The real question of the Wilders trial

25 01 2010

By Lawrence Auster, via View From The Right:

It is not, Did Wilders incite to hatred and discrimination against Muslims? And it is not, Is the government infringing on Wilders’s right of free speech? It is, Shall the Netherlands exist? I recommend a perusal of the long criminal indictment of Geert Wilders for inciting to hatred and discrimination against Muslims (posted at the Hudson Institute site, discussed previously here) as it consists entirely of his own statements about Islam. When his various comments are collected together like this, the consistency, power and truthfulness of his message, including the truthfulness and correctness of his occasional tough language, stands out more than ever. Which means that what he is being put on trial for is true statements about Islam. As I understand it, he is going to argue in court that the truth of his statements is a defense from the charge of inciting to hatred and discrimination. Is it true, as Wilders has said, that the Koran is a Mein Kampf like document that dehumanizes non-Muslims and calls for their destruction? Is it true that the program of Islam is the complete destruction of Western freedom and Western nationhood? Is it true that Dutch people should find this very alarming and that alarmist language is justified? There are various problems with the Dutch law that leave it open to challenge on technical grounds. For example, “incitement to hatred and discrimination” is too vague for a criminal statute, as it makes it impossible for people to know if their behavior is criminal or not, and leaves it up to law enforcement officials to define the law according to their whim, the very definition of tyranny. However, as important as that issue is, my own thoughts on the case tend to focus on a different type of question. When the indictment of Wilders came out in December, and I looked at the charges and the kinds of statements for which he was being charged, I thought:

Wilders is saying that Islam is dangerous and violent, that Islamic immigration should be stopped, that sharia believers should be made to leave. He is calling for discrimination against Islam, which of course I also support. His statements could therefore be reasonably characterized as “incitement to discrimination.” Meaning he is guilty under the law, a law which says you cannot criticize a group that intends the destruction of your country. So let’s have it out. Let’s state clearly that we believe in discrimination against Islam. Let’s have the debate between those who think that discrimination against Islam is necessary to prevent the Islamization of our society, and those who think that it’s criminal to oppose the Islamization of our society.

Read the rest here.




2 responses

25 01 2010
The real question of the Wilders trial « Defend Geert Wilders Criminal Me

[…] the original:  The real question of the Wilders trial « Defend Geert Wilders tags: consists-entirely, discussed-previously, geert, geert-wilders, his-own, hudson, […]

27 01 2010
The real question of the Wilders trial « Defend Geert Wilders | Drakz Free Online Service

[…] rest is here: The real question of the Wilders trial « Defend Geert Wilders Share and […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: