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.

The speech Wilders could not give

Thank you for inviting me. Thank you Lord Pearson and Lady Cox for showing Fitna, and for your gracious invitation. While others look away, you, seem to understand the true tradition of your country, and a flag that still stands for freedom.

This is no ordinary place. This is not just one of England’s tourist attractions. This is a sacred place. This is the mother of all Parliaments, and I am deeply humbled to speak before you.

The Houses of Parliament is where Winston Churchill stood firm, and warned – all throughout the 1930’s – for the dangers looming. Most of the time he stood alone.

In 1982 President Reagan came to the House of Commons, where he did a speech very few people liked. Reagan called upon the West to reject communism and defend freedom. He introduced a phrase: ‘evil empire’. Reagan’s speech stands out as a clarion call to preserve our liberties. I quote: If history teaches anything, it teaches self-delusion in the face of unpleasant facts is folly.

What Reagan meant is that you cannot run away from history, you cannot escape the dangers of ideologies that are out to destroy you. Denial is no option.

Communism was indeed left on the ash heap of history, just as Reagan predicted in his speech in the House of Commons. He lived to see the Berlin Wall coming down, just as Churchill witnessed the implosion of national-socialism.

Today, I come before you to warn of another great threat. It is called Islam. It poses as a religion, but its goals are very worldly: world domination, holy war, sharia law, the end of the separation of church and state, the end of democracy. It is not a religion, it is a political ideology. It demands your respect, but has no respect for you.

There might be moderate Muslims, but there is no moderate Islam. Islam will never change, because it is build on two rocks that are forever, two fundamental beliefs that will never change, and will never go away. First, there is Quran, Allah’s personal word, uncreated, forever, with orders that need to be fulfilled regardless of place or time. And second, there is al-insal al-kamil, the perfect man, Muhammad the role model, whose deeds are to be imitated by all Muslims. And since Muhammad was a warlord and a conqueror we know what to expect.

Islam means submission, so there cannot be any mistake about it’s goal. That’s a given. The question is whether the British people, with its glorious past, is longing for that submission.

Read it all on Het Vrije Volk

Geert Wilders banned from the UK

Today the unthinkable has happened: a Dutch MP, invited to the UK by a member of the House of Lords, has been denied entrance to to the UK when following up on that invitation. All because Gordon Brown's dhimmy government is afraid of threats uttered by Lord Ahmed (instated by that other dhimmy of sorts, Tony Blair), that he would organise riots by 10.000 muslims should Wilders be allowed to show his film Fitna. The BBC reports that "Wilders wanted to show" his film, while the truth is that Wilders had been invited to show his film by the UK Independence Party. Subtle difference, is it not, Mr. Goebbels?

Think about it: a western MP, denied the right to visit a peer EU country by that country's government, only because of islamic threats. Although there have been numerous indications of the abject manner in which Brown cowardly bends towards islamic demands, there has never before been a clearer statement that the UK has surrendered to the status of a Saudi colony: submission, the prime incentive of Islam, and also the title of the film Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh made with Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

We all know how that ended: Theo was killed and Ayaan was expelled from The Netherlands. She is still fighting the Dutch government over promises related who'd be paying for her protection.

UKIP peer Lord Pearson of Rannoch made a very true but sad statement:

"Indeed, any alleged threats associated with Lord Ahmed of attempts to prevent the showing of the film would themselves be a confirmation of the film's message and the need for it to be shown. The subsequent action by the Home Office to try to deter Mr Wilders from coming to the UK has, we believe, been rightly condemned by the Dutch Foreign Minister, and is a further example of the appeasement policies of the British government in giving in to the threats of militant Islam."

He and cross-bencher Baroness Cox also issued a press statement, asking this rhetorical question:

"Would this have happened if Mr Wilders had said 'Ban the Bible'?"

Of course not! All this was yesterday, when Brown's government had warned they would not allow Wilders into the country. Nevertheless, Wilders went ("I already have that ticket, so I might as well go") and was indeed denied entrance.

Given the very weak response of the Dutch government (which issued a "serious complaint") it does not really seem to care too much, most of its members despise Mr. Wilders anyway. I would think this matter requires a slightly stiffer response than just saying "Phew".

After the death of Free Speech in The Netherlands this is a new serious blow for western freedom and values in general and European lifestyle specifically.

See this link (pdf alert) for the letter Geert received on expressing his intention to accept the UKIP invitation (hat tip: Het Vrije Volk).

Shame on the Netherlands

What kind of justice system is it, where the truth is inadmissable as evidence?

The Death of Freedom of Speech

Today is a black day for the Netherlands. A judge (?) ordered that Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) politician Geert Wilders must be prosecuted for his criticism of islam. Note that the ruling (again, like all other criticism of Wilders) mixes muslims and islam, where Wilders always has maintained a clear division between the two. A deliberate falsification. This marks the end of Free Speech in the Netherlands.

From the PVV website:

The Freedom Party (PVV) is shocked by the Amsterdam Court of Appeal’s decision to prosecute Geert Wilders for his statements and opinions. Geert Wilders considers this ruling an all-out assault on freedom of speech.

Geert Wilders: “Apparently this is The Netherlands today. If you speak out you might be prosecuted. To participate in public debate has become a dangerous activity.”

“If I have to appear in court, not only I will be prosecuted, but also hundreds of thousands of Dutch citizens who reject the Islamisation of the West. In Dutch Parliament only the Party for Freedom is willing to speak up for the preservation of our culture and our many freedoms.”

The Freedom Party leader now faces legal proceedings that will probably take years to conclude and will also involve enormous legal fees.

“We depend on small donations. The Freedom Party is the only party in Parliament that does not accept any government funding. This court decision jeopardizes the very existence of the Freedom Party. We simply cannot afford the enormous legal expenses.”

“This is a black day for freedom.”

Personally, I think it's not so much about whether Wilders can be convicted of hate speech; there are Dutch politicians, like Socialist Party's can't-keep-my-hands-to-myself-with-women Harry van Bommel, who openly called for an intifada by Hamas last week, which really is calling for violence, but these have nothing to fear, they do not even have to leave parliament.

The real goal here is to remove the only non-Cultural Marxist party from the political stage. As with Pim Fortuyn earlier, they are well aware that they cannot reach that objective democratically; too many people are getting fed up with the fascist bunch of islamists that's currently in power. They cannot repeat the trick they did on Fortuyn, so they had to think of something else. And they found it: bankruptcy.

Whether or not the state can win this case is irrelevant; the state finances itself with money extorted from its workers, called taxmoney. Wilders has to pay for his defences himself. The state has bottomless pockets, Wilders does not. Wilders party is the only party that does not accept state-subsidizing, but is financed by private gifts. Once Wilders is bankrupt, his party will be gone: objective achieved. Even if the state would lose, and have to pay damages to Wilders, he'd have to start from scratch again.

The man's already under permanent surveillance because of threats on his life, and now he's being financially challenged as well. And the state can repeat this trick as often as it likes: there's no hope of winning.

As Vlaams Belang's Filip Dewinter stated: "This is an attempted murder on the PVV."

It's just a different tactic to what was chosen for Pim Fortuyn.

Geert Wilders on Islam

On September 25, Dutch MP Geert Wilders was invited to New York as a speaker for the Hudson Institute. Please take a few minutes to read the transcript of his speech:

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me. Great to be at the Four Seasons. I come from a country that has one season only: a rainy season that starts January 1st and ends December 31st. When we have three sunny days in a row, the government declares a national emergency. So Four Seasons, that’s new to me.

It’s great to be in New York. When I see the skyscrapers and office buildings, I think of what Ayn Rand said: “The sky over New York and the will of man made visible.” Of course. Without the Dutch you would have been nowhere, still figuring out how to buy this island from the Indians. But we are glad we did it for you. And, frankly, you did a far better job than we possibly could have done. More...

Pamela Geller (Atlas Shrugs) took the opportunity to conduct an interview with Geert.


For those of you that need a reminder of where this political correctness Geert mentions stems from, Bill Lind provides some clear insights.

Dutch apologies for Fitna...

As you may or may not know, Jordan is preparing an international arrest warrant for Geert Wilders because of his movie Fitna. 'Wilders has offended all muslims worldwide and should not escape punishment', according to Amman. One wonders what's so offending in Fitna. After all, Wilders only put a number of public newsitems in sequence, accompanied by the applicable Koran verses. Most people in those (video) items (not the victims, obviously) seemed to enjoy themselves pretty well, so according to Amman it's insulting to videotape a party and then show the world the partygoers' beaviour. The impression this makes on me is that muslims seem to be offended by being confronted with their own atrocities. A bit rich to blame the messenger for that...

Now the islamic world has approached Dutch companies to inquire about their position on Fitna, and most companies have presented as their official position that they are not involved in religious activity, and therefore distance themselves from 'the controversial movie'. For Dutch Airline KLM this proved not to be sufficient, as the company is now listed on the latest boycott-poster from The Messenger of Allah Unites Us.

So two Dutch companies, Zwanenberg and Friesland Foods, decided to take it one step further an sided with islam, in a futile (and can I say: typical Dutch) attempt to avoid being boycotted by Jordan, selling out to their oppressors-to-be, like true Judases; the well-known attitude so generously shown in (the run-down to) WorldWar II. They placed page-sized ads in Jordan newspapers, apologizing for and condemning Fitna and praising the islamic initiative to get islam-criticism criminalized everywhere. Willingly giving up our Western values of free speech and freedom, bowing before the tyrants, for a few pieces of silver. On their own websites, no indications of this abject activity is to be found, as they are probably afraid of losing their native customers. Cowards.

Well, wouldn't that be a good idea? Having these dhimmy companies' products boycotted by all the world except Jordan? For the list of brands to boycott, please visit here, oops, I mean here, and here.
If you'd like to complain by email, you can do that here and here.

Klein verzet also reports on the subject.

Enriching Dutch Culture

Dutch politicians always refer to Islam as

enriching our culture

Here's an example on how that works:

Last Saturday, Dutch newspaper De Telegraaf had an article on a new Islamic movement in NL, Hizb ut-Tahrir. It's supposed to be an Islamic political party. Some quotes:

We do not agree with freedom of speech, for we denounce democracy

and

What you need is a heavy bomb-attack

Nobody will take action against these movements, but try to say something half as bad towards Islam and you're in trouble (seen the items on Lionheart?).

Now someone decided to email a response to these people, and received a reply from Bouchra Ismaili (Dutch), from Rotterdam's local council for subdivision Charlois. It's totally illiterate, so I can't really bring myself to fully translate it, but it starts off with:

Listen you dirty fool WE STAY HERE hahahahahah DROP DEAD

She then continues to call the writer a Satan lover, and actually states that he and his kind are the foreigners ('allochtonen'), not the immigrant muslims, and that they should convert to Islam. She rants on a bit about the writer being slave to the devil, and that she'll leave judgement to

the judge of judges ALLAH A RAHMAN OU RAHEEM!!!

Guess what Dutch political party this moslima is a representative of? Only one choice really: PvdA, 'Partij van de Allahs' ('Allah Party'), Labour Party. The singlemost corrupt and Islam-appeasing party in NL. The Dutch are being sold out to Islam, by their very government. If it were up to me, this lady (cough) would be sent back to Morocco, covered in tar and feathers.

But then, I am 'Islamophobic' and 'xenophobic'...

British FoS Suppression

Today I discovered the shocking news about anti-Jihad blogger Lionheart. The UK has now succumbed to Islam to a level that Freedom of Speech no longer is recognised.

Lionheart, currently abroad, will be arrested on re-entry of his native country, on charges of

suspicion of Stirring up Racial Hatred by displaying written material contrary to sections 18(1) and 27(3) of the Public Order Act 1986.

Read his story on his blog, and the comments Pamela Geller wrote on her blog Atlas Shrugs.

When we tie in this story with the older charges brought against Mark Steyn, the sad conclusion has to be that Freedom of Speech is on the way out fast in the formerly free Western world, that is surrendering to the intolerance of and colonisation by Islam. While non-muslim people in Saudi-Arabia are not even allowed to use certain highways muslims in the West get all their demands fulfilled, including those that would not have a snowballs hope in hell in their native countries.

Words never killed people, and while the truth may sometimes hurt, it should be spoken and heard. Islam continually confirms what it is being accused of, by doing exactly those things they deny to be doing: "Islam's the religion of Peace, and anybody disputing that will be beheaded". And they're getting away with it as well, with all the anti-'hate-speech' commissions that don't even have half a brain but are there just to appease the destructive agenda of the Frankfort School and its Cultural Marxism.

Who will stop the Dhimmytude that has now firmly rooted in the West's suicidal elite's policies? When will the West say "No, I will NOT comply!", finally draw its line in the sand, and stand up to defend it?

The Trouble with Islam

According to Robert Spencer, the problem with Islam is not “radical” Islam, for which an imagined “moderate” Islam is the solution, but Islam itself. While that may be true in the Islamic world, it is not what threatens us.

The problem with Islam for the West is the West. The dhimmytude that allows wahhabist countries to fund Islamic organisations in the West, that allows Muslims to impose religious demands on public places and that refuses to prosecute and punish Islamic violence.

I don’t know the English equivalent, but we have a saying ‘gentle doctors make stinking wounds‘ and true enough, the ‘gentle doctors’ appeasing Islam are creating increasingly serious infections.

Just a few days ago we had a Moroccan enter a police station, jump over the front desk and stab the policewoman on duty in the chest. She fled and got stabbed in the back, twice. A male collegue that came to her rescue got stabbed in the neck and shoulder. By that time, the policewoman had her gun out and shot the guy. Care to guess the newspaper headlines?

"Policewoman shoots and kills boy at police station"
"Victim stabs two police officers and dies in cuffs"

How’s that, eh? The victim is a ‘Policewoman’ while the perp is a 'boy' and the ‘victim’. They kept the perp’s identity hidden but sent Moroccan 'neighborhood fathers' out into the neighborhood, which told us something. The guy was a known offender, had already stabbed someone with a screwdriver earlier and was under ’successful treatment’ for mental problems (and yet his prints 'could not be identified'). A day earlier we had a Turkish schoolboy stab and kill a Moroccan classmate over a pen.

There are more and more signs Eurabia is on the verge of a civil war. Half the police is fed up with the soft approach, while the other half wants to continue the ‘dialogue’, and Islamic scum laugh their asses off at these softies. Why should we tolerate what their own Islamic homeland won’t even tolerate? How about the Ted Nugent approach?

Dutch (and French) citizens are being delivered to Eurabia without having a say in it, while having voted a clear NO only two years ago. But the flag and the song have been taken out of the constitution, which is enough to negate that NO, according to Dutch godfather Balkenende (I must be careful not to offend the mob here, as I truly think the mob have more of a moral code than the Dutch government).

While our MP pipes he’s so great for taken the flag and song out he issued a directive yesterday that the EU flag will from now on be part of flagging protocol. So while it’s not official anymore in the EU constitution, it’s now official by rule. If only they could be punished for their crimes. But they’re above the law, and even if they weren’t, you probably could not find a judge that would condemn them. The EU wants to impose another 20 million Muslims on Europe, cultural suicide and Caucasian genocide.

And it’s all ‘democratic’, like Hitler was ‘democratic’ and Chavez is ‘democratic’. Problem is we’re not allowed to have guns, so we don’t have them, and even if we obtain them, we’re untrained to use them properly and effectively. So as long as the violence threat to the dhimmycrats in power is not coming from Islam, they know to be pretty safe in continuing their evil ways. But none of these dhimmycrats live in Islamic neighborhoods themselves…

They still (purport to) see no danger, well, sleep on, except someday they will be woken up.

Dutchmen Don't Exist

At long last it has finally become clear why the Dutch government keeps claiming there's nothing wrong with replacing the Dutch society of (rapidly shrinking) freedom wit the 'culture' of Islam: Dutchmen don't exist. It's official now, as imported queen-to-be and national cuddle-immigrant Máxima has proclaimed such in a personal speech.

She spoke at the presentation of a report by the WRR, the Wetenschappelijk Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (Scientific Council for Government Policy), that doesn't have not a single scientist among its members, but has no lack of dhimmies. "In a globalising world, possession of multiple passports is more and more a given. Not only for 'New Dutchmen', but also for emigrating Dutchmen".

This is a blatant lie. Fact is that Dutch law does not allow multiple passports. If I were to obtain US citizenship, my Dutch citizenship would be cancelled immediately. Nevertheless, we have Turkish and Moroccan secretaries of state, that reside under foreign as well as Dutch law. The Turkish secretary of state cannot acknowledge the Armenian genocide, as she's punishable by Turkish law, and as Turkish citizen could no longer travel to Turkey for the threat of being arrested.

Nevertheless, if an immigrant gets to stay here but refuses to give up his old passport "because his country does not allow it", he ceremonially receives a Dutch passport and is welcomed as a Dutchman. The logical thing would be to deny him Dutch nationality, but the political correct attitude is that the immigrant cannot help it. Well, that's the immigrant's problem, isn't it. Our earlier mentioned Turkish broad can give up her Turkish passport, but openly refuses to. Still, she got a Dutch passport as well as to be secretary of state. Her sister is also involved in immigration policy. Dangerous (to NL) positions for people with foreign loyalties.

If a Dutchmen offers criticism of Islam, and of the demands that Islamists and Muslims make (separate swimming hours, female gyneacologists, mosques-with-whining, no biology lessons on pigs, the list goes on and on) he's islamofobic, xenofobic, racist and what else. An ex-chief of police openly stated on television this week that Geert Wilders "should be 'done in', and all his voters should be deported if they can't cope with the reality of The Islamic Netherlands". Nobody raised a complaint about it, except of course the bloggers. Mr. Wilders has never made any statements that even come close to this, but he's the racist xenofobe.

But now we know why: we do not exist. So Islam is not replacing western values, as you cannot replace what does not exist. Miss Zorreguieta quickly mentioned that the Argentinian does not exist either. Well, she should know: many Argentinians vanished without a trace during the reign of the Junta her father was part of, and she never openly condemned that. So also there we now know why: Argentinians don't exist.

Máxima claims to have spent seven years in trying to find the Dutch nationality, aided by many lovely and wise specialists, but alas, she hasn't found it. This dumb broad, possibly the most expensive marry-in into the fake monarchy that claims power in the Netherlands, is supposed to be the next fake queen of a country that by extension of her own admission does not exist. On the fake part: the Oranjes lost their color and their royalness a long time ago. The bloodline has been severed twice, both times at a William III. So the Oranjes do not exist either.

Possibly the most stupid thing about this high-cuddle-immigrant's speech was the fact that she has now openly sided with the Cultural Marxists, while the Oranjes have always avoided making political statements in public. But then again, it does not matter. A would-be queen from a non-existing royal family makes statements on a non-existing racist, xenofobic people. Glad this is reality, it would be too far-fetched for fiction. Herbert Marcuse can be a proud man.

The Evil Jimmy Carter

Recently, I reported on the Mohamed Al Durah hoax and the role France 2, a French state television network, played in it. I also mentioned briefly how France was instrumental in helping Iran to be born by harbouring Ayatollah Khomeini.

But Iran was also very much helped by Jimmy Carter, who even back in 1976 already proved to be a real Dhimmycrat. Carter, who in 1977 spent Christmas with the Shah of Persia, worked between 1975 and 1978 fiercely to destabilize the Shah's position, by launching a 'human rights' campaign, aimed at the release of "political prisoners", among which radical fundamentalists, communists and terrorists. Carter was in no small way supported by the British government. The Shah never stood a chance. Read the detailed article on American Thinker.

It would seem that Carter can be held at least partly responsible for today's Islamisation and the war on terror. Nevertheless, he keeps defending terrorist activities. In January 2007, his book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid caused 14 members of his own Carter Center staff to resign. The amount of fiction was so overwhelming that even his own cronies could no longer stand it. And there's much, much more. Little Green Footballs has a wealth of articles on this evil character.

But he'll probably never be held accountable for his actions, and for the hundreds of thousands he helped killing.

More Dhimmytude...

The Dutch newspaper NRC.next published more dhimmytude today, in response to the commotion caused by Minister Ellen Vogelaar's interview in Trouw, which got some attention earlier on this blog. The opening lines tell a story in themselves:

"In the US, Muslims are Americans, just like the rest. Minister Vogelaar's attempt to reduce the fear for Islam recently caused angry reactions. Why is it that Muslim immigration in the US progresses so much smoother?"

The article continues by relating to a Muslim basketball event in Sterling, VA, held in the local mosque. For an hour, players yell instructions at each other in both English and Arabic. There's a lot of physical contact, all part of the game. Sajjad Ahmad, a 27 year old financial advisor who started the initiative, explains that "it's a way of showing young Muslims how to integrate in American society without giving up Islam".

According to the article, Muslims in America are much more integrated than in Europe. Americans feel that Europe is handling the immigrationproblem unwisely. Daniel Benjamin (former aide to Pres. Clinton) stated that the EU keeps immigrants too much outside of society. Well, I've got news for him: immigrants keep themselves out of society. They refuse to integrate. They chase people from their old neighbourhoods and create no-go areas for the natives. And all the while government pampers them with free money, housing and every right to make their backward sharia demands. According to Benjamin it's our fault that Muslim youth don't finish their schools. Well, he could have a point there: if you shower them with free taxpayer's money, why would they ever want to go work for a living? But I'm sure that's not what he meant.

"Americans take in new immigrant groups much easier. The fact that after 9/11 there were no successful terrorist attacks in the US, while Europe suffered losses in Madrid, London and Amsterdam (Theo van Gogh) proves this" (emphasis added). Ehh.., how exactly does that prove anything?

"America has a big heart towards other religions. Not one nation-wide paper published the Danish Cartoons, as it was felt that Muslim feelings would be hurt." How's that for dhimmytude? According to the article, a survey by Minnesota U. last year confirmed that distrust towards Muslims has increased since 9/11. But it also states that "when you ask an American whether they would have their child marry an atheist rather than a Muslim, the vast majority of the respondents will choose the Muslim". I rather doubt that, unless the survey was held among the American Muslims from the second paragraph of this post.

The article rampages on, also mentioning Ayaan Hirsi Ali. According to ex CIA analyst Marc Sagerman, she has her facts wrong. He says she cannot prove her statement that Islam itself feeds terrorism. Typical dhimmytude: a Western bureaucrat claims to be more informed than a woman, who was victim of Islam herself, fought herself free, analyzed Islam thoroughly and has a strong and valid view on the subject. Apart from that, Sagerman is simply proven wrong by 14 centuries of Islamic savagery.

Apart from anything else, a Pew Research Center Study showed that Muslims in America are only about 1% of total poulation, while this is over 5% in The Netherlands. And they have a much harder time entering America than the Netherlands: they have to cross an ocean and have an education, among other things. They are excluded from public welfare (for the first 5 years if I'm correct), while in Europe they just have to cross open borders and get welfare, housing and medical attention starting from day one.

"Only 5% of American Muslims support Al Qaeda; in Europe this percentage is much higher" (emphasis added), according to Luis Lugo, a Pew director. I think it's fair to say we get more of the backward inbreds, compared to America, and over 5 times as many, relatively speaking.

This article, intended to support Vogelaar's statements, clearly shows the leftist guilt cult that has taken over Europe and The Netherlands. It's our fault Muslims won't behave. We don't treat them well enough. Well, most Muslim crimes are tolerated, as they are induced by their religion, and critics will get labeled fascist, racist, Islamofobic, xenofobic and a number of other terms I'd never heard of about two years ago. But the lemmings are clearly heading for the cliffs.

By the way: the same article mentions a visit to Barak Obama's Islamic haidresser. Barak, of Islamic descent, frequents an Islamic hairdresser. Whether this has any bearings on his intentions after he gets elected (hope not) cannot be said, but I'd be careful. After all, given the article's info, only 1% of American hairdressers should be Islamic. Maybe it's 'just' political correctness, maybe not...

The bad news from Holland

Unbelievable as it may seem, the Dutch 'Minister voor Wonen, Wijken en Integratie' (Residence, Neighbourhoods and Integration (I'm not making this up)), Ella Vogelaar, today has declared in an interview (in Dutch newspaper Trouw) that The Netherlands will be Islamic at some point in the future. She feels that The Netherlands should adapt to Islam, and subsidise Islamic institutions. What will emerge, according to her, is a "Christian-Jewish-Islamic culture". As if Christianity and Judaism aren't 100% opposite to Islam's teachings. The stupidity of the statement is mind boggling.

Never mind separation of state and church, Vogelaar is willing, even advocating, to spend extorted taxpayer's money on converting a western nation to Sharia oppression. According to Vogelaar, "terrorism and religious violence are not unique to Islam; this also occurs with other religions. We have to accept this as part of our society and of every religion". Vogelaar wants to "make Muslims feel at home". Well, if they come to The Netherlands voluntarily, which they do, and they don't like it here, which apparently they don't, nobody's stopping them to go back home. I fail to see why I should have to pay in order to make another person happy, and that does not only apply to Muslims.

Everyone has a right to life, freedom and the pursuit of happiness. They do not have a right to happiness, as it would make me their slave, having to make them happy no matter their demands. Well, suit yourself. If you can adapt to the Dutch way of life, become western, and make your own future, through your own achievements, you are welcome. If you feel you have to impose a totalitarian belief, live from my money, and complain we don't adapt to your backward culture, please go home and stay there. Don't invade my freedom.

Only recently, a Muslim woman was murdered on the Alkmaar railway station by her Turkish ex-husband. She'd left him because he used to beat her up. Well, that was his right, wasn't it? She was his property, right? He killed himself after the fact, and it turned out his family had put him up to it: honor killing. Man and husband were cousin and niece. Not at all uncommon. But it's widely known what inbreading will do to both physical and spiritual health: lots of genetic defects and low intelligence, with all sorts of psychological disorders. Those are the Muslims we're importing, this is the Islam Vogelaar wants to become part of the Dutch culture.

Unfortunately, Vogelaar is just one of many traitors to the western culture, member of the PvdA political party (Partij van de Arbeid, Labour Party). She is totally incompetent. Ignorance never was an excuse for incompetence, and it's certainly not becoming one now. She actually thought that Mohammed Bouyeri, Theo van Gogh's killer, was some sort of social worker who's ideas she found agreeable. Is it surprising that PvdA has been nicknamed many names: Partij van de Allochtonen, Partij van de Allahs, Portemonnee van de Ander, Partij van de Achterlijkheid (Immigrant Party, Allah Party, Other People's Wallet, Retard's Party) and then some more?

The PVV (Freedom Party), the only party in The Netherlands that hasn't succumbed to dhimmytude, has asked questions on the issue to Dutch Parliament. The PVV wants these statements withdrawn, or else Vogelaar should resign. While PVV is the most (classical) liberal party we have in The Netherlands, and the only one with a critical attitude, I feel this is not good enough. Even if the statements were to be withdrawn, it won't change their meaning. Vogelaar said it, and she meant it. If she retracts, just to stay in office, it won't mean a thing. This woman is evil, and should be forced out of any official function immediately. In fact, she should be tried for high treason, but probably get equitted for being utterly clueless.

The only thing we may be thankful to Vogelaar for later on is that her incredible stupidity may have awoken some Dutch minds that up till now were too blind to see where our government is leading us. Whether it's too late or not, only time will tell.