For a change, now the Dutch left incites
Yesterday, Wilders put on X (Twitter): Jordan is Palestine!
Immediately, he got supportive, worthy reactions from people who explained it further. His ‘revelation’ is taboo in the West, as much as saying to a 6-year-old that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Man in the Moon are all made up. All the other leaders still believe in the Two-State Solution, and don’t hurt their feelings! No Israeli, Jew or Muslim, left-wing or right-wing, believes in it anymore. Only to foreign VIPs, they are obligated to pretend its viability. Yet, the Holy Land is large enough to accommodate everyone—on condition that Antisemitism is defeated.
Hamas joined the PA’s foreign ministry and also published a statement reproving Wilders’ words, calling him a ‘Zionist Nazi.’ Look who’re talking!
The Jerusalem Post instantly subheaded this lie: “Wilders put forth a radical proposal, suggesting that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could be resolved by relocating Palestinians to Jordan, denying their right to an independent sovereign state.” But Wilders said nothing about relocating anyone. And why is an independent Palestinian State in Jordan wrong?
Wilders has a US Republican distortion of Israel, dreaming it’s a bulwark against Islam, shielding Europe. With Jews, he has little feeling. When the Animal Party (I kid (pardon the pun) you not) demanded a ban on ritual slaughter (Chief Rabbi Lord Sacks spoke in the Dutch Parliament and made no dent because he didn’t know of the Dutch sensitivities), Wilders voted for the ban—to hinder Muslims, never mind the Jews. (Afterward, Jews and Muslims jointly designed a slaughter practice that was approved.)
Meanwhile, the Dutch National Broadcasting Cooperation NOS continues its anti-Jewish incitement of decades. They aired the moving return of convicted Muslim criminals and let someone say their joy could not be complete with what’s happening in Gaza. But it didn’t show the touching reception on the Jewish side of the innocent, kidnapped (war crime), starved (war crime) young and old people who were released. Neither it said, it’s hard to celebrate with hundreds still kept at gunpoint. But the NOS, together with the violent Hamas rallies, no doubt did help propel Wilders to power. ‘Every disadvantage has its advantage.’ (Johan Cruyff)
When Muslims in the Netherlands demonstrated for genocide against the Jews, the left did nothing. Now Wilders won, it fears more racism? When the Dutch left ignored Antisemitism, it lost any footing for talking against bigotry. When you’re asleep at the wheel, you can’t call yourself woke!
While the White Dutch left is very worried, the Black Dutch are not:
Rather than more alt-right racism in the Netherlands, I expect more left-wing incitement. Before the elections, the leaders of the left were the most big-headed. After the polls, they play vicarious victims, instead of rebuilding society after decades of capitalist ruin. Paradoxically, it seems that Wilders’ right-wing coalition will save the People. Fortunately, these so-called right-wingers all have an economically left-wing, social agenda.
Foreign correspondents who call him the Dutch Trump have no idea what they’re talking about. Wilders is an excellent debater and warns against Islam, but that’s where the similarities end. Trump was raised with wealth and manages to end his father’s inheritance, claiming he’s self-made rich. Wilders is not rich and for financial support for the working class.
The real would-be Dutch Trump is Thierry Baudet who recently had to purge his party of Neo-Nazis and is, like Trump, suspected of being a Putin spy. He’s the only Dutch MP for Putin’s war in Ukraine, and dispenses conspiracy and crazy theories liberally, from the flat earth to that he’s a reptile! Regrettably, for him, he’s arrogant but just not as smart as Trump.
When coalition co-leader Omtzigt gets his way, power will return to parliament, and MPs, rather than the PM, will decide what will happen.
It is entirely possible and plausible that Wilders and Omtzigt will be the parliamentary leaders of their caucuses, with a third person becoming PM.