Belgian Right-Wing Politician Calls Zionism as Bad as Islamism

Yesterday, the Belgian establishment newspaper De Standaard published a double interview with the Dutch politician Geert Wilders and the Flemish politician Jean-Marie Dedecker. Mr Dedecker, a popular former judo coach, is a populist right-wing politician who was ousted by the governing Flemish Liberal Party in 2006 and founded his own party, the Lijst Dedecker (LDD) or Gezond Verstand Partij (Common Sense Party). He won 5.5% of the Flemish vote in the June 10, 2007, elections. It is generally assumed that he did so mainly at the expense of the Flemish-secessionist and anti-Islamist Vlaams Belang (VB, Flemish Interest) party. According to the latest polls Dedecker is currently at 12.4%, again mostly at the expense of the VB. Last November, Dedecker called the VB “fascistic” and boasted that he is single-handedly succeeding in what the Belgian establishment failed to do for 20 years: “smoking out the VB.”

Geert Wilders, who was ousted by the governing Dutch Liberal Party in 2004 and also founded his own party, the Partij voor de Vrijheid (PVV, Freedom Party) won 5.9% of the Dutch vote in the November 22, 2006, elections with an anti-Islamist platform. Polls predict that his party will double in size if elections are held today. Wilders’ spectacular growth has, however, been stopped by Rita Verdonk, another former member of the Dutch Liberal Party (and a former Dutch Immigration minister), who was ousted in 2007 and also founded her own party, Trots op Nederland (TON, Proud to be Dutch). Verdonk is opposed to immigration but does not criticize Islam. In the polls she is doing better than Wilders.

Excerpts from the interview:
De Standaard: There are also large differences between the two of you. Mr Dedecker is opposed to prohibiting things, whereas you [Geert Wilders] want to prohibit all kinds of things, starting with the Koran. […]

Wilders: That I want to prohibit all sort of things is complete nonsense. I only want to prohibit things to defend our rule of law. I am still enough of a liberal to prohibit things only in the most extreme cases. I do not like to prohibit books at all. You will never hear me advocate prohibiting other books.

De Standaard: Do you also feel that our rule of law is threatened in this way, Mr Dedecker?

Dedecker: I feel threatened by the fact that the separation between church and state is diminishing. But I have no existential angst. There are two major phobias at present in our society: Islamophobia and climatophobia. Both are being promoted.

(To Wilders) You think that Eurabia is a danger. I disagree. Our enlightenment values are strong enough to withstand this. However, we have to wake up. What the politically correct Left has done to our society explains our [electoral] success.

Wilders: If you say that we must wake up, this means that the leftist political elite is sleeping at this moment. That is exactly the reason why our enlightenment ideas do not prevail. Because those leftist politicians, who have become ever more dependent on [the votes of] immigrant groups, will sleep on.

Dedecker: I think prohibiting the Koran is a form of overacting. We shouldn’t prohibit any books: neither Mein Kampf nor the Koran. The Bible, the Thora and the Koran are but fairy tale books. That is what you have to dare tell the people. If religion manifests itself as collective madness, then we must dare to oppose it and start the debate.

Wilders: The Koran is a diabolic book rather than a fairy tale book. It is also, unlike the other books which you refer to – and which I would not call fairy tale books, but it is your right to do so – a book from which people draw inspiration today to commit terrorist acts and exclude women and homosexuals from my community and execrate the separation of church and state. Fairy tale books do not do such things. Fairy tale books concern the Efteling or Walibi [Dutch and Belgian theme parks; equivalents of Disneyland]

Dedecker: I am opposed to the wearing of headscarfs by civil servants, I am opposed to separate swimming hours [for men and women] in swimming pools, but is this a reason to prohibit the Koran? On the contrary, I am one hundred percent behind our own values. And I am as much criticised for this as you. […]

[To Wilders] Up to a certain extent you are also a Zionist. I find that very strange of you.

Wilders: A Zionist? What next?

Dedecker: The way you always defend Israel – as a matter of fact this happens much more in the Netherlands than in Belgium. We both have visited Israel and the Palestinian territories. I consider Zionism and Islamism as similar phenomena. You constantly defend Israel although you know what is being inflicted there on the Palestinians. Do you do that perhaps because Zionism is the counterpart of Islamism?

Wilders: It is interesting that you say this. Zionist goes perhaps a bit far, but I am, indeed, a convinced defender of Israel. Because Israel is an oasis of democracy and Western values in the Middle East. I have also been in other countries in the region, from Syria via Iran to Afghanistan: all these countries are dictatorships. Israel is the only country where a majority in parliament can dismiss a minister – as members of parliament you and I should be able to appreciate that.

I am biased in favour of Israel. Is that so bad? No, I am even proud of it. You have to make up your own mind, but you, too, should be proud of every democracy in the world.

You are partly right. But that does not justify Israel’s apartheid policies – and that is exactly what I reject. I call Israel a kippah democracy.

Wilders: I have a different opinion. Palestinians who are living in Gaza and on the West Bank at this moment, could very well move to the other side of the Jordan – to Jordan or other areas. There is space and place enough there and many Palestinians already live there.

De Standaard: So you also favour ethnic cleansing?

Wilders: That is not ethnic cleansing. Israel can justly claim those regions. Moreover we do not have to harm anyone, but I see what happens today: Hamastan, governs Gaza.

Dedecker: Why should the Palestinians have to go to Jordan? The Palestinians are the outcasts of the Middle East: they are not welcome anywhere. These are people who were driven from their territory on the basis of an international treaty and pseudo property rights granted by the Thora or the Bible. Property rights on the basis of fairy tale books.

Wilders: For me the security of Israel as a democracy prevails on the rights of a group who is to a large extent guilty of terror and corruption. There is no democratic Palestinian authority – that is the sad truth. I am convinced that the attacks which Israel suffers from radical Islam are attacks aimed at us.

Dedecker: Isn't it the opposite? Research shows that three fourth of the suicide terrorists are motivated by the fate of the Palestinians. If we solve that situation, would it not lead to a safer world for all of us? Meanwhile we spend billions and billions on our security.



"I have to thank Norman Conquest for illustrating so clearly my point: For him the thought of a separation between church and state seems unbearable. (Although it is constitutional in the US I believe.)"

YOU have raised this issue. You're right to say that church and state are two separate things according to the US Constitution. You have not understood my point, of course. Not really surprising with the Left's permanent (intentional?)twist in reality perception.

What I mean to say is that I find it absolutely normal for a politician to be influenced by his/her background and education. If you don't want to have a POTUS who believes in God, then elect someone else, because the guy will most likely make decisions based upon his Christian values. The same can be said about Muslims, Free Masons, Socialists, etc...Exactly why I don't want an Obama-cool in the White House, dear! Do you get it now?     

You've mentioned the Bible Belt. Why is that such a problem? So what about the infantilising socialist social straightjacket forced upon each EU citizen?

I don't believe in evolution BECAUSE it does not make any sense!!! Or would Obama be the Missing Link? I am a creationist BECAUSE I don't think we are here on this planet just by mere coincidence!!! Why do you want to force people into believing this evolution crap? You will of course tell me that religion is irrational. Evolution is one more or less valid (but not validated)theory, which remains full of contradictions. Moreover, what I know for sure is that socialism definitely is and leads nowhere, Peter, BECAUSE it is irrational.

All socialist experiments from the enlightened French Revolution to nazism and communism have ended in shameful disaters (genocides on unprecedented scales, famine, totalitarianism, degradation of human integrity, etc), all this in less than two centuries.

Mr. Dedecker not the only gullible Palestinophile in Belgium..

Aren't the opinions of Mr. DD on Israel - and his laughable labeling of Geert Wilders as a Zionist - a mere symptom of the fact that the whole of Belgium's political/cultural establishment for some reason has eagerly swallowed Palestinian propaganda to the full, cork and bottle?


Once again, Wilders hits home with some obvious truths about democracy in the M-E, while avoiding the all too familiar and heavily politicized historiographics of the region.

Can't believe the degree of mindless naïveté as Mr. Dedecker actually seems to think that "liberating the Palestinians" will pacify all Islamists in the region, just because he is told that's what they provide as the "rationale" behind their actions.
What a joke.  

In Reply to Peter V.D.H.

I appreciate your optimism with regard to the fusion of Western and Islamic culture. However, I believe that you are ignoring three issues of concern.


Firstly, Western civilisation is decentralised and diverse, whereas Islam is monolithic and homogenising. Despite the differences between Sunni and Shi'a, Pashtun and Arab, the Ummah is far more unified than the West.


Secondly, the type of Western culture you espouse, namely liberal secularism directly contradicts Islam. Although there are Christian fundamentalists, Christianity also provides much of the intellectual foundations for the Enlightenment and its developments: liberalism and egalitarianism or socialism. Will the Quran or contemporary Islamic thought come to the aid of the Enlightenment? No.


Thirdly, this entire situation is one-sided. The Islamic world will remain Islamic, whereas Western Europe will gradually become Euro-Islamic.

Bible Belt or Socialist Belt???

@ Peter Vandenendoftheworld wrote: "Sects coming from the Bible belt are trying to get footage on European soil". Well, my dear, this is interesting. You're deeply anti-American and anti-Christian. Your rancit views stem from the self-righteous EU political correctness we love to hate so much. But ok. You know, there are other much more dangerous sects from the EU Socialist Belt, basically Western Europe, which are trying to get footage and armage and fuckage on US soil and, my dear, THAT is WHAT is absolutely unacceptable, 'coz they want to hijack the White House. America, be careful, the straightjacket is slowly but surely reaching you. Hey do me a favour read Thomas Sowell's three part story: "The Imitators":


@Atlanticist911: you're wonderful.

@ Marcfrans: I have always admired your culture and courage on this site.




@Norman Conquest

Norman Conquest, well put. Let's pray that Obama and the Dems that would surely unleash the garbage that has brought Europe down never bring it here. We've put fools in the White House before, not too often thank God, Carter comes to mind, and we've got to hope that in spite of the lefty MSM, our increasingly rotten schools riddled with socialist agitprop that the American public will do the right thing this time.

The people that have tried to strip our collective Western culture of its Christian roots have offered nothing that enhances the quality of human life in its place. Russia will never recover from their experiment with their spiritually devoid, Marxist decades. Humans by all empirical evidence don't fare well in the artifically constructed habitats of utopian secular planners.

We will never win the war against history's newest and more deadly fascist force, Islam, until we defeat the socialists here and in Europe.

The separation between church and state???

@Peter Machinsky and consorts:
So how about the separation between Obama and state? Free-masons and state? Socialism and state, hey? Please give me your coordinates: I will buy you a one-way ticket to Saudi Arabia where you will be able to make your point. I am sure they are looking forward to listening to your crappitude. Moreover, you dare to liken the Christian faith to Islam? Could you clarify your "great" point please?

exactly my point

I have to thank Norman Conquest for illustrating so clearly my point: For him the thought of a separation between church and state seems unbearable. (Although it is constitutional in the US I believe.) Bible belters are as much an endangering to my values as Muslims are. If they got it their way, they would force my children to learn idiocies as creationism or intelligent designs, stop lifesaving scientific investigations on human cell’s and lock away homos as perverts. The biggest problem is that they will probably find objective allies in the growing number of Muslims in the EU. To illustrate this a quote from wikipedia: “The only country where acceptance of evolution was lower than in the United States was Turkey (25%)”

He deserves Islamic tyranny...

@Atlanticist911 You call what I am reading from Peter "intellect" and you respect "that"?

People like Peter sadly deserve to be under the foot and tyranny of Islam. The man has the thinking and mind of a fool.

@ Onecent

The only reason I persist with Peter is because, unlike that spineless hypocrite kappert, I genuinely respect the man's intellect, even while at the same time  profoundly disagreeing with his worldview.

Answering my question

"In the EU we are committed to the separation of church and state, and that's something I will keep on fighting for".


Thanks, Peter. Although you don't realize it, you just have.


Save your breath. Peter has with his typical lefty muddled drivel avoided all direct questions, mine included. It's not about thinking with him, it's about stringing together the undigested drivel that swirls around his small brain.

Any moron that fears Chrisians in any form as much as Islam functions out of a position of deliberate ignorance. Ask yourself at this point in history where is the symmetry in human rights violations and who has scored with the higher body count in the last few decades.

There are far too many little fools like peter, spoon fed multicultural and anti-western drivel from the lefty media, academia and politicians that can't weigh the empirical evidence and arrive at logical fact based conclusions.

Anyone that thinks that life will be just the same if Europe morphs into a Muslim majority deserves their burqa.

@ Peter

So, for the record let me get this right, you're telling me that, as a resident of Europe, you'd feel equally 'safe' and 'free' under Islamic rule as you would under the current Judeo-Christian model, is that correct?

your question

My posting was submitted before I read yours.

Your question is a non-question. for the following reasons:

1) I'm NOT living under a Judeo-Christian model because such a model doesn’t exist. “Average” Judaism and “average” Christianity are very different indeed, and this average is put there on purpose because there are so many different Christianities and Judaism’s that the terms themselves are meaningless. In the EU we are committed to the separation of church and state, and that’s something I will keep on fighting for.

2) As there are many Christianities there are many Islam’s too. There is not such a thing as a big complot of “bad Islamers” trying to get me under their rule. Of course Muslims hold on to their values and are trying to get some of them into our society, just like Fundamentalist Christians try to cut back accomplishments of the enlightening. That’s their full right just as it is mine to object and to defend my values.

3) The real world is not "The good, The bad and the ugly." There is no black and white here. So it’s impossible to answer your black and white question with a yes or a no.

@ peter vanderheyden

You wrote: "Christians all over the world did treat Jews as second-class ctizens too".


You also wrote: " People of the Bible belt are as big danger to my values as traditional Muslims are".



As far as your first comment is concerned, perhaps you'd care to read  Ibrahim's article again (see: Comparison # 2)


"While so-called Christian anti Semitism DOES exist, it has absolutely NO DOCTRINAL BACKING in the New Testament... One canNOT say this about Muhammad...".


Do you accept this analysis? If not, kindly present your evidence to the contrary. If you cannot do so (and you can NOT) , kindly add the appropriate qualifier to that accusation, or withdraw it completely.



As far as your second comment is concerned, I would simply make the following observation. Even if what you say is true, the fact that you live in Europe and not in  the "Bible belt" makes that statement redundant.

bible belt

Sects coming from the Bible belt are trying to get footage on European soil. But even without that, the influence of the USA on the rest of the world is that big, that the political power of those people is a direct danger for my freedom. Evidently, I don’t need to search that far for dangers of the current day values I cherish. Conservatives trying to reinstate middle-aged views about women rights, sexual liberties, upbringing of children, homo’s and death penalty are also a big threat to the values of the enlightenment. The same goes for libertines that think that everything should be ruled by freedom and the outcome of free-market laws. Of course, my “values” will be different from yours. We will both fight to get ours respected as much as possible. By doing so we will create a kind of thesis; anti-thesis; synthesis wave. Muslims living amongst us will bring their own values creating an interference with our waves and coming to a new synthesis eventually. Consider this: Muslims are probably your objective allies in questions like birth control same sex marriages or abortion. It's not all that bad.

doctrinal backing

@atlanticist911, I don't care about doctrinal backing. People don't need it to commit atrocities. Wich doesn't mean they will invent some doctrinical backing the day they need to justify them selfs. on the other hand there are plenty in the Bible (I didn't need to google long to find them:
In the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) God is recorded as punishing ancient Israelite individuals and members of other tribes for following the wrong religion, or deviating from "proper" religious practices. In some cases, the victims are viewed as having no right to continue living. In the book of Joshua and elsewhere, God instructed the ancient Israelites to commit what would be termed genocides and "mass crimes against humanity" in today's world. The victims were newborn, infant, child, youth, and adult Canaanites and other nearby tribes who followed Pagan religions. 1 Samuel contains accounts of genocides perpetrated by David and his men.
In the Christian Scriptures, (New Testament) particularly in the Gospel of John, "the Jews" are vilified and called the sons of Satan. Until recent decades, many Christian denominations held that Jews of the first century CE and their descendents down to the present day were held responsible for Jesus' execution. 1 This laid the groundwork for millennia of Christian persecution of Jews and set the stage for the Nazi Holocaust of the mid 20th century.
Religious exclusivity is also found elsewhere in the Gospel of John, and in some Epistles which claim to have been written by Peter and Paul. A frequent message is that the followers of other religions hold invalid beliefs which were wrong, deluded, immoral, and/or heretical. These authors also condemned fellow Christians who followed different sects within the primitive Christian movement -- notably the Jewish Christian and Gnostic Christian movements.


I more and more discover in you a Belgian Trojan Horse.

You are actually toeing the lines of the Belgian "establishment" by circumventing any serious basic discussion: "Yes, Islam is probably a problem, but than Zionism is also a problem." This type of comments is an excuse and circumvents the discussion about excessive islamic immigration problems with their maffia culture of their uneducated uncultured people.

No wonder you voted the "snel-belg-wet"(quick Belgian naturalisation law.)

RE: "Zionism as Bad as Islamism"

I. Neither Mein Kampf nor the Quran should be prohibited reading. And Mr. Wilders' intentions are worrisome in this respect, despite his claims to De Standaard. According to him, his liberal convictions are merely "enough" and he is prepared to prohibit "extreme" things, whatever these may be.


II. Concern over the Islamic presence in Europe is a legitimate reaction on the part of indigenous Europeans. Concern over the degredation and contamination of food stocks, and supplies of water and air is equally so. The emphasis of environmentalism has been on carbon dioxide emissions; however, this folly does not negate collapsing seafood stocks, etc.


III. I disagree with Mr. Dedecker that Eurabia is not a danger. This issue is a 'numbers game' not a contest between opposing value systems. For Muslims and Europeans to co-exist requires a hybrid of each culture, which may not be equal. Given that co-existence with Muslims will entail ethnic and cultural dilution, it is to be avoided. However, it is arrogant to assume that Muslims will become Europeans. Muslims are not looking for Europeans to be Muslims; they want Europeans as second-class citizens at best and slaves at worst. Will the allure of pale skin and blonde hair really dissipate if covered by burqas? Unlikely.


IV. Mr. Wilders' position on Israel clearly states that national self-determination and so-called 'human rights' are secondary concerns to political systems and values. Indeed, he argues that democratic and Western states trump other peoples, especially if the latter are "guilty" of political violence and criminality. Of course, like "extreme cases", the terms "democracy" and "Western values" are vague and open to varying interpretation. Moreover, the Palestinians have never been convicted of a 'collective crime'. This conception of international relations is further muddied if one considers a people's degree of democratisation or Westernisation.


V. Mr. Wilders' also favors the non-voluntary re-settlement of Palestinians to other countries. Given the reluctance of Palestinians to relocate to Jordan and for Jordan to accept them, this re-settlement would be an exercise in ethnic cleansing.


VI. Mr. Dedecker is correct that a significant degree of Islamic violence perpetrated against the West is due to the perceived occupation of Islamic territories by Westerners, namely Israel as well as Coalition and ISAF military bases (e.g. Saudi Arabia, Qatar) and ongoing operations (e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq). However, he is wrong to believe that the clash between the West and Islam will vanish were these 'transgressions' resolved. Muslims exhibit both legitimate nationalism and illegitimate supremacism and it is almost impossible to extricate one from the other.

@kapitein andre

With the exception of point III I totally agree with you. (I know that's not a present considering my political views)
For III: History shows that Islam does assimilate local population. They would never have grown so wide spread if they didn’t. Indonesia, India, Sudan, Kosovo and Bosnia, all very different, yet all Muslim. That is a clear proof. If current demographics persist there will be a majority of people with a non-European ethnicity in Europe, no doubt. It will require a hybrid of each culture. In a fast and ever evolving cultural landscape, I don’t understand the problem. Why should ethnic dilution be avoided? Given the high number of sun bed’s sold in Europe… As for cultural dilution, we will have to fight for the values that are dearest to us. But that’s an ever ongoing process. People of the Bible belt are an as big danger to my values as traditional Muslims are.


"People of the Bible belt are an as big danger to my values as traditional Muslims are."

You've got no core values. That's pretty obvious.

People of the Bible are the foundation of western culture, those secular Christian democracies that Christ gave permission to form with "render unto Ceasar"....

Your breathtaking ignorance in proposing a moral equivalence, a symmetry, between conservative Christians and the anti-human thuggery and intolerances of Islam as equally dangerous is amazing.

Please, share with us how "Bible belt" people have robbed your life of any right or freedom? And, flipping the coin, how Islam will protect your rights and freedoms?

There won't be any "hybrid" culture shaping up in Europe's coming Eurabia, any more than there is one in any place on the globe where Islam's bloody intrusions are, your idiocy shows a profound ignorance of Islam. Europeans like yourself deserve their future dhimmitude.


@Peter Vanderheyden: "History shows that Islam does assimilate local population"

Do you mean "islam assimilates INTO the local population" or do you mean "the local population is assimilated INTO islam"?

But the question that really interests us is: "do islamic immigrants assimilate into the local culture?". 



Probably an interesting question, but I don't see the difference. It all are territory’s that were conquered by Islam rulers at one point in history. These rulers did spread Islam. They did not try to keep the local population “as second-class citizens at best and slaves at worst” to quote kapitein. However it is a fact that those who didn’t convert to Islam were treated as second-class citizens. But that’s rather universal. Christians all over the world did treat Jews as second-class citizens too. We needed to wait till the French revolution to see a prudent change, with many fall backs in the course of western history.


It should be clear that Dedecker has a distorted view of Israel's founding and history, and also of the nature of Israeli society.  Applying the pc-fashionable label of "apartheid" to Israel, and saying nothing about the nature of the Arab cultures surrounding it, may gain him sympathy in biased Belgium, but it is a very unfair and unrealistic attitude to take.  Also, his repeating of the old canard that islamist violence is largely motivated by the Arab-Israeli conflict, shows that he does not understand where the real problem lies that is facing us all.   If he thinks that muslim men would and will not be committing acts of terror in European cities, after Israel's (hypothetical) destruction, he lives on a phantasy planet in Brussels.

By contrast, Wilders has a much better understanding of the realities of the Middle East, and shows himself to be more independent-minded (relative to the cultural orthodoxy surrounding him).  Dedecker complains further down in the interview about purported Dutch narrowmindedness (and rules-addiction), but in fact it is he (the Belgian) who is more a prisoner of his cultural environment than Wilders (the 'independent' Dutchman) is.