Well, if Feiz Muhammad wanted to behead Geert Wilders because of Wilders’ outlandish bouffant hairstyle, I could understand that. Bouffant bigotry, fair enough. But for the “sin” of pointing out the obvious? I think not.
Note that the “cleric” Feiz Muhammad, an “aussie” apparently, has also called for young children to be radicalised and blames women for their own rape. The wonderful weave and woof of our muslim multicultural quilt.
Note also that the article says “He [Wilders] made a film in 2008 [Fitna], that claimed the Koran incited violence…”.
Actually, Wilders did no such thing. He showed Muslim terrorists of various stripes and various nationalities quoting the Koran in justification of their terrorist acts. In other words – it has to be spelled out, for the folks at Reuters in common with many in the mainstream media don’t seem to understand it – the distinction is this: Wilders reports that terrorists quote the Koran when they carry out acts of murder. Wilders does NOT “claim” the Koran incites violence. He REPORTS how Muslims use it to carry out violence. Clear?
References:
“Muslim cleric: women incited men’s lust with ‘satanic dress’”, Miranda Devine, Sydney Morning Herald, 24 April 2005
“Here is Fitna”, JW. With the comment: “Will Muslims rage against the truth?”. Well, more than rage; they will threaten murder.
