The Dutch Deception: Geert Wilders the Islamisation myth of the Netherlands
Erin LaPorte - September 24, 2010
Contents
Introduction - Geert Wilders and his radical Islamophobia - The "Islamisation" of the Netherlands is a myth - Who is supporting Wilders and the PVV? - The Dutch people are fighting back against Wilders - What we first need to do - Last, but most important, Geert Wilders is a dangerous fraud - Notes
Introduction.
We all have an interest in the maintenance of peace and international security, including the security of Europe. We all have an interest in advancing and protecting human rights and opposing actors and regimes that seek to use the powers of the nation-state to oppress and take violence against ethnic and religious minorities. We should be concerned that there are private groups and individuals that sponsor politicians and political parties that seek to overthrow a democracy and free society to bring about an undemocratic one that persecutes ethnic and religious minorities. The overthrow of a Western European democracy and free society for a Muslim-persecuting, undemocratic government as a goal of some American based individuals and groups is occurring, right now, and the gross human rights violations that will follow will become an international and European security issue every bit as much as the criminal actions of Slobodan Milosevic’s governance of Yugoslavia.
So, we should all be quite concerned with political and social developments in the Netherlands in relation to the loss of the country’s national character of tolerance, liberal society and a history as a nation of religious minorities. Along side of the Netherlands as traditionally a nation of religious minorities, the country is also known for its international human rights activitism (1). The developments involve the rise of Dutch politician, Geert Wilders, described as an "Islam critic," with his personal, one-man political party, with foreign backing from American neoconservatives, that is now attempting to globalize its "anti-Islam" efforts. Geert Wilders personal political party, also described as "anti-Islam," has the dubious name of "Freedom Party," or Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV in Dutch, and this party will be referred to as PVV in this letter. Geert Wilders’ radical "anti-Islam" ideology is growing in popularity, including outside of the Netherlands, and has a growing following in the Western world.
What are troubling are the policies that Wilders proposes for his country, the Netherlands, would place the country well outside the standards of democratic governance by bringing about national policies that would be gross human rights violations, perhaps violence, against the Muslim minority. These policy proposals are based on the myth that the Netherlands is "being Islamified" and this myth appears to have never been challenged in Dutch politics, including by the mainstream political parties, or in the Dutch news media. Part of this letter is dedicated to presenting demographic and social scientific data to demonstrate that Wilders’ claims are fraudulent and hateful myths. We need to, as an international community, keep on top of what is happening in the Netherlands, as these developments could have ramifications for international and European security.
Geert Wilders’ and his radical Islamophobia.
Definitions of terms: Islamophobia. The definition of "Islamophobia" used here will be one this Author developed for an April 2010 paper for the Yellow-Stars website using various sources (2). The 1997 Runnymede Report by the Commission on British Muslims is where the use of this term was believed to have first appeared, according to Chris Allen (2007) "as the shorthand way of referring to dread or hatred of Islam – and, therefore, to fear or dislike of all Muslims" (3). Using two other definitions for European contexts for this definition is:
"a largely social anxiety toward Islam and Muslim communities that manifests itself as an often irrational fear and hate of the presence of Islam and Muslims in Europe that is shown in speech, images, actions and public policy directed against European Muslims" (4).
Defining right radicalism that is not just limited to anti-Semitism. Paul Hainsworth argues that what helps define right radicalism is xenophobia and its accompanying Islamophobia, in promoting exclusion, intolerance and violence. Right radicals have used "common sense" notions in the form of catchy phrases and sound bits that have translated into election gains. The main message of the radical right is that immigrants, especially Muslims, are out to undermine and destroy Western culture and threaten the national identities and societies (5).
Hainsworth also argues that multiculturalism is not acceptable to far-right extremist parties. In the Netherlands, Pim Fortuyn addressed legitimate issues, such as Gay rights, but perceived multiculturalism and Islam as a threat to Dutch society. Fortuyn promoted the belief that Islam was incompatible with Western democracy and threatened the separation of religion and politics. After Fortuyn’s death, this mantra was picked up by Geert Wilders and his "Freedom Party" and Wilders further added strong reactions to the Koran. Anti-Muslim constructions were further picked by right radicals in the UK, such as the British National Party of Nick Griffin (6). The main theme, that Wilders has been promoting since about 2004, is that "Islam is not compatible with Western democracy" and the "Muslims are a threat to Dutch society" with immigration as a key point in his program (7).
Geert Wilders wants to ban the Koran. Wilders let his radical policy ideas be known about the Islamic holy book in an August 2008 editorial in the Volkskrant, titled "Genoeg is genoeg: verbied de Koran" (enough is enough: forbid the Koran) and equates Islam as and ideology that believes in the elimination of non-Muslims, accuses Mohammad of being a criminal and this is brought about in the Koran, which Wilders describe as s fascist book equal to Hitler’s Mein Kampf. In the same article, Wilders levies his usual accusations against Leftists, who he believes are helping to Islamify the West and bringing about "the political correctness that enables it" (8). In April 2009, Wilders gave a speech in Florida that was worded almost exactly like his rant piece in Volkskrant in August 2008. In another piece, Wilders called for the closing of mosques and Muslim schools, claiming that "this is where incitement to violence is taking place" and are "fascist institutions." (9).
I have enough of Islam in the Netherlands. No more Muslims immigrants. I have enough of the presence of Allah and Mohammad in the Netherlands. No more mosques. I have enough of the Koran in the Netherlands: forbid that fascist book (10).
Taxing headscarves… In September 2009, Wilders gave a speech with the full Dutch government in attendance where he called for a 1000 euro tax-license on headscarves to apply only to Muslim women. Wilders referred to the headscarf worn by Muslim women as a "head rag" and justified his proposal to tax them as efforts to "clean up the streets…this is pollution of public space" and "we have had enough of headscarves." Such a tax would only apply to Muslim women, not to Christian women or other forms of headwear, and money would supposedly go toward women’s emancipation programs. Dutch political figures openly branded Wilders "a racist" and could not believe that such a proposal was not a joke, but it was no joke. The reaction from the Tweede Kamer (House of Representatives) was that Wilders’ rant to ban the Koran (including for academic purposes) was "hurtful" (11).
Lack of democratic governance in Wilders’ PVV party. Prior to the June 9, 2010 elections of the Tweede Kamer, there were questions by at least one PVV member about bringing democracy to the PVV, "Freedom Party." This issue of democracy in the PVV rests only with the one man who created and controls the PVV: Geert Wilders. An attempt to force this issue of bringing more democracy to the PVV by one of its members, Hero Brinkman, who stated that he is "exercising my democratic right. He (Wilders) is a great believer in freedom of speech." Yes, but the PVV leader usually declines interviews, keeps tight reigns on those he has a members, and has now declined democracy in his PVV, so-called "Freedom Party" (12).
Geert Wilders' Freedom Party (PVV) has up to now been ruled by the will of a single man: Geert Wilders himself. There are no members, no party congresses, no youth or women's organizations, no party elections. In short, no democracy (13).
We should note that if this lack of democracy and transparency is how Wilders runs his personal political party, would this be how he would govern the Netherlands if he ever became its prime minister? Dr.Ton Zwaan, a Holocaust expert at the University of Amsterdam, tells us the dangers of Wilder's PVV party, and in light of its anti-democratic orientation [original in Dutch]:
What is the nature of the PVV movement ideologically and organizationally? To body movement is predominantly authoritarian, anti-democratic and anti-liberal. The leadership is hierarchically linked to a person around whom a certain cult of personality cults arose. There is no misunderstanding possible: this is typical of the collective hatred fantasy of ethnic purifiers, in the years ten in the Ottoman Empire, in the thirties and forties in Europe in the seventies in Cambodia, in the nineties in Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Within the hatred of the Freedom Party fantasy about people with Muslim backgrounds, this diverse combination of category reduced to the Muslims who live not possible. There is a gap that inevitably posited, would be insurmountable and unchangeable. This shows the movement was a perfect disciple of Osama bin Laden and his followers, who by their preaching and their terrorist always seek the divisions between Muslims and non-Muslims around the world as closely as possible to attract. The Freedom Party does not care for integration, but will be in more radicalization and polarization between us and them (14).
For the June 2010 election, the "central tenet" of the PVV party was "fighting Islam" and so-called "left hobbies," like development aid. "Fighting Islam" for Wilders and his PVV party means banning the Koran, closing mosques… policies that were discussed above (15). In the June 2010 elections, Wilders PVV party got 24 seats out of 150, and this placed Wilders as a "kingmaker" in the new cabinet and parliamentary coalition. This result and Wilders role in any new government is fiercely opposed by most Dutch politicians and political figures and will be touched upon below. As a result, the Dutch foreign ministry had to issue instructions to its diplomatic representation on how to handle questions about the Wilders and the human rights situation for its Muslim minority (16).
Wilders does not believe that freedom of religion should apply to Muslims and Islamic practice. Wilders, as a matter of routine, mixes radical Islamism and terrorism with intuitions and communities where mainstream (moderate) Muslim live and raise their families. Wilders believes that "there is no moderate Islam" and that extreme versions of Islam are the only form of Islam. Wilders also believes that "a huge number of Muslims in Europe want an un-democratic society" and that "millions of Muslims should be deported from Europe." In a June 2009 interview he gave on Danish television, Wilders called for mass deportations of Muslims from Europe, using his trademark idea that Islam is "an ideology, not a religion" and that "normal people were afraid of Islamisation" (17).
The "Islamisation" of the Netherlands is a myth. In a December 2008 speech in Israel, Wilders highlighted an American political slogan of "it’s the economy, stupid." From now on," stated Wilders, "the motto of my party will be ‘it’s the demographics, stupid" (18). Part of Wilders’ "Islamisation" argument and the "demographics stupid" involves a mass "Muslim conspiracy" of Muslim immigrants coming to Europe to have babies to displace the local, shrinking European population. Well – it is indeed "the demographics, stupid" as the demographic data presently below will demonstrate that Wilders’ claims of a "tsunami of Muslims" coming for the Netherlands are fraudulent and just hateful rhetoric.
No "tsunami of Muslims" to the Netherlands anytime soon. First off, a 2008 study conducted by Joop Garssen and Hans Nicolaas of Dutch immigrant Muslim population and their birth rates compared to native Dutch women found a lot less than a "tsunami of Muslims." In one generation, Turkish and Moroccan women birthrates not only parallel native Dutch women, the researchers indicated that birthrates of second-generation, immigrant Turkish and Moroccan women match those of native Dutch women . Also the first generation immigrant Turkish and Moroccan birthrates have become stagnant and below birthrates of native Dutch women. The researchers believe that this is not due to cultural assimilation, however, they do admit that it is not clear if native Dutch women set fertility examples (19).
According to Mary Mederios Kent (2007) of the Population Reference Bureau, Russia has a large Muslim population (15 million), the largest in Europe, and most Muslims in Eastern Europe are native born. Kent agrees with Joop Garssen and Hans Nicolaas’ assessments that the fertility gap between Muslim women and non-Muslim women is narrowing - and also confirms the narrowing gap between Dutch Muslim women and Dutch non-Muslim women (20). The notion of a tsunami of Muslims, according to Kent, is perception not reality (emphasis mine):
Concerns about the rapid growth of Muslims are based on popular perceptions, not statistical evidence. Because many European countries do not ask a person's religion on official forms or in censuses, it has been difficult to obtain accurate estimates of the number or childbearing rates of Muslims. Recent trends in the Netherlands tell a similar story. The fertility gap between native-born women and women born in predominantly Muslim Morocco and Turkey narrowed considerably between 1990 and 2005 (21).
So - Geert Wilders’ forecast of a "tsunami of Muslims" is wrong by the fertility rates studies presented here for Muslim and non-Muslim women in the Netherlands. Add to that a January 2010 study also confirmed that there is no "tsunami of Muslims" about to hit the Netherlands. This study from Han Nicolaas and Elma Wobma confirmed that non-western women were not only putting off having children until older, but non-western women are having fewer children, yet 1 in 6 children was of non-western origins (22).
Another interesting set of data is also found on the Statistics Netherlands site with regard to immigration. For the year 2008, the Netherlands received more immigrants from the United States (5,931) and the United Kingdom (7,497), approximately two times than from Morocco (1,828) and Turkey (4,221) combined. The highest number of immigrants, 13,842, to the Netherlands in 2008 was from Poland and most immigrants to the Netherlands appear to be from other nations of Europe (23).
No Shraria law courts in the Netherlands. According to Wilders, part of "Islamisation" also involves the introduction of Sharia law, usually in the form of a burkas, minority demands and generic accusations of honor killings, which is introducing Sharia "bit by bit." Wilders states that his country of the Netherlands is, "in the process of becoming Hollandistan" (24). Well, is the Netherlands in danger of becoming "Hollandistan" though Sharia law? Nope, not even maybe, and this argument, like the tsunami of Muslims, is also wrong. First of all, May 2010 study of Sharia law in the Netherlands found that the practice of Sharia is more along the lines of conflict resolution, which at the same time, there is respect for the supremacy of Dutch law. One factor, and a prevailing factor in the Dutch Muslim population, is the ethnic diversity and divisions into largely Turk and Moroccan ethnic communities. This factor means diverse interpretations of Sharia and competition between Muslim communities – as well as doubts about institutional authority. Many of the rules of Sharia that the study’s respondents already conceder important are already carried out in Dutch law and Sharia itself requires believers to follow the laws in force where they live (25).
TOP
Dutch Muslims, their ethnic groups and political participation. If the stories told by Wilders are true, that "Muslims are going to take over" we should see concerted action by Muslims in the Netherlands based on common group identification of "Muslim." According to the Open Society Institute’s (OSI) 2010 report, over 80% of Muslims in five European cities – Antwerp, Leicester, Rotterdam, Stockholm and London, are eligible to vote in both local and national elections (26). Political participation in elections varies, in the 11 cities studied in the OSI report. Some political parties, as in Germany and Belgium, seek the minority voting bloc. In Antwerp, participation of Turkish and Moroccan voters was credited with preventing the neo-Nazi, Islamophobic Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) party from gaining the largest vote and the mayor‘s office (27).
The OSI’s survey of European Muslims from the OSI found that there is a difference between identifying as a citizen or "belonging in he Netherlands" and ethnic identity or "being Dutch" (28). George Groenewold (2009) reports that second generation Dutch Muslims did not practice their faith by praying, have successfully combined belonging to different social groups, such as being "Dutch" and "Muslim," and are of the view that religion should play no role in society and politics. A minority of these second-generation, Dutch Muslims say that women should wear a headscarf outside the home (29).
To Sara Silvestri (2007) the decentralization of Islam, similar to that of Protestantism, and the belief in the direct relationship of the Believer to God means that Islam lacks a central leader with a centralized religious view (30). This aspect of Islam means that there is a fractured and highly diverse European Muslim community, which has been described by many authors (31). The fragmentation aspect of Islam, as well as tight-knit ethnic groups (Moroccans, Turks, etc.) means that concerted action based only on "being Muslim" is not likely and even impossible.
Candidates of Muslim background often have to make extra efforts to convince all voters to talk about issues (education, employment) and that the candidate is not a representative of a religious or ethnic group, but a representative for all citizens (32). A former member of the Green Party and Dutch Parliamentarian, Mohammed Rabbae, lamented that "more unity would be good" and that unity suffered from "sectarian and personal interests that are common place in Islamic movements." In 2006, the Islamic Party Netherlands got only 0.2 percent of all the ballot cast. Theo Coskun, a member of the Rotterdam city council who knows the Muslim community well, stated that "a lot of people who call themselves ‘Muslim’ are very secular" and pointed out that Dutch Muslims prefer to vote for established political parties. Coskun also stated that "no Turks will vote for a Moroccan. The opposite is even less likely" Overall, attempts at bring Muslims together into political parties have failed and Muslims that do enter politics do so through established political parties (33). If the "Muslims" are trying to "Islamify the Netherlands," they are certainly off to a bad start in their efforts and, therefore, the impending "take over by Muslims" is a fable.
Who is supporting Wilders and the PVV? Over the last few years, the Dutch media have brought about accusations that Geert Wilders’ one-man political party has been receiving support, including financial support, from extreme-right and neoconservative, American based groups and individuals. There is an American-based legal defense group that has been helping Wilders’ legal defense against charges of hate incitement. There are numerous individuals and groups, both in Europe and America, that are believed to be leading at least moral support for Wilders’ personal efforts to globalize his radical brand of Islamophobia. So, for this letter the emphasis will be on Americans who are out-front in giving at least moral support to what appears to be the attempt to bring about an anti-democratic, Muslim-persecuting government in the Netherlands (34).
Geert Wilders and his American radical right supporters. The most reporting on those Americans and American based groups that are probably supporting Geert Wilders was Vrij Nederland, a newspaper that dates back to World War Two resistance against the Nazis. On August 9, 2009, the paper reported on Wilders supporters in the US as possible sources of funding and legal aid. When given the so-called "free speech award" in Florida in April 2009, Wilders shared a dinner table with former American Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton. The Flemish neo-Nazi, Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) is heavily invested in Geert Wilders and his PVV party. The common bond is hate for Muslims and the desire to bring about anti-Muslim policies for both of their countries (35).
Over about the past three years, various Dutch media outlets have accused Wilders of being funded and supported by American based groups and individuals. A couple of good summaries of both Wilders early 2009 U.S. trip are provided by both Vrij Nederland and in an English-language article from Daniel Luban and Eli Clifton (36). Wilders‘ promotion tour in the U.S. included a private showing of his 17 minute, anti-Muslim film Fitna to members of the US Congress at the invitation of John Kyl. He has met privately with the Wall Street Journal editorial board. Wilders is also, at the very least, receiving funding for his legal defense which include PayPal buttons for donations for Geert Wilders on Robert Spencer‘s Jihadwatch and Pamela Geller‘s Atlas Shrugs blog. On some of these U.S. visits, almost on the command of Pamela Geller, Geert Wilders has visited the United States and received "freedom" awards from neoconservatives groups, had speaking engagements at universities and at the National Press Club (37). The efforts to present Wilders to the public, like the National Press Club, appear to be attempts to mainstream Wilders’ radical Islamophobic ideas.
One of those individuals is radical right blogger, Pamela Geller, who sponsored Wilders’ 2009 U.S. trips. Recently, Geller gave her support to the EDL after its August 28, 2010 action against police in the UK city of Bradford. The most prominent recent activity was Wilders’ hate speech given on September 11, 2010 "anti-mosque" rally in New York, but Wilders’ usual travels are especially attached to showing his anti-Muslim film, Fitna, under the banner of being a "champion of freedom of speech." Geller’s most recent and noteworthy activity was to place herself at the center of the opposition of the New York Islamic community center, which many observers have cited as the chief cause for the current, sometimes violent, disease of Islamophobia (38). At the September 11, 2010 New York protest against the Islamic community center, Geller called Wilders "a modern-day Churchill" to chants of "no mosque here." While Wilders was speaking, some in the crowd caught a man shouting "f---- all Muslims. Kill all Muslims" (39).
This "Ground Zero Mosque" speech should be regarded as a shame for the Dutch people - yet - the Dutch media treated Geert Wilders' speech as some kind of big statement on a future Dutch government. The truth is that the Dutch should regard the foreign support of Wilders and his PVV party as hostile actions against their country, culture and democracy!
It is easy to say that these are innocent activities, but when we place them next to Geert Wilders’ ideology, his illegal and radical policy plans for his own country, the Netherlands, we see that these are not "innocent activities." What these Americans and their American based groups are, in fact, doing is working for the goal of putting an anti-democratic and abusive government in the Netherlands. It can also be stated that neither the personality of Geert Wilders, nor the PVV party are really Dutch and a product of Dutch culture, but American neoconservative. Dutch people should regard this foreign support for a anti-democratic politician and political party by and for foreigners as a hostile act against their nation and culture.
The Dutch people are fighting back against Wilders, the PVV and their foreign sponsors. The many of the newspaper article used in this article have been efforts by Dutch newspapers to disclose especially the foreign support and possible funding of Geert Wilders and his PVV party. After winning 24 seats in the Tweede Kamer, the alarm was keenly felt by the other parties. Some courageous Dutch political figures are refusing to be a part of a coalition with Wilders- good for them - they are trying to save their own country as well as preserve international peace!
One such effort was from the former Dutch Prime Minster, Ruud Lubbers, but these are not the only Wilders opposition efforts:
Freedom of religion – also of Islam – and no discrimination based on religion or world view have to remain essential features of our constitutional state. On that, there can’t be a shadow of a doubt (40).
In another of these inspiring efforts, Elder VVD statesman Frans Weisglas had called on his fellow VVD members to voice opposition to any alliance with the PVV and based this on VVD party principles respecting liberalism: On the basis of Liberal principles alone we should have nothing to do with a party which stigmatizes groups of people,’ Weisglas said.
I urge VVD members to make their feelings known to [party leader Mark] Rutte. Let your criticism be heard’ (41).
What we first need to do… First, the purpose of this letter and future work, again, is to raise awareness about this current and future security threat growing in the Netherlands. Some, especially in the US, see the activities of Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and the so-called "Freedom Center" of David Horowitz as just an American problem that was most dramatically felt in the so-called "New York mosque controversy." Geert Wilders and the PVV are looked at as "only Dutch problems." This growing international network of radical and violent Islamophobia threatens the entirety of the Western world, America, as well as Europe and the Netherlands.
Understand the threat that this subversive activities against the Netherlands has for European and Atlantic security. First, these foreign activities of subverting the democracy of a good NATO ally are simply not in U.S. interests for Europe. This attempt to subvert the democratic society of a long time NATO ally and American friend is outrageous, but this appears to be the goal of the Americans supporting Wilders as discussed in this letter. However, there appears to be little in US law to stop and punish these dangerous activities that place US- European security interests at risk. Most important, the Dutch have a history of crafting their security policy in support of NATO and transatlantic security (42). The Dutch deserve better that allowing Americans and American based groups to support and perhaps fund an anti-democratic, political party that could create an international crisis and a security issue in the transatlantic area. Wilders and the PVV in control of a future Dutch government will create a transatlantic security crisis.
Monitor human rights developments in the Netherlands. The over-influence of Geert Wilders is probably occurring, as we can see from Human Rights Watch (HRW). HRW reports that in October 2009 stricter residency requirements for non-western immigrants came into force that were described as aimed at immigrants from Morocco and Turkey (43). Recently, HRW opened an office in Amsterdam, noted the Netherlands’ long standing human rights activism abroad, but only offered criticisms of the country’s policy toward non-western immigrants and sending asylum seekers back to places were they would be in danger (44). As demonstrated above, most immigrants to the Netherlands come from the rest of Europe. Twice as many immigrants come to the Netherlands from the US and UK combined than from Turkey and Morocco combined. We can see that non-western immigration is not a "problem" for the Netherlands, but Islamophobia is:
Muslims, who numbered approximately 850,000, faced societal resentment, attributable to perceptions that Islam is incompatible with Western values, that Muslim immigrants have failed to integrate, and that levels of criminal activity among Muslim youth are higher than the national average. Major incidents of violence against Muslims were rare, but minor incidents, including intimidation, brawls, vandalism, and graffiti with abusive language, were common. The Registration Center for Discrimination on the Internet (MDI) noted that the highest instance of reported offensive expressions (346) in 2008 concerned hatred of Muslims (45).
The 2009 human rights report from the U.S. State Department reports that societal abuses against Jews, as well as Muslims, were up, but there are different experiences for different communities. Much to its credit, the reports states the government was working to combat abuses, including with NGOs (46). What we should see as odd in the report from the State Department is that the Netherlands puts efforts to combat Islamophobia, has criminal sanctions against hate speech, but allows a political party that promotes hate and discriminatory policies to exist in its political system. We should understand that the presence of this "anti-Islam" political party also entails the possibility of gaining real governmental powers. We should also ask then: Why is there allowed to be a "political party" that now has 24 seats in its parliament, that is described as "anti-Islam," openly promotes hate of the Muslim minority and advocates national policies that would violate European and international human rights standards?
Deny legitimacy in your country to Geert Wilders, his supporters, and his PVV party members. As mentioned, Wilders is trying to internationalize his hate campaign against Muslims. As of the morning of this letter, we now learn the Geert Wilders, along with two legitimate political actors, is now involved in crafting security policy for the Netherlands, including the shape of the police forces (47). We should be concerned about this advancement of Wilders’ PVV into policy making. Given the radical policies of Geert Wilders and his PVV party, there is nothing for your government to gain from cooperation with any way with Geert Wilders, members of his PVV party, but your country has every interest in keeping this dangerous form of politics out of your country. Giving attention to Geert Wilders and members of his PVV party means giving their outrageous and hateful views credibility and legitimacy where too much credibility and legitimacy has already been given in Dutch politics.
Last, but most important, Geert Wilders is a dangerous fraud. Part of this letter demonstrated that there is no "Islamisation" of the Netherlands and that Dutch Muslims are no threat to their own country. It also appears that a rational debates among Dutch political parties and leaders on the whole myth of "Islamisation" and the presence of Muslims has not occurred in the Netherlands and as a result the country is tragically failing to protect its Muslim minority from dangerous, perhaps violent, political forces. Wilders uses this myth of "Islamification" and the myth to advance his political career and win supporters on both sides of the Atlantic. The Dutch political system continues to give credibility and legitimacy to the PVV’s agenda to advance also policies that are already placing the Netherlands as a nation outside international standards from treatment of its minority population, and these policies against the non-western population are based on the myth of "Islamification." We all have a stake in opposing Geert Wilders, his dangerous associates, and insuring that the Netherlands remains in good standing as a member of the international community of nations. Critical statements about PVV voters are not only correct and justified, but necessary. It was not only right for the Indonesian Ambassador, Mr. Junus Effendi Habibie, to be critical of PVV-voters, they have voted against their own country, but they are indeed, at least, suffers of Islamophobia. What is more, PVV voters voted based on the Islamification myth, and voting based on a myth can be seen as the most incompetent of voting habits.
The criticism of Wilders’ PVV party it is necessary and long overdue. The truth is we need of such citizens from the international community. Dutch voters, especially those that voted for the PVV, need to feel the ramifications of their poor election choices. Also - the majority of Dutch voters did not vote for the PVV, but it seems that those 1.5 million have more power than the others that voted for other parties. Yes - it is right that the Netherlands’ international image suffer as a result of the poor choices of its voters and a political system that gives legitimacy to a undemocratic and aggressive radical Islamphobe, politician like Wilders and his dangerous undemocratic PVV party. Again - it is about time that the Netherlands feel some international and perhaps European pressure for allowing itself to be put in this predicament. Mr. Junus Effendi Habibie owes no apologies to anyone in the Dutch government for telling the truth about PVV voters and we should be grateful for the stand he took against Geert Wilders and his psychotic supporters. Please do not be afraid to speak up, after all Geert Wilders states that he is a "champion of free speech," and we do need more in the international community to speak up about the situation in the Netherlands. What we should question is that it now appears that the PVV is being protected by the Dutch government, as well as given legitimacy for its dangerous policies in Dutch politics, society and government. We need to keep further watch…
Thank you for your generous time,
Mrs. Erin S. LaPorte
TOP
Notes
1. Andeweg, Rudy B. and Galen A. Irwin. 2002. Governance and Politics of the Netherlands. Palgrave Macmillian: New York, NY, 17-42. Baehr, Peter R., Monique C. Castermans-Holleman and Fred Grufeld. 2002. Human Rights in the Foreign Poilcy of the Netherlands. John Hopkins University Press. [November] Vol. 24, no. 4 (992-1010). [http://www.jstor.org/stable/20069641] accessed on March 28, 2009.
2. LaPorte, Erin S. 2010. Delusions of Eurabia: The Islamification myth, European Islamophobic Extremists and a rational picture of European Muslims. April 2. [http://freedom.yellow-stars.com/islam.europe.NL.htm] accessed on September 20, 2010.
3. Allen, Chirs. 2007. Islamophobia and its Consequences. In European Islam: Challenges for Society and Public Policy. Amghar, Samir, Amel Boubekeur and Michael Emerson, eds. Brussels: Centre for European Policy Studies, 144.
4. LaPorte.
5. Paul Hainsworth 2008. The Extreme Right in Western Europe. New York: Routledge, 73.
6. Ibid, 74.
7. Jeroen Bosch. 2005. Netherlands - Wilders tries to follow in Pim Fortuyn’s footsteps. Searchlight. February. [http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/index.php?link=template&story=122] accessed on August 20, 2010.
8. Wilders, Geert. 2008. ‘Genoeg is genoeg: verbied de Koran.’ Volkskrant. August 8. [http://volkskrant.nl/binnenland/article451338.ece/Genoeg_is ] accessed August 26, 2010.
9. Wilders, Geert. 2009. Human Rights Exist for the Protection of Individuals, not Religions and Ideologies (Excepts). April 30. [http://www.hudson-ny.org/487/human-rights-exist-for-the-protection-of-individuals-not-religions-and-ideologies] accessed August 31, 2010. Sara Berkeljon. 2008. Wilders: verbied de Koran, ook in moskee. 27 January. Volkskrant. [http://www.volkskrant.nl/] accessed on August 26, 2010.
10. Wilders 2009. This text is the same from the August 8, 2008 Volkskrant op-ed: Ik heb genoeg van de islam in Nederland: geen moslimimmigrant er meer bij. Ik heb genoeg van de annbidding van Allah en Mohammed in Nederland: geen moskee er meer bij. Ik heb genoeg van de Koran in Nederland: verbied dat fascistische boek.
11. Volkskrant. 2007. Vogelaar noemt outspread Wilders ‘schadelijk.’ August 8. [http://www.volkskrant.nl/ ] accessed on August 26, 2010. Tyler, John. 2009. Wilders wants headscarf tax. 16 September. Radio Netherlands International. [http://www.rnw.nl/article/wilders-wants-headscarf-tax] accessed on April 2, 2010.
12. Radio Netherlands International. 2010. MP wants more Democracy in Freedom Party. 11 May. [http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/mp-wants-more-democracy-freedom-party] accessed on September 12, 2010.
13. Ibid.
14. Zwaan, Tom. 2009. Het is zinvol om PVV en fascisme te vergelijken. 10 July. NRChandelsblad. [http://www.nrc.nl/opinie/article2297515.ece/Het_is_zinvol_om_PVV_en_fascisme_te_vergelijken] accessed on September 3, 2010.
15. Ian Traynor. 2010. Leaders fear for Netherlands' image as anti-Islam populist turns kingmaker. August 20. The Guardian. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/20/dutch-wilders-ground-zero-mosque] accessed on August 23, 2010.
16. Marco Hochgemuth. 2010. Opposing Islam central Tenet of Dutch Freedom Party. April 23. Radio Netherlands. [http://www.rnw.nl/article/opposing-islam-central-tenet-ditch-freedom-party] accessed on August 29, 2010.
17. DutchNews. 2009. Millions of Muslims cause problems: Wilders. June 15. [http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2009/06/millions_of_muslims_cause_prob.php] accessed April 2, 2010.
18. Wilders, December 16, 2008
19. Joop Garssen and Han Nicolaas. 2008. Fertility of Turkish and Moroccan women in the Netherlands: Adjustment to native level within one generation. Demographic Research. Vol. 19, Article 33, 1249-1280. [ http://www.demographic-research.org/Volumes/Vol19/33/19-33.pdf] Accessed on March 15, 2010
20. Mary Mederios Kent. 2008. Do Muslims Have More Children Than Other Women in Western Europe? Feburary. Population Reference Bureau. [http://www.prb.org/Articles/2008/muslimsineurope.aspx?p=1] accessed on March 4, 2010.
21. Ibid.
22. Han Nicolaas and Elma Wobma 2010. Non-western first-time mothers older. January 10. Statistics Netherlands. Non-western first-time mothers older. [http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/bevolking/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2010/2010-3019-wm.htm] accessed on September 12, 2010.
23. Statistics Netherlands. 2010. Migration (interactive). [http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/themas/bevolking/cijfers/extra/mappingworld-1.htm?Languageswitch=on] accessed on September 12, 2010.
24. Wilders, April 30, 2009.
25. L.G.H. Bakker, A.J. Gehring and K. Mourik, et al. 2010. Summary. Sharia in the Netherlands: A study of Islamic counseling and conflict resolution among Muslims in the Netherlands. May. Radboud University Nijmegen. [http://english.wodc.nl/images/1900_Summary_tcm45-266259.pdf] accessed September 4, 2010. NIS News Bulletin. 2010. Cabinet Finds No Sharia Courts in Netherlands. May 24. [http://nisnews.nl/public/240410_2.htm] accessed on September 4, 2010.
26. Open Society Institute. 2010. Muslims in Europe: Report on 11 EU Cities. [http://www.soros.org/initiatives/home/articles_publications/publications/muslims-europe-20091215] accessed on March 25, 2010, 187.
27. Ibid, 191, 188.
28. Ibid, 181.
29. Groenewold, W.G.F. 2009. "On being Dutch and Muslim: descendants of Turkish and Moroccan immigrants speak out about identity and religion." Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographics Institute. Vol. 25, p.4-6. [http://depot.knaw.nl/7536/] accessed on August 29, 2010.
30. Silvestri, Sara. 2007. Muslim Institutions and Political Mobilization. In European Islam: Challenges for Society and Public Policy. Amghar, Samir, Amel Boubekeur and Michael Emerson, eds. Brussels: Centre for European Policy studies 169-182, 170.
31. Open Society 2010; Klausen, Jytte. 2008. Public Policy for European Muslims: Facts and Perceptions. Feburary 22. Institute for Strategic Dialogue. [http://www.strategicdialogue.org/PublicPolicyMuslimsWEB.pdf ] accessed on March 22, 2010. Buijs, Frank J. and Jan Rath 2003. Muslims in Europe: The state of research. April. International Migration, Integration and Social Cohesion. [http://www.imiscoe.org/publications/workingpapers/documents/MuslimsinEurope-Thestateofresearch.pdf] accessed on March 16, 2010
32. Open Society 2010, 191-192.
33. Open Society Institute 2010, 192-193; Radio Netherlands International. 2010. In spite of numbers, Dutch Muslims are political non-entity. 5 February. [http://www.rnw.nl/english/article/wilders-calls-mass-deportation-muslims] accessed on February 20, 2010
34. Freke Vuijst. 2009. Op Zoek naar Dollars. August 9. Vrij Nederland. [http://www.vn.nl/Dossiers/Meer-dossiers/wilders-en-de ] accessed on August 29, 2010.
35. Freke Vuijst, August 9, 2009. Piet H. de Jong. 2009. Wilders en de finaciën. September 4. Nederlands Dagblag. [http://nd.nl/artikelen/2009/September/04/1914422] accessed on August 22, 2010.
36. Daniel Luban and Eli Clifton February 28, 2009 Dutch Foe of Islam Ignores US Allies Far Right Ties. http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45928
37. Daniel Luban and Eli Clifton, February 28, 2009. Freke Vuijst, August 9, 2009. Piet H. de Jong, September 4, 2010.
38. Daniel Burke. 2010. Pamela Geller, Queen of Muslim Bashers, at Center of N.Y. ’Mosque’ Debate. August 20. Huffington Post. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/20/pamela-gellerqueen-of-mus_n_689709.html] accessed on August 23, 2010. Justin Elliott. 2010. A contentious 9/11 anniversary unfolds. September 11. Salon. [http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/09/11/september_11_2010/index.html] accessed on September 13, 2010.
39. Garibaldi. 2010. F**K the Muslims! Says Protester at SIOA Rally. Loonwatch. [http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/09/fk-the-muslims-says-protester-at-sioa-rally/] accessed on September 15, 2010. The page contains a video of man at September 11, 2010, anti-mosque protest yelling "f--- all Muslims. Kill all Muslims" during what appears to be Geert Wilders’ speech.
40. Jurjen van de Pol. 2010. Dutch Coalition Talks Threatened as Lubbers Changes Mind on Wilders Party. Bloomberg. August 26. [ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-26/dutch-coalition-talks-threatened-as-lubbers-changes-mind-on-wilders-party.html] accessed on September 11, 2010.
41. DutchNews. 2010. VVD elder statesman urges members to protest about PVV. August 30.[http://www.dutchnews.nl/news/archives/2010/08/vvd_elder_statesman_urges_memb.php] accessed on September 11, 2010.
42. Andeweg and Irwin. 2002, 200-202
43. Human Rights Watch. 2009. European Union. Events of 2009. [http://www.hrw.org/en/node/87595#_The_Netherlands] accessed on September 19, 2010.
44. Erik Klooster. 2010. Human Rights Watch opens Amsterdam office. September 14. Radio Netherlands International. [http://www.rnw.nl/international-justice/article/human-rights-watch-opens-amsterdam-office-0] accessed on September 19, 2010.
45. U.S. State Department. 2009. 2009 Human Rights Reports: Netherlands. [http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/eur/136049.htm] accessed on September 18, 2010.
46. Ibid.
47. NOS. 2010. VVD, CDA en PVV sluiten akkoord over filigreed. September 16. [http://nos.nl/artikel/185405-vvd-cda-en-pvv-sluiten-akkoord-over-veiligheid.html] accessed September 16, 2010.
TOP - Yellow Stars - Stop Wilders
Fly a Dutch Flag - and show support for Dutch democracy and tolerence at this difficult time ...