If that link was appended to my comment by way of reply, I SAW the video. What I would like to know is who produced a transcript full of SPELLING errors and other errors that were TYPED OUT by someone who clearly isn't very GOOD at it?

I'd like to know how this transcript was generated, because it appears to have been written and or edited by a sub-moron.

On the distinction between Islam and Islamism (or lack thereof) - sure. But Spencer has repeatedly suggested that the "Wilders said ban the Koran" meme was turnabout of a suggestion Wilders had made merely to illustrate a point, and that he would not actually call for the Koran to be banned in the Netherlands. That is fact.

Wilders himself however, may take a different view of his own statements.

Jacoby: "Were you being rhetorical, or did you mean it literally?"

Wilders: " I meant it."

Glad to see the Wilders issue getting attention. The way he has been treated is appalling, and our indifference to it is even more so.

But I'm not sure Robert Spencer can continue suggesting that Geert Wilders is not advocating for a ban on the Koran in the Netherlands. He clearly IS making at least a legalistic argument that the book should be classed with Mein Kampf (something that might bring a shrug in a land where that doesn't mean anything - but over there, it does.)

Those laws don't merely ban books either. It's also illegal to BE a Nazi. It's illegal to wear a swastika. When Mr. Wilders says "there is one red line - incitement of violence" he actually DOES seem to be calling for a ban on Islamic activity altogether (another quote: "Islam and Islamism, it's exactly the same.") If that is indeed his position, it would certainly go far beyond anything I've heard Robert Spencer advocate on JihadWatch. I'd like to hear Mr. Spencer address this, and if possible, clarify the issue with Mr. Wilders.