Edwin Wagensveld, who has not received in this country the attention given to Geert Wilders, Tommy Robinson, Anne-Marie Waters, Eric Zemmour, and other European anti-Islam activists, deserves to be better known cisatlantically. He’s been warning Europeans for more than a decade about the perils of mass Muslim migration into Europe, and now he is trying to alert Americans as to the threat Muslims pose to their political wellbeing. More on Edwin Wagensveld can be found here:

In an exclusive interview, RAIR Foundation USA delves into the relentless and courageous struggle of Edwin Wagensveld, the leader of the Dutch arm of the political movement “Pegida” (Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the West), against the rising tide of Islamic supremacism threatening European identity….

Wagensveld, known for his unwavering resistance in the face of governmental and societal pushback, has embarked on a journey marked by a series of brave protests against Islamic fascism, a dangerous ideology infiltrating Europe through mass illegal immigration.

Wagensveld’s commitment to safeguarding European culture and values has come at a high personal cost, including over twenty arrests due to his free-speech protests. He explains, “I’ve been arrested over 20 times, often under questionable circumstances, such as wearing a pig-shaped hat at a rally. These arrests highlight the absurd lengths authorities will go to suppress our message. You arrest somebody because he had a pig head on his head… It shows how afraid they are of us.”…

Wagensveld’s demonstrations are frequently met with violent retaliation from Islamic migrants, serving as a clear affirmation of Edwin’s message. Moreover, his protests highlight the tangible threats posed by the Islamic ideology he opposes. His advocacy is not just a stand for free speech but a battle to halt the Islamization of Europe, a cause that has garnered him both widespread admiration and intense left-wing scrutiny….

Wagensveld’s perspective on the influx of immigrants from Islamic backgrounds is well founded by a belief in the incompatibility of Islamic ideology and law with European values. He argues that Islam, by its nature, is a totalitarian ideology aimed at establishing dominion over non-Muslims, mandating submission to Islamic Sharia law through violence and terror if necessary. Such beliefs, according to Wagensveld, pose an existential threat to the free nations of Europe, as they undermine constitutional freedoms, discriminate against non-Muslims and women, and even challenge the very notion of freedom of speech and religion….

Wagensveld does not believe that the ideology of Islam is compatible with European values. Islam is an aggressive faith whose adherents view non-Muslims as “the most vile of created beings.” The duty of all Muslims is to engage in jihad in order to spread the faith, by whatever means prove possible, so that Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere.

He and his fellow activists in the anti-Islam organization Pegida are calumniated as “Nazis”; they have lost jobs, been forced to mount expensive legal defenses against those who use lawfare — constant frivolous lawsuits —against them, and have been snubbed by “decent” people. Still they persevere.

Following the unelected Moroccan Muslim Mayor Ahmed Marcouch’s imposition of a legally questionable local ban on Wagensveld, effective immediately for six months, the Pegida leader finds himself unable to enter Arnhem. Despite Marcouch’s indication of a reconsideration of the ban after three months, the stringent measures significantly impede Wagensveld’s activism in the city.

The ban’s enforcement was precipitated by Wagensveld’s intention to burn a Quran on Jans Square in Arnhem, an act vehemently opposed by the Islamic mayor due to what he claims are concerns over potential chaos and heightened terrorist threats, as advised by the police….

Despite warnings from authorities not to hold another Quran burning, Wagensveld asserted his determination to proceed with his demonstration via social media. Consequently, Marcouch escalated measures by extending the ban to prohibit Wagensveld from appearing anywhere within Arnhem’s borders, except under specific circumstances such as appearing in court.

The decision to ban Wagensveld is claimed to be about fears that his presence would attract violent Islamic opposition, with the mayor citing concrete threats against him and the likelihood of Muslims mobilizing again to impede his actions. However, instead of addressing the threats posed by Islamic supremacists, many of whom are migrants, to Wagensveld’s safety, authorities opted to restrict his movements, escalating tensions between the activist and the state….

This is an example of the “heckler’s veto.” Because Muslims will react violently if Wagensveld tries to set fire to a Qur’an, or to take a Qur’an, attached to a leash, for a walk, the authorities will prevent Wagensveld from exercising his right of free expression.

Wagensveld tests the limits of free expression by some of his deliberately provocative acts. He has attached a Qur’an to a leash in order to “walk” it down the street. He was immediately arrested, but on what basis? Such an act may be prohibited and severely punished under the Sharia, but there is nothing in the Dutch laws that forbids such an act. And had he “walked” a Bible down the street, he is certain that the police would not try to stop him. So on what basis do Dutch authorities choose to prevent a disrespectful handling of a Qur’an but not of a Bible?

Despite all the political, legal, economic, and societal stumbling blocks strewn about to interfere with his activities, Wagensveld — Indefatigable, imaginative, deeply worried about the increasing islamization of the Western world—keeps on keeping on. For that we should be grateful.

Wagensveld warned Americans, cautioning, “Be wary of becoming too tolerant towards ideologies that fundamentally oppose Western values. Protect your freedoms and your culture, and do not allow the spread of ideologies that could endanger your way of life.” He explicitly emphasized the risks of underestimating the cohesive and singular nature of Islam, challenging the American public to heed the lessons learned from Europe’s struggles with Islamic supremacism….

He explains that there’s only one Islam, and there are no moderate or extremist factions; it’s all the same. ‘There are no moderates in Sunni Islam; Islam is Islam, just as Nazism is Nazism. You don’t have ‘good’ Nazis; you don’t have ‘bad’ Nazis.’…

In a candid exchange with RAIR, Wagensveld was asked if there’s still hope for a political resolution to Europe’s issues stemming from mass Islamic migration. His response was clear: “No.” It’s a sentiment echoing the growing urgency felt across the continent. “We must show our defiance. We must fight for our culture, our identity, and our traditions… Or else, it’s game over,” he asserted. “Action is imperative. More and more individuals are realizing that the time for dialogue and diplomacy has passed.”

Wagensveld foresees that there will be a “fight” for “our culture, our identity, our traditions.” He means there will be conflicts at every level between the indigenous Europeans and the Muslims now living in their lands — at the ballot box, in molding the school curriculum, in upholding the traditions and mores of the secular state. And he now believes that the time for “dialogue and diplomacy is passed.” That surely means he foresees a real war in the streets between Muslims — not all, but many — and those who have for too long have had to endure their unpleasant, expensive, and physically dangerous presence.