by David Safier
The conservative blog, Sonoran Alliance, gave a shout
down to BfA for my reference
to Rep. Biggs' comment, "Education does not create jobs. Entrepreneurs and businesses create jobs." Apparently, according to SA, Biggs got it right.
A few posts earlier, SA applauded something I was planning to point out in a slightly less positive light.
It seems Jon Kyl is hosting the screening of the film, Fitna, for members of Congress and their staff. Nothing wrong with that.
The film, according to the Hill's blog, the Briefing Room, was made by Geert Wilders, who is in the Dutch Parliament and compares Islamic Terrorism to Naziism. Again, that's his opinion. Nothing wrong with that.
Wilders, who will be at the screening, is a controversial figure.
Wilders has said he would ban the Quran, the Muslim holy book, according to the London Telegraph.
Now I think there's definitely something wrong with that. And while I don't deny Kyl's right to host the event, I definitely question his judgement. Why would Kyl give his stamp of approval to someone who would ban another religion's most sacred text?
Nonetheless, Kyl's spokesman defends his boss' courage, saying,
"When controversial views cannot be expressed in the United States, it will be only a matter of time before all forms of free speech are threatened."
And I agree. If Wilders wants to rent a hall and show his film, or a private organization wants to arrange a showing, that's fine. I'm certainly glad we're not banning him from entering like the UK did. It's equally OK with me for a holocaust denier to speak and show his film, no matter how despicable I might consider his views. But having a Senator choose to host the event? That doesn't sit well with me. But I guess it's his right to be as wrong as he wants to be.
Here's the funny part though. Even though Kyl is a free speech kind of guy,
The screening will take place in the LBJ Room, but is closed to the media.
Say what? The media won't be able to watch the film, see who is present or report on the speeches and conversations? Free speech behind closed doors, eh? Maybe all the goings on will be super duper classified top secret stuff. We wouldn't want to endanger national security by letting that kind of thing leak out, would we?