Thursday, October 14, 2010

The Testimony of Simon Admiraal at the Geert Wilders Trial

Update: Sorry I had these out of order. They're fixed now.

Below are three videos of the expert witness testimony for the defense by Simon Admiraal in the Geert Wilders trial. The transcript of his sworn testimony was read out last week in court by one of the trial judges.

Mr. Admiraal, in contrast to Wafa Sultan (whose testimony followed his) is a Western scholar of Islam, and specializes in radical Islamic preachers, particularly in Rotterdam. Once again, to have this material broadcast live on Dutch television and read into the public record of the trial is a milestone of enormous (and devastating) significance. If I were a member of the Dutch political establishment, right about now I would be trying desperately to figure out some face-saving means of making this all go away as soon as possible.

Many thanks to our Flemish correspondent VH for the translation and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling.

Part 1:

Part 2:

Part 3:

A full transcript of all three parts is below the jump.


  Part 1
00:04 [Judge J.W. Moors] The session is resumed and we’ll proceed to read the records,
00:08 or rather the reading of documents in the file. I have noted that we arrived
00:13 at the statement of Mister Admiraal to the investigating magistrate,
00:18 and my colleague on this side will take you through it.
00:23 Moszkowicz “Have you found the letter of the magistrate?”
00:33 [Judge M.M. van der Nat] I have before me, ladies and gentlemen, an affidavit,
00:39 by Mister S.R. Admiraal of April 26, 2010, with the examining magistrate
00:46 in the presence of Mr. Moszkowicz and Mr. Hogervorst, both present in the room,
00:51 the two prosecutors, also present, and Mr. Wilders, also present.
01:00 Mister Admiraal, just as with Mister Jansen, first went through his CV with the magistrate.
01:14 Mister Admiraal, an Arabist, also a sworn translator Arabic at the Amsterdam court since ‘87,
01:26 he studied Arabic from 1974 to 1980, with minors in Turkish and Persian, at the University of Amsterdam.
01:36 He stayed from1977 to 1978 in Cairo on an exchange scholarship.
01:42 He worked from 1980 to 1987 as sales manager at the U.S. educational publishing group
01:50 Addison-Westley, and frequently traveled to customers in Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Libya and Egypt.
02:00 He worked from 1987 to 1995 as program coordinator for business-oriented programs
02:07 for the Literature and Linguistics faculty of Leiden University,
02:11 this partly also took place at the faculty of the Erasmus University, Rotterdam.
02:16 In that framework he maintained contacts with international companies and the Dutch government,
02:21 including Foreign Affairs, and organized company visits and internships for students of Oriental languages.
02:31 Since 1995 he has worked as a freelancer in various fields, including in the arts world (classical music).
02:41 Besides this, he works as independent researcher and commentator on
02:45 contemporary Islam and the Arab world. He has written some articles for [newspaper] De Volkskrant.
02:52 Since 2007 he has worked independently on doctoral research on the Arabic sermons and fatwas
02:59 of Khalil el-Moumni, the imam of the al-Nasr mosque in Rotterdam from 1992 to 2006.
03:07 These Rotterdam sermons and fatwas have been published in Casablanca, Morocco.
03:14 From 2009 onwards, these investigations have been billeted with the Leiden University faculty of law,
03:20 with Prof.Ddr.Mr. P. Cliteur, law philosopher, with the goal an external PhD promotion.
03:29 Under his leadership, the research will also be broadened to possible positions from Islam
03:33 with respect to our constitutional democracy.
03:38 The views of El-Moumni will constitute one of the possible positions.
03:43 Provisional title of the thesis is: “Islamism, the secular rule of law, and the logic of radical indoctrination”.
03:52 So far this is the Curriculum Vitae of Mister Admiraal.
04:02 Mister Admiraal adds to the investigating magistrate: I graduated in Islamic languages,
04:08 to this also belongs part of knowledge of Islam.
04:12 I graduated from the University of Amsterdam with Pieter Smoor and Arie Schippers.
04:18 At Leiden University, from 1987 to 1995, I acted as coordinator for students of Oriental Languages,
04:24 history and culture, and businesses that operated internationally.
04:28 And, as also shown in the CV, part of that was business studies at the Erasmus University.
04:36 As an independent researcher, I started to make use of my knowledge and experience.
04:41 This led to a promotion plan at Leiden University.
04:46 I am not employed by this university, but am, as it is called, an ‘outside researcher’.
04:52 My research is on the various different positions of Islam towards the secular rule of law.
05:02 One of these positions is the normative Islam. Another is a more secular position.
05:10 Normative, that means: according to the science there is a normative system.
05:16 At the fringes are some sects that have attempted to reform Islam,
05:20 for instance Ahmadiyya, the Baha’i, and the Alevis.
05:26 When I speak of the normative Islam, I’m talking about Islam as considered valid.
05:32 I am now registered as having worked one year towards a PhD, but in fact have been working on this already for three years
05:39 I have read books and scientific papers. I have read about 250 sermons by imams.
05:48 How science thinks about this complex matter, is the question Mister Admiraal asks himself.
05:54 There are many opinions and they often clash. Precisely because of these conflicting opinions
05:58 the truth in this science is growing. The research I do on my own.
06:00 Whether I consulted others in my field? Not in framework of my PhD research.
06:09 That will only be once I send in my first article for publication. I do have contacts in my field.
06:17 I have contact with Professor Rudolph Peters, professor in Amsterdam,
06:21 in connection with my source research on, among others, Khalil el-Moumni.
06:27 As you know, in the lawsuit against el-Moumni Peters wrote an expert report, which I read.
06:34 In addition, I have had contact with Professor Hans Jansen. I know he also will be heard
06:40 as expert witness. I had no contact with him about my appearance here,
06:45 and on purpose. Hans Jansen also does not play a role in my specific research-field.
06:52 Did I have any further consultations about my role as an expert in this matter?
06:57 I try to be aloof and independent as possible in this trial; I also keep away the press.
07:02 I was called by the press, but put them off.
07:08 I do not know Wilders personally. You ask me if I have communicated with the defense.
07:13 I met Mr. Moszkowicz and explained him what my area of expertise is and that I am not a polymath.
07:23 You ask me how I got on the list of requested experts by the defense. No, I don’t know.
07:32 The investigating magistrate then writes that Mr. Moszkowicz notes
07:36 that he finds it rather odd that the magistrate asks how the expert ended up on his list.
07:46 You sent me the summons in advance. I had a look at statements
07:53 on which I, based on my expertise, my studies, and my qualifications, can comment.
08:02 I mean by this, based on my master’s degree in Islamic languages, and broader,
08:06 my research into Islamic fundamentalism.
08:10 You ask me what my knowledge of the Qur’an is. I know the Qur’an, I can read the Qur’an in Arabic.
08:20 In the Netherlands, there are two standard translations of the Qur’an.
08:24 The first is by Professor J.H. Kramers, Professor in Leiden. This is an older translation.
08:31 Professor Leemhuis published a translation after that.
08:36 These two translations overlap to a large extent.
08:40 I looked into the subpoena for elements of statements I encountered in the course of my research.
08:51 In that connection I’ve looked into scientific opinions. I wanted to see whether I could find…
08:56 the context within Islam, on the basis of which it may or may not be true.
09:04 Then the counselor, Mr. Moszkowicz asks about specific statements.
09:10 Fact 1, last paragraph, second page of the summons.
09:18 “ Islam wants to dominate, subjugate and out to the destruction of Western Civilization”.
09:25 You ask me if Islam wants to dominate and subjugate.
09:31 In the normative Islam the doctrine of the superiority of Islam is valid, and the need
09:36 to spread Islam until the Islam prevails over other religions.
09:41 Crucial to this are two verses in the Qur’an, namely Chapter 48, verse 28:
09:49 “He it is Who has sent His Messenger with the guidance and the Religion of Truth that He may make it prevail over all religions.”
09:57 This is the translation of Leemhuis, Kramers talks of ‘all religions’. And secondly,
10:04 Chapter 3 verse 19 is important. “Surely the (true) religion with God is Islam”.
10:13 According to Leemhuis, Islam means the surrender to God, submission to God.
10:19 With ‘God’ here ‘Allah’ is meant. It is the intention that the other religions are a step lower.
10:25 You ask whether that means ‘subordinate’. Yes. You ask me to explain this.
10:33 According to Islam, the other religions, Judaism and Christianity, are corrupt.
10:41 Jews and Christians are called to account by Allah, that the texts they received from the prophets,
10:47 for example via Abraham (according to the Islam: Ibrahim), they must no longer adhere to.
10:55 When the magistrate asks me whether Islam views the Jews as apostate Muslims,
11:01 then I say this is a defendable a position from the point of view of the normative Islam.
11:08 Islam is a body of doctrines which decides on all aspects of the lives of Muslims.
11:16 These doctrines have been drawn into the Sharia.
11:22 The Sharia is written based on the Qur’an and the sayings of Muhammad.
  Part 2
00:00 …. converted to Islam, or departed from Islam.
00:05 Islam speaks of Christians, Jews, Polytheists (Islam views the Christian Trinity as polytheistic)
00:17 and the unbelievers. All in all, the argument that Islam wants to subjugate is defensible.
00:27 The magistrate, or the counselor, I don’t know, asks whether Islam wants to predominate.
00:35 The answer is: Yes. I can argue that with texts, as I just also did.
00:42 We must also focus on the Sharia. In the Sharia such texts are also included.
00:48 This position is defensible. Nowhere in the Sharia is it established that it is otherwise.
00:55 When the magistrate asks me if I know from specialization, know opinions of experts
01:00 stating that Islam does not want to dominate, I say: No.
01:06 Whether Islam is out to destroy Western civilization? I believe that with Western civilization
01:11 is meant the liberal secular legal system. In this sense, Islam is out to destroy it.
01:20 In this respect I make a distinction between Islam as theory, and Islamism as the applied theory,
01:25 or the bringing into practice of Islam in the social, political and legal life.
01:33 — I would appreciate it if nobody would interrupt this —
01:46 Next quote. “Now the Islamic ideology has to be overcome,” end quote.
01:53 One can speak of an Islamic ideology. Islam is more than a religion; it also has,
02:00 given the Sharia, a social, political and legal component. It’s an ideology. That is fully clear to me.
02:12 There follows fact 1, first quote: “A moderate Islam” until “is from this book”.
02:24 In the science there is not consensus on the question whether there exists a moderate Islam.
02:29 There are moderate Muslims, these are people who try to reform Islam.
02:35 I dare not mention a percentage of the total number of Muslims. Spiritual leaders make no distinction:
02:42 There is only one Islam. Anything else would be insulting.
02:49 Islam has not yet been reformed. If you are a kafir, or an apostate, you are outlawed.
02:56 For example, the assassination of Sadat. Sadat was viewed as a kafir.
03:01 Another example is the assassination of Farag Fouda, in Egypt.
03:06 There was a sheikh who defended his murderers, and said [Fouda] was an apostate.
03:12 In the Sharia it is stated that apostates should be put to death.
03:17 The magistrate asked me what the Sharia says about people who do not want to join Islam.
03:23 There are accepted minorities, who must keep to certain rules. A non-Muslim may not marry
03:28 a Muslim woman, in Morocco, for instance, there is a Hebrew Charter for Jews.
03:35 If you leave Islam, this has all kinds off legal consequences, such as for your marriage
03:39 or your position as heir. As example I mention Nasr Abu Zayd.
03:46 He tried to reform Islam and subsequently had to deal with Sharia. His marriage was dissolved for this reason.
03:53 He went from Egypt to the Netherlands. Professor Leemhuis, whom I know, takes care of him.
04:00 The prosecutor tells me that he knows of clergymen saying that in the Islamic world
04:05 religions were allowed to retain their own identity, as long as the superiority of Islam was accepted.
04:10 That is true, but I want to add that there are also cases in which dissenters were forcibly converted.
04:20 There follows again a quote. “And Islam is the Qur’an and nothing but the Qur’an”.
04:27 Mister Admiraal says about this: This statement is defensible.
04:31 I recognize in this statement expressions of clergymen, who say that there is only the word of Allah,
04:37 and that ended up in the Qur’an. Indeed, the Qur’an is the basis for Islam.
04:45 The Qur’an calls others, non-Muslims, unbelievers: dogs. I mention chapter 7, verse 176.
04:55 Of Jews is spoken as inferior beings. I can mention the following locations. Chapter 2, verse 65;
05:02 chapter 5, verse 60; chapter 7, verse 166; chapter 8, verse 55 and chapter 62, verse 5.
05:16 Jews are compared with among others: monkeys, pigs, the worst animals, and donkeys.
05:23 The rest of this quote is actually a quote from Oriana Fallaci.
05:27 I have not verified that quote to see whether it is in the right context.
05:35 Further it is about page 2 of the summons, the second quote, about fascist Islam.
05:43 Mister Admiraal says: I am no expert on fascism. On the comparison between the Qur’an and Mein Kampf,
05:50 I refer to the book of Craig Winn, Prophet of Doom, published in Canada in 2004.
05:57 In this book, Winn draws a direct relationship between the Qur’an and Mein Kampf.
06:03 He tries to show that there is a relationship between the body of thought of the Qur’an and Mein Kampf.
06:09 The book, Prophet of Doom, provides verifiable quotes. I see this book a standalone study.
06:16 Islamo-fascism also spoken of. In America that term is used more often,
06:23 and there is no agitation against it when it is said. In this is understood the Islamic version
06:29 of fascism which focuses on religiously-based violence.
06:33 Islamic domination by means of violence.
06:37 Whether Islam contains fascist elements? Violence and anti-Judaism.
06:44 I again say that I am not an expert on fascism. In the Qur’an can be found with an anti-Jewish position,
06:50 I also want to point at a book of Sayyid Qutb [judge: the same name my colleague stumbled over],
06:57 who was an important leading ideologue. This book is called Our Battle Against the Jews.
07:03 It’s about the polemics against Jews in general and Israel in particular. I bought it in Rotterdam.
07:11 Whether this book calls for violence against Jews? That you can also find in the Qur’an.
07:16 With ‘battle’ is meant violence, and not an ideological battle.
07:22 In Islam there is much hatred against Jews. Mein Kampf, for example, in Arabic and in the Arab world
07:28 freely available. I have no opinion on the veracity of the phrase ‘The Qur’an is a fascist book’.
07:38 The hearing continues with page 4, fact 2 of the summons, the first quote, a quote by Professor Israëli.
07:49 Mr. Admiraal says: I am not familiar with the work of this professor. I do know he is Professor
07:55 at the Hebrew University and specializes in Chinese history.
08:02 You ask me whether I agree with this quote.
08:07 There is an ever-growing Islamic presence in Europe, more mosques and more halal-slaughtered meat.
08:13 So there is quite an obvious growth of Islam in Europe. The word ‘invasion’
08:18 I leave to the expertise of Israëli. I do not dare to say anything about a demographic change.
08:25 I hear the magistrate say that a growth of Islam is distinct from a growth of Muslims.
08:32 That’s right. I do not dare to comment on demographic issues. Whether Islam makes propaganda?
08:39 Yes. Whether Islam tries to convert? Yes. Whether that is also tried in Europe? Yes.
08:53 Fourth page of the subpoena, second citation.
08:58 The quote reads “The Netherlands as Islamic mission country”.
09:02 Mister Admiraal: That is true. The Netherlands is an Islamic mission country.
09:09 In the normative theory, the whole world is of Allah, and the world must be brought
09:13 under the domination or supremacy of Allah. The Netherlands is not the only mission country.
09:20 Islam is a logical and consistent religion with a consistent doctrine.
09:28 Same page, fourth citation. “Islam is a violent religion”.
09:34 The reply of Mister Admiraal: This quote is correct, because Islam is not a non-violent religion.
09:41 Violence however must be religiously justified. The attacks on the Twin Towers
09:46 on September 11, 2001 were religiously justified by the perpetrators.
09:52 Whether beating up homosexuals, as stated on page 3, seventh quote, is also religiously justified?
10:00 Admiraal answers: According to Islam, homosexuality is a capital crime.
10:05 According to the Sharia it is punishable. A penalty may be imposed by judges.
10:11 I quote form Professor Peters’ expert report in the case against Khalil el-Moumni:
10:17 ‘Also when the Sharia is not part of a society, the rules of Sharia greatly influence
10:21 the opinions of the Muslims on good and evil.
10:25 In this regard I refer to the books in the series ‘The Path of the Muslim’.
10:30 This is a guiding work. In the foreword it says that it currently is considered
10:35 one of the standard works of Muslims. These books are freely available in the Netherlands.
10:41 In it is a section saying gay men should be thrown off the tallest structure in the vicinity.
10:47 Whether I consider this a religious book? Yes.
10:53 Third page, underneath, about a tsunami. The answer of Mister Admiraal:
10:58 I can not say anything about a tsunami of a culture that is alien to us.
11:04 The Magistrate asks me if I can say something about page 3, fourth quotation. That quote reads
11:09 “their behavior stems from their religion and culture”. The answer is: I have not researched that.
11:25 The counselor asks me if I can say something in general about a relationship between
11:30 the aggressive behavior of Muslims and the body of thought of the Qur’an.
11:34 He holds before me chapter 48, verse 29. The quote reads
11:41 “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah and those who are with him are severe against the disbelievers,
11:46 but merciful among themselves”. End quote.
11:50 I point in this regard to the last quote on page 4. That quote reads: “aggressive elements”.
11:55 This …
  Part 3
00:00 You encounter this verse in texts dealing with the violent behavior in particular by jihadists
00:06 as legitimization of a jihad, a holy war. The translation of the verse that you quote
00:11 mentions ‘strict’, other words are also possible, ‘severe’ or
00:18 in English is referred to an explanation from the Middle Ages of al-Jalalein, ‘rude’ or ‘crude’.
00:25 In this context I want to say that we must be careful with direct linkages between
00:29 Qur’anic texts and aggressive behavior.
00:34 The Qur’an is still read by Muslims, it certainly is not a dead letter. During Ramadan,
00:39 the Qur’an is read several times, it still is a guide for Muslims, at least, it should be.
00:47 The hearing continues about page 5, quote 3, which reads:
00:53 “This book incites to hate and murder.” End quote.
00:58 Mister Admiraal: Quite literally understood, this is correct. Hate originating with Allah against infidels.
01:04 For example, that they will end up in hell.
01:09 The Qur’an is a big polemic of Allah through Muhammad towards those who do not wish
01:13 to adopt Islam. There thus are many hateful verses.
01:18 I have counted eight verses about murder. A Muslim cleric would say,
01:23 ‘Yes, that indeed is in the Qur’an, but maybe there are restrictions to it’.
01:28 In these verses however it sure is stated ‘kill them’. For instance in book 9, verse 5,
01:33 the verse of the sword. There is a lot to do about this, it says
01:38 that the unbelievers are to be slain, unless they convert,
01:42 then they must be considered remorseful.
01:47 Page 6, second citation: Eurabia. Admiraal says on this:
01:54 this word is in the title of a book by Bat Ye’or, a historian, that is a book of 2005.
02:02 Page 6, fourth quote: about the “Donald Duck”. Admiraal: If all the hateful verses from the Qur’an
02:09 Were to be scrapped, the Qur’an would be substantially smaller. I hand over to you a list
02:14 from Muslims Against Sharia, which can be looked up at
02:23 [Judge: You saw me looking up, I heard a phone, which may be switched off, again, thank you]
02:31 This is a list of verses that in their eyes contains discrimination and hatred and sow division.
02:37 [Judge: That list is attached to the hearing, you also want that to be read? (Response inaudible)]
02:44 I took random samples from these citations, and this shows it to be correct.
02:51 Up to here the hearing of Mister Admiraal by Mr. Moszkowicz.
02:57 Subsequently, the prosecutor also asked questions. Mister Admiraal answers as follows.
03:06 You ask me whether there is an Islamic culture and you ask me about the characteristics thereof.
03:12 This is a complicated question. If you see the culture separate from the religion,
03:17 you for instance speak of a Moroccan or Egyptian culture.
03:22 Islam knows no separation between church and state. There was once
03:27 a movement for secularization, but it was stymied. Secularism is still an insult in the Muslim world.
03:34 The Sharia dictates that there must be a Caliph who is both worldly and spiritual leader.
03:40 The Caliphate does not exist anymore, but there are groups who want the Caliphate to return.
03:46 Within Islam the spiritual leaders form the reference point. Worldly leaders hold their position
03:51 by virtue of the spiritual leaders.
03:56 The magistrate asks me who then is in charge. The counselor gives me the example
04:02 of Iran and asks me whether its President would be able to deny the Holocaust
04:07 without permission of the Ayatollah. The answer is: No.
04:12 A state that is fully controlled according to the rules of Islam, may be called totalitarian.
04:17 Examples are Iran and Saudi Arabia. There are few or no areas in which Islam does not say anything.
04:28 The question is asked whether Islam is a totalitarian system. Mister Admiraal: Yes.
04:34 Now I read this again I’d rather say Islam ‘knows’ a totalitarian system.
04:40 In Arab this is ‘(Shmwlyh?) al Islam’, the all-comprehensive Islam.
04:49 Questions about the film Fitna. Mister Admiraal says: I have read the translations
04:59 of the verses and they are correct. I know there was something about this. Sura 8, verse 60.
05:06 I know that in the official English translation of the Qur’an by Yusuf Ali, it indeed reads ‘to strike terror.’
05:13 There are also indications to be found on this in an online project:
05:23 Sura 47, verse 4. About that Admiraal says: This is just the translation of Kramers.
05:31 Page 7, last paragraph. Quote “If Allah permits us, Allah is great”.
05:40 Mister Admiraal: I recognize in this an Iraqi imam who said such in 2003.
05:46 He cites herein a statement of Muhammad. This statement can also be found on the internet.
05:51 I hand you a printout of what I found via the website of the University of Southern California.
06:00 Page 7, second paragraph. The quote reads: “Destroy the infidels and let not one be left over.”
06:08 This is a curse with which often a sermon ends. I’ve studied many fundamentalist preaches,
06:14 and at the end usually a curse is pronounced such as
06:18 ‘O Allah, make that Islam conquers and destroy the enemy’.
06:22 In that sense these sermons are consistent in their curses.
06:30 Next, the defense counsel [Mr. Moszkowicz] asks questions about Fitna.
06:39 The book shown is the Qur’an, says Mister Admiraal. The prevailing doctrine is
06:44 that the supremacy of Islam is spread worldwide, this may be by force of arms,
06:50 with the restrictions and rules that go with it.
06:55 The defense counsel asks a question about page 9, underneath. What is said in the El-Tawheed mosque
07:01 about stoning is correct. This is in the Sharia. In Iran and Saudi Arabia this also happens.
07:07 The penalties are fixed. Whether the execution of these penalties is also commonplace
07:12 in the Arab world? No, normative Muslims will say ‘unfortunately not’,
07:17 the complete Sharia is not applied everywhere.
07:22 On page 10, before the last paragraph. You ask me if I agree to the standpoint of Hans Jansen
07:26 “You already insult Islam by not being a Muslim’. In his daring nature, I agree.
07:36 On questions from the prosecutor on Fitna, Mister Admiraal says:
07:43 You ask me whether the suras quoted are complete and in a proper context.
07:48 I find this a difficult question. Sura 8, verse 60 continues [cites]: ‘if they [the enemy]
07:55 Are inclined to peace, accept it’. End quote. In this sense, this verse is not quoted in full.
08:03 But the Qur’an is a continuum. A few verses further, 8:65 for example,
08:10 it again is about inciting the believers to battle. As I said, the Qur’an is a polemic.
08:19 In The Al Qaeda Reader, by Raymond Ibrahim, published in New York in 2007,
08:24 can be read that the perpetrators of the attacks on September 11, 2001
08:29 in the exact same way quoted this verse. Therefore also only the first part.
08:36 Another example; in verse 2:256 it says that in the religion, Islam, there is no coercion.
08:45 Islam wants to be all dominant, and says in this verse that no coercion should be used.
08:50 There are also writers who a few paragraphs later again begin about the jihad.
08:55 A singular answer can thus not be provided.
08:59 You can question another expert and this one will view the first part of sura 8 verse 60
09:04 as unconnected with terror. How I understand it? That I can’t.
09:09 I do not see this verse unconnected from the Qur’an, or the context in which that verse is used.
09:15 I point again at the continuum I just outlined, and my comment that the Qur’an is a polemic.
09:23 These minutes have been undersigned. Attached is a curriculum vitae,
09:30 [and] the list that I previously referred to — I see the lawyer shake his head,
09:34 that I have not read that — and behind it is attached the second addendum
09:38 as handed to the magistrate. You want it to be read? “Yes please”. What? “Please.”
09:48 Those are various English quotes. You do know that, isn’t it? A list of Bukhari.
09:57 You want them all? “If that’s allowed”. [Of course] you may.
13:02 And with this I have held up the statements of Mister Admiraal and the annexes quite in full,
13:06 and give the floor back to the Chairman.
13:10 Thank you, then I myself continue with the statement Ms. Sultan has made to the magistrate
13:15 on June 28 this year [2010]. She lives in LA and is a psychiatrist by profession,
13:22 and she reports that she [received] summons in advance …


Watchful said...

I wonder how the judges are selected for this kind of trial in the Netherlands. Because the judges appear to be so relatively young, I can't help but wonder if younger judges were selected deliberately so that they could be more easily pressured by the establishment, by the governing "elites."

Anonymous said...

Quote: ". . . to have this material broadcast live on Dutch television and read into the public record of the trial is a milestone of enormous (and devastating) significance."

This particular testimony appears to have put Islam on trial. What if any reaction is there in the local press? Has any of this, as well as the film, FITNA been re-aired on television? discussed in print media?

Siegetower said...

Excellet stuff. To be played on national television? Yes, devastating.

How are the lamestream media reporting this, if at all? More please! :)

Nick said...

This is the discussion that should have been held on international TV throughout the West on September 12th, 2001.

Of course even now Wilders is forcing these issues on to the table. The mainstream media in the UK is unsurprisingly, completely silent about all this.

toro said...

This is simply devastating for Islam in Europe. The curtain is going down.
I don't know what to say, but by a strange twist of fate, this trial will actually prove beneficial to Geert Wilders. And discussing Islam in a court of justice in Europe, on a public television in 2010, it's simply unbelievable. A sign of sanity? Perhaps, but I think the violent solution for Islam cannot be avoided, still I'm glad to see this historic moment for Europe.

Go Geert.


It is indeed powerful testimony, and our expat blog here in Jakarta, Ross's Right Angle, will refer readers to Gates of Vienna so they can study the transcript for themselves.
It's to be hoped for that this trial, devised to suppress freedom, will end up empowering hitherto unknowing Dutch and other Western people. The truth, indeed, may make us free.

Nick said...

It is quite amusing to see those ignorant people say to Mr. Wilders that one cannot discuss Islam openly. Then engineer a situation where Islam is discussed openly on national TV. And give Mr. Wilders the opportunity to call expert witnesses too!