Verdonk thinks movement against Wilders is ridiculous

DEN HAAG- MP Rita Verdonk*, says the counter movement, which some prominent Dutch personalities want to create against PVV leader Geert Wilders is "a ridiculous idea". Verdonk pointed out Tuesday that Wilders is supported by approximately 600,000 Dutch people and that he has every right to proclaim his ideas (racist fight against Islam).

Verdonk believes that the parliament should have more substantive discussions with Wilders. […]

(Source: De Telegraaf in Dutch)

* Verdonck was the previous Dutch Minister for the integration of minorities. She is known for her extreme and populist ideas about minorities and Muslims. No wonder she is supporting the extremist Wilders in his war against Islam.

Front against Wilders on the rise

THE HAGUE – The "reasonable people" of the Netherlands are starting a movement against the standpoints of Geert Wilders, the Volkskrant reports. René Danen of the anti-racist organisation Nederland Bekent Kleur and Mohamed Sini of the Islam and Citizenship foundation hope to be able to put together a broad countermovement in the coming weeks.

The Refugee Council of the Netherlands also supports the call from Doekle Terpstra, former trade union leader and chairman of the HBO Council for universities of applied science. Terpstra said in Trouw last week that he was annoyed at Wilders' actions and his statements about Islam as a fascist religion. He talks about the "Wilderisation of society" and "Wilders' evil message."

"I feel more and more provoked by the constant insults towards Muslims," Terpstra says. "Wilders abuses his position and freedom of speech as an alibi to bait society and create rifts." He also says: "Am I the only one who is angry and concerned? Unions, employers, Muslims, churches, humanists unite, join forces and turn the tide."

"That is what we want to do now," says Danen. There are no concrete plans yet, but one aim is to organise a demonstration around the time that Wilders' much talked about film on Islam is to be shown, sometime in January.
Danen says that is feasible. As leader of a student union and more recently the protest platform Keer het Tij (Turn the tide), which opposed the social-economic measures of the last centre-right governments, he has plenty of experience in organising large scale protest.

"We mainly want the silent majority, which has always been against Wilders, to start a dialogue with the neighbour who does vote for the PVV." Politicians should also put up more active resistance to Wilders, Danen says. "They have been silent for too long."

In a reaction Wilders said Terpstra's comments were "outright disgusting." He pointed out that his party had the democratic support of a half million voters. Nor is he happy to be associated with something like "an evil message." It is a small step from that to calling for violence against his person, Wilders said.

Both Danen and Terpstra stress that their call is against the ideas of the PVV, and not against Wilders as a person. They say they have been flooded with positive reactions from people who want to participate in protest actions.

(Source: Expatica)

'Defeat Islam' declares Hirsi Ali

There's an interview with the Dutch-Somali 'wannabe' facist Ayaan Hirsi Ali in the November issue of Reason magazine. The following exchange takes place in response to Hirsi Ali's insistence on the need for Islam to be "defeated".

Hirsi Ali states that the West is at war with Islam, not with "terrorism", "Islamism", "radical Islam", or "Islamo-fascism":

Reason: The Polish Catholic Church helped defeat the [Wojciech] Jaruzelski puppet regime [1990]. Do you think Islam could bring about similar social and political changes?

Hirsi Ali: Only if Islam is defeated. Because right now, the political side of Islam, the power-hungry expansionist side of Islam, has become superior to the Sufis and the Ismailis and the peace-seeking Muslims.

Reason: Don't you mean defeating radical Islam?

Hirsi Ali: No. Islam, period. Once it's defeated, it can mutate into something peaceful. It's very difficult to even talk about peace now. They're not interested in peace.

Reason: We have to crush the world's 1.5 billion Muslims under our boot? In concrete terms, what does that mean, "defeat Islam"?

Hirsi Ali: I think that we are at war with Islam. And there's no middle ground in wars.

Nonetheless Hirsi Ali has no clear idea how a war with Islam might proceed. Again, from the Reason interview:

Hirsi Ali: Islam can be defeated in many ways. For starters, you stop the spread of the ideology itself; at present, there are native Westerners converting to Islam, and they're the most fanatical sometimes. There is infiltration of Islam in the schools and universities of the West. You stop that. You stop the symbol burning and the effigy burning, and you look them in the eye and flex your muscles and you say, "This is a warning. We won't accept this anymore." There comes a moment when you crush your enemy.

Reason: Militarily?

Hirsi Ali: In all forms, and if you don't do that, then you have to live with the consequence of being crushed.

Wilders rallies against Islam in Dutch parliament

This is the speech the Dutch Islam hater gave in the Dutch parliament on November 6:

Madam Speaker, allow me, first, to express my sincere thanks to you personally for having planned a debate on Islam on the very day of my birthday. I could not have wished for a nicer present!
Madam Speaker, approximately 1400 years ago war was declared on us by an ideology of hate and violence which arose at the time and was proclaimed by a barbarian who called himself the Prophet Mohammed. I am referring to Islam.

Madam Speaker, let me start with the foundation of the Islamic faith, the Koran. The Koran’s core theme is about the duty of all Muslims to fight non-Muslims; an Islamic Mein Kampf, in which fight means war, jihad. The Koran is above all a book of war – a call to butcher non-Muslims (2:191, 3:141, 4:91, 5:3), to roast them (4:56, 69:30-69:32), and to cause bloodbaths amongst them (47:4). Jews are compared to monkeys and pigs (2:65, 5:60, 7:166), while people who believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God must according to the Koran be fought (9:30).

Madam Speaker, the West has no problems with Jews or Christians, but it does have problems with Islam. It is still possible, even today, for Muslims to view the Koran, which they regard as valid for all time, as a licence to kill. And that is exactly what happens. The Koran is worded in such a way that its instructions are addressed to Muslims for eternity, which includes today’s Muslims. This in contrast to texts in the Bible, which is formulated as a number of historical narratives, placing events in a distant past. Let us remind ourselves that it was Muslims, not Jews or Christians, who committed the catastrophic terrorist attacks in New York, Madrid and London; and that it was no coincidence that Theo van Gogh was brutally murdered by a Muslim, Mohammed Bouyeri.

Madam Speaker, I acknowledge that there are people who call themselves Muslims and who respect our laws. My party, the Freedom Party, has nothing against such people, of course. However, the Koran does have something against them. For it is stated in the Koran in Sura 2, verse 85, that those believers who do not believe in everything the Koran states will be humiliated and receive the severest punishment; which means that they will roast in Hell. In other words, people who call themselves Muslims but who do not believe, for example, in Sura 9, verse 30, which states that Jews and Christians must be fought, or, for example, in Sura 5, verse 38, which states that the hand of a thief must be cut off, such people will be humiliated and roast in Hell. Note that it is not me who is making this up. All this can be found in the Koran. The Koran also states that Muslims who believe in only part of the Koran are in fact apostates, and we know what has to happen to apostates. They have to be killed.

Madam Speaker, the Koran is a book that incites to violence. I remind the House that the distribution of such texts is unlawful according to Article 132 of our Penal Code. In addition, the Koran incites to hatred and calls for murder and mayhem. The distribution of such texts is made punishable by Article 137(e). The Koran is therefore a highly dangerous book; a book which is completely against our legal order and our democratic institutions. In this light, it is an absolute necessity that the Koran be banned for the defence and reinforcement of our civilisation and our constitutional state. I shall propose a second-reading motion to that effect.

Madam Speaker, there is no such thing as “moderate Islam”. As Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan said the other day, and I quote, “There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it”. Islam is in pursuit of dominance. It wishes to exact its imperialist agenda by force on a worldwide scale (8:39). This is clear from European history. Fortunately, the first Islamic invasion of Europe was stopped at Poitiers in 732; the second in Vienna in 1683. Madam Speaker, let us ensure that the third Islamic invasion, which is currently in full spate, will be stopped too in spite of its insidious nature and notwithstanding the fact that, in contrast to the 8th and 17th centuries, it has no need for an Islamic army because the scared “dhimmis” in the West, also those in Dutch politics, have left their doors wide open to Islam and Muslims.
Apart from conquest, Madam Speaker, Islam is also bent on installing a totally different form of law and order, namely Sharia law. This makes Islam, apart from a religion for hundreds of millions of Muslims also, and in particular, a political ideology (with political/constitutional/Islamic basic values, etc). Islam is an ideology without any respect for others; not for Christians, not for Jews, not for non‑believers and not for apostates. Islam aims to dominate, subject, kill and wage war.

Madam Speaker, the Islamic incursion must be stopped. Islam is the Trojan Horse in Europe. If we do not stop Islamification now, Eurabia and Netherabia will just be a matter of time. One century ago, there were approximately 50 Muslims in the Netherlands. Today, there are about 1 million Muslims in this country. Where will it end? We are heading for the end of European and Dutch civilisation as we know it. Where is our Prime Minister in all this? In reply to my questions in the House he said, without batting an eyelid, that there is no question of our country being Islamified. Now, this reply constituted a historical error as soon as it was uttered. Very many Dutch citizens, Madam Speaker, experience the presence of Islam around them. And I can report that they have had enough of burkas, headscarves, the ritual slaughter of animals, so‑called honour revenge, blaring minarets, female circumcision, hymen restoration operations, abuse of homosexuals, Turkish and Arabic on the buses and trains as well as on town hall leaflets, halal meat at grocery shops and department stores, Sharia exams, the Finance Minister’s Sharia mortgages, and the enormous overrepresentation of Muslims in the area of crime, including Moroccan street terrorists.
In spite of all this, Madam Speaker, there is hope. Fortunately. The majority of Dutch citizens have become fully aware of the danger, and regard Islam as a threat to our culture. My party, the Freedom Party, takes those citizens seriously and comes to their defence.
Many Dutch citizens are fed up to the back teeth and yearn for action. However, their representatives in The Hague are doing precisely nothing. They are held back by fear, political correctness or simply electoral motives. This is particularly clear in the case of PvdA, the Dutch Labour Party, which is afraid of losing Muslim voters. The Prime Minister said in Indonesia the other day that Islam does not pose any danger. Minister Donner believes that Sharia law should be capable of being introduced in the Netherlands if the majority want it. Minister Vogelaar babbles about the future Netherlands as a country with a Judeo‑Christian‑Islamic tradition, and that she aims to help Islam take root in Dutch society. In saying this, the Minister shows that she has obviously gone stark raving mad. She is betraying Dutch culture and insulting Dutch citizens. Madam Speaker, my party, the Freedom Party, demands that Minister Vogelaar retract her statement. If the Minister fails to do so, the Freedom Party parliamentary group will withdraw its support for her. No Islamic tradition must ever be established in the Netherlands: not now and also not in a few centuries’ time.
Madam Speaker, let me briefly touch on the government’s response to the WRR [Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy] report. On page 12 of its response, the government states that Islam is not contrary to democracy or human rights. All I can say to that is that things can’t get much more idiotic than this.

Madam Speaker, it is a few minutes to twelve. If we go on like this, Islam will herald the end of our Western civilisation as well as Dutch culture.
I would like to round off my first-reading contribution with a personal appeal to the Prime Minister on behalf of a great many Dutch citizens: stop the Islamification of the Netherlands!
Mr Balkenende, a historic task rests on your shoulders. Be courageous. Do what many Dutch citizens are screaming out for. Do what the country needs. Stop all immigration from Muslim countries, ban all building of new mosques, close all Islamic schools, ban burkas and the Koran. Expel all criminal Muslims from the country, including those Moroccan street terrorists that drive people mad. Accept your responsibility! Stop Islamification!
Enough is enough, Mr Balkenende. Enough is enough.