This is just silly. What mechanism do the Dutch have in place to ensure that someone won't watch the film and then determine to enter and destroy the society that produced it? Also, licentiousness is not the key point. What mechanism do the Dutch have in place to ensure that they will not admit those who would still want to conquer and subjugate them under Sharia even if they were as strait-laced as the Amish?
From AP, with thanks to all who sent this in:
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - The camera focuses on two gay men kissing in a park. Later, a topless woman emerges from the sea and walks onto a crowded beach. For would-be immigrants to the Netherlands, this film is a test of their readiness to participate in the liberal Dutch culture.If they can't stomach it, no need to apply.
Despite whether they find the film offensive, applicants must buy a copy and watch it if they hope to pass the Netherlands' new entrance examination.
The test — the first of its kind in the world — became compulsory Wednesday, and was made available at 138 Dutch embassies.
Taking the exam costs $420. The price for a preparation package that includes the film, a CD ROM and a picture album of famous Dutch people is $75.
I, as a religiously observant Jew, would refuse to view such vulgar trash.
Holland is obviously not for me.
As mentioned, licentiousness is not the key. Where is the test for attitudes toward FUNDAMENTAL Western freedoms, such as individual liberty (no, you may not kill me 'cause I'm your daughter, and not a virgin), and free speech (those Mohammed cartoons again)?
What are the Dutch thinking??? Does their CD of "famous Dutch people" include any jurists who shaped the laws that resulted in their freedom? Does it include Theo van Gogh?
To not "hurt" the feelings of muslims the parts of kissing men and top less women on the beach have been removed out of the movies which are to be seen in muslim countries.
Shy Guy,
I'm a non religious Christian and I stand with you: this is disgraceful. And BTW I don't think watching men kiss or seeing a topless woman would actually really bother barbarians.
However, if the Dutch persist with this ridiculous censorship, then they at least ought to choose the correct movies. I suggest a new Godzilla movie: Godzilla Battles Mohammed. Or how about a filmed version of The Sermon on the Mount or Fiddler on the Roof - or even Gone With the Wind? If applicants for citizenship can watch this stuff .. including Scarlett O'hara sass Rhet Butler .. without murdering audience members - or themselves, maybe admission to Holland can be considered!
There must be lots of other movies that would make Islamists gag .. this could be fun .. any ideas?
Remember those stories of devout young Muslim men at Guantanamo who were "tortured" by having to watch women strip?
Muslim taqiyya merchants would pass the test, and probably secretly enjoy the "torment" that they were having to "endure" for the sake of Islam. Honest, strict Christians would fail.
Brought to you by the people who brought you hash bars, legalized prostitution, and heroin for the masses (anybody wanna get buzzed?) ...
-- Now -- A way to pay for all those boondoggles on the immigrant's nickel...
We bring you The most expensive soft porn tape ever...!
Folks! If they can make it through the tape, they're IN! And we get $420 bucks to help offset all the crime, the intensive care for botched clitorectomies etc., & increased security for our politicians, and, of course, all the hash, whores, and smack (if any is left over after all the crime, the intensive care for botched clitorectomies etc., & increased security for our politicians...)
Ah ... 2 more films for the acid test: "Submission" (by Theo van Gogh and Ali Hirrsi ) and ANYTHING by Dr. Wafa Sultan.
It is a good start-but those immigrants,who are starving in their native country,will be more than ready to meet any demands you put forward,till they enter the new country and settle. Then they show their real nature. Their holy books teach them to "pretend' tobe friends,and act like enemies of Islam in ainfedal country,till you get your goal.Allah will never forsake you as you are doing this for the sake of betterment of the Umma(Islamic world).
Instead of educating them by visual aids,the new immigrants should execute a contract to the effect,they will be abiding with the rules, and prevailing culture of the country,and never criticise,revoult,protest,burn,kill,loot,or create trouble inthe country.There will not be seperate foods such as halal in schools,planes,and in common eating places,and women will not cover their heads.DUTCH CULTURE AND FAITH PREVILS OVER OTHER IMPORTED CULTURES AND FAITHS,AND IN CASE OF A CLASH,DUTCH SYSTEM PREVAILS.If they fail to follow any of the above conditions,they will be deported,and for this,they must be ready and singn up an agreement before they are allowed inside the country.
One other best thing to do by all European and western countries, including Australia,before allowing these immigrants inside are:
* Immigrate only those people, who have a record of assimilation with your own country's people and policies.For instance,Chinese,East Europeans,Latino Chrsitians,the people from the new EU countries- They will work hard,and at the same time will not be a problem to you.
* Just like the Middle Eastern Muslim countries are doing,dont give them citizenship. If you are desperate to immigrate from Muslim countries, just give them work-permits,and as soon the work contract is over,they have to leave the country. Countries like Dubai,Saudi Arabia ,and Isreal are doing the same-why not us?. It will prevent these people to burn our subways,and kill our own people,or shout 'Alla is great' in our countreis,after getting fat in our own soil.
* Dismiss the conept of Multiculturism. These immigrants ,instead of appriciating our broad mindedness,take advantage of us,and humiliate our own people.They file cases against our long standing customs and faiths like Our Lords prayer in schools,Ten commandments etc.All our sacrifices are taken as our weaknesses. change our constitution to that effect- IF WE HAVE TO SURVIVE IN OUR OWN COUNTRIS.
I don't think watching men kiss or seeing a topless woman would actually really bother barbarians.
No, I don't think so either. I think this shows the Dutch have no conception of the problem.
It would be very interesting, however, to monitor propspective immigrants' brainwaves, using a 256-sensor EEG cap - this allows source-localization of electrical events in the brain - while they were shown a series of different videos. For example, they might be shown Wafa Sultan speaking on Al-Jazeera TV. What areas of different subjects' brains respond to something like that?
So it's five hundred bucks to get in, and we have not even seen the movie yet. The price of admission alone is enough to discourage some people. Others like Shy Guy would not see it if it was free. I suppose it would turn off any number of religious people and those believing in social and moral decency. So who actually gets through this filter? Muslims who close their eyes during the most controversial parts? (Do they peek?). Assorted loose people with loose morals...and, 'if it feels good do it', types?
Basically, I think this test is useless, except to collect money. They will let in as many undesirables as they will keep out.
Yojimbo ..
.."monitor propspective immigrants' brainwaves.."
You don't think relying upon taking an ax to your seat-mates neck would tell the story? :)
I'm not sure I understand the intent of this video. Isn't it kind of cold to be swimming/walking topless in the Netherlands?
What if every subscriber to Al-Manar or Al-Jazeera, in the West, were to discover that, as the family gathered round the television set for some suitable fare, as for example those carefully videotaped planned attacks on Infidels with I.E.D.'s or suicide bombs, where the camera records, and the television set displays, the black-balaklavaded, or keffiyahed warriors, the explosions that tear apart a Humvee or a tank or just a bus, and then the sight of those Infidel soldiers or civilians (what's the difference, after all?), trapped and set afire (perfect for the whole family, not like those violent shows that non-Muslims like to watch, where its all unbecoming and pointless fantasy, rather than noble reality), dying before the camera, or dead, the camera going over and over so that viewers may delectate over the inspiring sight -- what if those subscribers, those good family men, with their wives and children watching too (and why not?) found out that as everywhere in the Western world, somehow such broadcasts would suddenly be hacked into by someone or some group, and that there would appear on the screen the most risque, oh more than risque, images that the Western world could provide, and that such views, imprinted on young Muslim retinas, could do psychic damage, so it was best not to watch Al-Jazeera, al-Manar, and so on -- and possibly, best not to remain in the dangerously corrupting atmosphere of that West altogether. For while it was a good thing to remain to multiply and in such multiplying, at great cost to Infidel taxpayers and the cohesion of various Infidel societies, so as to eventually overwhelm them and inherit their lands, for Allah and for Islam, there were limits to what Muslims should be asked to endure for the sake of such conquest through Da'wa and demography, and perhaps this kind of thing made the atmosphere so intoleable that it was time to pack up and head home to Dar al-Islam.
I think this is a good first step that's being taken in response to the actions of ignorant and intolerant Muslims. Muslims who apparently expect the societies they immigrate to to change to accommodate them rather then trying to fit in to their host societies. The video is an educational tool to show immigrants some of what they can expect to see if they come to the Netherlands. If they don't like it then don't come, there is no right to immigrate to any country.The fact that new immigrants have to go through an educational process should also make easier to weed out undesirables as well as expelling troublemakers who lied to get into the Netherlands.
This film idea is not only foolhardy but superficial. The government needs to go beyond that and research Islamic ideology, and, once they have that information, adjust their immigration policy accordingly.
(I like Yojimbo's idea though. If that neuroscientific test could be applied using a more comprehensive set of stimuli...like, oh, say, Mohammad cartoons, pictures of a Koran being accidentally dropped on the floor, someone petting a dog (or a pig!), someone criticizing Islamic beliefs, etc.).
At first blush, I scoffed at this, but there is some sense to it. Afterall, they are going to be asked about the aspects of the film. I think taqiyya will be more difficult. I really like the fees. That is a great idea. Highly discouraging. Put up 'barriers' in an endless succession that will expose the fraudulent immigration seeker. If immigration to Holland collapses, it's a success to me.
Hugh ...
"... somehow such broadcasts would suddenly be hacked into by someone or some group, and that there would appear on the screen the most risque, oh more than risque, images that the Western world could provide, ... "
Love it! A few suggestions for: "the most risque, oh more than risque, images that the Western world could provide, .."
Private Benjamin w/ Goldie Hawn
Legally Blond w/Reese Withspoon
Monty Python's The Meaning of Life
Anything w/John Wayne
Janet Jackson's Breast
Daisytoo,
:-)
It was a piece of whimsy.
I see that while I was posting that your thoughts, too, had gone to the Wafa Sultan video.
I think the results would be interesting. How does one tell a wolf in sheep's clothing? For all I know, intelligence agencies may already be looking at their personnel in such ways. I believe they train people to notice very fleeting expressions on people's faces which most of us don't see - I suppose, it's a low tech version of the same thing.
But this is a numbers game really. The problem across Europe is not only with immigrants but with their children and their children's children. Sometimes it seems the parents were pleased to get out of wherever they had been, but their children become radicalized:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/12_4_the_barbarians.html
The Dutch should stop playing games - stop selling out the nation to the notion of not making "unfair" discrimations between different groups of prospective immigrants - and simply disallow any immigration from Muslim countries.
What matters abstract and flawed (flawed because they don't take account of the concrete situation) notions of "fairness" or the survival of the Netherlands?
Because that's what it comes down to.
Before too long, if someone asks "Wanna get stoned?" in a dark alley in Amsterdam, perhaps you'd better counter-ask "What religion are you first?" It might be wise, given the trends we see...
What about an EEG or EKG whatever is the heart monitor. Have that blood pressure cup around their arm while watching movies and answering questions. Watch their blood pressure rise as they see uncovered women. Working women. And anything else that would upset them.
But seriously, ask each one..ok, Akmed, you were a goatherder in the desert, what do you want to be when you enter our country?
Yojimbo,
Thanks for the link .. horrifying ... and thanks too for the whimsy .. edifying.
Ref. the question about " How does one tell a wolf in sheep's clothing? "
W/my husband's permission .. I'm taking this from an e-mail he just moments ago sent me: "In football terminology - ran many plays and gained no yards. But, that doesn't mean I won't make a touchdown on the next play (but then again, by induction, the more I go no where, the less likely I am to score). You may recall that induction is the mathematical process whereby one infers a general rule from specific data, viz : the sun rose this morning and on all prior mornings, therefore it will rise tomorrow."
Wolf detector: Muslims have abused your social order this morning and on all prior mornings; therefore they will do so tomorrow.
And using my methodology ... (which is a far different kind of logic than my husband's :) if they don't even bother to wear sheep's clothing .. and instead don dillajabs (sp.?) and burkhas - then Uh uh .. keep moving right back to where you once belonged.
BTW .. the logic of my heart also informs me my husband will score plenty more touchdowns -- & that I can rely upon completely!
jsia,
Ha! That would be soooo prudent!!!
Aside from the silly headline-grabbing aspect of this, I simply do not believe that it is possible to design an entrance test that can with any degree of reliability detect whether or not a prospective immigrant is or may in the future plot sedition. Does anyone know to the contrary?
I find this Dutch idea of freedom and their notion of Western values of NO value and nothing more than unbridled license; far from the notion of ordered liberty which our American founding fathers and mothers meant to bequeath us. Hash houses and porn are symptoms of a society as sick and enslaved as any Wahhabi backwater. These aren't the true freedoms with which our Creator endowed us and certainly not worth dying for.
As an alternative, how about giving an essay test to every would-be immigrant AND EVERY DUTCH citizen. The test would be to write an essay defending or refuting the concepts found in the following quote by Edmund Burke (1791):
"Men are qualified for civil liberty, in exact proportion to their disposition to put moral chains upon their own appetites. It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters." Bonus points given for a paragraph explaining in one's own words the truth of Seneca's statement: "The worst form of servitude is to be a slave of one's appetites."
The kind of answers that will have to be given to carefully-phrased questions that become part of a nation's required naturalization process, may be difficult for some to feign. Not all, but some, just won't be able to manage. Furthermmore, evidence of perjury -- that someone swearing to such-and-such when evidence arises that he could not possibly have been telling the truth, may justifiably be used to strip people of citizenship.
Essentially, one wishes to know whether or not someone swearing allegiance to the United States is, in fact, capable of being loyal to the principles of the Constitution, including above all the rights enshrined in the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and not temporarily on a "while-we-wait-for-an-increase-in-Muslim-power" basis, but wholeheartedly and forever. This is not a demand about allegiance to a particular party or distribution or maldistribution of wealth. It has to do with the laws, customs, manners, understandings that created this particular country (fill in the name of whatever Infidel country you wish), and which country, in turn, helped to create.
And now we have entered into Frostian precincts, and a cold inauguration day, and the wind whipping the sheets of paper held in one hand while the other wipes a forelock from a forehead, and we hear again that "the land was ours before we were the land's."
"gay men kissing in a park. Later, a topless woman emerges from the sea and walks onto a crowded beach"
These two things are in no way 'licencious' or 'soft porn' to the liberal European mind, perhaps they are to US citizens.
Two people kissing is something you can see on any European street. If you thing gay people kissing is somehow more 'licencious' than any other couple, you're definitely not ready for European culture.
As for toplessness - this is another long-standing European tradition and the WHOLE POINT is that the naked human body is not a sexual item, but just our natural form. People who see breasts as necessarily sexual are the types who oppose breastfeeding in public.
When I grew up in Europe, we often spent the summer in Yugoslavia at a nudist beach. Children and adults were simply relaxed and free about it - no big deal. The people who were embarrassed and preferred to wear swimsuits were the teenagers.
What I'm telling you is this: being embarrassed about the human body is an ADOLESCENT additude. Islam needs to grow up, and so do some of the people here.
I don't know whether this initiative will help much, but from what I can read here it doesn't seem at all licencious.
kafira
it may be, but they have wonderful summers too; it's whimsical.
bevc - excellent, couldn't agree more.
An ineffably stupid immigration measure -like blasting horseflies with a shotgun -when all they need to do is ask one direct question:
-Does your religious viewpoint prevent you from swearing a higher allegiance to the laws our land, The Netherlands, than to the laws of your religion?
No movies, no pricy tests, nothing but this question.
(Since the answer must be: "My religion is my only law!", the unadaptive immigrants can then return to practice their faith freely in their glorious homelands.)
And, for immigrants who can pass this question of allegiance, require them to know the usual "facts about the country", which every land has a right to demand of all those seeking entrance. William of Orange to Theo Van Gogh, with Rembrandt, Vermeer, Candy Dulfer and Rutger Hauer in between.
Instead of fixing the one hole in the one dike, the Dutch are shooting a million p.c. corks at every wall in the country, hoping that, by brownian chance, one will seal the actual hole. All to deflect from their real, sole intention:
-Restricting religious fanatics from parasitizing their land.
I appreciate the Dutch more when they are more pragmatic.
Or did the public slaughter of Theo Van Gogh geld [sic] their old honesty, directness, and common sense?
bevc - On an ethical level, your general view is hard to fault. But not agreeing with or being capable of justifying the quotes you cite is hardly a reason for exclusion from a country! In any case, many radical Muslims could give unqualified agreement to the statement that "the worst form of servitude is to be a slave of one's appetites".
The object some in the above comments are missing is that, according to the linked article, the film will show certain scenes that immigrants will be seeing during day-to-day life in Dutch society.
To those here who say they would refuse to see this film in order to enter the country: Fine, don’t go to the Netherlands, either! If you cannot stand to see such scenes in a film, how do you expect to handle seeing actual men kissing in parks and actual topless women at beaches?
As to the surety of the film being less than 100% effective, remember that it is hopefully only a filter. Man hath not yet crafted locks fellow man could not breach (which is where the household favorite shotgun enters the scene). If any such measure can raise the bar even enough to keep, say, another 20% of the bad guys out, then it very well may be worth it. Of course, the real solution (the shotgun) is a complete moratorium on immigration by Muslims. A careful exception may be added for ex-Muslim refugees such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali who would be willing to disavow Islam publicly, and perhaps have a pork chop dinner at the immigration office or urinate on a Koran; I am not sure taqiyya would allow faking one’s way through that, and besides, any few later found practicing Islam could be deported. But while a ban on the Religion of Death may be infeasible due to political idiocy, stop-gap measures such as immigration tests are worthwhile.
Peripherally, I must note that many of the comments here demonstrate gross ignorance of Netherlands society. Contrary to popular stereotypes, it is not a land of free heroin and junkies run amok. (And by the way, it is not “Holland”—that name refers only to two counties in the Netherlands. If you are going to opine on a nation, at least get your nomenclature correct.) The Netherlands government enacts the policies it does precisely because they want to keep the hash out of the dark alleys alluded to by one commenter above.
As to the society itself, the Netherlands’ success upon which they pride themselves has been integration of a broad spectrum of social elements, from Calvinist Christian conservatives to sexually liberated swingers to everybody in between; there are vastly different communities living in tight quarters together, and they all manage to live side by side in relative peace. Jews, too, supposedly; although if I visit myself I am not sure either way what my experience will be as an ardent “anti-Israelism equals Nazism” Gentile Zionist. (I hope Netherlanders live up to their professed standards.) The fly in the ointment is that now the Muslims are showing up and far from living peacefully amongst others, they are behaving as their usual barbaric murderous selves. Hopefully this predictable result will spark a deeper change of Netherlanders’ naïveté. Anyhow, at least read up a little before snidely pontificating—talk to a few Netherlanders—or maybe even visit and find the truth on the ground I might hope to see someday (but then you might see men kissing and women topless! the horror!).
P.S.—Evidently I came late to the party when I commented once and again on the long “Polygamy” thread from a few days back. Besides laying down a few words on the controversy some had so hotly debated therein, I had some salient points about keeping a unified, focused, and principled fight against the cancer of Islam. Much of my exegesis seems relevant here, where a few people seem more interested in snarking about Dutch prostitutes than directing fire at the common enemy.
The Dutch need to modify their constitution so that any immigrants or children of immigrants who disrupt and do not adapt adequately to Dutch society can be jailed, have their property confiscated and then be deported to the homeland of their forefathers. Send 'em back where they came from if they can't be civilized.
Lili said:
I am an American, and I do not find those “licentious” or “soft porn”. Watch your stereotypes, please; the “liberal European mind” is quite far from having a monopoly (or even a feeble purchase) on common sense. ;-)
Come to think of it, though, a better immigrant filter would be to show hardcore porn. Hardcore gay porn, at that. With the “receiving” fellow being named Mohammed. And in the next scene, having Mo’ being beaten by a most decidedly unveiled dominatrix with a pig-leather whip (ok, bisexual porn). My, do the Muslims give us plenty of emotional buttons to push.
I posit that humanity’s natural form is sexual, in consideration of sex qua sex as a state of purity. But that is off-topic, besides being a view highly offensive to Mohammedans who degrade sex in all its forms. (And if Islam presumes to hold authority on every issue, then every issue becomes a weapon against Islam. See?)
I wrote:
In other words, if the Dutch decide to leverage videos offensive to Islam, they should quit playing games and just go the whole hog. (Sorry. Could. Not. Resist.)
Why let them in in the first place?
londongirl wrote:
What are you, stupid? Amsterdam will be so much more beautiful when it looks like Gaza City. The production of IEDs will bolster the faltering economy. Uppity womenfolk will be put in their places, and crass homosexuals will be expunged from society (but anybody who so desires will be able to rape little boys “like pearls”, satisfying the NAMBLA lobby). Literacy will plummet, leading to the saving of many trees. Chain-smoking trash-talkers like Theo van Gogh will be dealt with properly. The Jewish Question will have, at long last, a Final Solution. A boot will stamp on a human face for all eternity. The benefits are endless and obvious.
""gay men kissing in a park. Later, a topless woman emerges from the sea and walks onto a crowded beach"
These two things are in no way 'licencious' or 'soft porn' to the liberal European mind, perhaps they are to US citizens.
Two people kissing is something you can see on any European street. If you thing gay people kissing is somehow more 'licencious' than any other couple, you're definitely not ready for European culture.
As for toplessness - this is another long-standing European tradition and the WHOLE POINT is that the naked human body is not a sexual item, but just our natural form. People who see breasts as necessarily sexual are the types who oppose breastfeeding in public.
When I grew up in Europe, we often spent the summer in Yugoslavia at a nudist beach. Children and adults were simply relaxed and free about it - no big deal. The people who were embarrassed and preferred to wear swimsuits were the teenagers.
What I'm telling you is this: being embarrassed about the human body is an ADOLESCENT additude. Islam needs to grow up, and so do some of the people here.
I don't know whether this initiative will help much, but from what I can read here it doesn't seem at all licencious."
-Lili
I cannot begin to tell you how much I agree. It was like reading myself think. I know you disagreed with me about the Koran/bibel issue (it was tongue-in-check), but I was not really serious.
I grew up with partial nudity at home and at the beach, due to my European background; it was NEVER a sexual issue. I was told that when my parents wanted to let me go to the beach without swim trunks (age 4), Americans (at the beach) were horrified that a small child's penis was showing and demanded it be covered up at once! My parents were very embarrassed. Needless to say, they never did that again. Even having grown up in the US, I am still amazed at American's squeamishness and crazy attitudes about such things as nudity and moderate alcohol consumption.
Alcohol was always available growing up. However, my family rareily consumed alcohol. I served alcohol to guests and it was freely available in the home, yet I never had any without permission. The exception to that rule was a social event like Christmas or New Years Eve (in which case I'd get a spritzer or Champagne). As a result, I never had an alcohol problem. If an American child were discovered having a glass of wine at age 10 or 11, the sirens would ring and the child would be taken away immediately! Never mind the movie on kissing or nudity!
How many Americans would pass this test?
-chuss
"Come to think of it, though, a better immigrant filter would be to show hardcore porn. Hardcore gay porn, at that. With the “receiving” fellow being named Mohammed. And in the next scene, having Mo’ being beaten by a most decidedly unveiled dominatrix with a pig-leather whip (ok, bisexual porn)."
-above
Well ok, they can make such a flick for you, but it will have to be made with no credits attached. lol
ouch, typo alert above.
I like the way they're thinking, insofar as they're looking for creative ways to filter out prospective immigrants who would like to bring in a Saudi-style society.
But, as many other comments have pointed out, how "offended" is too offended? I might fail the test myself. Is it more important not to be offended, or to be able to handle being offended in a civilized, nonviolent way? And how'd they do that-- a polygraph test?
Nice idea, poorly executed. But it is the first time we've seen something on this scale in Europe that would say: "This is who we are. Take it or leave it."
I wonder if that Dutch integration minister Robert wrote about was in on this...
Shinoliite wrote:
First of all, anybody with a strong visceral reaction to the Dutch film as described should not be in the Netherlands. This, like the Danish cartoons, is mild stuff; unless the AP article is wildly inaccurate, they are merely depicting commonplace public behavior! If you grow livid upon seeing it in a film—even if you manage to keep your seething on the inside—how are you supposed to assimilate into Netherlands society?
As to my slightly more controversial idea, well, here is one conceivable test: If you start blowing things up and beheading people, or raving about how you want to, you fail.
Speaking of which: The porn industry in the US is always pounding their drums about freedom of speech. After I make my Mohammed porn, I shall expect them to defend me in the ensuing fracas—just as the New York Times has so valiantly protected our right to cartoons.
(And guess what else is legal in the Netherlands? Imagine the possibilities of Mohammed the Boor trysting with a boar. Guaranteed not to bore. When earning a fatwa, why not go the whole hog, indeed?)
By the way, I believe it incumbent on me to highlight one point I may unintentionally have obscured. Freedom of speech is often defended with the aphorism, “If you don’t like it, you can change the channel.” My idea would press one step further than that. However, the Dutch film is depicting public behavior that immigrants will encounter; and when they see it, they will not be able to “change the channel”. Therefore, the film in question appears to be less about testing people’s tolerance to possible offense, and more about gauging how people will react to the actual Netherlands society where they wish to reside.
I dont think this is such a bad idea. Sure, the people who plan to be immigrants to Holland for the purpose of terrorism wont be affected by this.
But remember, most Muslims, extremists or not who apply for a visa to Europe do so with the purpose of settling down there. Such people will look for a place which is more in tune with their culture; a place which doesnt frown upon the hijab, one which is more conservative.
So, when the Dutch insist on every aspiring Arab to view this, they are effectively preventing the conservatives. IMO, they have started earning a name amongst the Arabs as a bad pplace for pious Muslims.
And if this move proves to cultivate a reluctance among Arabs to settle down in Holland, purpose solved.
Every European country should do something similar. Perhaps, the Arabs should be made to sit for an hour in a strip bar, amidst gay strippers and drinkers too.
I wonder whether they'll show the video to minors too.
In the above post, I meant "every Arab aspiring for citizenship", not "every aspiring Arab".
The latter will have no takers.
are you people forgetting that immigrants are people? not "barbarians" to study their reactions. honestly, I can show some porno to my 78 year old catholic neighbor and Im sure that'd give him a heart attack. Seriously, this site is startin to make me sick. Don't pretend you can know how all muslims think, im a muslim and I find all these comments a bit outrageous, however I think that may be because im from the bay area, a highly diversified place for those who havent visited. Maybe ya'll are from Alabama or something but I find
this to be extremely ignorant
GOOD DAY INDEED!
Mohd Is Satan wrote:
Do minors get to go out in public in the Netherlands? You know, to places like parks and beaches? Where they might see men kissing or women topless, just like in the film?
Ammar wrote:
These immigrants are barbarians. They are barbarians like the Muslim who shot and stabbed Theo van Gogh, leaving a death threat to a public official pinned to Mr. van Gogh’s body with a knife. They are barbarians like the Muslim thugs who gang-rape women for hours, sneering at them that they deserve rape because they do not wear a veil—and like the Muslim immigrants who bring with them barbaric practices of family violence they inflict upon their own sisters and daughters. They are barbarians who commit murder and arson over—wait for it—cartoons. They are barbarians like the Muslim youth who roam like wild Ishmaeli wolfpacks, beating up elderly Flemish folk and committing other violent crime for kicks. They are barbarians who beat their own children into being good Muslims and stunt their own children’s minds with that putrescent anachronism called the Koran. In short, they are the barbarians who bring with them the filthy, decrepit rape-and-death-cult of Islam.
Causing them discomfiture—or even a heart attack, as you later alluded so absurdly—is the least anybody should do to them.
Ibid:
Now that you are done with your own ignorant speculation, may I hazard a guess as to from where you originate, that you consider barbarians to be not-barbarians? I have twenty-two top wagers in mind, and thirty-something more after that.
This will only encourage them to kill us. It is "proof" that "all" of "us" are evil.
Either that or the Jihadi's will be trying to contain their hard on's thinking about all the sex slaves they will get when they conquer Holland.
I can see it now, one says to the other....
"Oh look Mohammed there all gay, that leaves all the women as booty for us. Look there's a topless one now - the Dutch are advertising them to us, they want me to take her."
"Yes Mohammed Assassin, Allah always provides".
A better test would be to make them watch a Dutch soldier in Iraq shooting and killing their fellow Muslims. Then make them eat an entire pig.
If they protest, then they can't come in.
I don't think the acid test for citizenship needs to include images that are either sexual or violent or porcine. Just do a slide show of Flags of the Western World and if they start reaching for their lighters then home again home again jiggety jig ..
"Last Tango in Paris " ?
If it seems ridiculous, and nobody has put much stock in the idea, ever, it's probably not a great idea.
It's hard to believe the continent of great thinkers just turned out a soft-core loyalty test. I have HBO, TMC, CIN, and Starz. Does that mean I'm a loyal Dutch citizen?
Hey, let's all move to the Netherlands! I never get to watch racy films in the States! (My wife would kill me).
The gap between the US and Europe on this is largely overstated. The "prudish" US has a higher birthrate, so it's not like we're wasting all our time watching golf or something.
Some activities, for that matter, are very much like golf-- more fun to participate in than to watch. The Dutch should try it; it would be a more prudent way to garner more Dutch citizens than this particular screening process.
well Im new to forums so I dont kno how to quote, but this is for Jonathon quince.
Listen dude, there not BARBARIANS, sounds to me like your only focusing on the negative side of Islam,
and sure you can guess where im from,
Im from the bay area...swhat I said before,
also im german, israeli, and moroccan,
my dad is an Imam of a oakland mosque and he raised me to choose whichever religion I wanted,
NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE BAD PEOPLE
stop the hate
"I can show some porno to my 78 year old catholic neighbor and Im sure that'd give him a heart attack"
A couple kissing and a topless woman at the beach are not porno - what the Dutch authorities seem to be trying to get across is that these are normal, everyday, public scenes in the Netherlands.
I'll say it again, because many of you don't seem to get it: a topless woman on a European beach is in no way more 'sexual' than a topless man. Europeans don't sexualise breasts at all times. And a kiss between gay men is the same as a kiss between you and your spouse/partner: sometimes it's just a peck, a sign of affection, greeting - and sometimes it's sexual. How appropriate the more sexual kiss is in public, depends entirely on the local culture.
Now let's all think of a sick culture that sexualises ALL PARTS of the female body at all time, thus forcing women to cover themselves in tents. Hmmm? Who could that be???
Burke, Seneca, Augustine, Paul, the list is endless and on and on and on down the centuries the stale voices of little minds echo. They try for ever to stifle the human spirit, to lay down rules of their own devising that, according to them, we must, yes must, all live by. Not for them the joys of discovery of oneself, not for them the drinking deep of the cup of life, not for them the sampling of the pleasures we were built to enjoy. No, none of that. Instead, just their thin-lipped vinegar smiles and their verbal bile designed to bleed, little by litle, all joy from the spirit, from life - designed to turn you into the same spiteful, venomous characters that they became. They have no trust in their fellow men at all, but what is worse, oh so very much worse, when another man stumbles on the path of life such people do not reach down and help him to his feet again and with a kind word set him back on his route - no, in their petty-mindedness they merely revile him, mock him, laugh at him, kick him aside and preen themselves on how much more moral a person they are.
Lord, spare me from the charity of such as these and keep me safe from the mohammedan hordes.
At least the Dutch are trying. They're waking up, albeit slowly. This may be a wrong step but it is a step - something not seen before. It is also the first sign of a dawning realisation that multiculturalism doesn't, and cannot, work.
ahahahahahah!!!! Eat a pig. ahahahahhahaha !!!!
3rdtime....too funny.
look lili, every culture has its problems, all im sayin is you guys need to stop hating so much, really, Sure the arab culture has is sick in some ways, so is the american culture! after all we are the fattest unhealthiest nation on the earth, so stfu already
Start with an oath to the host country above all else, sworn to on the Quran.
Follow up with jobs working for women bosses. That'll put taqqiya to the test.
Re this "shame of the body" nonsense-picture your naked mother or father taking a seat at the Sunday breakfast table and folding his leg, hiking a foot up onto his chair. The "horizon" is wide open. Appealing and natural, right? Yuck. This has nothing to do with prudishness-it has to do with keeping your breakfast in your gut. I don't watch people picking their buggers or defecating, or dogs licking their genitals, either. Go ahead and call me a prude; I'll stick with "civilized".
Ammar, this is a site where we talk about our concerns regarding Islamism. There are many other sites where other cultures' shortcomings are discussed.
I don't hate muslims, though you seem to have interpreted my post in particular in that way. In fact I'm becoming interested in supporting the Free Muslims Coalition who are seeking reform.
I do have a healthy concern about anyone who tries to restrict my freedom and rights, and currently the greatest threat I can see in that direction is from Islamism, though if I lived in other countries I can see other threats and other signs of 'sick culture' that I would be active against. I don't live in the U.S., btw.
When I said 'a sick culture that sexualises all parts of the female body', everyone can actually interpret that how they like. To me, it includes cultures that submit to sharia law.
And no, I certainly will not 'stfu', and I ask Robert whether someome posting that kind of abuse could please be banned?
Why is it that the standard response to something they don't like is abuse and violence?
Ammar -
I certainly do not hate mohammedans as people, that would be wrong of me and foolish. I do hate the satanic belief system that corrupts the minds of people like you. I wish there was something I could do to cure you of your devil-worshipping ways, but I am realistic enough to know that there is not, at present, such a cure.
However, if you keep reading on this site you may one day manage to slough of the evil shackles of the mind that mohammedanism actually is. Perhaps, for you, this site is the only cure that exists at present.
Lili -
What does 'stfu' mean? Remember, I am in my fifties and new to all this internet stuff so obviously not up to date on 'youthspeak'.
Generally I manage to work out 'breves from context but this one has me stumped. Judging by your reaction it is obviously not very nice.
And what's 'btw'?
BTW means by the way.
Ah, got it. Presumably, 'by the way'.
Sorry,I can be slow at times.
But, now , I don't know what stfu means either. Too old I guess.
Thank-you, freewoman.
You're welcome.
Freewoman -
The power of Google - all one has to do is type define:stfu and it tells you all you need to know; it works for words, as well. Magic dictionary in my magic box, I love it. Why did nobody show me this earlier?
Apparently it means 'Shut the f**k up'.
Now I see why Lili reacted. So would I.
Ammar -
Naughty, naughty boy. Do not use words like 'stfu'. English is full of perfectly polite ways of saying what you mean. It is the largest and most subtle language in the world. Use it properly.
Certiorari - Paul's book is in the same book, the Bible, as is Song of Songs. I think you are getting him out of context (if you are talking about the same Paul)
3rdtimelucky -
I was hoping that no one would spot that particular flaw in my somewhat overblown rant about puritan killjoys. on this site I should have known better.
I was talking about the same Paul - the Paul that told women to shut-up for they had nothing to say. Paul - urgh - that particular Christian makes my flesh creep. What a self-righteous prig.
Lili - you will find that many in the USA and Australia for that matter will disagree with over nudity (let alone Gay issues), and no, we are not all Muslims.
But it is why we live in a democracy, so that the people can decide to make laws via elected representatives. It seems in the USA, Australia that most groups, Christians, Atheists, Budhists, HIndu's, Humanists, even your average moron can accept this process.
Well except for one..........a Koran believer (most of us just call them Muslims!)
And Shinoliite has a point - the USA and Australia (despite the abortion rate) are still having enough infidel babies to keep our heads above the Islamic tide (just).
I for one would NOT like my child to witness Gays kissing or women who are topless on a regular public beach. Which is why I don't live in the Netherlands. NO ONE has the right to force that down my child's neck (and I'm sure many Muslims will feel the same way).
Here in Oz if you want to behave like that you can go to certain beaches. Other beaches are more orientated towards traditional family values (the main public beaches, well that is at least when your local Mohammedian isn't raping and beating the crap out of our lifesavers all in the name of expressing their religion).
If the Dutch like that sort of thing (or most of the EU for that matter) - good for them. It's all moot, after all, within 30years from now the indigenous Dutch will be accepting our "conservative ways" in the USA and Australia as they come here as refugees from Islamic Eurabia (or "breed" themselves out of existance - what ever happens first).
Some may see this video/test as a first step. Mark my words, all it will do will cause the Muslims to have a "justification" to wage Jihad against us. It shows how "low" Europe really is. They will use this video in their Mosques, as proof that European soceity is collapsing, and that they are the rightfull heirs.
Better to make them eat pig!
The Netherlands is one of the most densely populated nations on earth. They have every right to hang out the FULL sign and end immigration entirely.
List of countries by population density
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_population_density
Certiorari - you are seeing it out of context - he wrote it back in a time when women were not educated, and he was saying that as such they had no right to preach (note: he did not say that they shouldn't be educated; which in Revalation shows that BOTH young women AND men will speak out). But yes - I can see how many see his writings this way. It disturbed me a little when I first read such things, until I spoke to a Christian who was right into Jewish/Greek culture of the time (BTW - She was a woman I spoke to - and would have to be one of the best preachers I've ever heard! She also said that many a male preacher has used Paul against her - but she cuts them down big time!)
"And no, I certainly will not 'stfu', and I ask Robert whether someome posting that kind of abuse could please be banned?"
I really wish they could get a handle on those sort of postings, Lilith, and Robert has posted warnings a number of times. But I still see various rants and rude comments here way too much. You will have to pick out the insightful and objective remarks and ignore the rest. Or just stick to the updates and read Robert's books and anything else you can on Jihad past, present and future, which it sounds like you already have.
All the best,
Mac
When I said 'a sick culture that sexualises all parts of the female body', everyone can actually interpret that how they like. To me, it includes cultures that submit to sharia law. -Lili
yah its bad how they do that, and I kno you dont hate muslims, but are you seriously afraid there going to take away your freedom? thats alittle absurd to me for a 50 year old woman to worry about.
wow you cant travel in the mideast without wearing
a scarf, OH NOES
anyways to Certiorari, your sick, were called Muslims not muhammadens, this aint the mid 20th century anymore, what are you in your late 90's?
as for this forum, im gonna delete my account, I think you guys views are a bit old fashioned and intolerent.
Thanks Mac, I find it strange that he picked on me with his abusive comment, when others had posted others he clearly found 'hateful'. Ah, the mysteries of the Islamist mind...
“STFU” is Internet parlance for “Shut The Fuck Up”. Abusive and churlish. More suited to kiddi3z in IRC than to intellectual discussion amongst mature adults, as Ammar ought one day to learn.
Ammar also garners demerits on reading comprehension vis-à-vis what I said about where he originated. (Bad as the public schools are, I somehow doubt he acquired his breathtaking English-language skills in this country.) We are now expected to take lectures on how “ignorant” we are from he who insinuates that all Americans are fat, that all residents of Alabama are hicks, and that all of us are from Alabama. But then, he has earned a *plonk* for many other reasons—which means, again in Internet-speak, “I shall henceforth ignore him and I recommend you do likewise.”
3rdtimelucky wrote:
Good dhimmi thinking. At that, the Netherlands ought to veil all their women, stone all their gays, and torture Ayaan Hirsi Ali five times a day until she “returns” to Islam. And refrain from ever mentioning the moon demon or his child-raping false prophet (oops!). Perhaps then, the Muslims will love us.
More rationally speaking, it is our moral obligation to do everything we can to “encourage” them. Do it with cartoons, do it with words, and if you live in the Netherlands, do it with videographic depictions of Dutch people living their everyday lives in parks and on beaches. Perhaps by the time Mecca goes up in a mushroom cloud bright enough to summon the 12th imam, they might get the idea that “we” don’t like them, either.
Shinoliite wrote:
In golf, the object is to put the ball in the hole with the stick… Ahem. Low birthrates amongst civilized peoples are a well-known problem I often ponder, but unfortunately outside the scope of this site. On the other side, the Muslims breed “like mosquitoes”—in the momentarily honest words of Mullah Krekar, an Al Qaeda-linked Islamic leader who was granted refugee status in Norway (this was covered by JihadWatch). I, of course, would be accused of racism for using the same words.
guiltfree wrote:
This is wrong on so many levels, I just have to say: If you care to debate this in a forum where it is not wildly off-topic, I am sure I can rejoin in a discussion that I would hope would leave at least one of us enlightened. Suffice to say, those who implicitly equate genitalia with defecation usually entertain some odd paraphilias; and not everybody would uncomfortably fixate on their parents’ genitalia simply because such are on display. Not even all civilized people, I assure you.
Well, all, I am off for the evening for to recline ’neath good Luna’s silv’ry watch (for the moon-god pretender rules her not). I shall surely check in on this thread once again on the morrow. Good night, and don’t let the modern-day nuclear-obsessed Hamans of the world bite.
Bye bye Ammar, check out some more 'tolerant' sites, I'd recommend AskImmam - really great advice about the kind of lifestyle Islamism would like us all to follow.
And don't worry, I have no desire to visit the Middle East - why do you think migration patters are almost entirely from there to the west? Because the Middle East is so tempting to westerners?
Lili (who is not 50 btw).
Wrap-up notes:
I botched my reply to Shinoliite above: I certainly did not mean to imply that Americans are uncivilized! On the contrary. I meant to segue into saying that the American birthrate is also too low, even though it is better than the abysmal European birthrate, and that a solution to this problem must be worked out. Kind of left out the segue.
As to the rest above, most of it is rehash from that which was previously spoken on the thread. I must, however, point out that democracy is not a panacea, whatever your sensibilities. Right and wrong exist, rights exist, and democracy can buy you Hamas.
Good night, again (or good morning, if the sun hails you now where you are).
3rdtimelucky -
I see what you are driving at but basically I despise church-going, main-stream Christianity almost as much as I despise mohammedanism - though if I had to choose I would take the former over the latter because at least Christianity doesn't advocate murdering people - unless your Gay, of course, when a few Christians think its OK to kill you because you're the devils spawn (you should hear what my two Gay employees have to say about Christianity - it's more than uncomfortable).
The old argument, 'you have taken it out of context', I seem to have heard somewhere before. Now where was it? Let me think ... Ah yes, from defenders of the koran and mohammedanism. Strange the way all the religious use the same arguments. I have even had people tell me that you can't really appreciate the Gospels properly unless you can read New Testament Greek. Funny that, Arabs claim something similar about the koran.
The Netherlands has evolved a very tolerant society over the last fifty years - live and let live has been their motto. The mohammedans, however, simply refuse to accept this. They must either leave or accept it and, if they can't accept it, don't come in in the first place. What the film actually says is that you may catch glimpses of things that you will have to tolerate - get used to it or leave. That, to me, is a fair message but not one that mohammedans in particular and some, fortunately very few, Christians can accept.
So, you don't want your children to catch a glimpse of a healthy pair of breasts or a healthy gay relationship. Hopefully, they've had the naked breasts much earlier in life and as for the gays kissing what if one of your children is gay and will need the role models or are you going to raise them to see gays as 'intrinsically disordered' as someone said about them somewhere else. Then they can grow up and join the mohammedan youth in violently attacking them - for they will know no better.
The Dutch are only trying to defend a liberal society in the nicest meaning of those words - and they are entitled to do so. Obviously, this film approach probably won't do the trick but, as I said earlier, it is a sign that some people are beginning to wake up.
"this aint the mid 20th century anymore..."
-- from a posting above
No, nor is it 7th century Arabia, the customs and practices of which are taken as a permanent model for all Muslims, for they are the mores and customs and practices of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil.
"No, nor is it 7th century Arabia, the customs and practices of which are taken as a permanent model for all Muslims, for they are the mores and customs and practices of Muhammad, uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil."
Thank-you, Mr. Fitzgerald. I wish I'd said that. (You will, Oscar, you will.)
It may be old-fashioned but mohammedan is one of the perfectly correct ways of describing these people in English. I do not care how they wish to describe themselves for that is as farcical as asking me to call the great little city on the Arno 'Firenze' when English names it 'Florence', or 'Mumbai' for 'Bombay', or 'Venezia' for 'Venice', or 'Nippon' for 'Japan', or 'Moskva' for 'Moscow', or ... oh, but I'm sure you get my drift.
I speak English. Therefore, I will use English terminology to describe the world. English is the largest and most subtle language in existence, and I am aware that there are other descriptors of these people embodied within it but I have chosen mine and they are valid and correct. I shall continue to use them; mohammedans they will remain and in the face of their snivelling littel objections I will merely point out that both Bhuddists and Christians are proud to be named after their prophets.
Ah ... yes. I see the flaw. Would you be proud to be named after Mohammed. Exactly. Nonetheless, they are mohammedans.
P.P.S. (since I see that this is important)
Certiorari, I do quite concur with you on a few points. However, I must ask you to be a bit less divisive here. I am generally against allies of convenience, since compromise of principle usually results; but do remember that Christians are a strong ally in the fight against Islam, and no compromise is necessary on this specific issue. The most relevant example at hand is that JihadWatch is run by Robert Spencer, a Catholic; and whatever my opinions about Catholicism, which I will openly vent in other fora, I deeply recognize he is performing a vital service here that few have the bravery or scholarship to perform likewise.
As I said on another thread, we can settle our differences elsewhere. And settle them we shall; principles, I hold dear; but here, there are other fish (pigs?) to fry. I will settle here for briefer mention of my views on other issues, and more efforts exerted toward the common foe.
I once spoke to a woman who was quite left-wing. (I found her politics downright sickening.) On one issue she did have a clear head: She said she would rather live in a sea of Christian fundamentalists (whom she hated) than a neighborhood with ten Islamic fundamentalists. To give but one example, in America, occasional Christian loons murder gays—and they are arrested by police officers who are themselves Christian, more often than not; in Islamic countries, meanwhile, the police are the ones killing the gays. Moral equivalence, I ask? And again, this is the forum for dealing with the latter problem, not the former one.
Lili, Muslims are cowards. This is an empirical fact that borders on tautology: Open a mythical sane dictionary, and you will see coward as one of the definitions for Muslim. Pusillanimity is inculcated to them from childhood; and these are the people who bomb school busses! They gravitate toward attacking women, and they will naturally be inclined to tear into a person named Lili before one named (say) Jonathan. This is my hypothesis for why Ammar instinctually singled you out. Of course, I surmise he quite misjudged his quarry in this case. :-)
(And I never thought I would find myself defending Christians! In strange times do we live, indeed; but I hope they will stand by me likewise on this common cause.)
Jonathan, I suspected that too, but didn't trouble to check all the previous messages he might have interpreted as 'hateful' (I don't know his definition anyway), to check the posters' apparent gender.
"I surmise he quite misjudged his quarry in this case. :-)"
LOL, too true!!
Mr. Quince -
Indeed, I agree with you. Mayhap I went too far. I am frequently accused of rambling. I had hoped that I had made it plain that I, too, would choose Christians over mohammedans at any time, and that my strictures were directed against only a few Christians (a very few, in my experience); however, it does seem that I failed to communicate effectively.
Yes, needs must where the devil drives but this battle is providing some very strange bedfellows. It takes a little while to get used to it.
There are other fora? I will Google and hopefully join you there.
Oh, dear. Someone thinks I have equated nudity with defecation. Better go back and reread what I wrote. And think a bit more critically.
Mr. Quince, also the gay population should join us in this fight as they have a great deal to fear from the mohammedan hordes - more, perhaps, than we do - so perhaps the Christians should view them as allies of convenience, too, and be just a little kinder in their comments.
Any immigrant screening process should be able to answer, however imperfectly, two questions:
1) How willing is the applicant to cooperate with the culture in his new country?
2) How willing is the applicant to contribute to his new country?
The first question recognizes the need for the applicant to accept the mores of his adopted country. The Dutch film does this in part, but no mention at all is made of free speech. Maybe cartoons of the Moslen prophet would be a better gauge. However, there is no mention at all of how applicants are screened for their willingness to contribute to the economy and well-being of their adopted country. Is this issue addressed anywhere at all?
"The Dutch film does this in part, but no mention at all is made of free speech."
I haven't gathered that from the initial post in this thread - have you found more information on it somewhere?
Speaking of which: The porn industry in the US is always pounding their drums about freedom of speech. After I make my Mohammed porn, I shall expect them to defend me in the ensuing fracas—just as the New York Times has so valiantly protected our right to cartoons.
(And guess what else is legal in the Netherlands? Imagine the possibilities of Mohammed the Boor trysting with a boar. Guaranteed not to bore. When earning a fatwa, why not go the whole hog, indeed?)
Posted by: Jonathan Quince
Jonathan
That's an outstanding idea. I suggest that you be well armed, since those paper tigers aren't going to bat for you when they see an army of Jihadists baying for your blood.
And I agree with the gist of your postings, both here and on the thread on the polygamy teleseries. It's important to coalesce as infidels, regardless of differences we may otherwise have on taxes, gay issues, porn, minimum wages, abortion, euthanesia, et al.
Ammar
Regardless of what flaws America, or any other culture has, none are as deseased as Islam.
Immigrants are human too. Yes, but members of your illustrious cult (no, it doesn't qualify as a religion, even if 10b wackos recited the shahada every day) don't qualify (and neither do you). As Jonathan correctly pointed out, you people are barbarians. From honor killings of your own relatives, should they choose to apostate, to beheadings of infidels unfortunate enough to fall into your traps (and it's not just Americans - several weeks ago, it was an Indian working in Afghanistan, goodness knows why), there is everything to loathe about you. And don't give us that horse manure about your Imam-dad telling you to follow any religion of your choice. We see your tolerance in Oakland itself, in your raids on liquor stores for selling to blacks - the inane assumption being all Oakland blacks are members of your deseased cult. you're "german, israeli & moroccan" (sic) What happened - your moroccan mom was involved in a three-some?
You call us intolerant? If we were tolerant of
- stoning gays
- beheading hostages
- executing apostates (in islamic countries)
- murdering apostates (in infidel countries)
- beating women
- molesting children
- stoning adulterers
- murdering infidel men
- raping infidel women because they are not veiled
- charging rape victims of adultery and then executing them
- forcibly convert infidels to Islam
- murder any Mohammedans who convert away from Islam
We would be some of the most heineous vermin who walked the face of the earth. In other words, we'd be like you.
Nice to see you flush yourself out of here like those supposed Gitmo Qurans, tail between legs. Go off and f__k your Taliban Congresswoman Barbara Lee. Or go vandalize a liquor store near Jack London square.
Or walk in the Nimitz Freeway traffic. It's a real crawl, so don't be scared of getting run over.
A poster suggested, as a test film, "Last Tango in Paris".
Unfortunately won't work. Given the rape-and-beat, woman-as-tilth-and-domestic-animal sexual norm of Islam, anal sex appears to be preferred in Muslim countries:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21502
"The personal literary reports and the official UN analyses on Islamic family dynamics concur in a somewhat disquieting aspect. They confirm not only the tendency to incest but also an even stronger attitude towards anal sexuality, meaning an unusually high percentage of males preferring anal intercourse to vaginal, especially in the framework of "normal" marital life."
This attitude is in keeping with the framework of Islamic marriage itself,which is merely a license for the exclusive use of a female's sexual organs -- interpreted fairly widely, apparently. A more disgustingly base construction of a profound relationship between individuals simply cannot be imagined.
Good grief, I had a good laugh, but as a Dutchman I can say that this movie does not have my approval! It's plain silly and it certainly does not protect us from the political ambitions of Islam.
What we do need in this country is that "immigrants" take an oath on our constitution. This will subsequently allow us to deal with islamists by means of a legal framework, which, up to now, is shaky at best. Judges simply do not know how to apply the law to islamist and terrorist elements.
There is no need for silly movies. A proper legal framework to deal with islamists is so much more valuable.
Regards,
Jan.
"What we do need in this country is that "immigrants" take an oath on our constitution...."
-- from a posting by a Dutch poster above
Immigrants to Holland don't? The oath has to mean something, so that evidence that the oath taken has been given falsely, or that later clear signs of failure to uphold in deed the word given, can be cause for taking away the privilege of citizenship in an advanced, prosperous, generous, state, whose advancement, prosperity, generosity, have been and continue to be the result of Infidel laws, and the labors over the centuries of the Infidels who created those laws, that prosperity, that too-generous attitude.
The movie is an awkward attempt, one assumes, to let would-be immigrants know that this is what you will not only see, but must be prepared to fully tolerate. If you can't, stay away. In part, it may help to prevent some from entering the country by causing them to rethink their own desire for the easy and pleasant living (as compared to their own countries) that Holland provides (Holland and Denmark being the most crazily generous of welfare states).
But the most important thing is both to require an oath of willinghess to respect, and to uphold the constitution of the particular Infidel state (or, where the Constitution is unwritten, as in Great Britain, to find other ways to state the same kind of thing), and to make clear, by a questionnaire, exactly what such an oath of loyalty, in pracice, requires of Dutch citizens.
Sample questions with hypotheticals should be answered. The examination should be extensive, not something to be dashed off in a few minutes.
One example:
Immigrants might be asked to consider a case where various figures -- political, religious, politico-religious -- are made fun of in the press, on a talk-show, by someone on the street. They should then be asked what punishments, if any, the state should mete out. They should be asked what punishments, if any, they themselves should mete out. The hypothetical can be varied even more, so that the person on the street is 1) a Dutch citizen mocking the Queen 2) a non-Dutch citizen mocking the queen 3) your own son mocking the Queen 4) the imam of your mosque mocking the Queen.
In other words, it can be constructed the way in the United States Bar Examination multiple-choice questions are constructed for the Constitutional Law part of the examination. A hypothetical set of facts is given, then four possible answers, designed to test a real comprehension of the law, are offered.
No, the countries of the Western world should not entrust the construction of these tests to some corporation in Princeton, New Jersey or other Emperors of the SAT, the GMAT, the LSAT, and so on, nor to the Kings of Test Preparation. Each country may learn from what others attempt.
Of course this is only one of the many ways to deal with a problem. There is no divine right for those who themselves claim to be adherents of a belief-system that contains, in all of its texts, clear statements of permanent and violent hostility, even murderous hostility, toward all those who do not share, and are unwilling to yield to, that belief-system and rule by its adherents. It is the Infidels who are largely unaware of what that belief-system is like, who as they gradually discover the truth, will become, one hopes, more alarmed.
And will stop thinking that they can do nothing about this to defend themselves, except wail "But what can we do?"
There is plenty "we can do." . And that plenty should not be a task left to be associated with the disreputable (as for now it is in England and France), but taken up, and articulated, by those who see farthest, fastest, in the mainstream of political life.
Hey, let's all move to the Netherlands! I never get to watch racy flicks in the States. (My wife would kill me!).
ps-Whatever films the Dutch government wants potential immigrants to view they could only be very, very tame in comparison with the home-made garbage-videos the mosques have been retailing on the sly (videos of all their latest beheading (including Daniel Pearl's), jihad slaughters, etc)--which could only be described as truly the ultimate in gut-wrenchingly grotesque brutality, bestiality, and vileness.
Muslims/Mohammadans
Mohammadism is idol worship. There is some evidence that early muslims were worshipping Mohammad. After Mohammad died Abu Bakr gave the locals a pep talk about that. He told them that while Mo had died, Allah was alive and well and they should worship him...and dont forget to pay the tax. The most common name in the world is Mohammad, you cant make a cartoon of him or insult him in any way. You must ignore the truth of his life and prop up a false image...sounds like idol worship to me....Mohammadans is the right name...
and...
It would be nice if people quit claiming that Christians murder people. Just because a murderer says he is a Christian, does not make him one. No true follower of Christ is a murderer. A so called Christian who murders has renounced Christ and his teachings. He has renounced the Commandments and turned his back on his God. People who murder in the name of God are liars. They are hiding behind Gods image in order to perpetrate their evil. The fact that there is, and has been, a lot of this going on does not give it credibility. A 'Christian' who murders, murders in spite of Christ, not because of him.
I am not a Christian...
The Dutch have to be praised for taking some step at identifying jihadists, which is more than the vaunted Office of Homeland Security is doing.
Of course it is only the first try, and a bad one at that. The goal is not to identify prudes; we have those everywhere. The goal is to identify those who could not, will not, accept the core principles that our nations are built on. What is core to Western society is not seeing naked breasts or gay men kissing, it is things like separation of church and state, freedom of speech - especially controversial speech, a system of laws that apply to all people equally regardless of race or religion (at least in theory), equal opportunities to all regardless of race or religion (at least in theory), etc. I tolerate the outlawing of public nudity, I could not tolerate the imposition of Sharia.
bevc, profitsbeard, Chatillon, and Hugh have it right. The test takers just have to work on improving the next version of the test, so that it actually focuses on what they are trying to test. And of course the testing should not be done only in the Netherlands.
The only thing this video will do is prove to Muslim viewers that their imams are right: that the West is immoral and deserves to be destroyed. It will also gain sympathy for the Muslims by convincing observant Jews, Christians, Hindus and others that the Muslims are the only people in Holland that share their values. This video is nothing but a propaganda tool for the Islamists to use against a decadent Europe.
I agree with you, Provoslavni. All of the posters who have begun debating whether or not gay kisses or exposed breasts are right/wrong/offensive/natural have totally missed the point -- They are engaging in a pseudo-debate about their respective mores. These are immaterial! I don't know what else this video contains -- but the idea that this can serve as some kind of litmus test for immigrants is absurd. Worse, it is an imbecilic characterization abridgement of the heart and soul of what makes the liberal West "liberal". Fellow posters, friends, anti-Jihadists all, I don't think it's boobs and gay kisses which quite get to the nub (sorry) of the matter... these things may relate, but only peripherally at best!
Such a bastardized view of the West is more akin to the cartoon absurdities the Muslims subsribe to about what it is to be a Westerner. Something the tit-for-tat (sorry) pseudo-debate above fails to grasp.
characterization & abridgement
Provoslavni wrote:
Good dhimmi. Want a carrot? I am sure your friendly neighborhood Muslims will scratch you behind the ears, maybe even rub your tummy, if you lick their feet and beg very nicely. Mayhap they will even let you live, and only rape your womenfolk a little bit.
I have not time at the moment to do anything but feed this lovely troll. Hopefully I will have a chance later to reply to some of the more thoughtful comments above. In case I do not, allow me just to note that Mr. Hugh F. has, per usual, hit the nail on the head with incisive eloquence: Immigrant testing must be more fully developed. However, I should also add that even the best standardized test can be gamed; in-depth interviews are crucial, as are background checks leveraging as much data as available. The Netherlands (and every other civilized country) has been letting in hordes of people who should handily fail all of the above measures; and this video is hopefully only one small component in the beginning of a very serious lockdown process.
In that vein, I would think that standardized tests, difficult interviews, and background checks are part of any sane immigration screening process. But perhaps sanity is too much to expect.
Cheers all.
And jlsa, I think you need to reread some of the above comments. Most of what you said has been answered several times already. Also, you said:
Yet you then proceeded to spin out your mores:
I should also note nobody should care what “cartoon absurdities the Muslims subsribe to about what it is to be a Westerner.” This is suspiciously close to “winning hearts and minds”, which you can only accomplish by converting to Islam (and then bowing to your Arab masters as an Muslim ethnic inferior). The crux of the matter is that they must accept certain things when they immigrate, including gay men and topless women—and they will ultimately have to accept these things anywhere in the world, once somebody goes in and finally cleans up their barbarian countries. Freedom from the rape-and-death cult of shari’a is a basic and universal right.
I’ll match the Netherlands wager and I’ll raise a few dozen more countries. We need to up the ante.
In the context of this debate, we are talking about Muslims. These are people who:
To some of the recent commenters who seem to be finding common moral ground with the Muslims on these issues, do you really want to join that crowd?
I don’t really give a damn what your own views are of gays or topless women; we can flame each other about that elsewhere. But in the small matter of defending civilization, either you are with civilization or you are with the barbarians—and the barbarians are pouring through the gates at an alarming rate. I have only condemnation for those who give even one ounce of moral sympathy to the Islamic side for any reason whatsoever. Such sympathy can only be born of damnable ignorance or a damnably evil heart.
Do not fancy for one moment that I am only worried about my own ox somehow being gored. Personally, for example, I stand intransigently against feminism; but I would sooner gouge my own eyes out than consider “disagreement with feminism” to be some sort of exculpatory moral commonality between myself and those wonderful, moral, gang-raping, child-molesting Mohammed-worshippers.
Are you on acid?
jsia
:) !
Jonathan Q. : Breathe.
More generally, I'm just into the first chapter of Bruce Bawer's "While Europe Slept". Wow!
St. Patrick must be tossing in his grave ...
jsla wrote:
That is an interesting specimen of rhetoric. Are you a product of the public schools?
Daisytoo: Perhaps somebody should inform the Irish that Guinness will be banned under shari’a. They shall thenceforth set forth to make St. Patrick proud. ;-)
Jonathan,
Two Irishmen, Patrick & Michael, were adrift in a lifeboat following a dramatic escape from a burning freighter. While rummaging through the boat's provisions, Patrick stumbled across an old lamp. Secretly hoping that a genie would appear, he rubbed the lamp vigorously To the amazement of Patrick, a genie came forth. This particular genie, however, stated that he could only deliver one wish, not the standard three. Without giving much thought to the matter, Patrick blurted out, "Make the entire ocean into Guinness Beer!" The genie clapped his hands with a deafening crash, and immediately the entire sea turned into the finest brew ever sampled by mortals. Simultaneously, the genie vanished. Only the gentle lapping of Guinness on the hull broke the stillness as the two men considered their circumstances. Michael looked disgustedly at Patrick whose wish had been granted. After a long, tension-filled moment, he spoke: "Nice going Patrick! Now we're going to have to pee in the boat!
FYI Jonathan, St Patrick was a patrician Briton, captured by wild Irish Chieftains and made a slave in Ireland. When he was released and sent back home .. Patrick, of his own volition returned to Ireland and the Irish he had come to love. Under his now Christian influence, the Irish became Christian .. Irish monks went forth into dark (England) and taught the (mostly illiterate) population literacy. Personally, I think if he were around today, he'd sit down and have a Guinness or two and begin a movement to bring desperately needed literacy to those held hostage to Islam.
Happy St. Patrick's Day whether you like it or not Jonathan!
Daisytoo: Thanks for bringing back some memories. I first heard that joke while sitting with American expats in a pub where I could not, for the life of me, distinguish the men’s and women’s bathrooms by their signs. (Still can’t remember which is which. I think the Guinness may have clouded my abilities of recollection. :-)
Here is another one carrying a punch line best delivered in an thick accent:
At a world beer industry conference in Amsterdam, the presidents of the world’s largest beer companies meet in a restaurant for lunch. As the waitress goes around the table taking orders for drinks, each man reverently requests the brew made by his own company.
The president of Anheuser-Busch says, “King of beers, make it a Budweiser!”
The president of Coors says, “Cold from the Rockies. Give me a Coors!”
Finally, the waitress comes around to Arthur Guinness. He simply shrugs and says, “I’ll have a Coke.”
The waitress is flabbergasted. “Mr. Guinness, sir, don’t you want a Guinness?”
To which he rejoins: “If nobody else is having a beer, then neither will I!”
Happy St. Patrick’s Day to you, too.
To which he rejoins: “If nobody else is having a beer, then neither will I!”
Happy St. Patrick’s Day to you, too.
Posted by: Jonathan Quince at March 17, 2006 09:44 PM
I love it! I have to agree with Mr. Guinness. If you're going to drink beer, drink beer. I had some green Guinness today; actually it was brownish-green, revulsive in appearance but quite tasty. Guinness doesn't dye well.
YOu people who find this "distasteful" have to read between the lines. THis is just an "in your face" way of saying "keep Out!" also notice the steep price of the DVD! could the average Muslim sand farmer afford that? Could any "pious" burka wearing women watch this? No. Right now Observant Jews are not flocking into the netherlands!! The Netherlands is in serious danger of being overrun unless they do something drastic. This is drastic and i applaud them for it. Would you think that the US would ever impliment such a program? never. hence the greater danger for us! It might seem distasteful but it will send a poweful message. If you can think of a better way to keep religious fanatics out of your country i'd like to hear it. You cant just pick on muslims cause then charges of islamophobia would be rife, so the next best thing is to do this "broard stroke" approach, which lets face it, really IS geared just towards Islam. Since they are the only ones trying to immigrate there. As someone who loves 'den nederlands' and is worried for their future, they ingenious uniquely dutch solutions to problems never ceases to amaze me!!! ;D
Jonathan,
There is a big difference between being free to engage in gay sex, watch porno, etc. and a government forcing people to watch it. This video will have the exact opposite effect than its intention by giving Muslims more ammo against the West and gaining them allies within the west.
A more effective test for immmigrants would be to ask them if they are willing to tolerate activities (sexual or otherwise) that they themselves would never engage in. Most Christians, Jews, Hindus and straight non-believers are able to do this without any problem. Tolerance does not mean approval, only the ability not to impose one's own views on another.
Much Love,
The Troll
"Tolerance does not mean approval, only the ability not to impose one's own views on another"
Bravo Provoslavni! This distinction is vital. The enforced viewing of what can be tolerated (even while disapproved of) is just another step into totalitarianism. Totalitarian regimes can force their way into existence with equal effectiveness from Right or Left. Sexual 'revolutions' are no more immune from regressive dives into totalitarianism than any other forces of human nature.
The right to privacy that is so important to the American's sense of self-efficacy and freedom has as much to do with the right not to have someone else's bare ass imposed on your ocean view as it does with the right to take that self-same ass to a nude beach. This is a paradox of individual freedom and its attendant privacy much more than an occult practice of Puritanism.
I thank God for the privilege of having been born into a culture where I don't have to have someone else's ideas of what constitutes 'healthy' sexuality shoved on me in the name of freedom. Let the homogenized European's nude asses parade in the name of 'freedom from sexuality' all they want ... just don't impose European sexual mores on me .. As an American, I prefer my privacy and my autonomy. Personally, I like my ass sexy and not abstracted into some Calvinistically "healthy and non-sexual since shared publicly" abstraction, thank you!
"The enforced viewing of what can be tolerated (even while disapproved of) I could have added: "OR approved of" ....
How are muslims barbarians. You all need to grow up and stop being so freakin racist. People like you are the reasons there are still hate crimes and war all around the world. Take a look at yourself.
shelly ...
Just curious .. are you European or American? I'm guessing European because of your use of the word 'racist'. Americans tend to think of Islam as a 'religion' (which is also incorrect). Europeans, on the other hand, prefer to think of Muslims as a 'race' and also believe themselves sanctimoniously immune to racism .. just as long as that 'other' more colorful race doesn't dream of even assimilating into the native culture but instead accepts the low status of 'immigrant for life'.
Guess what shelly? The colorful immigrants have No Intention of integrating! However, they have every single intention of dominating. Keeping chanting peace slogans while practicing New Age style Colonialist Racism .. Keep on sleeping and keep on dreaming shelly .. cause you know what? There are worse things than war. One worse thing would be to wake up and find yourself a dhimmi for life in the land of your birth.
Of course, all this could be moot .. maybe you're Islamic in which case, you already know that what I'm saying is true.
Duh_swami,you said :"A 'Christian',who murders,murders in spite of Christ,not because of him ".
Thank you for this very thoughtful line.