Tuesday, October 5, 2010

The Left openly drops all pretense

Today the Dismissal-court, headed by 'impartial' Left-wing 'judge' F. Bauduin, has confirmed the use of plural in the headline of my previous article: we indeed have Kangaroo Courts in The Netherlands: it has denied the appeal for dismissal by Mr. Moszkowicz. Geert Wilders' judge may have used some 'unfortunate choice of words' but he was 'in no terms prejuduced'.

Says Bauduin, member of (a.o.) the Morocco Fund, in which his name is one of only two Dutch ones. Looking at the list of his 'other activities' (thanks, Artikel7) it quickly becomes clear he is no friend of Geert Wilders' PVV, but prejudiced himself, so he should have stepped aside instead of heading the dismissal court.

As it is, one 'impartial' (quod non) left-wing 'judge' judges another 'impartial' (quod non) left-wing judge to be impartial, only because that other 'impartial' (quod non) left-wing judge himself claims, after showing prejudice, to be impartial. One would think that the choice of Morocco loving Bauduin as dismissal-judge is a rather 'unfortunate choice of judge' given the fact that Wilders' case touches on the issues The Netherlands have with problematic Moroccan youth...

Well, at least it becomes clearer day by day what a circus the Dutch ' justice' system really is. First, we have an unprofessional judge who lets his personal bias against Wilders prevail in his job. Then, the justice minister himself appears to have had a part in the decision to prosecute Wilders. And now we have another unprofessional, Morocco-loving judge, who 'impartially' decides  that the biased judge is impartial. What's next?

These are interesting times (remember Confucius).

Kangaroo Courts in a Banana Monarchy

Yesterday, the political trial against Geert Wilders started. While the court earlier already denied Wilders the majority of his witnesses, it allowed only three out of eighteen, claiming that it did not need to hear the same story multiple times, it yesterday once again showed its true (green+red=brown) colors: when Wilders announced he will appeal to his right to remain silent, the lead judge commented that it looked like Wilders lived up to his MSM reputation of posing a statement and then avoiding the debate.

A more clear demonstration of prejudice is hardly thinkable, as anyone following the debate knows that Wilders is always prepared to defend his opinions, and explain the delicacy of his position. Yesterday Wilders commented that he felt more like being in conversation with a D'66 (Democrats '66, the left wing traitor party more commonly referred to as Dhimmy'66) colleague than with an independent court. He also said he did not take back a single word, but that he was not responsible for statements he never made, but which were attributed to him by others.

Friday, August 20, 2010

Fascism in The Netherlands

While on July 1st 2008 fascism was already introduced into the horeca sector when Dutch Government took away the right of bar owners to run their property as they saw fit with the introduction of the smoking ban, Labour (PvdA) in Amsterdam overbid the CDA smoking ban by taking away the right of home owners to do with their home as they see fit, a living ban. Here's the deal:

Anybody owning a small home or apartment with a purchase price of up to 163.000 euros (upping that to 200.000 is under consideration) and not living there permanently (i.e. the owner has not registered in Amsterdam) will be forced to rent his property out to the social sector, even if the property is used during the week to avoid commuting to the owner's proper home, which happens quite a lot.

Friday, June 18, 2010

Dutch Elections and the PVV ban

As I'm involved in other activities, I do not find the time to write at the moment. For an update on what's going on with Dutch Elections, please read this excellent article on Gates of Vienna. Don't miss the comments either.

Thursday, May 13, 2010

Controversy on Smolensk air crash

A couple of videos have surfaced on YouTube which have stirred some controversy on the Smolensk air crash in which the Polish president Lech Kaczynski died, amongst others. Below the fold you'll find two videos, one by Jane Bürgermeister, questioning what really happened, and the other an enhanced version of a video mentioned by Bürgermeister, which appears to show that shortly after the crash, before any emergency services arrived, survivers were being shot and killed. While some of Bürgermeisters comments seem a little far fetched, she poses a number of legitimate questions to which, to date, no answers are being given.

Allegedly, the person who shot the second video was stabbed and killed in hospital, in an incident referred to by authorities as an accident. I haven't been able to confirm this claim, and neither why this person would have been in hospital in the first place. If true, this would be a bit too coincidental for comfort.

What struck me first about the crash is the fact that apparently so many 'important' persons were on that single flight, something any security adviser worth his paycheck would have vehemently protested against. Businesses won't let strategic staff or specialists fly together, as a precaution against endangering the businesses' future by such an accident. So why would a government. Did they all deem themselves so important that they had to be on the government plane? Whatever the reason, it's bad strategy, as is so painfully proven here.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Nigel Farage in plane crash

This morning, UKIP politician Nigel Farage was involved in a plane crash, while taking off for a day of campaigning over parts of the UK. Today, the UK holds elections. The plane landed upside down, while still on the airport. Although information is limited, Nigel is reported to be only mildly injured, while his pilot is worse off, but not life-threatening.

Lets hope both recover soon, and that the cause of the accident will be not only found out, but honestly reported. Nigel has made a lot of enemies within the establishment, by freely speaking his mind and questioning authority, and one can only hope his plane was not sabotaged.

Tuesday, May 4, 2010


Or: How politicians really see their voters.

The fact that politicians as a rule are lying through their teeth while changing their story depending on their audience should not come as a surprise to anyone. Nor the fact that they will only openly state what they really think if they feel secure and unexposed.

Friday, April 9, 2010

The Totalitarian Failure called European Union

Despite having had imposed the maximum fine for 'undesired' behaviour, Nigel Farage continues to point out the fact that the EU President, a position that according to demissionary MP Peter Balkenende did not exist and hence there was no constitutional nature in the Lisbon TreasonTreaty so the 2005's referendum's NO could be overruled, is an appointed position, not an elected one. Herman van Rompuy was selected, not elected, by other unelected officials, removing the vox populi from the political process in the EU. The peoples of Europe have no means to remove this man from office, as he, and most of his accomplices, are not accountable to anyone.

Friday, March 5, 2010

Harare on the river Maas (updated)

(The city formerly known as Rotterdam)

Local elections were held in The Netherlands on March 3, and who has been watching them would not have believed these were elections in a European country. Where European states send observers to countries like Zimbabwe in order to ensure no irregularities take place it has become time for coutries like Zimbabwe and Venezuela to return the favor.

Labour politicians issued campaign posters in Turkish, Moroccan and Arabic, as otherwise the uneducated, unassimilated, analphabetic immigrants would not be able to understand where to get their free lunch. "You cannot exclude these people from the democratic process" is their legitimation. In my view, someone who doesn't understand the slightest about his guest country should not be allowed to influence that countries politics by being granted the privilege to vote. But then again, how else is labour to stay in power?

Wednesday, March 3, 2010

Free Speech in the EU is very expensive...

Nigel Farage, the outspoken UKIP member in the European Parliament, has been fined for exercising his right to free speech and telling an inconvenient truth in that Parliament. Here the 'offense':

And here's the result:

Free Speech is very expensive in the EU these days.

While I did not think the ad-hominem bit very strong, I can understand where it came from, and it shows that even Nigel is getting fed up with the totalitarian bunch that runs the EU. In a way, as he stated, he's only returning the favor. Anyway, he's corrected that now, by apologizing to bank employees, who might indeed rightfully be offended. But remember: being offended is a choice!

Saturday, February 6, 2010

The Crooked Judges of Amsterdam

Or: How the Truth Became Illegal. Well, it's been that for a while, but never as openly as in the case against Geert Wilders, who is facing prosecution for stating the truth. Mark Steyn had something to say about that, and so does Pat Condell, who should be taking care of his health. Michael Badnarik already suffered a heart attack, in his quest for the Constitution, which is bad enough, so we don need Mr. Condell following his ways... Listen to Pat, and 'enjoy'. I'm fully aware it's not the right term, but boy, do we need a voice like his.

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Geert Wilders on Trial

Yesterday, the Kafkaesque Prozess against Geert Wilders started. Wilders took a few minutes to address the court. Please find below Geert's personal message (English subtitled).

Hattip: Vlad Tepes

Full translation:
Speaker, judges of the court,
I would like to make use of my right to speak for a few minutes.

Freedom is the most precious of all our attainments and the most vulnerable. People have devoted their lives to it and given their lives for it. Our freedom in this country is the outcome of centuries. It is the consequence of a history that knows no equal and has brought us to where we are now.

I believe with all my heart and soul that the freedom in the Netherlands is threatened. That what our heritage is, what generations could only dream about, that this freedom is no longer a given, no longer self-evident.

I devote my life to the defence of our freedom. I know what the risks are and I pay a price for it every day. I do not complain about it; it is my own decision. I see that as my duty and it is why I am standing here.

I know that the words I use are sometimes harsh, but they are never rash. It is not my intention to spare the ideology of conquest and destruction, but I am not any more out to offend people. I have nothing against Muslims. I have a problem with Islam and the Islamization of our country because Islam is at odds with freedom.

Future generations will wonder to themselves how we in 2010, in this place, in this room, earned our most precious attainment. Whether there is freedom in this debate for both parties and thus also for the critics of Islam, or that only one side of the discussion may be heard in the Netherlands? Whether freedom of speech in the Netherlands applies to everyone or only to a few? The answer to this is at once the answer to the question whether freedom still has a home in this country.

Freedom was never the property of a small group, but was always the heritage of us all. We are all blessed by it.

Lady Justice wears a blindfold, but she has splendid hearing. I hope that she hears the following sentences, loud and clear:

It is not only a right, but also the duty of free people to speak against every ideology that threatens freedom. Thomas Jefferson, the third President of the United States was right: The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

I hope that the freedom of speech shall triumph in this trial.

In conclusion, Mister Speaker, judges of the court.

This trial is obviously about the freedom of speech. But this trial is also about the process of establishing the truth. Are the statements that I have made and the comparisons that I have taken, as cited in the summons, true? If something is true then can it still be punishable? This is why I urge you to not only submit to my request to hear witnesses and experts on the subject of freedom of speech. But I ask you explicitly to honour my request to hear witnesses and experts on the subject of Islam. I refer not only to Mister Jansen and Mister Admiral, but also to the witness/experts from Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom. Without these witnesses, I cannot defend myself properly and, in my opinion, this would not be a fair trial.

Thursday, January 7, 2010

Mark Steyn on Multiculturalism

"Multiculturalism is not about knowing anything about other cultures; it's just about feeling warm and fluffy about them."

Hat tip: Lagonda

Monday, January 4, 2010

Stop Injustice to the People of Iceland!

To: Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Gordon Brown and Secretary of Treasury of The Netherlands Wouter Bos

WE THE UNDERSIGNED hereby Petition the above officials to withdraw their claim that all the people of Iceland should be held responsible for the mistakes made by officials and bankers of the involved countries with regard to the demise of Landsbanki/Icesave.

This petition is created by Dutch libertarian blog www.vrijspreker.nl that speaks out for individual liberty and opposes abuse by the state. It is important that all morally responsible people, especially in UK and Holland, show to the Icelandics that we support them and are explicitly not supporting our government in their decision.

Total amount claimed by The Netherlands and UK amounts to 3.8 euro billion. Since Iceland only has 320,000 inhabitants, this results in a staggering 12,000 euro per inhabitant. Apart from the fact that the legal basis is very weak, the claims have no moral or ethical foundation and will lead to the robbing and prolonged suffering of ordinary citizens such as elderly, hard working laborers, children and disabled, all of them not being involved in the failings of Landsbanki/Icesave whatsoever.

Instead the governments of The Netherlands and UK should focus on finding and bringing to justice all involved greedy bankers, officials and regulators.

The Icelandic parliament has narrowly approved the payment plan with Dutch and UK governments with only 33 of 63 members. The people of Iceland are however increasingly against the bill. Polls suggest that 70\% is against it. Also more than 56,000 people have already signed a petition, handed over to the president Olafur Ragnar Grimsson.

Mister Grimsson has now asked for some time to consider the bill, which will only be effected once he signed it. Should he not sign the bill, the bill will be left to a referendum.


1) to respect fundamental ethical and moral values and to drop their excessive claims of in total 3.8 billion euro on the government and therefore ordinary citizens of Iceland
2) to find and bring to justice all involved bankers, companies and government officials


The Undersigned

Klick here to sign the petition.