Wilders is Fighting Back ...

... but legal experts doubt if advice by arguably the nation's number one legal eagle will hold water. But Abraham Moszkowicz isn't any old hack, he's a magician.

Just how politicized the case against Wilders is might be measured by counsel involved ... a subjective super minority representative versus the white, male 'power structure'. The dialectics not being within our frame of reference, we're merely pointing out here a remarkable coincidence - part of the local color - so to speak.

The plaintiffs are represented by another prime legal attack dog, trial lawyer Gerard Spong - of Surinam descent, black (sort of), and proudly gay.

- Caption: Gerard Spong -

Opposing counselor, Abraham Moszkowicz might be viewed - with some imagination - as a representative of the white, male establishment. He recently filed a complaint against a Socialist Party MP who took part in a pro Palestine demonstration in which the vilest antisemitic expressions are the accepted norm (in this case, "Hamas, Hamas, Gas the Jews!). Moszkowicz is Jewish.

It's unsure at this stage on whose side wishful thinking is taking place.

Moszkowicz intends to file a request at the Supreme Court to annul the Wilders indictment. Elsevier's legal correspondent is surprised by the move. Moszkowicz did this successfully on an earlier occasion, but the case differed markedly from the present.

- Caption: Abraham Moszkowicz -

That was when high ranking Surinam military leader Bouterse stood trial for a bloody coup in the former Dutch colony in 1982. The Supreme Court found the Netherlands did not have standing. This case is entirely different.

Elsevier opines an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strassburg, on the grounds that Wilders cannot expect a fair trial, would have had a more positive ring to it.

In another report in "De Pers" (The Press) 'deconstructionist' legal expert Ian (Ybo) Buruma rejects the Moszkowicz' move out of hand: the indictment against Wilders isn't open to appeal. To that the postmodernist added the usual ad hominems, which Moszkowicz declined to dignify with response.

But the road on which legal eagle Abraham Moszkowicz' travels is paved with the bleached remains of wretched opponents. The suspense is killing ...

Wilders for one, assumes the procedure to be on hold pending the request.

Updating throughout.

Mr Moszkowicz just explained, the move to skip the minor Courts is rarely used, and is justified given the general interest and portent of the matter, as was indeed true in the Bouterse case. He expects a verdict in 10 to 14 days.

Whatever are we talking about? A slippery slope indeed: subjective, objectively unmeasurable, personal opinion: what precisely constitutes hate speech and what in effect is hatred itself? The definition is increasingly, not an involuntary, emotional reaction to an injustice or an injury, but ideological whim.

From the concept 'Islamophobia' we already know that 'fear' has undergone a similar slide: not a involuntary, emotional reaction to threat or injury, but again ideological whim. This truly is the stuff of Orwellian doublespeak ... we are in deep trouble.

Update:

Team Wilders/Moszkowicz lost the case. At least, they tried.

- Filed on Articles in "Legislating Morality" -