“The secret of all victory lies in the organization of the non-obvious.” -Marcus Aurelius
I was going to write something clever about the severity of the situation in the UK and how freedom is vanishing fast to aid and abet the rapid Islamification of England. Instead, Ill just ask you to watch this yourself and form your own opinions.
This needs to be seen…
by Johan van den Dongen
Outgoing Minister Ernst Hirsch Ballin (Justice) has, from a very early stage, been personally involved in the decision making on whether or not to prosecute Geert Wilders.
This is evidenced by internal e-mail correspondence from 2008, between the public prosecutor’s office in The Hague (the top of the OM) and the public prosecutor in Amsterdam.
The information has quite some piquancy, because in our country the justice minister habitually keeps the necessary distance to prevent exposing the OM to changing political influences. In addition, with this information a different light is shed on the role of Hirsch Ballin as one of the fiercest CDA opponents of tolerating the support Wilders’ PVV [to a new coalition govenrment].
On March 14, 2008, the prosecutor-general and the prosecutor in Amsterdam emailed each other on the advise of Rick Lawson, professor of European Law at the University of Leiden. Lawson was asked by the OM for a mapping on whether prosecuting of Wilders would have a chance. On the last page of his ten pages analysis, Lawson concludes that it is “well-founded to prosecute Wilders”.
This opinion was, with both prosecutors, received with cheers, as can be established form the email correspondence: “What a superb piece!!!!” And: “Monday there will be a meeting with the Minister of Justice about this advise. We will try with all we can to provide as much input as possible to Harm Brouwer (OM chief, ed) for this conversation. Everything is welcome.”
Wilders’ lawyer Bram Moszkowicz is stunned by the internal information. “From this it shows that not only that at the highest ministerial level there has been spoken of the possible prosecution of my client, but moreover that there has been a matter of substantive political involvement in the decision to prosecute.”
Despite Lawson’s analysis, the prosecutor decided not to prosecute Wilders. The court however, later still ordered to do so.
According to a spokeswoman for OM, there is nothing strange about the involvement of Hirsch Ballin. “It is very common for the OM in cases with a social impact, to discusses and exchanges views with the minister. He is politically responsible for the OM and is regularly called to Parliament to explain why things will or will not be prosecuted. ALso when it concerns a prominent politician. The law provided that if the Minister disagrees with the OM, he may give a directive on how to still act otherwise, what in this case has not happened.”
Man reading this, feels like they are in Ottawa or something. I guess while Sanctimony is indeed Canada’s chief export, we do not have a monopoly on it.
Thanks to Snaphanen for this partial translation of this disgusting display from the Swedish Parliament:
from this editorial for Dagens Nyheter:
The greens and The Left [former communists] declared, that for environmental reasons they would not occupy the same building in the chancellery as the Sweden-democrats… …Furthermore they demanded seperate queues in the parliament cafeteria, so that they would not have to stand next to a Sweden-democrat waiting for lunch
I am not a lawyer, and neither am I familiar with the Dutch legal system. But clearly one can see from the proceedings so far that there are laws on the books in Dutch legal codes that a judge may not be biased before the evidence is seen. Here in this segment of day 3 of the trial, I have a very hard time believing the judge’s very weak attempt to cover up his clear bias when questioned by Geert’s lawyer on why it is understandable that the plaintiff would not want to view Geert’s movie Fitna.
For more excellent daily coverage and cometary on the Wilders trial including today’s, please visit Klein Verzet, the English language Dutch blog.
This from Klein Verzet, the excellent Dutch blog.
Today the trial against Geert Wilders continued with the same judges The trial day started with a screening of Fitna.
Before the screening we already had the first incident, a woman (plaintiff) asked if she could leave the room. She did not want to see Fitna she declared. The president of the court answers:
I can imagine
Wilder lawyer complained, he could not believe what he just had heard (again a value statement of the court).
See incident above and for the rest of the commentary please visit Klein Verzet by clicking here
brian.lilley – October 4th, 2010
There are stories that the mainstream media miss until they blow up. The case of Zijad Delic and his invitation to speak at an Islamic History Month event at military headquarters is a case in point.
As far as I can tell, no major media outlet picked up the story before Delic, an Imam and executive director of the Canadian Islamic Congress, had his appearance cancelled.
Now there is speculation mounting that conservative Christian groups, led by people like Charles McVety were the ones orchestrating this. That’s not exactly the case here.
The move against Delic started in an email campaign, the first notice of which I spotted around September 29th. It urged a call to action, for people to complain to the government that Islam was being given a privileged place over other religions with an official celebration of Islamic History Month at National Defence Headquarters. It also included the original DND announcement.
ISLAMIC HERITAGE MONTH CELEBRATION – 04 OCT 10
Join the Defence Visible Minority Advisory Group (DVMAG-NCR) on 04 October
2010 at 1000 hrs in the concourse of the MGen Pearkes building (101
Colonely By Drive, Ottawa) to celebrate Islamic Heritage Month.
Delic was scheduled to give a 20 minute talk, there were to be a pair of “cultural demonstrations” and cultural food tasting. While the rest of the program does go ahead, the talk by Delic will not.
One of the main questions in the early emails I received on this was “Why is Islam being given special treatment?”
Going on to point out that other religions are not given special months at National Defence Headquarters. It’s true there was an Anglican bishop that read a prayer when the new Governor General was sworn in last week but he could not even say the name of his God, referring to “Creator Spirit” and generally sounding like he was reading a United Nations brochure.
From the email campaign the story was picked up by bloggers such as Blazing Cat Fur, Five Feet of Fury, Free Canuckistan and others with similarly colourful names. These bloggers and their readers pushed the story for two or three days until the talk by Delic was cancelled late on Friday. As far as I can tell none of these bloggers is the Charles McVety type. They may be conservative but they are not card carrying members of the religious right. Continue Reading →
The Amsterdam district court rejected a request by Freedom Party Leader Geert Wilders, who is on trial for inciting hatred and insulting Muslims, to replace the judges hearing his case because they may be prejudiced.
“There are no weighty indications that the judges have given the impression of being prejudiced,” Judge Frans Bauduin, who was brought in to rule on the impartiality question, said at the court today. The trial, which was halted yesterday, will continue with the current judges tomorrow at 9 a.m. local time.
Presiding Judge Jan Moors yesterday, on the first day of the trial, told Wilders the court “reads newspapers and watches television” and that Wilders has been blamed by others for being “good in taking a stand and then avoiding a discussion.” By choosing not to testify “it seems you’re doing that today as well.”
Wilders, who has agreed to support the country’s new minority government, challenged the impartiality of the three- judge panel because of what Moors said, claiming “a fair trial isn’t possible anymore.”
“The words used by the presiding judge in that last sentence were chosen unfortunately,” Bauduin said. “They’ve given the requestor a wrong impression.”
Wilders, 47, is being prosecuted after complaints following a 2007 Dutch newspaper editorial he wrote that called the Koran “fascist” and compared it to Adolf Hitler’s book Mein Kampf. A year later, he released the movie “Fitna,” in which he calls on Muslims to rip out “hate-preaching” verses from the book.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jurjen van de Pol in Amsterdam at jv*******@*******rg.net.
This was done by the excellent English language blog out of the Netherlands, ‘Klein Verzet’ or ‘Little Resistance’ and in fact was one of the few sites I used to read daily before I started Vlad and inspired me to do all this work.
Today, it was the 1st real trial day in the prosecution against Geert Wilders and his opinions. The event is broadcasted live on Dutch state television and it’s quite a story:
The first amazing thing was that the court wanted to show Fitna in court. That means that for the first time, Fitna will be broadcasted on Dutch national television.
Second surprise was that at the start of the trial, Wilders his lawyer, unexpectedly stated that Wilders would use his right not to answer any questions during his trial, as he as his lawyer had advised him to do so.
His lawyer also asked the court to allow mister Wilders to make a small 2 minute statement in order for him to explain this decision. During the short statement Wilders defended free speech and declared that he has said what he has said and does not take anything back from it. Also he added that he can’t guarantee that anything that is attributed to him is also actually said by him.
The president of the court Jan Moorse then wanted to debate Wilders his decision, but again Wilders repeated that he wouldn’t not answer any questions in court. Then judge Jan Moorse amazingly did not accept his statement in which he took his right not to answer the court and even allowed him selves to make a value judgment about it. Judge Moorse said: that in the press Wilders has been criticized to make statements he is not willing to defend during debates and that he now seems to be doing the same thing here in court.
Here is a clip to which I added my thoughts fore and aft. Mostly aft. And yes, I broke the cardinal rule of not comparing things to Hitler because, well i did compare this mentality to Hitlers. I think it was fair in the context I meant it however. Many Utopians left unchecked and given enough slack tend to slaughter people in the millions to create utopias. Environmentalists are just a flavour of leftist and like communists before them, are sufficiently confident that they are right that they are ready to go farther and farther into the freedoms and rights of others to achieve their particular, and often misanthropic, utopias.
For a really good article on this clip as it was without my additions, please click here to Info-Wars.
Zombietime post about Ayers’ book Prairie Fire leads to his denial of Emeritus status
During Barack Obama’s 2008 run for the presidency, I dug up an extremely rare original edition of Prairie Fire, the forgotten communist manifesto co-written by Obama’s friend and colleague William Ayers, and I published excerpts of the book at zombietime.
As I wrote at the time, “This essay only exists to correct and unequivocally debunk claims routinely made by the mainstream media over the last few weeks … that William Ayers wasn’t such a bad guy after all, and that it is no shame to be associated with him.” Read the full essay to see the full extent of the devastating evidence against Ayers.
In my exposé, I highlighted what I thought were the most noteworthy aspects of Prairie Fire, including the part where Ayers brags about and then lists in detail the numerous terrorist bombings he carried out in the 1970s; where he describes himself as a communist, and cites his desire for a communist revolution to overthrow the United States; where he cites the many motivations driving the Weather Underground’s terror campaign, most of which had nothing whatsoever to do with the Vietnam War (as the media endlessly claims to this day); and so on. I also listed the many close links between Ayers and Obama.
Almost as an aside, I pointed out halfway through the report an absurd detail that I noticed by accident when scanning one of the book’s pages — that Ayers and his co-authors had dedicated Prairie Fire to (among dozens of lesser known criminals and radicals) Sirhan Sirhan, the assassin who killed Robert F. Kennedy.
I wonder if the soviets were ever this bad.
By Laura Clark
Last updated at 8:57 AM on 23rd September 2010
Teachers are being forced to report children as young as three to the authorities for using alleged ‘racist’ language, it was claimed last night.
Munira Mirza, a senior advisor to London Mayor Boris Johnson, said schools were being made to spy on nursery age youngsters by the Race Relations Act 2000.
More than a quarter of a million children have been accused of racism since it became law, she said.
Spied upon: ‘Racist language’ by children must be reported. (Posed by models)
Writing in Prospect magazine, she said: ‘The more we seek to measure racism, the more it seems to grow.
‘Teachers are now required to report incidents of racist abuse among children as young as three to local authorities, resulting in a massive increase of cases and reinforcing the perception that we need an army of experts to manage race relations from cradle to grave.
‘Does this heightened awareness of racism help to stamp it out? Quite the opposite. It creates a climate of suspicion and anxiety.’
The Act compelled 43,000 public authorities, including schools and churches, ‘to promote good relations between persons of different racial groups’. Details of the incidents are logged on databases.
Teachers are allowed to report racism even if the alleged ‘victim’ was not offended or if the child does not understand what they were saying.
Freedom of Information replies obtained by civil liberties group the Manifesto Club show that between 2002 and 2009, 280,000 incidents have been reported.
Published: Monday, September 20, 2010, 10:13 AM Updated: Monday, September 20, 2010, 10:13 AM
Four Christian missionaries arrested in June at the Dearborn Arab International Festival are heading to trial today after a judge denied a motion to dismiss the case.
Attorneys for the evangelists, who are part of a group known as “Act 17 Apologetics,” say their clients were attempting to engage Muslims in a dialogue about their faith.
But critics argue the suspects hoped to cause a scene at the festival, and Dearborn Police Chief Ron Haddad explained they were arrested for disorderly conduct to ensure they did not provoke violence from other attendees.
Defense attorney Robert Muise of the Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center sought to dismiss the case on the grounds the arrests were unconstitutional — an argument law professors say has merit — but the Detroit Free Press reports 19th District Court Judge Mark Somers on Friday denied the request.
“I think the evidence will show they did absolutely nothing wrong,” Muise told the newspaper, explaining he’s confident his clients will prevail at trial.
The case is being watched closely by First Amendment scholars and political pundits
Or at least that is what he said in 1999. Check this clip from Breitbart.com especially at around 1:00 to 1:10