Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch Freedom Party (PVV), has stirred controversy with a manifesto posted online, calling for the total “de-Islamification” of the Netherlands. In this far-reaching document, Wilders, a far-right Member of Parliament, pledged to halt immigration from Islamic countries, close all Islamic schools and asylum centers, and ban Muslim women from wearing headscarves in public if elected as prime minister in the upcoming elections.
Ahead of the parliamentary elections scheduled for March, Wilders aims to position the PVV as a leading force, capitalizing on the growing dissatisfaction with the Dutch government’s handling of the refugee crisis. Current opinion polls suggest that the PVV is poised to secure 35 seats in the 150-seat Dutch Parliament, a significant lead over the ruling Liberal party led by Prime Minister Mark Rutte.
Wilders, known for his provocative statements comparing the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf, is also committed to holding a referendum on the Netherlands’ EU membership following the historic Brexit vote in June. This stance has drawn criticism from Sybrand van Haersma Buma, leader of the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) party, who described Wilders’ plans as “utterly bizarre and unbelievable,” predicting that they would further polarize Dutch society.
While Wilders proudly defends his tough stance on Islam, emphasizing the need to control immigration from Islamic countries, his proposals face skepticism from other political leaders. The PVV, having provided critical support to the first Rutte cabinet from 2010 to 2012, may encounter difficulties forming a coalition if victorious in the upcoming election, as other parties express reluctance to collaborate with Wilders. The political landscape in the Netherlands is increasingly characterized by tension and division, reflecting the broader challenges Europe faces in navigating issues related to immigration and cultural identity.
RELATED ARTICLES
- German School Bans Children from Drinking Water Because its Offensive
- Geert Wilders Fails to Secure Prime Minister Position Despite Major Win
- Spanish Priest Faces Up To 3 Years In Prison For Criticizing Islamic Extremism
- EU conservative leaders Meet in Romania for Reelection and Victory lap
- Eritrean Gangs Wage War on the Streets of Hague, Netherlands
Loading ...
Before the muslim immigrants came to Europe there was no terrorism. So, why are they here? Has there ever been a European country that benefited by opening it’s borders to non-Europeans? If so, name it.
Do they make Europe a safer place to live? Have they made Europe great? Are they good for tourism? Do they bring anything positive to Europe? Do they respect the citizens of Europe and the customs? Do they support themselves without burdening the tax payers? Do they burden the judicial system due to high crime rates? Do they love Europe or what they can get from her?
Why don’t muslim “asylum seekers” go to Qatar, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates , Oman, Saudi Arabia or any of the other rich muslim countries? These are Islamic countries therefore more suitable for them.
Our governments have endangered all of us for generations to come. My children and my children’s children will be forced to live in a police state to keep the muslims in line until the day their(the muslims) numbers have grown large enough to make us refugees from our own country.
The muslims know they can’t invade and conquer Europe with military might so they come in the disguise of poor, downtrodden, abused people whose lives and well being hinge on asylum from the people for which they hate and want to destroy.
They aren’t trying to escape the life they left behind, they’re spreading it as they conquer Europe with terrorism and undermining it’s civilizations. This is the classic Trojan horse(muslims running from islam, think about it), Europe must look at the bigger picture. The muslims are the oppressors, the abusers, they have been this way for the past 1400 years, they don’t plan on changing now.
If a European country don’t let the hoards flood their land they are called “far right” “racist” “Nazis” and “xenophobic”. If they let them in, their country, their lives, their descendants lives will be torn apart. Which one is easier to live with? Which one does the most damage? Which choice is beneficial to the European country and it’s people?
C’est la sharia et les imams qu’il faut interdire: toute législation étrangère et tout juge étranger jugeant selon une législation étrangère, et percevant même des impôts pour lui, doivent être expulsés d’Europe manu militari!
L’islam, n’étant ni une race ni même une religion, mais étant une législation étrangère, doit être totalement interdit en Europe.
Comme le christianisme est totalement interdit en terre d’islam!
Il est débile que les chrétiens payent pour enrichir les mahométans!
Juncker et Merkel doivent être jugés pour haute trahison!
Yer these stooges called politicians well say anything to get voted in…..most people work this out by the time their 20
Please look up the unfortunate, late Pim Fortuyn, who was assassinated for refusing a Lockheed bribe. The “Company” used a small gang of Turks to gun him down at home.
Pim was assassinated by Volkert van der Graaf a pro-islam and animal rights activist.
I could find no connection to Lockheed.