BREAKING: Prosecutors of Dutch MP Geert Wilders Ask Court To Acquit on All Charges
In a surprising twist, the prosecution in the trial of Dutch MP Geert Wilders asked for complete acquittal today. With this, it strongly condemned the decision of a higher court to prosecute Wilders.
In a two-day long precise analysis of the remarks of Wilders, who had to stand trial for discrimination against Muslims and incitement to hatred, the prosecuting officers explained to the court that Wilders may have been insulting and provocative, but his words were within the limitations of Dutch law.
This doesn’t mean that the trial has stopped — next week the defense will continue. The Dutch law system demands a full cycle of prosecution and defense, and will end with an extensive verdict.
Though — in theory — the court could still convict Wilders, it now seems almost impossible.
Wilders had been charged with the following:
- Group defamation (article 137c of the Dutch Criminal Code).
- Inciting hatred against people, i.e. Muslims, on account of their religion (article 137 of the Dutch Criminal Code).
- Inciting discrimination against people, i.e. Muslims, on account of their religion (article 137d of the Dutch Criminal Code).
- Inciting hatred against people, i.e. non-western ethnic minorities and/or Moroccans, on account of their race (article 137d of the Dutch Criminal Code).
- Inciting discrimination against people, i.e. non-western ethnic minorities and/or Moroccans, on account of their race (article 137d of the Dutch Criminal Code).
Fantastic news. This was clearly a witch hunt from the start. The court simply disagreed with his political views and prosecuted Wilders to shut him up and make an example of him. If Wilders can get clear of this (and it appears he might) then perhaps he can get back on track with his political and personal life.
My only thought is, what if he had not been a high profile person? What if he were just Geert Nobody? Would they still have dropped his prosecution? Could he have afforded to defend himself or would he be in prison and dreading his release because the ‘religion of peace’ was waiting to fulfill their fatwa?
Your questioning how a trial of Gert Nobody would have run is surely known to any reader of the true news. He has had bodyguards 24×7 since this started and it will never stop. Isn’t Rushdie still receiving security from British security forces after…decades? Pretty soon all a country’s budget will be used protecting the elites from fatwaaaahhhh freaks and the rest of us will be left to our own devices. That sounds too interesting and terrible to believe.
SenatorMark4,
Perhaps that’s why Dutch Law should be overhauled so that Free Speech may flourish. Perhaps that’s why Dutch citizenry should reevaluate their politically correct, multiculturalist manner of embracing the invasion of a hostile force. Interesting and Terrible… Yes!
Wow, what a good surprise! The reason for this reversal may become apparent, but at this point, I don’t have a clue. can anyone offer one?
I believe that the prosecutors at first declined to prosecute, but that a higher court ordered them to proceed. They were never enthusiastic about it, and were just going through the motions. Now they’ve done as they were ordered, but still don’t believe a conviction is justified.
“a higher court ordered them to proceed”
This would be a rather funny way of doing things (if prosecution has no case, what can go to court?). It would be interesting to hear from someone who is intimate with these Dutch legal shenanigans.
It’s possible the higher court was stuffed with, what we would call, activist judges who believed Mr. Wilders should be prosecuted and convicted. They ordered the prosecution to continue, without worrying about whether it was a strong case, or whether it could be won, or whether it was the right thing to do. Maybe it was done strictly for political reasons. Maybe there was never any chance he would be convicted, maybe it was a show trial. The lawyers who prosecuted may never have agreed with the prosecution but did their jobs. Finally, here, near the end of the trial, much like we have closing arguments here in the states, the prosecuting attorney(s) were finally able to state their OPINION instead of just doing their jobs. While they did their job, to the best of their abilities, they may never have agreed with the idea.
You’re probably right. As Ezra Levant says about Canada’s kangaroo courts, the Human Right Commissions, it’s the process that is the punishment. The accused has to pay a pretty penny to defend himself.
Yes, a funny way of doing things, but European legal systems are different. If you’re interested in this case, gatesofvienna.blogspot.com has been covering it quite comprehensively. Today’s post reported Wilders’ statement as follows:
“Geert Wilders himself is “very happy” with the conclusion of the prosecution. This he said after the session. “I do not insult, I do not incite to hatred, I do not discriminate. The only thing I do and will continue to do is to speak the truth,” he said. The PVV leader pointed out that this was already the second time the OM has said this; the first time was when it decided not to prosecute Wilders. That he had to stand trial anyway was ordered by the court in Amsterdam.”
Thanks AnalogMan. This is bizarre in itself, unless someone somewhere somehow has been trying to manipulate the system in nefarious ways. For instance could some gov’t authority (parliament? ministry?) have been trying hard to muzzle Geert Wilders by triggering some kind of kangaroo process? Maybe this agent (yet to be identified) chickened out when realizing he was not going to get away with it, and let the prosecutors act properly.
What if the trial, which must proceed anyway, reveals who was trying to defeat free speech, and ultimately, for what purpose? So, maybe this is not the last of it. Before you have any chance to defeat the jihadists, you have to defeat their western apologists in the first place, so Geert Wilders still has some serious mountains climbing ahead of him.
This reminds me very much of the Valerie Plame fiasco which was a witch hunt, pure and simple, against a Bush aide to sidetrack his career and cause massive legal costs. What we do know is that Prosecutor Fitzgerald knew on April 10th of 2005 that Richard Armitage was the one who leaked the Plame name, but Fitz knew where his bread was buttered and began a paper/scissors/rock game of trying to trip up an Administration higher-up just to keep media-whore journalists cooing his praises.
n the end, the whole enchilada appears to be that Joe Wilson, a State Department has-been so obsessed by his own vanity that he outed his own wife and who a year earlier said uranium was sought by Iraq in Africa before he said it was not sought by Iraq, was used as a cheap, throwaway dirty trick by the Kerry campaign to dupe lazy pseudojournalists from the NYTimes, Newsweek, WaPo, Time, and NBC, which led Senate Democratic politics-is-a-dirty-game-players like Chuck Schumer, to push for a rabid, unfettered special prosecutor like Fitzgerald, who, in a previous life bested by attorney Scooter Libby, then broke all the DOJ rules in fruitless a hunt to bring down Dick Cheney, and whose investigation immunized the wrong people and didn’t follow up the simplest leads that would have lead to Richard Armitage, the original leaker of non-covert operative Valarie Plame Wilson’s identity, who likely leaked Plame’s relationship to several journalists because of a turf war with the CIA, an organization that, like State, also has leaked like a sieve whenever the bureaucrats disagreed with the administration, and that, like State, has yet to be held accountable by the equally irresponsible Department of Justice.
Whew, got that out in 2500 words or so….! Long story short, the persecution of the right by the left through “PROCESS CRIMES” and “STYLISTIC FAUX PAS” continues to this day in a brushfire war of nastiness which reflects the Euroleft’s [and the American left desperately aping its betters] need to keep the journalists’ eyes off their own silly missteps. In the USA, the wheel of fortune is turningon more time…!
The explanation you gave of the Plame/Wilson business is totally wacko. Dick Cheney’s flunky Scooter Libby wronged Plame, endangered her life, and because of the US screwed up doctrine of sovereign immunity she could not even sue the dastardly government. Courts in the US and in the Netherlands are both FUBAR, but in different ways. I hope all goes well for Geert.
The Dutch get a spine. Hell yeah!!
The Dutch are leading the way in the EU on tightening up immigration standards.
from Radio Free Europe:
“Under the new policy, which went into effect last month, would-be immigrants seeking a residency visa will have to pass a “civic-integration examination” before they arrive in the Netherlands. Applicants will have to pass a Dutch-language test administered at the Dutch Embassy in their country of origin.”
http://www.rferl.org/content/article/1067418.html
Islam has the justices and media exactly where they want them. Cowering and subservient. Going to get more ammo. Don’t try it in my neighborhood.
A sad victory for islamophobia.
No, it’s a DEFEAT for the Islamophobes, those who fear Islam- those cringing PC cowards who don’t dare say anything critical of Mohammedanism lest bearded Dark Age savages come to kill them.
Alice, who let you out of your cage. Child, you still haven’t been taking your anti-psychotics have you!
So you don’t have a decent argument. Instead name call, deride. Hmmmmmmmm
‘Alice’ is a troll. Just let him hit his ‘code for black’ or whatever macro key and ignore him. Yes he’s a guy and not a very imaginative one.
This one’s especially for you, Alice:
Here’s the hard, brutal truth about Islam:
Read here to get a sense of the Islamic mindset and what its ascendancy might mean for the rest of us:
The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims (Andrew Bostom)
Read here to get a sense of why and how the West’s days may be numbered. We are our own worst enemy unless we face up to the hard choices ncessary to remain free and prosperous.
The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam’s Threat to the West (Lee Harris)
When Muslims assert that Islam is a “religion of peace” they are not engaging in al taqqiya, they are making an assertion in good faith.
The problem lies in the fact that Islam has a defective concept of peace. In semitic languages like Arabic, the consonants are the “root” of the word: islam = submission, and salam = peace have the same root, slm.
The only concept of peace in Islamic jurisprudence is the peace between the conqueror and the conquered, between master and slave. There is no concept of a negotiated peace between nations in Islamic law (and note that law is the defining property of Islam—their clerics are jurists, schools of Qu’ranic interpretation are called fiqh, a legalistic term)—Muslims may negotiate a “hudna” or armistice of limited duration with non-Muslim, but not a definitive enduring peace.
Finally, Islam is a serial murderer of entire cultures and peoples. This is what Islam has done throughout its entire 1400 year history. This is what it has done whenever it has finally gotten the upper hand in whatever culture it has opposed. Those whom Islam does not destroy, it enslaves, diminishes and impoverishes. Islam strives for the conversion, enslavement or death of all who do not conform to its sadistic and cruel vision of Mankind.
Islam cannot be ‘reformed’ in the light of humanity and freedom. Were that so, it would no longer be Islam. For its psychopathic and cruel mysogyny alone, Islam is an abomination and worthy only of extinction – to the last believer.
The only “peace” Islam stands for is the peace of the grave.
“A sad victory for Islamophobia ” Hey Alice is that what you learned in school today?
Great news for free speech, but Mr. Wilders had better hire an army of bodyguards. Islamists don’t like to lose.
Exactly.
He already has!
A sad victory for islamophobia.
A phobia is an irrational fear. I would say that there are any number of rational reasons to fear Islam.
The Dutch pay lip service to free speech. The Constitutional First Amendment in America protects ALL speech, especially unpopular speech. Abhorrent speech sucks, but that is the price of living in a free society. The fact of this case even existing shows that the Dutch are not free in the first place.
Well yes. or it could be that the legal system is just very different from the American. At least, now they will have jurisprudence to protect other Wilderslike people. Or islamists, for that matter. I firmly believe in the freedom of the Dutch, but then, I do live here, so I suppose I’m brainwashed. And doped, of course. And on my way to euthanasia. And gay marriage. At the same time. While eating me some fine cheese.
It’s great news indeed. But let’s face it, all the jurisprudence in the world won’t protect Wilders when he’s just walking down the street like Van Gogh.
Alice – yeah, because no one, especially a woman named wigglebottom need to ever fear islam. Oh, did I misspell your name? And miss your snark? So solly…
Fantastic news.
Once more for ‘Alice’: a phobia is an irrational fear.
No-one is islamophobic. We merely disdain it, with good reason.
Back to the looking glass Alice Troll.
Actually, there are a lot of Islamaphobes.
Those who won’t even dare mention a certain name starting with ‘Mo-’ and ending with ‘-hammed’ for fear of losing a little off the top. Ironically, the ones with such a fear are the ones trying to project intolerance onto others, all because of CYN (Cover Yer Neck).
The case of the Dutch cartoonists is one such example of CYN.
How is this Islamophobia?
I would think that calling Islam a fascist religious dogma is no different than calling Christianity a fascist religious dogma. People do the latter all the time. Why not the former?
Oh yeah – Islamophobia – the real kind: in which people are so afraid of Islam that their critical thinking faculties break down and they start spouting politically expedient nonsense.
The thing is – that there is little (Western) Islamophobia in existance (excepting maybe from our policital leaders). Most people do not have an irrational fear of – but a loathing of the backward (or should I say unenlightened) beliefs and customs which it espouses. More to the point – it is forbidden to change in anyway which is what prevents it having an enlightenment (like the christian west) to move its proponants away from the backward teachings and beliefs.
Because there is no ‘give’ in their religious beliefs and practices they think that anyone who disagrees with them hates them – which is not the case ! Unfortunately the PC Left compound this idea by telling us (as per lefties – what to think) we hate them – for their own idiological agendas. Sadly – although the ‘left’ are cuddling up to Islam as a tool to oppress and supress Western cultural values – they are the very people who Islam will most want to destroy should it get a majority stake in Western Cultures. But ‘Lefties’ are usually too ideologically stupid to understand that their doctrines – along with who they choose as their supposed allies – are pretty much always the wrong ideas and choices. But they never learn ! It is a fact that if we ‘westerners’ were left alone – we would have no worries what Islamic countries were doing to their people beyond declaring our horror !
Of course the Islamists (using our PC infected culture against us) would point to Iraq and Afghanistan to show how the above is not true (or western support of Israel) – but it should not be forgotten that Islamic terrorists attacked western targets for many years before 9/11 brought the west crashing down on their heads. They forget that when the Soviets were in Afghanistan with their military might (and harsh suppression regime) they were in Pakistani refugee camps – until armed by the West ! The Islamists have short memories when it comes to their ‘victories’. In Both Countries – the West COULD WIN – if it stopped fighting with its kid gloves on ! But that is not our way ! In our ethics – Innocent people should be protected whenever possible. To the Islamists – they are just there to provide cover.
Real Islamophobia is exhibited by people who are too afraid to say anythign about Islam because they area afraid of the expressed violent reaction by Islamists.
Greetings:
Good news, certainly, unless you believe that the process is the punishment. As the old folk wisdom of “Where do I go to get my reputation back?” indicates, Mr. Wilders has had to give of his time and probably some of his economic resources to defend himself and now what he gets is a “Nevermind.”
Alice Wigglebotton
A sad victory for islamophobia.
The point is, we need to be afraid of Islam. Its proponents have told you over and over again that they despise and wish to destroy your way of life, substituting their own misogynistic, violent, primitive religion-cum-political system. I imagine that if you were around in 1933, you would have been vaguely aware that Mr. Hitler had written a book.
Abdul Kareema Wheat
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Don’t fear Islam. They’re 7th century cowards. They’re feebleminded,demented,crazed uncontrollable loons with AK47’s.
We have the means to destroy them…..and by G-d…..the time is coming where all civilized people….will come to their senses and realize that the Mohammedan WARRIORS AND RADICALS ( PC ENOUGH YOU WEENY MODERATOR? ) need to be crushed,vanquished, humiliated and annihilated.
Anyone who believes compromise is possible….is demented and living on moonbeams. Just as these savages believe in their 72 virgins.
The Dutch have finally and faithfully realized that as a free, open society….muslims need to be denied their ultimate goals. Lest they themselves perish.
I have to hand it to the Dutch…a practical, proud and resilient people. They are sending a message to the world with their dismissal of these false charges ( as absurd and obscene as they were ) that they have seen the realities of the potential enslavement of their country and a 1000 year history, being wiped out by the barbarians from the east.
They have said…NO MAS.
Now…will we in America heed the signs that the Dutch have now hand an epiphany?
Not so long as we keep dunces like Napp-ilatano and Obama among us.
Wow an unexpected win for freedom in a country known for bowing down in the face of oppressors. A big kudo to the prosecutors in this case. Now if the judges will listen?
Great News! I hope and pray this is the first visible tip of an ANTI-politically correct, muliticultural tsunami that washes across Europe.
Isn’t it ironic that all these laws against hate speech are wrongfully applied to critics of Islam telling the plain truth but never applied to Muslims actually perpetrating hate speech against all things non-Muslim?
God bless Geert Wilders! Now if only the Dutch People will begin to stand up and support him and denounce the teachings of Islamic jihad which treats “kafirs” (non Muslims)as not human. Islam has to be eliminated from Western Democratic Civilization. Outlaw Sharia Law!
If Muslims wish to follow the teachings of the Mohammed of the Koran, Sira and Hadith they may do so in a country that still lives in the 7th Century, like Saudi Arabia or any of the other Islamic Countries that do not respect other Religions.
Until Islam adopts the “Golden Rule” and Muslims treat kafirs (non-Muslims) as they do Muslims there is NO REASON TO ACCEPT ISLAM in Western Democratic Nations. Sharia Law must be Eliminated – it is BARBARIC.
“If Muslims wish to follow the teachings of the Mohammed of the Koran, Sira and Hadith they may do so in a country that still lives in the 7th Century, like Saudi Arabia or any of the other Islamic Countries that do not respect other Religions.”
Exactly. I have waded through the Koran. Its tone is so monotonously shrill that I can’t think of a better cure for insomnia. Its message is socio-political. Also, Allah has a convenient way of tailoring his revelations to whatever works for the economic and political betterment of his prophet Mohammed. The message is sensual, through and through, with pie in the sky promises of more sensuality in paradise. I’m no prude but I think that it is the height of selfishness to strap a bomb around your chest to kill without discrimination for no other purpose than to get laid in the world to come.
If there is some transcendant message in the Koran I have yet to find it.
That being said, I think that freedom is the only force that can neutralize the radical elements in the Islamic world. We should be air dropping the entire canon of Western Civilization over the caves and shitholes of the third world. And I am talking about air dropping everything: the good, the bad, and the ugly: Playboy magazines, Bibles, Ayn Rand, Shakespeare,the Greeks, The Russian novelists, The Founding Fathers, etc. Maybe then they will acquire a taste for freedom and the submission that Islam requires will not seem so attractive in comparison.
Most people (possibly including most Muslims) don’t realize that the Koran is not assembled in the chronological order of its “revelations”. It’s assembled with the longest surahs first, with the shortest last. Rearrange the surahs in the order that Koranic scholars say is the correct chronological order, then it’s apparent that Mo started off with conciliatory passages to attract converts from the local Christian, Jewish and paganistic populations. Those are the surahs that mollify the liberals. The later surahs show that Mo gradually devolved into a brutal Jew/Christian/infidel-hating militaristic empire-builder. Those are the surahs that galvanize the jihadis. I’m guessing that Wilders figured this out.
Indeed. It’s the process of abrogation where the later suras (in chronological order) nullify what Allah/Mohammed said in the earlier ones. I am reminded of one of Napoleon’s fantasies where he saw himself riding on an elephant into India with a new Koran which he would have written to suit his purposes.
Absolutely correct. He became savage against “infidels” only after they refused to acknowledge him as the latest, greatest prophet. You’d think the historical warning there would not be lost on leftists who consider Muslims their true allies (the Muslims do not return that sentiment, and if victorious, will demonstrate it in the leftists’ blood).
“The Dutch law system demands a full cycle of prosecution and defense, and will end with an extensive verdict.”
Lawyers protection program.
ALICE WIGGLEBOTTOM:Something is wiggling in your bottom dear,I think it’s your brain,and it seems to have been contaminated with the other contents of your bottom.I’m sure your iman can suggest a competent proctologist.Until then,refrain from commenting further.
Excellent result. This is not about the Dutch ‘getting a spine,’ though. Not at all. It is about testing a case according to the law of the land. In Dutch law, as in that of many juresdictions, freedom of speech is guaranteed within the law of the land. Since one of their early amendments to THEIR constitution is that all people must be treated equally, it is quite consistent that you can not advocate race hatred, or hatred of a group because of their religion. Thus, it may be reasonable for a higher court judge to instruct a lower court to test whether Wilders has broken the law. He has advocated a tax on Muslim headgear which he referred to as ‘head rags’. He advocates banning the Koran from Dutch territory, calling it a nazi book. He seems something of an extremist. If the court prosecutors having reluctantly brought the case and have now made it clear that they consider there is no evidence that he advocated race hatred (a specific crime in Holland and most of Europe – not so surprising after the events in Germany of seventy years ago) so much the better.
By the way, people who are sentenced for transgressing the constitutional right to be treated equally in Holland, mostly get only a small fine. Looking at the custom and practise of court cases there, nobody goes to Prison, even if they do stand on the street and advocate hatred of Jews or Muslims or black people. Wilders was never going to prison for making hot headed speeches. Not a chance. If he had set up some kind of death squad and conspired to harm people, that would be a different matter.
Euro Tony
This is a self-defeating system. You may not speak out against another group. In other words, you may not sound the alarm when the other group is doing that very thing! Rather than going after Islam for advocating their hatred of all Infidels, they go after the ones who point it out!
This system was put into place to prevent another Hitler. Instead, it makes a repeat more likely! The Hitlers of the world blithely ignore the law, and they are willing to use lethal violence! So, those who should be enforcing the laws will only enforce it against those who will not use violence… the law-abiding (Wilders), not the scofflaws (Islamists). Did the court ever order that Islam should be put on trial for hate speech? No. Nor shall they. Ever.
It is the same with guns. If guns are banned, only the law-abiding will not have guns. If speech of any sort is banned, only the upright will be silenced. This is why we in America have the 1st and 2nd Amendments. Our Founders really knew what they were doing!
I want to share this comment with you that I found under an article by Douglas Murray in a Daily Telegraph Blog. Murray was raving about Wilders being a martyr to free speech. The Dutch commentator I am quoting, first pointed out that in Holland, as in most European countries, free speech is not absolute, but is bounded by law. In most of Europe, it is a criminal offence to advocate the hatred of another ethnic group, or to incite violence towards them or the withdrawal of their rights. Wilders by the way, has done this in his pronouncements that Muslim Dutch people should be prevented from bringing their foreign marriage partners to live in Holland and the taxing of their headgear which he referred to as ‘head rags’. Anyway, this is what the commentator said:
“Let’s be clear on one thing: There is no such thing as special laws for muslims in this country, but there will be if mr. Wilders comes into office. He has already proposed some really disturbing notions such as legally making muslims second class citizens (Oh hey, the nazis made Jews second class citizens too!), banning the quran (Oh hey, the nazis banned books too!), deporting muslims if they break ANY law, even if they’re dutch citizens (Didn’t the nazis deport people too?) and taxing islamic headwear (Didn’t the nazis make laws that only apply to jews?). Mr. Wilders is not being prosecuted because he hurt muslim feelings, he’s being prosecuted because he’s systematically speaking out for hatred towards an ethnical group (Oh hey, the nazis did that too!). Please remember that before you start defending mr. Wilders in any way. He’s a racist, and an ethnicist scumbag. “
It’s exactly because of people like you and this idiot you quote from that Europe is no longer “Western” and is rapidly becoming an extension of the Middle East and Africa. Liberalism in Europe was how the “West” died out. And this “liberalism” is at present suffocating America, too.
An expanding point on “liberalism” is in order: when a society is “tolerent” towards its enemies, it becomes suicidal. That’s what is taking place now in the US, while having already permiated Europe.
Underneath it all is the internal hate liberals have for their own settings; European liberals hate Europe for what they consider as crimes committed by them in the past, and US liberals hate America for what supposedly America has done in the past, or stands for.
What is amiss here is the fact that islam does NOT hate what they have done in the past, or what it stands for – to the contrary, they’re proud of it and dedicated to repeating it.
This incongruity has proven leathal for the West.
Just curious, but how many Muslims have been charged with hate-speech violations in the Netherlands or anywhere place else where it is illegal to advocate “hatred” against another group?
Tony,
Mr. Wilders may be a scumbag, I do not know him well enough to comment, I assume that you do. However, he is right. The fact of the matter is that the poor innocent people that he is accused of offending are threatening to take away your right to not believe in Allah. I am a bit surprised that you don’t find some ‘scumbaggieness’ to that. Methinks you would not do well in Arabia on the Rhine.
Randal says that, ‘Abhorrent free speech is hateful, but is the price of living in a free society.’ Ok Randal, but I think the price of abhorrent free speech in Bosnia was the murder of a hundred thousand people. The price of abhorrent free speech in 1930s Germany was the murder of eleven million people, six million of whom were Jews. You are being naive old chap. We have all seen where race hatred advocacy leads, and the Dutch have every right to guard against the spreading of hatred and the advocacy of withdrawing people’s rights. In the end, they decided that Wilders had not gone too far. That is their right under their own constitution which holds everyone as equal and that people’s utterances and writing must remain within the law.
Your examples are terribly bad. The comment about Bosnia apparently assumes a mass slaughter of Muslims, when in fact there was civil war all around that had little to do with ‘free speech.’ Nor in fact did free speech have a great deal to do with Naziism unless you count things like distribution of Mein Kampf with the help of people like Henry Ford. The genocides that the Nazis perpetrated correlated strongly with a society in which true free speech was forbidden. Had it been allowed and coupled with democracy, Germans might have done something eventually to remove the Nazis. Try something better.
The very people who try (and successfully) limit free speech are the Islamofacists. Their tactics cry poor me while they slander anyone who has a different opinion. Without provocation, they attack Jews openly. Where is the balance within the law? I may not limit what they have to say, but they are free to limit me.
Say, Tony, isn’t Srebenica in Bosnia?
@#23 Your-opinion Toffeenose
Abhorrent speech did NOT kill 11 million.
The Nuremberg Laws did, and National SOCIALIST fascism.
And Hajj Amin al-Husseini, ‘grand’ Mufti of Jerusalem,
pal and guest of Hitler, would-be genocidist of Jews.
Muslims do not ‘fail to integrate’, they refuse to integrate.
They DEMAND to be MORE EQUAL than their ‘host’ country’s citizens.
They DEMAND to dress as they see fit, not like their hosts;
the opposite of Saudi Arabia which enforces ITS dress code on kufrs.
They DEMAND the right to stop work, to pray several times a day, then,
they DEMAND a suitable place to pray, then,
they DEMAND to have ablution facilities.
They DEMAND 7th century, barbaric, misogynistic Shariah (rhymes with pariah) law…
Your name is not Tony Blair, it’s Tony Husseini or Elmasry, or Awan.
“The price of abhorrent free speech in 1930s Germany was the murder of eleven million people, six million of whom were Jews.”
And, that’s why ideologies like Nazism…or Islam ought to be ruthlessly suppressed.
August 14 1954: A sad victory for Shintophobia.
November 9 1989: A sad victory for Murderphobia.
I’m so happy………….yeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Moroccans are the same race as Wilders – Caucasian. So, have they charged Wilders with hating his own race? Has this been about white-supremacy all along?
There’s nothing to celebrate: the Dutch – and all of Europe – lost some time ago to demography.
Because of the negative birthrate of native Europeans and the fecundity of Muslim immigrants in a few decades they will become the majority in Europe…
Invest in real estate – Europeans will be coming to the US in droves to escape dhimmitude…
Do you think that “in a few decades” the US (or at least a big chunk of it) will be any different? The muslim demographic bomb has been dropped here, too.
If you were to ask a native born Netherlander how he felt about the muslim problem in the country you would get two answers, first would be the “we have always been very accepting of other peoples” and that would be true. If you then pressed on and asked “but how about the last 15-20 years when you allowed almost uncontrolled immigration”, you would get “That was the biggest mistake we ever made and we should undo it.”
I can say this without fear of correction, my wife is a Netherlander, we have an extended family in Holland and spend a good part of our lives there. Thats the answer I get when I brace one of my in-laws, who has just commented on Americas’ race problem, with the Dutch equivalent. Wilders will get some sort of slap on the wrist to assuage the muslim population, but he speaks true.
Wow! This makes me so happy for my Dutch cousins that I might just risk e-mailing them with congratulations…only I’m not sure just where they sit on this kind of thing as they have been Europeans so very long. Sad huh!
I remember when Geert Wilders was banned from the U.K. I think he was suppose to give a speech and he was not allowed. Definitely the europeans are being taken over by the muslims. All you have to do is read AMERICA ALONE by Mark Steyn because Mark really did his homework about the subject.
There will be no freedom or safety on earth until Islam is relegated to a much smaller population of adherents.
In an ideal Western Democracy, where a perfect market place for ideas flourishes, where people freely and under no coersion choose to debate and adopt or reject presented facts, theories, hypotheses, claims, propositions, beliefs and all other forms of human thought and action; where discourse is not only allowed but encouraged, by a benevolent facilitator-State, one would have no issue with islam or any other human faith system co-existing with all else.
But we don’t unfortunately live in such a place, time or circumstance.
Whereas, in such a free market place of ideas the fallacies and realities of islam, the history, teachings and personal behavior of its “prophet” and his various followers from the 7th century AD to the present would have been subject to a thorough, unbiased, free and unhindered examination, analysis and debate, given all available evidence in a court of wide public opinion; when no one could prohibit such a debate claiming infringement upon “religious sensitivities” or characterize these debates as “attacks on a religion” or “violation of civil and religious rights;” were that to be feasible, then islamic tenets would be eventually fully revealed; and they would not be painting a pretty picture for islam.
Whereas, in an impartial and transparent governing system that would not only prohibit but instead supply incentives for and fully support and serve such free debate for the benefit of the population is supposedly represents, the truth about islam would be ultimately uncovered; and islam wouldn’t like it.
But then, it is safe to claim with confidence, that all parties, be them Christians, Jews, atheists, muslims or whatever could arrive to a well argued and educated verdict-conclusion about islam, no matter how painful that would be for islam and its followers. And of course, no one would have any objection to their presence anywhere, under in a reciprocal arrangement whereby non-muslims’ presence is also allowed under similar circumstances on their lands, where similar debates would take place.
But this isn’t reality. There are multiple failures in such markets of ideas as well as in governance, on many counts not only in Asia or Africa but even in Europe or the Americas. No matter how imperfect these markets and governments are, some extensive (although still not enough) debates about Christianity, Judaism etc have taken place in the West, but very little about islam; thus the emphasis here is on islam.
First of all, muslims migrating into Europe and the US are the least bit interested in such debates, brainwashed by islam – they are here to advance their cause. They aren’t here to either “assimilate” “integrate” or “accept the western value system.” They aren’t in England to enjoy a ride in the English countryside, or in the US to visit the Guggenheim Museum or Independence Hall. To these people, the educated and the uneducated alike, the marketplace of ideas is not only unfamiliar, strange even hostile territory, but instead an anathema. They are here to build mosques everywhere, even upon the sacred grounds of the Nation, and teach islam.
Moreover, and potentially far more pernicious than the muslims’ raison d’etre in the “West,” the “objective” “hands-off” wise governments of the “West,” i.e., the instiitutions by and through which this “free debate” is to take place, are far from neutral (for reasons not to be elaborated here). In a counter-intuitive manner, “liberalism” has turned western governments into a stifling mechanism suppressing a free exchange of views. This stifling mechanism is however grossly asymmetric: it stifles opponents but not proponents of islam. The fundamental flaws of islam are not allowed to be subjected to debate, as is the personal life and behavior of the “prophet” of islam, lest one is willing to be characterized as an “islamophobe” and be potentially targeted, mind you not only by islamists but by the very government which is there supposedly to defend the individual’s Right to free speech.
Under any reasonable criterion, this is a new form of obsurantism. It’s a new version of a Dark Age.
I wish to thank PJM for allowing us to express our viewpoint on this subject, without banning from their site these honest and deeply held views. It’s rather fashionable (and dare I say, effective) these days (both here in the US and in Europe) to censor and ostracize people holding such views under the leftist banners of “islamophobia,” “xenophobia,” or “racism.” Name calling is a typical school-yard means of bullying people into submission, and an act of attempting to intimidate them. Coupled with the loosely and largely arbitrarily and capriciously defined term “inciting violence” and its draconian legal enforcement by a leftist-dominated judiciary, and the First Amendment Right to free speech could easily become history.
Since I believe in “pie in the sky” is it possible the higher court wanted to force the issue knowing before hand what would transpire. This would recognize that free speech is not criminal.
It’s possible liberal politicians realized voters are shifting right because leftist “human rights” legislation is incompatible with actual human rights.
#23″EUROPEAN” TONY So free speech caused Hitler? And what caused you?Was your mother impregnated by a syphilitic Euroweenie? You appeasing ,self hating little Dhimniwit!Let’s follow your logic:since the Koran preaches holy war, maybe we should ban it eh Tony?
Great news!
#24 ALICE WAGGLEBOTTOM : October 10, 2010: A sad victory for tertiary syphilis!