... and counterpoint?

This is kind of curious: Belgian HLN.be (NL) has a short article up claiming the emails in the Climate Gate files were 'tampered with'. Now, HLN.be is arguably a respected outlet of the Belgian MSM.

But in this case, there is something amiss. No source for the claim of tampering is given. There is an extensive quote from someone dismissing the whole affair as a conspiracy theory already overtaken by facts. But the quote is not attributed.

A short google session on my part also didn't turn up anything. In fact, they seem to be assertions without any backing source whatsoever. I've put up a translation on Page II of KV, if you want to read for yourself.

All in all this seems to be a slightly panicked and incredibly lame reaction to the Climate Gate affair. This is journalism? This is the counterpoint to Climate Gate? This is all they can muster?

(thanks to Esther for the tip)

Watching a conspiracy in action

You may remember the day when the Hockey Stick went poof. The story began when Steve McIntyre, the same researcher who was largely responsible for destroying Michael Mann's "hockey stick" graph, turned his attention to a paper by Keith Briffa of CRU. This paper analysed tree ring data, including rings from an area called Yamal in Siberia. And quite the coincidence: CRU found another hockey-stick graph. Bishop Hill had a good account of the controversy here. In short: McIntyre's work appeared to show that Briffa had cherry-picked trees in order to get the desired outcome.

Powerline has found the Climate Gate e-mail correspondence between members of the 'hockey team' with regard to the Yamal implosion. Excerpts and analysis are here. It is astounding to read how these 'scientists' decided a priori that McIntyres results were 'bogus' and did everything in their power (up to and including sliming their way into the affections of NYT correspondent Andrew Revkin) to uphold their narrative. Nowhere in their correspondence the question is asked: But is McIntyre correct?

They knew the Briffa paper was flawed, but did nothing but be defensive about criticism of the paper. The did not correct Briffa, they did not redo the analysis. They went after McIntyre and tried to dismiss other critical voices.

Can we call it a conspiracy yet?

The story of the decade

Mrs. KV and I were away for the weekend with family. And wouldn't you know it? Cut off from any meaningful internet connection, I missed the breaking of the biggest story of 2009 (and probably the biggest story of the first decade of this, the 21st century).

Climate Gate, as the story has become known over the weekend, is on the road to become a scandal that is one of the greatest in modern science.

An Elegant Chaos have put up a searchable database of the content of the material leaked onto the internet. Moreover, comments made by CRU staff indicate not all of the stolen material has been leaked, so we possibly may look forward to more revelations about the 'climate change consensus' and the bully boys that tried to enforce it.

Bishop Hill has a nice (and linked) overview of the most damning email correspondence. This is being downplayed in the MSM as 'colloquial' language that means something other then what it actually says. Be that as it may, the most damning, and seemingly least controvertible, are 1) an overview of grants given to CRU scientists and where these grants originate from and 2) the comments left in the code of some of the modelling software developed and used by CRU and 3) comments left in a work document of a hapless soul at CRU logging attempts to make sense of the data used by CRU.

It all adds up to a picture where analysis was done on irreparably corrupted data, using models that are purposefully 'adjusted' to give the desired result and (unethical, unbecoming and possibly illegal) attempts to prevent anyone from finding out the extent of the rot, the corruption that beseeches 'climate science', while being funded by stakeholders that have a vested interest in a certain outcome (and it isn't 'big oil' either).

These are scientists that are key players in the compiltaion and editing of those IPCC reports. To put it as succinctly as possible: The IPCC has been totally discredited. Global warming goes poof, indeed.

The jury is still out on whether the material was hacked or leaked, apparently. If it was leaked, we at KV have a new hero. If it was hacked, we do think justice must be served. But we hope the hackers are put in front of a sympathetic judge and jury. And we at KV still have a new hero.

(Thanks to DP111 for the heads up)

Ongoing tracking:
Climate Depot
The Air Vent
Watt's Up With That (of course)
The Heartland Institute
James Delingpole

[UPDATE001] Lord Monckton adds his voice: They Are Criminals

Finally, these huckstering snake-oil salesmen and “global warming” profiteers — for that is what they are — have written to each other encouraging the destruction of data that had been lawfully requested under the Freedom of Information Act in the UK by scientists who wanted to check whether their global temperature record had been properly compiled. And that procurement of data destruction, as they are about to find out to their cost, is a criminal offense. They are not merely bad scientists — they are crooks. And crooks who have perpetrated their crimes at the expense of British and U.S. taxpayers.

I am angry, and so should you be.

[UPDATE002] US Senator Inhofe is calling for an investigation:

Senator Inhofe: Well, on this thing, it is pretty serious. And since, you know, Barabara Boxer is the Chairman and I'm the Ranking Member on Environment and Public Works, if nothing happens in the next seven days when we go back into session a week from today that would change this situation, I will call for an investigation. 'Cause this thing is serious, you think about the literally millions of dollars that have been thrown away on some of this stuff that they came out with.

Melanie Morgan: So what will you be calling for an investigation of?

Senator Inhofe: On the IPCC and on the United Nations on the way that they cooked the science to make this thing look as if the science was settled, when all the time of course we knew it was not.

[UPDATE003] And to put insult to injury, reader Herman Benschop points us to a paper (pdf) arguing the Greenhouse conjecture cannot hold for planetary climate: It doesn't compute with thermodynamics.

Fjordman -- November updates

[23 - 11] Two FFs today. First, A tentative piece as preparation for a more complete essay: The Coming Crash.

I get the feeling that tensions are building up and that something big is going to happen within the coming generation, probably within the next five to ten years. Since I have been writing about geology lately I will use an analogy from plate tectonics: The tectonic plates of the Western world are now about to make a big move.

Second, part three of A History of Geology and Planetary Science is up at Atlas Shrugs.

[18 - 11] On Brussels Journal: The Legend of the Middle Ages.

It is true that some ancient Greek texts were reintroduced to the West via Arabic, sometimes passing via Syriac or Hebrew along the way, but these were usually based, in the end, on Byzantine originals. The permanent recovery of Greco-Roman learning and literature was undertaken as a direct transmission from Greek, Orthodox Christians to Western, Latin Christians.

[ 8 - 11] On Gates of Vienna Fjordman has a short comment on the Fort Hood Sudden Jihad Syndrome shooting: Dying Not to Discriminate.

[ 4 - 11] On Gates of Vienna: A History of Geology and Planetary Science - Part 2

[ 3 - 11] On Brussels Journal: The Cold War Never Ended.

It is now almost twenty years since the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the Cold War. But did it really end, and did we win it? Look at the situation in Europe today, where many of the former Communist countries in the eastern half of Europe are freer and safer than many of those in the western half of Europe. Instead of an Iron Curtain we now have an Iron Veil of Multiculturalism, and Western Europe is on the wrong side of it this time around. Did we trade the USSR for the EUSSR? If we really "beat" Marxism, how come Marxists and Leftists of all stripes virtually control Western media and academia a generation later, and why does the USA have a Marxist-inspired President Obama?

[ 2 - 11] On Gates of Vienna: IQ and Warfare

Islam is a very simple, even primitive, creed, but as such it can ironically carry certain advantages. From a strictly evolutionary point of view, if Islam didn’t enjoy any advantages it wouldn’t have become as large as it has. Muslims are absolutely convinced about the justness of their cause and the fact that they literally have a God-given right to conquer other peoples. They have no moral qualms whatsoever about doing so. In contrast, the modern West is full of self-doubt.

RECENT FJORDMAN
A History of Geology and Planetary Science - Part 3
The Coming Crash
The Legend of the Middle Ages
Dying Not to Discriminate
A History of Geology and Planetary Science - Part 2
The Cold War Never Ended
IQ and Warfare
A History of Algebra
A History of Geology and Planetary Science - Part 1
Why Obama but not Osama?
Why Did Europeans Create the Modern World? - Complete
Music and the Rise and Decline of Western Civilization
Why Did Europeans Create the Modern World? - Part 4
Why Did Europeans Create the Modern World? - Part 3
A Brief History of Zero and Indian Numerals
What was the First Novel?

More Fjordman Files here.

Ceci n'est pas mon président

BBC item

EU Referendum: Commission 2 – Council 0

The hegemony of the commission is safe – the Commission have people in place that they control. The EU "leaders" may think they have been in the driving seat, but this is a "dual control" vehicle and the driver's side controls are not actually connected to anything.

And adding:

The forces of darkness are on the march.

Brussels Journal has details on the faux-president here.

Like Belgium, the European Union is an undemocratic institution, which needs shrewd leaders who are capable of renouncing everything they once believed in and who know how to impose decisions on the people against the will of the people. Never mind democracy, morality or the rule of law, our betters know what is good for us more than we do. And Herman is now one of our betters. He has come a long way since the days when he was disgusted with Belgian-style politics.

Herman is like Saruman, the wise wizard in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, who went over to the other side. He used to care about the things we cared about. But no longer. He has built himself a high tower from where he rules over all of us.

[UPDATE001] His Grace weighs in on Rompuy Stiltskin.

Herman Van Rompuy has succeeded precisely because he has no charisma, no initiative, no personality and no presence. In short, he has no teeth and is therefore no threat either to the Franco-German axis or to the omnipotent European Commission.

Something to ponder

... in the final days of our sovereignty.

Despite the amazing change 1989 and its aftermath brought to my life I feel no closure over the past and a sense of proportion in the way the fall of communism has been 'handled'. Today we should be looking back at the last 20 years counting the many communists who died in prison or are still rotting there... I can only hope that future generations will revisit the past and will have far lower tolerance of collectivism and totalitarianism. It may be a futile hope as today's teenagers have little knowledge of the world my generation grew up and my parents lived in. And so I am bitter and disappointed that people can say the word "communism" without spitting.

I am also bitter and disappointed because those who opposed communism have not won. It is still with us, in the idiotic juxtapositions of Nazism and communism, or socialism and free-market, used by those who aspire to communism and justify it by positing Nazism as the greater evil. It still raises its ugly head in those who despise free-markets and attempt to put a human mask on socialism by pointing out 'failures' of capitalism. Rather hard as socialism, like all totalitarianisms, has no face. It is the ultimate denigration of humanity, destruction of individuality, and subjugation of human beings to the vast merciless machine of control and power.

Read the rest (and the links) on Samizdata.

Oppression Watch: Road pricing in the Netherlands

Well, alea iacta est as they say. Last Friday our government decided for all of us that road pricing will be introduced by 2012. The government of course presents this new scheme as a blessing for all, to wit:

To make sure motorists are not worse off, road tax will be scrapped and the purchase tax on new cars will be reduced. Some 60% of drivers will be better off, the government claims.

The transport ministry said on Friday it expected fatal accidents will fall by 7% and carbon emissions would be down by 10%. Traffic jams will be halved and the amount of kilometres driven will go down by 15%.

After which it will proceed to cure cancer and abolish world hunger, presumably.

But there is a bit of trouble in paradise. The Telegraaf, vehemently opposed to the plans, is running a series of article, pointing out obvious issues with regard to privacy, or the completely draconian measures imposed on citizens (suspected of) tampering with this magnificent scheme.

The road-pricing scheme includes the obligation of installing a GPS device (which one has to pay for one self), which may never be turned off. Each car on the roads will be fitted with a GPS device which will use satellites to monitor where and when the car is driven and send the information to a central billing point. Hence, the government will know where you are (or at least: Where your car is) all hours of all days from the moment the thing is installed in your car and turned on. Not only that: Ones speed can be monitored in real time, preparing for real time enforcement of speed limits, another steady source of income.

The ministry said on Friday the information collected about motoring habits would be 'legally and technically' protected and would not be accessible to other government agencies. But today it was already forced to backtrack on that promise, admitting that data could be shared with other ministries and police forces (NL), of a situation required such.

If the "security of the state" is at risk, or in the case of "prevention, detection and prosecution of criminal activity", the police or the intelligence agency AIVD may [virtually] snoop around into your car.

For those that are of the opinion that Dutch government is rather meek in its punishing of offenders, there is good news. With road-pricing the government seems to have overcome its reservations against imposing tough sanctions (NL). The bad news is, of course, that this new found toughness is directed against the average citizen: Malfunction of the GPS device must be reported to the authorities within 8 hours, on pain of a a fine of €18,500 or a jail sentence of six months. That includes of course a criminal record that will last for 10 years. If deliberate tampering is detected, this may run up to €74,000 or four years in jail. Four years! What hardened criminals we must be, that such punishments are in order.

Missing from the reporting completely is the EUnion angle. As with the equally privacy-destroying 'smart energy meter', the whole thing is presented as a plan concocted by the christian-socialist cabinet of our would-be EUnion president. As usual the reality is even more grotesque. EU Referendum has done a series of posts in the past, explaining how road-pricing is the vehicle with which the EUnion will fund the Galileo project. Hence, this government is merely executing what their masters in Brussels have ordered. They are not our government, they are the representatives of the EUnion elite. This has been so for quite some time and will be so de jure when The Turnip comes into effect, December 1st.

We are becoming less free and poorer. Not because our own government (who we can dismiss) decided so, but because our supreme government in Brussels (who we cannot dismiss) ordered so. Freed of any accountability, they are in a position to rob us blind with impunity. What we are seeing here is the true meaning of the EUnion for us, mere subjects.

[UPDATE001] Isn't that just the coincidence: One year ago, to the day, I wrote:

Don't let yourself be fooled. Road-pricing will come, despite current protestations to the contrary. The EUnion needs it to justify the costs of the Galileo project and the EUnion will get it. Objections from parliament and assurances from Camile Eurlings and others are all sound and fury, signifying nothing.

And here we are, one year later. Being right isn't all it's cracked up to be, though... Would that I had been completely wrong.

[UPDATE002] For what good it'll do here's a petition against the governments plans for road pricing in the Netherlands: Kilometerheffing Nee

Climate Bombshell: Human produced fraction of CO2 NOT rising

(via WUWT)

A University of Bristol research project has found that the fraction of CO2 in the atmosphere that is produced by humans is not increasing. Of the human produced CO2 around 55% is absorbed into oceans and plant life. This fraction has been (statistically) constant since all the way back to 1850.

This study re-examines the available atmospheric CO2 and emissions data including their uncertainties. It is shown that with those uncertainties, the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 ± 1.4% per decade, i.e. close to and not significantly different from zero.

This may seem to be a 'So what?' finding, but consider this: If we are nearing a 'tipping point', if the Earth is close to CO2 saturation, wouldn't we expect less and less of (the tiny fraction of) CO2 we produce being sequestered? All of this is not know. The researchers themselves are wondering about this and arguing for a better understanding of processes of CO2 release in the atmosphere and absorption back into nature.

As for the discrepancy between this finding and dire warnings we've received over the years, not this remark (emphasis mine):

The strength of the new study, published online in Geophysical Research Letters, is that it rests solely on measurements and statistical data, including historical records extracted from Antarctic ice, and does not rely on computations with complex climate models.

As a WUWT commenter notes: 'They don’t rely on climate models from superconfusers'.

The science is settled, my (crass synonym of hiney).

Time to get out

Today the UN announced that they will evacuate 600 ''non-essential'' staff (almost half its staff) from Afghanistan. This decision follows in the wake of the attack on British soldiers yesterday by a 'rogue policeman'. But presumably the suicide-bomb attack on a guesthouse frequented by UN workers in Kabul last week also figures in the equation.

The incident where an Afghan police officer turned on British soldiers, killing five, is under investigation. But today the Daily Express quoted a Captain Doug Beattie, recently retired from the armed services, as saying: "The insurgency has infiltrated the police at virtually every level".

They are not really police. They are a tribal militia provided by their village.

They are not controlled by central Government but by local warlords, jihadis and tribal elders. The Government pays them and sometimes elders pass the pay to the police. That’s why police sometimes set up road blocks and extract money from locals – to make ends meet.

If the government’s paying them they’re reasonably happy. But if they don’t get enough money they’re quite happy to be paid by the insurgency.

Earlier last month we had the (quite under-reported) news that in the US a senior Foreign Service official with responsibilities in Afghanistan handed in his resignation in a four-page letter detailing his doubts about continuing the mission there.

I fail to see the value or worth in continued US casualties or expenditures of resources in support of the Afghan government in what is, truly, a 35-year-old civil war.

The problem, as is so often, is the limited understanding of the situation by political leaders and the general public. They seem to think about the Afghan situation in terms of a national government against a single insurgency organisation, in this case the Taliban. The Foreign Service official, Matthew Hoh, argues that this is the wrong perception. Naming the insurgency 'Pashtun', in stead of the more often used 'Taliban', Hoh explains:

If the history of Afghanistan is one great stage play, the United States is no more than a supporting actor, among several previously, in a tragedy that not only pits tribes, valleys, clans, villages and families against one another, but, from at least the end of King Zahir Shah's rein, has violently and savagely pitted the urban, secular, educated and modern of Afghanistan against the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional. It is this latter group that composes and support the Pashtun insurgency. The Pashtun insurgency, which is composed of multiple, seemingly infinite local groups, is fed by what is perceived by the Pashtun people as a continued and sustained assault, going back centuries, on Pashtun land, their culture, traditions and religion by internal and external enemies. The US and NATO presence and operations in Pashtun valleys and villages, as well as Afghan army and police units that are led and composed of non-Pashtun soldiers and police, provide an occupation force against which the insurgency is justified

Hoh concludes:

I have observed that the bulk of the insurgency fights not for the white banner of the Taleban, but rather against the foreign soldiers and taxes imposed by an unrepresentative government in Kabul.

And thus, sending in more foreign troops, or prolonging the presence of the foreign troops already there, serves only to ignite the negative feelings even further. Our continued presence there will only reinforce the idea, held by local Pashtun tribes, that we are there to oppress them.

Afghanistan is not a nation-state in embryonic form that needs our forces to guide it to gestation. The coalition in Afghanistan is learning what the Russians learned in the 1980's and the Brits learned (but evidently forgot) in the 19th century: Afghanistan is a collection of constantly shifting alliances between tribes, clans and local warlords, constantly vying (and fighting) for lordship over their immediate surroundings. There is no loyalty greater then that to the local tribe elders or warlord. There is no overarching sense of nationality or national identity. In such surroundings it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to install a lasting, functioning central government.

Pretending that such is the mission of our forces in Uruzgan is tantamount to sending our men and women on a fools errant. And a deadly one at that. Yet our government seems to be intent on prolonging the mission in Uruzgan. The mission is supposed to end in 2010. The Second Chamber of parliament has already signalled its reluctance to continue the mission, but the governments intentions, although not entirely clear, seem to be in the opposite direction. A decision is expected some time before Christmas this year (NL)

With our government poised to start a new round of budget cuts in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, the cost of maintaining our mission in Uruzgan seems to be unnecessarily throwing away money in a bottomless pit. Money that would be infinitely better spent rescuing our education and health care system from the brink of financial asphyxiation.

If our very presence in Uruzgan has led to a situation where we are fighting an uncooperative people who view us as oppressors, rather then the muslim-fanatics of the Taliban, then the wisdom of continuing seems to be doubtful at best. For the illusion of founding a peaceful nation state where none existed before, the cost in cold cash and more importantly: the cost in lives and human misery is just too great.

Dutch ME correspondent: Saudi Arabia superior to Israel with human rights

From Honest Reporting (link not in the original):

Gross was particularly disturbed by comments made by senior Dutch journalist Connie Mus, correspondent for the Dutch stations RTL 4 and RTL 5, and for Belgium's VTM TV, about how wonderful the Saudi authorities are:

The gentleman from the Netherlands, from Dutch TV - he was praising the Saudis, significantly praising them after his trip there. He even praised women's rights in Saudi Arabia, which I find quite incredible. He praised prison conditions in Saudi Arabia and then he severely criticized Israel, Israeli press freedoms, Israeli prison conditions.

Now I think we all know that Israel's not perfect but the idea that an objective European journalist from the Netherlands can think that Saudi Arabia gives more press freedom, more women's rights, better treatment of prisoners, where prisoners often die of torture in Saudi jails.

(h/t HVV)

Irredeemably biased and unworthy

From the Jerusalem Post: US House condemns Goldstone report (or here).

The US House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a non-binding resolution on Tuesday condemning the Goldstone Report, that accuses Israel of committing war crimes in Gaza, and calling on the Obama administration to oppose its endorsement.

334 representatives voted for the resolution while only 36 voted against and 22 abstained.

The vote came after Judge Richard Goldstone, who led the inquiry, criticized the resolution, which describes the findings as "irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy."

A little bit of good news in these dark days.

Last man surrendering - All over now.

Unsurprising

As we fully expected the Czech Constitutional Court has found that the Constitutional Lisbon Treaty is entirely in agreement with the Czech Constitution. What a surprise, eh? As President Klaus has already been given those meaningless promises (here and here) from the EU, the chances are he will sign and claim a victory for the Czech Republic. In this he will be supported by the majority of the Czech people who will eventually find out how little those promises mean.

The Conservative Party of the United Kingdom, on the other hand, is unhappy. Klaus, they feel, should have saved them and saved their leader's blushes. For today is the day when the Boy-King of the Conservative Party who is said to be "disappointed" by the Czech court's decision, will set out his party's plans on Europe. It is certain that they will not include a referendum on the Constitutional Lisbon Treaty. It is also likely that they will include a great deal of vague blather that cannot be turned into hard policy.

[UPDATE001] And that is all she wrote:

Klaus has signed the treaty. As one of our commentators put it, the Czech Republic as a sovereign state ceased to exist on November 3rd 2009, 15:00 CET. And so did we all. For the former satellites of the Soviet empire now in the EU, though, this is particularly poignant. Now that they have been subsumed into a new empire, their independence did not even last 20 years.

[UPDATE002] A translation of the statement by president Klaus is provided by Luboš Motl, who notes:

President Klaus signed the document at 3:00 pm. No photographs, no champagne, no foreign counterparts: there is certainly nothing to celebrate.

The statement reads:

1. The decision of the Constitutional Court was expected by me and I respect it, even though I fundamentally disagree both with its content as well its justification.

2. I can't endorse its form i.e. its legal quality. The ruling by the Constitutional Court is not a neutral legislative analysis but a biased political advocacy of the Treaty of Lisbon by its champions. This point is obvious from the entirely inappropriate, confrontational elaboration as well as the presentation of the verdict.

3. Most importantly, I cannot agree with the content because once the treaty becomes valid, the Czech Republic will cease to be a sovereign country, despite the political opinion of the court. This change is bringing legitimacy to the efforts of a part of our public that is not indifferent to our national and state existence and that doesn't intend to come to terms with these developments - efforts that will take place today as well as in the future.

4. I can't accept the Constitutional Court's decision to proclaim the obligation of the president of the republic to ratify this (or another) international treaty "without unnecessary delays" by references to the law about the Constitutional Court. This bill only deals with the work of the Constitutional Court: the rights and responsibilities of the president are defined exclusively by the constitution.

5. I inform that I signed the Treaty of Lisbon today, November 3rd, at 3 pm.

And thus comes an end to 27 sovereign nations. Thus comes an end to democracy on our benighted continent. Lights are going out all over Europe. When will we see them lit again?

[UPDATE003] Brussels Journal comments:

Like EU politics, Belgian politics is characterized by a lack of transparency, unaccountability, corporatism and a willingness to bend the democratic rules and legal procedures so as to allow the political establishment to proceed with their own project and secure the survival of a state which is unloved by its citizens but provides the livelihood of the ruling elites. What Vaclav Klaus calls “Europeism” is the application of Belgicism, the doctrine underpinning the Belgian state, on the European level.

The whole process of writing a European Constitution and changing the EU from a supranational organization into a state began with the Laken Declaration of December 2001, an initiative of the Belgian presidency of the European Council that year. The coming into power of the Lisbon Treaty marks the annexation of Europe by Brussels – the expansion of Belgium over an entire continent.

There's a novel thought: We're all Belgians now...

Five years ago today

Has it been five years already? God, how time flies...

Five years ago I was convinced that this moment would prove to be a watershed. Surely now the Netherlands, and Europe, would wake up. Surely now the aggressive wing of the muslim community would be dealt with, would be cut down to size.

With 20/20 hindsight we must conclude that it was a watershed moment, but not in the way I envisioned.

What made the day so memorable was the obvious panic coming over our political classes and the dignified calm that the general populace displayed despite everything. There were no riots. No bands of enraged citizens were roaming the streets searching out muslim victims to exact revenge upon. No headscarfs were forcefully torn off or spat upon. Mosques did not go up in flames, Korans were not torn up in the streets

And yet our intrepid prime minister Balkenende and the equally purposeful Amsterdam mayor Job Cohen kept urging us to remain calm. To not lash out, to not destabilize the situation further. As if Theo van Gogh was not murdered by an (ignominiously failed) would-be shaheed. As if this whole thing was some kind of awkward misunderstanding, that had absolutely no bearing on islam occupying the public space ever more aggressively. As if the population as a whole would seize this moment to go out and quench our lowest lusts at the expense of defenceless immigrants.

The day after the murder then-minister of Justice Justice Piet Hein Donner thought it the opportune moment to revive the articles of law on grievous blasphemy, sending the rather unambiguous signal that this government thought van Gogh has brought his gruesome death on himself. Minister Donner was not made to stand down and would go on suggesting that Sharia law should be possible in the Netherlands.

In the days following the murder we saw Mayor Cohen visiting the family of the murderer and the mosque he used to frequent. Our queen did not go out and meet with the family of the victim to pay her respects. But she did find the time to sit down with muslim youth to assure them that the government would be there to protect them. Protect them against an 'anti-muslim backlash' that never materialized and never was on the cards to begin with.

The van Gogh murder was the moment that our elites openly adopted a standard of operating that was to become so depressingly familiar in later years. In Slotervaart 'youth' were allowed to torch cars with impunity for days on end. But when the population threatened to react to the senseless murder of Rinie Mulder the entire neighborhood was virtually put under martial law.

No, from the royal family denying there is a Dutch identity to our political classes frantically and hysterically trying to prevent Fitna from premièring or their betrayal with regard to the EU Constitution, I mean the Lisbon treaty, I mean the Turnip, they have only reinforced the feeling they are there for everyone BUT the Dutch. That they are actively attempting to destroy Dutch identity. And that they will shamelessly employ any means at their disposal to de-legitimize any attempt to defend what we've built.

Even now, with new elections looming, a campaign seems under way to paint Geert Wilders, his PVV and those that would vote for them as the equivalent of Nazis and a threat to democracy. Needless to say: Geert Wilders and the PVV are not Nazis, they certainly are not a threat to democracy. Rather, they are a threat to the current political classes.

When Theo van Gogh was murdered, our elites came out against us, the people whom they pretend to serve. That was the moment when for the first time they did so openly, brazenly even. It definitely was a watershed moment. It was that exact moment that showed the Dutch that our leaders cannot be trusted.

And it will prove to be the moment that has decided the fate of many of them. Not tomorrow. Perhaps not even in another five years. But it will. Inevitably, inexorably the moment will arrive when the Saxon wakes and will seek a reckoning.

See also:
Amsterdam: Tensions remain five years after Van Gogh killing
Geert Wilders: “Right-Wing Extremist”
The Propaganda Machine is Working Full Power
Wilders warns against "climate of hate"