Samir A was arrested, october 2003, when he was on route for Chechnya, together with a fellow high school student. His trip, however, ended in the snow of Russia. He had left the Netherlands in January 2003.

Samir A had prepared a will. In it he stated that his son was to be brought up "in the spirit of jihad."

Samir A. is eightteen years old now.

During the trial A. demanded to be adressed as "U", comparable to "vous" in French or "Sie" in German. This is highly unusual in a Dutch juvenile court.

His family was present, dressed the way fundamentalists often are.
When the judges entered the court room, all present rose, except for A.'s family that remained seated.

Every year 30.000 muslims arrive in my country.

Posted by: martin from amsterdam at September 24, 2004 3:04 PM

martin from amsterdam-

"Every year 30.000 muslims arrive in my country."

What kind of insane government have you got? Generous welfare?

Since when is "A." a surname?
Is your press run by the government?

The madness has fallen upon us....

Posted by: Degenerate Artist at September 24, 2004 4:18 PM

Martin from Amsterdam:

This is from a radio news broadcast this morning in the Netherlands.

As the morning papers report, the way is clear for negotiations to begin on Turkey's possible future membership in the EU, now that Turkey has promised not to outlaw adultery. Well before the breakthrough was announced in Brussels yesterday, the NRC HANDESLBLAD knew clearly where it stands on the issue of Turkey's membership in the EU. "It is essentially in Europe's interest to support western-oriented, secular forces in Ankara and Istanbul."

In the opinion of the NRC, "The EU is better off admitting into its fold a secularized and moderate Moslem state on its southeastern flank than a rejected country that radicalizes. The Turkish people have something very interesting to offer aging Europe: youth. Turkish EU membership would send a signal around the world that the most important achievements of the EU -- peace and prosperity-- can also be achieved by a Moslem state."

I think many in Europe just don`t get it yet apparently

Posted by: Mackie at September 24, 2004 4:25 PM

Here is a more of those who don't get it- the French:

http://www.nationalreview.com/europress/boyles200409240836.asp

France (not!) for John Kerry! (or anyone else, for that matter).

Posted by: Gary at September 24, 2004 4:53 PM

Here's another "doesn't get it" clue:

With about one hour's worth of reading of Islamic source documents, one can get a pretty clear picture of the inextricable bond between the violence of jihad and every other tenet of the Islamic ideology. So the concept of a "Moslem state" that constitutionally renounces jihad, i.e., a so-called "moderate" Moslem state or even a "secular" Moslem state is impossible to imagine.

The only scenario that can be imagined, is a secular (non-muslim) state in which a majority of the population may indeed profess the Islamic religion but are powerless to impose their ideology on non-muslims in their own country and are certainly powerless to promote their ideology beyond their borders with the violence of jihad.

Kemal Ataturk comes to mind. So if the Turks were to show signs of renewing their country's commitment to the secular reforms of Ataturk, they might be able to serve as a buffer along Europe's bloody eastern border with the medieval Islamic world.

Just as the Nazi ideology could never be expunged of antisemitism, the Islamic ideology can never be separated from the doctrine of jihad. The prophet Muhammed says so himself. So for the Muslim faithful, to repudiate jihad, one would necessarily repudiate a doctrine that is prescribed by God. And they all know it. They just don't want the non-muslim world to know it until it's too late for them. So they must lie about it, and they must lie about it, and they must lie about it. And while they are shooting you and your fleeing children in the back, they must lie about it. And if you continue to believe it, and your governments continue to believe it, you will die, and your children will die.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at September 24, 2004 4:59 PM

They will "get it" sooner or later, when they are bankrupt, all business has left the country, and they live in 3rd world poverty, but still slaves to the Muslims they so generously let in.
Then, like Sudan and other countries, the muslims will slaughter those that don't fit in to their brand of Islam, or aren't the right color. Same old, same old. And here in the USA, the loony left will blame themselves, or some bg bad government conspiracy.

Posted by: Abu_Bin_Boobie at September 25, 2004 4:17 AM

I am happy to report Robert Spencer was mentioned this morning in an essay by philospher Paul Cliteur in national newspaper Trouw.

The truth is marching on.

Posted by: martin from amsterdam at September 25, 2004 6:45 AM

Martin from amsterdam:

That's good news. I keep clinging to the statistic that claims that it takes only 10% of a population to support a particular view to start a "movement." The American Revolution had the support of only 30% of the population.

Maybe, through sites like this, the 10% will eventually find each other and start a "counter-movement" at the grassroots level. It is not sufficient to have a government opposing the destruction of civilization, the people must oppose it too.

The most frustrating problem in our country is that the government created a tax-supported compulsory school system in the mid-1800s, just at the time so many of our young men were returning from completing their university educations in Europe, especially Germany (we and the Brits were still not particularly good friends after two wars, so not very many went to Britain). This was a bummer because Germany was (and with the rest of Europe, remains today) heavily influenced by Kant, a philosophical descendant of Plato and the philosophical father of Marx, Lenin, etc.

The United States, on the other hand, was a "designer nation," the first one ever to be created from "scratch" and based on a deliberately chosen philosophy, one that was evolved from Aristotle.

An important difference between the two was that Plato, Kant, Lenin, etc. all agreed that the individual existed only to support the State, the "collective." The individual was considered to be the expendible "cell" in a larger "organism" (hence the "organic theory of state), while the Enlightenment British and American philosophers, philosophical descendants of Aristotle, knew that the State existed by permission of the individual, and it's only legitimate function was to protect the rights of the individual. That was the entire reason for the police, the courts, and the armed forces.

The young Americans went to Germany with one philosophical view, and returned to their country with the opposite one. They were the forerunners of todays liberals, and have much in common with Islam, one of the world's most obvious collectives. A Borg, in fact, sucking up individuals who are converted into Units whose sole raison d'etre is to support the Borg. This is why we sense so many similarities between liberals, the watery-eyed versions of Europeans, and Muslims. They seem alike because, fundamentally, they are alike.

Well. I digress.

Upon their return, these fellows entered every field of endeavor--politics, education, journalism, etc. You can see how, after several generations, we slowly changed from a free nation to a mixed one. The liberals and the individualists just about equal each other in number now, and our school system has not only deliberately poured a liberal viewpoint into our young, it has kept us too damned ignorant to understand what is going on.

An author I admire a great deal has pointed out that our government school system has been a complete success. It's goal was not to produce thinkers--far from it. It's goal was to creat a compliant population. Compliance is not the result of a thinking population--a thinking population asks questions and rocks the boat.

Can't have any of THAT now, can we?

Posted by: cubed at September 25, 2004 2:52 PM

Cubed.

There is reason for optimism! According to a opinion survey published yesterday, NINE percent of my compatriots would vote for Bush. Half would go for the Flipper, and the rest has no opinion.

Nine is very close to your ten percent.

Win one for the gipper (= Dutch Reagan) !

Posted by: martin from amsterdam at September 26, 2004 8:49 AM