Our Flemish correspondent VH has composed a report on latest efforts to depose Mr. Wilders by the elites. He offers this introduction:
A Dutch (Socialist) Cabinet Minister last week openly called for a revolt against Geert Wilders and his electorate.
I always thought that openly calling for a revolt was considered a criminal act, but seemingly I am wrong: it is PC, as long as it is of “the elite” against “the right”. Socialist Minister: “I really believe that a revolt of the elite is desperately needed.”
The first translation is from Elsevier:
Wilders: The political elite demonizes and castigates- - - - - - - - -
“Government in panic”
By Luc van Kemenade
PVV leader Geert Wilders accuses members of the Cabinet and the Lower House of demonizing him and creating a climate in which a madman might proceed to attack him [similar to what happened to Pim Fortuyn after being demonized].
Several Cabinet members recently opened fire on Wilders, who recently said in an interview with newspaper de Volkskrant not to be impressed: “It’s pure panic. Until June 4, they could say that these were only polls. Until that night came, right after the elections. Then it became reality.”
The PVV leader says he regularly has to wear a bulletproof vest, “but for the little water pistols of all those Ministers, I do not necessarily need to wear that.”
After the major victory of Wilders’ Party for Freedom (PVV) in the elections for the European Parliament, the government began its attack on him.
Wilders received fierce criticism from amongst many others Integration Minister Eberhard van der Laan (PvdA, Socialists), who challenged him to a debate (“Come on”). Minister of Defense, Eimert van Middelkoop (Christian Union) said the threat-outline that the PVV warns about is “hysterical”, and State Secretary of Economic Affairs, Frans Timmermans (PvdA, Socialist), finds the PVV party “indecent”.
Even the Secretary of Finance, Jan Kees de Jager (CDA, Christian Democrat), denounced the PVV, which according to him has no financial nor economic policy [the PVV does have both, however, but it’s the opposite of “big government” and they don’t like that -translator], and Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende did reveal on TV that he sympathizes more with Fortuyn than Wilders.
Minister of the interior Guusje ter Horst (PvdA, Socialist) joined the Wilders-bashing queue this week. In the [left-wing] opinion magazine Vrij Nederland she said to hope for a “counter-movement” of “well-thinking” people, who “rise up against the PVV”.
Minister Ter Horst worries about the loss of values in everyday living. In an interview this week with opinion magazine Vrij Nederland she says: “The citizens distrust everything that smells of government, and besides that behave aggressively against employees of the government. I think that is a worrying development. It is bad for the Netherlands if there is no respect for authority anymore.”
The Minister is concerned about the “gut feelings” among the population and longs for “a revolt of the intellectual elite”. She hopes for a counter-movement “of well thinking and reputable people who make it clear that Wilders is proclaiming nonsense,” and who “have had enough of the coarsening of society as propagated by the extreme right”. She adds: “I really believe that a revolt of the elite is desperately needed.”
Geert Wilders responded: “A revolt!… What if I said anything like that! I determine that a prominent member of the Cabinet has now issued a call for revolt!”
The PVV leader considers the call of Minister Ter Horst to be an insult to the electorate: “The PvdA, the party which always pretended to be close to the people, is the self-proclaimed well-thinking elite par excellence, and according to them now the electorate are the stupid people against whom the elite has to revolt. This is a huge insult to the voters and a kick in the back for everyone who ran away from the PvdA (Socialists, Labour). […] Since that party is decomposing, Minister Ter Horst shows its true face,” Wilders said. “The ‘elite’ are radicalizing, not us.”
In addition, Minister Ter Horst put forward “the fact” that: “If Wilders says that he wants to expel young Moroccans with a criminal record, his voters better realize that this is not at all possible. Those boys almost always have the Dutch nationality.”
Wilders: “That is not a fact; that is nonsense. These guys always have, thanks to the Moroccan king, a double nationality. The government — of which I have the impression that Miss Ter Horst is a member — already set up in a proposed bill the principal means by which people with dual nationality, who are engaged in terrorist activities, may be stripped of their Dutch nationality so that they can be deported.”
“I simply ask to broaden the scope of that law, so that not only the traditional terrorists like Mohammed B. [murderer of Theo van Gogh], but also all the other scum can be expelled. You may find that an objectionable political choice, or maybe even morally reprehensible, but don’t come up with the legal argument that it is impossible. That is humbug.”
Another Minister, Van der Laan (Integration and Housing, PvdA, Socialists) said earlier on: “The PVV generalizes and is choosing pseudo-solutions that are far outside the rule of law.” Van der Laan’s call to “finally at last” debate with him, was rejected by Wilders as being the party politics of “Sharia socialists”: “The Labor Party is lying on its back jiggling like a maniac, and then I would have to come to help them a little? Just forget it.”
“Minister Van der Laan is a pitiful man,” the PVV leader added. “He clearly has been sent out against me, but he’d better make sure something changes in his policies. Immigration is overstretching our elasticity. Let him suit the action to the word. But in parliament he advises against any motion by us that aims to do something about it.”
A further excerpt from the interview by Remco Meijer with Geert Wilders that is quoted in the article above (in the newspaper De Volkskrant):
Meijer: Van der Laan is for ethnic registration in criminal records, but suddenly does not dare, now that the PVV seems to become such a large party. Van der Laan said: “Should I help to prepare the electronic database for possible abuse later?”
Wilders: Pure fear-politics. But we don’t need the PvdA at all for this. If we ever start to govern and want to have such registration in criminal records, then we simply do that.
Meijer: Was your expression on June 14 in Denmark about expelling tens of millions of Muslims from Europe a slip of the tongue?
Meijer: It was at least awkward and not precise. Even newspaper De Telegraaf used the word “malicious” in a comment.
Wilders: If I would had had more time, I could have provided more context. I was not only pointing to criminal Muslims. I have often said before, also in your newspaper, that I’m positive about assimilation contracts. In such a contract, all non-western immigrants with dual nationality or with a residence permit should assent to the equal rights of men and women, to reject discrimination against homosexuals, to reject sharia law — all those things. If you refuse to sign, then subsequently you are not qualified to be here.
Islam is 90 percent a totalitarian ideology and only 10 percent a religion. So if you enter such contracts, across Europe — because I have never mentioned that it should only be the EU — millions of Muslims will not sign. Those may then leave.
Meijer: Now already many young Muslims want to leave the Netherlands, a survey this week revealed.
Wilders: Wonderful news. We live in a free country. So, go, if you do not like it in the Netherlands.
Meijer: State Secretary Timmermans (PvdA, Socialist) called you indecent.
Wilders: The PvdA continues to play the card of moral superiority. While I simply say, my party is a lot better than yours. He makes such remarks so as not to alienate the Muslim voter, now that he has almost no other voters left. But it is precisely these kinds of Sharia Socialists who are responsible for the growth of the multicultural society, and now they are at the infusion of the same multicultural society. While all along they should struggle against the disadvantages of it: the precarious position of women, unbelievers, homosexuals. We are doing their job.
Why were we the number one at the web site of the Gay Krant [Gay Magazine]? Does nobody ever think? Because homosexuals in the neighborhoods daily encounter the consequences of the Islamization. They see Van der Laan come up with his neighborhood-coach and an additional touch of paint. These people have totally different problems. They don’t want that other intolerant Netherlands the “elite” enforces upon them.
Meijer: A recurring criticism: the PVV is not democratic. You are a one-man movement which does not gives insight into its finances.
Wilders: The idea that a party with members is the only democratic form of organization I do not share. I do not believe in the old party structures, in which you first have to polish the car of the chairman of a local chapter for twenty years before you achieve a certain position. That leads to political prostitution.
Concerning finances, I make use of the existing rules and stay within the law. So write another one hundred articles in how bad this is; I am not at all interested.
Meijer: Is the risk of a party with members the loss of control?
Wilders: Yes it is, surrendering control to the wrong people. What happened to the LPF taught me a lesson [the LPF was the party of Pim Fortuyn in parliament that finally devolved into quarreling and dissention, due to the absence of leadership and the huge pressure, stalking and conniving by mainstream media and old-politics — translator]. I have a close group now, many volunteers and nearly every Saturday, I am in the Chamber Building to recruit people. Preceding the elections of 2011 we will need a substantial list.
Meijer: How many seats are you aiming for?
Wilders: Around thirty, the number which we are at in the polls. It may be less, but it can also suddenly be ten more.
Meijer: It seems that the Interior Minister Ter Horst now also wants to subsidize the PVV [parties are subsidized from when they are elected for a second term, maybe the Minister wants to subsidize and at the same time forbid private donations, which would make parties financially fully dependent of the Interior Ministry — translator].
Wilders: It would be better when all subsidies to political parties were abolished. Then you’d have a level playing field and may all those party office buildings at the canals, each filled with fifty semi-civil servants, be done away with.
I first want to see the draft proposal of the Cabinet, but it should be clear that in principle I feel little for it.