“To the Last Gasp, I Will Always Let My Voice Be Heard”

Geert Wilders, the leader of the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, gave an historic speech on March 22, 2014.

He spoke out spontaneously, without a prepared text, before answering media questions. His remarks were prompted by the recent controversy over an incident when his supporters chanted a call for “fewer Moroccans”.

In the following video you’ll notice a poignant parallel the PVV leader’s words: one of his well-trained bodyguards stands behind him, constantly scanning the room in a professional manner, alert to the possibility that one of the thousands of people who want to kill Mr. Wilders may appear on the scene at any moment.

Many thanks to SimonXML for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


00:00   Ladies and gentlemen, ten years ago
00:04   via the Wilders group, I founded the
00:08   Party for Freedom, a party that stands for
00:12   many things: better healthcare, lower
00:16   taxes, the construction of roads,
00:20   but also a party which I founded
00:24   in particular to oppose blurring
00:28   the disadvantages of a multicultural society,
00:32   to oppose Islamisation,
00:36   to preserve our own culture and our own
00:40   identity. In that fight, ten years ago
00:44   I lost my own freedom
00:48   From shortly after the murder of Theo van Gogh
00:52   until today, I have no longer been a free man.
00:56   And I did all that, and all our members of parliament with me
01:00   and all the volunteers, on behalf of our
01:04   voters. On behalf of Henk and Ingrid,
01:08   as we call them. We stand for
01:12   the themes I just mentioned which other parties don’t touch,
01:16   and which, in order to be seen as politically correct, they dare not mention.
01:20   We reject fear but come up with solutions.
01:24   This period of ten years has been characterised
01:28   by ups and downs. We have
01:32   won elections. We have lost elections.
01:36   and at the last elections,
01:40   you cannot have failed to notice it, a discussion started about
01:44   the Moroccans. I have, during the campaign,
01:48   in a district in The Hague, called for fewer Moroccans
01:52   and at a campaign meeting in De Plein here in The Hague
01:56   I asked people the question
02:00   “Do you want more or fewer
02:04   Moroccans?” Why did I do that?
02:08   I did it because I wanted to. I did it
02:12   because that is what I think.
02:16   I have explained repeatedly how we want to achieve that goal.
02:20   I didn’t say we want to deport all Moroccans,
02:24   I said that we wanted a three-stage
02:28   approach: limiting immigration
02:32   from Islamic countries, including
02:36   Morocco, which is in our election manifesto,
02:40   promoting re-emigration, which
02:44   is also in our election manifesto, and deporting
02:48   criminal Moroccans by
02:52   revoking their Dutch passports, if they have dual nationality – and most have –
02:56   and sending them back to the country of their other nationality, Morocco.
03:00   A method that
03:04   the cabinet has already made possible for
03:08   terrorists; it’s already possible for terrorists: if you have dual nationality
03:12   your Dutch nationality can be revoked and you can
03:16   be sent back to Morocco or another country, and as PVV
03:21   we have called for that method to be applied for other violent crimes.
03:25   These three measures
03:29   are all in our election manifesto and lead to
03:33   fewer Moroccans.
03:37   Any why did I refer to Moroccans in particular? Not just because
03:41   someone has Moroccan nationality, but
03:45   because Moroccans are at the top of the list
03:49   of over-representation in crime
03:53   and welfare dependence. Moroccan youths younger than
03:57   23, more than 60% of them are known
04:01   to the police and the judicial system. Moroccans are 22 times
04:05   more frequently guilty of violent crime
04:09   such as mugging and robbery.
04:13   They are seven times more likely to be on welfare.
04:17   These are facts that I haven’t made up, but these are facts that
04:21   I have to make known or I might just as well NOT have gone into politics.
04:25   I went into politics to state things like this,
04:29   and to propose solutions – and I just mentioned three.
04:33   The media – not I – websites,
04:37   other politicians who were in the cafe
04:41   when I asked the people during an election campaign meeting
04:45   “do you want more or fewer Moroccans?” the media made the comparison
04:49   with abject examples from the past,
04:53   such as Nazism. I’ve been portrayed as Hitler.
04:57   I was compared to Goebbels.
05:01   Films were made in which I spoke while images of Hitler
05:05   were shown and my voice was dubbed in.
05:09   Abject comparisons that I haven’t made
05:13   but that the media and the websites made.
05:17   I spoke the truth.
05:21   I talked about the problem, one of the problems
05:25   that are the reason why I went into politics
05:29   opposing the excesses of a multicultural society and Islamisation.
05:33   I did not say anything wrong.
05:37   I have no regrets, and I am not
05:41   going to apologise to anyone for the truth
05:45   and for exercising my political profession.
05:49   I have noticed that there has been disquiet,
05:53   unrest, in society, but also
05:57   unrest within my own political party, the Party for Freedom
06:01   and of course
06:05   that is not something you’d want. But I am convinced of one thing
06:09   and that is that I have acted within the boundaries of the law,
06:13   within the margins of the law, within the limits of my election manifesto
06:17   and the only person who can decide otherwise
06:21   is a judge, not other politicians
06:25   who complain whenever I ever say anything about a court case in progress,
06:29   that ‘Wilders is respecting the separation of powers’.
06:33   And now from Mr Roemer to ministers are saying that
06:37   I am guilty – not a suspect, but guilty – of hate speech,
06:42   incitement and discrimination.
06:46   The pot is calling the kettle black.
06:50   But the worst thing is that the person who has wiped his feet on the law the most
06:54   is the Minister of Justice, Ivo Opstelten, and I am really angry about that.
06:58   Ivo Opstelten, after the Council of Ministers, said yesterday
07:02   that he considered what I had said on election night to be disgusting.
07:06   Minister Opstelten is the head of the
07:10   Public Prosecution Service,
07:14   the chief of the civil servants who are deciding at this moment
07:18   whether or not the complaints against me must lead to prosecution.
07:22   How can the Public Prosecution Service
07:26   still decide in all objectivity
07:30   whether or not I must be prosecuted if their highest chief
07:34   the Minister of Justice has actually declared me guilty.
07:36   Apart from the fact that the Minister of Justice,
07:40   as far as I know, has put up no resistance whatsoever
07:44   against the fact that there are preprinted complaint forms
07:48   against me – any lawyer could tell him that’s totally not done –
07:52   that there are pre-printed complaint texts
07:56   available throughout the country and that people are even assisted
08:00   at home – at home – when they want to make an official complaint.
08:04   My colleague, Fleur Agema, said, quite rightly, that
08:08   they should be doing that for old people when they are mugged or robbed.
08:12   Ladies and gentlemen, I don’t know
08:16   where this will end. I too see what is happening.
08:20   I can see there is unrest in society. I also see
08:24   that there are people in my own party who say that they will not take part any longer,
08:28   and I don’t know where this will end
08:32   for my party in parliament or in the country,
08:36   but I do know one thing: I will go on,
08:40   I will not apologise for things I haven’t done,
08:44   for things that are the truth, because that is my professional duty.
08:48   I know one thing: no-one will make me back down.
08:52   Whether we end up with thirteen, ten or five in parliament
08:56   or however many we end up with, Geert Wilders will go on
09:00   and hopefully, and I am convinced with a lot of people, on behalf of all the voters
09:04   on behalf of our joint project
09:08   on behalf of our culture, our identity and against
09:12   the excesses of a multicultural society and Islamisation,
09:16   and if I then am not allowed to say what the problems
09:20   are with Moroccans, referring to existing data,
09:24   if I have to feel guilty because the media make comparisons
09:28   with abject World War Two objects
09:32   that I have never made and will never make, then that’s the end of it.
09:36   However, whatever they write, whatever they broadcast, whatever the Ministry of Justice
09:40   does, whatever my colleagues in parliament will do,
09:44   I will go on and I will, for the hundreds of thousands,
09:48   for the millions of Dutch who want to hear it,
09:52   to the last gasp, I will always let my voice be heard.
09:56   Thank you, and if you have any questions I will be pleased to answer them.

16 thoughts on ““To the Last Gasp, I Will Always Let My Voice Be Heard”

  1. Good to see a man stand by his principles. It is too easy to fall into the trap of accusations of racist scaremongering. The demise of western culture is happening. The demands of Muslim immigrants are increasing . The natural desire for those who want to defend their culture will continue (both sides), as will the unshakeable belief that many Muslims hold , that Islam will one day rule the world!
    If not tackled these truths will lead us all into eating one giant [excrement] butty.

  2. Why Wilders doesn’t mention former remarks made about Moroccans by the PvdA ( labour) party, I don’t know. Maybe he will if he has to go to court.

    One , Hans Spekman, said in 2008 :Moroccans need to be humiliated, and the other the now leader of PvdA, Diederik Samsom said in 2011 that : Moroccans have a monopoly on violence.
    Underneath it says :
    “These cronies were never any complaints against them and everyone was silent.
    Now Wilders calls for less Moroccans, and to send foreign criminals back
    He is the bogey man, compared to Hitler and charges are presented against him”

    There are more instances where the left have said worse and certainly worse than Wilders ! Hypocrisy is rife. Shame on them all !

  3. Observers in Canada see a flickering light in Europe representing freedom of thought and speech – it’s name is Wilders and the PVV!
    We wish we had just such a voice in the Parliament of Canada with the courage and conviction of a Geert Wilders.
    Keep on Geert – you have more friends internationally than you may know!
    Slavery manifests itself in many ways and even freedom itself has its price.
    Our thoughts, prayers and best wishes are with you, your colleagues and the Dutch people.

  4. All of Europe has contorted itself because of its unwillingness to embrace the bedrock principle of free speech, namely that truth is a defense. Mr. Wilders states the truth about Moroccans — who are indistinguishable from other Muslims, let it be said — and that should be the end of it.

    Instead, we witness the disgraceful chief of the Public Prosecution Service announce his decision in advance on the metaphysical question of whether Mr. Wilder’s speech is “hate speech.” His subordinates will now dutifully, soberly, justly and earnestly labor to ensure that, in their considered bureaucratic judgment — which will exemplify the highest principles of a qualified, educated, informed and disinterested civil service acting only after (1) due and principled deliberation, (2) consultation with legal experts in their own ranks and academic advisers of the first rank, (3) and dismissal of all evidence of the disastrous transformation of Dutch society by the purposeful importation and subsidy of people of a culture vastly inferior to Dutch culture and determined to remain apart from it and to undermine it — that the arbitrary, casual, reflexive, malicious determination by the chief of the Public Prosecution Service is the correct one.

    It’s an inexpressible tragedy that Europeans countenance an absurd inquiry into the state of mind of a speaker of unpleasant truths, often as not linked with a disgusting, obsequious hysteria over the dishonest, manipulative complaints from Muslim agitators that Muslim sensibilities have been bruised.

    Just what would non-“hate” speech look like if one were to speak out and point out, inter alia, the abuse of welfare services and the disproportionate representation of Moroccans in Dutch crime statistics? After decades of oppression of Europeans alarmed by the extraordinary damage to their nations from massive immigration, there are still no examples, no guidelines from European governments on exactly how one can talk about important and fundamental facts of existence. What are the exact guidelines on how to speak of indisputable facts and avoid prosecution? If one has the utmost disdain for Moroccans and states that Moroccans in the Netherlands are disproportionate users of welfare benefits and disproportionately represented in crime statistics how, why is that different from one who has no such disdain and merely points out that Moroccans in the Netherlands are disproportionate users of welfare benefits and disproportionately represented in crime statistics? European government need to make clear why the former speaker has committed a crime but the latter has not. Or is the latter also culpable? Why would that be the case, if so? How is the formers malignant mind to be discovered and proved in court? These issues cry out for clarification from state actors.

    What has been clearly established, however, that speaking the truth about any aspect of the Muslim presence in any European country is presumptively “hate speech,” the criminal consequences of which an accused can attempt to avoid only at great personal risk and expense. That this is no less the case in the Netherlands is a national disgrace considering the admirable support for free thinkers it has provided in the past.

    Thomas Jefferson said “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty, than those attending too small a degree of it.” Alas, Europeans demonstrate that they now cannot tolerate liberty and that they will kiss the hem of the robes of those who are intent on debasing their countries and turning them over to foreigners. That there will be bloody conflict in that process cannot be doubted.

    As it is, the presence of indigestible non-European minorities inside the borders of European countries today has only occurred in other lands and times only after a disastrous failure of the nations armies at the frontiers. But today, massive numbers of foreigners enter European countries to colonize it with the enthusiastic welcome and support of all national governments and the E.U.

    But if any European objects, why, it’s “hate speech” for which a criminal penalty must be imposed.

    No nation is guaranteed an eternal existence. However, it is also true that no nation is required to feebly surrender to extinction and debasement before its allotted time. When the destruction of Europe is accomplished by the leaders of the treasonous parties of Europe, it will be clear that their attacks on free speech were, at heart, not not premised on any kind of a principled view on what is or is not acceptable speech in the public square. No. The attacks were mounted to disguise their treason and cowardice.

    • All so very true Colonel Bunny. What is now permitted in the arena of public interaction between ‘communities’ is nothing more than collectivist thinking and woe betide those who speak outside of the collectivist thought bubble.

      ‘Hate speech’ must be called out for what it really is; fascist legislation to shut down the dissent of those who have the temerity and the guts to point out the obvious, but which is radically enforced by cowards too afraid to rock the boat.

  5. kutmarokkaantjes a perfect definition for those crimanimals although if you were to translate it into English the Baron would ban you. I am surprised that he didn’t mention the so called rappers video while not calling for his death was certainly enticing other people to kill him. That in my eyes is a far worst crime than saying that the Netherlands would be far better off if we deported a few Moroccan criminal. What I have noticed is the level of demonetization has reached a pitch I have not seen since the time of Pim Fortuyn but that is over ten years ago and as we all know most Politicians have only a very short term selective memory and no feel for history. The comments about the Justice minister Ivo Opstelten was very telling

    • The demonisation of Pim Fortuyn occurred because the Establishment felt all powerful, and expected another minor confrontation against a politician refusing to obey and push him back into obscurity. The demonisation of Wilders is of a different nature, they are no longer secure about their future.

      Speaking of Pim Fortuyn, any decent Dutchmen will still feel his eyes well up watching the “Nacht van Pim Fortuyn”


      For those readers who do not speak Dutch, in this video he his arguing with the staff of his political party before he would start his own. After stating he doesn’t mind to change how he says what is needed to be said, as long as he gets the point across,he spoke the famous words “Then I will be killed. Fine!, but the problems will remain”.

      • Are you aware of a copy of the video where Pim debated with some imam, an imam who appeared to be the height of moderation, but whom Pim led into an eruption of anger – at which point, I am told, Pim turned to the camera and said “that is the real islam”?

        It pains me to count how many gay men I’ve spoken to who have no knowledge whatsoever of Pim and his assassination. Yet the terrorist Nelson Mandela is praised like he was the second coming of Christ.

        Considering that the politics of the PVV and the FN are so far apart economically, it is now clear that the unspoken ground on which Europe is going to tear itself apart is islam. That the Left and Right in countries like Holland will form coalitions to keep the PVV out of government, shows that they too understand that this-which-cannot-be-named is of greater importance than any other issue in 21st century Europe.

  6. I wish Wilders would point out to the Dutch people, that the Algerian muslims in 1961 forced out the unwanted christians and jews from that country, saying to them: “choose the suitcase or the coffin”. History does not even bother to record this event, which happened within the lifetime of millions of living Dutch people.

    By the standards of islam, it is clear that Wilders is positively gentle.

  7. Hmm, I hope GW knows what he’s doing, but anyone concerned about racism would be happier to go along with ‘we will have fewer criminals’ and ‘we will have fewer islamists’ than ‘fewer Morroccans’. In Europe it’s just such an explosive thing to say. Perhaps to many Dutch people ‘Morroccans’ is short for ‘high percentage criminal and muslim’, but it’s still a dangerous way to go.

    • Alas, massive, unwanted immigration by Moroccans, or anyone, is never “explosive.” Just objecting to it is.

      Adieu to the Netherlands and all the rest. They embrace their colonizers with a vengeance.

      No criticism of you.

  8. I guess everybody now knows that there is something going on in The Netherlands regarding immigrants. To be more precise: immigrants of muslim descent. And in this case to pin point it even further: immigrants of Morrocon descent. This group numbers around 350.000 people right now. When the first immigrants of Morrocan descent immigrated to the Netherlands, around early sixties, they came on working permits. In 1968 they numberd 12.600 people. All men. In 1969 the number rose to 69.000. Around 1975 the law was changed, and wives and family were allowed to come and also immigrated to the Netherlands.

    Already around 1980, a discussion was on the way what was to be done with these people, as the assimilation in Dutch society and culture was not working. Furthermore, ever more Morrocan persons started to show up in police records and arrests. At that time, trouble was already lurking, especially in the bigger cities. For the last decade (and longer), second generation Moroccon immigrants have consistently led the wrong statistics in criminal behavior of just about any type.

    This however, can not be discussed on a normal and factual basis in this country, There is a strong elitist layer right through society, press/media and politics, which blocs any attempt to try to come to grips with the problem of criminality and immigration, especially when muslim immigrants are concerned.

    This country has had a very bad trackrecord during the second world war. 90% of the jewish population was deported with the help of Dutch government officials, police and other collaborating forces. The Germans could count on the Dutch to help them in getting rid of the jews. This discrace has haunted Dutch politics and public opinion, and started a rebellious streak in the country, led by left politicians at first, and flowing over into other political parties, long after WW2, around 1970. Since then, any balanced discussion on immigrants and/or sending some back, has become almost impossible.

    In the meantime, the problems keep on growing, and many neighborhoods in the Netherlands suffer the concequences of this inability and inaptitude in Dutch politics to grab hold of this problem. In 2002 the Netherlands was swept into a political storm on exactly the same subject, resulting in the first political murder in centuries, on the outspoken Dr. Pim Fortuyn. In 2004 another political murder, this time fueled by religious (muslim) fanaticism, struck writer and filmmaker Theo van Gogh, who also was very outspoken on muslim immigration. After that, other people were threatend, and some had to leave the country altogether (Ayaan Hirsi Ali among other).

    Now, in 2014, we have Mr Geert Wilders, who started his own party in 2005. He too is threatend with deadly aim and has been living a guarded life ever since.

    The Netherlands is a sharply divided country, wereby all kinds of activists on all levels (including within local and national government) are being whipped up into a utopian frenzy of love and peace, aided by an extremely biased press/media, stirring up emotions to an even higher boiling point. In this setting anything can happen ofcourse. The country is being held captive in a strangling hold of boundless hypocrisy and loony politics.

    Mr Wilders is a brave man in a land of political cowards.

  9. Perhaps the book Savage Continent by Keith Lowe helps set the stage for what we see going on in the Netherlands today and most of Europe, albeit on different levels.

    The comment by Charles is what brought me back to SC. A book that I refer to countless times now and yes, what Holland did to the Jews is a snapshot of the guilt that Europe has grown up with since WW2. Political correctness and of course the bottom line trumps all now. Geert Wilders is a hero in my eyes and indeed he is a marked man. Wilders has spoken the truth yet he is attacked and vilified for this.

    “If any European objects it is hate speech”.

    If any American objects in the same manner, he or she is branded a racist.

    Political correctness is truly an evil concoction.

Comments are closed.