On Nov ember 2, 2004, a fanatic Islamist shot and killed the Dutch filmmaker, Theo van Gogh and then slit his throat and pinned his angry message to those who were regarded as anti-Muslim. Since that day, many Dutch politicians have regarded their nation as engaged in a war against Muslim terrorists. Geert Wilders, leader of the right-wing Party for Freedom(PVV) has become the symbol of hatred toward Muslims. Several months ago while attempting to enter the United Kingdom he was refused entry on grounds he was a ‘serious threat” to harmony in British society. This month, he entered Great Britain and was warmly welcomed by those sharing his hatred of Muslims. Current estimates is Wilders stands an excellent chance of becoming prime minister of the Netherlands in 2011.
His basic argument is that Islam is not a religion but a fascist ideology similar to that of the Nazis. He terms the Koran as similar to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and wants it banned. His intriguing solution to controversy over the Muslim burqas is to impose a $1,500 tax on wearing it. Wilders is living proof of the human tendency to reach for voices of hate when economic times become precarious. One can only assume Wilders will soon announce that by getting rid of burqas economic revival will shortly follow.
Geert Wilders, the provocative Dutch political leader who has been in the forefront of anti-Muslim activities came out strongly against any law which bans hate speech. In his address in Denmark, the firebrand stated bluntly: “Islam is not a religion. It’s a threat against everything we stand for.” This fighter for freedom of speech wants to close down all Muslim schools and mosques because people in those places do not speak the truth, or at least, the truth as viewed by Mr. Wilders. He told the audience at least 40% of British Muslims seek to introduce sharia law and a high percent of Muslims support the 9/11 attackers.
Mr. Wilders speaks eloquently in support of freedom of speech, but for some reason he does not wish to allow Muslims to have freedom of speech. Undoubtedly, he is not a supporter of the “wrong free speech,” and prefers the government should make clear what is “the right free speech” and the “wrong free speech.” Of course, isn’t that what governments are trying to do with hate speech laws?