Autumn each of us can happen complain (for example Seasonal Affective Disorder), but now we have winter and spring will come soon.
Can we already call members of PVV mentally ill...(-:?

Jonathan Kay Jun 23, 2011 – 4:57 PM ET

Geert Wilders is Dutch, not Canadian. And his acquittal this week on hate-speech charges was decided by a court in The Netherlands, not Canada. Nevertheless, his case deserves close scrutiny in our own country, because it points the way toward the correct balance between free speech and multiculturalism in all nations.

Mr. Wilders is perhaps the best-known third-party political leader in the world. That’s not only because his populist Freedom Party holds the balance of power in the Netherlands’ minority government, but because he has been full-throated in his denunciation of the threat to liberal values posed by unassimilated Muslim immigrants – a problem that most other Western politicians have dared not tackle.

Central to Mr. Wilders’ viewpoint is the idea that Islam – in the way it is presented in the Koran, and interpreted by fundamentalists – is a political ideology as much as a religion; and that this ideology is fundamentally incompatible with modern Western liberal values such as pluralism, feminism and gay rights.

“There is no ‘moderate’ or ‘immoderate’ Islam,” he recently told me in an interview. “Islam is Islam, and that’s it. This is the Islam of the Koran. Now, you can certainly make a distinction among the people. There are moderate Muslims – who are the majority in our Western societies – and non-moderate Muslims. But Islam itself has only one form. The totalitarian ideology contained in the Koran has no room for moderation. If you really look at what the Koran says, in fact, you could argue that ‘moderate’ Muslims are not Muslims at all. It tells us that if you do not act on even one verse, then you are an apostate.”

Mr. Wilders also has suggested that The Netherlands halt the immigration of Muslims until such time as it can assimilate those who already have arrived.

It was on the basis of remarks such as these – and, in particular, his 2008 film Fitna, which juxtaposed pages from the Koran with images of terrorism, women in Burkas, and radical Muslim demonstrators – that Dutch complainants launched a hate-speech case against Mr. Wilders. On Thursday, that case was dismissed. Marcel van Oosten, the presiding judge, declared that Mr. Wilders’ comments were “crude and denigrating” – but also that such “statements are acceptable within the context of the public debate.”

From across the Atlantic, I applaud the Dutch court’s judgment. And I hope this precedent influences the development of jurisprudence in the field of hate-speech law globally.

In Canada, it is difficult to secure a criminal hate-speech conviction under Section 319 of our criminal code. And generally speaking, only the most repellant hatemongers, such as Alberta public-school teacher James Keegstra, have been convicted. But the standards used by our human-rights tribunals to launch investigations are much looser; and these investigations have swept up men, such as Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant, whose pronouncements about radical Islam have been quite mild compared to those of Mr. Wilders.

As I see it, the only people who ever should be targeted in hate-speech prosecutions are those who (1) communicate clear and explicit hatred against people belonging to an identifiable racial, ethnic, religious or sexual group; and (2) intend such communication as an inducement to violence against this group. Nothing that Mr. Wilders said rises to this level.

In fact, a close reading of Mr. Wilders’ comments over the years shows that he does not hate Muslims per se. What he dislikes is Islam, which he likens to a dangerous and violent cult. Some may see this as a distinction without a difference, but there actually is an enormous difference: Classic hate-mongers – KKK racists, and anti-Semitic neo-Nazis, for instance – believe that Jews and Blacks are debased and inferior on a genetic level. Mr. Wilders, on the other hand, has made it clear that he has no problem with Muslims who reject a literal reading of the Koran and assimilate into Western society.

Had Mr. Wilders been convicted of hate speech, the message from the court would have been that Dutch citizens are proscribed not only from expressing hatred of people, but also hatred of certain cultures and ideologies – in particular, those cultures and ideologies that happen to be embedded within religious-faith traditions.

That would be a very dangerous road for any Western society to go down, for it would effectively put a gag on every intellectual, pundit and politician seeking to protect Western values from the greatest current threat to the liberal tradition. Mr. Wilders has therefore scored a victory not only for himself, but also for intellectual liberty.

jkay@nationalpost.com
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/06/23/jonathan-kay-geert-wilder...

Is a kangaroo a dutch animal ? it seems they abound in dutch courts. I think had this bigot tried to inflict his ideas on another religion, such as Judaism, he would probably be behind bars today. As of today, the Dutch nation has no locus standi to comment on repression or bigotry in any other country since its legal system has prostituted itself to support naked bigotry.

Bravo voor Geert, een overwinning in laatste. Welverdiende.

The article states, "His case has been helped by a reluctant prosecution, which last month again asked for his acquittal..."

In other words, the prosecution asked for an acquittal. Not the defense, mind you, but the prosecution asked for him to be found innocent.

It sounds to me like this case was done, not to determine his guild or innocence, but rather to pave the way for more Muslim bashing and Islamaphobia.

Speech there is selectively cherry picked in its legality to further the ends of those who make the laws and determine the wider agendas.

After this, they should definitely stop complaining against any alleged reports of restriction of speech in Muslim countries, or in China, or in Russia, or anywhere.

No one in the Dutch system wanted this trial on either side of the docket, and now to the relief of all responsible seeing it through, the proceedings are over with a non-guilty verdict. This result may be satisfactory in the immediate short term, but now there is the new problem that Geert has been given more than enough rope to hang the Netherlands with, as he continues his way with the EU as a whole as a member of the Dutch parliament. For those breaking out the champagne, they must be cautioned to celebrate carefully, more controversial times are ahead.

please check out http://www.islamicsolutions.com/hitting-the-nail-on-the-head-dr-pasha-on...

THE world was wrong in its perception of fascism. It mistakenly believed that in the fall of the Nazis in World War II, fascism died a natural death. In fact, it survived in its new avatar — Zionism. And, like the ugly heads of Medusa, the scourge reared its own in Israel in 1967, more than 20 years after the second Great War ended.

In trying to trace the growth and consolidation of this neo fascism, one factor that kept revisiting me was the burgeoning of an ultra right wing school of thought, which fundamentally endorsed a movement in a perpetual state of formation and expansion — an upheaval that relied so heavily on the traditional Jewish prowess to foist their will and weight on everything that lay in the surrounding.

This sinister dynamism of conquering nationalism deliberately ignored to recognise any situation as final. And in this, the Zionist attitude differed little from the fascist Nazis.
In putting to use a persuasive racial nationalism, Zionism towed in words and spirit the quintessence of fascism in creating an aura of phantasm that inspired the Jews of Israel on the road to discover the ‘undivided country’— their promised land. In its success in transforming the Jewish religious zeal into chauvinism, Zionism emerged more conquering than fascism, and carried forward the racial foundation on which Israel stands today.

All vociferous claims notwithstanding, democracy in Israel is nothing more than misnomer. The entity in no way guarantees democracy, equality, fundamental human rights and even a decent life to all who live in there. All it guarantees is an unrelenting Jewish hegemony over everything it lords over. And in the process of guaranteeing that, it has been successful in ensuring that all voices of dissent and protest remain muzzled for ever.

In fact, in ensuring elimination of all impediments, and even the most muted voices of protest, Zionism made sure that no additional political entity is established in Israel. And in securing the end, anything and everything was deemed permissible. No cost was considered high enough to deter the Zionist protagonists from their intentions.

Hitler ought to have lived to take some lessons from his Jewish successors to set up the fourth Reich. Had he survived the World War II, he would have certainly been put to shame to see his expansionist ambitions belittled by Zionist dreams of ‘Great Israel’.

Fascism is too conspicuous a fact of Jewish life for denials. And we were warned of this menace long before the World War II was over. William Zukerman, a Jewish thinker was prophetic in his warning. Way back in 1934, he was categorical in saying: “It may sound like a paradox, but it is nevertheless a fact that Jews --- probably more than any other people except the Germans, are stricken with the virus of fascism. The bulk of Zionist movement gravitates towards fascism”.

Unlike in any democracy, dissension, variance of opinion and logic never had any role to play either in the creation of Israel, or in the governance of the land. And that was why when European colonisation was collapsing faster than ever imbued Israeli intelligentsia, sans dissension, variance of opinion and logic, collaborated like zombies with the claims of their governments and contrived shamelessly to legitimise the occupation.

Israel’s claim that it faced an existential threat in 1967 is a blatant lie and a propaganda that towed the Nazi principle postulating that a lie turns into truth if repeated over and over.

The lie received further corroboration from the Israeli intelligentsia that concurred with the claim in their exhibition of obedience and kowtowing. Fascism in Israel thus took roots deep enough from which neither the Jewish entity, nor the citizens, apparently have any way out.

American complicity in allowing fascism to reinvent itself in Zionism is tell-tale. The labyrinths of lie and the myth that Israel began to create in 1967 could have been easily unravelled, had the United States initiated the effort. Instead, and unfortunately, the United States contrived in association with Israel in exploiting the blunder committed by the then Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser.

Fascist strains are unmistakable today. And we need not to hunt in the Moon for evidence. Jewish writer Zeev Sternhell wrote in Haaretz: “The legislation that passed in the Knesset, which makes ethnic inequality a legal norm, has no parallel in democratic countries because it contradicts the very essence of democracy.

Unlike Europe … in this country the racists, the extreme and clerical right is the government, with only a vacuum opposing it”.

More than the Star of David, the guiding principal in Israel today is the policy of strengthening and legitimising violations. And as an overwhelming majority of the Israeli masses has exiled sanity beyond Mars, the likes of Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman have become role models for Jewish youth.

Resorting to messianic claims and reiteration of ‘ancestral right’ to legitimise violations and crimes must not be allowed to vitiate our civilisation and our democratic institutions. It is time now for the Israelis to say no to Zionism, nay fascism. And had the Jews said that way back in 1967 — the day after occupation began, the Israeli debauchery would not have smeared our civilisation in such dark hues.

THE world was wrong in its perception of fascism. It mistakenly believed that in the fall of the Nazis in World War II, fascism died a natural death. In fact, it survived in its new avatar — Zionism. And, like the ugly heads of Medusa, the scourge reared its own in Israel in 1967, more than 20 years after the second Great War ended.

In trying to trace the growth and consolidation of this neo fascism, one factor that kept revisiting me was the burgeoning of an ultra right wing school of thought, which fundamentally endorsed a movement in a perpetual state of formation and expansion — an upheaval that relied so heavily on the traditional Jewish prowess to foist their will and weight on everything that lay in the surrounding.

This sinister dynamism of conquering nationalism deliberately ignored to recognise any situation as final. And in this, the Zionist attitude differed little from the fascist Nazis.
In putting to use a persuasive racial nationalism, Zionism towed in words and spirit the quintessence of fascism in creating an aura of phantasm that inspired the Jews of Israel on the road to discover the ‘undivided country’— their promised land. In its success in transforming the Jewish religious zeal into chauvinism, Zionism emerged more conquering than fascism, and carried forward the racial foundation on which Israel stands today.

All vociferous claims notwithstanding, democracy in Israel is nothing more than misnomer. The entity in no way guarantees democracy, equality, fundamental human rights and even a decent life to all who live in there. All it guarantees is an unrelenting Jewish hegemony over everything it lords over. And in the process of guaranteeing that, it has been successful in ensuring that all voices of dissent and protest remain muzzled for ever.

In fact, in ensuring elimination of all impediments, and even the most muted voices of protest, Zionism made sure that no additional political entity is established in Israel. And in securing the end, anything and everything was deemed permissible. No cost was considered high enough to deter the Zionist protagonists from their intentions.

Hitler ought to have lived to take some lessons from his Jewish successors to set up the fourth Reich. Had he survived the World War II, he would have certainly been put to shame to see his expansionist ambitions belittled by Zionist dreams of ‘Great Israel’.

Fascism is too conspicuous a fact of Jewish life for denials. And we were warned of this menace long before the World War II was over. William Zukerman, a Jewish thinker was prophetic in his warning. Way back in 1934, he was categorical in saying: “It may sound like a paradox, but it is nevertheless a fact that Jews --- probably more than any other people except the Germans, are stricken with the virus of fascism. The bulk of Zionist movement gravitates towards fascism”.

Unlike in any democracy, dissension, variance of opinion and logic never had any role to play either in the creation of Israel, or in the governance of the land. And that was why when European colonisation was collapsing faster than ever imbued Israeli intelligentsia, sans dissension, variance of opinion and logic, collaborated like zombies with the claims of their governments and contrived shamelessly to legitimise the occupation.

Israel’s claim that it faced an existential threat in 1967 is a blatant lie and a propaganda that towed the Nazi principle postulating that a lie turns into truth if repeated over and over.

The lie received further corroboration from the Israeli intelligentsia that concurred with the claim in their exhibition of obedience and kowtowing. Fascism in Israel thus took roots deep enough from which neither the Jewish entity, nor the citizens, apparently have any way out.

American complicity in allowing fascism to reinvent itself in Zionism is tell-tale. The labyrinths of lie and the myth that Israel began to create in 1967 could have been easily unravelled, had the United States initiated the effort. Instead, and unfortunately, the United States contrived in association with Israel in exploiting the blunder committed by the then Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser.

Fascist strains are unmistakable today. And we need not to hunt in the Moon for evidence. Jewish writer Zeev Sternhell wrote in Haaretz: “The legislation that passed in the Knesset, which makes ethnic inequality a legal norm, has no parallel in democratic countries because it contradicts the very essence of democracy.

Unlike Europe … in this country the racists, the extreme and clerical right is the government, with only a vacuum opposing it”.

More than the Star of David, the guiding principal in Israel today is the policy of strengthening and legitimising violations. And as an overwhelming majority of the Israeli masses has exiled sanity beyond Mars, the likes of Benjamin Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman have become role models for Jewish youth.

Resorting to messianic claims and reiteration of ‘ancestral right’ to legitimise violations and crimes must not be allowed to vitiate our civilisation and our democratic institutions. It is time now for the Israelis to say no to Zionism, nay fascism. And had the Jews said that way back in 1967 — the day after occupation began, the Israeli debauchery would not have smeared our civilisation in such dark hues.
take the beam out of your eye before you try to remove the mote out of someone else's eye

I wonder either by publishing the translation to English of the leading Islamism ideology book is considered incitement or sharing info that the media is reluctant to publish?
---Knowledge is power!
Read the ideology book of all Islamist groups.
Sheik Abu-Bakar Naji book "Governance in the Wilderness" (Edarat al-Wahsh)
--
* "The West has no stomach for a long fight.
The only Western power still capable of resisting is the United States/

Its last bastion, America, lacks the will for a long war

*NO one should feel safe without submitting to Islam,
Those who refuse to submit must pay a high price.
Islamic movement must be global- fighting everywhere, all the time, and on all fronts
*low-intensity war be extended to anywhere in the world with a significant Muslim presence.

* Islamists in infidel countries must create parallel societies alongside existing ones, under the very noses of the authorities
Operating as secret societies with their own rules, values and enforcement.
* The Muslims should live a distinctly Islamic appearance, by imposing special styles of dress for women and beards for men.
Then they will start imposing the shariah., effectively taking the areas out of government control.
* Terror countless small operations that render daily life unbearable,
* The "infidel," leaving his home every morning, should be unsure whether he'll return in the evening
* Recommended are kidnappings, holding of hostages use of women and children as human shields, exhibition killings to terrorize the enemy, suicide bombings to make normal life impossible for the "infidel" and Muslim collaborators.

Who among us believed a Dutch man is a just man. Who among us believed a Dutch soldier is a just soldier. Who among us believed a Dutch judge is a just judge.