Posts

Learn Why Islamic Jihadists Want Him DEAD!

When jihadists opened fire on a “draw Mohammad” free-speech event on Sunday, one of their main targets was Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, who traveled to the United States under heavy security to speak at the event.

Martin Mawyer from the Christian Action Network states, “Although Christian Action Network had nothing to do with this cartoon-drawing contest, and is not affiliated with the organizers in any way, we produced a documentary a few years ago entitled Islam Rising which explains Geert Wilders’ battle against radical Islam — and also includes his controversial film ‘Fitna’.”

If you’ve never heard of Wilders, this is the film to watch. In Islam Rising, you’ll learn about Wilders’ rise as a Dutch Parliamentarian, and his outspoken criticism of Islam.

“I don’t hate Muslims, I hate Islam,” he said, sparking a maelstrom of Islamic hate from Islamic forces throughout the Middle East and Western Europe. “There is no such thing as moderate Islam,” Wilders also stated, adding: “The Quran is a fascist book.”

Wilders risked his life to produce “Fitna” (meaning “disagreement and division among people”)-which provides proof of Islam’s true radical agenda. The reception was explosive: Al Qaeda placed a death sentence (“fatwa”) on him. Wilders was also banned from entering a number of European countries, included Great Britain, and he was ultimately charged and tried on charges of hate speech for producing the film.

In 2011, Wilders was acquitted of all charges.

Despite threats to his life and the constant risk of facing arrest and going to jail, Mr. Wilders continues to warn the Western World about the dangers of Islam.

In “Islam Rising,” Wilder states, “Mohammed said, ‘I have been ordered to fight against people until they testify that there is no God but Allah alone.’ The purest joy in Islam,” Wilders warns, “is to kill and to be killed.”

“The truth is,” Wilder states regarding the mass migration of Muslims to Europe, “Islam has always attempted to conquer Europe. And it has done so for centuries.”

But this time Islam isn’t trying to conquer Europe with armies, “but through the doctrine of migration.”

“For the first time in world history,” he says, “there are dozens of millions of Muslims living far outside the dark Islamic world. And that poses an enormous threat to us in the West.”

Wilder states that Europeans are losing their culture, identity and even religion to Islam.

“All over Europe, churches are emptying out, whereas mosques are shooting up like mushrooms.”

While native Europeans are losing their national pride and heritage, Wilders cautions that Islam is filling the gap with their own religious identity and practices.

“Burqas, honor killings, female genital mutilation are becoming more and more prevalent in the Europe of today.”

“Sharia statements, Sharia testaments, Sharia mortgages, Sharia schools, Sharia banks and, yes, even in the United Kingdom, Sharia Courts and even Sharia Barbie dolls – we all have it in Europe today.”

Texas Muslim Shooters’ Profile: Elton Simpson and Nadir Hamid Soofi

Elton Simpson and Nadir Hamid Soofi, both suspects killed in the Garland, Texas jihad attack have been identified from the Arizona vehicle registrations and driver photo IDs. Simpson, 30, and Soofi, 34 were roommates in a central Phoenix condominium. The Phoenix condominium was the subject of an FBI and police bomb squad investigation early this morning

Simpson was the author of the tweets sent just before the attack. He has been the subject of an FBI terrorism investigation since 2006 and was convicted in a Federal Court trial in 2011 for material support for terrorism, an attempt to travel to Somalia to Join Al Shabaab. One of the two perpetrators is alleged as having connections to CAIR, the self-styled Muslim civil rights group, an affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood.

 ISIS in a series of tweets,  sent prior to the May 3rd Muhammad Art Contest sponsored by Pam Geller’s American Freedom  Defense Initiative,   inspired brothers  in the U.S. to undertake an attack on the event. ISIS social media claimed responsibility for the attack in which both perpetrators were killed and a security officer slightly injured. The pre-event ISIS tweets doubtless increased the security arrangements at the AFDI event. A purported Muhammad Art contest  that featured a speech by Dutch Freedom Party leader, Geert Wilders and appearances by Rep. Louie Gohmert, Geller and Robert Spencer and others.  200 attendees were in lockdown following the attack and vehicles impounded as evidence in the crime scene. The event was webcast yesterday by the team from The United West led by Tom Trento.

Trento will discuss his experience at the Garland, Texas Muhammad Art Contest event with this writer and Mike Bates, co-host of “Your Turn” on 1330am WEBY, Northwest Florida‘s Talk Radio.  You may listen live here.

Heavy.com has compiled a dossier on the perpetrators of last night jihad attack in Garland, Texas, “Elton Simpson: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know.”  The article reported:

Elton Simpson has been identified as one of the two gunmen who opened fire Sunday night outside the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest in Garland, Texas. An unarmed security guard was shot, but survived with a non-life-threatening wound, before Simpson and his accomplice were killed by police.

Simpson, 30, and the other gunman, his roommate, 34-year-old Nadir Hamid Soofi, are from Phoenix, Arizona.

Simpson was “well known” by the FBI and was the subject of a previous terror investigationABC News reports. He and Soofi were armed with assault rifles and wearing body protection, police said. They exchanged fire with a Garland police officer armed with handgun.

Simpson’s father, Dunston Simpson, told ABC News, “We are Americans and we believe in America. What my son did reflects very badly on my family,” adding that his son “made a bad choice.”

WFAA reports that FBI agents were searching the gunmen’s Phoenix, Arizona home.

Police also remain at the scene of the shooting, and have been examining the gunmen’s car. They were concerned about explosives being hidden inside it.

[…]

The FBI began investigating Simpson in 2006, when they began recording conversations he was having with an informant. He was arrested in 2010.

According to court records, Simpson received a sentence of three years probation in 2011 after he was found guilty of making a false statement to the FBI.

Simpson told FBI agents he had not talked with others about traveling to Somalia, when he in fact had talked to others about traveling to the African country, according to court documents. Judge Mary H. Murguia found there wasn’t enough evidence to support the FBI’s claim that the travel was related to terrorism. He had elected for a trial by the judge, rather than a jury.

The FBI had claimed that Simpson was traveling to Somalia to engage in “violent jihad.” The FBI claimed he was planning to travel to Africa to join the al-Shabaab terror group, which has since been responsible for the deadly Kenyan terror attacks at the Nairobi mall and Garissa University.

Simpson’s probation ended in 2014.

The Volokh Conspiracy blog wrote about the case in 2011, calling it a “partial government victory / partial defeat.”

Read the court order explaining why Simpson was found guilty:

According to court documents, Simpson was born in Illinois and then moved to Phoenix, Arizona, where he “converted to the Muslim religion at a young age.”

His attorney during the 2010 trial, Kristina Sitton, told ABC News that Simpson was on the no-fly list and the FBI had tried to convince him to cooperate with them, including after his conviction. Sitton said she thought Simpson was “harmless,” according to ABC News:

He grew up the most normal guy. Just a normal high school guy… Converting to Islam seemed like a good thing for him. He had been going down a bad path and then he found Islam. He never struck me as someone who would do this sort of thing. I’m not a bleeding heart, I’m a Republican. I’ve seen some pretty bad guys and he seemed pretty normal.

Simpson was working at a dentist’s office in Arizona, but had been on vacation prior to the shooting, his father told ABC News. Dunston Simpson said he last spoke to his son three weeks ago, but they “had not much to talk about, because we had some very serious differences.” Dunston Simpson said Elton was a “good kid.”

Here are some items from the Heavy.com dossier on Nadir Hamid Soofi, “Nadir Hamid Soofi: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know”:

According to his Facebook page, Soofi spent a considerable amount of time with his little brother. He’s a graduate of the University of Utah and the International School of Islamabad in Pakistan. His page also shows multiple posts featuring Palestinian and anti-police propaganda. Frequently, he posts the phrase “Eid Mubarak” meaning celebration to the blessed. Soofi was the owner of Effinity Solutions, a carpet cleaning business in Phoenix. In July 2013, he called himselfa “newbie to the carpet cleaning industry.”

[…]

AZ Family reports that the two gunmen lived at an apartment on 19th Avenue and Thunderbird Road (above) in Phoenix. The day after the shooting, FBI agents, some clad in bomb squad gear, searched the apartment. The car they drove to the attack in Garland was registered in Arizona. The car, a 2008 Chevrolet Cobalt, was owned by Soofi. He tried to sell it back in March 2015 for nearly $9,000.

Police said prior Soofi’s name being released that the two had gone to the event with the intention of killing people. Both were armed with assault rifles. Garland cops stopped short of calling the attack a terrorist incident.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Elton Simpson and Nadir Hamid Soofi perpetrators of Garland, Texas attack on May 3, 2015.

Geert Wilders’ Speech at Garland, Texas Muhammad Art Event

Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) gave this speech at tonight’s deadly Muhammad cartoon event in Garland, Texas, sponsored by Pam Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI).  See our Iconoclast breaking post on the attack outside the Garland Education Center venue where two perpetrators were killed in quick action by Garland police security, while Wilders, sponsor Pam Geller and Robert Spencer and 200 guests were inside.

Watch this YouTube video of Wilders’  speech at the AFDI Garland, Texas event:

Speech Geert Wilders at Muhammad Cartoon Contest, Garland, Texas, 3 May, 2015

Dear friends,

Thank you all for being here. It’s great to be in Texas, the Lone Star State. The one star in the Texan flag represents all the free Western world needs today: defiance, pride and independence.

It is no coincidence that we are in Garland, Texas, tonight. It is here that, three months ago, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, Islamic activists convened to demand that free speech be curtailed. They want to prohibit cartoons, books and films which they find insulting.

Our answer is clear:

Don’t mess with Texas!

Don’t mess with the free West!

Don’t mess with our freedom of speech!

Friends, allow me to thank Pamela Geller for organizing this exhibition.

Pamela is an extraordinary woman. I only have a few heroes, but Pamela certainly is one of them. Let us give her a big applause!

My friends, you are all winners. Everybody present here tonight deserves respect, just for being here.

The cartoonists, the participants in this Muhammad contest all did fantastic work. All of you are not only talented but also very brave. For Islam has put a death sentence on depicting Muhammad. But this has not frightened you. And even if it did, it has not stopped you. Because you believe in freedom of speech.

I applaud you for that.

However, there can be only one winner of the contest. And that is, as you already know, Bosch Fawstin.

Bosch knows what he is talking and cartooning about, being a former – or in his own words recovered – Muslim.

I have known the fantastic work of Bosch – who also created the anti-jihad superhero Pigman – for many years already and I want to congratulate him for his bravery and excellent work and winning the contest today.

Your statement, my statement, the statement of every single person present in this room here tonight is clear: We will never allow barbarism, we will never allow Islam to rob us of our freedom of speech! Never!

I know from my own experience how dangerous it is to stand for this freedom. I know how dangerous it is to speak the truth about Islam.

I am on death lists of Al-Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban and terrorists from ISIS because I tell people the truth about Islam. Islam has declared war on us, on our Judeo-Christian civilization. Islam wants to rob us of the freedoms and liberties. Islam and freedom are totally incompatible.

I am a politician, but cartoonists, like my good friends the Danish cartoonist Kurt Westergaard and the Swedish artist Lars Vilks, are also on the death list. Both Kurt and Lars have already been the victims of murder attempts.

Another man on this list was the cartoonist Charb, editor of the French magazine Charlie Hebdo. As we all know, he and 9 of his colleagues were murdered last January in Paris by followers of the religion of hate. According to Islamic Sharia law, they were all guilty of the same crime.

The crime of depicting Muhammad, the crime of defaming the so-called Prophet of Islam.

A crime punishable by death by the religion of death.

In order to show them that we will not have Islam dictate us the law, we are here with an exhibition of Muhammad cartoons.

We are here in defiance of Islam.

We are here to defend our rights and stand for freedom of speech.

That is our duty.

As Ronald Reagan, your greatest president ever, said: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.”

I am happy to say that nobody died while watching these cartoons.

This proves that, unlike jihadis, cartoons do not kill people.

Cartoons do not kill jihadis, but jihadis kill cartoonists.

That is a huge difference which we should never forget.

Huntington was wrong. It is not a clash of civilizations, but a clash between civilization and barbarism.

Our Judeo-Christian culture is far superior to the Islamic one.

I can give you a million reasons. But here is an important one.

We have got humor and they don’t.

There is no humor in Islam.

In 1979, ayatollah Khomeini devoted an entire radio broadcast to this topic: “Allah did not create man so that he could have fun,” the ayatollah said. “There are no jokes in Islam,” he added. “There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam.”

For once, the ayatollah was right.

Islam does not allow free speech, because free speech shows how evil and wrong Islam is.

And Islam does not allow humor, because humor shows how foolish and ridiculous it is.

Friends,

You are extremely fortunate to live in America. Because you have a first amendment.

In Europe, it is not just the jihadis who go after you. The authorities do so, too.

In the Netherlands, I have been dragged to court on hate speech charges for speaking the truth about Islam. I was acquitted, but now the authorities are prosecuting me again.

We are harassed, but sympathizers of the Islamic State are left in peace. Last Summer, they took to the streets in The Hague. They carried swastikas and ISIS flags. They shouted “Death to the Jews.” And you know what? The authorities did nothing. We have weak leaders. Appeasers are ruling The Netherlands, Europe and the USA. We have to turn the tide and we will. New leadership is what we need to defend our freedom of speech and resist the ongoing Islamization of the West.

Today, many of our Western leaders want us to shut up.

When we tell the truth about Islam, they call it Islamophobia.

When cartoonists make drawings of Muhammad, they are accused of provoking people.

A few years ago, in my country, the Netherlands, the police even raided the house of a cartoonist.

In his address to the United Nations in 2012, President Obama said: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

But we say: The future must not belong to Islam!

Do you hear, Mr Obama? We say: No to Islam!!

Unlike President Obama and his European colleagues, we are not willing to sign away our freedom and independence.

The day we give away humor and freedom of speech is the day that we cease to exist as a free and independent people.

And that day will never come.

That is what this exhibition is all about!

From here we send a message to President Obama and all his colleagues: We will never submit!

We are not intimidated by Islam.

We will not be picking up swords and axes and breaking into people’s homes. But we will not remain silent either.

Moderation in the face of evil is evil. This is not what our age needs. We must uncap our pens; we must speak words of truth. We are facing a determined enemy who is striving through all means to destroy the West and snuff out our traditions of free thought, free speech, and our Judeo-Christian values. Make no mistake: if we fail, we will be enslaved. So the only option is to defend our freedom with all the energy we have. It’s time to be brave. It’s time to do our duty.

Instead of giving in to fear and adopt the Islamic taboo on depicting Muhammad, I propose that we draw another conclusion:

Lift the cause of the fear!

Let us de-islamize our societies!

No more Islam, no more mosques, no more Islamic schools. It is time for our own culture and heritage.

Let us liberate ourselves from tyranny.

That is another good reason why we are having this exhibition here today.

Depicting Muhammad is an act of liberation!

Let us hold similar exhibitions all over the United States and all over the free world. From Canada to Australia to Europe.

We need Pamela Geller everywhere in the world.

I invite you to come to the Netherlands with this exhibition. I will help you exhibit these cartoons in the Dutch parliament building.

We will never allow Islam to restrict freedom!

And we will never bow in the direction of Mecca!

I am not saying that there are no moderate Muslims. Fortunately, there are Muslims who do not live according to the Islamic commands. But there is no moderate Islam!

Not all Muslims are terrorists. But most terrorists today are Muslims.

That is why we say: The less Islam, the better!

The Islamic creed obliges one and a half billion people around the world to take Muhammad as their example.

He led a gang of robbers, who looted, raped and killed hundreds of people.

Historic sources describe orgies of inhumanity. An example is the genocide of the Jews of Medina in 627. One of the head choppers was Muhammad himself. Confronted with the lunacy of Islamic terrorists today, it is not hard to find out whom they get their inspiration from.

It is from Muhammad who – we have to tell the truth – was a warlord, a murderer and a pedophile

There is no turning back once one has become a Muslim. For even though article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that every person has the right to “change his religion or belief,” in Islam there is only a death penalty for leaving the faith.

So, let us expose Muhammad. Let us show the world what Islam truly is.

And let us support Muslims, like Bosch, who wish to leave Islam and liberate themselves from fear.

Apostates are heroes and more than ever they deserve the support of freedom loving people all over the world.

Muhammad fought and terrorized people with the sword.

We fight Muhammad and his followers with the pen.

And the pen will prove mightier than the sword.

Muhammad’s followers fight us with bloodbaths, but today here in Garland we fight them with humor.

Because bloodbaths enslave, while humor liberates.

Let me end by quoting Sam Houston, the founding father of this great state of Texas:

“Texas has yet to learn submission to any oppression, come from what source it may.”

May his words inspire us all today never to submit to Islamic barbarism.

Thank you very much.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Dutch MP Wilders offers solution to Illegal Immigration Problem

In the May New English Review, we drew attention to the problem of Illegal Migration threatening Europe and even the US,”Stemming the Surge of Deadly Illegal Migration Across the Mediterranean”.

We cited Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party (PVV) from his April 29, 2015 speech at the Washington, D.C. Conservative Opportunity Society saying:

The UN plan to resettle 1 million immigrants in Western nations will provide jihadis an opportunity to infiltrate Western countries, including the U.S. It will give terrorists the opportunity to settle in our countries without the extra scrutiny involved in obtaining a visa or a residence permit.

We should not do this. The vast majority of the European citizens disapprove of the way their governments are handling immigration. Moreover, there are plenty of other safe countries where immigrants bound for the West can go to, including the wealthy Gulf States that have almost zero asylum-seekers today.

Immigration, especially Islamic immigration, had devastating consequences. It has made our countries less safe.

A week prior on April 22, 2015. Wilders engaged in a debate with opposition of the merits of the Australian solution- blocking and returning illegal migrants.  As he points out in the debate, that  resulted in no drownings and yet spared  Australia the burden of providing asylum.  Moreover, Wilders points out that the wealthy Gulf Emirates and Saudi Arabia do not provide sanctuary nor underwrite the costs of refugees fleeing the jihadi conflicts in the Middle East and Africa.

He argues that it would cost $26,000 per annum to support an illegal migrant if granted asylum by the Netherlands, nearly double the average Old Age pension of 13,500 Euros.   The opposition invokes the plight of refugees from the jihadi conflicts in Syria, Libya and Africa, but without suggesting a solution.  He sticks to his arguments.  Perhaps as the leading party in polls taken in the Netherlands, he appears to have the support of many of its citizen harboring grave concerns about illegal Migration from predominately Muslim countries.

Watch this Vlad Tepes YouTube video with English subtitles of The Hague Parliament Debate on Wilder’s Australian solution to the illegal migrant problem:

That is reflected in the number of Muslim émigrés leaving to join ISIS, only to return as possible domestic terror threats. Despite the resonance of Wilders views with the Dutch polity, save for émigré Muslims and political allies on the left in the Hague Parliament, he is once again being investigated by public prosecutors in the Hague over comments in a campaign Rally about Holland not needed “more Moroccans”.

We note his statement on December 8, 2014 prior to a police interrogation on the Hague prosecutor charges:

Those who do not understand that we have an enormous problem with Islam and with Moroccans in the Netherlands, though seeing, they do not see, and though hearing, they do not hear.

For the reasons above, while on campaign in The Hague, I argued that there need to be fewer Moroccans. And, at an election meeting in The Hague, I asked those present a number of questions, one of which was “Do you want more or fewer Moroccans?”

Indeed, I want fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands for the reasons and context that I have previously expressed in this statement as well as in Parliament and for which I refer you to the documents that I now deposit.

I have yet to meet the Dutchman who wants more Moroccans in the Netherlands. Asking for fewer Moroccans is something totally different than if I were to want all Moroccans to leave the Netherlands or if I were to object to every Moroccan.

Like me, 43% of all the Dutch and 95% of my supporters want fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands. I have said what millions of Dutchmen think.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Geert Wilders during a debate in the Hague Parliament about the Mediterranean’s migrant crisis. April 22 April 2015. SOURCE:  EPA/BART MAAT

Dutch MP Geert Wilders’ Warning on CAIR’s abuse of the First Amendment

Geert Wilders was on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. on April 30, 2015 at a press conference with Rep. Steve King (R-IA), Louie Gohmert (R-TX) and Scott Perry (R-PA).  He  warned  Americans  about the dangers of  mass  Muslim immigration  and  suggested letting  Americans who volunteer   leave and   join  the Islamic State but be denied  return  to this country. He said:

I am warning America. Don’t think that what’s happening in Europe today will not happen in America tomorrow because it will. Islamic immigration has proven to be a Trojan horse, the jihadists are among us,” he added, warning of “enormous security problems” in the United States if Muslim immigrants are allowed to stay. Let them go, but never let them return.

The Congressmen praised Wilders exercise of free speech vis a vis his criticism of Islam, defense of Judeo-Christian values and Israel. Wilders paid court to this” beautiful land” with its protection of free speech rights and expressed “the wish that the he and other citizens of the EU” had the equivalent protection.  Wilders is once again the target of investigations by the Dutch police as the behest of Public Prosecutors in the Hague over his alleged hate speech remarks at a Freedom Party rally during the May, 2014 European Parliament elections in the Hague, over “ fewer Moroccans”.   Wilders has criticized Islam for being an ideology and the Qur’an for being the equivalent of Hitler’s Mein Kampf.  His most recent book, Marked for Death, presented that and more fundamental arguments referencing    Qur’anic doctrine, Hadith, Sunna and Shariah Islamic Law. Wilders defeated an earlier hate crime charge brought against him in the Amsterdam district court in 2011.

Watch the Wilders Capitol Hill press conference with Reps. King, Gohmert and Perry:

Prior to his Capitol Hill press conference, Wilders gave a speech on April 29, 2015 at the Washington, D.C., Conservative Opportunity Society.  Two Muslim U.S. Representatives, Keith Ellison (D-MN) and  Andre Carson sent a letter  on April 23, 2015 to Secretary of State Kerry and Department of Homeland Security Chief Jae Johnson seeking to bar Wilders entry to the US on the grounds that his speech violated provisions of the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998. They wrote:

In the past, the United States has denied entry to international leaders under the authority of the International Religious Freedom Act which allows the Department of State to deny entry to a foreign leader who is responsible for severe violations of religious freedom. This precedent is applicable to Mr. Wilders.

[…]

In the U.S., freedom of speech is a bedrock principle that distinguishes free societies from ones living under oppressive regimes. Freedom of speech, however, is not absolute. It is limited by the legal and moral understanding that speech that causes the incitement of violence or prejudicial action against protected groups is wrong. As Mr. Wilders continues his pursuit of political power, granting him entry will embolden him to engage in further incitement of violence and discrimination against Muslims.

Anti-Semitism and Islamophobia are sweeping through Europe. Mr. Wilders is among the hateful leaders responsible for perpetuating prejudice. Allowing him to enter the United States will cause harm to our nation that values religious freedom and respects pluralism.

Eugene Volokh, a UCLA law professor and expert on free speech and religious freedom law in a “Volokh Conspiracy” column in the Washington Postexamined the arguments of the two Representatives, referencing Supreme Court case rulings, notably, Brandenburg v. Ohio and Hess v. Indiana, regarding “incitement. Volokh concluded:

Whether “Christian culture is superior to other cultures,” which groups should be allowed to immigrate into a country, and even whether Islam should be viewed as an ideology rather than a religion (an unsound distinction, in my view) are matters that the First Amendment allows us all to debate. The Congressmen quite clearly don’t want to allow Rep. Wilders to debate such matters here in the U.S. But their “In the U.S.” paragraph suggests that they view even such debates by Americans as constitutionally unprotected.

CAIR, the self styled Muslim civil rights group affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood,  sent  Government  Affairs Manager, Robert McCaw, to question Wilders and the Congressional Representatives who participated in Capitol Hill press conference.  The CAIR press release noted the exchange:

CAIR Government Affairs Manager Robert McCaw pressed Rep. Gohmert as to whether he stood by “Wilders’ statement that Islam is an ideology of a retarded culture.” Congressman Gohmert avoided the question only stating that he “proudly stands by Wilders” and that he may not always agree with him but will defend his right to make such comments.

McCaw also pressed Wilders on whether or not the Republican Party should adopt his Dutch Freedom Party’s proposal of “banning the Quran and the building of new mosques.” Wilders sidestepped the question by stating that he is “not trying to unify the two parties” and comparing the Quran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

[…]

“By endorsing and promoting Geert Wilders’ anti-Muslim hate, these elected officials tarnish the Republican Party’s reputation and harm our nation’s international image,” said McCaw.

CAIR arranged for a counter press with the authors of the letter, Reps. Ellison and Carson, joined by Rep. Joseph Crowley (D-NY) protesting Wilders anti-Islam stands and promoting inter-faith unity.

Watch the CAIR YouTube video of McCaw’s questioning of Wilders and Rep. Gohmert:

Tomorrow, May 3, 2015 Wilders will next appear at an event in Texas.  According to a Breitbart News report Wilders Will speak at the First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest. The event will be held May 3rd at the Curtis Caldwell Center, which is owned and operated by the Garland Independent School District, and hosted by the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI). The Curtis Caldwell Center was the site of an “Honor the Prophet” rally in January. About two thousand Texans came out to protest that event.

 Pam Geller and Robert Spencer of AFDI will also be speaking at the event.  For those interesting in watching this event. It will be live streamed at 5-7 (CST) and 6-8PM (EST). Read more, here.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of Geert Wilders at a press conference near Capitol building April 30, 2015 in Washington, DC (AFP Photo/Brendan Smialowski).

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO INTERVIEW: Geert Wilders on Islam

There are few people in the world, and fewer less who hold elected office, in a significant country who know more about Islam than our special guest – Member of Netherlands Parliament, Mr. Geert Wilders.

Join us as the man reviled by many enemies now being called a “prophet” by citizens throughout the free world explains exactly what is needed in the West to defeat Islamic jihad. After the Wilders interview, Tom and the boys along with Imam Abdullah discuss several of the key issues that Wilders addressed.

If you want to get a powerful, first-hand look into the supremacist Muslim problems faced by America, Israel, Holland and the West, turn in and enjoy!

Geert Wilders’ “Warning to Israel”

We interview the ever controversial Mr. Geert Wilders, MP, Netherlands who, unlike many politicians, stands proudly with Israel and boldly against HAMAS and Islamic jihad worldwide.

Mr. Wilders, leader of the Party for Freedom (PPV), analyzes both the immediate problem that Israel has with the HAMAS and the long-term problem that the West has with the global advance of the Islamic Caliphate. Moreover, Wilders provides solutions that are essential for Western countries to defeat supremacist Islam.

WARNING: Some of these solutions are absolutely NOT politically correct!

ABOUT THE UNITED WEST AND THE CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY

The United West and Center for Security Policy present Operation Protective Edge An Inside Look: Destroy HAMAS. This is a special series providing analysis, commentary, opinion and activism designed to assist Israel in its’ effort to destroy HAMAS. We feature leading subject-matter experts with live reporting from the war front in Israel.

Follow The United West on Twitter: @TheUnitedWest.

Geert Wilders: ‘‘Now is the time for The Netherlands to stand with Israel’’

Hamas unilaterally breached a three day cease fire this morning with barrages of rockets fired at Israel shortly before it expired at 8:00 a.m. Israel time.  IDF spokesperson, Lt. Col. Peter Lerner said:

The renewed rocket attacks by terrorists at Israel are unacceptable, intolerable and shortsighted. Hamas’ bad decision to breach the ceasefire will be pursued by the IDF, we will continue to strike Hamas, its infrastructure, its operatives and restore security for the State of Israel.

Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) leader, Geert Wilders was interviewed by NU.nl.  He raised the importance of Dutch solidarity with Israel in the face of recent anti-Semitic incidents in pro-Hamas and pro-IS rallies in Amsterdam and the Hague.   Wilders criticized Dutch Foreign Affairs Minister Frans Timmermans calling for an international investigation of Israel’s alleged “violence” in Gaza in interview. He also cited the “insanity” of Dutch government providing developmental funds to Hamas.

Here is Wilders’ exchange in the interview by NU.nl Politiek, “The Netherlands Must Stand with Israel”:

The end of the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel is near and the call for an independent international investigation into Israel’s behavior is getting harder.

Not if it depends on PVV leader Geert Wilders. “We must unconditionally support Israel in the battle,” he tells NU.nl.

International criticism of the war behavior of both Hamas and especially Israel increases every day. In the Netherlands the tensions between ethnic groups increase as well. Last Tuesday, Minister Frans Timmermans (Foreign Affairs) wrote in an op-ed article in NRC Handelsblad that he finds the violence in Gaza “unacceptable.” What did you think of this article?

“Incomprehensible. He says it is not a fight between Jews and Muslims. Well, it isn’t a fight between Christians and Hindus. This is exactly what it is all about, and what is going on in the region. At a moment when Israel is the only democracy in the region and a bastion of the free West, we must stand firmly behind Israel.”

“Incomprehensible. He says it is not a fight between Jews and Muslims. Well, it isn’t a fight between Christians and Hindus. This is exactly what it is all about, and what is going on in the region. At a moment when Israel is the only democracy in the region and a bastion of the free West, we must stand firmly behind Israel.”

Do you miss that attitude?

“Yes, I miss that in the Netherlands. It does not surprise me of the Minister of Foreign Affairs (Frans Timmermans) because I know that as a Labor politician his views are different than mine, but I find it incomprehensible that we do not show solidarity with Israel at this moment. I also find it incomprehensible that the minister does not point to the cause of the hatred of Jews, which exists within Hamas.”

Yet Minister Timmermans is also critical of the role of Hamas in the conflict. He condemns the storage of weapons in schools and hospitals, and the shelling of Israel. Timmermans also believes that Israel has a right to defend itself against this.

“This is not a time to be balanced. This is a time to choose. This is a moment that is not asking for balance, because balance is not necessary. Today we must defend a country that, as far as I know, does not aim to destroy any Arab country or people. The opposite is, however, true.”

“At such a moment you have to stand with the state of Israel and do not say ‘listen, this is not a conflict between Muslims and Jews’ and ‘the Israeli actions are disproportionate.’ Imagine that this would happen in the Netherlands, we would also hit back hard.”

But Timmermans also says in the op-ed piece and in the written consultation with Parliament last week that the government agrees that Israel has the right to defend itself?

“Yes, but in the meantime he criticizes Israel.”

Is he not allowed to question the proportionality of the Israeli use of violence?

“Sure he can. An investigation is also allowed. I would prefer he had not done it, but he is allowed to do it. However, I would have preferred it if he had demanded an investigation into the actions of Hamas. Everyone can read and see how Hamas is firing rockets from schools and hospitals.”

Still, an international independent investigation would be good to determine at least whether Israel has acted proportionately?

“No, this gives a wrong signal. What we forget is that the fight against Israel is a fight against everything that is not Islamic, a fight against freedom and democracy. If Israel falls, we are next. Timmermans should stand behind Israel.”

Unconditionally?

“Well, I do not say always and unconditionally, perhaps that is going a bit far. As far as I’m concerned, we stand unconditionally behind Israel in this fight, but of course not behind everything Israel does. That would be ridiculous.”

“This is not a territorial conflict, but an ideological conflict. Many people think that you can give land in exchange for peace. It is an illusion to think that if you give away a piece of land, you will get peace in return.”

“It is a mistake to believe in a two-state solution.”

You do not believe in a two-state solution as imposed by the UN?

“I do in the sense that the Palestinians already have a state, namely Jordan. Jordan is the Palestinian state. Hence, the two-state solution is already a reality.”

What do you think is the best approach to deal with Hamas?

“It is a waste of time to talk or negotiate with ISIL or Hamas. They are barbarians. Only the total destruction of this type of terrorist organizations is helpful.”

On Wednesday, Bram van Ojik, the leader of the Green Left Party, advocated a drastic change in the attitude of the Dutch government in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Van Ojik wants economic development of Gaza, the imposition of an arms embargo against Israel and political support for the Palestinian state.

“My view is the opposite of what the Green Left proposes. I find it insane that the Netherlands has given development money to Gaza. This is a reward for bad behavior. This money is being spent by Hamas.”

But Timmermans assures Parliament in the written consultation that no money has been given to Hamas. He mentions “strong verification procedures” to ensure that the money does not get into the hands of terrorist organizations.

“Ultimately, Hamas controls Gaza. So ultimately this money benefits Hamas.”

Is Timmermans lying when he informs Parliament in this way?

“This is a charade of the highest order. The money may not end up on the bank account of Gaza, but Hamas is the boss there. No-one can exclude that Hamas uses this money to build the tunnels. Even if this is not the case, the money goes to an area that is controlled by Hamas.”

The war in Gaza has led to reactions worldwide, and therefore also in the Netherlands. Anti-Semitic statements have been made during a number of Gaza demonstrations. Together with Jewish organizations, the Cabinet released a statement in which a firm position is taken against anti-Semitism and discrimination in the Netherlands. You have said that his statement was “worthless.”

“Indeed. It is worthless because Prime Minister Rutte and the Cabinet refuse to see the elephant in the room. It is an objective fact that all those anti-Semitic statements are made by people who adhere to Islam.”

“A statement, in which the cause of anti-Semitism is not mentioned, is without substance, makes no sense and is worthless.”

Most protesters are critical of the policies of the Israeli government. Are they also anti-Semitic?

“No. Of course you can be critical of every country. Let us be glad that in the Netherlands we have a right to demonstrate. However, bringing the Hitler salute and waving ISIL flags is something which should not be permitted.”

“We have to deal in a different way with organizations like ISIL that aim to destroy us. We have to hit them hard.”

In that same statement, the Cabinet writes that it will act hard against anti-Semitic and discriminatory statements made during demonstrations. Those who make such statements will have to deal with the public prosecutor and the judiciary. What else can the government do?

“I think that demonstrations by types like ISIL should not be allowed in the Netherlands.”

But the Cabinet says that it will act against this.

“They still allow it.”

We have seen, however, how the police acted appropriately in Amsterdam?

“Yes, fortunately in Amsterdam it was different than in The Hague for example. So it can be done.”

This morning, the newspaper The Telegraph published a full-page ad against anti-Semitism which was signed by many prominent Dutch people. You had been asked to sign the ad by Ms Voet of CIDI [a Dutch Jewish organization], but you did not find your name under the ad. Did this startle you?

“I find this incomprehensible. On Tuesday, I got a letter from Ms Voet. I responded within half an hour. Of course I was prepared to sign. Afterwards, I did not hear from her again.”

So you were surprised when you opened the paper this morning?

“Yes, I was looking for my name and I did not find it. I thought ‘what is this…’.”

According to Ms Voet you were removed from the list because you had called the joint statement of the Cabinet and the Jewish organizations “worthless.”

“She could have called me to explain the situation. By removing me because of my criticism, Esther Voet disqualifies herself as someone who fights anti-Semitism and defends the interests of the Jewish community in the Netherlands. It is as if she does not accept criticism. I regret this, because I would have liked to sign the statement against anti-Semitism.”

CIDI and the Central Jewish Board (CJO) distanced themselves from you and the PVV after your calls for fewer Moroccans and your flirting with European political parties with an anti-Semitic past. Does that bother you?

“They may pretend this, but here is the reason why this is not true: It is CIDI which asked me to sign the ad. I did not call to ask ‘May I join.’ If I respond positively to a request within half an hour, it is inappropriate to remove my name without explanation. Then they should not have asked me.”

What do you think of the fact that representatives of the Jewish community distance themselves from you?

“I have very many friends in the Jewish community. I know that I have the support of many of them. CIDI does not speak on behalf of all Jews in the Netherlands. CIDI is also not why I take my positions.”

“My mission is not about CIDI, but to preserve the Netherlands, where the Judeo-Christian, humanistic culture is currently being threatened by Islamization, as a free Western country.”

“Apparently Ms Voet does not want me to link Islam to anti-Semitism, but look at what Hamas is doing in Gaza, look at what ISIL does with Christians in Iraq. They all get their turn.”

“I do not understand that someone who claims to represent the interests of the Jewish community does not see this. If Islam takes over power here, the Jews will be the first to feel it.”

So you do not feel that you have lost the goodwill of the Jewish community in the Netherlands?

“In my opinion that is only a minor thing. On the contrary, there is still a very warm support, both in the Netherlands and internationally.”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the New English Review.

Saudi Arabia Threatens Sanctions against the Netherlands over Anti-Islam Stickers

Wilder-met-sticker-470x340

Geert Wilders

Over the weekend, Saudi Arabia announced possible  sanctions against The Netherlands allegedly because of Geert Wilders’ anti-Islam sticker that he launched in December 2013. The Saudi Foreign Ministry said the stickers blasphemed the Saudi flag and Islam.  AFP/Reuters reported:

A royal decree, made public by the Mecca chamber of commerce, bans “Dutch firms from taking part in future projects in the kingdom, whether directly or through sub-contracting”.

It also reduces to a minimum the number of visas “for Dutch companies and investors who are not part of vital projects in the kingdom.”

And it orders an end to visits by trade delegations between the two countries.

Bilateral trade was about US$5 billion in 2010 and the Netherlands was among the largest investors in Saudi Arabia, making up nearly 4 per cent of foreign direct investment that year, said the Dutch government.

In addition to trade in oil and gas, the Netherlands exports a wide range of products and technology in  agriculture, machinery, chemical and petrochemical sectors to Saudi Arabia.

A Dutch foreign ministry spokesman said the government was trying to contact Riyadh regarding the matter. The stickers were first printed in December.

“The cabinet strongly distanced itself from the insults Wilders first made to the Saudi flag and the religion in December,” said the spokesman. “It still does now.”

Mr. Wilders, in reaction to possible trade measures by Saudi Arabia, said the Netherlands “should have boycotted that country a long time ago”.

The  controversial sticker uses the green and white colors  of the Saudi  flag . That flag is emblazoned with the  Islamic profession of faith, the Shahada and the sword, the symbol of Jihad. The inscription on the sticker was translated into Arabic and read:  “Islam is a lie. Mohammed is a crook. The Quran is poison”.  The Dutch newspaper,  Z 24  wrote:

Following a complaint by the National Council of Moroccans at the time of the PVV sticker campaign launch Google blocked the e -mail address where people could order the sticker. Then Wilders made ​​a new account with another Internet company.

Deputy Premier Lodewijk Asscher called it ” a disgusting sticker with the sole purpose to hurt .” Wilders, said the intention was not to hurt, but to shock. It is not clear why Saudi Arabia would take action just now.

Perhaps  Saudi Arabia is taking the action because Wilders and the Freedom Party (PVV) are tied in the lead position as the European  Parliamentary elections are about to held  later this week , May 22 to 25.  Clearly, the Saudis are endeavoring to intimidate the Dutch electorate to desist from casting a ballot for the PVV MEP slate. That may also be a message to voters in other countries where Euro skeptic parties have Anti-Muslim immigration positions akin to those of the PVV and Wilders.

The Economist in a forecast of the upcoming European Parliamentary election noted the rise of these –Euro skeptic or “populist” parties:

To add to the drama will be the presence in the parliament of so many populist parties, most of them anti-European. These range from far-left, like Syriza in Greece and the United Left in Spain, to far-right, such as Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France, Geert Wilders’s Party for Freedom in the Netherlands and Golden Dawn in Greece. Britain has the UK Independence Party, Italy has Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Movement and the Northern League. Most central and eastern European countries have populist parties, some nastily racist. The latest polls suggest that the number of MEPs who could be classified as anti-European may rise after the election from about 140 now to more than 200, well over a quarter of the total.

The delayed  Saudi reaction to the PVV anti-Islam  sticker campaign launched five months ago is  all about imposing  a Blasphemy code. The Wahhabist Saudi government is  trying to silence criticism of  Islam threatening the free speech of Wilders and the liberty of those Dutch voters who are inclined towards his message.  A message the PVV propounds that  Muslim mass immigration in Holland  harbors  the seeds of homegrown terrorism on a significant scale.   Soeren Kern  presented  that reality  drawn from a Dutch intelligence report in the Hague Parliament last Month in a  Gatestone Institute articleDutch Jihadists in Syria Pose Threat to the Netherlands.  He wrote:

More than 100 Dutch Muslims travelled to Syria in 2013 with the intention of taking part in jihadist activities there, and at least 20 battle-hardened jihadists have since returned to the Netherlands, posing a significant threat to national security, according to a new report published by the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD.

The AIVD annual report for 2013 was presented by Interior Minister Ronald Plasterk and AIVD head Rob Bertholee in The Hague on April 23. In contrast to previous years, when the main security threat was deemed to be a cyber-attack, the principal concern in this year’s report is the mounting threats posed by the returning jihadists, as well as by Muslim hate preachers who are using the Internet to radicalize young Dutch Muslims and incite them to violence.

The report warns that the presence of European fighters in Syria provides the jihadist groups active there with an “excellent opportunity to recruit individuals familiar with our region to commit acts of terrorism here.” In addition, returnees could “exploit their status as veterans to radicalize others in the Netherlands.” Overall, AIVD’s primary concern is about the radicalizing influence that Dutch jihadists will exert on Muslim communities in the Netherlands.

Against this evidence Wilders has attracted an increasing following among non-Muslim Dutch voters.  If the PVV MEP slate comes out on top in the coming elections this week that could be a harbinger of a PVV led coalition in a future Hague parliamentary election.

RELATED STORIES:

Interview with Wolfgang G. Schwanitz, co-author, Nazis, Islamists, and the Making of the Modern Middle East
Hackers Set Sights on Dutch Politician for Anti-Islam Sticker
UK: Education secretary to announce voluntary code of conduct to regulate teaching in madrasas
Nigerian Muslim cleric tells media to stop calling Boko Haram Islamic, doesn’t mention Islamic justifications for its acts

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Poll: 43% of the Dutch want fewer Moroccans

The virulent attacks on Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party (PVV) by opposition parties in the ruling coalition in The Netherlands and threats to have him prosecuted for his “fewer Muslim” comments in our April NER article “Geert Wilders Once Again Endures a Firestorm of Criticism” have backfired.   A new poll commissioned by the PVV reveal that Dutch voters reject those threats categorically.

A news release by the PVV today noted “43% of the Dutch want fewer Moroccans”:

At the request of the PVV, the independent research bureau “Peil.nl / Maurice de Hond” conducted an opinion poll into the view of the Dutch regarding the presence of Moroccans in the Netherlands.

No less than 43% of all the Dutch prefer to have fewer MoroccansOnly 3% wants more Moroccans, while 48% does not care how many Moroccans there are in the Netherlands. A majority of the voters of PVV (95%) and of the governing VVD (59%), but also more than one third of the voters of the Socialist SP and more than a quarter of the Labor voters prefer to have fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands.

A majority of 55% of all Dutch is opposed to a criminal prosecution of PVV-leader Geert Wilders.

Geert Wilders: “The figures are very clear. Millions of Dutch agree with me. It is great, too, that a majority of the Dutch is of the opinion that I should not be prosecuted.”

This latest poll bolsters a previous one of Dutch parties in the European Parliamentary elections just one month away on May 22 to the 25th that showed the PVV in the lead.  See our March 17th Iconoclast post, “Wilder’s Freedom Party Leads Poll for Dutch European Parliament Elections”.    We noted:

Geert Wilders” Freedom Party (PVV) leads in Dutch polls next month’s European Parliament elections.  According to a report in the Dutch publication,  Spitsnieuws:

A TNS NIPO poll published today predicts that the PVV, the Party for Freedom of Geert Wilders, will become the biggest party in the European elections in the Netherlands.

According to the poll the PVV is going to win the European elections on 22 May with 18.1% of the votes, followed by the Liberal VVD of Prime Minister Mark Rutte with 16.2% and the liberal-democrat D66 party with 15.7%.

The losers of the European elections would be the Christian-Democrats and Labor.

At the conclusion of our April NER article we said:

We hope that those Dutch folks who went to the polls on March 19th and gave the PVV victories in several smaller municipalities may be joined by others in the majority, who didn’t vote. That might provide the PVV with a victory in the May EU parliamentary elections. We have seen Wilders bounce back from previous episodes like a proverbial cat with nine lives.

Both polls taken in the Netherlands clearly indicate that the groundlings aren’t buying the ‘extremist’ charges and calls for prosecution of Wilders. Instead they may be auguries of a possible significant victory for the Freedom Party candidates in the May 2014 European Parliamentary elections.

RELATED STORIES:

France: Muslim unfolds prayer carpet in church, reads Qur’anic verses during Easter mass
UK: Shi’ite Muslim cleric investigated for hate rants against Sunni Muslims
China-Vietnam border: Seven dead as Muslims seize guns from Vietnamese border guards and shoot at them

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Conservative Freedom Party Leads Poll for Dutch European Parliament Elections

Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party (PVV) leads in  Dutch polls next month’s European Parliament elections.  According to a report in the Dutch publication, Spitsnieuws:

A TNS NIPO poll published today predicts that the PVV, the Party for Freedom of Geert Wilders,  will become the biggest party in the European elections in the Netherlands.

According to the poll the PVV is going to win the European elections on 22 May with 18.1% of the votes, followed by the Liberal VVD of Prime Minister Mark Rutte with 16.2% and the liberal-democrat D66 party with 15.7%.

The losers of the European elections would be the Christian-Democrats and Labor.

In our April NER article, Geert Wilders Once Again Endures a Firestorm of Criticism, we noted how Dutch voters in the March 2014 municipal elections had voted their disapproval of the ruling coalition parties in the Hague Parliament, noting how they immediately tried to pin the blame on Geert  Wilders as an extremist.  Presciently in our conclusion we suggested that those same Dutch voters would ultimately vindicate him in the May european elections.  We wrote:

To paraphrase England’s Henry II regarding the fate of former boon companion, Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Beckett, the Dutch political and media establishment might say: “who will rid us of this upstart meddlesome blonde.” We hope that those Dutch folks who went to the polls on March 19th and gave the PVV victories in several smaller municipalities may be joined by others in the majority, who didn’t vote. That might  provide the PVV with a victory in the May EU parliamentary elections. We have seen Wilders bounce back from previous episodes like a proverbial cat with nine lives. His Euro-skeptic alliance partners, especially Ms. Le Pen in France, would deem that a stunning and well deserved turnabout.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.

Geert Wilders’ NExit Plan to Leave the EU

The Hon. Geert Wilders of the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) is serious about the Netherlands leaving the bureaucratic morass of the EU. That would include returning to the Guilder instead of the Euro as the currency. Yesterday, he held an important news conference at The Hague and released the findings of an assessment of what the proposal would mean to the Netherlands and its citizens.

The NExit report, “Assessing the economic impact of the Netherlands leaving the European Union” was prepared by the London-based Capital Economics, Ltd. It purports to be a macro-economic analysis of the effects of exiting the EU in terms of future impacts on gross domestic product, national and personal income, as well as the costs and benefits. NExit puts gravitas behind Wilders proposal. It should be considered the opening bow shot in the upcoming May 2014 European Parliamentary elections where Wilders has already built up a head of steam in the polls in Holland. Further there are the burgeoning alliances with similar Eurosceptic parties like Vlaam Belang in Belgium and Marine le Pen’s National front in France and other parties in the EU.

We have been through the NExit report and found it professionally well done. Its methods, assumptions and findings appear credible. In light of that we find the mainstream reports, to be uniformly dour hewing to the line that polls in The Netherlands are unfavorable. In terms of the upcoming European Parliamentary elections the PVV may be in a lead position to pick up a majority of the Dutch delegation seats. Dutch opinion heretofore has allegedly been not sanguine about the PVV Euro skeptic proposals. That is until now. The NExit report puts flesh on the bones, of how the average Dutch citizen and the national economy would benefit.

Overall the Capital Economics NExit report finds “overall, the various strands of analysis point to NExit being a long term benefit to the Dutch economy and, more than likely, a short term help in easing the Netherlands out of its current economic ills”.

The Report notes that if the NExit project began in January 2015 under a so-called Swiss-like relationship between the Netherlands and the European Union the aggregate economic impacts would be:

  • Gross Domestic Product  would grow by 10 to 13 percent  by 2035 than if the country remained in the EU;
  • National Income would have increased by 1,100 to 1,500 billion Euros equivalent to 7,100 to 9.000 per house and per year.

How would these tantalizing economic benefits be achieved?   Here is what the Capital Economcs NExit report finds:

  • Costs of doing business in Holland would be reduced by a minimum of 20 billion Euros;
  • Public finance would add a cumulative 240 billion to GDP by 2035;
  • Public spending would be reduced by 7.5 billion Euros through revised immigration policies;
  • Expansion of trade with both major trading partners and emerging growth  countries;
  • Tailoring monetary and fiscal policies to the needs of the Netherlands economy add a cumulative 309 billion Euros by 2035.

Capital Economics NExit report suggests that based on its macro-economic assessment that the costs of the transition are manageable. That fears of a revaluation of the Dutch Guilder against the Euro are unfounded and the volatile swings in currency trading on a continuing basis following transition are expected to be minimal. Moreover, Capital Economics believes should have minimal impact on the country’s banking system, its sovereign debt and national pension system.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report, “Dutch Nationalist Pushes for EU Exit”,  quoted Wilders saying, “Leaving the EU will restore the national sovereignty and boost our economy. It offers the Netherland a way out of the crisis. The transition costs will be temporary and manageable.” There are of course skeptics in both the Netherlands and EU who are dismissive of both Capitol Economics, the consulting group that produced the 159 page report calling the underlying assumption ‘unrealistic’.  Capitol Economics authored a 2012 report on the benefits of dismantling the Euro zone. The WSJ cited Dutch Finance minister, Jeroen Dijsselbloem saying that leaving the EU would be “very unwise” for the Dutch economy and business.

Whether the NExit report’s potentials can be realized depends on election of PVV Members in the majority of the Dutch delegation to the European Parliament in Strasbourg. Wilders is first past the post with a plan that he can point to that appears to offer a credible and highly attractive alternative to the economic stasis that the Netherlands and many leading member countries of the EU find themselves in for the foreseeable future.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The New English Review.