This morning Lord Malcolm Pearson, a member of the British House of Lords, announced that he has invited Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch Parliament, to show the movie Fitna (see it here ) in a committee room of the House of Lords next Thursday (12 February). Mr. Wilders has been asked to address a private meeting with members of the British Parliament, explaining to the Peers and MPs why he made Fitna and to engage in an open and frank discussion with them.
This afternoon Mr. Wilders received a letter from the British ambassador to the Netherlands saying that he is a “persona non grata“ in the United Kingdom. The ambassador told Mr. Wilders that he is a threat to public security and public harmony because of the controversy created by Fitna. Mr. Wilders intends to go to London anyway. “Let them arrest me in Heathrow,” he says.
If Mr. Wilders is denied entry to the United Kingdom, it will be the first time that Britain refuses entry to an elected politician from another member state of the European Union. The Dutch government has lodged formal objections with the British government over the unprecedented barring of an EU parliamentarian by another EU country.
Category Archives: Holland
Interview with Geert Wilders.
This is fascinating. For those of you old enough, I would ask you to imagine that you are listening to this interview in the 1960s or 1970s. You would all think it was mildly funny as what he is saying is so blatantly obvious that it would appear that he was talking to the mildly retarded. Back then, we could not have imagined it would ever be necessary to have to speak this way about a nation in the ‘west’.
The idea that someone would have to explain why he is for women’s rights and freedom of speech would seem, anachronistic at best. Geert wilders is one of the few politicians left who is not racist but is simply a classical liberal. We need millions and millions more of him and now if we hope to salvage any remnants of the finest most reasonable civilization the world has ever seen. Short of that, it will be washed in rivers of blood with no guarantees as to how it comes out.
CBN video on Geert Wilders charges by the Dutch Court
Great essay about Geert Wilders from Anti Jihad.org
A great man once warned that we “cannot sit idly by” and “not be concerned about what happens” in other places as injustice happens, equality is crushed, and liberties are threatened. He told us that: “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.”
That great man dared to defy an ideology of identity-based supremacism, an ideology based on denying equality to all men and women, an ideology based on the lie that some are inherently superior to others simply based on their race, religion, creed, or national origin. That great man challenged a supremacist ideology whose “ugly record of brutality is widely known,” and he did not fear to name it or protest against its oppression of others. As a result, he was threatened and charged by some with actions that would “incite to hatred and violence.” Those against him felt that a line had to be drawn to stop his protestations and stop his message of defiance against supremacism. That man was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a man in America, who is still celebrated today and honored today as a courageous leader in defending equality and liberty.
But just a few days after the United States’ annual honoring of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s life and courage in defying supremacism, another man in another part of the world in another era, was being charged once again with inciting hatred for defying another supremacist ideology. That man was Geert Wilders, a legislator in the Netherlands, who has dared to defy the ideology of Islamic supremacism. Mr. Wilders has challenged Islamic supremacism because of its leaders’ threats against humanity, because of Islamic supremacism’s goals to conquer the Earth, and because of Islamic supremacism’s refusal to acknowledge the inalienable human rights of equality and liberty.
Like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. did not fear to recognize that this problem dealt with the identity-based supremacist ideology of “white supremacy,” so Geert Wilders has also not feared to address the identity of those who would promote an Islamic supremacy. Like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. challenged whites, so Geert Wilders has challenged Islam. Defying any supremacist ideology requires the honesty to name the problem, so that humanity can find a solution. Whispering among ourselves in the dark in the face of a brutal supremacist ideology will only ensure that no one can gather the courage to light the first candle of wisdom to help humanity find the answers we desperately need.
In the case of Geert Wilders, a court was repulsed by his comments comparing Islamic supremacism’s beliefs to those expressed in Hitler’s Mein Kampf. That court was not repulsed by the daily calls for killing Jews by Islamic supremacists. That court was not repulsed by the antisemitic hate that is regularly channeled in the Islamic supremacist media. That court was not repulsed by the regular calls for the destruction of Israel by Islamic supremacists. That court was not repulsed by the references to the antisemitic Protocols of the Elders of Zion promoted in Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf within the very charter of the Islamic supremacist Hamas organization, a group defended by protestors in the Netherlands over the past few weeks. That court was not repulsed by other Netherlands politicians defending calls for an intifada against Israel, while Amsterdam crowds called for “Jews to the gas.”
For the rest of this excellent essay please visit this site where it originated. Thank you.
A few links for January 27 2009. The canaries in the coal mine post.
First, a very sad email that was republished in the Huffington Post. Really hard to read as it’s so sad. The fact that the MSM is electing to ignore these issues speaks to the clear complicity at some level. Whether its fear of reprisal from violent groups or as likely, fear of accusations of some kind which would threaten the assets of the media companies themselves through ‘lawfare’ or most likely some combination of both. The fact remains. Jews are the canaries in the coal mine. It never never stops there.
Dear Brett,
I am sending you this e-mail regarding the situation in France concerning the Israeli offensive in the Gaza strip. I doubt I will tell you something that you already don’t know, but still, things look pretty grim right now. We already reached an all-time low in this country during the second intifada. The phenomenon which appeared during that time, especially in the high schools located in the Parisian suburbs, where the majority of the students are Muslim, has not disappeared.To summarize in a few words a very complicated and painful situation, it is impossible for an individual, whether a student or a teacher, to say that he or she is a Jew. If you say so, you’ll end in a hospital. Don’t show any hostility to Al-Qaeda, or Hamas, you’ll be exposed to the same kind of violence. You can also talk to some of these kids, they’re open to discussion. Many of them dream to become a martyr and blow up themselves. It’s after all understandable, that’s what they hear in their mosque.
The situation right now is much worse. And it’s only the beginning. We had demonstrations every Saturday in every big city in France, and also smaller cities, against the Israeli bombings in Gaza. There’s nothing wrong with that per se. We live in a democracy after all. These demonstrations have a different flavour. The 20.000 people demonstrating in Paris were not in the streets to claim peace but to shout that Israel should be destroyed. Israeli flags were burned, the support was for Hamas, not Fatah (as you know, this organization has betrayed his own people), and you could see giant pictures of Nasrallah. One of the sentences you could hear, repeatedly, was “Death to the Jews and the Zionists”. This was going on in Paris among other places. Two weeks ago the demonstrators stopped Place de l’Opera, shouted Allah is great and prayed [to] Allah. This is a fact, not bad science-fiction. In Mulhouse, the demonstrators wanted to end the day at the synagogue, and destroy it. The police prevented it.
Clip from Dutch TV on the charges against Geert.
You may have to watch this a few times to make heads or tails of what is being said here even though it is subtitled in English. The forces in favor of prosecuting Geert of course have to use some slippery language to justify why this is a good thing. I will have to see it again before it makes any sense to me at all.
More on how Holland has become totalitarian
Pat Condell weighs in on Geert Wilders situation in Holland.
I know as soon as I heard about Geert’s new charge in the Netherlands, I was hoping Pat would come out with a new video. I’m delighted to see that he has. Here it is.
Another stellar article about Geert WIlders in the Netherlands from GOV
It’s time for a change!
by H. Numan
Last week Geert Wilders was indicted for highly questionable charges by a kangaroo court that already convicted him before his trial has yet begun. In fact, his case hasn’t even been placed on the agenda of the court as yet. Already convicted? Yes, because of a legal loophole (art. 12 wetboek van strafvordering) and biased judges. The court found that the public prosecutors hadn’t done their homework properly and decided that Wilders must sentenced after all, which means a trial is actually just for show. They already indicated clearly what their verdict will be.
The loophole? Well, any interested party, being a person or juristic body, can force the court to prosecute a case that was rejected by the public prosecutor. Our left wing friends and lots of Muslims jumped at it. (art. 12 wetboek van strafvordering)
The government, by means of (in)justice minister Hirsh Ballin, lied (as he usually does) that it will not be a political trial. This is the same minister who refuses to abolish the obsolete blasphemy law (art. 137 wetboek van strafrecht) against the wishes of the House, and actually wants to strengthen it by abolishing it, but placing it elsewhere as a discriminatory criminal offense. Where it can and will be used to muzzle anyone. Guess who first? And yes, this very same minister that sent the dogs of justice to devour Gregorius Nekschot. That minister.
Of course it is a political trial. What else can it be? If Wilders is prosecuted for inciting hatred, why aren’t all the imams that do so on a daily basis on trial, imam Fawaz leading the line? If one can compare the Bible with Mein Kampf, why not the Koran? If a book, religious or not, is above criticism, we are in effect setting up a totalitarian regime.
I will go even further: compared with a common telephone directory the Koran is worthless. A telephone directory doesn’t contain as many errors and is much better organized. Also, a telephone directory is based on verifiable facts. Not fairy tales and horror stories. Nor does it promote hatred.
But I think our multicultural friends have bitten off far more than they can chew. For, can we change? Yes, we can! And even better: we are already changing! There is a very good reason why the left can’t manage the Internet. Remember the times when a newspaper bluntly stated “this or that has a 95% approval rate”? You knew it was wrong. Everybody you talked with said so. But nothing was and could be done about it. Yes, you could write a letter to the editor. Usually it would not be printed. If it was, nine out of ten selected letters supported the approval rating. Yours was added for variety’s sake.
Enter the Internet. “Wilders will be indicted”. Headline in De Telegraaf. Within one hour (!) eight thousand comments adorned the article supporting Wilders. The blogging world, at least in Holland is currently almost overloaded. People investigate who are the judges, the accusers and the whole case. Facts that are normally hidden are suddenly published for everybody to see. The official plea (pdf) ‘magically’ dropped in somebody’s mailbox.
Suddenly the accusers as well as the judges are in the spotlight. And boy, how they hate it! Their agendas are open for everybody to peruse. The left hand touches another left hand. Dark liaisons between government subsidies, non-functional ‘art groups’ and judges who (surprise, surprise) are in their board of directors or trustees…
A pat Condell video I would like to dedicate to Geert Wilders
It’s worth thinking about the nature of the charges against Geert and the meaning of due process in this case. He was charged among other similar things with comparing the Koran with Hitlers Mein Kampf. Imagine if you would that the Dutch court after trying this charge on the basis not of whether or not one may say this thing, but whether or not it is a fair comparison which appears to be the direction of the proceeding. Even if it isn’t it will be percieved to be as such. Imagine if the courts found that it was (as it in fact is) a reasonable comparison to make. The Dutch courts may well see the start of even more profound open hostility to the indigenous Dutch than already exists in Holland. If I can see this the court of appeals can. In essence, this is not a charge against Geert Wilders but a conviction with a slight delay before sentencing.
On a quasi related matter, here is an article about how a British holocaust survivor begged his family to leave the UK for the same reasons his family left Germany right before the war. Just in case we thought England was still a liberal democracy.
Ezra Levant writes on Geert Wilders
There are a number of excellent articles appearing online about Geert Wilders and the Dutch appeals court descision to try him on the criminal charge of offending Islam. Few on planet earth are more qualified to write on Geert’s situation than Canada’s Ezra Levant who faced his own very similar inquisition in Canada’s ‘human rights commission’.
This article by Ezra is a little longer than most of the others I will post or link to here but it is more than worth reading, it may be an obligation for those of us wishing to preserve any aspects of liberal democracy as opposed to the proxy sharia law more and more of the western world is now subject to. To be clear, many nations are now charging people who speak plain truth about the consequences of Islam in the west with thought crimes linked to inciting hatred. Yet none of the Muslims who advocate genocide, subjugation and beating of women, Islamic supremacy and the destruction of liberal democracy are being charged with these same crimes. Truly pointing out the hate speech of others is now the greater crime than the hate speech itself in more than just Canada but across an increasingly islamified Europe. This is sharia law. To make blasphemy of Islam a crime and no other form of blasphemy.
Below please find a few articles on Geert starting with this most excellent one by Ezra Levant.
The Dutch court of appeal has ruled that Geert Wilders, the Member of Parliament and anti-terrorism activist, must stand trial for hate speech.
You can read the English page of the court’s website announcing the decision here.
It is a national suicide note, a white flag of surrender flown by a once-great empire in the face of illiberal fascists and hoodlums. It is a homicide note, too — announcing the murder of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. And it is a warning note to other Western democracies. The warning is this: liberal democracy, multiculturalism and immigration — pick any two.
Holland has picked multiculturalism and immigration, and has heaved liberal democracy overboard.
The announcement is so eye-scratchingly stupid, it really must be read line for line. Here goes. (The spelling, punctuation and grammatical errors are from the court’s own English translation):
Amsterdam, 21 january 2009 – On 21 January 2009 the Court of Appeal in Amsterdam ordered the criminal prosecution of the member of parliament Geert Wilders for the incitement to hatred and discrimination based on his statements in various media about moslims and their belief.
Did you catch that? It’s just like the execrable section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Incitement to… what? Violence? Murder? Riot? No. Incitement to hatred.
Hatred is an emotion. And apparently in Holland, “making” someone feel that emotion is a crime. And inciting “discrimination” is, too. Not just discrimination itself, mind you. But inciting someone to discriminate. The Dutch court has not announced the prosecution of anyone who Wilders has “incited” to discriminate against someone else. But they’re still charging Wilders with discrimination, once removed — even if that discrimination hasn’t happened, and isn’t logically tied to his political criticisms of Islamic fascism. (Question: don’t we all have a duty to incite each other to discriminate against — or at least hate — fascists who would destroy our liberal way of life?)
In addition, the Court of Appeal considers criminal prosecution obvious for the insult of Islamic worshippers because of the comparisons made by Wilders of the islam with the nazism.
I appreciate the honesty. This is the criminalization of “insults”.
Of course, the comparison of radical Islam and Naziism can be found in their fascist, anti-democratic and illiberal streaks. And — something the Dutch should know — anti-Semitism. But, more practically, if comparing people to Nazis is now a crime, how about the countless comparisons of Jews to Nazis — comparisons ubiquitous at the United Nations conference in Durban, just to pick one big example?
The Court of Appeal rendered judgment as a consequence of a number of complaints about the non-prosecution of Wilders for his statements in various media about moslims and their belief. The complainants did not agree with the decision of the public prosecution which decided not to give effect to their report against Wilders.
Geert Wilders in Jerusalem. video speech
I believe I have posted this before. But having watched it again, I believe it is worth posting again. Geert is in the news again for his views but this time because his own government in Holland, a government of which he is an elected member, has turned on him and charging him with crimes of speech and thought. George Orwell would not be proud. But neither would he be surprised.
Mark Steyn on Geert Wilders and the Dutch courts. As expected, Steyn nails it.
Each incident that Mr. Steyn mentions in this article has been clearly detailed and documented here on Vlad. You can dig around for the links if you want to verify any of it. Its worth mentioning that as usual, Mark understated his own case. The Dutch policy of ‘non escalation’ was the grounds to prevent Dutch news crews from filming the destruction of the mural mentioned here in this article. But ultimately its to one purpose. To create a false impression of Islamic tolerance of it’s host nation.
Dutch courage [Mark Steyn]
Last year, The New York Times ran a story (front page, above the fold, gosh) on my troubles with the Canadian “thought police”, at the end of which I’m quoted as follows:
“Western governments are becoming increasingly comfortable with the regulation of opinion. The First Amendment really does distinguish the U.S., not just from Canada but from the rest of the Western world.”
The latest jurisdiction to get way too “comfortable with the regulation of opinion” is the Netherlands. As Andrew noted below, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal has ordered prosecutors to put the politician and film-maker Geert Wilders on trial for “making anti-Islamic statements”.
The Dutch, like the Canadians, think they can maintain social peace by shriveling the bounds of public discourse and bringing what little remains under state regulation. But one notices that the coercive urge, which comes so naturally to Euro-progressives, only goes in one direction. The Swedish Chancellor of Justice shuts down the investigation into the Grand Mosque of Stockholm for selling tapes urging believers to kill “the brothers of pigs and apes” (ie, Jews) because that’s simply “the everyday climate in the rhetoric”. The masked men marching through the streets of London with placards threatening to rain down another 9/11 on the infidels are protected by a phalanx of Metropolitan Police officers. The PC nellies of the Canadian “Human Rights” Commission, happy to hound the last neo-Nazi in Saskatchewan posting to the Internet from his mum’s basement, won’t go anywhere near Abou Hammaad Sulaiman Dameus al-Hayitia, the big-time Montreal imam whose book says infidels are “evil people”, Jews “spread corruption and chaos”, and homosexuals should be “exterminated”.
Instead, the state’s response to explicit Islamic intimidation is to punish those foolish enough to point out that intimidation. You don’t have to be as intemperate as Minheer Wilders can sometimes be: In the Netherlands even the most innocuous statement can get you into trouble. To express his disgust at Theo van Gogh’s murder, the artist Chris Ripke put up a mural outside his studio showing an angel and the words “Thou shalt not kill”. But the cops thought this was somehow a dig at the local mosque and so came round, destroyed the mural, arrested the TV news crew filming it, and wiped their tape. The Dutch have determined to commit societal euthanasia, and dislike fellows pointing out it might not be as painless as they’ve assumed.
Petition to the Dutch Government objecting to the prosecution of Geert Wilders.
As many of you already know the Dutch Government has seen fit to reverse a previous decision to not persecute Geert Wilders for speaking out against the destruction of liberal secular Dutch values by an increasingly powerful Islamic presence within Holland.
I have not blogged anything about this as there is so much good information all over the net on Gates of Vienna for example and elsewhere. I will however post the link to the petition so as many people can sign it as easily as possible. Please have a look and consider this one small action of civil disobedience. The Dutch Government and by proxy all governments really need to understand that the people of the world or at least many of us, take freedom of speech very seriously even if we do not agree with it but for the love of (insert god of choice) especially when we do.
From the venerable Gates of Vienna…
“I Will Not Stand Trial Alone”
by Baron Bodissey
There’s one thing you can say about the Dutch political establishment: it is thoroughly immune to irony.
The images of burning cars and firebombed synagogues have barely faded from the TV screens of the Netherlands.
The cries of “Heil Hitler!” and “Jews to the gas!” that mingled with “Allahu akhbar!” are still echoing in the glass-strewn streets.
Yet Geert Wilders — who speaks out against these barbaric forces, and proposes to halt the Islamization of his country in order to put a stop to them — is the one who is being prosecuted for “hate speech”.
The true heirs of National Socialism rage unimpeded through the streets of Europe, while Geert Wilders is the one who “incites hatred” and “insults groups of people”.
Go figure.
According to Elsevier, as translated by our Flemish correspondent VH:
Wilders: Court decision is an assault on free speech
By Claudia van Zanten
The PVV leader said he was deeply affected by the ruling of the court in Amsterdam. The court decided Wednesday to prosecute PVV leader Geert Wilders for “discrimination, incitement to hatred, and insulting groups of people.”
“This is apparently is the way the Netherlands sticks together. If you give your opinion, you run the risk of being prosecuted. Taking part in the public debate has become a dangerous activity,” Wilders said in a response.
Islamization of the Netherlands
“If I have to stand trial, I will not be alone, stand trial alone, but also with the hundreds of thousands of Dutch people who reject the Islamization of the Netherlands,” says the PVV leader.
“Their opinion is only represented in The Hague [parliament] by the Party for Freedom. Who else will stand for our culture when I have to remain silent? This strengthens me in these harsh days,” he continues.
Wilders is worried of the costs of the court case. “We depend on small donations. The PVV is the only party that is not conditional on making itself dependent on subsidies. The ruling of the Court will endanger the survival of the Party for Freedom. The hundreds of thousands we will loose on the costs are impossible for us to afford.”
“A Black Day”
Dutch courts decide to prosecute Geert Wilders after all.
This will be a trial to watch closely. It will have repercussions for freedom of speech all over the world as well as a nations ability to be self determining. Should Wilders be convicted and sentenced in any way for his pro Dutch and western values and his stance against unbridled Islamic immigration and the values Islam carries, it will almost certainly add fuel to any fire against those few in other western nations who would preserve anything traditionally western and by this I mean liberalism. Keep a close eye on this matter.
Dutch court rules that anti-Islamic lawmaker should be prosecuted
A right-wing lawmaker should be prosecuted for inciting racial hatred with anti-Islamic statements that include calling the Quran a “fascist book,” a Dutch court ruled Wednesday.
Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders made headlines around the world in March 2008 with his film “Fitna,” which juxtaposed Quranic verses against a background of violent film clips and images of terrorism by Islamic radicals.
In 2007, Wilders called for a ban on the Quran “the same way we ban ‘Mein Kampf.'” He said both Adolf Hitler’s work and the Muslim holy book contain passages that contradict Western values.
The Amsterdam Appeals Court called Wilders’ statements in his film, newspaper articles and media interviews “one-sided generalizations … which can amount to inciting hatred.”
The court’s ruling reverses a decision last year by the public prosecutor’s office , which said Wilders’ film and interviews were painful for Muslims but not criminal.
Wilders told Dutch media it was a “black day for myself and for freedom of speech.”
The decision set the stage for what will likely be a highly charged trial touching on the declining Dutch tolerance toward a large immigrant population from Muslim countries, mainly Morocco and Turkey. Dutch attitudes shifted markedly after the 2004 murder of filmmaker Theo van Gogh by a radical Dutch Muslim.
Wilders, whose party has nine lawmakers in the 120-seat lower house of Dutch Parliament, has built his popularity largely on tapping into fear and resentment among Dutch voters of Muslim immigrants.
“I’ve had enough of Islam in the Netherlands; let not one more Muslim immigrate,” he wrote once in national newspaper De Volkskrant. “I’ve had enough of the Quran in the Netherlands: Forbid that fascist book.”
The three judges said they had weighed Wilders’ anti-Islamic rhetoric against his right to free speech, and ruled he had even gone beyond the normal leeway given to politicians.
Because Wilders has not yet been charged, it is not clear what maximum penalty he could face if convicted.
While judges in the Netherlands generally are loathe to become involved in public debate, the court said it was making an exception in the case of Wilders’ comments about Islam.
“The court considers this so insulting for Muslims that it is in the public interest to prosecute Wilders,” a summary of the court’s decision said.
Gerard Spong, a prominent lawyer who joined Islamic groups in pushing for Wilders’ prosecution, welcomed the decision.
“This is a happy day for all followers of Islam who do not want to be tossed on the garbage dump of Naziism,” Spong told reporters in Amsterdam.