The fact that Badar is free to relentlessly criticise the West while living here and studying without persecution highlights the superiority of liberalism over Islam. Imagine relentlessly criticising Islam in Mecca or Islamabad. Imagine a conservative Catholic student studying in a university in a Muslim country sprouting the virtues of the West and demonizing Islam at every turn. Would there be repercussions? Wilders knows the repercussion of criticising Islam, in his own country too. He's under constant protection and has had death threats.

Wilders has every right to criticise Islam. It has nothing to offer the West. Its submission to Allah trumps all pragmatic political and social concerns. The West removed Christianity from politics because of this. Submitting to god was more important than fixing any social issue. This is why the Islamic countries haven't progressed for hundreds of years. Any progression in those countries are imported from the West anyway and have not grown organically.

If you want to reinstate the Caliphate in the Muslim world, as your signature suggests, one wonders why you're in Australia. You obviously have no commitment to Western values. So why are you here? To undermine liberalism? Rejected from an Islamic university?

Runner,
So you don't think the bodyguards and all the security are part of the act?
The Wilders issue isn't about Islam as much as it is about Islam's relationship with Judaism and Zionism because that's the lens through which he views the world.
Read this link from the American Jewish site "Forward":
http://forward.com/articles/147934/devilish-pact-with-europe-s-right-wing/?p=all

Here's a statement from two of Australia's nationalist micro groups:
http://www.natalt.org/2013/02/09/the-anti-jerusalem-declaration/

So you see Wilders has a written statement of common purpose, an alliance if you will with explicitly Nationalistic and racialist Israeli parties but he decries and denounces explicitly Nationalistic and racialist European parties.
Rhetorical question; Whose side is he really on?

Right on, Aristocrat.

Wilders is trying to keep the debate on IDEOLOGY, NOT Race, as pseudo-Leftist opportunists try to portray him, or Culture, or even nationality - Ideology. The ideology of Islam, he claims, is an ideology of fear, of hate, of death, and manifestly of totalitarianism. He is not calling for anybody's extermination.

Wilders has been surrounded by police for many years now.

Last year, an imam was allowed to talk around Australia about 'Jewish rats', 'exterminating Jewish filth from the face of the earth', and so on. I don't recall news broadcasts of leftists with placards demanding his expulsion, so I guess we know where they stand.

A reporter asked that bloke if he had ever needed police protection, in all the years he had been spreading this message. No, he answered.

If I knew of it beforehand, I would love to go to an Islamist rally with a placard saying "Criticise Those who Insult Atheism". But I cwould probably get shouted down, and have my placard torn up, by brave Leftists. And beaten up by the bloke with his placard saying "Behead Those who Insult Islam" as they stood by, cheering.

Christ, talk about Lenin's 'useful idiots'.

Joe

The posting is worthless propaganda, and incidentally raises the alarming question of how he can be “completing a Ph D” at Uni WS when he has no grasp of first year logic:
“As for causing problems in terms of social cohesion and harmony, this has little to do with Islam. Liberalism has simply failed to address the issue of 'minorities' in any satisfactory way. The decades-old and still persisting issues with blacks in Britain, African-Americans and Hispanics in the US, and Aborigines is Australia, to pick but a few random examples, is testament to this failure.”
For Australians, it is simply a question of whether we should encourage immigration of Muslims who place allegiance to Sharia law before our secular society. Wilders’ extreme statements should not mislead us into ignoring the evidence he provides of the dire consequences being experienced in other countries.

Joe,
The pseudo Leftists are explicitly pro Islam and Anti Judeo Christianity while the pseudo Right are pro Judeo Christianity and anti Islam, what they have in common is a commitment to the overarching Liberal democratic reform agenda.
The Radical Left and Radical Right are revolutionary movements, we both seek the overthrow of liberalism and totalitarian humanism, as I said the Radical Left view the solution as international socialism, the Radical Right see the salvation of Europe in social nationalism.These are two completely different ideas, two genuine alternatives as opposed to the fake theses and controlled opposition of the pseudo left and populist groups.

This from today's Australian newspaper:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/cut-paste/all-they-are-saying-is-give-the-religion-of-peace-a-chance-to-beat-up-gays-jews-and-wives/story-fn72xczz-1226583047090

>>IT'S billed as the "largest, the biggest and the best-ever Islamic event in the history of Australia", a three-day festival for an expected 20,000 Muslims ... But the chief attraction is a Saudi imam who has called for violent jihad ... Dr Abdul Rahman al-Sudais>>

Quote from sermons by the Imam:

>>THE Jews of yesterday are the evil forefathers of the even more evil Jews of today: infidels, falsifiers of words, calf worshippers, prophet murderers, deniers of prophecies ... the scum of the human race, accursed by Allah, who turned them into apes and pigs ... These are the Jews - an ongoing continuum of deceit, obstinacy, licentiousness, evil and corruption ... The insult to and contempt of Arabs, Muslims ... reaches its height at the hands of the rats of the world, the violators of agreements, in whose minds abide treachery, destruction and deceit and in whose veins flow occupation and tyranny.>>

Another attraction is Dr Zakir Naik:

>>" ... the 44-year-old medical doctor recommends capital punishment for homosexuals and the death penalty for those who abandon Islam as their faith. He has said that a man is within his right to beat his wife "lightly", though ... he cautioned against hitting her on the face or leaving a mark ... his view (is) that Western women make themselves "more susceptible to rape" by wearing revealing clothing ... (in a) 2007 video (he said): "If (Osama bin Laden) is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him ... if he is terrorising America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, I am with him" ... Dr Naik ... (said) the (exclusion order was [from Canada]) "overzealous and islamophobic" ... (and his comments) were "taken out of context".>>

They make Wilders look like a pussycat.

I think I'll take the "totalitarianism of liberalism" over anything the "religion of peace" has to offer.