Top Menu

Lars Vilks defends decision to join Geller’s hate fest: “If the Ku Klux Klan had invited me, I would have gone”

Your right to draw anything you want, anyway you want it, without fear of violence is a right that must be protected, even if it is offensive.

But should you draw Prophet Mohammed as a dog and then join the hate group SION for an anti-Muslim hate-bash to commemorate 9/11? I believe that says something about where you are coming from in regards to Muslims, and it is not good, but hey I guess Lars so hates the Muslim community now that he would be willing to accept an invitation from the KKK if it was about bashing Muslims.

Lars Vilks defends decision to join Geller’s hate fest

Swedish artist Lars Vilks has defended his decision to speak at an anti-Islamic conference in New York on September 11th, claiming he would also accept an invitation from the Ku Klux Klan.

Vilks, the Swedish artist who enraged Muslim groups with his depictions of the Prophet Muhammad as a dog, agreed earlier this month to speak at a conference organized by the anti-Muslim group Stop Islamization of Nations (SION).

Last week, however, an art gallery in northern Sweden booted him from a planned group exhibition because of his decision to accept the SION invitation. Several of the other participating artists pulled out in solidarity with Vilks, stirring up a debate in Sweden this week about artistic freedom and Islamophobia. The art exhibition, which was due to open on September 30th, has since been cancelled.

In a lengthy interview published in the Aftonbladet newspaper on Thursday, Vilks defended his decision to speak at the SION event. “If the Ku Klux Klan had invited me, I would have gone,” he told the paper.

The Local, 31 August 2012

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Pingback: Loon lore | Seihantai()

  • Chameleon

    @eslaporte,

    I agree, and thank you for that paper. I have skimmed it enough to understand that is worthy of being kept as a permanent reference on my hard drive, and I will definitely read it in more detail later when I have time.

    You have probably seen these articles on Loonwatch already, but just in case you haven’t, take a look at these too, which further corroborate your points, particularly regarding the meaningless propaganda definition of “terrorism”, the sham “terrorism expert” industry, and the shockingly miniscule threat of “Islamic terrorism” in Europe according to the best statistics available (from Europol):

    http://www.loonwatch.com/2012/08/the-sham-terrorism-expert-industry/ (also make sure to read the full Glenn Greenwald article linked in here, as well as all the other links in red if you want even more detail)

    http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/

    I wish you all the best in your research endeavors. May the truth be with you and shine brightly to guide us all.

  • I’m starting up a different blog on Critical Terrorism Studies (CTS). Critical terrorism studies questions the Orthodox field – but mainly looks outside the State and measures State policies and their effects, both domestic and foreign. CTS also embraces the idea that Western governments can also commit “terrorism” and also policies that oppress some of its own citizens. Richard Jackson in the UK is at Aberystwyth University and is the main author and expert in CTS studies.

    “Terrorism” as a term and concept has a history disputed definitions. “Terrorism” is also a highly charged term with panic like responses from people. Yes – America’s revolution can be an example – and the difference between revolution and terrorism is public support. Public support (and support from the Western nations) for violent action against a government, including an elected one, is a “revolution” – but lack of public support and lack of Western government support is just “terrorism.”

    Discourses analysis is often used to study the language of “terrorism,” along with what is and is not labeled “terrorism.” This is certainly true in the Netherlands (the country I study the most) where it appears that acts of violence by people of a Muslim background are “terrorism,” but similar high profile acts of violence by non-Muslims is not “terrorism.” It probably could be argued before a human rights body that this situation is biased toward Muslims, especially if harsher punishments await for those acts deemed “terrorism.”

    See Richard Jackson’s essay: The Ghosts of State Terror: Knowledge, Politics and Terrorism
    Studies – http://humansecuritygateway.com/documents/ISA_theghostsofstateterror.pdf

    Most “terrorism experts” go in and out of government sponsored think tanks and government service. Politics is what decides what is a security threat, where to direct intelligence assets — and how “terrorism” is defined. There is almost no analysis being done in other fields with greater social science, like criminology.
    As I’ve said, I have a collection of resources on the Theo van Gogh murder – and it is this murder that has been used to justify profiling young men of Moroccan background, especially if they are religious Muslims and good students in school. This murder is being shamefully milked by just about every tin-pot “terrorist expert” author who writes about “jihad in the Netherlands” – has spawned a whole genre of books, and bring about the notion of “lone wolf jihad,” as well as use to drive Islamophobic fear among the Dutch people.

    There is NO evidence of an extensive “jihad network” in the Netherlands, or Europe, for that matter.

    If you want to be upset by the murder of “Theo” – be upset at how this horrific murder is being abused by some in the Dutch government, as well as “terrorism experts.”

  • Chameleon

    @eslaporte,

    I would love to hear more about your work, so I look forward to your future contributions on Loonwatch.

    As I wrote in another thread, the word “terrorism” ironically becomes even more absurd when you accept and apply the official definition of it (by the National Counterterrorism Center, “NCTC”, of the U.S. government) to historical events. In this case, I took the unorthodox perspective of applying their definition strictly, and as they interpreted it, to the actions of the Founding Fathers of the United States itself. What I found is that the Founding Fathers of the United States would have to be found guilty — by the NCTC — of terrorism on a massive scale; and therefore that the Declaration of Independence would have to be considered — by the NCTC — as a terrorist manifesto. If you are interested in my comments and can’t find them, I can repost them in full. Though seemingly incredible and downright bombastic, the conclusion itself is merely a logical implication of the definition of “terrorism” being applied to an historical event when “terrorism” supposedly did not yet exist.

    The irony is merely the logical implication of the definition conveniently excluding all atrocities by state actors and including almost all violent resistance against occupying forces, who are deemed (by the NCTC) to be “noncombatant targets” when they have not initiated combat themselves.

  • Pingback: Lars Vilks defends decision to join Geller’s hate fest: “If the Ku Klux Klan had invited me, I would have gone” | Spencer Watch()

  • Last – how is “terrorism” defined?

    “Terrorism” has never had a consistent definition.
    We see in practice that “terrorism” usually means “a violent crime by Muslims,” no matter other possible motives.
    Anybody can call himself a “jihadist.” Anybody can call himself anything he/she wants to – claim he “did it for a jihad.”

    I lean toward abolition of the term “terrorism.” What it’s called makes no difference to victims and their families…

  • Solid Snake

    @eslaporte
    Nice post. I agree with everything you said.
    Actually it is a very interesting phenomena that almost all high profile crimes committed by Muslim are always classified and investigated as terrorism (itself an ambiguous sometimes meaningless term, but thats another topic)

  • @ Nassir H.

    First of all – the murder of “Theo” has never been studied by other fields of study, including criminology and from the perspective of street gangs and criminal subgroups. This murder also needs to be studied from the perspective of critical terrorism studies – and the Dutch government has used this murder to justify spying and labeling free expression by Muslim citizens as “radicalization.”
    It seems that many European countries want their own “9-11 attack” – as it justifies various security policies with regard to immigrants, and Muslim immigrants especially, including “fellowship” with the US. .

    The dominate view is that the killing of “Theo” was some kind of terrorist attack. Only the AIVD – Dutch intelligence service has said this – and other authors only cite the AIVD – meaning that only the AIVD claims Mohammed Bouyeri was a “terrorist” and Hofstad as “an international terrorist network.”

    I have plans to study and analyze the Theo van Gogh murder from the disciplines of criminology and critical terrorism studies. I have acquired extensive information and studies on street gangs in the Netherlands, the murder of “Theo” and the criminology perspective in terrorism and political violence studies.

    So – I am highly skeptic of the murder as an “act of terrorism,” especially in comparison into other high profile violence in the Netherlands that IS NOT labeled “terrorism.” Right now – I am working on an extensive national identity study for the Netherlands for a possible book that will contain a criminological study of the Theo van Gogh murder.

    Because I believe that the murder of “Theo” WAS NOT “terrorism”- but a murder by Mohammed Bouyeri for his own personal reasons and nothing else- I make NO apologizes!

  • Yes – the murder of “Theo” was only by one person – Mohammed Bouyeri – and only for the reasons of Mohammed Bouyeri.

    “Theo” was not killed by the Dutch Moroccan community …
    “Theo” was probably killed by a member of a street gang to raise his status in the gang, a common reason why street gang members commit high profile murders – like kill a police officer.
    So far, the only one who has said that Hofstad was “an international terrorist network” is the AIVD … and all other “experts” are an echo chamber for AIVD’s claims.

    Since there is NO unified “Muslim community” in the Netherlands … to claim that the murder of “Theo” is part of some “Muslim takeover” is absurd!
    There is NO effort to “bring sharia law” to the Netherlands.
    “Muslims” are not meaning anybody in the Netherlands.
    There are NO efforts on the part of “Muslims” to subvert the rule of law and the democratic society — but there is on the part of Geert Wilders.

    There is a question that Hofstad was just a youth street gang. Mohammed Bouyeri was probably just a street gang member. The murder of “Theo” has had little analysis from other fields of study- including criminology and critical terrorism studies. I am working on changing that in the near future…

    Now – we have an entire genre of dubious “jihad in the Netherlands” books and articles – but only AIVD has made the claim that the murder of “Theo” was “an act of terrorism” which could be questioned…

    The murder of “Theo” – by a single person for his own reasons – has now provided an excuse for the media and “terrorism experts” to claim “lobe wolf jihad” whenever a person of a Muslim background commits an act of violence.

    We seem to never see the same label of “terrorism” fixed to other acts committed by non-Muslims. This is especially true in the Netherlands.

    -Apeldoorn, 2009, April 30, Queen’s Day celebration – Karst Tates rams his black Honda through a crowd of parade watchers. The flying bodies were witnessed by the royal family from an open air bus – by Prince William and Princess Maximia – not a terrorist attack – even though Tates said he was targeting the Royals.

    -Alphen aan den Rijn – April 9, 2011 – Tristan van der Vlis – engages in a Mumbai-style shooting in a shopping mall – and fires of 100 shots in the attack that killed 7 and injured 17…and this was not a “terrorist attack.” It seems that in the Netherlands something is not “terrorism” unless the killer is a Muslim.

    And – as with the murder of “Theo” – the murder of a single person by another single person – this is a “terrorist attack,” “jihad in the Netherlands” – “al-Qeada in the Netherlands” and loads of other rubbish – and forever justifying labeling every single act of violence by suspects of a Muslim background as “terrorism.”

  • Sir david

    Apart from TROP , atlas bugs And Jihab Watch that is
    🙂

    Sir david

  • Sir David ( Illuminati membership number 5:32)

    Rockybore
    Can you advise me where I can read about the “two wrongs make a right” school of philosophy you obviously believe in .

    Sir David
    Angers

  • Nassir H.

    @RockyLore

    So LoonWatch accuses Lars Vilks of hate…

    His comment about the KKK speaks for itself.

    yet says nothing about the Muslims who kill over cartoons.

    Not true. Loonwatch has repeatedly condemned extremist Muslims. Your comment is a nonpoint, though, since this blog’s mission statement is “to monitor and expose the web’s plethora of anti-Muslim loons, wackos, and conspiracy theorists.”

    Who is the real hatemonger now? This is the same LoonWatch who praised the murderer who killed Theo van Gogh.

    Well that is, without a doubt, a lie. I say that as someone who has read most of the articles on Loonwatch. Again, Loonwatch has condemned Muslim extremists numerous times. On the other hand, Islamophobes can’t bring themselves to condemn violent rhetoric against Muslims (let alone actual violence like the recent sectarian violence against the Rohingya or the Bosnian genocide). In fact, one can easily find deeply conservative and patriotic Americans support all of the aforementioned on popular anti-Muslim websites.

    If you’re so resoundingly against any threat to freedom of speech, why not condemn Geert Wilders hypocrisy and his calls to tax hijabs and ban the Qur’an?

    As always, I’m not expecting a coherent response. You’ll probably pop up on another thread and make a whole new round of baseless assertions.

  • @Rocky Lore

    WOW the Loons are in over drive plz provide some eveidence

  • Chameleon

    @Rocky Lore,

    You say, “So LoonWatch accuses Lars Vilks of hate…yet says nothing about the Muslims who kill over cartoons. Who is the real hatemonger now? This is the same LoonWatch who praised the murderer who killed Theo van Gogh.”

    Is this a challenge? Are you prepared to be humiliated by facts, or do you just want to sit down and shut up now, remaining content in believing what your hate wants you to believe?

    On second thought, I don’t think I want to leave you with any such contentment. Here is the official word from Loonwatch (Danios himself) on the whole cartoon controversies (South Park, Danish cartoons, etc.), which is supported by every Muslim that I have ever seen post on Loonwatch:

    http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/04/south-park-controversy/

    I await your rebuttal with the pleasant thought of humiliating your hate with some more facts.

  • Rocky Lore

    So LoonWatch accuses Lars Vilks of hate…yet says nothing about the Muslims who kill over cartoons. Who is the real hatemonger now? This is the same LoonWatch who praised the murderer who killed Theo van Gogh.

  • Work by this “artist” must be quite bad. He now has to make his living through the Islamophobia industry. Sort of like Theo van Gogh, actually a rather bad film maker, who probably had to make “Submission” and insult Muslims to make a name for himself to sell his “art.”

    Maybe this “artist” could follow in the steps of Robert Spencer and claim to be an “expert” without actually being an expert.

  • mindy1

    I will be remembering 9/11 with sadness for the fallen, anger at the hate and prayers for peace-that is the best way to remember that day, not by causing more hate 🙁

  • Reynardine

    And if I were to depict this artist as a dog, I would be slandering all good dogs. And if I am not mistaken, it is not for their characters, loyal and noble, that dogs are in some places avoided; it is simply for some of the the things they like to eat and roll in.

  • Miriam

    Of course this man knew what he was saying/doing~ as to why he pursues this course is open for speculation….and because Sweden is a supposed democracy….his speech is a protected right. He’s demonstrated his ‘free speech’ (Hate) both spoken and “artistically”…..he’s become far more well known thru his hate mongering than most (struggling) graphic artists would imagine. He’s made his choice….he chose bigotry and hatred.
    Proving that the laws of physics apply to human interactions..he’s now receiving an equal equivalent/opposite reaction from the arts community….ostracism. Righteous response.
    As they exercise their right to refuse, reject and ostracize his ignorant racist bile.

    Bird and others said it well –he’s gotten the “associates” he deserves (geller et al) by taking this path along with indulging his craving for attention. A true narcissist. But haters always lose …especially in matters of the heart and spirit. This gives parents a perfect teaching opportunity on ‘values’….

  • Crow

    Lars vilks: I would accept an invitation from a nazi pos…oh wait…I already did…what a silly lars I am

  • Bird

    Lars reminds me of a woman who promised that she’d draw Muhammad (doing something evil) once a year (on draw Prophet Muhammad Day), and they don’t get very much comments on the website she post them on, as far as I know, but this guy, much like that woman I’ve just mentioned, only wish to seek attention for the crowd, I’ve never heard of Lars in my life and I couldn’t care less about his foolishness.

  • Ustadh

    Wow, scared White person, claiming victimhood for demonizing a whole religion and its adherents went on to make a lot of money joins other scared White people, demonizing the same religion and its adherents, who also are making a lot of money off of it, wouldn’t have a problem with accepting an invitation from the KKK, a group of Whites who terrorized, raped, lynched, murdered, beat, assaulted, tar and feathered, stole from, intimidated non-Whites for over a century.

    No, he knew what the F*%/k he was saying…Vilk, is a racist piece of s/hit!!

  • Nilufer R Sage

    And later he will “commit suicide” by jumping off his wallet.

  • @Emperor

    I wonder if he actually doesn’t realize how bad his statement makes him look.

Powered by Loon Watchers