Free Geert Wilders

That's an extraordinary statement. To assert that the truth is illegal. Hmmm.

It's not merely a violation of freedom of speech but a violation of the basic axiom of such freedom - that it rests on a movement, by such free talk, towards reality, towards truth.

How can the state, and it is the state that makes the laws, define truth as illegal?

Wow, when the truth becomes illegal for fear of offending the same people who would take away your freedoms at the first opportunity (like in this situation) , and you let them, then, your society doesn't deserve to survive.

Please join the Facebook

I Support the Prime Minister of Canada Stephen Harper

we are at 950 members

fh

the truth can be "illegal" depending on how it is used, what's important here doesn't seem to be the truth but "his observations" are accurate and that is "illegal".
So in every day terms if you wrote a news story say or blog and point out any accurate "observations" you are apparently considered a criminal in Holland.
It's really all just lawyer babble but they get away with their drivel in courts. Nothing new to Canadians.

These pathetic squishes deserve to be buggered by Islam if Wilders is convicted.

Reminds me of the CHRC .... Is Mr. Harper Paying Attention?

Sort of defines whats wrong with progressives today -

" The truth is illegal"

Wow - everyone should carry a big aluminum bat...

What a waste of Canadian lives saving this lot from the nazis

the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ stated, “what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal”

Then the law is wrong and needs to be broken by so many people that it is repealed.
Civil disobedience on a large scale, but usually starts with just one individual paying the cost.

This is the sort of thing that only direct action, not walking away as some might council on other threads, can remedy.

This stuff is very hard to read. Plowing though it creates, in me at least, a sense of being smothered to death (for my own good of course).

Although several factors contribute to the spread of censorship, one of them is women's suffrage. With a few spectacular exceptions, most women recoil instinctively from confrontation. You can't expect much support for free speech from people who would rather say nothing at all if they can't say something "nice" about someone. Admittedly, most of the people prosecuting these so-called "thought crimes" are men, but I would dismiss those as political hacks who are cynically appealing to a carefully assessed demographic.

"What a waste of Canadian lives saving this lot from the nazis
Posted by: kermit at January 17, 2010 12:29 PM"

kermit, remember last year when the CHRC made a ruling forbidding a Christian minister from preaching in his church about Christian doctrine regarding homosexuality??? The so-called Human Rights Tribunal labeled his sermons "hate speech".

It's not just in Holland where Freedom of Speech, of Religion, of Press are in grave danger. They're just further down the slippery slope.

The point is there is great danger in all the Anglophone Democracies from those leftist collectivists who would rob us of our God-given freedoms.

The Nazis are HERE!

What ever Wilders is defending, it isn't free speech
He wants the Koran banned [like Mein Kampf].
He wanted to ban american islamic preacher Khalid Yasin from speaking in the Netherlands.
He wants to forbid the construction of mosques; to place muslims in "administrative detention" -- there go freedom of religion or association.
But really, he want votes. And singing the anti-islamic song it his way of getting them.

I laughed at the Spinoza link --
Again,Wilders wants to ban the holy book of a world religion in the name of Netherlands' cultural traditions.
In the Netherlands, that tradition includes the publication of Tyndale's english bible in Antwerp [then in the Netherlands] At a time when Oxford University had about 60 books in English, Antwerp had that many printing houses. Tyndale died for his publications. Wilders will probably just get more votes.

As for the JDL, an earlier Canadian leader committed suicide in prizon a few years back after an attempt to bomb an American Muslim legislator.
In the link you posted --
Note the graphic hand
See the speech from its present Canadian head to a "Toronto High School" [his inspiration, he says in about the first minute, was Meir Kahane]
http://jdlcanada.wordpress.com/

And from this description of a designated terroritst group, [ see the hand again.]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kach_and_Kahane_Chai

RSP nonsense. Your conclusion rests on the unscientific axiom that the dominance of truth in life and the search for truth relies on confrontation.

This further rests on an equally unproven assumption that falseness is primary and that arriving at truth rests on fighting against these dominant false perceptions and opinions.

And, yet another unproven assumption that it's easier to be 'false' (nice) than truthful. And finally, that women prefer this mode.

No people, male and female, could survive without the ability to objectively interact with their world and differentiate between the false and the true. That includes such vital realities as how to care for the farm, for the animals, and the health of human beings.
It also includes the basic elements of justice and fairness, which rely on objectivity and differentiation.

Truth is primary not secondary to the imaginary world - and both genders require an equal involvement in such.

" The truth is illegal"

The truth IS illegal depending on how it is used.

slander/libel I believe

I'm not a lawyer dink but ya gotta get over that.

What ever Wilders is defending, it isn't free speech
He wants the Koran banned [like Mein Kampf].
~dizzy

Geert Wilders is protecting free speech.
Not only that he is protecting the Dutch way of life.

He knows that all free speech will be ended if the Koranimals get their way and over run the Dutch way of life.

He is looking further down the road than you are, dizzy.

Mein Kampf is banned in Germany yet in Germany they still have some free speech.
When the author of Mein Kampf ruled Germany there was no free speech just as there would be no free speech at all in the Netherlands if the followers of the Koran ran the country.

Geert's analogy is apt.

Makes you wonder why we liberated their worthless cowardly asses from the Nazis. We should have left them to rot.

This time there will be no rescue when they lose their country again.

They don't deserve to get the country back.

The truth is never illegal, unless you live in a banana republic, or perhaps The Netherlands! If Wilders is calling to ban a holy book of a recognized religion then he has a problem, but the facts he points out are not hateful, just facts.

I wonder when our own courts will turn into the kangaroo version that seems to be setting up in The Netherlands.

ET, I won't even try to untangle the "assumptions" you think you've detected in my post. "The dominance of truth in life... the assumption that falseness is primary...'. What on earth are you taking about, and how does it relate to my post? I have no idea, and I'm not sure you do either. Why don't you just say that you're offended by any suggestion that women are more timid than men? That would be direct, down-to-earth, and far less pretentious.

RSP - again, you are making claims that rest on unexamined assumptions.

Now, you are saying that I'm 'offended' by your claim that women are timid. I'm not 'offended'; that's an emotional reaction and I'm not emotionally involved. I rationally disagree with your statements that relate truth to confrontation!

What does feminine timidity have to do with truth? Certainly women are less physically powerful than men but they are psychologically extremely aggressive - and that can be empirically verified. Also, women are equal to men in physical abuse - also empirically verifiable. But that's a red herring.

Don't you see that you are setting up some axioms that assert that truth requires confrontation? That's what I disagree with - so, how about dealing with that issue.

Um, please excuse the following for its tone, but I believe it's justifiable in the face of rapidly growing state fascism, as currently evident in the Netherlands.

It's just some serious, real-world-possibility stuff that needs to be said...

It's all about Islamo-Nazism and about the state-apparatus collaborators who, likely in vain, hope they'll be spared one day. These collaborators are apparently taking their orders from the Islamo-Nazis.

I'd suggest to the Dutch that if Wilders is convicted via flagrant, premeditated violation of the Dutch Constitution and in violation of the inalienable rights of the Dutch People, that they should issue an ultimatum to the government that if they don't immediately step down and call an election, they'll be removed by force by The People (yep, imagine the pitchforks, the clubs, the torches being brandished by the villagefolk as they storm the building housing their oppressors and tormentors). The People own the country and the government, and when The People decide, en masse, to remove the current lot of corruptocrat fascists, appeaseniks and Dhimmis, then The People have all the rights in the world to do so, using force if necessary.

The big question is whether the Dutch military will obey or disobey the corruptocrat fascists. Would the Dutch military slaughter the Dutch People? I would certainly hope not.

Who wants to live a life of slavery, after all? What kind of life is that? No freedom, etc...

The People needn't tolerate state fascism.

OpenBaar? OMG, the jokes just write themselves.

“It is irrelevant whether Wilder’s witnesses might prove Wilders’ observations to be correct”, the ‘Openbaar Ministerie’ stated, “what’s relevant is that his observations are illegal”.

This would serve as a fine rallying cry for all of political correctness. The truth is not - and never has been - relevant. It's about naked political power. George Orwell would understand perfectly.

"...was amended with new accusations of racism against muslims..."

When is somebody going to point out to their court system that Islam is not a race?

Why do socialists feel the need to jail those that disagree with them? At least that's what they do in the beginning...

blanks - telling the truth isn't illegal.

Libel and slander are the act of damaging someone's reputation but if the statement is true, then anyone can say it...and you aren't liable.

Also, libel and slander can't apply to amorphous groups, i.e., 'all thin people'...That's what the infamous Section 13 of the HCAct was geared towards, and it is a violation of freedom of speech.

dizzy - Wilder's opinions, that the Qur'an should be banned as inciting violence and hatred towards non-Muslims -- have you read it? It does! The Dutch are a tolerant people; are you saying that the Dutch should support an ideology that insists that non-members be killed? Can you seriously except us to believe that being against an incitement to murder is all about votes?

His goal of stopping Muslim immigration is based on this ideology promoting hatred and violence and the refusal of the Muslim immigrants to integrate with the Dutch culture (a tolerant and open culture). Do you have anything to say in support of advocating killing of 'infidels', in support of honour killings, etc?

He has every right to criticize the Islamic 'religion' - and that 'religion' is more accurately a social/political structure removed from debate and reform by calling it a 'religion'.

ET:
The search for "truth" depends on the freedom to express one's mind. Although such freedom need not lead to confrontation, it often does. In such case, courage and a willingness to endure threats are important, and I think that men on average are more willing to proceed in such circumstances. Notice, I am not saying that women are less perceptive than men but only that they are generally more accommodating. Women will more readily accept laws designed to promote "social harmony" at the expense of free speech. If you disagree, fine. But at least do me the courtesy of disagreeing with what I say rather than with what you find it easier to dispute.

This could get interesting : "JDL Solidarity Rally for Dutch Freedom Fighter Geert Wilders", Wednesday, January 20 at the Toronto Zionist Centre. Details here." I say that because of yesterday's post "
"Your presence here is upsetting to some people..."
Maybe a showdown at the center of the universe?

What to the people prosecuting Wilders ultimately hope to accomplish? Political power, utopia, peaceful co-existance with the Islamists that Wilders has railed about?

The Islamists make the same statements that Wilders does and worse. They act violently on those statements regularly.
They care nothing for Dutch law or Dutch society, they intend to wipe it out. If (when?), they succeed all the prosecutors, simpering politicians and high court judges will be lucky to still be alive, much less in positions of power or prestige.

As someone has mentioned above, what is happening in Holland today is a vision of what people like Jennifer Lynch have in mind for Canada.

Regarding comments about "why did we save them in WW2?", I'll say that nearly all the adult Dutchmen alive at the end of WW2 are now dead. I think that if they were alive now, they would be kicking the asses of these so-called modern politicians and judges very hard. Geert Wilder's too.

dinna fash yerselves...this thing is just more grist for the mill...

the inevitable explosion of disgust one day will be that much more magnificent..

OZ //Geert Wilders is protecting free speech.
Not only that he is protecting the Dutch way of life.
He knows that all free speech will be ended if the Koranimals get their way and over run the Dutch way of life.
He is looking further down the road than you are, dizzy.//

He's looking down the road to the next election. And MAYBE a spot in the government coalition.
Looking down the road myself, my main concern is a self-fufilling prophecy. There are some prominent people peddling this "Eurabia" nonsense. If enough governments [or mobs] take measures dor the sort demanded by such as Wilders, they could get the clash they say they are worried about.[see above Canadian Sentinal]

Wilders is not stupid, but he does say some strange things --
2005 USA "With heavy-lidded eyes, Mr. Wilders laid out his views. He said over the last 30 years, the population of non-Western immigrants in the Netherlands grew 40 times faster than the Dutch population. "The Dutch are a minority already," he said. "
http://www.nysun.com/on-the-town/commentary-on-dutch-conservative-geert-wilders/7483/

Nationmaster stats -- Netherlands Ethnic groups
Dutch 80.7%, EU 5%, Indonesian 2.4%, Turkish 2.2%, Surinamese 2%, Moroccan 2%, Netherlands Antilles & Aruba 0.8%, other 4.8%
Islam > Percentage Muslim 6% Islam > Population 984,449

Update 2007 The CBS said it was cutting estimates to 850,000, or 5.2 percent of the country's 16.3 million population, from 1 million, or 6.1 percent.

From the same occassion --
An audience member asked Mr. Wilders where he saw himself on the political spectrum - was he a Burkean or a classical liberal, for example? Mr. Wilders shrugged, "I don't want to be put in some kind of corner."[...] . But he did finally come up with a French political thinker to describe his views: "Alexis de Tocqueville."

Mr. Siegel asked if the Dutch were to engage in preventative detention, wasn't that contravened by EU law? Mr. Wilders acknowledged he would be sued under EU law. "If his party took power, it would produce a clash with the EU," Mr. Siegel later said.

In 2009, Wilders recently had his show on the road again, invited to the US by an Arizona senator --
http://www.radionetherlands.nl/currentaffairs/region/netherlands/090227-wilders-usa
"He also told Fox he wants to prepare a European "First Amendment", like that in the US constitution, protecting the right to free speech."

The Fox interviewers were non-confrontational, but CNN interviewer Jim Clancey was harder on his guest, saying he thought Fitna was fear-mongering and reminiscent of the kind of propaganda used to provoke violence in Nazi Germany or Rwanda. Mr Wilders denied the accusation of course, but was left briefly floundering for words.

Still, I wonder if he knows that his supporters include the Canadian JDL. He refused to join the far-right coalition in the European parliament.

RSP - I continue to disagree, both with your view that truth requires confrontation and that women are unable to confront.
I hope you aren't saying that women lack courage, though your words suggest it.

I've seen a lot of new ideas come up in the academic world, with research from both men and women. These ideas are new and disturbing to the old guard who are also, men and women. I haven't seen any difference in the confrontations between the old and new ideas, with regard to gender. The old have the power, both men and women, and fight to retain that power.

I also disagree with your view that censorship has increased due to the suffrage of women. Our history has a long record of censorship at the hands of those in power, both church and court, and these people were primarily men.

"Fitna was fear-mongering and reminiscent of the kind of propaganda used to provoke violence in Nazi Germany or Rwanda."--- Dizzy,are you implying that this is a true statement? If showing the dangers of a lifestyle is dangerous,there is a lot of public service messages that should be ignored.

the bear @ 2:28 asked "Why do socialists feel the need to jail those that disagree with them? At least that's what they do in the beginning...".

They do it "for the good of the people", then later, when they start executing those that disagree with them it is also "for the good of the people". Our family has experienced this.

BTW, a few days ago I emailed the Dutch Embassy and told them I disagreed with the prosecution of Geert Wilders for this charge and that the regiment that I served with for 34 years had helped liberate Holland in WW II and was recognized annually in the city of Bergen op Zoom for its efforts.

I have not yet received a reply.

As to the matter of whether the Dutch military would defend the government against a popular uprising as envisioned.
Very unlikely. Athough the Dutch Military is very competant and professional it is much like the US military......sworn to defend the Constitution....not the government.
However a military coup is not possible in the Netherlands. That is not to say that a military government would not form in the aftermath. This is a usual feature of overthrown governments----for the simple fact that in the aftermath, the military is usually the only surviving command/control structure.
The prolonged conflict following the attempted assasination of Hitler...is some evidence of this mentality. The only thing that saved the Nazi regime was that it held unquestioning loyalty from the SS and security services. In instances, it amounted to a minor civil war between the Waffen SS and the Whermacht.
The Soviets took this to heart and maintained vast formations of KGB troops---complete with armour and artillery.

"The truth is never illegal, unless you live in a banana republic"

Welcome to Canada then.

The truth can be illegal depending on how you use it.

re: libel/slander I believe
though I am not a lawyer-dink

Nationmaster stats -- Netherlands Ethnic groups
Dutch 80.7%, EU 5%, Indonesian 2.4%, Turkish 2.2%, Surinamese 2%, Moroccan 2%, Netherlands Antilles & Aruba 0.8%, other 4.8%
Islam > Percentage Muslim 6% Islam > Population 984,449.

In fifty years Holland has gone from being 100% Dutch to only 80% Dutch. How can you not see this as a national survival issue? What do you think those numbers will be in another fifty years?

I would be curious to know how they arrive at the 6% Muslim number when it is likely that 100% of the 2.4 % who are Turks are Muslim and 100 percent of the 2 % who are Moroccan are Muslim and close to 100 % of the 5 % who are Indonesians are Muslim. Some tf the "others' are probably Muslim so that adds up to at least 9.4% who are Muslim.

ET go home
"blanks - telling the truth isn't illegal.

Libel and slander are the act of damaging someone's reputation but if the statement is true, then anyone can say it...and you aren't liable."

like most legal professionals in this country you are almost half right

i've probably fired more lawyers than you will ever encounter and have defended myself successfully on three separate occasions in a criminal court and after the crowns pathetic attempts to settle before trial.
learn the law cause your lawyers won't unless you have very large sums of money to pay them off.

and your statment accusing me of error and being wrong is libelous though since I have incurred no damages either to my reputation or pocket book I knowing the law shall choose not to sue you - this time.

though if you should ever need to attend a Landlord Tenant Board hearing to defend yourself from a "slumlord" in Ontario do get yourself a lawyer at any cost,you'll need them if not just as a witness to the absolute nonsense that goes on.

Methinks that Blanks is shooting blanks.

Too bad his poppa wasn't.

blanks - you are wrong. If the statement is true, then, anyone can say it and, the fact is that the individual's reputation has already been 'tarnished' by that truth.

Defamation law in Canada (except in Quebec) is the tort of making a FALSE statement. If I say that X was fined ten years ago for extortion and spent y-days in prison, these are facts - and I can't be accused of defamation.

Try again.

I seem to recall from reading the Levant/Steyn nonsense that if you are the accused by a human rights tribunal and you offend a selected victim group truth is not a defence. That was the crux of the whole matter.

ET, I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this. Incidentally, I would never deny that individual women have on occasion displayed far greater courage than that required to defend an academic thesis. My comments concern broad, average tendencies and the effect they have on public policy. I do think women are biased toward unconditional nurturing and an avoidance of conflict and that this tendency has moved political conversation decidedly leftward. If I'm wrong, so be it. It won't be the first time.

minuteman - the Human 'Rights' Act and Commission are not part of the Canadian legal statutes regarding defamation.

Their articles refer only to 'feeling insulted' - a totally subjective experience, and in addition, to a non-actual event but one which is 'likely' to occur.

They are nonsense, and as such, when appealed in a genuine court, the HRTribunal's decisions have been thrown out.

"What ever Wilders is defending, it isn't free speech
He wants the Koran banned [like Mein Kampf]."

First off trying to compare the Koran to the Mein Kamph is Laughable, Iv'e read both. Mein Kamph was banned for political reasons. Its actually quite boring and gives you some insights into a mad man. Mohammad was far from mad, but evil and calculating (more like satan himself)a far more dangerous read.

Posted by: minuteman
//In fifty years Holland has gone from being 100% Dutch to only 80% Dutch. How can you not see this as a national survival issue? What do you think those numbers will be in another fifty years? I would be curious to know how they arrive at the 6% Muslim number [...] .//

So you agree that Wilder's claim that "The Dutch are a minority already," is wrong [and wrong-headed]
I suppose you could see it as a "national survival issue" if you meant NATIONAL in the exclusionist sense -- that only traditional netherlanders could ever be real netherlanders.
As for the next 50 years, I'm sure there are demographic [as distinct from Steynian] projections.
[just over 60 years ago the Netherlands was the world's most populous Muslim state]

About actual numbers. First, you misread a bit of it. It's the EU figure that's 5%. And, conversely, there are Netherlands nationals elsewhere.
Secondly, using the nationmaster national figures in order to turn them into religious numbers by inspection is not the best way to go.
Better to use the Netherlands Central Bureau of Statistics actual count of muslims, which as I mentioned has been revised downward.
//Update 2007 The CBS said it was cutting estimates to 850,000, or 5.2 percent of the country's 16.3 million population, from 1 million, or 6.1 percent.//

In addition, there are muslims & muslims. You got a problem with this one?
http://www.bergen-henegouwen.com/news/images-news/Ayaan%20Hirsi%20Ali.jpg

People.Please stop the arguing.Go watch the Grammys.There you can see REAL heros who,when not fellating each other,are doing,well,nothing,but fellating each other.

"What ever Wilders is defending, it isn't free speech
He wants the Koran banned [like Mein Kampf]."

//Posted by: pete
First off trying to compare the Koran to the Mein Kamph is Laughable, Iv'e read both.//

Good for you. As for the comparison, take it up with Wilders. In fact, he equates them as fascist.
We might both equate them as boring.

UNPRINTABLE, UNTHINKABLE -- but THE answer given by a small (almost) dead animal

Credo in unum Patria...

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law should leave OUR land.

Spy agencies should monitor the mosques, which are learning to thrive in our naïveté.

IMMIGRANTS, NOT CANADIANS or AMERICANS, MUST ADAPT. Take US Or Leave US. We are tired of worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. We are tired of interminable mayhem at airports and elsewhere because thousands upon thousand of Muslims won't speak out against their she-mams or their he-mams.

Our culture has been developed over FIVE centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom, not Islamic bondage to misery.

We generally speak English or French or Spanish. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn our languages!

Most North Americans believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political demand, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this culture, which is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools or institutions. If God offends you, then we suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture. Allah is foreign to our way of thinking, our morality, our peace, and our prosperity. What Islam is doing to our land is quickly making it our enemy.

Sorry, we cannot accept your beliefs because they rule out our beliefs. If you want to stay we ask that you live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us, but keep Allah and his legion of thugs to yourselves.

This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flags, Our Pledges and/or Anthems, our Non-Islamic beliefs, or Our Way of Life, we highly encourage you take advantage of one other great North American freedom: THE RIGHT TO LEAVE, or get lost.

If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.

IF you fail to help towards the North American goal of freedom, peace and prosperity, cultivated with responsibility, then you can expect worse than the misery of bondage you left behind.

History has shown it over and over. The Western quest for Liberty is relentlessly longsuffering. They sometimes give-in, sometimes give-up, sometimes compromise. But there is a point beyond which which the spirit for that quest is unstoppable. There is a point when all Goliath's weapons of self-destruction prompted David to remark to his wife...

Never you mind, my dear, you put on the kettle, and we’ll have a nice hot cup of tea.

Some among us will remember that gentle (and traditional) words can conjure very decisive victories.

Until then, pour me a taqiyya Allah
I'll lay down; you'll run me over again

[with due apologies to others who had the ideas]

So you agree that Wilder's claim that "The Dutch are a minority already," is wrong [and wrong-headed]
I suppose you could see it as a "national survival issue" if you meant NATIONAL in the exclusionist sense -- that only traditional netherlanders could ever be real netherlanders.

In a nutshell, yes. Is there any other way to look at it?