Bad News from Europe: Nazi Methods in Court

The Dutch judicial authorities are going to prosecute Geert Wilders, one of the 150 members of the Dutch Parliament, for making the movie Fitna. In this short documentary, which explains what happens if a number of verses of the Koran are taken seriously, Mr Wilders compares the Muslims’ holy book to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. He claims the Koran calls for violence against Jews and other non-Muslims. Fitna can be seen here.

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal ruled yesterday that the views of Mr. Wilders

“constitute a criminal offence according to Dutch law […] both because of their contents and the method of presentation […] as a result of which hate is created. According to the Court of Appeal most statements are insulting as well since these statements substantially harm the religious esteem of the Islamic worshippers […] by affecting the symbols of the Islamic belief as well.” 

The Court is of the opinion that

“a criminal prosecution and a possible conviction later on […] does not necessarily conflict with the freedom of expression of Wilders, since statements which create hate and grief made by politicians, taken their special responsibility into consideration, are not permitted according to European standards either.”

The Court also states that

“the instigation of hatred in a democratic society constitutes such a serious matter that a general interest is at stake in order to draw a clear boundary in the public debate.”

Since Mr. Wilders is the founder and leader of a political party, the Dutch Freedom Party PVV, which currently holds nine seats in Parliament and whose popularity is rising fast, the Court also addressed the question whether approval or disapproval of Mr. Wilders’ opinions should not be left to the electorate. The Court says that it, indeed,

“prefers the political, public and other legal counter forces rather than the criminal law […] However, the Court of Appeal makes an exception as regards insulting statements in which a connection with Nazism is made (for instance by comparing the Koran with ‘Mein Kampf’). The Court of Appeal considers this insulting to such a degree to a community of Islamic worshippers that a general interest is deemed to be present in order to prosecute Wilders because of this.”

The Canadian lawyer and author Ezra Levant, remarks that

“Hatred is an emotion. Apparently in Holland, ‘making’ someone feel that emotion is a crime.”

Mr. Levant has himself been the victim of an official ‘hate crime investigation’ in Canada, following complaints by Muslims for republishing the so-called ‘Danish cartoons’ about the Prophet Muhammad. In Mr. Levant’s case, the complaints were dismissed.

Mr. Levant points out that the Dutch court also considers it a crime to

“incite ‘discrimination.’ Not just discrimination itself, mind you. But inciting someone to discriminate. The Dutch court has not announced the prosecution of anyone who Wilders has ‘incited’ to discriminate. But they’ll charge him with discrimination, once removed – even if that discrimination hasn’t happened, and isn’t logically tied to his political criticisms of Islamic fascism.”

The case against Mr. Wilders in the Netherlands bears a striking resemblance to the 2004 conviction of the Vlaams Blok, another popular political party, in neighboring Belgium. The Vlaams Blok, despite the electoral support of 24% of the voters, was disbanded following a court verdict that it should be considered to be a racist, hence criminal, organization. The party was convicted on the basis of an anthology of 16 texts published by local party chapters between 1996 and 2000. Many of these texts simply quoted official statistics on crime rates and social welfare expenditure, One of the texts dealt with the position of women in fundamentalist Muslim societies and had been written by a female Turkish-born Vlaams Blok member from the town of Aalst who had herself been raised in such an environment. The court said the Aalst section of the party published her story

“not to inform the public about the position of women in the Islamic world, but to depict the image [of non-indigenous people] as unethical and barbarian.”

The court stated explicitly that what the party had written “was not necessarily untrue,” but alleged that the party’s “intentions” in publishing the truth had been of a criminal nature.
The same applies to Mr. Wilders’ Fitna movie. Whether or not it is true what Mr. Wilders says does not matter to the Dutch court. It claims he has committed a crime by making statements which

“substantially harm the religious esteem of the Islamic worshippers […] by affecting the symbols of the Islamic belief.”


A major argument in this regard seems to be that Mr. Wilders compared the Koran, with its many verses that call for murdering Jews, to Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf. Mr. Wilders is one of Holland’s most outspoken defenders of Israel and the Jews. Ironically, his adversaries have on several occasions compared him to the Nazis, but none of them has been prosecuted for making this comparison. Countless non-leftist European have been compared to the Nazis in the past decades. The European Left has used terms such as ‘Nazi,’ ‘Fascist’ and ‘racist’ to such an extent that the words have become meaningless. Even Israel is regularly called a Nazi state. However, when Mr. Wilders uses the comparison, the Amsterdam Court of Appeal

“considers this insulting to such a degree […] that a general interest is deemed to be present in order to prosecute Wilders because of this.”

As in Belgium, the prosecution against Mr. Wilders is a political attempt to kill a politician and a party which threaten the ruling establishment. As Dutch public prosecutor Otto Van der Bijl told CNN, Mr. Wilders will be prosecuted because a total of nine (!) people filed complaints against him. One of these is Mrs. Els Lucas of the governing Labour party, a political opponent of Mr. Wilders’ PVV party, and a party which is rapidly losing its blue-collar voting base to the PVV.

What must one call the methods of a court that issues verdicts like the one in Amsterdam? The Wall Street Journal calls them Saudi methods. But perhaps Nazi methods is more appropriate. Or is it a criminal offence to say so because it might incite ‘hatred’ against the Dutch judiciary?

A petition in defense of Mr. Wilders can be signed here.

It boggles the mind.

Its remarkable that the elites in Europe have found a way to usher in their own fascist state largely in part by claiming to fight fascism.

Once the power becomes firmly entrenched in the EU (via lisbon II, etc) there will be no remedy. Like all fascist states, it will burn itself out in several decades but it will leave in its wake death and misery.

The end of Europe and the Western World?

 A letter to the Australian Greens


While the world has looked at terrorism as a threat to the future
of western civilisation, Islam is gaining control by stealth. { see
node/1609 } The left including the Greens
are promoting  pro Muslim policies endangering our way of life and our
future. One only has to look at Europe to see what Australia's future
will look like with the influx of uneducated, radical leaning, racist
dangerous people of the Muslim religion. In Belgium 80 % of school
lunches are made using an halal butcher ( Meat killed in a Muslim way ),
there are areas in Brussels that  native Belgians fear to visit with
gangs of Turk and Moroccan youths ruling the streets taking on the
negatives of Western culture ( Drugs, Rape, Violence) while showing
extreme hate for their adopted country and its native people. These
young  Muslims come from uneducated peasant families which retard the
youths from gaining an education and the will to move out of the self
constructed ghettos putting a huge burden on social services. The
earlier Muslim  immigrants to Europe did not leach on its host countries
free social services until it was promoted by Liberal do gooders and
left wing political parties where now they are an unwelcomed burden on
native workers. While promoting a free society  we are giving power to a
religion that will become our captives , recently a Dutch government
minister and a British Archbishop said it was inevitable that Sharia law
will be voted as policy in many council and town areas  {  see } and this is
the danger. With the decline of native European populations, Muslims are
not far from becoming the majority in some towns and council areas all
over Europe and they are being courted my the major political parties of
Europe. Examples of this can be seen by the growing number of Muslims
being candidates for the said parties with native Europeans voting for
the party whilst being ignorant of the candidates beliefs. Nominal
Christians are attracted to many of Islam's conservative policies and
will support them over a more liberal progressive candidate. Yet its
this progressive candidates party that has opened the door and promoted
the plight of Muslims as downtrodden and deserved. Reverse
discrimination has progressed so far that both native and ex Muslims
that speak out against Islam are jailed, fined or/and deported. //( In
the Netherlands an ex Muslim parliamentarian was kicked out of the
country for warning people on the evils of radical Islam. ) All this has
resulted in the rise of pro Israel right wing nationalist parties in
Belgium, France and Austria as well as in Eastern Europe and Russia.

    I would advise people to research this subject and see that we are
at the mercy of Islamic supporting progressives and once they achieve
their goals it will be too late. I believe that any refugees and
immigrants that refuse to assimilate with their adopted country should
be returned to their country of  birth. I  believe that like the rules 
regarding the removal of motorcycle helmets in banks, shops etc. so
should the head covering be removed by Muslim women when entering these
establishments. I believe that a religion which promotes the degradation
and enslavement of women should not be tolerated and removed from our
nation. We have little time to save our nation from the death that
Europe is now facing it is up to us to rescue the western world from
Islam for our children

Bill Weller

Nondemocrats all

Courts that draw "boundaries in the public debate" are instruments of UNdemocratic societies.  There is no substantial difference whether these courts act on behalf of 'revolutionary' leftist autocracies or of 'monarchical' rightist autocracies.  The essence of democracy is freedom of political speech, which is a necessary pre-requisite to make free elections possible as well as for the public to 'control' the government (and not the other way around).

Shadows of progress

While Le Pen is denied freedom of speech by democratic France.

Worth repeating

“the instigation of hatred in a democratic society constitutes such a serious matter that a general interest is at stake in order to draw a clear boundary in the public debate.”