Because there is an unspoken adherence to the Shariah descending over the West. As I noted in my Monday column, Robert Spencer and I are scheduled to join other members of the President’s Council of the international human rights coalition Stop Islamization of Nations (SION) – the English Defence League leaders Tommy Robinson and Kevin Carroll and Stop Islamisation of Europe (SIOE) leader Anders Gravers – on June 29 for a Memorial for Lee Rigby in Woolwich. Rigby was the British soldier who was beheaded by Islamic jihadists in Woolwich on May 22.
But now the left-fascist group Hope Not Hate and Labour MP Keith Vaz, chairman of the Home Affairs select committee, are trying to get us banned from entering the country.
Imagine: The country of the Magna Carta Libertatum, or the Great Charter of the Liberties of England, would consider banning two human rights activists whose body of work is founded on the freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and individual rights. The Magna Carta led to the rule of constitutional law. It was the model for the legal structure of the American colonies.
My organizations stand for the very things the British fought and died for in World War II and decades later in Afghanistan and Iraq. After their great sacrifices, the U.K. is going to ban freedom?
The British media are on a jihad against free speech – apoplectic as they are at the thought that I, as well as Spencer, Gravers, Robinson and Carroll, would be laying flowers in Woolwich on Armed Forces Day in memory of the young dad and soldier Rigby. Despite the endless column inches that have been devoted to this manufactured controversy, not one member of the British media has asked me for comment – some, like Kevin Rawlinson, go so far as to lie about it: “Neither Ms. Geller nor Mr. Spencer responded to requests for comment.”
Rawlinson also called Spencer and me “America’s most notorious anti-Muslim campaigners.” “Anti-Muslim” is now the knee-jerk smear against those who oppose jihad and the most brutal system of governance on the face of the earth, the Shariah. Such a smear implies that all Muslims support the jihad and the Shariah. It implies that all Muslims support Shariah oppression of women, gays and non-Muslims, its denial of the freedom of speech and more. Is that what they believe?
This defamation and libel is widespread. Despite the fact that our impending arrival has made front-page headlines at the BBC, the Mirror, the Independent, the International Business Times, the Huffington Post and elsewhere, not just the British media, not one media outlet anywhere has contacted me for comment or given me any opportunity to rebut these false charges. Goebbels groupies have studiously followed the methods and practices of the Third Reich’s Ministry of Propaganda. They no longer even attempt to project a modicum of objectivity or journalistic ethics. They are waging jihad on the truth and freedom.
And like the historic rally the American Freedom Defense Initiative held in Tennessee when the Department of Justice essentially announced its intention to criminalize postings on social media that offended Muslims (that is, the blasphemy laws under the Shariah), the American media went into Shariah-enforcement mode. They have said not even a single word about this outrageous attempt to subvert the freedom of speech in the country of its birth. It’s a non-story. What’s the latest on the Kardashians?
Remember: A few years ago, Vaz led a march of thousands of Muslims in Leicester calling for the banning of Salman Rushdie’s book “The Satanic Verses.” He has even demanded that “Islamophobia” – that is, honest discussion of the jihad threat – be prosecuted as a “hate crime.”
This is the kind of man who is setting the agenda in Britain today?
This is one to watch. This battle is not about me nor my colleagues, or any single person, for that matter. This is a battle for our very way of life, our freedom and the unalienable rights that we hold dear. This is who we are. By destroying the few who dare speak out, they achieve their totalitarian goals.
“It took centuries of intellectual, philosophical development to achieve political freedom. It was a long struggle, stretching from Aristotle to John Locke to the Founding Fathers. The system they established was not based on unlimited majority rule, but on its opposite: on individual rights, which were not to be alienated by majority vote or minority plotting. The individual was not left at the mercy of his neighbors or his leaders.” – Ayn Rand