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.

Brussels: Landmark encounter of Belgian and German extremists Dewinter and Ulfkotte

Leading Belgian Flemish (Dutch language) daily "De Morgen" had an interesting scoop on Monday August 18, 2007. In the Flemish parliament offices of the Vlaams Belang Party in Brussels, it met it's historical leader Philip Dewinter (on the right in the picture), hosting the German maverick right-wing politician Dr. Udo Ulfkotte (to the left).

("De Morgen" daily, p. 6, 18.8.07)

The meeting was about an appeal to the highest Belgian administrative Court, Ulfkotte intends to make against the refusal of Brussels Mayor Thielemans to allow an Europe-wide "Anti-Eurabia" manifestation, that Ulfkotte had planned for September 11 at the European Parliament buildings. This manifestation was intended to underline Mr. U.'s ambitions for the European Parliament elections, due in 2008. A critical portrait of Dr. Udo Ulfkotte has been published by Dialog International, a German-American blog, on July 31, 2007. That text is also incorporated in Uncontrolled Fallout from the Pepperdine Conference: Udo Ulfkotte, that I published today in Legal Alien @ New York.

A welcome change of battlefield: from streetwise hooligans to the courtroom
As positive response to Mr. Ulfkotte's Brussels manifestation proposal had remained restricted to the usual rightwing mini-formations in different countries, the Brussels interdiction may have been a welcome development to him. His recent identification with "European Judeo-Christian values", to be anchored in a new "Christian-ecological" party that he intends to create, doesn't marry well with the image of some thousand neonazis, baldheads and hooligans, marching through the Brussels streets, provoking indignation with the population and laughter with the counter-demonstrators.

Awkward and embarrassing allies
A public battle in a courtroom, where he might position himself as a protagonist of "free expression" and a staunch defender of Europe against "the Islamic tsunami", suits him better. That is why he accepted the offer of the separatist and racist (condemnation in 2004) Vlaams Belang Party ("quarantained" by all other Belgian parties) to help him out with a very special lawyer: Mr. Hugo Coveliers (his foot is visible in the picture).

Coveliers used to be an Antwerp city council member for the liberal VLD party. At the last communal elections (2007), he created a new rightwing formation (VLOTT) that leaned heavily to- (and upon) the Vlaams Belang. Together with the VB, he lost those elections in Antwerp. At the federal parliamentary Belgian elections in June, he associated completely with the VB, getting a third position on the VB list for the Belgian Senate. Those elections were also unsuccessful for the extremist formations, but Coveliers got his seat. The man is also a lawyer. In the eyes of Dewinter, he must be an ideal person for the job.

Ulfkotte, caught red-handed, pleads naivety and features his nonpoliticalness
But for Ulfkotte? - Dr. Udo was apparently taken by surprise, when the journalists came in. (Did Dewinter play him that nasty trick?) He denied any political cooperation with Dewinter and his party. VB-members were allowed to march with "Pax Europa" in the manifestation, but he had turned away an offer of the VB "Ordedienst" to put up a security and order service for the manifestation. All political symbols and party-flags were to be outlawed in his manifestation.

Ulfkotte positioned himself during that interview as an "unpolitical" person, unbeknown with the Belgian juridical system, just looking for help. "Indeed," said Dewinter ("looking amused", dixit De Morgen), "he is a kind of Pim Fortuyn or Geert Wilders. See for yourself: his statements are totally unpolitical!"

Dewinter lets Ulfkotte ramble and puts forward a murderous comparison
Here we must allow for some appreciation for Dewinter's ironical capacities and for the cunning ways in which he succeeds in enrolling the German Doctor in his ailing movement. For both names of Dutch anti-Islamic activists he mentions, are the names of ... politicians! Fortuyn participated in the 2002 Dutch parliamentary elections with his LPF (Lijst Pim Fortuyn) list and won, days after he was murdered by an extremist animal-protector, more than 20 seats in the 150 strong Dutch parliament. Geert Wilders is leader of a (PVV) party, with an anti-Islamic mission, who won 12 seats in November 2006. Both politicians consider(ed) themselves as "anti-politicians", ready to abuse of the parliamentary system for populist agitation and fear mongering. For some years, Dewinter has been unsuccessfully proposing collaboration to the latter (Wilders). By putting Ulfkotte and Wilders in one sack, he catches two flies in one move: Putting himself in the position of an acceptable ally of non-quarantained movements abroad, and, subtly, defining Ulfkotte as the populist extremist politician he denies being.

Is Dr. Udo Ulfkotte as naive as he pretends?
"We do not collaborate with this [VB] party", says Ulfkotte, drinking his cup of tea or coffee at Dewinter's conference table. "I am completely upset because of that interdiction," he declares. "Do I look like a hooligan? Of course, I accepted readily Dewinter's proposal to arrange a lawyer for our organisation. I don't know anybody here in Brussels, I am completely jammed. How could I find my way in the Belgian juridical system on my own?"
Poor Udo! Somebody (a Moroccan, a Turk?) must have stolen his telephone directory at home. Otherwise, he would have engaged a, preferably francophone, non-socialist Brussels lawyer (Below, we will tell you, why...), without links to politics!

We cannot get rid of the impression, that Dr. Udo, caught red-handed, is desperately excusing himself for the awkward company he keeps. But, if we believe, for a moment, that he is really as naive as he pretends, he would make a poor politician, if ever elected. To let yourself be embarrassed in this way by a second-rank regional extremist, is unforgivable for a man with such far-reaching pretensions as he is.

The manipulator manipulated
In the end, we do not believe, however, that Ulfkotte will succeed in denying his association with a party that has been condemned for racism and forced to change its name and program. As a former foreign editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (1986-2003) and self-appointed "international security expert", boasting about his links with the German Bundesnachrichtendienst, the Israeli Mossad and the British MI6, as well as international oil companies, he cannot but have known, what company he was going to keep. Maybe, he thinks, that in associating with his Flemish ally, exclusively for the sake of a juridical procedure, he can win its sympathy, without having to subscribe to its racist ideology.

Indeed. He needs badly allies who may provide some simulacrum of a mass following. The only "masses" he can summon in Germany, are the "Bürger in Wut" (Outraged Citizens) party in Bremerhaven, a xenophobic and "security"- obsessed local movement, that managed to get some representatives elected in the local council earlier this year. His effort, to make the Flemish separatists and xenophobes abandon their beloved yellow lion-flags and march orderly and exclusively for the election of Dr. Ulfkotte into the EP, seems to have lead to a mini-disaster.

Ulfkotte's collaboration with racists cannot be denied any more
Why? - In July this year, Ulfkotte started a defamation procedure in Germany against a blogger (Jochen Hoff, Berlin), who had qualified him as a "racist". Another blogger, who had merely linked to that blog, was also summoned (bigberta, Watchblog Islamophobie). Betraying his own "freedom of expression" principles, he, together with his organisation "Pax Europa", claims more than 100.000 Euros from the two bloggers. German judges ordered a provisional suppression of the incriminated texts.

Consequences for Ulfkotte's chances in his complaint against German bloggers
But how can Ulfkotte, now that his links with a movement that has been condemned for "racism", have been revealed, maintain that Hoff's qualification was outrageous? Will a German judge disregard a definitive judgment by the highest Belgian court? Not very likely.

Mr. Ulfkotte, who spent already much money on expensive lawyers in that German case, will have to explain to the contributors to the Pax Europe organisation, who thought they were helping the promotion of "European Judeo-Christian Values", how and why he wasted their Euros. Will he have enough money left, to pay for Coveliers in Belgium? Or will he, "jammed" again, resort to financial help or a gift "in natura" (if Coveliers offers free services) from his Flemish friends, with whom he "does not collaborate"?

Ulfkotte's courtroom activities in a wider perspective
As we wrote today in "Legal Alien @ New York" (Uncontrolled Fallout from the Pepperdine Conference: Udo Ulfkotte), the American and European protagonists of the anti-"Eurabia" Pepperdine Conference in Malibu, California, of June 11, 2007, will not be very happy with Mr. Ulfkotte's handling of one of it's main instructions to counter Islam in Europe. That strategy is called "advocacy", and is meant to abuse the juridical system in order to harass Muslims and their property (and anti-racists) by legal and administrative means. Ulfkotte, however, spoils his capital in efforts to take personal revenge on relatively unimportant bloggers and tries to kill freedom of speech.

Stuck in the Belgian communitarian swamp
Now, on top of that, he hands the advocacy issue in Belgium over to classical ("traditional extreme right") and separatist actors, whom they cannot associate with. A good opportunity to nail the social-democrats once again to their supposed "dhimminess" (Brussels Mayor Thielemans is affiliated to the Belgian (French) Socialist Party - Parti Socialiste, PS) is foregone. With VB-man Coveliers as a lawyer, the issue will for sure become part of the eternal Belgian language-community feud, where all French-speaking people will automatically solidarise with the attacked PS, who, as the biggest Walloon party, embody Frenchness in the country.

How Ulfkotte selects his fear-mongering issues
Once again, Mr. Ulfkotte appears as an embarrassing ally to a cause, he chooses to adopt as his own. In an upcoming article, we will study his previous (pre-2001) obsession with the Israeli Mossad as a danger to European security. An obsession, he apparently traded in after September 11, for his actual themas, that contrast remarkably with the former one.