From the Orwellian Department: it's all because people talk bad about Islam, you see. Evidently if someone points out that Islam is unique among religions in having a doctrine of warfare against unbelievers, it will provoke Muslims into fighting that war, when they wouldn't have otherwise. Mmm-hmm. "Anti-Islamic rhetoric helps radicalisation," from Expatica, with thanks to Nicolei:
AMSTERDAM — The radicalisation of young Muslims is partly caused by the negative way Islam is being talked about in the Netherlands, the head of the security service AIVD has claimed.Sybrand van Hulst made the suggestion during an interview with television current affairs programme Zembla on Wednesday night.
Van Hulst's organisation is leading the investigation into the activities of extremists in the Netherlands and is deeply involved in the arrest and trial of 12 young Muslims said to be part of a terrorist network called the Hofstadgroep.
But he did not specify who he was referring too as being partly responsible for driving some young Muslims towards radicalism.
MPs Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Geert Wilders have led the criticism against aspects of Islam and the Muslim community in the Netherlands in recent years. Both have received death threats.
Filmmaker Theo van Gogh, another vocal critic of Islam, was murdered in Amsterdam on 2 November last year. Mohammed B., 26, who was arrested for the murder, was said to be on the edge of the Hofstadgroep.
Dumb, dumber, Dutch....???
Hehe.I've been waiting to hear this one.
Of course its true.http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&oi=defmore&q=define:paradox
Ol' mohammed set it up that way.
Indeed, dhimmitude from an agency (AIVD) that should know better. Or is it a tactical move to get off the hook, but to remain focussed on the objective to address the Islamic threat?
In any case, do I see radical mouth-frothing Jews and Christians with a death wish when we mock the Lord? I haven't seen any, sorry.
Then what explains the behavior of Muslims toward non-Muslims in countries where the non-Muslims do not dare utter a word? In Egypt, with the persecution of the Copts? In the Sudan, with 2 million murdered in the south? In Nigeria, where the Ibos or other Christians never attacked Islam, but for a long time tiptoed around? In southern Thailand or the southern Philippines? This is a theory for which all the evidence goes the other way -- that the behavior of Muslims is based purely on the texts, and the deep belief in the teachings of Islam, and the sense of superiority it gives.
What maddens Muslims for now, in the West, is that they should rule, they should be on top, and until that happens, they will grow increasingly furious and deadly. If anything, they become more Muslim and less secular, more violent, than they would at home -- as the example of the Turks in Germany demonstrates.
It is puzzling why the Western world seems to want to allow itself to be tied in knots, tied by its own legal procedures, its own respect for pluralism, its own decency, against an enemy that does not wish it well, that will use those legal procedures, that pluralism, that Western decency, all in order to destroy that very legal system, that pluralism, that decency. Sixty years ago, even with a German occupation, there were those who resisted, or who supported secretly those who resisted. Where is the resistance today?
Islam is not powerful.Islam is a failure, political, economic, intellectual, and social. Islam exists, and has always existed, as a conquering force that led to the subjugation and exploitation of others. The jizya, the vast slave trade (both in white Europeans and black Africans), the demand for tribute both within Muslim countries and without, continues -- in modern guise, and sometimes disguise -- to this day. The "Bumiputra" system is a tribute. The oligololistic rents that are charged by OPEC,and that the non-Muslim world has been buffaloed into doing nothing about (the Americans,for example, have for the past 32 years been relying on the kindness of their "staunch Saudi ally" -- an ally that does not now, and never did exist, for Saudi Arabia has always charged Americans exactly what others are charged for oil, i.e., the market price, and in return for this non-existent "gift" has received a great deal, including its continued existence and ability to make mischief and finance the world-wide spread of mosques and madrasas that are so threatening to our physical and mental well-being.
How silly this Dutchman is, to claim that criticism of Islam is what causes Muslims to behave badly. Has he not looked about him, and noticed that in most of the world, and especially in Europe, non-Muslims have been falling over backwards not to articulate obvious home-truths about Islam (and which any ex-Muslim can so easily confirm). Everywhere the apologists are on the march, in the universities, in the Western press. Everywhere Western man has chosen to ignore the tenets of Islam, and the 1350 year history of Islamic conquest and of imposition of dhimmitude.Everywhere, the very best representatives of Western thought, and Western statesmanship, from Montaigne and Spinoza and Hume and Tocqueville, from the American John Quincy Adams and the Englishman Winston Churchill, from the hundreds of Western and other non-Muslim scholars (Charles Dufourcq, Emile Fagnan, Armand Abel, Clement Huart, G. Vajda, C. Snouck Hurgronje, W. Robertson Smith, St. Clair Tisdall, David Margoliouth, Joseph Schacht, Leone Caetani, Henri Lammens, G. Noldeke) -- any one of them superior, in their scholarship, to the apologists who make up 90% of the membership of MESA Nostra, from the compilers of expurgated Qur'ans and their supporters (Michael Sells, Carl Ernst), to the islamochristians nonetheless determined not to criticize but rather deflect criticism from Islam (Fawaz Gerges, Shibley Telhami), and of course the True Believers, who sometimes disguise their Jihadist impulses in a transparent "two-tiny-peoples-construction-of-Palestinian-identity-Israelis-are-European-colonialists" argument that falls apart upon the least inspection.
There are intelligent Dutchman. An intelligence chief who appears to blame articulate analysis of Islam for the murderous behavior of Muslims is the wrong man for the job. Perhaps public relations at the Rijskmuseum, or maitre d' at the "Five Flying Flies" restaurant, would be better.
Of course this is not funny, but you have to laugh at the ridiculous logic. Islam is the religion of peace and cannibals are great chefs.
What a silliness
All right! all right! all right! I will confess. ISLAM IS THE RELIGION OF PIECE. Piece of hand, piece of foot, piece of head, ECT. Anyone else make the same confession?
"The radicalisation of young Muslims is partly caused by the negative way Islam is being talked about in the Netherlands, the head of the security service AIVD has claimed."
say, you dont the koran has anything to do with this?how bout the literature disseminated from the mosques?talking bad about islam in the netherlands so they must have had rights to terrorize and kill?this is what you would call an infinite dilema.
Posted by: Hugh at February 10, 2005 05:42 PM
"What maddens Muslims for now, in the West, is that they should rule, they should be on top, and until that happens, they will grow increasingly furious and deadly. If anything, they become more Muslim and less secular, more violent, than they would at home..."
Creator - Muhammad, Tribe - Quraysh and the forlorn region which follows this gangland agenda are exercising alpha-male tendencies towards turf.
The Golden Age is theirs. It will always be theirs, for there is no remembrance without it.
Pre-Islamic history is nothing but fairy tales.
"The creation of Andalusia with her splendid cities of Seville, Granada and Cordoba are Allah's jewels... Temporarily lost, but never forgotten and eventually to be "re-taken".
I agree. Less secular and more violent is the way towards a retrograde culture.
Extry! Extry! Read all about it! Man Bites Dog!
Actually, Mr. van Hulst's argument does have some merit. When approaching a hive of Killer bees (otherwise minding their own business of invading the hives of native honeybees, killing the competing Queen, cross-mating, etc), it may only take a bit of carbon dioxide from the breath to agitate them and trigger a deadly attack. In that sense, one may say that the passer-by "provoked" the attack.
If criticism of Islam, causes muslims to behave badly, then what has 2,000 years of persecution done to the Jews? Surely the holocaust and other progroms in Europe would have made Jews go on their own Jihad wouldn't they? Yet, no-one fears retribution from the Jews, even though it would be perfectly understandable if they did.
So why is it OUR fault if muslims kill and maim non-muslims?
To Hugh:
Dutch Intelligence is an oxymoron!
Mr. van Hulst's comments are not unique to Dutch but are common to many touchy-feely liberals. The attitude is actually a kind of solipsism that does not allow the free will of others. He believes that if the superior Dutch changed their behavior, the little brown Arabs would fall into line. His belief is the height of arrogance, and of course ignores centuries of history as readers here know.
Hugh,
"...to the apologists who make up 90% of the membership of MESA Nostra,..."
This from Jay Nordlinger's article today
http://www.nationalreview.com/impromptus/impromptus200502110736.asp
scroll down
"One day, at a particular forum, he gave what I can only describe as a kind of beer-hall speech. Shouting and pumping his fist, he admonished the Arabs to forget any negotiating with Israel and to stay true to pure radicalism. (The crowd was full of students from the Middle East, who cheered raucously.) Later, an older professor said to Beinin, "No one gets Arabs riled up like you do."
It was this sort of thing that sickened me, for it had nothing to do with scholarship, and was both intellectually and spiritually ugly. I left the department.
Why do I revisit all this? Because I read the other day that Professor Beinin — who has spent the last many years at Stanford — is the new president of the Middle Eastern Studies Association . . .
Oh, well."
Apologists they are not. Just politicized thugs wanting their gallons of blood.
The only way to prevent the tentacles of MESA Nostra encircling and strangling free discussion of Islam, is to use the money weapon. Cut off all gifts to universities who employ such people. Period. Others will also suffer. Too bad. If the administrators and the other faculty are so negligent that they permit the bearers of this nonsense to take over, by slow infiltration, entire departments of Middle Eastern studies, and if they can give each other tenure, and then believe they are permanently home free, and will only hire their own clones, then there is no way that young, innocent Americans can reasonably learn about Islam. This cannot continue.
University presidents have to inform themselves about Islam, and then inform themselves thoroughly, in a way that will require some effort on their parts, about what is being taught. They should look at reading lists, syllabi, examination questions (and the grading -- one student at Harvard last year was given an "F" for describing Muhammad's Night Journey up to heaven and back on his winged steed al-Buraq as "apocryphal" -- the Muslim grader wrote "So you don't think it really happened?"). They should sit in on classes. Indeed, why should not all classes be taped, for further review in fields where there is a strong sense that not education, but indoctrination and intimidation, are taking place? Who can object? On what grounds?
ANNOYED WITH THE GOLDEN RULE?
IRRITATED BY THE TOLERANCE OF OTHERS?
OPPOSED TO INDEPENDENT WOMEN?
TICKED WHEN THE REST OF THE WORLD WON'T CLIMB ON BOARD WITH YOUR FAILURE TO JOIN THE 21ST CENTURY?
DON'T GET MAD...GO MAD!
C'MON, OVER TO OUR SIDE AND JOIN OUR PEACEFUL, FREEDOM-LOVING COMRADES AS WE REMAKE THE WORLD AS IT SHOULD BE!
ISLAM!
WE'RE A RELIGION OF PEACE, AND WE'LL KILL YOU TO PROVE IT!!
With a cowardly appeasing attitude like that, it's no wonder why Europe is sinking!