YouTube Censors Geert Wilders

YouTube has taken down Geert Wilders’ video about Mohammed. Here’s the notice sent out today by the PVV:

Today the Party for Freedom (PVV) was notified of YouTube’s decision to remove the Dutch Wilders’ video about the prophet Muhammad because it would be in violation of the User Guidelines. Previously, Twitter already censored the English version of the video in France and Germany. In addition the videos have been watched an unprecedented 1.8 million times through all PVV channels (Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook).

In the video Geert Wilders shows that the Prophet Mohammed should be considered a terrorist, mass murderer and a pedophile, and that it is very dangerous that this man is a role model to one billion Muslims.

Geert Wilders: “It is an outrage that the freedom of speech is sacrificed because of expressing the truth. It must always be permitted to express the truth even when it concerns a deranged prophet. Fortunately the video is still available on Twitter and Facebook.”


55 thoughts on “YouTube Censors Geert Wilders

  1. I find it dangerous to justify the freedom of speech by saying that you have that fundamental right if and when you speak the TRUTH.

    If freedom of speech doesn’t include ALL speech, however false or misguided the words might seem, that freedom will soon fall prey to the censor’s whim in a world where the truth is defined by Power and its accomplices in media and academe.

    Geert Wilders shoots himself in the foot when he asks for a ban of the koran. Along his line of reasoning for a koran ban, his videos can be banned too. Sorry to say, but that is sloppy thinking on his part.

    • The complaint is that freedom of speech is being restricted even when it involves speaking the truth.

      • Yes, but Ron has a point, too.

        I’m not in favour of banning the Qoran.
        I’m in favour of making fun of it, making Mohammed cartoons, etc.

        I would call out the National Guard to protect anyone who does so, or burns it, or whatever. But I wouldn’t ban it, as such.

        • Geert Wilders is only calling for the Koran to be banned because Mein Kampf is banned. His position is that both books are so similar that both should be banned, or neither should be banned.

          • Baron, that doesn’t make a lot of sense. If “equality” of speech is his goal, he should demand for Mein Kampf to be legalized instead of asking for a ban on the koran.

          • He does both. I’ve heard him make the either-or demand, just as I phrased it. But the media don’t report that.

          • Ron Blum how long it took they gave the Book of Mein Kampf free to read?And The Koran call for hate and kill gays&lesbian and the ‘non’ believers meaning christians and jews. So why do YouTube shut down someone even when it’s Mr Wilders? I see YouTube is afraid of muslims of course, like a lot of left thinking people. What a shame.

          • The more it is seen and read and understood, especially fine points like abrogation, the more we win…(I think.)

          • I guess what it is is that I’m also against banning Mein Kampf.

            I would like to be free to set fire to either of them (assuming that they’re copies that I own) and post it on YouTube.

            As things stand, there’s only one of the two that I can get away with doing that to.

            The other one is a bigger danger.

        • Making fun of the Quran and Muslims is juvenile fun, but it doesn’t stop radicalisation. In the worst case, hate Imams use it as examples when converting and radicalising youth.

          If you want to convince kids Western Culture is superior, we will have to behave accordingly; You don’t teach kids to respect you by beating them up, ridiculing their culture, and telling them their parents are evil.

      • Right, and I am saying the “truth” doesn’t enter that equation. That argument leads onto a slippery slope since it is not in our power to define truth.

        Freedom of speech has to be absolute! That implies that is has to be completely independent of its content.

        • Freedom of speech must NOT be absolute. It is the thinking that freedom of speech to be absolute that destroy the West. Speech about Islam must be curtailed, must not be given freedom. Giving the free speech about Islam is what brings down the West. So, how to discriminate what speech is to be protected? Power. Does my answer seems similar to fascist? Yes it does, but that’s the truth. All arguments in deciding what things are true come down to power.

          • So, would you censor Coughlins “Catastrophic Failure” which is one of the best exposes of Islam available, and which heavily quotes Islamic sources?

          • Speech about Islam should certainly NOT be curtailed. Islam is a dangerous theocracy shielding itself in Appeasement.

    • his first priority is to whipe out all moslims, you can not talk sence into this man. he’s gone crazy with power

      • You should pay more attention to what Wilders is actually saying and less attention to those who take to denigrating him and taking his words out of context.

      • You mean ‘wipe’ instead of ‘whipe?’ Geerts does not intend to wipe out all moslims. He intends to deport all practicing moslims out of Netherland only. Assuming Geerts is crazy about power. Moslems are crazy too about it. Who do you choose among those two? Choose none? Well, good luck. M* will kill you, while Geerts won’t. There’s a very big difference.

    • Freedom of Expression is a Principle that Western Christendom Should be striving for. Not to be Confined, Diluted or Redefined by the whim of Political Correctness. It Must Not be dictated by the Groveling Appeasement to the Foreign, Intolerant Religion of Islam, or of Any Authoritarian Ideology or Dogma. Islam will Never cease Demanding until They Alone is the Only Religion Left.

      Censorship is Anathema to the Free, Enlightened Civilization we have, but take for granted.
      I’m Against the banning of books because they can teach us a great deal about how Idealistic Visions are Doomed to Fail.

      I believe that a requirement to consider one’s self truly Educated, that the Basis of Ideologies upon which Ideal Societies Arise and inevitably Fail. Being a bit more Knowledgeable about Real History is Significantly better to Understand the World as it is.

      Instead of Banning Mein Kampf, it should be Read and Debated in school. Along with Karl Marx’s Das Kapital, the Christian Bible, the Islamic Qur’an, Plato’s Republic, Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations, the Constitution of the United States, Darwin’s Origin of Species, the Tao Te Ching and so on. Having each a bit of familiarity with these, allows one to See Clearly through the Fallacies, Lies and Propaganda that assails us from all sides.

      On a National level, an Educated Citizenry is a Crucial Bulwark against Political Forces from Outside and from Within. And the Wisdom to Preserve the Nation for our Future Generations.

      A quick note about “Truth”.
      Certainly, Banning Expressions which are True, but are Stifled to Appease a Vocal Minority, is Wrong.
      However, somethings are complex and not easily enough understood, let alone debate.
      There is No place for Any One entity who decides What’s True, and more, What is”True enough” to be available to the public.
      That’s a Dangerous Regulatory Intrusion into the “Marketplace of Ideas”. The Freedom to Express Honestly Must Be Inviolate. Even if you’re Wrong. A Free Individual Must have the Freedom to Be Wrong (but Not Dishonest). Honest Debate will allow the Truth to emerge, and this produces a very Robust and Self-Correcting Society.

      • You’ve expressed a noble ideal.

        The problem is humanity as it exists in the real world.

        The US is supposed to have educated, enlightened, and mature voters. Instead, we have a nation where half the people are too childish to accept the results of a legal election.

        • You are Correct, sadly.
          Paraphrasing a quote by Czech President Vaclav Klaus:

          “The problem with America is not really Obama, who is merely a Fool.
          He is a symptom of a much greater threat to what ails America.

          An Ignorant and depraved electorate that elected him as their Prince of Fools, Twice!”

  2. So I found a mirror and downloaded it. Now I can samizdat it via physical media. Whereas until today I hadn’t thought about the film for years.

    Good work YT. Keep on not getting it.

  3. Koran should be banned in Christian countries as the Bible is banned in Muslim countries.
    Koran is a terrorist book written by a pedophile.
    The Muslim religion should be banned completely, with [no] religious equality.
    If the Muslims don’t like it they can leave the west.

    • MyFreeEurope, I understand the emotion behind your words but believe me, if you give a government the power to ban one book, other books will soon follow and your natural right to free expression will be toast.

      The Logos is our only saving grace. You gotta be careful not to become what you hate.

      • Don’t give the government power, retain the power on yours. Banning Koran is good. You want sustainable good (imperfect, but good) society while Koran is not banned? You’re joking. Not banning the Koran will lead to war everywhere. It’s just a matter of time. Banning Koran is a good step.

  4. No book should be banned in America. We are supposed to be the leaders of free speech, free thought, free expression and so on. If I wanted to read the Koran I would really expect to find it on the internet, since it’s been out there for years. I would not want to buy it since I don’t want to support Muslims.

    On the other hand, when I finally decided I needed a bible, I went downtown and bought one.

  5. We want to minimize joining up:
    If the book is banned, it has the allure of the forbidden. Some will join to be different and special and elite….blah blah. It is forever misunderstood and sits as an ocult attractant for hundreds of years.
    If the book is available and openly discussed and understood, who in their right minds would want to join up? Gays wouldn’t. Women wouldn’t. Jews and Christians wouldn’t. People with any respect for freedom wouldn’t.

    • Koran is available and you ask ‘who in the right minds would join up’? Well who decides ‘right mind’? And the fact is : many join up. Women would (convert), Jews and Christians too. Did you live in the cave that you don’t know the converts? The fact already shows your proposal is invalid.

    • Only the fringe would join if the Quran were banned and the government did other sane things like, oh I dunno, incentivize healthy nuclear families versus ghettos packed with single mothers and immivaders.

  6. I’m very happy to see the alternatives emerging for the duopolies YouTube,Twitter, Facebook, and hopefully Google.

    These entities are so large, they are following the patterns of the MSM: speak to the lowest common denominator, avoiding turbulence is far more important than including the truth. We can’t forget the fact that the large internet media now attract all the affirmative action and fair usage drones in the exploding government bureaucracies. I’m still convinced Google fired Damore because of fears that snowflake females would file suits about a “hostile workplace” if he were allowed to remain employed there. The rough-tough female equality poseurs find it intolerable that someone be in proximity to them that doesn’t share their views on social justice.

    Anyway, I look forward to the development of alternative channels of communication. The real journalists and thinkers will continue to work on the margins, and the money-making channels like YouTube monitarization will increasingly attract the smiling huckster mediocrity entertainers.

    By the way, I don’t really care if Wilders is consistent or inconsistent. It’s important to my concept of him as an exemplary person, but unimportant concerning the desirability of allowing him free expression.

  7. This man is disturbed. He is obsessed or finds pleasure attacking and belittling Muslims and their religion. He is disturbed as his brother already confirmed and in many occasions.His political life and personal life are based on harming the religion which remains his remedies. Take good care of other issues, crucial ones remains its true weakness. He should be ignored to fade away in his loneliness. He should invite people at loving each others instead of hating each others. He was prevented from love himself. So how can he give it. One who lost something cannot give it.

    • By your standard, you would also call Jesus as obsessed. He does not attack Moslem, at least not physically. Geerts also take care of other issues like money spending. Yet issue of Islam should be highest priority. Because Islam is what gives us trouble the most, not climate, not money, not other things. You ask us to ignore a person who sacrifice everything for our freedom? Wow, it’s much much better to IGNORE YOU.

    • A religion? Isn’t it the political religion?

      Show me any other “faith” with blessed arsenals of divine ordnance.

      Show us who else claims God demands their hegemony and fills the streets with blood to that end.

      Islam is unworthy of accommodation and incurably incompatible, which is why there is gathering sentiment for its banishment from the West.

      And, of course, the homicidal Bronze Age monsters continue to nourish that sentiment with our blood.

  8. The problem with not banning Islam is that it is specifically designed to prey on weak minds and those of low intelligence.

    Unfortunately people in those categories make up the bulk of any human population.

    This is why Japan’s blanket ban is the correct thing to do.

    • Liberal Progressive Left:

      Loves Muslims
      Never read the Koran.

      Hates Christians
      Never read the Bible.

  9. The better approach is to ban migration of Islamists, instead of banning their book.

    “Qorans don’t kill people. People kill people.”

    • And what is the basis of banning the migrantion of Islamist without mentioning their (source of) belief? Like Trump’s travel ban? People still relate it to belief.

  10. I fear that British law will very soon criminalise anyone who has even taken a cursory glance at this kind of material, as I believe our Home Secretary intends to legislate for a minimum 15 years jail sentence on the basis that it is incitement to ‘hatred.’

    I am therefore certainly not going to look at it – however much I might simply want to inform myself. With that sort of state ‘fatwa’ hanging over such outlawed material it simply isn’t worth being an invisible martyr for a suppressed cause.

    I might find this turn of affairs deeply offensive to my conscience and inexpressibly depressing. But if such potential leaders as Wilders are to be kept forever in the political wilderness, then all the little man with no influence or power-base can do is to keep his head down and make the best of things – as usual.

    I fear that whatever the number of supporters this Website has in Britain is about to diminish suddenly. The private individual is in no position to stand up to the State.

    • Reminds me of the scene in A Clockwork Orangewhere the Minister of the Interior comments that cell space made available by the application of the Ludovico Treatment to the criminal inmates is needed for political offenders.

      This is a nightmare.

  11. [[In addition the videos have been watched an unprecedented 1.8 million times through all PVV channels (Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook).]]

    Duh, the emperor has no clothes?

    1.8 million views, or just 1.8 million clicks on a link? How many people actually took the time to watch the video, 1% at most? Quantity is not quality.

    If Wilders or any anti-Islam leader really wants to get results, he must build up his own loyal following that goes to his Web sites regularly and signs up for email service and seriously studies his material, doing his own marketing and not relying on the cheap-trick illusion of hits on YouTube or Google. All those hits are just making money for them for displaying worthless offensive ads, who needs them anyway?

    Don’t rely on them in the first place and you will reap a rich harvest of real followers. If they decide to take down a video, their motivation is all about ad money, not freedom of speech, we all have that still on the Internet, and Wilders shouldn’t care if he built his following the right way.

  12. This same intolerance would be said against Bridgette Gabriel, Ted Shoebat, Aynaz Anni Cyrus or a host of other great Patriots who risk their lives speaking against such evil ideology masked as a religion.
    We should think hard on the reasons a person would risk not only their lives but also their families, just for telling the truth as to what Islam really teaches and the end desire. You sir , and others preaching the truth about this 😈 religion have my up most respect and admiration. Thanks and God bless and protect you.

Comments are closed.