Radio Netherlands Worldwide

SSO Login

More login possibilities:

Close
  • Facebook
  • Flickr
  • Twitter
  • Google
  • LinkedIn
Home
Monday 22 December  
Judea and Samaria / the West Bank
News Desk's picture
Map
Tel Aviv, Israel
Tel Aviv, Israel

Wilders urges Israel to annex West Bank

Published on : 6 December 2010 - 2:41pm | By RNW News Desk (Photo: Wikipedia)
More about:

Dutch anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders has called on Israel to settle the West Bank. In a speech Mr Wilders gave in Tel Aviv on Sunday, he urged Israel to build more settlements in "Judea and Samaria", as the West Bank was historically known, in defiance of international calls for a construction freeze.

The Freedom Party leader said that Israel needs defendable borders for its own survival and security: "A county that is only 15 kilometres wide is impossible to defend. That is the strategic reason why Jews need to settle Judea and Samaria".

Mr Wilders also said Palestinians should be allowed to voluntarily settle in Jordan. The country could then rename itself Palestine and the Palestinians could "freely elect their own government in Amman."  The Dutch politician said there was no reason for the Jordanian king to become nervous: "If the present Hashemite King is still as popular as today, he can remain in power. That is for the people of Palestine to decide in real democratic elections."

He told his audience that the West too often points an accusing finger at Israel, which, according to Mr Wilders "is not to blame for the situation in the Middle East." The Dutch politician said he knew why the Palestinians are a problem in Israel: "Because the Palestinians were not welcomed in the neighbouring Arab countries. There was no Arab solidarity; the refugees were forced into camps and slums, where many of their descendants still linger today."

Mr Wilders also said that the United Nations has not handled the situation well: "Under international definitions the status of refugee or displaced person only applies to first generation refugees. However... descendants of Palestinian refugees are granted the same refugee status as their ancestors. Consequently, the number of so-called Palestinian refugees registered with the UN increased from 711,000 in 1950 to over 4.7 million in 2010. These refugees are being used as a demographic weapon against Israel."

Mr Wilders said the Jews had built new lives for themselves in Israel and that Palestinians should do the same in Jordan. The situation could then slowly return to normal, even though he warned that: "Islam... conditions Muslims to hate Jews. It is a religious duty to do so." He said it made him sick to see how Western leaders refuse to acknowledge that Israel plays a vital role in the region: "If Israel falls, the West falls. That is why we are all Israel."

Unlike his former personal visits to Israel, Wilders was in Tel Aviv on Sunday as the result of an official invitation by Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

 

 

Discussion

julietsm 17 December 2010 - 6:39am

Hiram 3: So tell me, what is GOOD about Islam?
Not one thing! And just so you're clear on it, all the 'peaceful' Mecca verses have been abbrogated (superceded) by the violent Mecca verses.
So any good Muslim is a terrorist with a strong desire to kill all Christians, Jews, and Kuffar. Is there something I am missing? WHAT IS GOOD ABOUT THAT?
We can also add to the list mysogyny, pedophilia, female genital mutilation, marriage between first cousins and many more 'fine' traits of Islam.
I challenge you to find anything GOOD in a fascist, totalitarian political ideology which puts women on the same footing with animals, wants to either kill everyone or enslave them unless they are Muslim, and commits unspeakable acts of terror all in the name of allah. Tell me just ONE GOOD THING ABOUT THAT... Just one.

You can't.

Anonymous 17 December 2010 - 3:24pm

I'm not a big fan of any religion. The Koran, Torah, and Bible all have ridiculously inappropriate things in them.
Any number of atrocities can be justified in the name of god. They did it during the Crusades. Hitler did it in the 40s. Certain brutal regimes do it today. Should we aim to destroy any religion that has any such affiliation? If we did, there would be none left. Like most Christians, Jews, Hindus or atheists like myself, most Muslims are kind and reasonable people.
Why should war be waged on a people who are mostly kind and reasonable?

julietsm 17 December 2010 - 6:34am

For God's sake people, quit being ashamed of the Crusades! The Crusaders were taking back lands stolen by the Islamists, they were not trying to steal land from them. There is a big difference! STOP BEING ASHAMED OF THE CRUSADES BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGHT ANOTHER ONE...
Mr. Wilders is my hero, who clearly loves the West and Israel is crucial to the survival of the West! I think his advice is sound, like everything he says. He never speaks in haste or hate. He speaks the truth.
Some have criticised Mr. Wilders and say he is a 'Zionist butt kisser' (sorry!) but we know that his love for Israel is genuine and anyone who loves democracy and/or God will do likewise.
Way to go Geert! (I guess I like to be on a first-name basis with my hero!)
God bless you in all you do! KEEP THE TORCH OF FREEDOM BURNING! The West is counting on you!

Hiram3 14 December 2010 - 8:39pm

@wina So Islam is bad, but all other religions are good? I would ask why, but I don't want to encourage you. I liked the non racist stuff you wrote, but the 'destroy Islam' part makes me think that you're actually crazy.

Wina 15 December 2010 - 1:46pm

Hindu, Buddha, Christianity, or even Jehovah Witness (some people even call it as a cult), all of them teaching GOOD. All of them teach their followers about love, not to kill for what any reason.

What about Islam? Speechless....everyone know that mohammed himself kill people. Badly, HE DID UNDER THE NAME OF ALLAH. What the heck Islam is? Terorrism religion? Yeah..

Oh yeah...how about america, israel who genocide afghanistan, and irak and palestinian?
Hell no, do you ever hear these counrty with their soldier killing while yealling..IN CHRIST I KILL YOU, or I KILL YOU IN THE NAME OF JESUS...? Do you ever heard about it?

Oh yeah...how about crusader thousand years ago who kill thousand of muslims people? Oh yeah.... it is bad christians. But muslims terrorist? THEY are GOOD muslims, because the follow the prophet.

Good religion will result both good followers and bad followers, how about bad religion?

Bad religion just like ISLAM just producing destruction around the world with its terrorists. There is no moderate muslims. Moderate muslims just hug of silent vampires which can be 'pushed on' at anytime and anywhere, when the time is come. You know when it is...

Wina 15 December 2010 - 1:32pm

Am i crazy? Do you think all the world crazy when combat NAZI?
For what reason declaring WAR against religion is PROHIBITED? The world will DIE SOON if all the people of the world have your view. And it is quiet easy to me to achieve POWER and CONQUER the world just by creating another NAZI. But learn from hitler, i will assign GOD name and brand it under religion. WHOEVER against my religion will called by racist and crazy, and my religion will keep survive until i conquer the world using both persuasive and military, just like mohammed did.

You better called your self crazy first before calling somebody else crazy.

Hiram3 15 December 2010 - 5:32pm

You're the only one here who wants to destroy. Think about it.

Hiram3.1 15 December 2010 - 6:34am

"And that's why use your wisdom and your brain to recognize that Islam is a threat to civilization and must be destroyed." You responded "I liked the non racist stuff you wrote, but the 'destroy Islam' part makes me think that you're actually crazy." Maybe, Wina is right! Crazy, maybe but I doubt it. Is wina crazy because he/she does not support your views?

Hiram3 15 December 2010 - 1:18pm

Declaring war on a religion IS actually crazy. It's a good way of telling who is crazy and who is not. I'll prove it. Write the words: atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jew, Buddhist, and Hindu on separate scraps of paper and put them in a hat. Now do the same with the words: atheism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and Hinduism into a second hat.
Next, read this statement:
"There's a ____ (draw and read a word from the 1st hat) man in my neighbourhood who says that ____ (draw, read from the 2nd) should be destroyed".
Do it a few times for randomness. Does the hypothetical neighbour sound crazy more often than not? Be honest. Yes. Even crazy people would probably agree.

Wina 14 December 2010 - 7:16pm

Islam is nota race. Jew is a race. GOD created race. God created Jews, God created Dutch. BUT GOD NEVER created Islam nor Christianity nor any other religion. GOD give us wisdom and freedom to choose or not to choose any religion.

That's why it is our duty to use wisdom and freedom wisely, choose the right one, or at least choose the good one. There is no bad race and good race, because God himself created them not us. But absolutely there is bad religion and good religion, because religions are man's made.

That's why banning Islam is not racist. And that's why use your wisdom and your brain to recognize that Islam is a threat to civilization and must be destroyed.

That's why anti islam is CORRECT, but anti-jews is FULL INCORRECT.

I hope you still have wisdom and brain left in your head. Save Netherland!

Hiram3 13 December 2010 - 1:03pm / Holland!

Wilders is off the rails again. When someone equates innocent newborns with weapons, it become clear that rational thought has been replaced by hatred.

Wina 14 December 2010 - 7:18pm

Islam is nota race. Jew is a race. GOD created race. God created Jews, God created Dutch. BUT GOD NEVER created Islam nor Christianity nor any other religion. GOD give us wisdom and freedom to choose or not to choose any religion.

That's why it is our duty to use wisdom and freedom wisely, choose the right one, or at least choose the good one. There is no bad race and good race, because God himself created them not us. But absolutely there is bad religion and good religion, because religions are man's made.

That's why banning Islam is not racist. And that's why use your wisdom and your brain to recognize that Islam is a threat to civilization and must be destroyed.

That's why anti islam is CORRECT, but anti-jews is FULL INCORRECT.

I hope you still have wisdom and brain left in your head. Save Netherland!

Anonymous 13 December 2010 - 5:35pm

Wilders is off the rails again because he knows that something has to be done to keep the train from crashing. What one perceives as hatred, others perceive as justice. It is not clear, thank you.

Mathews 12 December 2010 - 6:46am / India

Sandra let the world to find out an alternative energy source there will not be any palastine or any arab supermacism. They will start fishing and enjoy dates like before the oil boom.

Daniel Rey M. 11 December 2010 - 10:06pm / Colombia, S.A. (NOT South Africa!)

I used to think that Wilders, being an ultrarightist, was a neo-Nazi, so these new suggestions of his were completely unexpected, and not only that, but they're fantastically creative and imaginative, and even brilliant. After all, Jordan is an artificial entity dreamed up by the British in order to propitiate the oil-rich Arabs whose valuable resource they badly needed.

However, he's weak on strategic matters. Not even annexing all of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt would a Greater Israel, or Israeli Empire, be easily defendible in the Age of the Missile, since missiles can quickly destroy military targets, IF THESE ARE LAND-BASED. That's why the Israelis have been discussing an entirely new idea, which is to make the move towards sea-based defenses. In the long run that's their only chance for survival. Even the first nuclear powers felt vulnerable on their gigantic landmasses, so they put missiles on airplanes and submarines.

The matters concerning both Israeli legitimacy and ruthlessness are so complex that it would take an entire book to discuss them. I don't even want to start doing that. Just look at all the arguments that can be seen right here, in this tiny corner of the bottomless ocean magically crammed into the mainframe computers that sustain the Web!

user avatar
knirb 8 December 2010 - 5:51am

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.
Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism.
For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."
(quote PLO leader Zuheir Mohsen, March, 1977)
Wilders is not making any outrageous statement. It just sounds like that at this point because we have become accustomed to appeasing Arab states, and have assumed that these states have been bargaining in good faith.
It should be obvious to anyone who does a minor amount of research that the existence of any Jewish or other non Muslim state in this area will not be tolerated. Only the dumbest or laziest among us have not noticed that these “agreements” have the same value as Chamberlains 1938 “peace in our time” agreement with Hitler.
Wilders is trying to wake people up from their comfortable fantasy that everything will turn out fine as long as no one gets offended. People get nasty with him because they do not want to be disturbed. He is going to do this no matter what and doesn’t appear to give two shits whether you don’t like it.

Anonymous 7 December 2010 - 7:21pm / MALAWI

Wilders has said many times that he hates islam and not moslems. Islam is a dangerous political ideology that incites its followers to kill anyone who refuses to submit to it. They took over a christian church in Damascus, a Hindu temple in India, a Jewish temple in Israel. They have an agenda to take over the whole world. North Africa was not Arabic and islamic before mind you. Lets support ISRAEL and GEERT. How friendly are moslems to their christian neibors in Saudi Arabia.

David Berridge 7 December 2010 - 12:33pm / Canada

Yes JW, this is all about publicity and nothing to do concerning the governance of the Netherlands. Geert, right or wrong in his assessments of international situations, is acting as a self-appointed ambassador instead of the leader of a third place party who holds the position of the rump party in a minority cabinet government. Even though he was invited to speak on the subject by Israel's Foreign Minister, Geert has no authority to make or deliver official foreign policy statements on the behalf of the Netherlands and its government.

JW 7 December 2010 - 11:03am / NL

Another astonishing statement from Wilders. Another impossibility. Israeli annexation of the West Bank would be counterproductive for Isreal. The US has been applying pressure to stop the development and commence dismantling of settlements. The ICJ has ruled that they're illegal. What would happen if Israel completely ignored both? One immediate possibility would be loss of 7 million dollars per day of funding from the US. Another could be the angering of all of Israel's neighbours. Israel won't risk either.
Would Isreal follow the advice of this disconnected Dutch politician? Clearly not. Though scoring points with constituents in the short term, any forward thinking Isreali leader would have to reject such a toxic idea.
Was making such a statement a good thing for Wilders' career? Absolutely. More wordwide headlines and attention drawn to himself. He clearly cares not a whit about practicalities. Ít's all about publicity.

Historic realist 7 December 2010 - 7:17am / USA

Unless you are a Phonecian or a Roman emperor, there is no such place as Palestine. At best, Palestine belongs in the dust bin of history alongside the Holy Roman Empire. What we have in the mid east is Israel, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt as soverign states. Those who engage in the fantasy of Palestine don't comprehend the misery they have created since 1947.

user avatar
knirb 7 December 2010 - 3:25am

Wilders makes an excellent point that is usually overlooked in settling the Arab-Israeli territorial dispute. The Arab League has a huge responsibility in keeping the conflict alive by marginalizing their Palestinian brothers and preventing them from easily integrating into neighbouring countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_refugee#Arab_states
At the same time Jews are being harassed out of their homelands in Muslim dominated countries without compensation. Israel and many other countries accept these refugees. I think that Israel should be expanded far more than Wilders suggests in order to accommodate Jewish refugees. The displacement of all non Muslims in Muslim dominated countries should be a part of this debate.

david singer 7 December 2010 - 2:50am / australia

The real two state solution is Jordan -an Arab State sovereign in about 80% of Palestine and Israel - a Jewish state sovereign in about 20% of Palestine.

The sooner Jordan and Israel divide sovereignty of the West Bank between their two respective States the sooner an end to the 130 years old conflict between Jews and Arabs can be contemplated.

Interposing a third State between Jordan and Israel is a fiction that has proved impossible to achieve after 17 years of trying and will never eventuate.

Anonymous 7 December 2010 - 12:58am / USA

All this reminds me of the Judenrat councils in Nazi Germany, and Nazi Palestine policy pitting Jews and Muslims against each other in a plan to subvert the ruling government and prepare the way for Nazi takeover.

David Berridge 7 December 2010 - 12:41am / Canada

Well, Hitam, Geert must hold the top priority on the list of charities you donate to. What it is I am curious to know is how many donors to Geert do you think would need to contribute X euros each divided evenly amongst them in order to meet Geert's annual expense budget? So, how many donors are needed each to contribute an equal sum in order to keep the PVV contiuing the "struggle" as you put it for one year? No one can actually know for certain what Geert needs as opposed to what he receives, but the latter no doubt exceeds the former by a comfortable margin if the exact sums could be truly known. What my precious, venerable but humble crumbs could achieve for Geert, I don't know, but he seems to thrive as a "going concern" nonetheless!! What is with the term "struggle" anyway? It has an historically ominious ring to it!! Whatever you give to your favourite causes, Hiram, don't bet the farm on Geert, spread the wealth as far as it can go among other good works on a higher proportionate basis to get more bang for the buck!!

SandraV 6 December 2010 - 8:50pm / Nederlands

that was a fantastic speech, and i agree with wilders 100 percent. Wilders is the greatest!

David Berridge 6 December 2010 - 7:34pm / Canada

An interesting suggestion Hiram, Geert is part of the government, which at last report, has no difficulty meeting the parliamentary payroll. Of all the many worthwhile causes in the world to support, Geert and the PVV are not in the greatest of dire straits requesting international aid. The Crown and government of the Netherlands have the country firmly secure from any internal uprising, and the United States has publically declared the Port of Rotterdam to be in its own interest of vested security. What Geert's struggle can add to this is not clearly defined. Perhaps if Geert could authorize an independently forensic audit of his personal and the PVV's financial income and assets, could many more people internally be induced to donate to whatever monetary shortfalls remain in Geert's march to victory! I personally feel confident in Geert's fundraising abilities that he hardly need to apply for any official status as a registered charity. Given the PVV's 27 parliamentry seats, the donor based derived therefrom, should be more than adequate to cover his costs from within the Netherlands itself, before any need to seek external assistance. In fact, it would be interesting to see how things stand if Geert was a legitimate charity and had to divulge the same financial statements as one, according to the figures he uses to demand reductions of other organizations he claims wastes the money of the Dutch taxpayer.Geert's travels have not been discussed as money losing ventures, in fact the silence over what they generate may well be truly "golden"!! Hiram, I'm truly very interested as to what you may estimate an amount a foreigner to the Netherlands donate as a median sum to "do one's fair share" for Geert's cause in order for him to "break even" on an annual basis. think of this as a benchmark towards a "ball park estimate" that would be beneficial to our fellow readers of this forum. Many thanks in advance!!

David Berridge 6 December 2010 - 7:31pm / Canada

An interesting suggestion Hiram, Geert is part of the government, which at last report, has no difficulty meeting the parliamentary payroll. Of all the many worthwhile causes in the world to support, Geert and the PVV are not in the greatest of dire straits requesting international aid. The Crown and government of the Netherlands have the country firmly secure from any internal uprising, and the United States has publically declared the Port of Rotterdam to be in its own interest of vested security. What Geert's struggle can add to this is not clearly defined. Perhaps if Geert could authorize an independently forensic audit of his personal and the PVV's financial income and assets, could many more people internally be induced to donate to whatever monetary shortfalls remain in Geert's march to victory! I personally feel confident in Geert's fundraising abilities that he hardly need to apply for any official status as a registered charity. Given the PVV's 27 parliamentry seats, the donor based derived therefrom, should be more than adequate to cover his costs from within the Netherlands itself, before any need to seek external assistance. In fact, it would be interesting to see how things stand if Geert was a legitimate charity and had to divulge the same financial statements as one, according to the figures he uses to demand reductions of other organizations he claims wastes the money of the Dutch taxpayer.Geert's travels have not been discussed as money losing ventures, in fact the silence over what they generate may well be truly "golden"!! Hiram, I'm truly very interested as to what you may estimate an amount a foreigner to the Netherlands donate as a median sum to "do one's fair share" for Geert's cause in order for him to "break even" on an annual basis. think of this as a benchmark towards a "ball park estimate" that would be beneficial to our fellow readers of this forum. Many thanks in advance!!

Hiram2 6 December 2010 - 7:50pm

"!! Hiram, I'm truly very interested as to what you may estimate an amount a foreigner to the Netherlands donate as a median sum to "do one's fair share" for Geert's cause in order for him to "break even" on an annual basis."......David Berridge, I don't believe in median sums for giving. I give to others on my ability to give and still maintain myself and family. I am not socialist that believes one should pay more taxes because he/she has more. Governments assign medians. If Wilders truely was in need, I would get with you and I would send some ham, mustard and onions for him to have with the bread crumbs you send him. I wouldn't expect you to send him anything and if you did, I wouldn't expect you to give anymore then what you thought was right. Giving comes from within and each person has to decide to give or not give and the amount in a like manner.

Anonymous 6 December 2010 - 6:54pm / Lalaland

Politics continues to be the second oldest profession, and it bears a very close resemblance to the first oldest.

Vera Gottlieb 6 December 2010 - 6:15pm / Germany

Even without Wilders' suggestions, this is what Israel has been doing since 1967: stealing land, ethnical cleansing and all the while claiming "self defence". Even before the founding of the State of Israel, Zionists' plans were to take over the entire area and this is exactly what has been going on, one square meter at a time. And the world, afraid of being branded "anti Semitic" and looking the other way, has blood on its hands too.

Post new comment

Please be reminded all comments must be in English, short and to the point - guideline 250 words. Abusive and inappropriate comments will be removed.

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <p> <br>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

RNW on Facebook

RNW Player

Video highlights

Ladies on the move
RNW is keen on featuring inspiring women in our target countries, women who...
What about men?
In many countries, men don't stick around to raise their children. This is...