Looks like Gert Wilders is going to make the British eject him:

“A newspaper reports that Dutch MP Wilders has been “taken away” from an airliner at Heathrow Airport, no immediate official confirmation.”

And that: A Dutch newspaper reporter describes a “chaotic” scene aboard an airliner at Heathrow airport as banned Dutch MP tries to enter country.

And here is the money quote of all money quotes:

Mr Wilders told The Times on the flight that the British Government was “the biggest bunch of cowards in Europe”. ”It is easy to invite people you agree with, it is more difficult to invite people you disagree with and this is the proof of the pudding,” he said.

“I am going to Great Britain because I was invited by another politician (Lord Pearson of Rannoch). I am a democrat, I am serving freedom of speech. They are not only being nasty to me they are being nasty to freedom of speech.

He added: “They (the British government) are more Chamberlain than Churchill.”

Me I’ve always said that the answer to speech you don’t like is more speech. England is making a huge mistake here. They are afraid of the fight, you’d better have that fight now while freedom of speech and expression is still strong enough to win it. If not then you will quietly sink into Dhimmitude.

Atlas Shrugs

Bye bye England — they are done. They should be kissing his ring for his bravery and courage in doing what they don’t have the spine to do.

Glenn Reynolds:

The lesson to me is that if you want freedom of speech, then, like the Muslims in Britain, you must make the authorities afraid to bother you. If you seem harmless, you will be silenced at the demand of those whom the authorities fear. Once again, I note that this is an incentive structure that the British authorities will likely come to regret.

A few days ago Charles Johnson declared a plague on both your houses:

Yes, it’s a disgrace. Geert Wilders has the same right to free speech as anyone else, and the government of Britain is demonstrating once again that they’ve completely lost their way in a maze of multicultural contradictions.

However, Wilders himself does not deserve to be called an icon of free speech, since he explicitly wants to ban the Koran and make Islam illegal in Europe; in other words, he wants to take away other people’s freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and that is simply wrong. Book banning is what totalitarians do, not believers in free speech.

Update: Bad link fixed.

Update II Diana West:

How can the UK call itself a “civilised society” when it has just proven beyond any doubt to the entire world that it cannot and will not and does not wish to ensure freedom of speech against the threat of Islamic violence?

Update III: Mark Steyn nails it:

As to the judgment of the British Home Office, they have no problem admitting to the United Kingdom the likes of Dr Ijaz Mian, who preached as follows at the Ahl-e-Hadith mosque in Derby:

You cannot accept the rule of the kaffir. We have to rule ourselves and we have to rule the others… King, Queen, House of Commons: if you accept it, you are a part of it. If you don’t accept it, you have to dismantle it. So you being a Muslim, you have to fix a target. From that White House to this Black House, we know we have to dismantle it. Muslims must grow in strength, then take over

Just the guy you want over for dinner.

Update IV: The Times of London echos Charles Johnson:

For all the obvious hollowness of Mr Wilders’ credentials as a defender of free speech, the cause is a good one. It is a common notion that the right to free speech must be held in balance with the requirement to avoid needless offence. That is a mistake. The right to oppose, mock, deride and even insult people’s beliefs is essential to a society where bad ideas are superseded by better ones. There is no right to have one’s emotional sensibilities protected, for it is no business of government to legislate for people’s feelings. Mr Wilders’ views are obnoxious, and (not but) his freedom to express them must be defended. It is regrettable that Mr Wilders faces not just ostracism but prosecution in the Netherlands because of his comments about Islam.

Sort of a reverse of love the sin hate the sinner.

Gates of Vienna translates this Jylliands posten editorial. Those guys know a few things about the dangers of appeasing Islam:

At the end, it is probably not about disagreeing with Wilders that has led to this. Actually, it is apparently based directly on fears that there will be riots in the streets if he shows up.

That is, the British government admits that it would rather break its good international character than risk violent reactions from people who argue with violence. It is a day of shame for Great Britain.

Gateway Pundit:

A blow to free speech. Geert Wilders was not allowed on the plane to England today.
Wilders produced this 10 minute film called “Fitna” that offended Muslims.

Because of this controversial film, England announced this week that Wilders would not be allowed into the country. Wilders was asked to show the film at the House of Lords by UK Independence Party peer Lord Pearson.

He embeds a youtube of the film as well.

I’m surprised it took two days for this stuff to hit the papers:

Students and faculty returned to campus after winter break to find that Boston College had quietly completed, without announcement or fanfare, an eight-year project to dramatically increase the presence of Roman Catholic religious symbols on campus. The additions are subtle but significant, as the university joins other Catholic institutions around the nation in visibly reclaiming its Catholic identity.

“The Christian art reflects our pride in and commitment to our religious heritage,” said Jack Dunn, BC’s spokesman.

Student reaction has been generally supportive, but among faculty, there is division over the appropriateness of the step. A meeting last month of arts and sciences department chairs turned into a heated argument over the classroom icons; a handful of faculty have written to the administration to protest, and some unsuccessfully circulated a petition asking to have crucifixes removed.

“I believe that the display of religious signs and symbols, such as the crucifix, in the classroom is contrary to the letter and spirt of open intellectual discourse that makes education worthwhile and distinguishes first-rate universities from mediocre and provincial ones,” Maxim D. Shrayer, chairman of the department of Slavic and Eastern languages and literatures, said in an interview.

Much to my surprise this Globe story was pretty balanced.

Inside higher ed give the anger a little more vent:

“A classroom is a place where I am supposed, as a teacher, to teach without any bias, to teach the truth. And when you put an icon or an emblem or a flag, it confuses the matter,” said Amir Hoveyda, the chemistry department chair.

“For 18 years, I taught at a university where I was allowed to teach in an environment where I felt comfortable. And all the sudden, without any discussion, without any warning, without any intellectual debate, literally during the middle of the night during a break, these icons appear,” Hoveyda said.

God knows how you can teach chemistry with a crucifix on the wall. I don’t know how Catholic high school teachers manage it.

Michael Graham has fun with it:

“In the name of tolerance, TEAR DOWN THIS CROSS!”

Watching all the Valentine commercials they have a single message:

Buy your woman X and she will have sex with you

Let me give my fellow guys a clue. If your lady isn’t willing or interested to give you sex a stuffed Bear, set of pajamas or a rock isn’t going to make her interested.

If you are going to pay for it, pay for it. Craig’s list is full capitalists people who will put out for money without cluttering the house. If you want to give your lady something do so because you love them.

Do you remember during the election Gov Palin talked about Obama worrying about Mirandaing terrorists left called us a bunch of alarmists?

Wellllll lookie here:

But in a potential problem, Pentagon officials note that most of the evidence against Jawad comes from his own admissions. And neither he nor any other detainee at the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, was ever told about their rights against self-incrimination under U.S. law.

The Miranda warning, a fixture of American jurisprudence and staple of television cop shows, may also be one of a series of constructional hurdles standing between Obama’s order to close the island prison and court trials on the mainland.

The weekly standard opines:

if the Los Angeles Times is to be believed, his administration is considering doing just that. The obvious consequence of such a decision: terrorists would now have the right to remain silent.

And Jo’s Cafe brings up a great point:

You have the right to remain silent. Okay that’s obvious duh! But then jump down to Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? Now law enforcement officers first have to determine what language the terrorist speaks. Arabic? Pharisee? You get the point. So before an officer can even mirandise a suspect, they have to figure out what language they speak.

Then they have to find a translator in that language.

But do they really understand their rights? Language translation can be suspect and can the officer understand if the rights are even being translated with the proper meaning of the warning?

Land minds everywhere.

Our guys are just going to end up shooting these people in the field instead. So much for information. This is madness. I predict that this is going to destroy Army recruitment over the next couple of years.

National Review nails it:

Some of our enemies can be convicted in federal court. Most of them can’t—at least not until after they’ve carried out the kind of attacks that it is the aim of this war to prevent. We can have the war, in all its imperfections, or we can have those attacks. We can take four months to study it, but there is no avoiding that choice.

If this stuff keeps up we won’t need to have an Arthur Carter watch the hoping for Arthur is going to be done.

Carter 8 Arthur 3

UPDATE: AllahPundit was on this yesterday.

…I’ve been very interested in what is going on in Israel and I’m interested in elections in general. But I’ve got to tell you. It is about as strange as it can go. The winner isn’t going to be able to govern because of the many tiny losing parties that got enough votes to give the losers the win.

At least with Obama I know I”m in it deep. If I was an Israeli voter I’d have no idea what is going on. This guy gets it though.

I’ve been complaining the nonsense that is the stimulus bill and the misgoverning moves that the president has made.

And one thing stands out. He DID win. We collectively did vote for Obama we asked for this. To paraphrase President Bush he may have won 54% of the vote but he won 100% of the presidency.

We don’t have the votes in either house so we have to hold a large mirror so when things happen the way they do, we can answer them.

Bit of a headache this morning and starting the day with Joe yelling isn’t the way to go.

6:30 a.m. Joe is very very angry, ready for the Network sequel.

6:40 a.m. Both he and Barnicle make the point that Geitner should know better.

6:55 a.m. I don’t get the fuss about dog shows. I like dogs but this is weird.

7:00 a.m. “Masterful performance?” Did they listen to him promising goodies to people yesterday?

7:03 a.m. Americans don’t care about pork, they do when they are paying for it.

7:08 a.m. Does anyone know what the Atlantic Counsel actually does? Does anyone care?

7:12 a.m. You know I really thought that with a new administration we wouldn’t see much of Hegel anymore since there was no Bush to bash. Wishful thinking I guess.

7:23 a.m. Money party: “He soiled the bed”

7:27 a.m. Joe does his Jack Welch, Mika breaks up.

7:29 a.m. You can’t defer to treasury when he has nothing to say.

7:45 a.m. Boxer says an energy bill and a Global warming bill in a few weeks. Joy.

7:47 a.m. If we can’t do all these things at once Sen why does this bill have so much extra stuff?

8:02 a.m. Here comes the lynchings bank hearings. The news segment says that they guys want to pay back as soon as soon as they can so they can’t be told what to do.

8:05 a.m. Conservatism is dead? Bullshit. You are giving a New York Times guys saying conservatism is dead and you are giving it credence?

8:07 a.m. Weren’t people saying that liberalism was dead a few years back? The NYT is more likely to die before conservatism.

8:15 a.m. Scarborough quotes Andrew Sullivan as a counter, you know it would be nice if they brought on an actual conservative like a Jonah Goldberg or a Michelle Malkin when saying this stuff.

8:25 a.m. Shock democratic strategist decided republicans are wrong to vote against their pork bill.

8:30 a.m. My head is splitting that is enough Joe for today.

Listening to Rush while I work on a customer’s system I’m getting worried as people are asking the government for Stoves, cars, unemployment to cover 100% of pay and extra work benefits.

I’m also worried by college students who can’t talk but I digress…

You know it is very easy to sit back and collect unemployment, particularly if you are able to cover the bills with it. If you make it easy and comfortable then people aren’t going to be inclined to go out and find work.

Once people decide that the government is going to give them everything we are finished, and remember a government big enough to give you everything is big enough to take it all away.