You either believe in free speech or you don't, there is no half-way house.
That is the message we hear loud and clear from the so called "freedom lovers".
They point out that Mr Wilders is an elected MP from another EU country who should not be banned from entering the UK.
They totally ignore the fact that his own country is going to try him for inciting hatred.
Not long ago Mr Wilders himself asked the Dutch government to ban an imam entry to the Netherlands for the exact same reasons.
If Mr Wilders beleived in freedom of speech then why is he calling for a ban on the Koran?
The "freedom lovers" beleive that Mr Wilders should have have been allowed to make his case and anyone could then challenge his asertions.
Wrong.
Nobody is allowed to say whatever they want on TV. There are clear rules on what is acceptable. Those likely to abuse them are not given the opportunity.
All sensible websites like the BBC do not allow any one to say anything they like in their blogs. They moderate the blogs.
Why is that? Why is allowing a rebuttal NOT good enough for them?
Prevention is better than cure.
Does any one feel that their freedom is being under-mined by this?
No, only those whose opinions have been rejected by the vast majority of people in the U.K.
Being turned back at the airport Mr Wilders said: "I'm not doing anything wrong. I'm not protesting or running through the streets of London."
If he is not protesting then why did he fly over here after the British Government told he would not be allowed?
If he is not protesting then why is he making all this fuss?
Michael Portillo beleives that if Mr Wilders had been allowed in he would have arrived unnoticed. The ban has made him a "globally famous figure".
It takes guts to make the right decision.
The government had no choice but to act.
Foreign Secretary David Miliband said: "We have profound commitment to freedom of speech but there is no freedom to cry 'fire' in a crowded theatre and there is no freedom to stir up hate, religious and racial hatred, according to the laws of the land."
That is the message we hear loud and clear from the so called "freedom lovers".
They point out that Mr Wilders is an elected MP from another EU country who should not be banned from entering the UK.
They totally ignore the fact that his own country is going to try him for inciting hatred.
Not long ago Mr Wilders himself asked the Dutch government to ban an imam entry to the Netherlands for the exact same reasons.
If Mr Wilders beleived in freedom of speech then why is he calling for a ban on the Koran?
The "freedom lovers" beleive that Mr Wilders should have have been allowed to make his case and anyone could then challenge his asertions.
Wrong.
Nobody is allowed to say whatever they want on TV. There are clear rules on what is acceptable. Those likely to abuse them are not given the opportunity.
All sensible websites like the BBC do not allow any one to say anything they like in their blogs. They moderate the blogs.
Why is that? Why is allowing a rebuttal NOT good enough for them?
Prevention is better than cure.
Does any one feel that their freedom is being under-mined by this?
No, only those whose opinions have been rejected by the vast majority of people in the U.K.
Being turned back at the airport Mr Wilders said: "I'm not doing anything wrong. I'm not protesting or running through the streets of London."
If he is not protesting then why did he fly over here after the British Government told he would not be allowed?
If he is not protesting then why is he making all this fuss?
Michael Portillo beleives that if Mr Wilders had been allowed in he would have arrived unnoticed. The ban has made him a "globally famous figure".
It takes guts to make the right decision.
The government had no choice but to act.
Foreign Secretary David Miliband said: "We have profound commitment to freedom of speech but there is no freedom to cry 'fire' in a crowded theatre and there is no freedom to stir up hate, religious and racial hatred, according to the laws of the land."