Some animals are more equal than others

750 privately owned houses

This blog featured a post yesterday about the City of Amsterdam which is confiscating the second house of people who have a first house elsewhere. 750 owners are risking de facto confiscation. The confiscated houses have to be rented at controlled nominal rents to people who are deemed needy by the municipal bureaucrats, according to the housing statute of the City of Amsterdam. Labour party (PvdA) politicians are still defending the policy on the thinnest of grounds. Namely that the shortage of houses is "so acute". But no grounds are needed when men are bent on being tyrants. Whim is the heart of tyrranny.

Forced into loss

These house owners have to rent out the houses at rents which do not cover the costs of the mortgage, they are forced into heavy losses. But the municipality does not care about their troubles. It does not feel their pain. 

400 municipality owned houses

How could it know their pain? The municipality does not own houses, does it? However today Dutch daily "De Telegraaf" dug up the fact that the municipality owns about 400 houses in the centre of Amsterdam (Dutch). Two municipality owned firms, NV Zeedijk and NV Stadsherstel, obtained these houses in campaigns to end the large power drugs- and other mafias have in the Amsterdam red light district. By forcing suspect and seedy owners to sell their houses in this district. This by force of another right to property undermining law: BIBOB. But that is another story.

Paying mortgages is a pain

The municipality paid good money to obtain these houses. It had to get mortgages from banks to finance the purchases. And now the municipality has to pay the montly payments on the mortgages. According to the statutes used against the owners of second homes the houses are not used for living by the owner. And they have a value below 163,000 Euro. So they qualify as houses which must be rented out at controlled, nominal rents, according to the Amsterdam housing statute.

Amsterdam and its newest, bestest friends

However the houses are rented out through nearby hotels, Krasnapolsky and Barbizon, at 200 Euros per night. The location of the houses is the best, there will be a lot of demand for these municipality owned houses. The municipality and friends must be making a killing on this deal. The civil servants enforcing the confiscations from the private owners of second homes have been instructed to waive the statute for the municipality owned houses. This was confirmed by former Amsterdam Alderman Hans Gerson in September 2009 on the grounds that otherwise the municipality would own the houses at a loss. That is enough reason when the municipality has to bear it, but not enough reason when prive owners have to bear it.  

See no evil

Oh and if houses are rented out and it does not get into the books? There is no keeping track of the coming and going of tourists and travellers is there? This situation is ideal for the creation of black, undeclared money flows. Who knows who might be on the take?

Some animals are real pigs if you ask me

The right to property undermined in Amsterdam

No protection for property owners

Within The Netherlands Amsterdam has been infamous for the weak protection of property rights. Bikes and cars be stolen without the police being willing to investigate the matter. I am speaking from experience here. Real estate, such as houses and apartments, is prey to a violent and arrogant squatter movement, who may take over empty buidings counting on the protection and assistance from the city government, and the public utilities for supply of power and water. This has been so since the late 1960ies.

Movements for property rights

Since the Fortuyn populist revolt in 2001 there is a counter-movement, seeking to bring back the protection of property. Fortuyn was bankrolled by big real estate owners, who sought the protection of their property rights and the destruction of the squatter movement. The leadership of rightwing parties in parliament saw in this a part of the agenda of the populist movement that they could implement without touching the multicultural ideology. They were hoping to isolate the populist movement from its financial base and they felt they needed to give something to their respective conservative bases to ease the grass roots pressure on the party leadership. And so the Balkenende cabinet wrote and passed a anti-squatter bill. This bill is going to take effect on 1 October 2010.

The bitter-enders of the left

The left did not give up so easily. Last June the national council of Public Prosecutors announced that they would not enforce the new anti-squatter law (Dutch). Law or no law, Naboth could go to Hell. Minister of Justice Hirsch Ballin insisted that the law would be enforced. Whatever that is worth.

But the left is not finished in its quest to replace the rule of law with the rule of whim of bureaucrats. And the the whim of its favoured violent special interest groups such as squatters, animal rights activists and such 1.). Which in the past furnished them with the assassin of Pim Fortuyn, when they needed one. To show their disdain for property rights the Labour Party (PvdA) dominated City Council is confiscating privately owned apartments (HT KV) whose owners are living in a first home elsewhere. Distributing the apartments to their own needy clients at a nominal controlled rent. A typical apartment with a monthly mortgage payment of 1,000 Euro will be rented out for a maximum rent of 548 Euros. So the owners will not be able to make good their investment. In addition the clients of the City Council may run down or damage the property of the owner, with uncertain recourse for the owner through the overloaded courts.

This is not at all new. In book 6 - Democracies and Oligarchies - of The Politics and The Constitution of Athens 2.) Aristotle remarks on phenomena which tend to bring democracies down:

The demagogues of our own day often get property confiscated in the law-courts in order to please the people.

The Rule of Law is a good thing

Kleinverzet introduces his article by remarking that

all and sundry on the Dutch left are decrying Geert Wilders as a potential threat to Justice and Rule of Law.

In the context of the lack of protection of property rights invoking the Rule of Law by the left is indeed totally unappropriate. The Rule of Law is a convenient stick to batter Geert Wilders and his Freedom Party (PVV). The left has never shown respect for the Rule of Law when it fettered their unrestrained rule.

By contrast, it is the effort of the supporters of the populist PVV and its forerunner, which put the nation back on the track of the rule of law. The efforts to enshrine and protect private property are part of that quest.

1.) This blog featured articles on the collusion between the Dutch establishment and violent radical leftist groups and how this was a fertile breeding ground for the assassin of Pim Fortuyn. E.g. connections to Fortuyn's assassin.

2.) Aristotle's Politics and the Constitution of Athens may be purchased from Amazon here.

Mayor: Dutch against asylum seekers

Do the people agree with mass immigration?

Europe is being ruthlessly transformed by wave after wave of non-western immigration. Because European countries are democratic one would expect that the people agree with the transformation because they are not opposing it. Or is it perhaps more complicated and is the absense of political opposition the result of subtle political repression? A Dutch mayor, Eric van Oosterhout (Labour), has implicitly said so. He said that if it was up to Dutch citizens, no asylum seekers would ever be housed in The Netherlands. The mayor of the rustic Dutch town of Aa en Hunze, said this on 3FM, a Dutch radio station (Dutch).

With regards to opening a asylum seekers center against the wishes of the local population the words he used where:

we are defending a minority interest here, and such an interest should not be influenced by the majority. If the state would listen to the citizens not one more asylum seeker would be housed. You may call it authoritarian - but I call it accepting one's responsibility.

Dutch mayors are appointed and they are hand picked from a pool of 30.000 active members of the political parties. This is a narrow caste of satraps, which does not fear political competition for their positions. Hence the electorate, the citizenry has been made powerless. Enabling the satraps to overwhelm the Dutch nation and the other nations of Europe.

The media

Things are moving though. DJ Giel Beelen (Dutch) of the Labour affiliated VARA radio said it was irresponsible to increase funds to pay for asylum seeker in the midst of an economic crisis.

Liberalism kills

Fascinating story coming to us from the Middle East (HT Mr. Lawrence Auster): a dippy Italian bint named Pippa Bacca takes it upon herself to hitchhike to Israel from Italy through Turkey, Syria, Lebanon and the territory of the Palestinian Authority dressed in a bridal dress. To prove that peace between the West and Islam is possible by Westerners giving up steretypes of Muslims as rapists and becoming more tolerant.

Mrs. tragically is raped and murdered in the first Muslim country she visits: Turkey.

What does that prove?

Stabbing at Amsterdam school

It is Ramadan time, stabbing time! Yesterday there was a lethal stabbing between a 14 year old Turk and a 16 year old Moroccan at Technisch - College Amsterdam in Amsterdam West. The Turk killed the Moroccan in a fight over a pen. Friends of the Moroccan beat the knive-killer up before handing him over to the police.

This is part of a spate of stabbings, mostly at black schools, in 2007 in The Netherlands.

Amsterdam Labour major Job Cohen was shocked, shocked, by the stabbing.

Naturally Leftists have to be shocked by these events. According to the Leftists all people, races, ethnicities, religions and cultures are equal.

For those who keep their minds uncluttered by Leftism have seen this coming a long way. And it will only get worse. much worse as the borders are wide open. Trying to impose western style laws is not going to make much of a difference as the numbers of immigrants is too big and their capabilities too limited.

Dutch police finds murderous connections to Fortuyn's assassin

Volkert van der Graaf, ideological killer

Dutch daily "De Telegraaf" published exerpts of a confidential police investigation report (Dutch), in which clues are put together adding up to a picture of Volkert van der Graaf's extra-legal activities as a animal rights activist. The report is remarkable because it is one of the very few police reports into the violent animal rights activists in The Netherlands. This report was composed by the Investigative Branch of the National Police (Nationale Recherche, Korps Landelijke Politie Diensten).

Volkert is the assassin of populist Fortuyn. He shot Fortuyn on 6 May 2002, at 18:00 hours in Hilversum, The Netherlands. Hilversum is a town near Amsterdam where most of the media have their national offices and their studios.



Not the first assasination

There have been suspicions that it is not the first killing Volkert carried out for a long time.

Chris van der Werken, a civil servant responsible for environmental policy in the North Veluwe, an agricultural part of the country, where both Volkert and van der Werken used to live and work. Volkert as an animal's rights and environmental activist subsidized by quasi-governmental organisations ("Postcodeloterij" and "Actie Kinderpostzegels").


Chris van der Werken was shot in the back when he was taking a stroll in a forest in 1996.

Volkert and Chris van der Werken had a conflict about a plan both their organisations were collaborating on. A plan to reduce the ammonia emissions of pig breeders. This was in 1995 and 1996. Chris van der Werken was a moderate.

The animal rights network, an infrastructure of the left

A bit of background: Volkert was working for the Environmental Offensive Foundation or VMO ("Vereniging Milieu Offensief"), a foundation he had founded himself and of which he was a administrator and paid employee. The organisation was funded by subsidies, alotted by sympathetic politicians. The organisation was a part of administrative bodies and councils that deal with environmental policy. A lot of his work consisted of lobbying provincial and municipal polities, in addition to starting up environmental complaint procedures against farmers who wanted to change or enlarge their operations.

Those were his legal activities. Volkert was also a member of a group called the "Furious Potatoes" (De Ziedende Bintjes). This is a group that carries out illigal violent actions against fur breeders, companies that carry out animal tests and firms that operate in a way that is environmentally unsound. These groups are connected to the extreme leftwing squatter movement. Their activities are again often subsidised directly and indirectly by sympathetic politicians. Politicians hinder and disband police units investigating violent activities of animal rights and environmental activists. The activists are known to terrorize police investigators and their families. Biologist Margreet Jonker, a researcher into cancer treatment using test animals, was one of the few who dared to come forward to testify about the violence and threats against her and her family, by these governments sponsored left wing terrorists. Dutch judges are full of sympathy towards the terrorists and let them off with minumum sentences.

The new facts in the police secret file

The Investigative Branch (Nationale Recherche) report mentions:

1. a "Farmer B." who told police that Chris van der Werken had come to his farm in a state of shock because Volkert had threatened to kill him. This was a few weeks before he was killed.

2. witnesses who were walking nearby the liquidation on country estate "Welna" saw a red Opel Kadett, the car Volkert used at the time.

3. Both Fortuyn and Van der Werken were bravely shot in the upper back by multiple shots.

4. The landlord of Volkert of the house where Volkert was living at the time of the murder of the civil servant has declared that he entered the house unannounced during the tenancy of Volkert van der Graaf and found a pistol on the attic were Volkert slept. He identified the pistol as a Walter PPK.

5. Volkert has no alibi for the time of the murder of civil servant Chris van der Werken.

6. A friend of Volkert spoke with Volkert about obtaining a pistol, to commit suicide. Volkert had said that he knew how and with whom to procure pistols.

7. Both murders involved the use of ammunition that does heavy damage to the human body. Both used heavy automatic pistols (in van der Werken's case a Walter PPK and on Fortuyn a Star 9mm) and rapid fire hitting with all bullets fired. Achieving rapid aimed fire takes practise.

International co-operation hardening the Dutch scene

The Dutch animal rights and environmental activists have a working co-operation with like minded extremist British organisations as SHAC (Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty), a violent British organisation.

Again support in high places

One of the most shocking attacks is the abduction of Ferry de Vries, a fur trader. He was bound and gagged and beaten up by 10 masked animal activists. Later during the court case against the abductors the judge shows all kinds of sympathy for the abductors who go off scot free, no jail time, just corvee, maximum 200 hours. A symbolic punishment. The activists got all kinds of possibility to propagandize during the court hearings and even to show a propaganda film about fur breeding.

Volkert van der Graaf is an example of the way these organisations operate. They create legal entities. They do not fund raise or appeal for money from the public, but are funded by chums in the governments, provincial and municipal administrations and bureaucracies. Their activities are encouraged by mainstream environmental organisations as Lekker Dier and Greenpeace. They gather information (maps, registers, notes of meetings) using their legal fronts and use the information for attacks by the underground organisations, such as SHAC and the "Furious Potatoes/De Ziedende Bintjes").

In case of investigations by police they use their contacts in the Leftist parties Greens, Socialist Party and Labour to disband the Investigative Teams. In case of prosecution due to theft, destruction of property and accounting ledgers of firms the judges show their sympathy and give the activists very light sentences.

And so the violent environmentalists scene grew throughout the 70ies, 80ies and 90ies. A hairtrigger gun, just lie-ing about.

The aftermath of Fortuyn's murder

Let us now go to Fortuyn's murder. During the 2002 election campaign Fortuyn challenged the establishment political cartel. He received broad political support for the party he had joined, Livable Netherlands. Three months before the elections the establishment manage to have Fortuyn thrown off the Livable Netherlands party list. The challenge to the cartel has been fended off.

Pushed by Van Gogh Fortuyn starts a new political party. Lijst Pim Fortuyn (LPF). Soon he is again dominating the polls. Support levels are as high as 20-30 percent of the electorate again. Due to the fact that The Netherlands does not have a two party system, this translate in real political power. Municipal elections show a landslide in Rotterdam, home turf of the Left since 1945.

The establishment panics. Especially the Left because their organisations are so dependent on subsidies. Subsidies that Fortuyn says he will end.

A killer from the animal rights organisations network kills Fortuyn. Co-incidentially there is a car nearby with policemen with bulletproof vests and guns. They arrest Volkert within 10 minutes.

But they do not go to his house, to search for clues and a wider involvement.

Cover-up

A politician of the Greens in a nearby town of Wageningen, a hotbed of Green and animal rights activism, an acquaintance of Volkert hears the news that Fortuyn has been assasinated. His name is Jack Bogers and he is a Green Aelderman. He makes a phonecall within minutes after the assasination to a friend of Volkert, Sjoerd van der Wouw, working for the same organisation as Volkert. Sjoerd van der Wouw enters the house of Volkert and erases the hard disk of Volkert's computer.

Obviously Sjoerd and Jack suspect or know that Volkert is the killer of Fortuyn. At the time the identity of the killer is not known and there is widespread speculation that it is a Muslim.

Only the next day the police search the house. They still found some clues, amongst other things plans and blueprints of buildings and premises of targeted firms.

It looks as if Volkert was a tool for other people who knew what he was up to and what he was capable of and did not want him stopped. Fortuyn was threatened and had asked the Ministry of the Interior for protection against assasination. This protection was denied by the Minister himself, Labour politician Klaas de Vries. Fortuyn had also said on TV that if he would be shot the blood would be on the hands of the politicians denying him protection.

In conclusion: Klaas de Vries was in charge of the police, which had the arrest team ready to apprehend Volkert as he killed Fortuyn, but which did not search Volkert's house until at least some of the evidence had dissappeared.

And Sjoerd and Jack, the Green aiders of Volkert were never prosecuted.

The Vote

The campaign for the communal elections in 2006 is getting underway. The political parties have started bombarding the public with proposals to woo voters. Early last week we already saw a proposal from Fortuynist Liveable Rotterdam to prevent unproductive populations to be born, by compulsory abortion and contraception.

Later last week the Green GroenLinks party launched a proposal (Dutch) to include those foreigners in the National Franchise who are:

born in The Netherlands and over 18 years of age
and
living in The Netherlands for a minimum of 5 years and over 18 years of age.

The people under this definition have the right to become Dutch citizens. They just fail to apply for it. Femke Halsema who presented the proposal said that the law is meant for people who forget to file for citizenship and those who do not file for citizenship because of a conflict of loyalty.

Basically Ms. Halsema is looking to give those people the vote that specifically have NO LOYALTY to the rest of the nation.