Dutch anti-Islam MP Geert Wilders convicted of hate speech

Populist politician slams verdict as attack on freedom of expression, says comments against Moroccans are not racism

ed note–a few things worth noting here concerning Wilders–

1. As reported just this week, Wilders was/is under heavy investigation by Dutch secret service for being an asset of Israeli intelligence. His obvious role in this capacity is to foment hatred of Muslims, the sole beneficiary of which is, you guessed it–the Jewish state, which seeks the annihilation of both the Christian West and the Islamic East through what organized Jewish interests hope will be a century’s long war between the 2 entities in which MAD–Mutually Assured Destruction–is achieved. All can be assured therefore that this conviction is part and parcel of this investigation, and particularly after some of Wilder’s handiwork–the mass murder of over 70 young people by Anders Breivik, an ‘apostle’ of Wilders’ inaccurate, libelous and incendiary teachings about what the religion of Islam encompasses–occurred just a few years ago.

2. Please note the silence on the part of the Jewish community in this regard. Had Wilders been out there exposing the evils of Judaism which he inaccurately and deliberately casts as being part of the teachings and tenets of Islam, he would have been convicted years ago, with organized Jewish groups leading the charge against him as they do in any and all countries where ‘hate speech’ laws which they themselves lobbied to have passed are enforced.

No, we are not fans of ‘hate speech’ laws, the aim of which obviously is the further empowerment of organized Jewish interests by silencing any and all discussion of the true danger they pose to all civilized societies, but if we are forced to live with these laws, then let them be enforced equally and equitably as they were in this case involving Wilders. 

Times of Israel

A Dutch court convicted populist anti-Islam lawmaker Geert Wilders of hate speech Friday at the end of a trial he branded a politically motivated “charade” that endangered freedom of speech.

The politically charged prosecution centered on comments Wilders made before and after the Dutch municipal elections in 2014. At one meeting in a Hague cafe, he asked supporters whether they wanted more or fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. That sparked a chant of “Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!” — to which he replied, “we’ll take care of it.”

Prosecutors say that Wilders, who in 2011 was acquitted at another hate speech trial for his outspoken criticism of Islam, overstepped the limits of free speech by specifically targeting Moroccans.

On Friday, he was convicted for the interaction with the crowd of supporters in the Hague cafe, which judges said was carefully orchestrated and broadcast on national television. He was acquitted for similar comments he made in a radio interview a week earlier.

Presiding Judge Hendrik Steenhuis said the court would not impose a sentence because the conviction was punishment enough for a democratically elected lawmaker. Prosecutors had asked judges to fine him 5,000 euros ($5,300).

In a video response posted on YouTube, Wilders called the verdict an attack on the freedom of speech and vilified the judges who handed down the ruling.

“You have restricted the freedom of speech of millions of Dutch,” he said. “This sentence proves that you judges are completely out of touch.”

He also hit back at the accusations of racism, saying that, “Moroccans are not a race and people who criticize Moroccans are not racists.”

“I am not a racist and neither are my voters,” he said. “We will never let them take away our freedom of speech.”

Wilders was not in court for the verdict that came just over three months before national elections. His party is currently narrowly leading a nationwide poll of polls and has risen in popularity during the trial.

Even before the hearing, Wilders vowed not to let a conviction muzzle him.

“Whatever the verdict, I will continue to speak the truth about the Moroccan problem, and no judge, politician or terrorist will stop me,” he tweeted shortly before the verdict.

He had denied the charges and insisted he was performing his duty as a political leader by pointing out a problem in society.

Before declaring Wilders guilty, Steenhuis stressed that freedom of speech was not on trial as Wilders had claimed during the case.

“Freedom of speech is one of the foundations of our democratic society,” the judge said. But he added: “Freedom of speech can be limited, for example to protect the rights and freedoms of others, and that is what this case is about.”