News

Report: Daniel Pipes and David Horowitz gave money to anti-Muslim politician Geert Wilders

WildersGeert Wilders, the Dutch anti-Muslim politician. Photo: Cynthia Boll/AP

That Geert Wilders, the virulent anti-Muslim Dutch politician, has links with American Islamophobes is well known. But a report in Reuters fills in some previously unknown details, like which people and organizations have given money to Wilders for legal and security costs.

Reuters’ Anthony Deutsch and Mark Hosenball report that David Horowitz and Daniel Pipes, two leading anti-Muslim figures in the U.S., have sent Wilders money. Pipes’ Middle East Forum “funded Wilders’ legal defense in 2010 and 2011 against Dutch charges of inciting racial hatred.” The charges were eventually dropped. Horowitz “paid Wilders fees for making two speeches, security costs during student protests and overnight accommodation for his Dutch bodyguards during a 2009 U.S. trip.”

Wilders’ far-right positions on Islam include calling the Koran a “fascist” book and advocating for a ban on Muslim headscarves and the construction of mosques. He has also said he “hates Islam,” which is the “ideology of a retarded culture.”

Here’s more from the Reuters report:

Horowitz said he paid Wilders for one speech in Los Angeles and one at Temple University in Philadelphia. He declined to specify the amounts, but said that Wilders had received “a good fee.” When Wilders’ Philadelphia appearance sparked student protests, Horowitz said, he paid a special security fee of about $1,500 to the Philadelphia police department. Horowitz said he also paid for overnight accommodation for four or five Dutch government bodyguards accompanying Wilders on the trip.

Wilders said in response: “I am frequently asked to speak abroad. Whenever possible I accept these invitations. I never ask for a fee. However, sometimes the travel and accommodation expenses are paid. My personal security is always paid for by the Dutch government.”

Pipes and Horowitz denied funding Wilders’ political activities in Holland. Both run non-profit, tax exempt research and policy organizations which, under U.S. tax laws, are forbidden from giving direct financial backing to any political candidate or party. U.S. law does allow such groups to support policy debates financially.

Pipes is a leading neoconservative activist and a main player in the US Islamophobic network. He helped lead the fight against the Khalil Gibran International Academy, the Brooklyn dual-language Arabic public school. Pipes has written that “Muslim customs are more troublesome than most” and that “West European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and not exactly maintaining Germanic standards of hygiene.” (After that quote made the rounds and generated controversy, Pipes clarified on his website: “My goal in it was to characterize the thinking of Western Europeans, not give my own views.”) 

Horowitz is another prominent anti-Muslim figure. He is the man behind FrontPag Magazine and Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch, sites that routinely publish Islamophobic material. Horowitz is also fond of smearing Muslim student groups by claiming they are actually fronts for the Muslim Brotherhood.

All three of them–Pipes, Horowitz and Wilders–were cited in Anders Behring Breivik’s anti-Islam manifesto that Breivik wrote before he carried out his deadly assault in Norway.

In turn, these anti-Muslim activists are funded by a small group of wealthy right-wing donors. For instance, as Max Blumenthal reported for The Nation, Nina Rosenwald, a former AIPAC board member, has given enormous amounts of cash to Pipes; the philanthropic organization bearing her family’s name gave Pipes “$2.3 million over the past ten years.” Rosenwald has also funded Horowitz.

42 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The New Anti-Semitism
by URI AVNERY:

The Nazi Propaganda Minister, Dr. Joseph Goebbels, calls his boss, Adolf Hitler, by hell-phone.

“Mein Führer,” he exclaims excitedly. “News from the world. It seems we were on the right track, after all. Anti-Semitism is conquering Europe!”

“Good!” the Führer says, “That will be the end of the Jews!”

“Hmmm…well…not exactly, mein Führer. It looks as though we chose the wrong Semites. Our heirs, the new Nazis, are going to annihilate the Arabs and all the other Muslims in Europe.” Then, with a chuckle, “After all, there are many more Muslims than Jews to exterminate.”

“But what about the Jews?” Hitler insists.

“You won’t believe this: the new Nazis love Israel, the Jewish State – and Israel loves them!”

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/07/30/the-new-anti-semitism/

Follow the money. Thanks Adam. Had no idea that Pipes, Horowitz, Wilder all mentioned in Brevik’s anti Muslim manifesto. Follow those influencing the killing.

Just know Pipes “Campus Watch” has done their best to shut down much needed debate etc on college campuses for years and years. Not so successful lately.

In December 2010 the Dutch weekly Vrij Nederland was the first to publish about Wilders’ funding in a stunning series of three articles. More publications followed per January 2012 by the daily newspaper NRC Handelsblad. The recent Reuters report is shallow and too late.

The fact that Wilders and his American friends act as inspirational for the Breiviks of this world is only one aspect of the case. The fact that Pipes c.s. bought a dicisive vote in the EU and UN another. Where was Reuters when that happened, or – for that matter – any other media outlet? Where were the progressive media?

Last March I sent the underneath article to Mondoweiss for publication. Note that since March Wilders brought the government down and elections are due tomorrow (Sep. 12). The PVV (Wilders’ party) has lost its power and important figures have left. Moreover no other party is willing to ever work together with Wilders anymore. Much has changed since March – but not thanks to the media.

—-

Thanks to the Dutch – How the American Israel Lobby Steers Official EU Policy on Israel

On 26 January the Dutch quality newspaper NRC Handelsblad quoted sources in Brussels and other European capitals, revealing that Dutch officials managed to soften the tone of an EU declaration about Israel earlier that week. Last September a similar thing happened, when the Dutch silenced a critical EU standpoint on Israel in the UNHRC. The censuring role of the Dutch brings to light the successful influence of the American Israel Lobby on official European politics.

—-

Dutch minister of Foreign Affairs Uri Rosenthal did it again. He sabotaged an official EU Declaration referring to the recent ‘Area C Report’ by the EU diplomatic representation in Israel. This report states that ‘Palestinian presence is being undermined’ by the continuous arrival of Jewish settlers – up to a point that it is preventing a Two State Solution. Just like the report, the drafted declaration was in fact the final call for a just solution.

Not anymore. The EU now speaks of ‘disturbing developments on the ground’ – a formula that Rosenthal tried to block as well, preaching that ‘this is the wrong moment to criticise Israel’. But even so he successfully dismantled the urgency and in fact the reality of the alarming EU Report, downgrading its makers – his own diplomats – in the process. The frustration in their ranks will be fierce. And so is the anger among the leading EU nations Germany, France and the UK, and most other member states.

Why would the Dutch alienate themselves within the European community for which they have always been a driving force? Of course – Holland is a loyal friend of Israel by tradition, so seeing the Dutch step in for Israel should surprise no-one. But pro-actively clearing the way for the large scale abuse of human rights and international law is something else. Especially for a country that carries an important tradition for safeguarding these fragile values, and aspires to shine as the international beacon of peace and justice, hosting most of the world’s institutions in this field.

In its foreign policy Holland humbly tails the US. Over the last decade this ‘Atlantic reflex’ has dragged the Dutch into the muddy waters of the War on Terror. It is only two years ago since the Iraq Inquiry by the independent Davids Commission concluded that the Dutch government had been seriously in breach with international law by supporting the war against Iraq in 2003. For Dutch proportions the Davids Report was devastating. But it didn’t help. On the contrary – things have changed for the worse. While it was an official US Administration that pushed the Dutch into the Iraq War back in 2003, nowadays the Dutch are steered into law-breaking by American pressure groups.

Since October 2010 Holland is being governed by a minority coalition of liberals (VVD) and christian-democrats (CDA). Lacking the power to unfold their plans, the coalition parties sought the support of a third party on all major issues in advance. That party happened to be the Freedom Party (PVV) of Geert Wilders. Wilders is an outspoken result of what Israeli historian Ilan Pappe calls the successful strive of the Israeli government to introduce Islam-bashing as a weapon for its occupation policy. Wilders’ sudden change as a politician on themes like immigration and Islam, too easily overlooked by the media, is a triggering fact in that respect, as is his personal connection with Israel. So guess what Wilders demanded back from his new coalition friends: massive support for Israel. Not in words, but in decisive deeds. Not only domestically, but on global platforms like the UN or EU.

Wilders’ financers must be happy, since they are able to wield power over the EU’s foreign policy toward Israel. One phone call by their disciple Wilders sends the Dutch Foreign Office out stealing – a mellow description for the actual mission. So who are these financers? This is where the American Israel Lobby comes in. Among Wilders’ most loyal supporters and fundraisers are David Horowitz, Daniel Pipes and Joyce Chernick. The Dutch paper NRC Handelsblad dug up their names, and some of the large amounts they donated, in American tax returns and other sources. Wilders himself refuses to account for his party’s financial records; his donors are anonymous. And although a new law will now force him into transparency, his American friends will surely be glad to help solve that.

—-

Useful backgrounds or links
– Newsweek on Geert Wilders, January 16, 2012: http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/01/15/geert-wilders-says-there-s-no-such-thing-as-moderate-islam.html
– Mentioned article in Dutch paper NRC Handelsblad, January 26, 2012; in Dutch: http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2012/01/26/rosenthal-grijpt-in-bij-kritische-eu-tekst-israel-2/
– Davids Commission/Report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8453305.stm

Apparently Wilders’s Eurasian mother herself had a Jewish-Indonesian mother. GEERT WILDERS ‘HAS JEWISH-INDONESIAN ORIGINS’:

In an article in the left-wing weekly De Groene Amsterdammer anthropologist Lizzy Van Leeuwen asks: “Is it possible that the post-colonial and family history have made Wilders what he and his politics are today?”

The 6-page article reveals that Wilders’ grandmother, Johanna Ording-Meijer, was from a Jewish-Indonesian family and that ‘Wilders lied about this in his 2008 biography’.

Wilders’ grandfather on his mother’s side, Johan Ording, was a regional financial administrator in the Dutch colony of Indonesia (then called the Dutch East Indies).

From Van Leeuwen’s article:

Voor de zwangere Johanna, afkomstig uit de bekende en grote Indisch-joodse familie Meijer en gewend aan een zwerm van bedienden om zich heen, moet het eerste verblijf in Nederland vreselijk zijn geweest.

I wonder if they feel they’ve been taken for a ride with Mr. Wilders support for a ban of ritual animal slaughter.