Category Archives: Holland

Stunning testimony at the trial of Geert Wilders.

Posted on by

Thanks to the Counter Jihad Collective, and especially the work of V.H. as translator and the good Baron over at Gates of Vienna, we have managed to translate and subtitle a lot of the testimony given by the judge (I still don’t exactly understand that as procedure) reading from Wafa Sultan and others, on behalf of Geert Wilders.

This testimony, written by Hans Jansen, is the most blunt and insightful of all. Yes it is nearly an hour, but well worth it. Jansen does not mince words and responds to all the questions asked of him with tremendous clarity eliminating irrelevant assumptions from the questions and then discussing the pertinent aspects of Islam relative to the charges against Geert Wilders directly. This really is an excellent watch. Hans is an Arabist with world class credentials on Arabic and Islamic history and culture.

Dutch TV interviews the new, Dutch Defence League and others

Posted on by

This is a worthwhile clip. There is of course, a huge demonstration planned for Amsterdam on Saturday Oct 30 with some EDL members. This is an interview with the Dutch chapter, as well as a leader of the self labelled, ‘Anti Fascists’ where he is quite clear that it is them who typically initiates the violence.

Please read this post on the upcoming demo in The Netherlands:

The president of the Supreme Court says remarks made by anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders “undermine” the judiciary.

Posted on by

Radio Netherlands:

Speaking on television, Supreme Court President Geert Corstens said statements such as those made by Mr Wilders about his hate-speech trial “address in an erroneous manner” feelings living among the public.

Mr Wilders has repeatedly denounced his hate-speech trial as a “political trial” aimed at limiting the freedom of expression. On Friday he said he had “lost all confidence” in the judges trying him on charges of group insult, inciting hatred and discrimination. A review panel later that day granted his lawyer’s request to have the judges dismissed for creating an appearance of bias.

The Supreme Court president said undermining the judiciary was all the more serious in the case of an MP such as Mr Wilders. Mr Corsten said it was an MP’s task to help ensure the stability of the constitutional state.

© Radio Netherlands Worldwide

Dutch MP Wilders to face retrial

Posted on by

(UKPA) – 18 minutes ago

A court in the Netherlands has ordered a retrial before a new panel of judges in anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders’ hate speech trial.

Wilders called for the judges to be dismissed after a defence witness alleged improper conduct by a member of an appeals panel directly involved in the case.

A hastily convened panel at the Amsterdam District Court ruled that Wilders’ objections were valid. That means the trial which began in January must be repeated from the beginning with new judges.

Wilders faces charges of inciting hatred against Muslims for many remarks, including some equating Islam with fascism and violence, and others calling for a ban on the Koran and a tax on Muslim headscarves.

UPDATE: From http://www.chron.com

Dutch retrial ordered for Wilders hate speech case

By TOBY STERLING Associated Press Writer © 2010 The Associated Press

Oct. 22, 2010, 10:39AM

AMSTERDAM — A Dutch court ordered a retrial Friday for anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders, sending the closely-watched hate speech case back to square one before a whole new panel of judges.

The far-right politician faces charges of inciting hatred against Muslims for many remarks, including some equating Islam with fascism and violence and others calling for a ban on the Quran and a tax on Muslim headscarves.

Wilders accused judges at the Amsterdam District Court of bias and called for their dismissal after they refused to recall a defense witness who wrote on a weblog that a member of an appeals panel directly involved in the case had improperly contacted him.

A hastily convened substitute panel ruled Friday that Wilders’ objections were valid, which means the trial that began in January must restart from the beginning with new judges.

Wilders welcomed the decision.

“This gives me a new chance on a new fair trial,” he said in an e-mail to The Associated Press. “I am confident that I can only be acquitted because I have broken no law but spoke the truth and nothing but the truth and exercised my freedom of speech in an important public debate about the dangerous totalitarian ideology called Islam.”

Judge G. Marcus said the panel understood Wilders’ “fear that the court’s decision displays a degree of bias … and under those circumstances accepts the appeal.”

Since the charges were filed, Wilders’ party has become part of the Netherland’s ruling conservative government, making him one of the most powerful politicians in the nation.

Wilders’ case pits his right to freedom of speech against the right of Muslims to worship freely. Dozens of complaints had been filed against Wilders by Muslims who said they felt insulted or threatened by remarks such as “let not one more Muslim immigrate” and “I’ve had enough of the Quran in the Netherlands: Forbid that fascist book.”

Prosecutors initially refused to take the case, saying Wilders’ remarks are part of legitimate political debate. But they were ordered to do so by appeals judges, who said there was sufficient evidence for a hate speech trial.

Defense witness Hans Jansen, called as an expert on Islamic culture, wrote on his personal website that he had been approached at a dinner party by one of the appeals judges, Tom Schalken.

“He kept steering the conversation back to the Wilders case,” Jansen wrote. “He tried to convince me that his decision to drag Wilders in front of the Amsterdam District Court was correct.”

Wilders earlier had asked the court to dismiss the judges because one said that Wilders appeared to be dodging debate by remaining silent in court. That motion was rejected.

The politician asked again Friday that the judges be dismissed, calling Schalken’s contact with Jansen “scandalous.”

“A judge that’s part of my process in the sense that he decided I should be prosecuted … without blinking an eye goes to dinner and tries to convince a witness that he’s right,” Wilders told a new panel of judges convened to rule on the dismissal. “I wonder which circus I’ve landed in here.”

A conservative government that depends on Wilders’ Freedom Party to reach a one-vote majority in parliament took office this month. In return for his support, the government has vowed to turn away more asylum seekers, halve the number of new immigrants from non-Western countries, ban face-concealing Muslim garb for women in public and force immigrants to pay for their own mandatory citizenship classes.

The other side in the Geert Wilders debate

Posted on by

Here is a rather compelling video clip. This is a plaintiff who I believe, is representing various Muslim organizations in Holland and is suing Geert as well as laying the criminal charges against Mr. Wilders shows his real contempt for all things Dutch here.

As an afterthought, the guy “dancing through the courtroom” reminds me a lot of this moment from Monty Python

IT”S OVER! ALL CHARGES TO BE DROPPED FOR WILDERS!

Posted on by

Please click over to Gates of Vienna for the details. The judge may not accept the recommendation of the crown attorney.

A Giant blow for freedom! Get out the Champagne and your best Sunday ham!

Prosecutors ask for Wilders acquittal on all charges

Analysis & Opinion

  • Wilders’s anti-Islam film screened in Dutch court
  • Dutch anti-Islam lawmaker Wilders challenges judges at hate speech trial

    • AMSTERDAM | Fri Oct 15, 2010 10:50am EDT

    AMSTERDAM Oct 15 (Reuters) – Prosecutors asked a Dutch court on Friday to acquit anti-immigration lawmaker Geert Wilders on charges of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims.

    Prosecutors, who had already called on the court to drop a charge that Wilders insulted Muslims by comparing Islam to Nazism, said his comments targeted Islam and not Muslims as a group. They said he also had the right as a politician to make statements about perceived problems in society. (Reporting by Aaron Gray-Block; Editing by Louise Ireland)

    Please enjoy this little tribute I did for Geert and many like him through history with perhaps the most joyful music ever written.

    More strong evidence of bias in the Geert Wilders trial.

    Posted on by

    Translated from Dutch media by VH with much thanks!

    Hirsch Ballin was consulted over a trial

    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.”

    A day at a show-trial. Geert Wilders being hung out to dry

    Posted on by

    Please read this play-by-play over at Klein Verzet:

    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.

    Jan Moors repeats political smear against Geert Wilders as if they are facts.

    The rest is at the link at the top. Please read to see how democracy and due process of law becomes tyranny and Torquemada show trials.

    The New Dutch Government, the EU, and the Wilders Trial

    Posted on by

    Thanks to The Baron at Gates of Vienna for this post:

    Rutte-Verhagen-Wilders
    I mentioned a couple of days ago that a new coalition government has been agreed upon in the Netherlands. As expected, the cabinet will consist of a VVD/CDA minority coalition, backed by Geert Wilders’ party, the PVV.

    Details of the new government’s program have now emerged, and when I read what they’re planning, it made my mouth water. The most conservative Republican government imaginable would never attempt half of this stuff in the USA. Just think — if only Geert had been born in Kenya, we could elect him president!

    Our Flemish correspondent VH has translated several articles from the Dutch media about the new government, German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s reaction to it, and Geert Wilders’ upcoming trial for hate speech.

    First, from De Telegraaf:

    “Everyone will notice some of it”

    “We’re cutting the budget by €18 billion in the coming years. Everyone will notice some of that,” VVD leader Mark Rutte said Thursday at the presentation of the coalition agreement of the VVD and CDA with support of the PVV. The cabinet Rutte wants will give the country back to the “hard-working Dutchman”.

    The government will work hard to increase safety. “We want to put the burglars in chains, not you,” said Rutte — as expected, the incoming Prime Minister. There will be a national police force [instead of the local and regional police]. Street-terror [usually performed by the enriched “new Dutch”] will be tackled hard. There will be minimum sentences handed out to recidivists for crimes for which there is a maximum sentence of twelve years or more.

    The TBS system [“offenders with severe personality disorders who are detained in special forensic psychiatric institutions”] will be cut back. Trial-leaves will be addressed. Criminals with dual nationality will loose their Dutch citizenship. The ticket quota [in which a police officer has to write out 120-160 fines a year or else has to face losing a promotion or a cut in salary] will be abolished. Coffee shops [where soft drugs are permitted to be sold and consumed] must become closed clubs where clients are only allowed in with a ‘club card’.

    There will be a strict immigration policy. The influx of non-western immigrants has to decrease substantially, according to Wilders by 50%. Illegal residence in the Netherlands will become punishable.

    There will also be a burqa ban:

    Burkas and other face-covering clothing will be banned. Police officers and judges will not be allowed to wear headscarves. Unemployed persons who due to their behavior or dress code will be less likely to find a job will feel it in their pocketbooks. Their welfare benefits will be reduced, or they will not have any right at all to them. [source]

    And those who “take it easy” with their citizenship course, may lose their residence permit:

    Turks will also have to continue to integrate. The judge recently ruled that such would not be required for Turks, based on a European treaty, but the new government wants to alter the treaty-agreement. The government wants to spend less on subsidies for integration. Only “Vluchtelingenwerk” [“Refugee aid”] will be spared. People who come from elsewhere have no more special preference in applications. The abolition of “affirmative action” will also affect women [source]

    Continue Reading →

    Dutch anti-Semitism reaches record high

    Posted on by

    Found on GAR

    From the JPOST

    By BENJAMIN WEINTHAL
    09/19/2010 03:07
    Dutch anti-Semitism reaches record high
    Photo by: Associated Press

    According to Dutch police statistics, the 48% increase represented 209 reported anti-Semitic incidents in 2009.

    Talkbacks (10)

    BERLIN – The mushrooming number of anti-Semitic incidents in the Netherlands in 2009 – a 48 percent increase over 2008 – may be “just the tip of the iceberg,” Ronny Naftaniel, the head of The Hague-based Center for Information and Documentation on Israel, said on Thursday.

    Many anti-Semitic incidents are not reported, Naftaniel said in a statement.

    According to Dutch police statistics, the 48% increase represented 209 reported anti-Semitic incidents in 2009.

    That accounted for 9.4% of discrimination- based incidents in the Netherlands, although Jews constitute only 0.3% of the country’s 16.6 million people.

    In 2008, the police registered 141 anti-Semitic incidents. Anti-gay attacks rose 13% in 2009 when compared to the previous year, and amounted to 35% of all discrimination-based incidents.

    There were 428 anti-homosexual incidents in 2009; in 2008, 308 incidents were registered.

    The Center for Information and Documentation on Israel said in its statement that “In January 2009 alone, CIDI – an independent watchdog organization – documented 98 attacks against Jews. This figure included nine physical assaults. The remaining incidents were threats and hate speech.

    “During the whole of 2009, CIDI documented 167 anti-Semitic incidents – constituting an increase of 55% compared to CIDI’s 2008 report. Out of these, 35 were serious incidents, involving violent attacks or threats of violence, damaging synagogues and monuments and anti-Semitic graffiti of Jewish- owned buildings.”

    The rise in attacks prompted human rights groups to urge the Dutch government to take action.

    “CIDI and the gay rights organization COC called on the upcoming government of the Netherlands – whose makeup is being determined in coalition talks following a recent election – to address the growing anti-gay and anti- Jewish trends apparent in the report,” CIDI noted in its statement.

    Dutch observers say that the Netherlands’ 1 million Muslims (about 5% of the population), largely from Morocco, coupled with anti-Israel leftists have contributed to a hostile climate for Jews in the Netherlands.

    … But think of all the great restaurants! The cost of multicultural enrichment

    Posted on by

    From Gates of Vienna:

    Calculating the Cost of Cultural Enrichment in the Netherlands

    by Baron Bodissey

    “The second generation of non-Western immigrants makes greater use of collective provisions and contributes less in taxes and social security premiums than the average citizen.”

    Last year Geert Wilders asked the Dutch government to prepare a cost-benefit analysis of immigration into the Netherlands, so that voters could make an informed decision about whether mass immigration from the Third World should be halted. The government refused his request, so his party commissioned a report from NYFER, a private research firm, to assess the overall net cost of immigration.

    As Mr. Wilders mentioned in his speech last week, the results are in, and the report has been published. The full NYFER report (in Dutch, pdf) is available online, and the conclusions (in Dutch, pdf) have also been posted.

    Our Flemish correspondent VH has kindly translated NYFER’s conclusions for Gates of Vienna. It’s easy to see why the Dutch government was reluctant to look into the matter: for the last ten years, the net cost of immigration to the Netherlands has been €7.2 billion annually.

    Below is the PVV’s introduction to the report, followed by the entire text of the conclusions as reported by NYFER and published by the Party for Freedom:

    10 years’ immigration in the Netherlands costs 72 billion euros

    The Dutch government [the Balkenende Cabinet] refused last year to investigate the cost of mass immigration at the request of the PVV fraction. The research institute NYFER has now conducted this study, as commissioned by the PVV. The results are shocking. The Party for Freedom is pleased that the taxpayers will finally get what they are entitled to: insight into what happens with their money.

    On a net migration of 25,000 non-Western immigrants per year, with an equal number of offspring, our society loses €7.2 billion [$8.8 billion] a year. Ten years of unchanged immigration policy therefore means running up a tab that eventually costs the society 72 billion euros [$8.8 billion]. Compared to natives, non-Western immigrants pay less on net taxes and premiums, are more dependent on government benefits (including social security benefits) and are more often involved in crime with all its associated costs.

    PVV faction leader Geert Wilders: “The fact that mass immigration is also disastrous from a financial standpoint confirms the need for the actions the Party for Freedom recommends, such as a halt to immigration from Muslim countries, a reduction of the remaining migration and asylum flows, and the exclusion of new immigrants from social security benefits for a period of ten years.”

    Most important conclusions of the NYFER report:

    Continue Reading →

    Geert Wilders openly threatened with beheading

    Posted on by