Comments 1 - 5 of 5 Search these comments
I respect his courage. Pim Fortuyn would have addressed the problem of Islamic immigration more than a decade ago, but got assassinated in 2002, and the Dutch have already freed the assassin.
And Theo van Gogh was similarly murdered by a Muslim explicitly because of Islam.
At least his murderer is still in prison.
"Targeting Islam, Mosques and the Koran
Wilders, who is from Venlo, a town skirting the German border, even introduced his policy platforms for the campaign on Twitter and Facebook, surprising even the PVV party group in parliament, which barely played any role in their drafting. The platforms fit on a single piece of paper. Right at the very top: "De-Islamize the Netherlands-" Further down he called for the closure of all mosques and to ban the Koran. The platforms quickly outraged the other parties."
Geert Wilders has the right solution. Allowing Islam is allowing terrorism.
Allowing Islam is allowing terrorism.
That is essentially what the Dutch have been doing. Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh remain dead. Ayaan Hirsi Ali remains in exile in the USA, where Democrats insist on importing more Muslims who believe they are commanded to kill her. Geert Wilders has emerged from hiding but campaigns mainly via mobile phone with bodyguards for protection. Most Dutch are too terrorized to speak publicly in their own country about the hateful doctrine they made the mistake of importing. Almost the only public voices, then, are the advocates of spreading Islam, which is precisely the result that the assassins intended.
It's tough to have a debate where one side is in danger of being arrested and prosecuted for telling the truth, as Wilders was, or killed as Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh were, while the other side is allowed to continue using murder.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/geert-wilders-and-donald-trump-use-same-playbook-a-1135759.html