was invited to speak by a new group on campus called Temple University Purpose.
Before the meeting, about a dozen students held signs with phrases including “Temple U. Does Not Condone Hate” and “Hate Speech [does not equal] Free Speech.”
Among the demonstrators was Megan Chialastri, vice president of All Sides, an organization that seeks to promote peace between Israel and Palestine.
“We feel student groups should not bring people on campus that jeopardize the safety, or just the way people feel on this campus,” she said.
In a letter issued last week, Monira Gamal-Eldin, president of the Muslim Students Association, criticized the university for being the first in the United States to allow Wilders to address students.
“The Muslim population at Temple feels attacked, threatened and ultimately unsafe that Mr. Wilders has been invited to voice his hate-driven opinions,” she wrote.
“The decision to allow Mr. Wilders to share his viewpoints is a danger not only for the public safety of Muslims and the honor of the core principle of Islam, but also for academic integrity and objectivity on campus.”
Would these groups have the safety concerns or this level of outrage if an anti-semitic or anti-Christian speaker were engaged? Nevermind–that’s a silly question. Hate speech only applies to protected groups, and in our world it is not only ok to be critical of Judeo-Christian ideals, it is actually encouraged, especially on our campuses.
These student groups who are so aggreived at the mere presence of a man who holds controversial ideas should ask themselves what it is they are afraid of. Labelling something “hate speech” is just another way of silencing dissent and stifling debate. It is the surest way to close a mind, which is the last thing university students should be encouraging. As Wilders himself has stated:
“I believe we have been too tolerant of the intolerant. We should learn to become intolerant of the intolerant,” he said.
And as far as safety concerns go, these same outraged Temple students who fear their safety has been “jeopardized” should ask themselves why it is Mr. Wilders who now requires a 24/7 bodyguard.
He lives under police protection because of earlier death threats, and has told the BBC his intention has only ever been “to have a debate about freedom of speech and the threat of Islamisation of our Western societies”.
“It’s not my intention to have anything at all to do with violence. On the contrary, I despise violence – I just want a debate.”
Temple University should be applauded for their courage in allowing Mr. Wilders to speak to students.
And those who think about it hard enough will wonder why any Unversity would need to exercise courage to invite him in the first place.
Possibly Related...
Comments, compliments or complaints?