I suppose that I should explain this blog a little bit; its purpose in the blogosphere. The purpose of this blog is to form a sort of centralized source for coverage of and opinion on the Geert Wilders case. Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician, radically and -arguably- hatefully opposed to Islam, who the Dutch government has decided to prosecute under ill-defined ‘hate-speech’ charges.
The last time that I checked, a religion, be it Islam, or Christianity, or Hinduism, or whathaveyou, was not able to set the tone for what discourse is and is not acceptable. If religion is setting the pace now, in Holland, then that is not acceptable.
So what this blog will be doing is linking to various people who are talking about this case as it develops, be they bloggers or journalists. The only central theme will be Geert Wilders. The only central political opinion will be freedom of speech – there are no other agendas. This is not necessarily an anti-Islamic website – merely a site dedicated to our freedom to speak as we please, about whichever religion we please.
Defend Geert Wilders 
This blog is an excellent idea, and I am impressed you put it together so quickly. Timely and forceful action is needed to put a stop to this particular, and the more general cultural, assault on our basic liberty — free speech.
Thank you for your excellent work for Mr. Wilders and for freedom.
Robert
Hey, it’s my pleasure. Once I thought of putting this site together I knew that it would really bother me if I didn’t go through with it.
Hate-Free Speech
By INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, January 22, 2009 4:20 PM PT
Islamofascism: A threat to basic freedom has opened a new front in the war on terror. Dutch filmmaker and politician Geert Wilders is finding out what it means to yell “truth!” in a crowded theater.
Wilders is a leader in the Dutch Freedom Party and a thorn in the side of politically correct Europeans who’ve been cowered by their increasing Muslim populations into accepting the creeping Islamicization of Europe — or Eurabia, as we and others have dubbed it.
In March 2008, Wilders posted “Fitna,” a film about the Koran, on the Internet. It equates Islam with violence and the Koran with Adolf Hitler’s “Mein Kampf,” at least in its advocacy of obscene violence against humanity and as a blueprint of things to come.
The opening scenes of “Fitna,” a Koranic term sometimes translated as “strife,” shows a copy of the Koran followed by footage of the attacks on the U.S. on 9-11, then London in July 2005 and then Madrid in March 2004. Subtle he is not. But neither is he a criminal.
It did not help that Wilders included in the film a scene showing Muslim protesters holding signs reading “God Bless Hitler.” This would tend to lend credence to Wilders’ thesis. Mention of Hitler and Nazism in any context is still a touchy subject in Europe to this day, as is criticism of anything Muslim.
On Wednesday the Dutch Court of Appeals ordered a criminal prosecution of Wilders, who is also a member of the Dutch parliament. “The Amsterdam appeals court has ordered the prosecution of member of parliament Geert Wilders for inciting hatred and discrimination, based on comments by him in various media on Muslims and their beliefs,” the court said in a statement.
As his film shows, this largely amounts to quoting the Koran accurately and reporting the statements of Muslim organizations and their supporters, many of which can’t be repeated here.
Wilders is in fact guilty of nothing but resisting the Islamicization of Europe and the attempt to impose Sharia law on the West. Suppressing all criticism of and debate about Islam is part of that move. Free speech and Sharia law are incompatible.
Columnist Mark Steyn felt Wilders’ pain in 2008, when he went on trial in Canada for “Islamophobia.” As in Wilders’ case, this consisted largely of quoting Muslim speakers verbatim and then drawing obvious conclusions. Steyn ultimately prevailed, without civil libertarians warning of any “chilling effect” on public discourse.
Leading this charge to eviscerate freedom of speech in the West is a group called the Organization of the Islamic Conference, composed of Muslim governments in the Middle East, Asia, Africa and around the globe. Its stated mission is “defending the image of Islam, and combating the phenomenon of Islamophobia.” In practice, this means using our freedoms to end them.
Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the OIC, says the group has already targeted the United States. “We have established an OIC group in Washington, D.C.,” he announced recently, “with the aim of playing a more active role in engaging American lawmakers.” Prosecution of American politicians and opinion-makers may not be far off.
Ihsanoglu also gave us a warning: “In confronting the Danish cartoons and the Dutch film ‘Fitna,’ ” he said, “we sent a clear message to the West regarding the red lines that should not be crossed.”
We are reminded of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh, great-great-grandson of the famous artist, who crossed that “red line” and paid for it with his life in 2004. He was shot and his throat slit on an Amsterdam street after making the film “Submission,” which criticized the Islamic world for its harsh treatment of women as exhibited in the Taliban’s reign of terror in Afghanistan. Was his film hate speech or merely a documentary of Muslim intolerance?
Islamofascists know that free speech is the linchpin of Western democracy. We need people like Wilders, van Gogh and Steyn, who dare to exercise that right in the face of such threats. We need to know the truth, for that’s what shall keep us free.
__._,_.___
Thanks for that, Marvin.
I have been trying to find an email link to the author of this blog to offer this little video I made for youtube about Geert and Canada’s HRC’s. Ill post the link here but m preference was to send it to the blog author and let them decide if they wished to post it on this forum. Thank you for making it by the way
VT for vladtepesblog.com
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=XSvDRALMHA4
Your blog and your work are here publicised over here:
http://citizensandneighbours.blogspot.com/2009/01/defence-of-realm.html
http://citizensandneighbours.blogspot.com/2009/01/freedom-of-speech_24.html
http://citizensandneighbours.blogspot.com/2009/01/international-relations.html
http://citizensandneighbours.blogspot.com/2009/02/church-and-state.html
Good luck and every success with your work for Mr. Wilders and all our freedoms.
Think jew when he says muslim and tell me what you think of him then.
I don’t necessarily agree with the man, but I don’t think that he should be prosecuted merely for his words, for a film. I’m against holocaust denial laws, I’m against hate speech laws, and I will be against any law that infringes upon our right to freedom of speech, or any others’ right to freedom of speech – even if those others are not necessarily people that I agree with, or find particularly tasteful.
What he says is open for public debate; you can ridicule him, make fun of him, deride him, do all that you like. And I think that you’re more than entitled to do so – although I think that he raises a couple of good points as well. I think if we really want to combat racism, we shouldn’t be trying to force it underground where it can fester into an even more vile version of the BNP – or suchlike.
Dutch: If Mr. Wilders attempted to make a *Fitna* about Judaism, he would find the task impossible because contemporary Jews are not committing terrorist acts in accord with their scriptures, with the injunctions and commands of Moses. While Jewish holy books contain demeaning remarks about Caananites, Elamites, Amorites, and other extinct ethnicities, they do NOT command Jews to hate, despise, enslave, and kill all non-believers. The Koran does so enjoin Muslims.
Jewish history is not one endless tale of horriffic slaughter of non-believers. Jewish theology does not command Jews forcible convert, kill, or enslave gentiles.
Your equation of “Jew” and “Muslim” is entirely invalid and misleading.
Not “forcible,” but “forcibly.”
It is ok for Mulsims to criticise us in our own country and call for hate crimes against us, but if we do so then we are criminals. Geert Wilders is the product of Islam and hopefully its downfall.
Religion is not setting the pace. But the law is. In spite of what people may think, freedom is speech is limited by the law. In the case against Wilders it is the law who will determine wether Wilders went to far or not. What’s wrong with that?
Nothing’s wrong with that, in your view of things. But for people who value freedom of speech as something beyond the law, subject to no government, and owned solely by ourselves as individuals, this is an abomination 🙂
So you disagree with the Dutch free speech laws and the Geert Wilders case is just a means to make your point? Why this interest in Dutch law from a Canadian?
Out of curiosity: if Geert Wilders were Canadian, would it be possible to prosecute him under current Canadian free speech laws?
Well, in Canada we have what are called Human Rights Commissions – one federally, and then provincial equivalents. The federal one and some of the provincial ones are equipped to handle hate speech complaints. Canada’s criminal code also provides provisions for extreme cases of hate speech as well – although people are rarely convicted by it. I disagree with those laws as well…
I think you pretty much nailed it, there: I’m in this for the larger, over-all point about freedom of speech. For the most part, I respect Holland’s tradition of law, but I think they’ve gotten this one wrong. So, I thought that I might as well show my disagreement in some small form, at least 🙂
Well, the Geert Wilders case is an interesting one. He’s smart enough not to say something that would obviously be hate speech. But at what point does continuously criticizing Islam (with valid and invalid points, but he has a right to express incorrect beliefs just like anyone) turn into hate speech? It’s a tough call, but I hope the court resists the urge to make this about politics and prefers to err on the side of free speech.
And Dutch free speech law does have its flaws. We have a law against blasphemy (Did Wilders insult Allah at any time? :-)) and selling Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ is prohibited. (Not that I think it’s such an inspirational book, but banning it?! It is available to scholars, btw. And it was available in the library of the Belgian village I grew up in.)
Denying or minimizing the Holocaust is also against the law. I do have sympathy for this law, but still, it is a ban on an opinion – however unsubstantiated and ridiculous that opinion may be. Difficult issue.
About showing your disagreement in some small form: that’s one of the best uses of the internet. 😉
at what point does continuously criticizing Islam (with valid and invalid points, but he has a right to express incorrect beliefs just like anyone) turn into hate speech?
Answer: Never. Islam is a belief system it is not a race. So it can never be hate speech to criticize it any more than criticizing Republicans can be hate speech. Let me go farther. It is extremely dangerous to entertain the notion that it is hate speech for exactly that reason. Once we establish that certain belief systems need or deserve protection over others, we have defacto created an oligarchy. When you talk about Jews, you talk about a people who have nothing which ties them except they are called jews. So when people attack Jews its rarely because of the beliefs, (Very few Jews believe in Judaism) but you are asking to attack the people. When you attack Islam you are not saying that people who believe in Islam are inherently flawed even if you are saying that the religion is. An Arab for instance, who converts to a non-Islamic belief is typically never still under attack by critics of Islam.
So once again, it is never hate speech to attack a belief system whether its communism, islam, nazism or whatever similar paradigm.
I don’t think hate speech can only apply to race. Saying all homosexuals (sexual preference) or all muslims (belief system) or all jewish people (race) are less than human, are all forms of hate speech. The fact that your belief system is more of a choice than your sexual preference or your race, is in my opinion besides the point.
So my question is: at what point is it reasonable to say that continuously criticizing Islam (or homosexuality or whatever) is the same thing as saying that that all muslims (or homosexuals or whatever) are less than human? In my view this is only possible when you can prove that the person in question is using this as a conscious tactic to spread hate speech, while preventing himself from being prosecuted under hate speech laws. In every other case, you’re making someone responsible for the way other people interpret what one is saying and that makes no sense at all.
With homosexuality we run into a problem indeed. Being gay is not genetic, but neither is it a choice exactly. One however, should be free to attack that behavior as often as one wishes and as harshly as one wishes. No one has to listen or like it. As for Jews, they are not a race. There is no way to properly define jews other than all jews identify as jews or more accurately, all jews are identified as jews by those on the outside who wish them harm. Therefore, to denigrate jews as subhuman is tantamount to race as there is no element of choice or behavior in it. Hitler’s rule, one Jewish grandparent is enough for the gas chambers, may as well apply since there is no other way to identify if one is jewish. His is distinctly racial. Islam is a pernicious belief system. The more devoutly one believes in Islam, the more dangerous to a free and democratic society one is. Further, the more deeply religious a Muslim is, the more likely are his ties to terrorism as terrorism and its financing is central dogma to Islam and takes up over 60% of the hadiths.
To attack Islam cannot be hate speech anymore than to attack Nazis communists republicans ofr the NDP can be hate speech. However, as you say, should you attempt to claim that members of the NDP are actually sub human and not the same species and should be exterminated by virtue of their credentials as not real people, then I suppose you have crossed a line into some form of hate speech. At this level, I would say that truth is a defense. In other words, what I have said about Islam is demonstrably true. I can show you where and how I came to these conclusions. In fact, Islam itself by Canadian standards is itself hate speech and to point this out should not be itself hate speech, although the hypocrisy of the irrational left has made it so.
Ultimately I believe in free speech. There must be no hate speech laws whatsoever as the second you do have them, you open the door to selective enforcement of them to an evil agenda, which we most certainly have now in Canada as Point De Bascule showed us when he tried to bring charges against the Montreal Imam who broke every single aspect of section 13 of the hate speech act against women, jews, non muslims, Canadians etc. and they refused to hear the case.
So in my ethical system, as interesting as this discussion is, I would prefer we not be dancing on the head of a pin as to what speech should be allowed, instead we should be jointly demanding all laws governing political opinion should be repealed no matter how repugnant you and I may find such speech.
Eeyore said:
“Islam is a pernicious belief system. The more devoutly one believes in Islam, the more dangerous to a free and democratic society one is. Further, the more deeply religious a Muslim is, the more likely are his ties to terrorism as terrorism and its financing is central dogma to Islam and takes up over 60% of the hadiths.”
I have mixed feelings about the quote above.
On the one hand, I think you too easily equate devoutness with extremism. It’s what the extremist muslims want you to believe. 🙂 (= rhetoric trick, not an argument, I know.) Are moderate Catholics by definition less devout than the Catholics that don’t accept the Second Vatican Council? I don’t think so and the same applies to the Islam.
On the other hand, Mel Gibson apparently once said: “What’s the point in believing in God, if he’s not (an) absolute?” I think the man has a point. (Disclaimer: I’m an atheist.)
And on the third (?) hand, how come we hear so little of the moderate muslims? Is it because they do not perform terrorist acts, because they are less organized, because the media has little interest in them, because they are less vocal as they are moderate and not extremist?
jss when I first started looking into Islam, I realized it, and consequently we, had a problem. Islam was not a healthy thing for the west. Sometimes I would meet people who would make absurd claims. Like Mohamed was a pedophile etc. I used to get angry at them claiming that Islam was sufficiently bad of a problem that one did not need to make up horrors to make people turn off of it and that sort of thing hurt our case.
Then I learned that in fact:
1. Mohamed did marry Aisha when she was six
2. He DID have sex with her from that point on but not vaginal intercourse till she was nine
3. Central dogma to Islam, is that Mohamed was a perfect person and his example is to be followed in every way. This is I believe, the Sunnah
So you see, I was wrong. Mohamed was a pedophile and make it a good thing.
Then, I started reading more about Islam and it turns out that jihad represents the majority of the hadiths. In fact, Mohamed was quite clear that a day on the battlefield fighting for Islam, is ‘worth’ ten years of good works. That anyone who is a Muslim but cannot fight jihad personally must do so by assisting those who do financially and pay zakat. This is why sharia banking must never be legal anywhere.
Your comparison with Catholics simply does not wash. You need to know more about Islam. For example, a church is a Christian place of worship. Rarely if ever are explosives or bomb making gear found there. In Islam, a mosque is quite deliberately a beach head or foothold. It is a place from which, Muslims establish primacy of Islam wherever they are.
I do recommend you read The Mosque revealed if you get a chance, its a short book you can read in two hours, and The Trojan Horse about Islamic immigration. You will see that the comparison between Islam and anything you may be familiar with, is not valid.
Thank you so very much for your Blog and the opportunity to post the following Program in support of *Geert Wilders*
http://jdlcanada.wordpress.com/2010/01/06/jdl-solidarity-rally-for-dutch-freedom-fighter-geert-wilders/
Join our
Solidarity Rally
for Dutch Freedom Fighter
Geert Wilders
Wednesday, January 20
7:30-9:30 pm
Toronto Zionist Centre,
788 Marlee Ave.
The Dutch Member of Parliament will stand trial on this date in Amsterdam for our collective rights to speak the truth about the spread of political Islam in the free world.
See his Anti-Koran film Fitna and hear a diverse coalition of community leaders including Boston Rabbi, Jon Hausman, a close associate of Wilders.
For more information,
please call JDL Canada
416.736.7000
http://www.jdl-canada.com
WONDERFUL ! MR. GREET WILDER. I SALUTE YOU FROM THE CORE OF MY HEART FOR THESE WONDERFUL SPEECHES.MY GREAT NATION – INDIA IS ALSO THE VICTIM OF THIS ISLAM.
I HAVE ALREADY FORWARDED YOUR FOUR SPEECHES TO AROUND 2,000 MY KNOWN LIKE MINDED PEOPLE E MAILS.
GREAT REGARDS
VIKRAM KUMAR
“Why I Stand with Geert Wilders”
Daniel Pipes – National Review, January 19, 2010
“Who is the most important European alive today? I nominate the Dutch politician Geert Wilders. I do so because he is best placed to deal with the Islamic challenge facing the continent. He has the potential to emerge as a world-historical figure.”
http://www.danielpipes.org/7888/stand-with-geert-wilders
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
JDL *Solidarity Rally* for *Geert Wilders*
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
TOMORROW – On January 20th, the honourable Geert Wilders, Dutch Member of Parliament, will stand trial in Amsterdam for our collective rights to speak the truth about the spread of political Islam in the free world.
Join us for a Solidarity Rally for Geert Wilders
Wednesday, January 20
7:30 pm – 9:30 pm
Toronto Zionist Centre,
788 Marlee Avenue
The film Fitna will be shown and a diverse coalition of community leaders will speak, including Rabbi Jon Hausman from Boston, a close associate of Geert Wilders.
Jewish Defence League of Canada
http://www.jdl-canada.com
416 736 7000
JDL Blog > http://jdlcanada.wordpress.com/2010/01/06/jdl-solidarity-rally-for-dutch-freedom-fighter-geert-wilders/
Nice site
http://antialqaida.wordpress.com
Geert Wilders is a modern hero. The hero of the West. The champion of freedom of expression.
http://www.livingscoop.com/watch.php?v=MjMw
I want to read daily news about the trial against mr Wilders. Where can I get that?
Tao – well, a good way to stay on top of the news about Geert Wilders is to get an account with Google, and set up a Google News Alert about Geert Wilders – this will bring what news the Google Alert can find straight to your inbox.
Another way, of course, as I’m obliged to say, is to keep checking in with this website 😛
Thank you mr Morrow. Will do both of your suggestions.
What is the schedule for the trial, like how many days a week are there going to be court activity?
My pleasure!
I’m actually not too sure on the trial schedule to be honest – although I do know that the next day of the trial is scheduled for February 3rd. 🙂
Oki doki, February 3rd.
Merely to put things into perspective and balance the comments made over here:
http://dutchpolitics.net/2009/12/17/wilders-terecht-aaangepakt/
There’s an English Google translation possibility beneath the article. You may use a different translator after clicking the link to the entire article.
Best regards,
Paul Wilders
Great – thanks Paul! I’ll include that in my weekly link round-up as well.
Wilders has a new web page up:
http://www.wildersontrial.com/
Hi,
A very informative blog.
What an excellent idea to create this webside that opposes the islamic and left-wing antisemitism that stands behind the efforts to forcefully silence Mr. Wilders.
We have think broader and create a rainbow-type coalition (women, jews, gays, Christians, Hindus) to fight islamic extremism !
jss when I first started looking into Islam, I realized it, and consequently we, had a problem. Islam was not a healthy thing for the west. Sometimes I would meet people who would make absurd claims. Like Mohamed was a pedophile etc. I used to get angry at them claiming that Islam was sufficiently bad of a problem that one did not need to make up horrors to make people turn off of it and that sort of thing hurt our case.Then I learned that in fact:1. Mohamed did marry Aisha when she was six2. He DID have sex with her from that point on but not vaginal intercourse till she was nine3. Central dogma to Islam, is that Mohamed was a perfect person and his example is to be followed in every way. This is I believe, the SunnahSo you see, I was wrong. Mohamed was a pedophile and make it a good thing.Then, I started reading more about Islam and it turns out that jihad represents the majority of the hadiths. In fact, Mohamed was quite clear that a day on the battlefield fighting for Islam, is ‘worth’ ten years of good works. That anyone who is a Muslim but cannot fight jihad personally must do so by assisting those who do financially and pay zakat. This is why sharia banking must never be legal anywhere.Your comparison with Catholics simply does not wash. You need to know more about Islam. For example, a church is a Christian place of worship. Rarely if ever are explosives or bomb making gear found there. In Islam, a mosque is quite deliberately a beach head or foothold. It is a place from which, Muslims establish primacy of Islam wherever they are.I do recommend you read The Mosque revealed if you get a chance, its a short book you can read in two hours, and The Trojan Horse about Islamic immigration. You will see that the comparison between Islam and anything you may be familiar with, is not valid.
+1
Looks like this is a Starr Chamber and Charles Manson is taking care of Sharon Tate! The fake Dutch judicial system is fairly evident.
Antichrist Geert Wilders
For more: https://sites.google.com/site/crimesexposed/antichrist-geert-wilders
Greet Wilders of Indonesian mother and Dutch father is audaciously anti-Muslim and shamelessly pro-Israel similar to infamous Ayaan Hirshi Ali and “expired” Ershad Manji!
The Muslims are not burning Bible, Torah, … and I oppose such a barbaric and intolerant act by anyone! One must wonder why do we have a few hate merchants who are deliberately inciting hate against Muslims?! Who is intolerant and barbaric here? Who is inciting hate based on racism and sectarianism?
Does any Muslim trotting the globe and inciting hate against the Christians like Wilders? The answer is no.
Does any Muslim calling to behead the Catholics (an old practice of England) for the existence of 10% child molesters in the church? NO.
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are Middle Eastern religions! Yet, somehow Islam is the target and alien religion.
Could you kindly let us know;
1. Which part of Quran permits Muslims to kill non-Muslims?
2. If anyone was killed simply for not being Muslim?
3. How many Muslims were stoned to death?
4. Why is it that when non-Muslims commit suicide, no one mentions anything about virgins or the afterlife?
Last year alone 40 000 farmers in India and 80 000 worldwide committed suicide! Did they do this to get virgins? Or is it the fact that these mostly non-Muslim farmers are not worthy of anything?
Geert, remove your prejudice and bigotry and answer me with evidence if you can.
Oh, the Jews of Messada! Why did they murder their own children and then committed suicide?
So why do you blame the Muslims about suicide contrary to Islamic teachings and statistics?
It is time to stop attacking Islam and Muslims unfairly. I know Greet Wilders is using “made in Israel” i.e. deliberate lies against Muslims. Please think very carefully, the Muslims are not attacking anyone’s religious believes or cultural sensitivities! So, why other people are attacking Muslims? Why Greet wilders loves Christ Killer Jaws? He loves to visit Zio-Nazis Israel. Is it true that Greet wilders is an Israeli puppet? Or simply is he an anti-Christ?
I respect Adam (PBUH), Abraham (PBUH), Mosses (PBUH), Jesus (PBUH), Mohammad (PBUH) and rest of them. However, you gas chamber bound lot are insulting Jesus (PBUH), Mohammad (PBUH), … with any excuse! However to test your sentiment and authenticity when I mentioned about the same treatment of Mosses you are calling me blasphemous!
Tell me, why Moses is superior to Mohammad or Jesus? I love to know why is Geert sucking up to the Zio-nazi Israel? Is it because he is a closet Zionist?
Geert, your illogical, irrational and racist outburst due to bone deep hate against Christian and Islam is blatant and disgusting.
No one got picture of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH)! Yet, some cunning group of criminals created and published series of cartoons of so called terrorist Mohammed contrary to history and reality to incite people deliberately. They also made Piss Christ to offend Christians under the guise of fun and free speech. However, the same people find a half naked Moses (PBUH) sucking cock is ‘blasphemous! I hope we know now, who is behind all of these crimes and deliberate incitements!
Oh, without advent of Islam and Christianity, the Indians would have no choice but to become homosexuals today! Remember, it was the Muslims who influenced and saved Indian women from mass murders emanating from Satidaho, dowry and many other barbaric practices. Kopalkundola and many great works of Hindu reformers are only a few examples in support of my statement unlike false and fabricated anti-Muslim incitements of gutless Geert Wilders and your racist supporters due prejudice and bigotry. All of you are megabyte Nazis indeed.
You should be thanking the Muslims for saving millions from the yoke of infamous caste system.
For more please click this link if you like: Toxic Links and Zio-Nazi Crime Spree.
This is really among the list of far better content articles involving people who I have read more this specific subject matter of late. Great deliver the results.