Geert Wilders in the Dock: “Freedom of Speech is the Only Freedom I Still Have”

Geert Wilders appeared in court for the first time yesterday in the latest show trial against him. He has been charged with a “hate crime” for saying that he and his party wanted fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands.

The following video from the hearing shows Mr. Wilders’ statement that formed part of the official entry of his plea. In his remarks the PVV leader highlighted the grotesque manner in which the Public Prosecutor has applied a blatant double standard in his choice of whom to prosecute, and whom to leave alone. Furthermore, one of the three judges sitting on the panel has a blatant conflict of interest concerning the case, and should have recused herself.

Nothing highlights the surreal nature of this trial more than the fact that it had to be held in a bunker under Schiphol Airport, for security reasons. It takes enormous state resources to protect Mr. Wilders from the thousands of culture-enrichers and leftists who are determined to kill him. Yet he is the one who is accused of inciting violence.

Welcome to the Modern Multicultural Netherlands!

Many thanks to H. Numan for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:


00:01   Mr President, Members of the Court:
00:07   For more than eleven years I have been living under death threats.
00:14   Every day, I am reminded of this. Even today.
00:19   This morning, I was driven here in a convoy of armored cars, with sirens,
00:25   flashing lights, and surrounded by bodyguards. And not only today, but every day.
00:33   I will be brought home in the same way. Home is a safe-house.
00:44   My office is a shielded room. And when I have to stand in court, it is here, in a bunker at Schiphol.
00:55   For more than eleven years already, I’ve been paying a heavy price.
01:01   I think that you as well as I know why.
01:04   I am paying that price for the same reason that I am in the dock for the second time.
01:12   Because I dare to criticize Islam and mention the Moroccan problem.
01:21   “Freedom is the power that we have over ourselves,” said the great Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius.
01:30   His statue stands at the entrance of the Supreme Court in The Hague.
01:36   Hugo Grotius is the symbol of Dutch law. But once he was on trial himself.
01:44   But once he was on trial himself. He was sentenced to life
01:49   because he had fought on the side of Johan van Oldenbarnevelt for Dutch freedom.
01:54   But Grotius escaped in a book chest and fled to Antwerp.
02:00   Sometimes I wish I could escape myself. But I know I can’t.
02:08   I would have to pay a price which I do not want to pay.
02:13   I would have to become silent, and I can’t do that. And I won’t do that.
02:24   Freedom of speech is the only freedom I still have. And — forgive me — I will never give it up.
02:33   So here I stand again.
02:37   And I honestly think it is a disgrace that I have to stand here.
02:41   Millions of people in this country and abroad think so, too.
02:49   I do not ask for your compassion.
02:55   But now that I am forced to stand here, I ask of you that you give me what I am entitled to:
03:01   a fair trial. I ask that Lady Justice be blindfolded.
03:08   And I fear this will not be so.
03:14   As my lawyer explained, over half of the legal complaints
03:19   lodged against me proved to be false when they were investigated.
03:24   People thought they were voting in elections, instead of pressing charges.
03:29   Or they did not know my name. Or they were illiterate or did not recognize their signature.
03:37   Or they said they did not feel discriminated against, even though it said so in their complaint.
03:42   I hope that you will never be accused of something that you did not do.
03:49   Or they got assistance from mosques or Labor politicians.
03:55   Or they were told by the police that the officers also felt uncomfortable with Wilders’ statements.
04:04   Or they were told by the mosque administration that they had to fill out the forms the police were going to bring.
04:14   Mr President, Members of the Court, this is nothing but deception, manipulation,
04:20   intimidation, ignorance, yes, even fraud. It is incredibly shocking.
04:26   And the fact that the prosecutor just said, and I quote, “this is nothing to worry about” is a disgrace.
04:37   Before you stands a politician.
04:40   And he is being prosecuted because he has voiced a political opinion.
04:48   Why did I speak about fewer Moroccans?
04:53   The honest answer is because I want fewer Moroccans in the Netherlands.
04:58   The Netherlands has a huge Moroccan problem.
05:03   It is my job as a democratically elected representative of the people
05:07   to honestly identify the problems in our country.
05:11   How and why do I want to get fewer Moroccans in our country has already
05:18   been written down in the PVV election platform since 2006:
05:25   We want to stop immigration from non-Western immigrants, and therefore
05:32   also of Moroccans, to promote voluntary repatriation, and to denaturalize criminals
05:41   with a dual nationality and expel them from the Netherlands.
05:50   And before, during and after the contested election night, I have repeatedly
05:57   explained this in front of many cameras and microphones.
06:04   I did not say “All Moroccans must leave the country” or “Moroccans are no good,”
06:11   but I advocated “fewer Moroccans”. Because that is my opinion; that is what I want,
06:16   and what many millions of Dutch people want together with me.
06:20   The Public Prosecutor is trying to catch me, but he is shopping selectively.
06:29   If I had advocated fewer Syrians, then I would not be standing here today.
06:35   Or I would not stand here alone, but together with Prime Minister Rutte
06:39   and almost all the government leaders in Europe.
06:43   Because today they all want to get fewer Syrians.
06:50   The Public Prosecution also applies double standards.
06:54   And there are many examples of this.
06:58   How quiet was it when, earlier, politicians from the Labor Party spoke about Moroccan c**ts (Mr Oudkerk),
07:10   about humiliating Moroccans (Mr Spekman),
07:15   and about Moroccan boys who have an ethnic monopoly on nuisance (Mr. Samson).
07:21   Why are they not being prosecuted?
07:24   And how quiet it was when a Turkish member of the Dutch Parliament (Mr Öztürk) compared me with a tumor
07:31   and said “One has to fight him,” and likened me to Hitler.
07:36   Where were the mayors then who spoke of shame of it and led processions of people going to press charges?
07:46   Where was the Public Officer’s press spokesperson
07:50   when a Labor Party chairman (Mr Den Hertog) said that he hopes that I die of a heart attack,
07:58   but that if a bullet is needed then it would have to big enough to engrave from the grateful people on it?
08:09   Where was the outrage of the Prime Minister when a D66 member (Mr Mohammed) said
08:21   he would put a bullet through my head and cut me open and feed me to the pigs?
08:32   And why was there no prosecution of the former police commissioner of Amsterdam,
08:41   Mr Van Riessen, who said about me, and I quote:
08:44   “Basically one would feel inclined to say: let’s kill him, just get rid
08:49   of him now and he will never surface again.” End of quote.
08:55   Where were the preprinted declaration forms then?
09:00   What a duplicity. What selective indignation.
09:06   And when someone is taken to court, such as the Moroccan rapper
09:13   who said that he, and I quote, “hates these f***ing Jews even more than the Nazis”, end of quote,
09:17   then he is acquitted, because then suddenly his words are covered by freedom of speech.
09:25   These double standards and this hypocrisy by both politicians
09:31   and the Public Prosecutor turn this trial into a political trial.
09:36   The leader of the largest opposition party, who proves too strong to defeat in Parliament, must be neutralized.
09:46   That is a disgrace and I hope you will not allow yourselves to be taken advantage of.
09:57   Because the problems of which I speak will not go away by keeping silent about them.
10:01   Silence is not an option. Silence is cowardly. Silence is betrayal.
10:07   If I, as the political leader of my party, during an election gathering of my party,
10:14   am not allowed to say what has been written down in my party platform for a decade,
10:20   then this is absolute madness and then one has to convict me.
10:25   My opinions will not change. And one will not be able to silence me.
10:33   I have been deprived of my freedom for over eleven years,
10:38   and the only freedom I still have is my freedom of speech.
10:42   Nobody will be able to rob me of it.
10:46   But obviously, I hope that you will leave the political and public debate to the political and public debate,
10:56   that you will not turn this courtroom into a political forum, and that you acquit me.
11:04   On August 24 last year, in the television program ‘Looking into the Soul’,
11:14   I heard one of your fellow penal judges, Mr Hermans,
11:18   say that voting for the PVV is — I quote — a “huge contra-indication to the profession of judge.”
11:29   Excuse me, but this worries me.
11:32   And I am even more worried because, of all people,
1136   it happened to be one of you three, Mrs Van Rens,
11:40   who on August 17 last year in the television program ‘Looking into the Soul’
11:44   criticized political views of my party,
11:48   which is allowed of course.
11:55   She said that she opposes minimum sentences and expelling illegal immigrants.
12:01   But she said even more. Mrs Van Rens also criticized the judicial decision
12:08   during my previous trial to approve our objection to the court.
12:14   She said she did not understand that the objection was assigned by fellow judges because, and I quote:
12:22   “There was no proper basis in penal law to allocate the objection.”
12:29   Mr President, Members of the Court, there has been only one single judge
12:35   in the Netherlands who has openly criticized the judicial decision in favor of me.
12:42   Only one. And she is exactly the judge opposite me in court today.
12:50   Madam Judge, I hope you understand that I am saying this and that I do not find this very reassuring.
13:00   It would do you credit if you would withdraw from this case, and I strongly call on you to do so.
13:09   Mr President, Members of the Court. I conclude.
13:13   I meant what I said; I spoke on behalf of millions of Dutch people;
13:20   I retract nothing and have no regrets.
13:23   I said what I think and I will continue to do so. Always.
13:29   But I hate no one. I do not incite any hatred and I abhor everything that has to do with discrimination.
13:39   That is the truth. Only in a dictatorship, is speaking the truth a crime.
13:46   Only in a dictatorship, is the opinion of millions of people criminalized.
13:52   I stand here before three judges, but actually it should be the 17 million
13:57   Dutch who should judge my political expressions.
14:01   So I ask you: Let freedom of expression prevail.
14:07   Let the Netherlands remain a free country. Acquit me. Thank you very much.

15 thoughts on “Geert Wilders in the Dock: “Freedom of Speech is the Only Freedom I Still Have”

  1. I know it isn’t exactly the same but I felt like I was watching “The Twilight Zone”. Episode – “The Obsolete Man”.

  2. IF Mnr. Wilders is ‘innocent until proven guilty’ then this speech, once confirmed for accuracy, should result in either further prosecutions of those who have used similar, so called, ‘hate speech’ or acquittal.

    But Romano-Dutch law is strange to us; simplified; instead of defining what one cannot do, it defines what is permissible, and everything else (that which is undefined) is possibly illegal. The problem here being that ‘freedom of speech’ does not fit this context at all well. So there is ‘freedom of speech’ until, that is, one says something outside of an explicitly permitted context…..

    Then ‘lawfare’ can have a (political) field day and force a court hearing to decide the permissibility thereof, with an (otherwise innocent) enemy as the scapegoat. It is a wonderful ploy to bring down an enemy, but can have consequences as well, the Dutch people are not stupid and they can see what is behind all this. I would be highly embarassed if I were Dutch. The real question is do the people care enough to do something about it?

  3. Thanks for your support of Geert Wilders. It is important to retain our free speech.
    A lot of his attackers want to silence any dissent against islam and the qu’ran. I recently
    studied the qu’ran and listed the unfulfilled prophecies in the book. One statement said an inviter would come and that he has a good character. Another said a calamity would strike some people far away from the Arab world. Nothing else existed to help determine when this inviter was here. Who could ever play the role and prove he was the one? There were no other comments which would help determine when the prophesied calamity far from the Arab world took place. It looks like God gave them some prophecies, which make a commitment for the described acts to take place, and then did nothing more to help show when these events have taken place. This is more of an act of sabotage then anything people should want in their book. I think they have the prophetic outcome in their book one deserves when you are guilty of stealing authority away from the murdered men of the Bible by using their names but changing their story.

  4. Exactly why we in the US should fight to the death for the 1st and 2nd amendments. With out this we rapidly become a socialist dictatorship. Don’t give up your rights to the dictators! It’s time to recognize where the line we must establish that they cannot cross without a fight. I would rather go to jail than voluntarily give up the 1st and 2nd amendments. Gandhi knew how to fight this kind of thing, because it exposes the fascist ideology that the left really is. Just fail to comply and fail to continue to support the system that tries to oppress you. We don’t need to shoot anyone, just don’t respond.

    • Gandhi was resisting the British occupation of his country. Amritsar notwithstanding, the colonialists were hardy fascist, and certainly not left wing!

  5. In a free country, the first thing that would have occurred would have been a successful application for the judges who have previously voiced opinions contrary to Mr Wilders’ position in a public forum to recuse themselves so that the Court would not be tainted by an apprehension of bias. As to all the other people who weren’t prosecuted–a law applied selectively is not a law applied justly, is no longer (if it ever were) a just law and shouldn’t be on the books at all. I pray for the day that the PVV has a sufficient majority to govern and also to fire a rocket through this abhorrent legal system.

  6. Quite right, if the position is as stated she should recuse herself. Why have 3 judges if one has decided the issue before the case begins

  7. Baron, what a wonderful website you run. This battle is vital for us all. Even for those of us in Australia so far away. I sense the battle here has turned, but we look to Europe with dismay. The cornerstone of freedom is freedom of speech. It is under assault by those politically correct SJW and their financially compromised sponsors. However, after the name calling they only have incarceration. It is silence that is their best friend, and at the moment this compliance is falling apart at the seems. The Islamic battle is long term, but the battle for free speech in Europe is being won now and may be over after Brexit. The change in the vote in Europe is happening as we speak, Cologne was the tipping point, why Rotherham was not in the UK is astonishing. How supine the English have become.

  8. Wilders is a lion. Lets all pray that he escapes the latest trap they have set for him.

    • A political giant being unjustly put on trial by political pygmies!
      Should he be found guilty I would like to see massive demonstrations by the good folk of the Netherlands accordingly. Bring the whole country to a halt as you cannot afford the political vendetta against this man to succeed.

  9. Geert explained very well the farcical nature of the politicised circus trial he is having to endure. The judges do themselves, their nation no favours in allowing this to even go ahead.

    It is preposterous to treat people unequally in law. It is certainly not in the public interest that this trial should even take place and a guilty verdict would be a gift to Geert, strengthening his political position. Own goal for the opponents of freedom.

  10. Geert Wilders is inspirational! The female “judge” should have been ashamed of herself. In fact I caught her lowering her eyes when being confronted with the truth by Geert! Please keep us in the loop, Baron! Especially here in Australia where the
    fight is becoming so much more polarised as I write. Thank you.

Comments are closed.