Geert Wilders has yet again gone on trial in the Netherlands for “hate speech,” and this time the case against him is especially flimsy: as Europe is roiled by the criminal activity of Muslim migrants, he is being accused of “hate speech” for saying that the massive influx of immigrants from Morocco (from which most of the Muslim migrants in the Netherlands come) has to be stopped.
This trial could very easily backfire on the Dutch inquisitors, and make Wilders more popular than ever with the people of the Netherlands and Europe in general, as they are increasingly fed up with the political and media elites’ forcing them to accept a massive influx of Muslim migrants that ensures a future only of civil strife, bloodshed, and Sharia oppression.
Consequently, those elites are trying desperately to shore up their position. In this DW piece by freelance “journalist” Teri Schultz, Wilders is (of course) “far-right,” that all-purpose and meaningless semaphore that serves only to signal to right-thinking Deutsche Welle readers that Wilders must be opposed and shunned, his positions unexamined. Schultz contacted me to serve as the villain of her piece, being sure to tell her hapless readers that I am “known for extreme anti-Islam views,” to make sure that if any of them are foolish enough to find themselves agreeing with me, they will immediately reverse themselves and get their minds right. The term “extreme” also, since the Western governing class unanimously refers to jihad terrorists as “extremists,” also implies that I am a terrorist. (After the article came out, I challenged Schultz on this; she replied: “I don’t think even you would consider your views ‘mainstream’, do you?” I responded: “Absolutely yes. My views were the broad mainstream in the Western world from 632 AD until the 1960s. What changed? Not Islamic teaching.” To that she said: “Okay. You’d have to argue it with another expert, which I am not. But thanks again for contributing.” Indeed, she is just a mouthpiece for the views the political and media elites want us to hold.)
In any case, Schultz’s article merely reveals the desperation of the ruling class and the self-appointed opinion-shapers. They can call those of us who wish to defend the people and culture of Europe and North America “far-right” and “extreme” every day (and they do), but the public can see with their eyes what is happening. Wilders’ popularity isn’t growing because he is a charming fellow. It’s growing because he speaks the truths that the political and media elites are in a frenzy to obscure. And it’s only going to get worse for them: the Brexit vote and the Trump candidacy (whether he wins or loses) shows that their hegemony is beginning to be challenged. Those challenges will continue, and grow. They will before too long be decisively voted out and repudiated.
“Far-right Wilders skips hate speech trial in Amsterdam,” by Teri Schultz, DW, November 1, 2016:
On Monday, the far-right leader Geert Wilders refused to show up for his trial on charges of hate speech and incitement of violence for comments he made against ethnic Moroccans in the Netherlands.
Instead, Wilders let his legal representatives repeat the views that caused the charges to be brought against him: that the country has a “mega Moroccan problem” and that too many Moroccans get welfare benefits and commit crimes. Wilders believes that he has said “nothing wrong” as he is just vocalizing the views of his constituents….
But while judges ponder the legality of Wilders’ views their popularity grows, as evidenced by Wilders’ showing in the polls and the growth of populist, anti-immigrant parties across Europe, such as the far-right Alternative for Germany. In a world where US Republican Party nominee Donald Trump campaigns on building a wall on the US-Mexican border and a plan to block Muslims from coming to the United States, controversial commentators such Robert Spencer, director of JihadWatch.org, promote Wilders’ perspective. Known for extreme anti-Islam views, Spencer said Wilders’ comments are not out of line.
“Moroccans don’t have some natural right to immigrate to the Netherlands any more than anyone does to anywhere,” Spencer told DW. “And so if someone expresses an opinion saying they would like to slow the rate or stop that immigration, there is nothing ipso facto hateful about that.”
Moroccans make up approximately 2 percent of the Dutch population. Asked how Wilders could consider that as excessive, Spencer said the concern centers more on the growth rate than the actual number of inhabitants at the moment.
Spencer also said since Wilders himself has shown no tendency toward violence – though the court is considering whether he’s encouraging that outcome – the greater “danger to society” would be for Wilders’ remarks to be deemed illegal hate speech.
But European Parliament lawmaker Cecile Kyenge doesn’t think remarks like Wilders’ can be explained away like that. “There has been a constant stream of concerning comments from politicians across Europe,” she said, “that fall short of the responsibilities they have as public figures and opinion leaders. In recent months, politicians have disseminated false information and engaged in hate speech against minorities for political gain. Actions such as these are all the more damaging when they are propagated by politicians.”…
Though Wilders has been acquitted on hate-speech allegations before, Spencer doesn’t necessarily think he’ll be found not guilty again, because Spencer said the ruling elite is afraid of losing power to him. “I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if he were convicted this time and if they don’t convict him this time, they’ll convict him next time. But eventually,” he predicted, “they might have a situation where they’re convicting the sitting prime minister.”
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments