Islam in Europe - Commentary by Snouck

Making all the appointments

Today the Amsterdam court ruled in the set-up of the resumed Wilders trial. There were two issues. One was the issue of the witnesses that Mr. Wilders had requested and another was that Justice Tom Schalken would be heard on his supper with witness Hans Jansen. This is the supper which caused Wilders' first trial session to be declared invalid and to be redone.

The matter of the 18 original witnesses.

Wilders had originally requested that 18 witnesses for the defense would be heard, amongst them Mohammed Bouyeri, the assassin of Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh. 15 of the 18 witnesses were turned down in the first trial session. Well, the 15 witnesses were turned down again today by the new judge.

The matter of Justice Schalken

The first trial session was suspended when it turned out that one of the Justices who had ordered the trial of Wilders for hate speech, discrimination and racism had appeared to try to influence witness Hans Jansen. Mr. Wilders' defense had asked that Justice Tom Schalken would be heard as a witness. Also he asked for the host of the supper, Bertus Hendriks, to be heard as a witness. These requests were granted.

Conclusion, the trade-off

The score seems to be 1-1. One point for the prosecution and one for the defense of Wilders. My take is that the Court views this as a trade. They have sacrificed a smaller value for a bigger value. The smaller value is the reputation of the Judiciary. The court is willing to have some brother-judges to be humiliated and having the impartiality of the courts questioned. The bigger value to be protected is the protection of Islam. The 15 witnesses that Wilders' defense had asked for would have given the public the opportunity to learn about Islam as it is seen by its adherents. It would have exposed this political and expansionist ideology for what it is and was. The protection of Islam is so important for the court that they are willing to catch flak for it.

Hate Speech Trial against Wilders part 2

I just happened to find out that the trial against Mr. Geert Wilders for Hate Speech (Dutch) is about to be resumed. Already next Monday there will be a first session of the re-trial against the leader of the PVV or Freedom Party. This will be a planning session on which the dates will be planned for the sessions of the new trial.

New witnesses

For the first trial Geert Wilders had asked for hearings for 18 witnesses. The court turned down 15 of these witnesses. For the new trial Geert Wilder's defense Bram Moszkowicz made a new request for having the 15 witnesses heard by the Court. The three original witnesses will also be heard again. Another new witness is to be heard. That is Justice Tom Schalken (Dutch), one of the three judges who ordered the trial and who tried to influence the witness for Geert Wilders' defense Hans Jansen. When the news that Justice Schalken tried to influence Hans Jansen came out it caused the original October trial to stall.

On 14 February the final decisions for the planning of the trial will be taken.

A well-prepared court

The website of the courts rechtspraak.nl has announced that the new trial will be done with new judges, who will be better prepared to deal with the intense media scruteny for the trial. Additionally the substitution court will be staffed by judges from the Haarlem court in order to avoid having a substitution court with judges who have friendly relations with the trial judges having to substitute the latter. This caused intense recriminations between judges after the trial within the Amsterdam Court. 

The charges against Wilders

The Public Prosecution (OM) has announced it will demand a "not guilty" for hate speech and discrimination for Mr. Wilders. Despite this the judges may still convict Geert Wilders on those charges, but this is not so likely.

Talking like a real Turk

Kleinverzet has a story on Freedom Party (PVV) EU MP Barry Madlener questioning the consul to the EU Egemen Bagis. MP Madlener asked why the government of Turkey refused to meet with PVV leader Geert Wilders, who is opposed to Turkey joining the EU. MP Madlener added:

You are good friends with Iranian dictator Ahmadinejad, while you shun my party's leader. It is a disgrace.

The consul of the Turks responded with a personal attack on Wilders and Madlener

Racism is a dangerous disease from which Europe suffers much. It is clear there are still people suffering from it. Mr. Madlener, we will cure you.

In addition to a personal smear, this is a direct threat against Mr. Madlener, Mr. Wilders and those who stand with them. How will the Turks "cure" those who oppose their joining the EU? Will they cure them with the cure the Armenians received less than a century years ago, when they were against remaining a part of the Ottoman Empire?

Seeing but not seeing

Indicative of the refusal of the EU elite to see reality of Turkish and Muslim irredentism for what it is, the EU secratariat ommitted the remarks by the consult of the Turks from the meeting notes. Quoting Kleinverzet:

Thomas Grünert, secretary of the EP, says the remarks made by the Turkish minister were not included, because it wasn't 'really a political point'. According to him it was something personal between the Bagis and Madlener.

We didn't think it was in the interest of the governance of the European Union to emphasise the confrontation between the Turkish minister and Madlener.

Geert Wilders Hate Speech trial
Today on Monday the Fourth of October 2010 the trial against Geert Wilders was resumed. There is an excellent write-up by Ferdy at KleinVerzet on this trial.

Showing their colours

Well now the new Dutch cabinet has been put on a firm footing. The agreement or regeeraccoord that was negotiated between right-liberal VVD, Christian Democrat CDA and populist PVV was approved by a congress of CDA members in the city of Arnhem last Saturday. 4,000 members showed up and 68 percent of these approved of the participation of the CDA in the new cabinet.

Wilders and his movement becoming accepted

What is remarkable is that the ballot was not secret, but public and even live on TV. This means that 2,759 people showed their support for co-operation with Geert Wilders on TV. This breaks the ice for showing support for Wilders in a major way.

The future of the CDA

The CDA and its forerunners was the major political movement of the right in The Netherlands since the 1901 cabinet of Abraham Kuyper's ARP, the first true political party in The Netherlands. Due to ongoing secularisation the Christian Democrats have been weakening considerably. Especially in the last 20 years. With the acceptance of the populist movement the CDA is confining itself to the margin, while the PVV will take its place as the centre piece of Dutch politics.

Here is video of the leaders of the three parties Mark Rutte, Maxime Verhagen and Geert Wilders announcing having come to an agreement. All in Dutch of course, but one can sense the relief of the three leaders.


The agreements or regeeraccoord still has to be approved by the three parties, the right-liberal VVD, the Christian-Democrat CDA and the populist PVV.

Geert Wilders defends his voters

As negotiators are working on putting together a new coalition government of CDA, VVD and PVV, more and more formerly prominent politicians are coming out with their opposition against a possible government including the Freedom Party (PVV). These former prominents are all members of the Christian Democrats (CDA). The reasons given for their opposition to a coalition with are that the PVV endangers the Rule of Law and excludes and demonises the Muslim part of Dutch society.

Wilders on Twitter

Wilders reacted yesterday on Twitter by defending his 1.5 million voters and to call for an end to the demonisation against them.

Who and by whom?

It bears pointing out that while the former CDA prominents mourn the possible exclusion of the followers of Islam, they actively seek the exclusion and demonisation of the PVV-voting base. Therefore it is not exclusion and demonisation as such they are against and differ with the PVV. It is who must be excluded and demonised. And it is about by whom there must be demonisation and exclusion that they differ from the PVV. They seek the moral high ground by their complaints about the baseness of demonisation and exclusion. While practising both of these as part of their political art.

The Good Book

And this Sunday's Bible reading is from Matthew 7, verses 1 - 29.

Emerging opposition

In European countries like Belgium, The Netherlands and Denmark the ruling Multiculturalist ideology is effectively challenged. Vlaams Belang, PVV and DFP are formed as opposition parties who manage to convey the failures of Multiculturalism and the dangers of mass-immigration. In other countries criticism of Multiculturalism is still effectively barred. But even there cracks are appearing. E.g. in Germany a top banker, Thilo Sarrazin, is not mincing his words and attracting a lot of attention. Mr. Sarrazin notably is a member of the Social Democrat party or SPD. He recently wrote a book with the title "Germany is self-destructing"

Germany is self-destructing

Esther's IslaminEurope featured a Der Spiegel article a few days ago. Notable exerpts are:

This week, though, the Social Democrat (SPD) seems to have outdone himself. German media outlets, including SPIEGEL, have published excerpts of his soon-to-be-published book on Germany's supposed demise. As Sarrazin makes abundantly clear, that demise comes as a result of immigration. The bluntness with which he presents his ideas has kicked off a debate in Germany, and within the center-left SPD, as to whether Sarrazin has crossed the line into racism and whether he should be censured. []

If the fertility rate of German autochthons remains at the level it has been at for the past 40 years, then in the course of the next three or four generations, the number of the Germans will sink to 20 million," he writes in the book. "And, incidentally, it is absolutely realistic that the Muslim population, through a combination of a higher birth rate and continuation of immigration, could grow by 2100 to 35 million. []

Through the language used in his polemics, Sarrazin appears to be aiming to push the highly divisive debate over immigration and integration closer to that of right-wing populists elsewhere in Europe, like Geert Wilders in the Netherlands.

A German Fortuyn

The emergence of a respected and high ranking dissident against the Multi-Cultural consensus is disquiting news for the political and media cartels. It is easy to discredit swastika-waving Neo-Nazis. But another thing to defeat the critical analysis of an insider. Sarrazin appears to be a Fortuyn-like figure. Fortuyn was also a former member of the establishment who showed by writing books and columns the inconsistencies of Multicultural ideology. Thus giving words and power to members of the public who had already become disaffected with Multicultural lies. But who felt uncomfortable with the existing rightwing parties, who were seen as connected to the unsavory far right.

The German Christian-Democrats express concern

Last week Franz-Jozef Achterkamp, a German Christian-Democrat, sent an open letter to the Dutch Christian-Democrats urging the latter not to form a government with Geert Wilders. The German Christian Democrats are part of the Multi-Cultural political concern. The rise of the Freedom Party (PVV) in The Netherlands and their possible participation in government adds gravitas to the voices of German critics and dissidents against Multi-Culturalism. Multi-Cultural society in Germany shows the same problems of crime, joblessness and hostility to the native population. Sofar the German media and the political cartel have managed to keep the spirit in the bottle, but there also the pressure on the lid is becoming greater.

International Freedom Alliance

Geert Wilders understands the dynamic and for this reason he launched the International Freedom Alliance, in order to defeat Islam and Multiculturalism in many Western countries apart from The Netherlands. Because this fight is a fight of the whole West, not just The Netherlands.

There's nothing 'right wing' about the PVV. You might stipulate that the PVV is the least 'left wing', the least socialist party in NL, but it's still socialist. And that's NOT 'right wing', not even 'centric'.

Many commentators are acting surprised that the PVV is creating waves over these issues. This shows that they do not understand what the PVV is about and how their strategists perceive the economic and political landscape. What the PVV is doing makes a lot of sense and is highly coherent. This is another reason why the PVV has a real chance to become to premier right wing party in The Netherlands. It is rightwing on cultural and religious issues. But it highly opportunistic in economic questions, where it may take positions which are associated with the left. Because politics has been about economic issues for 40 years people are looking at politics through a prism of economic theory. This explains that commentators observe the PVV to be coming from the "wrong" direction. 

Still, the conclusion must be that Geert Wilders is not easily going to compromise on these matters with the VVD. The formation of a minority cabinet could well fall apart on this issue, because the PVV cannot be seen to compromise to much on these core matters.

It is quite amazing that 1,000 members of the CDA are going on the record to show their willingness to co-operate with a party that is the biggest enemy of Multiculturalism. That takes some moral courage.

The laywer

Last Friday the 13th a Dutch news and commentary show Knevel en van den Brink featured a well known Dutch criminal laywer Mr. Theo Hiddema. What causes me to mention him was the fact that the laywer is known for some time as a Freedom Party (PVV) supporter and managed to bring the ideas and policies and the reasons for those policies of the PVV to the limelight.

Keeping the right-liberals on track

Amongst other things Mr. Hiddema mentioned that the Dutch courts are flooded with criminals of foreign origin. At some point his interviewers said that Geert Wilders was too radical and that it would be better to vote for the right-liberal VVD, which has a very restrictive immigration paragraph. To which Hiddema replied that the VVD would only be reliable on immigration as long as the PVV was there to compete with them for votes.

A joy to listen to. Unfortunately it is all in Dutch but still here is the video:

The Fragmented Dutch political landscape

The Dutch political landscape is splintering and in the June elections this resulted in a heavy fragmented Left and Right. Both with four parties. Under such circumstances it is difficult to form a cabinet which can constitute a viable government. An added difficulty on the right is the Freedom Party (PVV) of Geert Wilders, which breaks the consensus of the political elite on Islam, multiculturalism and mass-immigration.

Negotiations to form a cabinet

Negotiations in June on a right-wing government of Christian-Democrats (CDA), right-liberals (VVD) and PVV broke down in June. Especially the CDA was hostile to Wilders' anti-Islamic agenda. Due to the adverse economic situation Labour (PvdA) did not want to form a leftwing government, they feel the need to shrink the state budget and the leftwing partners could not be made to agree. A centre government of the main leftwing and rightwing parties was tried but was found wanting. Meanwhile the PVV started rising in the polls again and taking votes from the rightwing parties, who were shrinking.

We are seven weeks without a government now and counting.

The minority Cabinet

The Queen appoints a functionary who leads the negotiations, a informateur. In each variant the informateur concerned gave up his mission to form a cabinet.

This week the Queen advised CDA-leader Verhagen to co-operate to try a new variant on the right. They must form a minority cabinet with the right-liberal VVD, which would be tacitly supported in key areas by the PVV. Or other fleeting coalitions of non-government parties in order to legislate specific issues.

A declaration of discord

This is leading to some results. As parties come closer to a deal, the need for caveats and conditions is felt and yesterday CDA, VVD and PVV made a joint declaration on their differences on how they view Islam.

The declaration was translated and put on GoV. It reads:

The three parties VVD, PVV, and CDA disagree about the nature and character of Islam. The dividing line is in the characterization of the Islam as either a religion or a (political) ideology.

Parties accept each other’s different views on this subject and will also act on this based on their own views.

However, there is much that binds the parties: making the Netherlands stronger, safer, and more prosperous is the common goal and starting point.

- - - - - - - - -

Therefore — accepting each other’s differences of opinion and fully assigning to one another the freedom of expression with regard to the differences of opinion — it is agreed that the PVV will support elements of the yet-to-be-negotiated government agreement from a position of support. The VVD and CDA will on their part honor the wishes of the PVV in the support agreement to be settled.

In any case the, such support agreement arrangements should settle the details of the measures for budget cuts and firm agreements on immigration, integration and asylum, safety, and better care for the elderly, whereby it is clear that for the PVV the willingness to support the budget cuts is linked to the content of the agreements to be settled in the fields of immigration, integration and asylum, safety and elderly care.

Mark Rutte [VVD]
Geert Wilders [PVV]
Maxime Verhagen [CDA]

The Hague, July 30, 2010

So the PVV has not had to compromise its view that Islam is a political ideology and not a mere religion. While the leftwing of the CDA is appeassed by the declaration's insistence that the Christian-Democrats see things differently.

The benefits of this almost a deal

Taking a long view this set-up may be very beneficial for the PVV. They keep their distance to the government, while being able to deliver some real benefits to their voter base. VVD and CDA will get the plush jobs but in a few years there will be new elections and they will probably have to face a strengthened PVV which is becoming the premier rightwing party.

The trial in July

In February this year this blog reported that the trial against Freedom Party (PVV) leader Geert Wilders would held in July. July is almost over and still no trial.

The new date for the Geert Wilders trial

The website of the Court of Amsterdam, rechtspraak.nl, states that the Wilders trial (Dutch) will be held in October. The hearings will start on the fourth of October and the verdict is planned for November 2. The reason for the delay which is given is the fact that some of the witnesses Mr. Wilders called up would be unable to make it at an earlier date.

PVV voters not welcome

The anti-jihadist blog Gates of Vienna published an article stating

The skate shop “Toms Outlet” in Amsterdam does not want to have any customers inside who voted for the party of Geert Wilders. On the shop window it reads: “PVV Voters Not Welcome”. ....
The Amsterdam photographer Thomas Schlijper took a picture of the shop window, which was also published at GeenStijl.nl: “Where have we actually seen this before?”

Invoking Godwin

There is nothing wrong with the proprietor of a shop refusing entrance to PVV-voters. He is free to associate with whom he wants to. Also the use of a Godwin by Geenstijl is inappropriate. The reference is to the "Jews not admitted" policy Dutch public places had to enforce on orders of the Nazi-occupation authorities in 40-45. This is inappropriate because such a state enforced policy has a broad reach which can not be compared to individual busness proprietors associating with customers at their own discretion.

Problems with Muslim males in Western societies

Compare it to the right of bar and nightclub owners to refuse for instance young muslim males, because these are a menace to the non-muslim customers especially women.

Freedom of Association

There is such a thing as freedom of association. This freedom seeks to prevent the state from interfering in the social relations of citizens. Progressives use anti-racism legislation to undermine this freedom. This gives free way to intrusion by the state on the social relations between citizens. Conservatives should oppose anti-racism legislation on the principle of freedom of association.

Conservatives for progress

Gates of Vienna positions itself as a conservative blog. It is sad to see Conservative giving extra power to the assault by the state into the social relations of private citizens.

Not talks with the Christian-Democrats

The new leader of the Christian Democrats (CDA), Maxime Verhagen, has shot down the possibility of a rightwing coalition of right liberal VVD, CDA and the Freedom Party (PVV). Today Mr. Verhagen turned down an invitation by negotiater (informateur) Mr. Rosenthal (Dutch) to start talks either with VVD's Rutte and PVV's Wilders separately or together. Mssrs Rutte and Wilders reacted dissapointed.

Over the left

With this refusal of talks the prospect of a rightwing coalition has become unlikely. Negotiater Mr. Rosenthal will probably start to look into the possibilities of a coalition with leftwing parties, such as Labour (PvdA), Lib-Dems (D66), Greens (GL) or Socialists (SP).

A program to keep Holland Dutch

Dutch populist Geert Wilders is well known for his pro-Dutch stance and opposition against the Islamisation of The Netherlands. In order to stop creeping Islamisation Wilders wants to end all immigration from Muslim countries, send back criminal foreigners to their countries of origin and reduce all other immigration to maximum 1,000 per year.

Stopping all non-western immigration

But Wilders does not only oppose Muslim immigration. He critisises all non-western immigration. I blogged in July 2009 that PVV parlementarian Mr. Sietse Fritsma requested Minister van der Laan of Integration to calculate the cost of immigration. After much hemming and hawing van der Laan refused to make such calculations, arguing that the government cannot put a price tag on groups of people. Geert Wilders argued that the government constantly puts all kinds of price tags on people, but alleged that the government does not want to make it known how costly immigration is. Ethnic Dutch women have only 1.6 children each. Supporters of high levels of immigration in the government have always maintained that immigrants will pay for the pensions and health insurance of the aging Dutch population.

Finding out whats going on

When the government refused to break down the expenses of the government between ethnic Dutch, western immigrants and non-western immigrants Geert Wilders' Freedom Party (PVV) tasked an economic research institute with the task at their expense. This institute, NYFER, diligently did its research, wrote a report and published it in May, a month ago. "Budgetary effects of immigration of Non-Westerners" it is called. The report limits itself to the costs of Non-Westerner immigrants to the state and ignores the costs to society at large.

A bucketful of Euros

To compress the findings of the report to the utmost: the cost of immigration of 25,000 non-westerners annually was calculated at 7.2 billion Euro. The report estimates that 25,000 immigrants who stay here per year is roughly the yearly count in the past ten years.

Raising the pension age

An important issue for the rightwing parties in the elections was raising the pension age from 65 to 67 in order to keep the welfare system affordable. The PVV made keeping the pension age at 65 an important part of their election platform. During the campaign Geert Wilders was able to argue that raising the pension age to 67 would only make an economy of 7 billion Euros until 2030. So just stopping non-western immigration for one year would be able to finance his promise to keep the pension age at 65. And this promise helped to convince enough voters of those who used to vote for the populist leftist Socialist Party (SP) to take three seats from the Left and bring them over to the right.

In conclusion: the PVV does not only discuss the agressive and supremacist ideology of Islam, but debates other excesses of the Multicultural society as well. Geert Wilders does not only use Islam critical arguments, but also economic arguments.

The Freedom Party shockwave

The populist Freedom Party (PVV) had 9 seats in parliament between 2006 and now. The 24 seat victory of Geert Wilders' Freedom Party in the June 9 elections sent a shockwave through The Netherlands. And one of the ships hit by the PVV shockwave is the Dutch business world and they are truly unsettled. Their mouthpieces, the employers' federation has warned in March against the rise of the PVV:

The head of the Dutch employers' federation has accused far-right politician Geert Wilders of "seriously" damaging Dutch interests abroad.

Bernard Wientjes, who chairs the Confederation of Netherlands Industry and Employers (VNO-NCW), said it was outrageous that Mr Wilders recently presented himself in London as the next Dutch prime minister and then derided Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan as "a complete fool". Mr Wilders' statement, which was broadcast around the world, caused shock in the British press.

Mr Wientjes, who heads the largest employers' organisation VNO-NCW in the Netherlands, says Mr Wilders poses a serious threat to the Netherlands and the Dutch economy. He underlined that three quarters of Dutch GDP comes from revenue earned abroad.

Mr Wientjes stressed that his federation will do business with any Dutch cabinet, including one joined by Mr Wilders' PVV party. But he emphasised that he hoped Mr Wilders party would not be included in the next government following parliamentary elections on 9 June.

And on Friday bussiness daily FD (Financieele Dagblad) published the responses of the chairmen of the employers federations FME-CWM, MKB-Nederland,Holland Financial Centre and VNO-NCW what kind of a government they want on their frontpage. All of the federation are rooting for a coalition which exludes the PVV. In an half page interview inside Mr. Wientjes of VNO-NCW again insisted that he hopes that a centre righwing or a centre leftwing government without PVV is formed. Mr. Wientjes was shocked by the good showing of the PVV and the Socialist SP despite their weakness in the polls. He mourned the weakening of the political centre. He regretted the evident splintering of Dutch politics and could not give a reason for the strength of the PVV apart from his strength in the television debates.

Islamisation is okay

This shows that the business world is hostile to the rightwing surge in The Netherlands. Business is opposed to a brake on mass immigration and the islamisation of The Netherlands. For them a good business climate and good relation with international trading partners take precedence over the continuity and security of the the nation.

Some remarkable results in the last elections for Geert Wilders.

Taking votes from the ultra-left

At the parliamentary elections on 9 June Geert Wilders' Freedom Party (PVV) managed to turn The Netherlands to the right. Usually rightwing parties win at the expense of other rightwing parties and likewise leftwing parties win by cannibalizing other leftwing parties. However the PVV managed to win votes (Dutch) amongst those who used to vote for the ultra leftwing Socialist Part, a party to the left of Labour (PvdA).

Mobilizing a new base and demobilizing opposition

Another first is that the PVV managed to mobilize many voters who never used to vote. Eighteen percent of his voters did not vote before. At the same time the PVV demobilizes the electorate of other parties, as the total number of voters at this election was lower than in previous elections. To be precise the number of voters dropped by -5.6 percentage points, voter turn out was 80.3 percent in 2006 and stood now at 74.7.

There will be municipal elections on March 3. Two days ago on 15 February there was a political debate on Dutch public TV. Amongst others the PVV (Freedom Party) send Geert Wilders and the coalition party CU (Christian Union) was represented by Arie Slob.

The CU is part of the ruling coalition togehter with CDA (Christian Democrats) and PvdA (Labour). CU is supposed to be a Conservative party, but it moved to the left on many issues and is losing its right-wing profile. This makes the CU vunerable to competition from the right especially from the Geert Wilders' PVV. This became glaringly obvious during the debate. At some point Mr. Wilders launched an attack against CU's Arie Slob asking

Mr. Slob you represent a Christian Party in The Netherlands. Do you think Islamic culture is equal to Christian culture, can be combined with the rule of law in a democratic state, do you see Islam is a totalitarian ideology [more of the same from Wilders].... ?

Arie Slob answers for the CU:

There are a million Muslims in The Netherlands, they cannot be excluded, they have to obey the rules everybody has to obey our rules [waffles on]

Geert Wilders interrupts:

That is no answer to my question, you are not answering my question is Islam equal to Christianity ?

Arie Slob:

Do not turn groups of people against each other

Wilders [mockingly in a falsetto voice]:

He is not answering my question he is not answering my question!

The public laughs. In the studio a political commentators says that the question is clever and is impossible for the Christian Union to answer.

Snouck's Commentary: as the right-wing parties are moving to the left they become more and more vunerable to competition from the PVV. The PVV stands to make a lot of hay during the national elections from the failure from CDA and CU to champion the Duch Christian heritage. Polls show all parties a vunerable to competition for votes from the PVV, but the Christian parties more than the Leftist parties. In the municipal elections the effect will not be significant as the PVV is only participating in four municipalities.

The whole fragment of the debate can be viewed here (Dutch).

Wilders strategy so far

As I wrote before the crux of the indictment against Wilders' is his comparing the Quran with Mein Kampf. Wilders insisted that the entire indictment was read out. The judges of the trial did not grant this, and allowed the public prosecutor to read a summary, leaving out parts that were doubly quoted in the indictment. Wilders intention must have been to get as much of his quotes verbatim publicized. The advantages he sought are:
1. Islam is shown in its full glory as the Wilders quotes are Quran quotes, red in tooth and claw. This turns Islam into the defendant.
2. The entire indictment speech becomes quotable even after a possible conviction of Wilders for hate speech. The indictment will prove a treasure trove for those who wish to continue to expose the truth about Islam. Wilders is aiming for a tactical advantage here.

The instruction of the Court of Amsterdam provides the indictment

The indictment has been written up by the Public Prosecutor acting on an instruction of the Amsterdam Court. A laywer, Mr. Hiddinga, pointed out on TV yesterday that the instruction by the Court of Amsterdam was written as a indictment. This shows the intent of the Amsterdam Court. For this reason Wilders tries to get the Amsterdam Court declare itself not the designated court for a trial against him on the ground that Dutch procedural law designates the trial to take place at the court in the place where the defendant resides. The public prosecutor argued that Wilders made his attacks on Islam on the national media and therefore the trial can take place anywhere in The Netherlands. It remains to be seen whether the Amsterdam court will indulge Wilders on procedural grounds.

Wilders' defense wants witnesses

Wilders has requested the judges to grant his requests for witnesses for the defense such as Arabists Hans Jansen and Simon Admiraal, in addition to the assassin of Theo van Gogh, Mohammed Bouyeri. He needs these witnesses in order to make his defense that he spoke the truth about Islam and it is absurd to be convicted for speaking a truth.

Truth was no defense in Belgium

In my opinion this will not work. In Belgium the nationalist party Vlaams Belang of Filip Dewinter was convicted for hate speech when they quoted government statistics on immigrant crime. "Truth was no defense" declared the Belgian court. Dutch judges are notoriously procedural. The law says that there are protected classes, classes which are protected due to their ethnicity, gender or religion. The adherents of Islam are one of these protected classes. This follows from the modified article 1 of the Constitution and article 137 of the Penal Code. In 2006 I have pointed out that these articles are similar in they way they work to articles in the Constitution of the Soviet Union. And this trial against Wilders is similar to the Stalin's trials against his enemies of the 1930ies. This trial against Wilders is a political trial. It is a show trial. The intent is to intimidate the Dutch population into acceptance of the Multicultural society and to stop critizising protected classes.

My take on the outcome of the trial

Truth will be no defense. Wilders WILL be convicted if the trial in Amsterdam goes on. The question is whether the judges will impose a heavy punishment on Wilder, such as two years in prison or a symbolic punishment say a 5.000 Euro fine.