Geert Wilders in Rome (1): White Supremacism, wild mythology

March 25 (26), Mr. Geert Wilders, Dutch MP and leader of an authoritarian movement (no membership, one leader), called the 'Freedom Party' (PVV), spoke at a meeting in Rome, Italy.
In addition to what Mr. Wilders will have to say himself about his actual position and perspectives in Holland and elsewhere, we'd like to mention, that his hosts (the Italian Magna Carta Foundation) are closely linked to media tycoon and  much criticized populist head of Government Silvio Berlusconi as well as to the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). The AEI, as is well known, are under neo-conservative influence.
But, actually, neither the AEI, nor the main neocon publication (The Weekly Standard, Washington DC) seem to be much in favor of a crusade against Islam as such. The US Neoconservatives consider religion, Christian or not, as an efficient disciplining tool for the masses. That is, why AEI and WS scarcely mention the Dutch peroxyd blond verbal crusader against Islam. They prefer a more subtle approach.
Wilders is trying to establish an international federation of anti-Islam movements. He has already a name for it: 'Geert Wilders International Freedom Association' (GWIFA). GWIFA should be established in the US. But, alas for him, large egos like Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and Daniel Pipes, are not in a mood to leave the stage and put up a wooden shoe loon as their mascot.

Wilders' GWIFA effort limits itself, up to now, to an association with a remarkably un-sexy ex-christian democrat from Berlin, Mr. Stadtkewitz. Other potential allies, like the Flemish VB and the Austrian FPÖ are, for the moment, under Geert's ban because of their too close association with an anti-semitic past.
Wilders' invitation by the Italian foundation can only be explained by the presence, as it's international secretary, of Anita Friedman. Friedman is head of an association "We'll Meet in Jerusalem" and she comes from an active Zionist American family.
I do not know yet, if Wilders' speech (see below) had any impact in Rome or in Italy. But, whatever it did, or didn't, it helps us to study the actual level of folly, idiocy and despicable hate-mongering that Mr. Wilders and his American-Israeli funders try to make us believe at this point of time.

The Failure of Multiculturalism and How to Turn the Tide
Signore e signori, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends of the Magna Carta Foundation, molte grazie. Thank you for inviting me to Rome. It is great to be here in this beautiful city which for many centuries was the capital and the centre of Europe’s Judeo-Christian culture.

Wilders speaks of a "Judean-Christian culture", leaving out the "humanistic", "rationalistic" or "laic" component he always features. That is remarkable. The city of Rome was for a long time opposed to the introduction by 4th century emperors like Constantine of Christianity as a state-religion. It sticked to its centuries-old tradition of polytheïstic and rational philosophy. Even now, a self-conscious Roman upper class loathes the Vatican and it's pretensions.
1st-4rd Century Jews were confined to a poor ghetto that existed already under Nero (Year 20-40). Christians were considered a Jewish sect. Persecuted by all emperors up to Diocletian (300) as well as the Jews proper. Until deep into the 6th century, the Bishop of Rome struggled to be recognized as head of the Western Roman Catholic Church. The Byzantine colleague had much more power.
Rome, on the brink of the Middle Ages, was neither Jewish, nor a Christian centre.

Together with Jerusalem and Athens, Rome is the cradle of our Western civilization – the most advanced and superior civilization the world has ever known.

Nothing against mentioning of Athens an Jerusalem. But Wilders' classification of the civilization (culture?) of Rome as "the most advanced and superior civilization the world has ever known.", when speaking of early medieval Rome that is, at best, an exaggeration. Jews were mostly exiled to the upper Rhine valley. Theological thinking and renovation came from North Africa (Augustinus), from Egypt, Syria and Babylon, not to speak of Constantinople. And the Islamic renovation had yet to start
As Westerners, we share the same Judeo-Christian culture. I am from the Netherlands and you are from Italy. Our national cultures are branches of the same tree. We do not belong to multiple cultures, but to different branches of one single culture. This is why when we come to Rome, we all come home in a sense. We belong here, as we also belong in Athens and in Jerusalem. And the Islamic renovation had yet to start.

It is important that we know where our roots are. If we lose them we become deracinated. We become men and women without a culture.

So, now we know where "our" roots are. In a small, uncultured and ailing city in Italy. Goats were herded between the ruins of the Roman Forum. Roman bishops were people who could not write or read. There are stories, that one Roman bishop even was a ... woman! It is a favor of History, that Babylonian and Spanish Jews and Muslims rediscovered Greek Philosophy, translated Plato and Aristoteles into Arabic, so that (much) later on, those texts could be read in Latin, as the Renaissance imposed itself upon stubborn stupidity and superstition.

I am here today to talk about multiculturalism. This term has a number of different meanings. I use the term to refer to a specific political ideology. It advocates that all cultures are equal. If they are equal it follows that the state is not allowed to promote any specific cultural values as central and dominant. In other words: multiculturalism holds that the state should not promote a leitkultur, which immigrants have to accept if they want to live in our midst.

We are only at the 4th paragraph of Mr. Geert Wilders' Philippica, and many are to follow. But he gives us already the root of all of his reasoning: The existence of a so-called "leitkultur". And, as if that were not enough, Mr. Wilders assumes, that "the State" has to maintain that "Kultur". Not the Church, not the Philosophers, nor Sociologists or Psychiatrists, no, the State.
Of course, he does not speak of common people. Of voters and members of social organizations. No, no, for Mr. Wilders, it is the "State" that is reponsible for maintaining something that he defines als "Leitkultur".
Traditional Liberals, or Conservatives like Burke, are full out against any state-intervention into the beliefs and thoughts of citizens. Wilders sides with authoritarians like Bismarck ("Kulturkampf" against Catholics and Social Democrats) and even less palatable ideologies of the 20th century.

Intermediate conclusion: Mr. Wilders invents a "judeo-christian" myth, connected to the city of Rome. It's "culture" is "superior", right from the start, to all other "cultures" in the world. Not the Church or the Philosopher, but the "State" must impose that culture on it's citizens, old and new. It has to reject everything new that comes from outside it's cultural sphere. 

This may seem already outlandish and retrograde. But madness has no limits. You'll have to get used to more and worse. Accompany us into the fairy world of a paranoiac! You'll have to see why wrong roots produce inevitably the wrong people. (Geert Wilders in Rome (2)).

L.A., May 1st: Spencer and Geller Celebrate St. Geert Wilders, a Loony Prophet from Holland

Pamela Geller* (Atlas Shrugs) and Robert Spencer ** (Jihad Watch), are not the kind of people, Geert Wilders likes to show himself off with. In Europe, that is.
On May 1st, in Los Angeles, he will do, what he avoids doing in Europe: Associate openly with 100% racist loonies, suprematists and war-mongerers.



(Wilders and Pamela, Spencer, Los Angeles, May 2009)

Again. For Wilders' outrageous and hollow hate-speech (I have no time to give you a link) against Muslims, Obama and Liberals in May last year in the same LA, has left his US adorators longing for more. They have produced a one-hour long movie "Islam Rising", featuring Geert Wilders as "the Winston Churchill Of Our Times (Pamela)".
In Europe, Wilders is accepting and cashing passively support, money, adoration, celebration and flattery from nazist, revanchist, ultra-zionist and racist personalities and groups, like

1. the Vlaams Belang (former Dutch-speaking Nazi-associates in Belgium, getting about 20% of the vote in their region),
2. the French Front National of Mr. Le Pen (ultra-nationalist, anti-arabian revanchists, 17% at the last French elections),
3. British and Danish white suprematist groups like SIEO,as well as rightist anti-European movements like UKIP in Britain and a similar party in Denmark,
4. German Nazi-Nostalgics from the NPD, but also "modern" German, Swiss and Austrian racists, who say that they are inspired by the actual Israeli politics, such as the "Politically Incorrect" hate blog and others.

But Wilders NEVER acknowledges their support and, at the same time, NEVER explicitly dissociates himself from those (hidden) anti-semites, either.
He thinks that he can get away with Likud and Israel Beteinu support, for the Dutch feel guilty about the huge number of Jews, carried away 1940-45 from Holland to Auschwitz with the active and passive help from many among them, and they will not dare to discuss Holocaust.
He also thinks, that he can get away with Daniel Pipes, whom he invited as an "expert" to his Dutch hate-mongering trial. In fact, I think, that Wilders is completely dependent on Israeli-US financing of his agitation. That is why, for instance, he announced his solidarity with an ethnic cleansing of Palestinians (muslim AND christian) from Palestine, NOT in Dutch Parliament, but in Copenhague, so as to satisfy his Israeli-American sponsorers, without provoking an upsurge among the Dutch, who oppose of course nearly all such an outrage.

 Enjoy (above) the trailer of the Spencer-Geller movie celebrating the clown Wilders!

*) Pamela Geller, the looniest blogger ever, her site and her evaluation at Loonwatch.com
**) Robert Spencer, his site and his evaluation at Loonwatch.com
-----
Please, join us at the LA information campaign, against anti-semitism, against anti-muslimism and against anti-Holland agitation, at a meeting on May 1st in Los Angeles, time and location to be announced soon!

Geert Wilders' difficult choice: Being Immigrant or Exigrant?

Geert Wilders' international actions are made of European-Union bashing, advocating the most right-wing Israeli views and collecting money from rich, but scared, American Jewish elder people in Florida. 

Not counting the -officially- unsolicited money that may be got from "allies" like:

• the post-fascist Belgian Vlaams Belang movement,
• the racist German "Politically Incorrect" Website
• the so-called European, but in reality American, website "Gates Of Vienna"
• and Daniel PIPES' blog of hatred against Islam, a real Wilders' fan,
• etc.

I do not like it, when the Judges intrude into freedom of speech. I accept limits to that freedom, but I think that a fair and open discussion between responsible people will be able to solve any misunderstanding that might occur. Not so with Mr. Wilders. He avoids any confrontation with Muslims or with people who favor an open mind to culture. That is, why I have, reluctantly, to admit that the only solution to the Wilders' hate agitation lies in a condemnation in Court of Geert Wilders.
In 1917, my grandfather-in-law, Henk Sneevliet, was condemned in a Dutch-Indonesian Court for "hate-mongering". He was banned to go to Holland, leaving alone his friends from the Indonesian Nationalist Movement, who were inspired by the Russian February Revolution.
In 1933, again, he was in Court in Amsterdam, for having greeted the "Seven Provinces" rebellion of seamen, who were despatched at suppressing an Atjeh rebellion against the Dutch. After some months in jail, he was elected to Parliament under the slogan: "Sneevliet, from jail to Parliament"!
You'll see, why I think that Geert Wilders will be able to profit from his indictment before a Court, as a "victim" of Justice. But I have no choice. As an elected member of Parliament, only the other elected members of Parliament could have stopped him. They did not. Out of fear, out of calculation, they let him do.
Wilders is of mixed Dutch/German-Indonesian descent. One of his grandparents was Jewish. Out of that multicultural mix, he choose to be Jewish. I repect that. But I do not allow somebody to negate altogether his/her roots. The "Indos", of mixed Dutch-Indonesian descent, choose in 1948/9, when it became clear that the Indonesian nationalists under Sukarno would get the upper hand in Djakarta, in majorty to go to Holland. They "integrated" successfully. Only, when during the eighties a virtual ban was proclaimed on foreign immigrants, their brown skin and their black hair got them unawares as "foreigners". Most assumed. Few, like Wilders, hid under, for example, a blond wig.

The Dutch Wilders Hysteria. Who exploits it. And how it will be Overcome. (3, The Funders)

Who are exploiting the Dutch crisis? And How? Follow the Money!
1. A loophole in Dutch legislation.
While most developed ("judeo-christian") democracies have laws and rules that block organizations with foreign funding and/or no democratic structure, from participating in elections, the Kingdom of The Netherlands makes a notable exception.
In Germany, in France and even in countries like Belgium, Spain and Portugal, political parties are subjected to rules, based upon Law, that guarantee their democratic (membership) structure and the transparency of their revenues.
For instance, former German Chancellor, Mr. Kohl, was sued in Court for black financing of his CDU party. In Belgium, each locally elected representative is screened by Justice, and if he or she has published his/her name or image in local official publications within a three-month period in advance of elections, he or she is punished.
But in Holland, any body can participate in elections. As far as I know, Mr. Wilders is the first person to go it entirely alone. Geert and Geert alone, selects candidates for Parliament, for the European Parliament and for local elections.
2. Populist maffia leaders have to go "whoring"
Before the year 1917, in Holland, members of Parliament were chosen locally in conscriptions, like in Great Britain. After 1917/1918 big "pillar" parties, with their membership structure, took over. There was never a real need to discipline parties. They cared for themselves. Until, at the end of the Nineties, Mr. Pim Fortuyn started to organize his following under a "List Fortuyn". (LPF: List Pim Fortuyn).
Fortuyn himself described his meetings with potential funders as "whoring". He met marginal traders in real estate, who promised funding in exchange for liberty of speculation within the Rotterdam social housing sector. Eventually, the funders even took over the whole LPF party, after Fortuyn's death in 2002. The Rotterdam social housing was for a large part sold to real estate speculators. The motivation: "Raise rents, so that people with low income will have to leave and be replaced by young gentry." People with low incomes are, of course, mainly (muslim, but also Surinam and Antillean,) immigrants. (See: Rotterdam weert arme Nieuwkomers (February 2006, Dutch, in my blog "In Europa Thuis").
Likewise, Ms. Verdonk, a former Conservative Liberal Minister of Immigration, funded her party 'Trots Op Nederland', TON (Proud of Holland'), with donations from marginal personalities and real estate speculators.
3. The Wilders construction
Geert WILDERS must have decided at an early stage, that, if he wanted to keep his independence, he could neither count upon eventual members of his PVV party, nor on Dutch private funders. At first, Wilders hoped, that the bulk of his money would come from the US Neoconservatives. In 2005/6, Mr. Bart Jan Spruyt wrote a Reaganite programme for Wilders' new party and did some headhunting among the neocon followers in the Netherlands. Geert Wilders, who was then sitting alone in Parliament as a dissident of the conservative liberal VVD party, was transported into the States, where he met the Neocon pundits, who were just then at the apex of their power under the presidency of George W. Bush.
But the neocon cabal was not sufficiently amused by the peroxide blond loon. Wilders is a (rabiate) critic of religion in general, although exclusively haunted by the Islam, while the Neocons, who are not religious themselves, as former Trotskyites, consider religion (for the masses) as a necessary antidote to social action. Even if some Neocons made a visit to Holland under Wilders' patronage, their alliance did never materialize. I wrote about the neoconservative strategy of engaging fundamentalist Christians into their action in: Paul Wolfowitz and neocon Morals (June 6, 2007). And the Spruyt-inspired neocon American Enterprise Institute's excursion to Rotterdam was a failure. In the neocon Weekly Standard, Spruyt was relegated to the cultural and book review section.
It was soon afterwards, that Wilders broke his relation with Mr. Spruyt. He was to go it "alone". But not so much alone as that. Fundraising trips to Israel and the US started to fill Wilders' war treasure.
4. The Likud-US connection
While the Neoconservative American Enterprise Institute (where his former friend Ajaan Hirsi Ali is engaged as a researcher since 2005) kept its purse closed, the president of the American Peace (!) Initiative, nominated by Bush in 2002, Daniel Pipes, came to the rescue. Pipes, who is firmly linked to Likud in Israel and to the powerful AIPAC pro-Israel lobby in the US, channeled American taxpayer funds to Wilders, as well as private contributions from US sources, collected through websites like "Gates Of Vienna" e.a.

John Tyler, blogger at the Dutch world service radio "Wereldomroep (RNW)", sorted it out. The RNW site is not just a loony dhimmi playground, but an independent blogging platform hosted by the Dutch state-financed worldwide information service by radio:

An important source of funding for his legal defence comes from supporters in the United States. He has travelled there frequently: showing his anti-Islam film Fitna, giving speeches, accepting awards. And raising money.
Neither Mr Wilders nor many of those involved in organizing fundraisers for him are prepared to indicate how much money he has raised.
Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, has raised money for Geert Wilders’ legal defence through The Legal Project. “The Legal Project engages in various efforts for individuals who talk about this bundle of issues: Muslims and Islam. Wilders is one of those that we have helped both financially and in other ways. I have helped him in terms of law and in terms of fundraising. But I can’t tell you amounts… It’s not my concern.”
Although Mr Pipes is not prepared to talk in more detail about money raised for Wilders, he has told a Dutch magazine that Wilders raised a six-figure amount during a recent US trip.

In June 2007, at the Californian Pepperdine Conference about the looming 'Collapse Of Europe', Pipes set the agenda already, with his proposals to support "advocacy" against Muslims, denying them the building of Mosques, wearing headscarves and attacking "leftist" anti-racists in Court. That is what the "Legal project" is about. The Legal Project and other advocacy initiatives were dealt with in a closed session, following the public one. Now we get a peep into what it boils down to. Tyler, again:

Readers are asked to send money to a bank account of the Friends of the Freedom Party Foundation. This is the same foundation which funds Freedom Party (= PVV, HR) activities. Apparently, Mr Wilders has not set up a separate foundation for his legal defence. According to Dutch daily de Volkskrant, Mr Wilders instead re-wrote the statute of the existing Freedom Party foundation to include his legal defence. This would mean there is no division between donations for Mr Wilders’ personal legal defence and the Freedom Party’s political activities.

As Wilders keeps his financial resources hidden, and says: "Where I get my money and from whom is nobody’s business”, it is difficult to prove exactly, how much of the spenders' money is used for legal defence, and what part is devoted to party campaigns. Tyler:

According to Dutch daily de Volkskrant, Mr Wilders instead re-wrote the statute of the existing Freedom Party foundation to include his legal defence. This would mean there is no division between donations for Mr Wilders’ personal legal defence and the Freedom Party’s political activities.

5. The European dimension. Mccarthyism returns?
As we saw in the preceding article in this series, Dutch Law governing funding for political parties is quite lax. A new law is being prepared at the Ministry of the Interior, but two of the three bigger political parties, the liberal-conservative VVD and the Christian-Democrat CDA are used to get their funding for a large part from big business. However, says Tyler:

Greco, an anti-corruption body and part of The Council of Europe, reprimanded the Netherlands in 2007  for the lack of transparency regarding political donations. A new law governing political parties and how they are financed is in the making. But as it now stands, Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party have very few limits on how and where they can raise money. And he has no obligation to reveal his money sources.

I remember the McCarthyist US policies during the Fifties. Funding was channeled to anti-Communist organizations. Neutral youth- and students-organizations were being infiltrated. Let me add, that this reflected similar policies that originated in Moscow. But that doesn't make it any better.

Racist anti-islamic websites like "Politically Incorrect" (PI) in Germany are being funded and even hosted in the US. The CIA sponsored (if we may believe the German security- and anti-islam expert, Dr. Udo Ulfkotte) a huge anti-Eurabia conference in Brussels, November 2007, hosted by the separatist and post-fascist Vlaams Belang Party, outlawed by all other Belgian political parties. Ms. Bat Ye'or and her husband, as well as the enigmatic white supremacist "Fjordman" and Dutch "Arabist" Hans Jansen, converted from anti-Zionist to anti-Islam agitator (we will come back to him!), came together and studied, how hate-mongering against Islam and Muslims could be promoted. Wilders himself never mingles directly or openly with the far right as assembled in Brussels. But their money is apparently welcome.

6. Couldn't we get some information about the secret Wilders funding, out of the anti-terrorist legislation's monitoring of bank transfers?
I believed, that some forty years ago, we put an end to this kind of shameless intrusion into our political life. When Nixon had to step down in shame, at that point of time, more or less. But I was wrong. American authorities, as says my bank every month, when I transfer some money from Holland to Belgium, from my retirement pension, register what I do. I hope, they will catch Al-Qaeda transfers timely, in that way. But what about secret transfers of money from the States to people who undermine democracy and freedom in Europe and who are in Court for hate-mongering and discrimination?
If Pipes and Wilders cannot be forced to reveal their financial dealings, perhaps the post-9/11 anti-terrorist legislation and rules could be of help for once, for the necessary transparency!

Photos: 1. Jihadwatch, USA. Wilders and Robert Spencer. 2. Hoeiboei Blog: Arabist Jansen.

Technorati Tags: Bart Jan Spruyt, American Enterprise Institute, Geert Wilders, Daniel Pipes, Neoconservatives, Robert Spencer, Hans Jansen, Party Funding

Please, comment at: At Home in Europe-Euractiv.

How the Wilders Hysteria is Linked to Holland. Who exploits it. And how it can be ended. (2, Dutch society)

Wilders is NOT about Islam. Any foreign intrusion would have done. He is about xenophobia and hate-mongering.
In the first part of this series, we talked about the transnational effects of the Dutch Wilders hysteria against Muslims. And how it is exploited and financed by foreign sources like the Advocacy Project of Daniel Pipes in the U.S.A. and Israel. We will have to return to the international financing problem as well as to the ongoing European contamination, in one of the next instances.
"Geert Akbar": The some 200 activists who supported Wilders on January 20 at his Amsterdam court appearance, were not without some humour... 

Our subject here, in the second part, is the typical Dutch background of the hysterical Wilders upsurge. The Wilders phenomenon has nothing to do, in our opinion, with the Islam. Any religious, ethnic or cultural intrusion into the dream of a peaceful and quiet Dutch society, could have done the job. Wilders is not about Islam. It is about xenophobia. And hate-mongering.
Redundant workers are left alone
As many researchers and thinkers nowadays understand, the globalization of economy, trade and culture are felt as an intrusion into their daily life, by the men and women who live in marginalized parts of Western cities. Structurally, they are no more needed for production of goods. (See my articles about the rise and downfall of the need for urban workers at the e-urban site: Les quartiers relégués... (FR),  Missbrauch der Geographie des Armuts.. (DE).
Foreign, mostly Muslim, immigrants take the jobs of the former local (former generation) immigrant workers. And the new immigrants are in their turn put aside, as their wages get too high, compared to those in, for instance, China. But China is over their horizon. The local inhabitants only see their immigrant neighbours.
And that is hard. Welfare State has, since a century, taken responsibility for the citizens' well-being, their security and their peaceful life, taking the place of the Church and the heads of the village communities. And it is felt, that the State fails. Nobody is really left alone. But life has become pointless. Strangers are coming in. They take our houses, our schools, our local shops. The State does nothing against it. Frustration becomes aggression against the newcomers and their children: headscarves, minarets, halal slaughtering are symbolical targets.
How is it possible, that an open, tolerant, society like the Dutch, reacts so strongly against the newcomers?
The Dutch tolerance is an "empty tolerance" as in: "De Lege Tolerantie", a book, published in 2007 by a number of Dutch thinkers and writers. It is empty, for it is in fact a way of hiding within one's own community.

It was developed during Middle Age and the early Modern Times. As a small country, the Dutch republic, in its summit of power, received the Flemish refugees from Antwerp and made them the top of Lowlands' culture (notably Joost van den Vondel, poet). Sepharade refugees from the Iberic countries were welcomed, as new traders on the world markets. Baruch d'Espinoza, one of them, was condemned to isolation, by the Sepharade court, confirmed by Dutch justice. The Jews had to manage their own problems.

As long as immigrants did not endanger Dutch elites' relations to England or to France, they were welcome. Not in the countryside, but in the cities. When the 18th century was nearing its end, Dutch "Patriots" demanded a Democracy in Holland. Second-class citizenship rules for Jews were to be abolished. But, finally, full-fledged discrimination was reestablished under the "Restoration" regime, which lasted from 1814 to 1830.
In the second half of the 19th century, the country accumulated its riches from its colonial possessions, the Netherlands Indies, i.e: Indonesia. Typical Dutch "tolerance" was developed into an ideology of "inspraak", "giving your opinion", imposed upon Indonesian leaders. "Inspraak" is not about real policies. It deals exclusively with social issues. It was a check on how far Dutch authorities could go in their exploitation of Indonesia.
The imperial illusion
While the British left the Indonesian wealth to their Dutch clients, those last ones lived with the illusion of an imperium. Holland considered itself both as a world player and as a small reserve of peace and civilization. It did not take part in the First World war, it only profited largely from trade with both sides. The German Nazi occupation in 1940 was a shock, but was relegated into shameful oblivion afterwards.
Dutch society reacts to foreign arrivals with tolerance. But what does Dutch tolerance mean? It is not about accepting, but about leaving alone. Leave us alone. Manage yourselves. The well-known "pillar" structure of the Dutch nation is its outcome: catholics, protestants, conservatives and social-democrats have each their own "pillar" under the state. It consists of social, educational, cultural and political organizations, whose tops negotiate all the time compromises with the other pillars, in order to keep the state going.
The emptiness of Dutch tolerance
Secularization, death of ideologies, dealt a mortal blow to that system from the sixties on. So mortal, that there can be no question of a new Dutch "islamic" pillar now, at the start of the 21st century. Which leaves Dutch society with a fundamental destabilization. The "inspraak"-strategy, so successful with the Indonesian elites, doesn't work with the new immigrants. Denial, until the middle of the nineties a favored attitude among the political elite of the country, became impossible after the tumultuous passage of Pim Fortuyn, murdered in May 2002.
In short: Dutch society is without a clue. Traditional elites are either hiding behind their pillar walls, or expecting the fall-out of Fortuyn- and Wilders-like racist movements to fall into their laps. That is why Parliament and traditional parties (for the most part) let Wilders do his thing. Hoping, that somebody would dare to come forward and put him in the right place. At this moment, it is a part of the Dutch judiciary system, who are coming forward against Wilders' hate-mongering. There is little or no support from the political side. Everybody is commenting as if it were a match between two foreign soccer teams.
Strangers to the new European community
The structure of the European Union, a hybrid hesitating between a common civilization and a loose union of independent nations, does not help. Dutch citizens, in their majority, do not feel responsible for the European common good. As the traditional parties do not work to engage citizens with an European project in the world, demagogues like Wilders, find an ample room to play with the illusion of a Dutch "Alleingang", as if the country were still an imperial power. Wilders copies the model of the ex-maoist populist Dutch "Socialist Party" in the European Parliament, who sabotaged during many years all European construction.
A commenter on this blog, rightly said, that a Wilders movement would not be possible in the bigger European countries like Britain, France, or Germany. But, as the EU is composed, now, of 27 countries, a destabilization of one or more of the smaller ones, like Poland, Denmark, Ireland, Italy, Greece or Holland, could contaminate the whole process of European unification.
2007, a financial support for the Irish movement against the Lisbon Treaty, channeled through a military contract with the US State of Georgia, and managed by the American Heritage Foundation, succeeded in endangering the whole project. The US funders behind Wilders may have the same intention.
That is why not only the Dutch, but all people of the EU should be worried about the fragility of democracy, as illustrated by the destructive Wilders phenomenon in Holland, and its hidden sponsors from abroad.

(From At Home in Europe (EN) and Huibslog)

Please; comment at: At Home in Europe - Euractiv, where this post is republished!

Why Wilders Hysterics happen in Holland. Who exploits it. And How it will Disappear. (1, Daniel Pipes)

Ritual slaughter, normal in Jewish and Muslim traditions, is attacked at right-wing pro-Wilders manifestation in Amsterdam, Jan. 20, 2010.

 In the USA, loonies like Mr. Geert Wilders, just appear in the shape of hysteric bloggers, or television priests, or talkshow-pundits. (Making an exception for Ms. Sarah Palin. That is another story.)
Even so, it is bad enough. But in Holland, a small country in Western Europe, those loonies can even become statesmen, or, as things are at this point, statesmen-hopeful.
Daniel Pipes, January 19 2010, consecrates Geert Wilders' ambitions on his blog: Why I stand with Geert Wilders. More on Daniel Pipes at Loonwatch, USA.

Pipes doesn't hide his admiration for the peroxide blond Lowlands Messiah:

Who is the most important European alive today? I nominate the Dutch politician Geert Wilders. I do so because he is best placed to deal with the Islamic challenge facing the continent. He has the potential to emerge as a world-historical figure.

 

Pipes and Wilders, 2006

Well, well. Mr. Wilders has no proposals for economy, social issues, culture, education, etc., other than eliminating immigrants of Muslim descent from Dutch society. He has no ideas about foreign policy, other than debilitating the European Union (we'll come to this later) and following the Likud - and even more right-wing policies, of Israel (idem).
Pipes:

In addition, Wilders is a charismatic, savvy, principled, and outspoken leader who has rapidly become the most dynamic political force in the Netherlands. While he opines on the full range of topics, Islam and Muslims constitute his signature issue. Overcoming the tendency of Dutch politicians to play it safe, he calls Muhammad a devil and demands that Muslims "tear out half of the Koran if they wish to stay in the Netherlands." More broadly, he sees Islam itself as the problem, not just a virulent version of it called Islamism.

"A full range of topics"? - When Dutch Parliament debated measures to counter the banking crisis, Wilders and his 8 colleague-parliamentarians left the meeting. Playing victims of majority dictates, but in reality, because they have no answers to the economic challenges of the crisis. No, the one-member Wilders party (Wilders himself is the only member, financing is hidden from the public, see my analysis of Wilders-finances later), waited and diverted the discussion to xenophobic issues later on.

Pipes ends the eulogy about Wilders in this way:

The Netherlands' fractured political scene means the PVV must either find willing partners to form a governing coalition (a difficult task, given how leftists and Muslims have demonized Wilders as a "right-wing extremist") or win a majority of the seats in parliament (a distant prospect).

Wilders must also overcome his opponents' dirty tactics. Most notably, they have finally, after 2½ years of preliminary skirmishes, succeeded in dragging him to court on charges of hate speech and incitement to hatred. The public prosecutor's case against Wilders opens in Amsterdam on January 20; if convicted, Wilders faces a fine of up to US$ 14,000 or as many as 16 months in jail.
Remember, he is his country's leading politician. Plus, due to threats against his life, he always travels with bodyguards and incessantly changes safe houses. Who exactly, one wonders, is the victim of incitement?

Confronting Wilders' agitprop, is that a "dirty tactic"? We are talking of freedom of opinion here! I regret that Dutch politicians did not confront Wilders with the means they have at their disposal under parliamentary democracy.
They ducked away. That is, why the Dutch Justice system was forced into action. The Amsterdam High Court rejected a lame response of the prosecutors to a number of complaints about Wilders' agitation and decided to go forward in challenging him to Court on the issue of hate-mongering against groups.
The City of Amsterdam has a libertarian tradition. February 1941, a mass strike occurred against the beginning Nazi elimination of Jews, who made 10% of its population of nearly a million. It has been a heroic action against the Nazi occupier. Many strikers lost their lives under SS-fire and in concentration camps afterwards.

The Amsterdam heroic tradition of struggle against anti-semitism
The city of Amsterdam and its major, Mr. Job Cohen and its assistant major Asscher, and its former assistant-major Ahmed Aboutaleb, now government-appointed major of the city of Rotterdam, have consistently avoided discriminatory action against its Muslim inhabitants. Wilders and his provincial followers are all the time trying to represent those politicians as "capitulators" in front of the so-called "Islamic Tsunami". As "dhimmis", shortly. I always am questioning myself about how it can be possible that Cohen and Asscher, of Jewish descent, could be diabolized by an Israel-friend as Mr. Wilders. And, indirectly, by Mr. Pipes...
But no, Daniel Pipes is not completely in tune with Geert Wilders:

Although I disagree with Wilders about Islam (I respect the religion but fight Islamists with all I have), we stand shoulder-to-shoulder against the lawsuit. I reject the criminalization of political differences, particularly attempts to thwart a grassroots political movement via the courts. Accordingly, the Middle East Forum's Legal Project has worked on Wilders' behalf, raising substantial funds for his defense and helping in other ways. We do so convinced of the paramount importance to talk freely in public during time of war about the nature of the enemy.

And yes, Pipes' "legal project", or, in other words: "advocacy against Islam", financed by the US taxpayer under the G.W.Bush presidency, has sent much money to the falsely-blond agitator. So much, that he has not to submit to the rules of party-financing transparency in Holland. Wilders' one-member "party" can afford to refuse government subsidies, thus avoiding being scrutinized on its revenues!
This is a typical "failed state" issue, that must have some consequences on the EU level. The European Parliament should not accept non-democratic maffias as members. (About the consequences of the Wilders intrusion into the EP, another time.)

As opinion-polls stand now, Mr. Wilders' fake party could master a 30% score at national elections (at the latest in 2011), become the biggest one in Parliament and get a claim to the post of Prime Minister. With the Christian-Democrat and the Conservative Liberal Party as junior partners in a coalition (as both big parties mentioned here, have not excluded that sort of coalition up to now), Wilders could effectively become Prime Minister of the Netherlands.

This would not be as disastrous as it looks now, if the Netherlands were on a Pacific island, with a small, self-sufficient, economy. But the country is among the world's twenty biggest economies and a middle-size member of the European Union, as well as a core NATO-ally.
The world has changed into a global village. Small countries may exert a disproportional impact on world affairs. The big European Union Three (Great Britain, France and Germany) are, at this moment, stable and responsible players in world politics. That was illustrated at the occasion of the 2006 "Danish anti-Islam cartoon crisis". All three managed to remain neutral and not add to the world outrage, nor to the provocations by anti-Islam people. The new members of the European Union in the East are, with the notable exception of Poland, too small to transmit their eventual instability to the European Union as a whole.

How did Mr. Geert Wilders get such a large following in a country, formerly known for its tolerance and stability?
That is the subject of the next article in this series.
Keep an eye on us.

Published also in HUIBSLOG and At Home in Europe - Euractiv.
Please, comment at At Home in Europe - Euractiv, where this post has been republished! 

Dutch hate-mongerer Wilders turned into hero by Rupert Murdoch [EN]

The New York Wall Street Journal (WSJ), owned by Rupert Murdoch, is known for its heroic struggle against anyone who it deems guilty of blasphemy of the free market, the stock exchange, composite investment vehicles and US moral superiority in the world.
It is so busy with its crusade and its inquisition against men and women who make use of their right to free speech on these subjects, that, alas, it neglected recently its core business, that is, if I am not mistaken, to inform the public, specifically the financial world, about the upcoming financial crisis, about the Ponzi schemes and about the fraudulent balances of main financial institutions.

You and I would expect, that the WSJ, like the London Financial Times, would be doing some self-critical introspection at this point of time.
The opinion makers at WSJ, could, for instance, reflect upon the billions of dollars the US are pumping every year into the Saudi Kingdom, enabling it to maintain a barbaric internal police regime and, worse still, financing fundamentalist and retrograde, even terrorist, institutions abroad.

I have seen nothing of that in WSJ. On the contrary. Not unlike Saudi Mollahs, it identifies Satan as exclusively coming from abroad.
WSJ featured heavily, for instance, the lying demagogue Mark Steyn (America Alone), also known as a Canadian humorist. Steyn specialises in Canada- and Europe-bashing. Collective health care, feminism, birth control, so he says, produce countries that are already lost to (Islamic) barbary. America alone, has to do the job. With crackpot wisdom, for instance, about the Istanbul Aya Sofia, that should be unislamized, he reaches a vast audience. Only a pity, that since 1939 the Aya Sofia building has been desacralized by the Turkish Parliament, and is a Museum now, with exhibits that illustrate the Christian as well as the Muslim history of the 5th Century edifice.
Another Europe-basher (when she is not trying to return to Europe) is Ajaan Hirsi Ali, a former Dutch parliamentarian of Somali origin, who is employed by the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington since 2006. She, or Daniel Pipes, could well have been the author of the WSJ-opinion under the heading:

"Silencing Islam's Critics - A Dutch Court Imports Saudi Blasphemy Norms to Europe."

It appeared two days after the inauguration of Barack Obama as the 44th US president, who stated that in the US there has to be a just place for Christians, Muslims, Buddhists and Non-believers. Its conclusion:

The [Amsterdam] court yesterday overruled this decision [i.e: the August 2008 Prosecutor's decision NOT to prosecute Mr. Wilders, HR], arguing that the lawmaker should be prosecuted for "inciting hatred and discrimination" and also "for insulting Muslim worshippers because of comparisons between Islam and Nazism."
This is no small victory for Islamic regimes seeking to export their censorship laws to wherever Muslims reside. But the successful integration of Muslims in Europe will require that
immigrants adapt to Western norms, not vice versa.
Limiting the Dutch debate of Islam to standards acceptable in, say, Saudi Arabia, will only shore up support for Mr. Wilders's argument that Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties.

Well, the point is, that Mr. Wilders is not seriously criticizing Islam as a religion, but that he is all the time targeting all Muslims, representing them as a permanent danger. He summarily rejects any perspective of "working together for a more perfect union", even systematically refusing proposals for dialogue, made to him by Muslim groups.

Mr. Wilders has had all freedom of speech he could wish for. Now he has to bear the consequences of what he has been saying. The Dutch juridical system is not unlike any other in the Western world. On the issue of blasphemy, it is more liberal than the American practice. It is not of "blasphemy" that Wilders is accused, but of hate-mongering ("haatzaaien"). A nation that is committed to a peaceful togetherness of its citizens and to equality between gender, religion and ethnicity, has to protect itself against systematic hate-mongering.
It is as if the WSJ forgets, that US law is imposed upon the Ku Klux Klan racist hate-mongerers, and rightly so. No "freedom of expression" for them. And people who deny the Holocaust, should we give them "freedom of expression"? In France, Mr. Le Pen, also a parliamentarian and party leader, has been condemned more than once for hate-mongering against Jews and against immigrants from Africa. A former French Communist leader, turned Muslim, denied the Holocaust and was condemned in court, in spite of his old age. That is what a civilized society does. In Europe as well as in the US.

So, it is not about blasphemy, but about systematic racist agitation. And it is not about freedom of expression, but about hate-mongering by someone who knows that he is lying. Or, maybe, he doesn't know, but then a psychiatric team has to be called in.

Back to the WSJ and its tendency to find European (Canadian) giving in ("appeasement", "capitulation"), to the Enemy (in an earlier phase, it was: "soft on Communism"), as a main cause for the actual woes in Wall Street.

As always, its explanation comes from inner policy.
Murdoch and his WSJ team cannot (yet) attack openly the new course of president Obama, who pleads for American-European dialogue, with the approval of a large majority in the US. Therefore, it is being done by the way of a bit of misinformation about an event, most Americans do know near to nothing about.

It all boils down to a cowards' intrigue, to sabotage the new American foreign policy, an offense to a Democracy that defends itself (the contrary to "appeasement"!) and to the integrity of Dutch justice. (Which might come handy in, where the The Hague International Courts for genocide and war crimes are concerned, that are boycotted by the US, and that will have a role in prosecuting war criminals from recent conflicts.)

Well, and if the WSJ is so concerned about Saudi "norms" (which it should be), what about an oil boycott against that regime?

Technorati Tags: Wall Street Journal, Europe, Netherlands, Wilders, Hirsi Ali, Daniel Pipes, Islam, Racism, Mark Steyn

Akte Islam bans Fjordman as a "CIA-agent" and finds refuge with local Islam-bashers

Akte Islam Fjordman
Originally uploaded by huibriethof

This statement comes from "Akte Islam", November 2007. The German 'Pax-Europa' movement, founded by Secret-Services freak Dr. Udo Ulfkotte in 2006 in order to promote European values, like tolerance, Enlightenent and judeo-christian heritage, limits it's action to vulgar Muslim-bashing.

After the flopping of a pan-European anti-Eurabia manifestation on September 11 in Brussels, with Danish-English SIOE and the Vlaams Belang, Ulfkotte bans right-wing extremists and CIA-inspired people like Spencer and Bat Ye'or and their stooges (notably the so-called 'Fjordman') from collaborating with his ailing Pax Europa movement.

Yesterday, Ulfkotte fusioned his Pax Europa club with the German 'Association of Citizen Movements', in order to get "observer status" with the EU, the European Council and, as if that weren't enough, with the UN too.

We wish the new couple a happy honeymoon and we are eagerly expecting the inevitable clash between President Ulfkotte and CEO Schwend.
Technorati Tags: Germany, Ulfkotte, Europe, Islam

Legal Alien: Pepperdine 2 and 3 Reports: European stooges enter the scene. Pipes underhandedly calls for a pogrom on Mosques.

Leon de Winter, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Henryk Broder, Andy Bostom, Daniel Pipes and Greg Davis (This photo is merged from two smaller photos. [By Vik Rubenfeld, on whose reporting I draw, HR])

In A Legal Alien in New York I published two new reports about the Pepperdine Conference against 'Eurabia' and Islam.

1. Pepperdine 2: "Ibn Warraq" tells his tale. (July 7)
2. Pepperdine 3: European Stooges enter the Scene (July 10).

1: "Ibn Warraq", a Pipes pet and anti-muslim hetzer working under pseudonym in the US, takes a Muslim mother's warning to her children not indulge in stupid commercial "sport" hooliganism, as proof, that Muslims never will integrate into Western society. However, that mother did nothing else than a Christian mother could have done: she referred to religion as a basis of discernment.
Nevertheless, the Pepperdine audience seems convinced, that this is proof of the Islam danger and the dhimmi treason.

2: Ayaan Hirsi Ali introduces a new concept. Suppression of Muslims is no more a Government task, in her eyes. She has 'learned' in the US, that a "popular upsurge" will be a better way. Dutch writer Leon de Winter delivers a vague statement about the Amsterdam situation and confirms that even Calvinists are ready to come into action, as they have "enough" of the Islam intrusion. (If the reporter understood him well, and if I understood the reporter correctly). German prize-winning anti-islamic writer Henryk Broder communicates some German and British anecdotes that should deliver more proof of Islam's evilness and the treacherously weak ('appeasement') reactions of mainstream European politicians.
Finally, the conference initiator, Pepperdine visiting Professor Daniel Pipes, delivers an outrageous statement, calling, underhandedly, for a pogrom-like popular movement against Mosques.

The reporting will be continued in the next days.

London Financial Times Commenter is as disgusted as I am about Pepperdine...

Ah, I'm not alone in my disgust about the Pepperdine Conference.
Listen to Gideon Rachman of the London Financial Times, who chastizes Mark Steyn and Ajaan Hirsi Ali even more than I did:

The collapse of Europe

If you happen to be passing though Malibu next month, why not pop into an intriguing-sounding conference at Pepperdine University on "The Collapse of Europe". One of the early sessions is entitled - "Eurabia: Is Muslim domination of Europe inevitable?"

My answer to this is "No" it's not inevitable. In fact, given that the Muslim population of Europe is just 4% at the moment, I would say it's highly unlikely. But don't trying telling that to an audience of American conservatives. The idea that Europe is about to be submerged by the Muslim hordes seems to be almost recieved wisdom over there. It is certainly a notion that has launched a great many books. There is “Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis” by Bat Ye’or; “While Europe Slept – How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within” by Bruce Bawer; “The Death of the West” by Pat Buchanan; and “The Cube and the Cathedral” by George Weigel.

I was depressed to see that Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born Dutch politician is taking part in the Pepperdine conference. She is a highly intelligent and courageous woman, so it's a shame to see that she is mixing with buffoons like Mark Steyn, who is giving the keynote address at the conference.

Steyn is the author of the most successful recent book about the alleged Muslim takeover of Europe. “America Alone” earned its author a place in the New York Times best-seller list and praise from President Bush.

Mr Steyn argues that – “Europe has all but succumbed to the dull opiate of multiculturalism.” Indeed “a fearless Muslim advance has penetrated far deeper into Europe than Abd al-Rahman” – a Muslim general who made it to the outskirts of Paris in 732. With apparent relish Mr Steyn predicts a “Eurabian civil war”. The weak-kneed elites will succumb to militant Islam. But an “unreconstructed minority” will turn to “neo-nationalist strongmen”. The poor old Europeans can’t win. It’s either appeasement or fascism.

It is alarming stuff. So it is comforting to recall that Mr Steyn has been disastrously wrong about many things in the past. I've just looked up a piece that he filed from Iraq in June 2003, in which he confidently informed his readers that everything was fine - "a vast number of bureaucrats are running around Iraq with unlimted budgets in search of a human catastrophe that doesn't exist." This is vintage Steyn - jeering, complacent and utterly stupid.

Steyn's Iraq epic ended with him sitting in an Iraqi cafe, watching a BBC television report suggesting that there was a crisis in Baghdad's hospitals. Once again, Steyn knew better. He sneered at:

"the blazing lights of round-the-clock CNN and BBC camera crews filming their reporter yakking away in front of a telegenic moppet whose acute tonsillitis is somehow all Rumsfeld's fault. These days, I always laugh my head off at BBC World reports. And, in that Ramadi cafe, I was touched to find that, even though most of them hadn't a clue what he was going on about, within half a minute, the rest of the crowd was roaring along with me."

Ah Iraq - if only the rest of the world could see the funny side. In fact, I have a suggestion for Mr Steyn. When he has finished lecturing the inmates at Pepperdine, perhaps he could repeat his trip to Iraq and see if it's still as hilarious as the last time.

Nothing to add. My analysis is upcoming...

EU Commission's Response to Mark Steyn: 18 couples coming, together!

Reproductive Activities...

In A Legal Alien in New York, we quoted Mr. Mark Steyn (11.6.07), a keynote speaker at the "Collapse Of Europe" Conference at Pepperdine University in Malibu last month. In a Wall Street Journal article of January 2006 Steyn resumes his New York Times bestseller "America Alone: The End Of the World as We Know It":

It's the Demography, Stupid
The real reason the West is in danger of extinction.

BY MARK STEYN
Wednesday, January 4, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

[..]

The challenge for those who reckon Western civilization is on balance better than the alternatives is to figure out a way to save at least some parts of the West.

One obstacle to doing that is that, in the typical election campaign in your advanced industrial democracy, the political platforms of at least one party in the United States and pretty much all parties in the rest of the West are largely about what one would call the secondary impulses of society--

• government health care,
  
• government day care (which Canada's thinking of introducing),
• government paternity leave (which Britain's just introduced).
  

We've prioritized the secondary impulse over the primary ones:

• national defense,
  
• family,
  
• faith and,
  
• most basic of all, reproductive activity--"Go forth and multiply," because if you don't you won't be able to afford all those secondary-impulse issues, like cradle-to-grave welfare.

Americans sometimes don't understand how far gone most of the rest of the developed world is down this path... [..]

Who could have guessed, that, of all people, the "European Bureaucrats" (as the EU was labeled in all documents of that "scientific" seminar) would come up with such a convincing refutation of Steyn's, Pipes', Hirsi Ali's, Claire Berlinski's, Arnaud Dotézac's accusations, that they are committing high treason to Western values, participating in a conspiracy to keep down the production of white, Christian babies, born in faithful and docile families, as they are promoting abortion, homosexual couples, kindergarten, women's liberation and other horrors.

The movie shows, exclusively white, European couples, engaged in state-sponsored, (the movie features 18 quotes of EU-subsidized movies), reproductive activities by consenting adult heterosexual couples.

It opens up original suggestions about who, where and and how Europeans should f**k against the Turk: Old and young, in toilets and on tables, in varying positions!

Watch this EuTube movie, quoted from the official EU Commission Website!

By July 4th, it had scored (since June 15): Views: 1,872,501 Comments: 530 Favorited: 2133 times. Rating: Four stars out of five by 2217 viewers...

If these are not Steyn's "reproductive activities", what else is?

The EU shows, that it is fully committed to "primary impulsions".

A loud "Hallelujah!" was heard at Pepperdine Churches of Christ University at Malibu, when the students discovered this divinely inspired result of their prayers against 'Eurabia" on the Internet...

A German Mouthpiece for Hirsi Ali and Daniel Pipes: Udo Ulfkotte

Dr. Udo Ulfkotte is a German security expert. Trained as a lawyer, he serves business and security agencies like the American NSA in the anti-spy sector.
He and his front organisations like "PAX-Europe" were some time busy attacking "greens, leftists, reds, and islamist fundamentalists". Recently, he put his activities into a higher gear, following instructions from Hirsi Ali and her friends (see my Daniel Pipies Rallies his Friends against Islam and Eurabia in A Legal Alien in New York - 11.6.07), declaring outright that "Islam" as such is undermining Europe (creating a phantomatic "Eurabia"). He might have been inspired by Dutch ex-conservative-liberal Geert Wilders, who, with a similar one-issue program, won 10 seats in the 150-strong national Parliament in The Hague.

The Dutch international Public Radio Programme's Blog section carries (13.6.07) a contribution by its Berlin correspondent Laurens Bovens, that we reproduce here:

(RNW - Radio Nederland Wereldomroep Logo)

'German Wilders' attacks Islam

by Laurens Bovens

13-06-2007

Just like Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, a politician has appeared in Germany who is warning against "a tsunami of Islamisation." His name is Udo Ulfkotte, a former journalist who has often made appearances on German Television programmes as an expert on Islam. But Mr Ulfkotte has turned over a new leaf. He is working on the formation of a political party. A party that is to defend Christian values in Germany and Europe against what he regards as the increasing influence of radical Islam.

Udo Ulfkotte (Photo from own website )

Cheers go up when Udo Ulfkotte declares: "I am not with the left, I am not with the right, I am with the Lord God"He casts his eyes upward. Mr Ulfkotte is a confirmed Christian, but one who belongs to a movement that believes living together with Muslims is practically impossible. "European values are those of the Judeo-Christian tradition: peace, freedom, democracy and tolerance."

"Muslims are different, they are from a different tradition. This is clearly demonstrated at many schools in the Netherlands and Germany by the extent to which children are willing to use violence. Muslims are in many ways different from Europeans."

Lecture
Fifty people have come to attend Udo Ulfkotte's lecture in an out-of-the-way hall in a poor Berlin district. This is where the fledgling politician, who travels far and wide and also lectures abroad, tells his tale for the umpteenth time. Just like Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders did before him, he talks of a tsunami of Islamisation. Mr Ulfkotte means to say that European governments are too easily swayed to give in to the demands of radical Muslims. Where will that lead? Mr Ulfkotte goes through a long list of examples:

He claims that Germany allows polygamy among Muslims. And that some swimming pools have introduced separate opening hours for Muslims and non-Muslims. He asks himself why 'we' accept that some parents do not have their children innoculated.

Mr Ulfkotte does not limit himself to Germany. The Netherlands is up next: "Amsterdam has cancelled education on rural life" he says, because pigs were part of the discussion during these classes and that was an affront to Muslim schoolchildren. Mr Ulfkotte claims the affair escalated to the point where the curriculum was changed.

It's an example of how he only tells half the story. Yes, there was one school in Amsterdam where this occurred, but Mr Ulfkotte fails to mention that the Amsterdam authorities were furious about the incident. A spokesperson for the responsible councillor says this must never happen again because you cannot solve problems that way.

Dutch politician Geert Wilders, another critic of the Islamic culture

Political party
Mr Ulfkotte says he has around 500 supporters and has plans to form a political party, the name of which is yet to be revealed. He says he has no intention of sitting in parliament, but hopes to pressure other parties into adopting his programme and turning against Islamisation in Germany. "If that doesn't happen, I hope we will be strong enough to do it ourselves", he says.

His audience likes what he has to say. His words are frequently interrupted by applause, and afterwards several people say they have learned something. But not everybody is pleased. Two Muslim students from the Berlin Free University are also listening to his speech and later accuse Ulfkotte of being racist. "He tries to paint an evil picture of Islam and conducts a witch hunt against Islam."
Radical Islam
She disputes that Mr Ulfkotte is only denouncing radical Islam. According to her, he makes Muslims in general appear in a bad light. "He is peddling conspiracy theories here."She compares Mr Ulfkotte to the far-right NPD. "It would be dangerous if he formed a party." Which could happen in the coming weeks, ahead of the 2009 p[arliamentary] election.

A Dutch listener commenting on this article from Australia, however, is fully convinced of Wilders', Ali's and Pipes' 'Eurabia' myth:

Maarten Hoogesteger, 14-06-2007 - Australia

Hooray that someone with a bit of commonsense is finally raising their voice. About time. I have watch with incredulity as Europe hands over their continent to a bunch of stark raving mad desert dwellers. European politicians who allowed this to happen should be put on trial for treason and for aiding and abetting an enemy. Shame on them.

Short, but everything is in it:

• the 'collapse' of Europe (continent 'handed over')
• racism: 'a bunch of raving mad desert dwellers' (does he know, that the germanic tribes came once from the central Asian steppes?)
• and the "treason" by the 'Left' - our concentration camps are under preparation...

A second commenter, however, sees it otherwise:

This [softening of Christian fundamentalism through Enlightenment, HR] is therefore no justification to claim moral high ground over Islamic Jihadists. This "Judeo-Christian tradition" is only interesting for historians but not for politicians. If Udo Ulfkotte is defending Christian values in Germany and Europe, than he is by default someone I distrust.

And so do I.

Ajaan Hirsi Ali in Sydney: A Controversial look at Islam

Page 2 of the Pepperdine Public School full Catalog for 2006/2007. Daniel Pipes is 'visiting Professor' there from Jan. 1, 2007. In spite of the Pepperdine commitment to traditional values (which explicitly includes support for "mosques" (!)), Pipes managed to get it to host his extremist international conference against Islam and 'Eurabia'. This venerable institution that doesn't hide, as you can see, it's staunch belief "That God is uniquely revealed in Christ" (third slogan on the picture). Will Ayaan Hirsi Ali feel at home there?

Before taking a plane to California, to attend on June 10/11, 2007 the "Collapse Of Europe?" conference with Daniel Pipes (see next post), Ayaan Hirsi Ali stayed in Sydney, Australia. Her Dutch website reports about her new instance of ranting about Islam, down under, citing the Sydney Times:

Times Writers Group: 'Infidel' gives controversial look at Islam

Source: Times/St. Cloud

Islam needs to veer away from these radical fundamentalists using religion as their vehicle to control their millions of followers, according to controversial political figure Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

Ali, whose autobiography "Infidel," was published earlier this year, says today's fundamentalist Muslims preach hate and violence as a tenet of their religion and insist on total control of half of their own population — women.

While Ali acknowledges Islamic leaders did teach such positive lessons as being compassionate and showing charity to others, too often this approach was overshadowed by the vengeance, anger and control preached in the Islamic holy book, the Quran.

As Ali says of this document ... "the Quran is not a holy document. It is a historical record, written by humans. It is one version of events, as perceived by the men who wrote it 150 years after the Prophet Muhammad died. And it is a very tribal and Arab version of events. It spreads a culture that is brutal, fixated on controlling women, and harsh in war."

[The '150 years afterwards' proposition is what Daniel Pipes, the well known US Islam-basher, maintains in his books and articles. He even says, he is not sure if Mohammed ever existed. Having been appointed by president Bush in 2002 as president of the American Peace Institute, he pleads for an 'inevitable' preventive WAR of the West against Islam. Ayaan agrees also with Pipes, that "moderate" Islam (like the AKP-version in Turkey) is even more "dangerous" than the fanatic and extremist currents of Wahhabism and Al-Qaeda, for instance.

Even if Muslims are loyal to Western laws and attitudes, they do so, in the view of Ali and Pipes, only to be able to impose afterwards Sharia laws "by surprise". The Malibu international Conference at the Pepperdine University is so extremist, that is only tacitly supported by the Neoconservatives. A closed session on Monday June 11 is going to distribute American taxpayers money among Ayaan and her friends from Germany, France and Holland, in order to 'counter' Islam in 'Eurabia' and its "EU-bureaucracy".

The latter is declared an "enemy combatant", because of the fact, that the EU recently warned against a military coup in Turkey against the elected Turkish Government. For a more close look at the fundamentalist Christian Pepperdine University, Daniel Pipes, his "Campus watch" against Islam and the composition of the group of keynote-participants from Europe, see next post.]

The Sydney Times continues:

Ali says the West cannot continue to tolerate behavior among her people that it would not allow among fellow Westerners.

Then, as usual, the 'Dhimmis' are being attacked:

"In reality, these Westerners [who say, that most Muslims would not even think of re-creating seventh century Mecca in Europe, HR] misunderstand Islam. The Quran mandates these punishments. It gives legitimate basis for abuse so that perpetrators feel no shame and are not hounded by their conscience or their community. ..."

And then, she says something that makes the Neoconservatives very uneasy:

On a broader scale, she says the kind of thinking in today's Islamic countries "is incompatible with human rights and liberal values." It's as if the most radical Christian fundamentalists were running the Western world on the beliefs of the seventh century and insisting the rest of the world had to join them in this approach.

For, as you will know, the NeoCons lean exclusively on just that kind of Christian fundamentalist support. Support from people who believe in earnest, that all prescriptions of the Bible (written down from the 3rd century BC on to the 2nd after JC) have to be followed by the letter. The racist and thundering Reverends of the Mid-West are the "mass movement" without which they would shrink into a marginal, exotic sect of world-dominance dreamers.

That is why the neoConservatives keep their distance from people like Hirsi Ali and Christopher Hitchens (who adores Hirsi Ali, but loathes Pipes). But , as you never can know if they will serve somehow, somewhen their dream of an "American Century", they facilitate, from behind the screens, their playing with some money from the State Department (Peace Institute) and the Pentagon (Disinformation Program, started by Douglas Feith), in order to undermine Europe, stop Islamic modernization and leave a free hand to the US in the Middle East.

The Aussies got their first taste of it this week. More agitation and disinformation is in stock for them.