Brave New Netherlands
The court case against Geert Wilders is intended to change the democratic rules of the game, end the separation of church and state and abolish free speech
by Arthur Legger
The International Free Press Society
February 2, 2009
https://www.legal-project.org/163/brave-new-netherlands
Excerpt:
The brute facts, grim consequences and apparent incongruity clearly baffled the author of last week's Wall Street Journal's column: "Silencing Islam Critics: A Dutch Court Imports Saudi Blasphemy Norms to Europe". After all, in June 2008 the Dutch Public Prosecutor had decided after viewing Fitna. The Movie and reading several writings of Geert Wilders MP in which he compared the Koran with Mein Kampf and Islam with fascism, that these comments belonged to the realm of free speech. Wilders, leader of the Party For Freedom (9 seats in the Dutch Parliament, and 20 in the latest polls) did not address individuals or called for violence, he attacked a religion, so his comments were legal. Clearly, his statements outraged Muslims around the globe, but "if freedom of speech means anything, it means the freedom of controversial speech. Consensus views need no protection", the Wall Street Journal pointedly concluded. However, on the 21st of January 2009 the Amsterdam Court decided exactly the opposite. Wilders has to stand trial for the expressions and comparisons that are so insulting to Muslims. Perplexed the Wall Street Journal noted that "this is no small victory for Islamic regimes seeking to export their censorship laws to wherever Muslims reside", and the writer chillingly concluded that after the court has accepted the free speech standards of, "say, Saudi-Arabia", Geert Wilders is correct in his observation that "Muslim immigration is eroding traditional Dutch liberties".
Read the complete original version of this item...
Related Topics: Geert Wilders
receive the latest by email: subscribe to the legal project's free mailing list