Hans Jansen on Dhimmitude in Holland

I'm still waiting for one brave politician in the United States to take the advice of Mr. Jansen. Confronting the horrible truth about Islam is only done on the Internet or in person. We get bowing and scraping instead, even in President Bush's Inaugural Address.

We have a huge and growing Muslim population here in Central Florida. Once it reaches critical mass, as it has in France, the game is over. Muslims seem to accommodate until their numbers are sufficient to take over.

Still waiting.

At the same time, other Dutch professors go around in Europe to tell people about the situation in Holland after van Gogh's murder. What they actually talk about is the "terrible threat" of Dutch "xenofobia" and "extreme right", that is, the growing criticism of Islam... Nothing about the Islamist threats to Islam-critical politicians; nothing about the real problem itself. No, in dhimmi Scandinavia we're still being taught that the real problem in Holland is that the dhimmitude is still imperfect.

We have to fight this "far right" tendency (to criticize anything at all about Islam), we're told, because we still need a lot of immigrants from North Africa; because we're getting older and we need workforce. The same is repeated by the Social Democratic politicians of all Scandinavian countries. Wierdly enough, these same Social Democrats do everything they can to prevent people from Eastern Europe from coming to work in the "old" EU countries: Scandinavia, Holland, France, Germany etc. So, why do we "need" immigrant workers from Islamic countries, but not from Eastern Europe (and we don't even speak about immigration from China, India and other far Eastern or non-Muslim African regions)? Why was it politically correct and OK to have public smear and scare campaigns before the EU-enlargement last May about the approaching hordes of "social tourists" from the new EU-countries (the famous prediction of the Swedish PM Göran Persson that never fulfilled itself), while it's not politically correct to speak about slowing down Muslim immigration; although it's known fact that the Polish, Hungarian, Czech and Baltic immigrants actually work in the "old" EU, while many Muslims live on the dole with their 6+ children?

It becomes harder and harder to believe that it's just stupidity and ignorance that drives these professors and politicians; it looks more and more like an organized political program. Looks like Europe has seriously decided to Islamize itself, and the elite refuses to change its mind; despite the mounting evidence of fact and the wisdom of people like Janssen, Hirsi Ali etc. They just won't listen.

Scandie wriotes:
At the same time, other Dutch professors go around in Europe to tell people about the situation in Holland after van Gogh's murder. What they actually talk about is the "terrible threat" of Dutch "xenofobia" and "extreme right", that is, the growing criticism of Islam... Nothing about the Islamist threats to Islam-critical politicians; nothing about the real problem itself. No, in dhimmi Scandinavia we're still being taught that the real problem in Holland is that the dhimmitude is still imperfect.

These bastardi academics disgust me.

On cooler thinking, it seems obvious now why the academics love the leftist agenda and hate the free markets & free choice so much - what they couldn't do in terms of real world achievement, the great among the entrepreneurs did - some of the latter being mere high school dropouts.

These same gashole profs now wanna claim they know whats the best social policy prescription - even more leftist utopian daydreamning and multiculti rantings. What they couldn't own (the real world achievements of real heroes) they wopuld rather control....remionds me of orwell's Animal Farm and its swine...

Scandie,

So, why do we "need" immigrant workers from Islamic countries, but not from Eastern Europe (and we don't even speak about immigration from China, India and other far Eastern or non-Muslim African regions)?

I think western societies who are well steeped in the freedoms they enjoy and frankly take them for granite and find it difficult to conceive of the oppressive and totalitarian Ideology that is Islam. Yes; the Ignorance about its encroaching presence appears to be terribly misunderstood. Small signs are not enough to convince western societies that there is an ever increasing threat to the free societies they live in when compared to the tenets of Islam and its sharia law. Many muslims are masters of deception (taquiyya) or half and misleading truths (kitman). They are good at playing the role of victim when somone critisizes Islam and it miltant tenets and its oppression of women to the oppression of all other religions but Islam. Only when things reach critical mass may the dhimmis' become aware of what is happening to their freedoms and then it may be to late.

Muslim immigration will result in a very bad result for all of us. Does 1492 ring a bell?

Has anyone ever considered what would happen if large numbers of Christians, Hindus or Bhuddists started moving to Muslim lands and what the Muslim reaction would be? The immigration, the "respect" demanded is totally one-sided. People of other faiths are not accorded any "respect" in Muslim lands. Why should we accord them any "respect" here? The minute a Muslim group voluntarily starts fighting for the right of Christians to practice their religion freely in Egypt or Pakistan is the moment that I will accord Islam any "respect". At the moment, the "respect" demanded is totally one-sided, i.e. Muslims want respect for their faith and the freedom to Da'wah but do not reciprocate with other faiths.

The whole business is going to end very badly for the Muslims and for us. The religious wars of the middle ages will return within my lifetime. The bloodshed will be horrific. Those who do not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Plus ca change; plus la meme.

Reading Bat Ye'or's Eurabia
and Paul Sperry's Infiltration
Please everyone, read these books!

The comments above reflect what Bat Ye'or has pointed out: the policy of the EU appears to be to favor Muslim immigrants over non-Muslim immigrants from Eastern Europe, to perform those jobs that, famously, Western Europeans "don't want to do." Why? Would not people from Czechoslovakia, Poland, Russia, Hungary and so on integrate far better, without having Islam in their mental baggage, than any Muslims? In Italy, Filipinos (Christian, not Muslim) are often employed as domestic workers.

The Muslim migration into Europe began in ignorance, and continued as folly -- a folly that is now suicidal. It began when two countries allowed in large numbers of Muslims. The Germans, with their Ludwig-Ehrhardian boom, wanted workers. They came up with the policy of importing Turks. They made two assumptions, both of them disastrously wrong. The first was that by calling these Turks "guest-workers" they would in fact go home after a certain time. They did not. They stayed. They settled. They built mosques, they build madrasas. And even those who never attended a mosque remained Muslims. A handful became fully Westernized, and threw off Islam -- but only a handful. That handful got the attention, not all the others, who had families, very large families relative to the Germans.

The other mistake the Germans made was in telling themselves that Turkey, a NATO member, a contributor to the West in the Cold War (for its own good and sufficient anti-Russian reasons, but this was not understood), was "secular" and that therefore all Turks were "secular" and what's more, would always remain so. Not at all. Islam is permanent, Kemalism is transient. And where the constraints on the practice of Islam cannot be imposed on Turks (which is when they have gone to Germany) it has been observed -- even by Bernard Lewis -- that they become more, rather than less, fervently Muslim in their beliefs.

And that is Germany's situation.

As to France, after the 1963 withdrawal from Algeria (ending the only period of civilization that Algeria had known -- 132 years of French rule -- the government of France felt morally obligated to allow in, along with the million pieds noirs (the French of Algeria, who included as well many Jews, whose ancestors had lived in North Africa for many centuries, but were treated as dhimmis by the Muslims in Algeria until they received, under the loi Cremieux in 1870, French citizenship, and were exempt from the humiliating and degrading treatment they had formerly received), hundreds of thousands of Muslim Arabs who had fought for the French -- the "harkis."

And then the French did two things that were fateful, if not as yet fatal, for France. They began to allow in not only the "harkis" (who might have been killed for collaboration) but hundreds of thousands of North Africans from Algeria and Morocco (and some Tunisians). It was fondly belied, in some quarters, that the French "understood" the Arabs, given their brief rule (132 years in Algeria, less than 50 years in Morocco and Tunisia), and knew how to handle them. But an older generation of scholars of Islam had died out, or retired -- virtually the only one left was Charles-Emmanuel Dufourcq, who foresaw, with alarm, what was to come. Rodinson was a third-world Marxist, who would have done nothing (but he has changed his tune in the last decade of his life) to warn against Third-World immigrants. There was also an overwhelming, suffocating, Third-Worldist slant, even a pro-Arab slant, everywhere that mattered: there was Eric Rouleau misinforming the French public in Le Monde (if not a paid Arab agent, then a voluntary one); especially after 1973, Arab oil money flowed and flowed. Chirac received a jewel-encrusted falcon -- shades of the Kniphausen Hawk of the Dukes of Devonshire -- from Arab admirers. Other money came in, as it did all over the Western world. Diplomats and journalists were bought up, academic centers paid for by the Arabs opened. And in France, the elites convinced themselves that Arab money, adn the "two-sides-of-the-Mediterranean" policy, what one might call the policy both of cunning arrivistes uplifted on the oily wave, as it were, of "deux-rivisme" (the "deux rives," or two banks, of that utterly trivial Mediterranean). These deux-rivistes had no understanding of the power, the pervasiveness, the affect of Islam on its adherents; they forgot all of European history. They did not listen to the few who remained who were knowledgeable and could have warned them. The philosopher Jacques Ellul complained back in the 1980s that it was impossible to "say anthing critical of Islam" anywhere in France. Shallow "scholars of Islam" such as Olivier Roy (who still cannot see that it is Islam itself that is the problem, and not Western policies, nor poverty, nor the "failure to integrate" Muslim immigrants -- they don't want to integrate with the French, but to have Islam take over France, but Olivier Roy cannot bring hismelf to recognize, much less admit, that), and the sociologist Gilles Kepel, wrong in every single one of his predictions and nostrums -- yet still listened to respectfully, as if he did not have that unbroken record of incorrect predictions about Muslims and Islam.

And then, having admitted male workers, and finding that their behavior was so often criminal if not downright sociopathic, the French government under Giscard d'Estaing (a great disliker of America, by the way) did something that made matters permanently worse. In order to calm those maghrebins down, someone had the bright idea to allow those workers to bring in their families. It was hoped that this would lead to stability, to less crime, to better things all way round. It was not to be. Those "families" consisted, often, of several wives -- or several wives were taken, sometimes in France itself -- and many children came, and many more were produced, and continue to be produced. Families of 12, 14, 16 children are not unkknown, by 3 or 4 wives. The famous imam of Venissieux had 16 children by several wives, but no income -- or rather, the entire menage was supported by the French state. And this continues to happen all over. Meanwhile, the aggressive and undisciplined Arab students have wreaked havoc all over the public schools, forcing a transfer of resources, forcing many French students to transfer out to private schools, and lowering standards which are reflected in the latest proposal by the government to water-down the standards for the famed baccalaureat.

But that, of course, is nothing compared to the vandalism of cars, home burglaries, rape and gang-rape, that are all so closely linked to the Muslim population. But the property of Infidels, the women of the Infidels, are fair game. And so too are the Jews of all sorts. And eventually everyone will be fair game, if they are not Muslim. Not every Muslim immigrant or second or third generation Muslim in France thinks that way -- but a great many do. And anyone who takes his religion seriously, who simply takes in Qur'an and Sunnah, will inevitably come to the same conclusions. It would take a gigantic effort not to -- the texts inculcate such hostility, offer models of such hostility.

It cannot be otherwise.

But what can be otherwise is for Infidels, in France, and in Germany, and in England, and in this country, to study the matter instead of being mesmerized by the most obvious and transparent propaganda of Ramadan Days and Muslim Outreach and the manipulation of gullible or sinister Christian clergyman (and gullible rabbies or Jewish groups as well), to believe in the "three abrahamic faiths" and how much we all have in common, and how Muslims, too, believe in "pluralism" (this is nonsense -- what is believed in at the moment is exploiting Western ideas of "pluralism" -- never to be found anywhere in Muslim countries -- in order to buy time while Muslims entrench themselves free from close scrutiny of their ideology and their own attitudes).

The ship of state is turning into a Narrenschiff, a ship of fools. It certainly did in France, where the emblem of Paris is a ship afloat on the waves: "Fluctuat nec mergitur" reads the Latin motto of the city of Paris..

That means: "It is swayed by the waves, but does not sink."

Don't be too sure.

On March 19, I wrote the following in my blog:

An article in today's Globe and Mail by Hamida Ghafour (available online by subscription) describes the unpleasantness Dutch Muslims have encountered since the murder of Theo van Gogh. Up till then, the Dutch, described as belonging to "the world's most famously tolerant nation", were prepared to put up with imams from Syria and Egypt preaching hate in "a handful" of Dutch mosques. And, because of the Dutch mindset, which could not conceive that their "live and let live" philosophy was not shared and accepted by all, they had convinced themselves that the large Muslim minority would somehow accommodate themselves to living in a nation where pornography was ubiquitous, homosexuality was considered commonplace, prostitution was a normative social feature and recreational drug use was legally sanctioned. This even though the majority of Muslim immigrants were consigned to the fringes of Dutch society and dwelled separately in "satellite cities", so called because of the plethora of satellite dishes which have sprouted on apartment blocks like barnacles on a ship's hull. These satellites receive signals beamed in from their their homeland, "content" from "the Arab world", and "anti-Semitic and anti-Western programming", i.e. propoganda. But the wheels came off the multicultural caravan when van Gogh--the epitome of irreverent, free-ranging Dutch culture--was ritually slaughtered on an Amsterdam street and the Dutch were rudely awakened to their new reality: They had opened their doors to a huge tide of immigrants for whom Dutch culture and social norms were perceived as irrelevant at best, an existential threat at worst; who identified themselves first and foremost as members of a much larger community--or ummah.

Ms. Ghafour doesn't use those words, of course. Her article is framed as how Holland's Muslim population, especially the Moroccans, have suffered at the hands of the superficially tolerant Dutch. One little murder and, poof, the tolerance evaporates in a puff of marijuana smoke. Now Dutch Muslims sense an unpleasant "chill in the air". Their imams are required to attend seminars on Dutch jurisprudence, "including rights of women and freedom of speech"; they may soon have to take courses in "moderate theology" (a breach in "the divide between church and state", insists Ms. G.). The Dutch themselves have become more suspicious of Islam. Ms. Ghafour quotes a Dutch-born Muslim of Moroccan origin (as was van Gogh's murderer) who organized a protest against extremism after the killing and who says he used to consider himself Dutch until recently, when people began making comments like, "There are nasty things written in your Koran". He says it was these comments that prompted him to read it for the first time and thus discover how un-Dutch he really was. As if to accentuate the point, the Dutch owner of a bike shop says (or, in Ms. G.'s more loaded word, "claims") a gang of Moroccan teenagers is responsible for many of the city's bicycle thefts--he's seen them roaming the streets when they should be in school--and says in a quote the writer intends to to be construed as racist, "I don't want to discriminate, but we should say enough: The line is here and no further."

The inference here is that the Dutch reaction is unjustified, that Muslims should be free to pursue their religion unfettered by any state intrusion--even if, as Ms. Ghafour mentions, three of the 9/11 hijackers met at Amsterdam's extremist al-Tawheed mosque during a 1999 conference; and even if "Moroccan parents think (Dutch) schools should discipline the children" while Dutch parents believe teachers should merely "educate" them; and even if some religious leaders are preaching a religiously-based intolerance that is the antithesis of multiculturalism, the framing device of the society in which they now live. What hasn't been addressed in this article is the larger question: is a literal interpretation and application of the Koran compatible with western society, and is it possible for members of those societies to pose that question without being branded as racists and Islamophobes--and thereby silenced? Or even worse, being murdered for speaking out like Theo Van Gogh?

And perhaps the most crucial question of all: if we aren't permitted to ask the question, how much longer can we expect to preserve our cherished freedoms; the ones that embody our own identity and make us the tolerant--if often gullible and woefully naive--people we are?

One good example of dhimmitude Mister Jansen forgot to mention. The very important role of royal dhimmitude that reach its temporary climax the days after the murder of Theo van Gogh.
In those days of national calamity the Queen didn’t visit the spot of the murder or didn’t make a gesture to the jewish community as no one did of the dutch authorities, while they were the one blatantly insulted and threatened in the Pamflet Mohammed Bouyeri sticked into the chest of Theo van Gogh.
Instead of that she visit a Morrocan coffeeshop to talk with youngsters and the upcoming crème de la crème of the multicultural propagandists. She honored Sadiq al Azm, Soroush and Fatima Mernissi with the prestigious national Erasmusprice, while Mernissi took the opportunity to declare that Dutch society were the first to blame for the murder of Theo van Gogh. This wasn’t the end of honouring. Later that month she gave the nationalistic Palestinian poet Mahmud Darwish the Prince Claus price named after her deceased husband. Publicly she made a little dance on African music

Princess Maxima wife of the Royal Prince Willem Alexander and daughter of Zorreguieta, former Minister of agriculture under dictator Videla in Argentina. called days after in a public adress before the parliament: "to achieve an new shared identity"
And Prince Bernhard, father of the queen in Holland known to be bon vivant declared just before he died in the end of november it didn’t matter to him how and where he would be burried in a church or a mosque.

House of Orange was always sensative for the spiritual side of live. The Sister of the queen gets inspiration out of talking with trees. Mother of the queen. Queen Juliana caused in the fifties government crisis with her spiritual healer Greet Hoffman

Just after 9-11 there was a Dutch official memorial for the victims. It was a oecumenical show. One of the islampreachers was Abdel Hasselhoef a convert to islam.
Royal Prince Willem Alexander and Maxima were deeply touched by his words of peace and harmony. Later that month he visit the royal couple.
Allready then we were making jokes a new Greet Hofman affaire was about to happen. But then Hasselhoef who became a media darling was demasked as a fake imam, because he didn’t receive the right education.
Anyway the palace certainly couldn’t show off with him in public
Later on we found out Hasselhoef is a sufi, follower of Sheigh Nazim of the Naqshibandis
The same tariqa of Hisham Kabbani of the Islamic supreme council of America, who is a follower of Sheigh Nazim as well
They are keen to involve influential arristocrats all over the world into their "Tariqa"
Rumours are mentioned Prince Charles is initiated and became muslim and Hillary Clinton
They initiated AbdelWahid former president of Indonesia.
Hisham Kabbani follows a smooth Clintonian line of Da’wa
In Holland we do with less. According to Hasselhoef the war on Iraq was a Jewish Purim complot. Sympathy of the Dutch aristocracy was easily gained and he prefered to make efforts to become populair with the muslimyouth

But now the House of Orange.
They regret the lost of religiousity and respect in Dutch society. Converting to islam would be a great solution for them. The only way to involve moslims in Dutch society and to get to "a new shared identity".
Also in the past they switched on a certain strategic moment from religion to gain their central role in Dutch History
This Last Autumn The Queen almost forgot her political protocal in her adress to the European Parliament to favour in disguised words the membership of Turkey.

I bet within ten years you will see some European royalties converting to islam
They are playing a central role in the instiutionalisation of dhimmitude in Europe

In the UK, some 34% of muslim families from Pakistan and Bangladesh have not one person employed in the family. As muslim families are 2 to 3 times larger then the norm, it gives an indication of the huge number of people that are on welfare. Even if one person was employed in a family, it is hardly likely that the family could sustain itself without considerable welfare benefits. This just indicates the huge drain on resources that muslims are deliberately imposing on us. This excludes all the expenses for security measures, legal expenses, prison expenses (muslims are well represented in the prison population). All this is good jihad. Be in no doubt, draining the kuffar economy is 'good jihad'.

Most muslim immigrants to the UK have virtually no marketable skills, in fact are functionally illiterate for the most part, and will remain unemployed (very likely voluntarily), for the rest of their lives. At 65 they will all be eligible for a state pension, whether they have worked or not. And yet the cry goes out that we need muslim immigrant workers to fund the pensions gap. Muslim immigrants far from being an an assett are a fatal liability.

Mentat:

I agree with you wholehearetedly. This is not going to end well, and I have felt this for over 20 years as regards letting muslims into the West. I have no misgiving about Indians or Chinese or any other. Both groups work hard and make a conscious effort to assimilate. Muslims OTH are a different proposition altogether.

This Jihad is going to get worse with each passing day. And with that, our freedoms will become increasingly threatened or stifled. The only way we will win this war and at the sametime regain our freedoms, as well as free muslims from islam, is by separation. I do not think our societies, geared as they are to free and open thought, can continue with an ever increasing 5th column assault on it. If this assault is not brought to a halt soon, then free society will start to perish. It may not be evident immediately, but perish it will in the fullness of time. In fact we see the evidence of the death of freedom of speech free from fear, every where we look.

This is going to end very badly - and not in the sense of a bloody war but the slow death of a free society, slow enough that successive generations do not realise that a change happening - death of the most unique civilisation in history, not with a bang but in a whimper.

DP111:

Never doubt for a moment the eventual triumph of Enlightened Civilization over primitive barbarity - WE SHALL PREVAIL.

Gently I remind you that any expression of doubt or defeatism on your part "gladdens the heart of the ummah" and is copied to islamist boards worldwide as a sign of "allah's" promised victory over the infidel and the assured impending establishment of the caliphate. While I understand your frustration and natural tendency towards pessimism given some of the current circumstances, never give the enemy the psychological advantage.

It would also help to focus on the positive, as well. : - )

Scandie posted It becomes harder and harder to believe that it's just stupidity and ignorance that drives these professors and politicians; it looks more and more like an organized political program. Looks like Europe has seriously decided to Islamize itself, and the elite refuses to change its mind; despite the mounting evidence of fact and the wisdom of people like Janssen, Hirsi Ali etc. They just won't listen.

I have thought about this strange unity of purpose, extending as it does from politicians, academics and even Church leaders. There seems to be a deliberate effort to reject the Christian foundations of the West and impose instead an islamic order on the West. So why should such a programme be desirable?

My feeling is that since the Protestant reformation, Christianity simply lost its hold on the State. Once the Bible became readable by all, it became clear that Christianity was a pacifist religion, with - and this is crucial, with no claims on the state. Thus, in an ever-expanding role of the individual and his Human rights and the subsequent atomisation of society, the state and its functionaries found that they had an ever decreasing number of tools for social control of the individual and the masses. Freedom is a good thing, I hear the elites say, but it has gone too far.

It does not require much thought to see that Islam is the very best ideology designed specifically for social control of the masses by a group of "avante-gardes". It functions on both the political and religious domains. It brooks no dissent and allows only what is interpreted by the "avante-garde" from a confused and convoluted text such as the koran. Perfect. Couldnt ask for more. The beauty is that islamisation can be implemented by immigration, and any who question either immigration of muslims or islam, can be dismissed as racists. And the elites will have the social control that they had been progressively loosing over the last couple of centuries. Just perfect.

CGW:

Yes, I do sometimes go into a pessimistic phase. I have watched this problem of islam, in the form of muslim immigration to the West for over 25 years, with nothing but alarm, knowing full well its implications for a free society.

And yes, I'm sure that we will win, and that islam will die the death that it so richly deserves. However that happy outcome is not going to happen until the mass of the public is enlightened about islam and the surreptitious agenda of islamisation that is in progress. Whether this agenda is deliberate or just misguided liberalism, is not clear, but Scandie thinks it more likely to be deliberate.

On the positive side, islam is under scrutiny as never before in its history. In the UK, the Daily Telegraph and the Times had major articles on the obscurantism of islam. The DT has run a series of such articles. The "lesser" papers such as the Daily Mail, have been scathing in their articles. The very fact that muslims are demanding that islam be given protection from critique, is proof that they are feeling the heat; for at no time in islam's history was such a protection required or needed.

Muslims must feel dejected. Here they are in the West, and as they must see it - our dhimmis instead of being our masters, and their koran under critical scrutiny. Their only protection comes from our own Left-liberals - the very segment that is most repugnant to islam. Meanwhile, back in dar ul islam, the Infidel armies hold sway with no islamic power to stop them. The Infidel masters then impose alien ideologies of democracy in a domain where nought but islam should hold sway. It must be depressing and demoralising for those who believe firmly that allah grants invinciblity to the believer in allah.

As for us in the West- we have a tendency to dance with danger. Fortunately we have always come out alright in the end.

Bravissimo ! ! ! ; - )

Our Royal family is only royal in its spending, for the rest it is just sucking up the suckers, sorry to say so, and being always in just that political corner that advances their interests most. That would not be a problem, as long as they'd stick to épatez-le-bourgeois, but helas, they always strive for political power and do not show the best of taste in where to look for it. The same was true after the murder of Theo van Gogh, the queen became our royal Dhimmi, not a (publicly announced) word for the victim or its relatives, but visits to the local mosk. She was asked publicy by some writers to at least show her concern for Ayaan Hisi Ali (the mp that made Submission with Van Gogh which led to his murder and her having to go into hiding in the US) but she declined, because she could not be burdened wiht politics, she is supposed to be neutral. There was a nice cartoon with our queen with headscarf walking some meters behind a male ismalist, that said it all. But then, who cares as long as the interests of our royal family can be advanced, and what else is there to expect from the daugther of a known SA-member as well as mother in law of a daugther of a former junta member from Argentine? And further down the line (as far as one is deluded enough to consider this line legitimate) it isn't any different, noblesse oblige, but -luckely enough for the House of Orange, there is not a lot of nobility in it.

But let me keep my national frustrations to myself, there are more pressing matters at hand. Dhimmitude for instance, although the times might be changing. More people then ever raise their voices in the public debate, and it seems to help. P.e. a girl was blocked from having a certain education (that involved encounters with male, i.c. parents that took their childeren to a daycare center) trial period for refusing to give a handshake to a father of one of her pupils.

And do not forget, we look liberal from the outside but basically the Dutch are more calvinistic then liberal (helas, for my part), that is why we undertake everything so serious, even being liberal, being pc, or on dope. This means that everything is forbidden, unless it is allowed, and if it is allowed, it is mandatory. We are slow to anger, really slow, but when we are, we are quite fundamental about the changes that have to come about and calvinistic in our zeal. Do not forget, we have (apart from 1940-45 and somewere in the 19th century in the French period) never been occupied, and -looking at internet- never will. But helas, there is still a long road to go and we have not only to fight the political party of the Islam but also our own dhimmi leaders. I like mr Janssen for so eloquentie ginving information about what we are up to, and regret that he is considered an Islamophoob at the best. But as I said, the times might be changing.

DP111: Well said. Much as I hate PC in the UK, there is room for hope. First of all, the press here is relatively free. The Telegraph, and to a lesser extent The Times have featured critical commentary on Islam that would never have been voiced before Sep 11.

An interesting development concerns the, until recently, 'leftwing' journalists, David Aaronovich and Nick Cohen. What have these two in common? Jewish and writing for the Guardian and Observer respectively. (For the non-Brits, these are lefty papers, anti-Semitic in the way that lefties increasingly are these days. ) David Aaronovich is defecting to The Times, following in the footsteps of Julie Burchill, who has a no-holes-barred critique of Islam and is a genuine feminist. Nick Cohen is now the only non-leftoid/islamofacist on The Grauniad and will, almost certainly, be next.

My other reason for not giving up on my country is that, almost alone of members of the EU (curses be upon its moustache), the UK welcomed as workers (ie no welfare benefits) members of 'New Europe' (effectively Eastern Europe). France and Germany, too busy pandering to its Muslim population, didn't want to know.

I loathe the EU, but these new members, being from former Communist countries, are a source of hope. They have relatively recently thrown off the yoke of Communism and so don't take freedom for granted. They have not yet gone soft and pathetic on PC and bureaucracy. They are a more reliable bulwark against Islamofacism than PC Eurodhimmis.

The Blair government, which I loathe for many reasons, made a good decision, and a cynical one. In racist terms it wanted to 'whiten up' immigration. Skin colour is neither hear nor there to me, but I applaud the effect, which is to 'Christian up' immigration.

East Europeans are Catholic, by and large, or Eastern Orthodox, both relatively robust forms of Christianity, which would see Islam for what it is. In Britain Christianity is weakened, softened by moral relativism and multiculturalism, and sees Islam as just another religion to respect.

Bring on the Poles, Czechs, Ukranians. No more Pakistanis, Morrocans and so forth. And in case anyone thinks I'm racist, please come to Britain all you Christian Pakistanis, Arabs, Nigerians and so forth.

Welcome, all. Wanna fight with demography? Catholics have big families too.

Ernst: I did a Ph.D. dissertation on the Calvinist influence on the rule of law and consensual government ideals (although I focused on a bunch of Scotsmen rather than Netherlanders) and was rather impressed by your analysis of the "Gereformeerde" intensity and passion of the Netherlands. Maybe it is why we Anglophone Americans tend to "throw ourselves into" things, whether for good or ill (after all, Puritans grew out of the same Zwinglian root). I believe that one of the problems we have in facing Islam is that once in power, the heirs of the New Left and the rest of the Western radical "no God and no masters" tradition is that they fear all passion save the sexual kind and what it takes to hold down the older Western tradition.

Interested: I'm not betting on the Roman Catholic Church. With the Pope kissing the Qur'an, it's in big trouble.

Yes, but the Koran kissing Pope is on his way out (remember, in the old days, Islam was a bulwark against Communism, which would influence a Polish Pope). Questions are being asked about his successor. My opinion on faithfreedom.org:

'I'd prefer a Pope who was a bit more liberal on birth control issues.If not abortion, then contraception has to be addressed - it is simply ludicrous to forbid this in the 21st century. And there should married priests and women priests.

Apart from this, I'd like the Pope to be old fashioned, ie free from political correctness. He should condemn Islam as a herasy and denounce it clearly and unequivocally.'

Since you can't post images you will have to click on this link to see Islamic Europe 2015

Kepa.
One of the funny things is that, in the political spectrum, of the Netherlands I’m considered a conservative (meaning member of the liberal party- the party for freedom and democracy), but in US terms I would be considered a liberal of the worst –or at least most loose- kind. Furthermore, I’m an atheist but I also learned that one should not bough one’s knee but for God (in my case this means I’m not supposed to bough it to anyone), a real Calvinistic point of view. This means (among other things) that you should not bough to anything else (but God) then your own conscience, and the least of all to the people who are in their own mind Its replacement or advocates on earth. And that is what the Islam and its followers are demanding from everybody, bough your knee, not to God but for its followers on earth. One of the problems is that we all –here in the west at least- are inclined to respect other beliefs, or at least the conscience of people with a believe, however outrageous it may seem. The problem (one of the problems) with Islam, as I see it, is that this common decency is seen as defeat, as dhimmitude and as a sign to push further. So we are forced to push back, not because we want to but because we have to. And as I said, it takes some time to awaken to this reality, but more and more people in the Netherlands are doing so, but as in the US, our political elite is still sleeping, and that is one of the problems. Another problem is that our media, like in the US, are not reporting fairly about what is going on and opinionleaders are still trying (as in the Van Gogh case) to blame the victim and not the perpetuator.
Luckily, although we are more softhearted here in Europe (that is how we got in all those worldwars, but that is another story) then in the US, we at least do not have to coop with a president sharing the blankets with the biggest financiers and protagonists of international terror.
Problem is that our political correctness is also driving by a Calvinistic zeal, it is hard to root out, even if all factual evidence is contrary to all pc-believes. We are still considered (forced almost) to see the immigration as an enrichment of society, and thus hell awaits everybody thinking or stating otherwise. Although I ventilated some optimism in my last posting, I still see that we have to conquer some stubbornness of the Calvinistic-pc-class that wants to stay pc and, last but not least, of the Calvinistic tendencies (even if you do not want to integrate, you always pick something up in your new country) of our new Dutchmen, they stayed Islamic but became Calvinistic in their defense of being so and claiming our rights without returning the compliment.

Respect and extreme caution have introduced many odd scenes in the Netherlands since the murder of Theo van Gogh — despite the fact that Muslims are a minority. It’s clear that once muslims are the majority, as they are in the Middle East, more respect and cautionary zeal will have to follow"

One cannot look forward to that!

"Never doubt for a moment the eventual triumph of Enlightened Civilization over primitive barbarity - WE SHALL PREVAIL."

I don´t doubt that, but would be better if they knew they stand no chance, they are barbarians in their own mind, they have the perfect godgiven way of life and religion. If we grow weak militarily and economically at some point, and keep being weak and divided ideologically. The quickly multiplying population of the moslem world may see it´s chance. Remember in their demented worldview god is on their side and they have the perfect religion as god himself revealed it, superior to and abrogating anything before that and after. And even without sick ideology, their immense hate would be a bomb ready to blow at any moment.

We shall prevail, but it might just get very bloody, take some very tough choices like what size of H-bombs to use. They are crazy, they don´t think anyway like us. In their blown up bodies they see unselfish sacrifice to god and his cause, their aspiration is not towards this world. To them it´s nothing but the path to hell or paradise: To the ripping and burning of flesh constantly, or the 72 virgins in eternal hedonistic bliss.
The most of the Arab world is grateful to God and islamists, hateful towards jews and western civilizations which they attribute all evil to, anything bad thing happens to Arabs, Zionism is behind - period. The average moslem may not revel at the thought of war, but Lo mohammed have a verse for that too: “Jihaad (holy fighting in Allaah’s Cause) is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a thing which is bad for you. Allaah knows but you do not know”[al-Baqarah 2:216] And this verse is not the only one. There is a lot of firebrand ones to throw into the face of those that feel like ”shirking” about Allah will notice and punish, and a lot about the rewards for martyrs, to replace the stick with a carrot, they can go on an on bombarding the poor average believer, there is multiple ammo. But for hating us they need no further words from the Koran or anything, they already, and don´t matter we do they will probably continue. Their hate has little to do with us and much more with their pride, mentality, and inherited cultural view. Anger is teeming and a elite of islamists are ready to take full charge of the situation, they are pushing and waiting for their moment, and they might just succeed more than good is.

Ernst said something memorable,

"we are forced to push back, not because we want to but because we have to"

And this sentiment has surely been shared by dhimmi peoples and others confronted by Islamic aggression over 1400 years.

This may serve as a general explanans for why conflict, violence or open warfare rages in every part of the globe where Islam touches lands occupied by non-Muslims.

Never doubt for a moment the eventual triumph of Enlightened Civilization over primitive barbarity - WE SHALL PREVAIL Posted by CGW

You're right, and it is ludicrous to think for one moment that the savage, retrograde ideology of Islam will destroy our vastly superior, advanced civilization.

I believe that bloody conflicts between muslims and civilized humanity are inevitable. There will be some who are too civilized (sniveling cowards) to defend themselves and their heritage; they will surrender to the beasts. But most people will revolt and do whatever it takes to reclaim their lands, with or without the help of the stupid governments that encouraged and abetted the muslim invasions.

Muslims will be the biggest losers. I have absolutely no doubt of that. When the dust settles and Western Civilization is once again free of Islamic treachery, maybe future generations will not ignore the lessons of history and Islam's ignominious legacy as the ignorant multiculturalists and social engineers of our generation have so foolishly done.

I was trying to find answers to all these questions for a long time and couldn`t come up with any possible ,logical ones...
The left wing politicians in the West are not blind and they`re not stupid either;they know exactly what islam is and what islam wants.
But their far left indoctrination is so deeply firebranded in their mind that they accept and they even celebrate islam,for one reason and one reason only:islam will destroy the West,the West is racist,homophobe,xenophobe,etc and it must be destroyed at any cost.
And even when they realize that they will also have to pay the price and perish in the process,they accept that too.
To some extent,the radical left ideology is similar to the mental frame of the suicide bombers....destroy and die in the process. I stil think that we will never be able to fight and defeat islamic terrorism,unless/before we defeat the radical left in the West. "Unholy alliance" by David Horowitz is a must read.

wally klomp & ernst-

Groetjes uit Amerika,

Sterkte hoor! Jullie hebben veel vrienden in 'de nieuwe wereld'.

(for the non-Dutch reader:

"Greetings from America,

Hang in there guys! You have a lot of friends in 'the new world'.")

A mosque built in The Netherlands is like painting a malignant mole on the face of "The Girl With the Pearl Earring" by Vermeer.

Not only unnecessay, but grotesque.

Meanwhile-

We appreciate you sticking by us in Iraq, as messy as that anti-terror enterprise has become, and will stand side by side with you to help keep your beautiful and civilized land free of the 'supernatural termites' [gekke Mussulmannen] trying to bore their way into the heart of your freethinking republic.

Theo Van Gogh died for your politicians' "sins".

I can only hope the Dutch have awakened from the "multicultural" dream and finally see the "Muslim guest worker" nightmare for what it is:

Invasion in slow-motion.

"De Ondergang van Nederlands"*.... as M. Rasoel
warned.

(*'The Downfall of the Dutch".)

Tot ziens!

Here's a book you might enjoy over een borreltje:

http://freespace.virgin.net/sarah.peter.nelson./lazyman/lazyman.html

Sorry- about link above-

I added an extra "." after "nelson" to it.

here we go again- corrected:

http://freespace.virgin.net/sarah.peter.nelson/lazyman/lazyman.html

(Enjoy!)

Proftsbeard,
Bedankt voor het medeleven, we rekenen hier altijd op de US en gedragen ons onderwijl als kinderen die altijd weer alles vergeven wordt. Om mezelf iets volwassener te profileren: ik heb inmiddels ook een huis en verblijfsvergunning op een ander continent, het geeft wat rust bij het strijden voor wat je lief is als je weet dat de achterdeur open is en je wegkunt als het hier niet meer te houden is voor een overtuigde niet-islamiet.
En ja, het verhaal van Rasoul heb ik inmiddels gelezen, ben nog steeds benieuwd wie dat geschreven heeft, het is allemaal (helaas) uitgekomen.

Thanks for your compassion, we still count on the US (like little childeren) to save and forgive us. Trying to be a bit more mature: I tried to safe myself and got me a house on another continent, just to have some peace while trying to fight for what I love (i.c. the Netherlands), it is nice to have a way out while doing that.
I read the book of Rasoul -still curious who wrote it- and yes (helas), it all came true.

Proftsbeard,
Bedankt voor het medeleven, we rekenen hier altijd op de US en gedragen ons onderwijl als kinderen die altijd weer alles vergeven wordt. Om mezelf iets volwassener te profileren: ik heb inmiddels ook een huis en verblijfsvergunning op een ander continent, het geeft wat rust bij het strijden voor wat je lief is als je weet dat de achterdeur open is en je wegkunt als het hier niet meer te houden is voor een overtuigde niet-islamiet.
En ja, het verhaal van Rasoul heb ik inmiddels gelezen, ben nog steeds benieuwd wie dat geschreven heeft, het is allemaal (helaas) uitgekomen.

Thanks for your compassion, we still count on the US (like little childeren) to save and forgive us. Trying to be a bit more mature: I tried to safe myself and got me a house on another continent, just to have some peace while trying to fight for what I love (i.c. the Netherlands), it is nice to have a way out while doing that.
I read the book of Rasoul -still curious who wrote it- and yes (helas), it all came true.

Proftsbeard,
Bedankt voor het medeleven, we rekenen hier altijd op de US en gedragen ons onderwijl als kinderen die altijd weer alles vergeven wordt. Om mezelf iets volwassener te profileren: ik heb inmiddels ook een huis en verblijfsvergunning op een ander continent, het geeft wat rust bij het strijden voor wat je lief is als je weet dat de achterdeur open is en je wegkunt als het hier niet meer te houden is voor een overtuigde niet-islamiet.
En ja, het verhaal van Rasoul heb ik inmiddels gelezen, ben nog steeds benieuwd wie dat geschreven heeft, het is allemaal (helaas) uitgekomen.

Thanks for your compassion, we still count on the US (like little childeren) to save and forgive us. Trying to be a bit more mature: I tried to safe myself and got me a house on another continent, just to have some peace while trying to fight for what I love (i.c. the Netherlands), it is nice to have a way out while doing that.
I read the book of Rasoul -still curious who wrote it- and yes (helas), it all came true.

Proftsbeard,
Bedankt voor het medeleven, we rekenen hier altijd op de US en gedragen ons onderwijl als kinderen die altijd weer alles vergeven wordt. Om mezelf iets volwassener te profileren: ik heb inmiddels ook een huis en verblijfsvergunning op een ander continent, het geeft wat rust bij het strijden voor wat je lief is als je weet dat de achterdeur open is en je wegkunt als het hier niet meer te houden is voor een overtuigde niet-islamiet.
En ja, het verhaal van Rasoul heb ik inmiddels gelezen, ben nog steeds benieuwd wie dat geschreven heeft, het is allemaal (helaas) uitgekomen.

Thanks for your compassion, we still count on the US (like little childeren) to save and forgive us. Trying to be a bit more mature: I tried to safe myself and got me a house on another continent, just to have some peace while trying to fight for what I love (i.c. the Netherlands), it is nice to have a way out while doing that.
I read the book of Rasoul -still curious who wrote it- and yes (helas), it all came true.

I know this is a bit off topic but people here have been talking about the changing demographics in the west (especially in Europe) towards an eventual majority Islamic society as a real threat. Looking at historical and present day evidence I would agree, that being the most logical conclusion to make.

One of the problems has been the seeming inability of the wests westernised/non-muslim citizens to have enough children. Alot of social policies have been tried but none have resulted in a western society having enough births to reach even replacement levels (though the US birth rate is just at replacement levels due to hispanic immigration).

A baby bonus and some other family friendly social security and tax measures have been introduced here in Australia. Interestingly since the baby bonus has been implemented there has been a significant spike up in the birth rate. The last 6 months have been the highest level of births in this country for 14 years (note the births during those last 14 years have until now been steadily decreasing), and the baby bonus has only been active during the last three months of these. Also further spikes upwards in the birth rate are expected as the baby bonus steadily increases.

I am probably being overly optimistic but maybe this kind of policy is the answer for a western civilisation seemingly unable to replenish itself. I am going to watch the increasing birth rate in my country with alot of interest because I know very well what is at stake.

P.S. here is one link to an article about my countries baby boom.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=625280

this article is a little better.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0%2C5744%2C12697054%255E2702%2C00.html

Just to reiterate:

"It seemed unthinkable to me that Coptic theologians hadn’t pondered Islam, and that there wouldn’t be any books or articles about Islam from their vantage point. A good topic for a dissertation, I thought. But within three seconds, the bishop had set me straight. No, there were no such books. He pointed out that right next to every church in Egypt is a mosque, its minaret just a bit higher than the neighboring church spire. And also that, especially when the Copts were holding a church service, the mosque’s amplifiers broadcast Islam’s message at full blast, so that it was usually plainly audible inside the church. All of this, he said, had to do with the respect for Islam which was mandatory for Christians in Egypt."

Salient point from the article. Is this the tolerance of 'beautiful' islam in a muslim-majority society?

Geoff

adela, I'm not so sure I agree with you about the left-wingers, at least not entirely. Nothing could be any more xenophobic, intolerant, triumphalist or dogmatic than Islam. If the suicidal, self-hating, guilt-ridden, left-wing destructionists are so smart, surely they must realize that with all its faults, Western Civilization is far more egalitarian than Islam.

But since these people are not mentally competent anyway, maybe you're right. It's difficult to comprehend such irrationality, but I suppose lunatics are supposed to be irrational. Nihilists who devote their lives to destroying the best the world has to offer and dream of replacing it with the worst are psychotic.

I'm not convinced that these very dangerous fools understand Islam. I think they are exploiting Islam much as it exploits Western naivete. They need allies to wage war against the mutual enemy but their ultimate goal is not an Islamic victory. Islam is using them and they are using Islam, each with a different objective. These are strange bedfellows for sure, and I do not forsee an amicable conclusion to their alliance.
.

I agree Susanp, I don't think that average people on the left have a clue about the real teachings of Islam. They just believe the Islam is peace and Islam liberates women mantra, and don't look any further.

Being pro-Arab, and anti-Israeli/America/Bush/West/Globalisation (and of course anti-Semitic) is frankly fashionable. Especially among young people and students, it’s mostly fashion. It’s the new Rock and Role; you are not cool, until you bash Israel, America, and the West in general. You don’t have to know why; all your peers are doing it and that’s what’s important. If you want to be really cool than wear a kaffeyah, that’s just so in right now.

When I ask these young people if they know anything about the history of the Middle-East or the culture of the Middle-East, they are quite happy to admit that they know nothing at all. Mostly we don’t have time to talk for long, as they are always in a hurry to some anti-Israel/America/Bush/West/Globalisation protest.

To be honest I’ve never met anybody from the left, who had any substantial knowledge of the Middle East. If it wasn’t so tragic it would be comical.

History repeats itself. The Russians were more than amused about all the support they got in the 60s 70s from the Communist all over Europe. They affectionately called them “useful idiots”. That’s what they really thought of them. And make no mistakes that’s exactly what the Mullahs and Muslim leaders really think of all those loud leftists.