Or worse: Prosecution may well follow persecution. As part of his platform, Barack Hussein Obama has also promised to expand the so-called hate crimes statutes, which could result in the criminalization of speech and the prosecution of people for naturally licit actions—for speaking their minds.
Across the pond, in the Netherlands, the sizeable Muslim population (six percent and growing) has forced the national question to the forefront. The champion of freedom of speech, who regularly storms the ramparts of a decaying, liberal, political establishment, is lawmaker Geert Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom.
Sixty percent of the Dutch “considers mass immigration to be the worst mistake since the Second World War”—the words of Wilders delivered in a speech in Jerusalem late last year. (“The Jihad against Israel is the Jihad against the West.”) An equal percentage of Wilders’ countrymen see Islam as the number one threat to their national identity.
The Dutch want to hear Wilders’ message. According to Dutch pollster Maurice de Hond, Wilders “has the most loyal following of all political parties in the Lower House.” The Party for Freedom is the fifth largest party in the Dutch parliament, and the third largest opposition party.
As Wilders knows too well, one of the defining issues of our times is speaking and publishing under the threat of death—death by Muslim migrants. A vexation the West has invited. Those who’ve been following the latest installment in the saga know that Wilders released a film: “Fitna.”
“Fitna” is unremarkable; it’s your basic primer to Islam. The Koran commands the faithful to kill the kafir. Wilders excerpts these Koranic commandments, and shows Muslim believers articulating and acting on them.
Wilders could have easily been neutralized had Muslims across the West, and their puppy-dog proxies, allowed the screening of “Fitna,” and adopted a western, live-and-let-live stance toward this tradition of benign protest.
But no: Predictably, at least from a cursory reading of the Koran, Muslims went berserk. By so doing, they proved Wilders right: Islam and its fervent adherents are a danger to men and women yearning to breathe free.
Before “Fitna,” Wilders’ Party had nine seats in the Lower House. Post-“Fitna,” De Hond reckons “the party would win 15.” While a sizeable segment of the Dutch people applauds Wilders, the state seeks to silence him.
Instead of standing up for their courageous son, the Dutch dhimmis in charge have joined the enemies of civilization in terrorizing Wilders; instead of tailing and jailing the terrorists threatening to extinguish his life, the Dutch secret service shadows Wilders.
And now the turncoats have heeded demands from wily Muslims, and their suicidal, western accomplices, to prosecute Wilders for inciting hatred and discrimination against the Ummah. The Dutch appeal court of Amsterdam has duly instructed the Public Prosecutor’s Office to proceed against Wilders.
“The ideas of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem” animate the man’s passionate defense of the West. Wilders is thus Israel’s best—perhaps only—friend in Europe. But along comes the local, Dutch Judenräte, and demands that Wilders’ popular party be banned. Among such imbeciles is a left-liberal Jewish foundation named for Anne Frank, a Jewish girl killed by the Nazis. Another is Dr. Ronny Naftaniel, head of the Hague-based Center for Information and Documentation on Israel. Naftaniel denounced “Fitna” in a fit of pique.
Amidst an eruption of violent attacks on Jews in the rapidly Islamizing Europe—where Muslims march holding up signs that read “Be prepared for the real Holocaust,” and “God bless Hitler”—liberal Jews, nevertheless, want the words of Wilders suppressed.
In the words of 19th-century French writer Louis Veuillot:
“When I am weaker, I ask you for my freedom, because that is your principle; but when I am the stronger, I take away your freedom, because that is my principle.”
Thanks to the weaklings of the West, Islam need not be “the stronger” to sunder cherished freedoms.
©By ILANA MERCER
January 30, 2009