http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=757EF675-E73E-43D3-9698-
20F42BCAD623
 

The War on Wilders 

By Jacob
<http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/authors.aspx?GUID=757ef675-e73e-43d3-9
698-20f42bcad623> Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | 1/22/2009 

Geert Wilders has long been a thorn in the side of Holland's politically
correct powers that be. In an era of rigid multiculturalism, the gadfly
politician has persisted in asking uncomfortable questions about the
compatibility of Islamic mores and European values - an often-lonely
campaign that has earned him death threats from Muslim fanatics and the
disdain of the Dutch political class, media, and civil authorities. But
rather than challenge Wilders in the court of public opinion, the Dutch
establishment has decided to put him on trial. 

This Wednesday the Dutch Court of Appeals in Amsterdam ordered
<http://www.rechtspraak.nl/Gerechten/Gerechtshoven/Amsterdam/Actualiteiten/A
msterdam+Court+of+Appeal+orders+the+criminal+prosecution+of+the+Member+of+Pa
rliament+of+the+Dutch+S.htm>  a criminal prosecution of Wilders on charges
of "incitement and hatred and discrimination." His specific crime:
statements that he has made about "Muslims and their belief." Citing
Wilders's comparisons of Islam with Nazism, the Court of Appeals claims that
criminal prosecution is the "obvious" response to this allegedly intolerable
insult. 

To understand just how outrageous is the court's order it is necessary to
consider the substance, such as it is, of the charges against Wilders. It
does not exaggerate the case to say that Wilders is being accused of nothing
more than holding an opinion with which the court's judges disagree. (One
cannot call it an unpopular opinion since, if recent polling is any guide,
majorities of the Dutch public  <http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/12143>
share Wilders's apprehensions about Islam and Muslims' ability to
assimilate.) Thus, the court cites Wilders's "insulting statements" and
complains that his "presentation is characterized by biased, strongly
generalizing [sic] phrasings with a radical meaning, ongoing reiteration and
an increasing intensity." In fact, the only truly "radical" idea is the
notion that having a "biased" opinion, even one that some consider
"insulting," constitutes a crime. According to this absurdly open-ended
standard, any Dutch citizen who has ever expressed an opinion has
potentially committed a crime. "Apparently this is the Netherlands today,"
Wilders darkly observed yesterday. "If you speak out you might be
prosecuted. To participate in public debate has become a dangerous
activity." 

Indeed, it may be even worse than that. In effect, Wilders is being
prosecuted for stating the obvious. It is telling that in deploring his
comparison of Islamic extremism to Nazism, the court pointedly omits to
mention that Wilders has produced ample evidence for the charge. In Fitna,
his March 2008 film about Islamic radicalism, Wilders included images of
Muslim demonstrators wielding placards declaring "God
<http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=19291_Muslim_Protesters-_God_
Bless_Hitler&only> bless Hitler," calling for "another Holocaust" and paying
tribute to Adolf Hitler. In another scene from the film, a 3-year-old girl
is seen reciting Koranic verses calling Jews "apes and swine." When Wilders
likens the Koran to Hitler's Mein Kampf - yet another criminal offense,
according to the Dutch court - it is this observable context that he has in
mind. 

But one need not take Wilders's "biased" word for it. As even the most
casual news reader would have noticed, pro-Nazi imagery and anti-Semitic
incitement have become a staple
<http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/024341.php>  of Muslim
<http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2009/01/toronto-pro-ham.htm
l> demonstrations across the world
<http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/islamists-chant-heil-hitler-at-pr
o.html> . At a January 2001 rally for
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLlHPPO25nM> Hamas and Hezbollah in
Amsterdam, Muslim protestors shouted what has become a familiar slogan in
the Netherlands: "Hamas, Hamas, Joden aan het gas" (Hamas, Hamas, all Jews
to the gas). In Copenhagen, Denmark, earlier this month, Muslim
demonstrators' chants of "Alla-hu Akbar!" were punctuated with "Heil
<http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/01/video-of-copenhagen-pali-rally.ht
ml> Hilter!" salutes and calls for the deaths of Jews. Similar examples are
legion. When a prominent Dutch lawyer praised the court's decision this week
as "a happy day for all followers of Islam who do not want to be tossed on
the garbage dump of Nazism," he missed the point entirely. No one has done
more to make Wilders's parallels between Nazism and Islam plausible than
Muslims themselves. 

What makes the legal war on Wilders all the more stunning is that the court
seems in part to agree with the thrust of his arguments. Allowing that
immigration and integration are valid subjects for debate, the court noted
in its decision this week that "Islamic immigrants may be expected to have
consideration for the existing sentiments in the Netherlands as regards
their belief, which is partly at odds with Dutch and European values and
norms." This of course is the very point that Wilders' has been making all
along, if in a more provocative fashion. Supposing that some will find it
"insulting," what is to stop Dutch magistrates from being brought to trial
on the basis of their own court orders? As Wilders points out, "If I have to
appear in court, not only I will be prosecuted, but also hundreds of
thousands of Dutch citizens who reject the Islamisation of the West." 

The travesty of the Dutch court's decision goes beyond the Orwellian illogic
of its reasoning. While only Wilders will be prosecuted, at least for the
moment, the court's decision is really an attack on his rebel Freedom Party
(PVV), which holds nine seats in the 150-seat Dutch lower house of
parliament. The expected legal fees - and the prospect of years of
dragged-out litigation - could prove fatal to the PVV. "We depend on small
donations," Wilders points out. "The Freedom Party is the only party in
Parliament that does not accept any government funding. This court decision
jeopardizes the very existence of the Freedom Party. We simply cannot afford
the enormous legal expenses."

This is not the first time that Wilders has found himself in legal trouble.
In June 2008, a Jordanian prosecutor charged
<http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL015190420080701>  Wilders
with "blasphemy and contempt of Muslims" and ordered him to stand trial in
the country. Just a few days later, Wilders was cleared of similar charges
in his native country by the Dutch public prosecutor's office, which ruled
that Wilders's views of Islam should be considered part of a legitimate
debate on Islam in Dutch society and that the he had committed no criminal
offense. "Thankfully, our legal system is still not like that of Jordan,"
Wilders observed at the time. He may have spoken too soon. 

>From a free-speech perspective, 2008 proved a disappointing year. While
Wilders battled with the courts in the Netherlands, the writer Mark Steyn
went on trial for "Islamophobia" in Canada. As in Wilders's case, the fact
that Steyn's most "Islamophobic" writings were direct quotations from
Muslims was deemed immaterial. Like Wilders, too, Steyn ultimately
prevailed, but the state of free expression in the West was tarnished. With
Geert Wilders in the dock, 2009 is shaping up to be another banner year for
the self-appointed censors of debate. 

  _____  

Jacob Laksin is a senior editor for FrontPage Magazine. His e-mail is
jlaksin [...@] gmail.com. 
 

It may be better to be a live jackal than a dead lion, but it is better
still to be a live lion. And usually easier. - Robert A. Heinlein

 


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[email protected] 
    mailto:[email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to