Im glad they didnt listen to her she doesnt understand the tidelwave of muslims moving from country to country would have been like water sloshing around in a full bathtub drownding what is left of Europe.

EU: CONSTITUTION BEST WEAPON TO FIGHT EXTREMISM, SAYS HIRSI ALI

The Hague, 31 May (AKI) - Fresh from the resounding 'no' in the French referendum on the Europen Constitution and the resulting resignation of the prime minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin, on Wednesday it is the turn of the Dutch to vote. The Netherlands - which is still feeling the aftershocks of filmmaker Theo van Gogh murder in November and where immigration has become a key issue - also looks set to vote 'No'. But Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the MP who wrote the screenplay of the film which cost van Gogh his life, told Adnkronos International (AKI) she believes that would be a mistake.
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level.php?cat=Politics&loid=8.0.172655186&par=0

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at June 1, 2005 5:00 PM

Now let's see what happens to the YES politicians who have been predicting doom, the fall of Europe, Auswich, the end of the world, if the population voted NO. Will they be called to eat their words?

It's a laugh how they lie.

Posted by: skidd at June 1, 2005 5:14 PM

I have nothing but respect for Ayaan. But I don't agree with her on the Constitution either. It will set up a Soviet Union of Europe, not the United States of Europe (political structure-wise).

Posted by: skidd at June 1, 2005 5:16 PM

Go read the CNN article on this. Here is a specific snippet of which Robert was kind of looking for...

"Others feared that Turkey will soon be admitted to the union, worsening tensions between Dutch Muslims and the non-Muslim majority, according to the AP.

In addition, some analysts said the recent murders of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a suspected Islamic militant and of populist politician Pim Fortuyn have challenged the once liberal Dutch."

Posted by: Avatar at June 1, 2005 5:32 PM

Three cheers for the Dutch!

Posted by: the poetess at June 1, 2005 5:38 PM

The Dutch were rightly afraid of losing their fabulous unique culture of tolerance - all the legalised fringe culture - if they melted into the EU state.

Posted by: skidd at June 1, 2005 5:38 PM

To listen to the Eurocrats, these are *not* votes against the constitution, they are desperate cries for more integration and that votes should continue until they get it right...

Posted by: Cthulhu at June 1, 2005 5:42 PM

I like to think of the "no" vote as Theo van Gogh's revenge.

Posted by: scaramouoche at June 1, 2005 5:47 PM

Free beer for the Butch!

Posted by: jsla at June 1, 2005 6:41 PM

It is better for the Americans that Europe remains a fragmented collection of unique and quaint Old World tourist destinations. Many Europeans apparently agree.

Posted by: Hulegu Khan at June 1, 2005 7:51 PM

Bold Moves Might Reap Great Returns

I am glad to see the constitutional montrosity offered to the Europeans voted down, but, I am not sure that it is in Americas long term interest to have Europe divided, ineffective and weak, even as outrageous and annoying our EU cousins can be, even as traitorous as our French "friends" can be.

Someone has suggested that the U.S. should offer to create a new North Atlantic Economic Union on OUR TERMS. This offer would be made to the new countries in Eastern Europe and any other country willing to participate in greater and FREER trade between Europe.

You can't fight something with nothing. I just wish our government were sufficiently light on its feet to do this.

Posted by: Athena at June 1, 2005 9:18 PM

Even though it appears that Ayaan Hirsi went along with PM Balkenade in incouraging the Dutch to vote in favor of the EU Constitution which the apparent reason was that the Dutch where one of its original supporters and PM Balkenade was on a train that he could not get off. Because of the thumbs down vote by the Dutch People he may have to get off the train anyway and possibly make room for Geert Wilders? This article which appeared recently on Ayaan Hirsi's website is worth another read after this vote

By Ali Sina

In an act of total insanity, the Council of Europe, decided to ban criticism of Islam equating it to anti-Semitism.

Selcuk Gultasli in zaman.com wrote: “Anti-Islamism has been included in the text as a “dangerous inclination” that has to be fought against upon the insistence of Turkey at the summit that 46 Council members attended. The conclusion draft of the summit included the notion of "Islamophobia". The inclusion of this notion in the European organizations' documents for the first time is described as the success of Turkey.

The 3rd Council of Europe summit has for the first time mentioned "Islamophobia" in the 9th paragraph of the Warsaw Declaration that was accepted on Tuesday, May 17. The Council has reached the following decisions regarding the issue: Condemnation of any kind of intolerance and discrimination based on gender, race and religious beliefs in particular, including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, the fight against these within the framework of the Council of Europe and the use of effective mechanisms and rules to combat these problems.

Thus, anti-Islamism as well as anti-Semitism will be dealt with within the framework of legal proceedings. The Council reports will include anti-Islamist movements. The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) will closely monitor these movements. The Commission will record in which country anti-Islamism increases or how it is reflected.”

This is the beginning of the fall of Europe. Anti-Islamism is not the same as anti-Semitism. Islam is a belief system, Semites are a race. We can’t equate a race with a doctrine. Racism is sheer evil. Apart from the fact that no race is better or worse than other races, unless one is Michael Jackson, one can’t change his race. Instigating hate against a race is instigating hate against mankind. Doctrines that instigate racial hate must be condemned and those who engage in racial slurs must be brought to justice.

Islam advocates the hatred of the Jews in particular but also of Christians who according to the Quran have corrupted their Scripture and call Jesus the son of God. The Quran’s biggest condemnation is reserved for the people of other religions and of no religion. All these people, including Jews and Christians are considered to be najis and fuels of hellfire. This is hate. This is hate-mongering. There is no other way to put it. Why are we not banning the Quran? Why are we not condemning Islam for blatantly advocating hate?

The decision of the Council of Europe is oxymoronic. How can we condemn anti-Semitism if we are not allowed to criticize Islam that incites hate of the Jews and says God transformed them into swine and apes? Is this not insult?

There is a fundamental difference between religions and people. One is made of flesh and bones and the other is merely a doctrine. People must be protected, but doctrines don't need to be protected. They have to be scrutinized, questioned and if found dangerous or wrong, rejected. Doctrines that advocate the hatred of people must be criticized and banned, not protected. How can we protect the rights of people to life and to freedom if at the same time we protect doctrines that incite hatred against them? If someone calls Muslims filthy, untouchable, impure, he is inciting hate. He should be stopped. This is clearly a racial insult. But the Quran calls all of us who are not Muslims najis. Najis means filthy, untouchable, impure. Why criticizing this book of hate should be against the law? Is this not double standard? is this not hypocrisy? Is this not dhimitude? Why Muslims should be allowed to insult everyone else but criticizing their hateful doctrine should be against the law?

This decision simply makes no sense. It is a contradiction. You can’t ban anti-Semitism and anti-Islamism at the same time. Islam is anti-Jew and anti-Human. The two don’t go together. They are mutually exclusive.

Today May 25, 2005 an Italian judge, Armando Grasso, in city of Bergamo, ordered the best-selling writer and journalist Oriana Fallaci to stand trial in her native Italy on charges she defamed Islam in her book “La Forza della Ragione” (The Force of Reason)

In it, Ms Fallaci argues that Europe is turning into "an Islamic province, an Islamic colony" and that "to believe that a good Islam and a bad Islam exist goes against all reason".

In "La Forza della Ragione," Fallaci wrote that terrorists had killed 6,000 people over the past 20 years in the name of the Koran and said the Islamic faith "sows hatred in the place of love and slavery in the place of freedom."

Adel Smith, president of the Muslim Union of Italy, sued the writer, claiming that Ms Fallaci’s book is offensive to Muslims.

So what? The Quran is offensive to all Mankind. No one, including Ms. Fallaci, can go far enough to insult Muslims the way the Quran insults non-Muslims, calling them, kafir (blasphemers), najis, fuels for hellfire, enemies of God, etc. But the Quran does not stop there. It actually incites violence against the non-Muslims. Muhammad asked his followers to instill terror in the hearts of the unbelievers, to wage war against them, to smite their heads from above their necks, to deceive them, to kill them wherever they find them, even to rape their wives. Why such a book should be protected and why criticizing it should be banned?

Europe is threading a very dangerous path. Two things can happen in Europe:

Islam is left alone to grow unchecked, which means Europe will succumb to Islamism before the end of this century. Or

The Europeans sense the danger too late, panic, and give birth to Eurofascism to counter Islamofascism.

In either case Europe will be destroyed.

Curtailing freedom of speech, specially banning criticism of a doctrine of hate is foolishly dangerous. Europe is playing with fire. The path that Europe has taken today will lead to its fall before the end of this century, but more likely it will auto disintegrate in a civil war in the next two or three decades.

Concerned Europeans must:

Write to their Prime Ministers, Presidents and MPs and demand for freedom of speech and freedom to criticize doctrines of hate.

Organize campaigns to defend freedom of speech and beat the resolution of the Council of Europe.

Support candidates that are conscientious and are not willing to sell their souls and your country to Islamists for vote.

Politicians are like prostitutes, one will do anything for your money, and the other will do anything for your vote. Threaten those politicians who pander to Muslims for their votes with withholding your vote.

Support parties that have anti (Muslim) immigration policies and are not afraid to call a spade a spade. At this moment, saving Europe is more important than your political ideology. Bite the bullet and vote for parties that you don’t like but have clearly the interest of saving your country from Islamofascism at mind.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by: Mackie at June 1, 2005 10:01 PM

Mijn Schilt ende betrouwen
Sijt ghy, o Godt mijn Heer,
Op u soo wil ick bouwen
Verlaet mij nemmermeer:
Dat ick doch vroom mach blijven
V dienaer taller stondt,
Die Tyranny verdrijven,
Die my mijn hert doorwondt.

_Willem van Nassouw_ van Phillippus Marnix van St. Aldegonde

Go, Dutch!

Posted by: Kepha at June 1, 2005 11:25 PM

I'm glad the Dutch said 'enuff!' Finally seeing a little spine in the people to tell these political elites you can't make decisions that the people do not want. Well, it's a start.

Posted by: reset at June 1, 2005 11:31 PM

The U.S. Constitution is less than 20 pages long and has lasted over 200 years.

This EU attempt was over 400 pages dense, and won't last one honest round of votes.

Brevity is the soul of wit. And Law.

(Hirsi Ali may be right about Islam, but on this, she was clearly out of her element.)

Goed zo, Nederlanders!

Uitstekende!

Posted by: BigSleep at June 2, 2005 12:47 AM

BigSleep: Brevity is the soul of wit. And Law.

Like!

Posted by: skidd at June 2, 2005 1:34 AM

Well done, Holland, but only 62% turnout? Come on, you can do better than that! After all the French had 88%. Is tolerance a euphemism for apathy?

Posted by: Elephant at June 2, 2005 4:32 AM

"but only 62% turnout?"

Well, given this has been the highest turnout for an EU related vote, I think we did pretty well. Last years EU Parliament elections had a turn out of a whopping 39%.

Yesterday afternoon, when the turnout as of 1400 was announced, I made a quick calculation and arrived at a predicted 62% turnout. I quietly erased it from my screen and told no-one, for fear of ridicule (as a scientist I do have a rep to protect, y'know).

Still can't believe I was right after all. This is really big.

Posted by: EJ at June 2, 2005 6:23 AM

Obituary:

European Constitution. 2000 - 2005. R.I.P

The European Constitution died earlier this evening following a short but torrid illness.

The sad passing of the Constitution is unlikely to be a surprise to many people who doubted whether she would be able to recover from the savage beating she took in France last weekend. Indeed, it may prove to have been a merciful providence that she found herself in a terminal condition in the euthanasia-friendly Netherlands where she was emphatically put out of her misery.

http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/007613.html

Posted by: hutchrun at June 2, 2005 7:10 AM

EJ,

I agree with you it's a large turnout compared to your usual Euro elections, but it's still shows that there is massive apathy in the Netherlands given how much is at stake, and they were still put to shame by the French tally at 88%.

By the way in last year's Euro elections in England only 10% of the people in my street voted which is shocking considering that one of the EU proposals is to chop the UK up into nine different bits. This tiny turnout was inspite of the fact that the mayorial and the local council elections took place with the Euro one.

Posted by: Elephant at June 2, 2005 7:11 AM

Elephant-

I find the 62% turnout remarkable, since the Dutch, being pragmatists, must have realized that the French 'non' vote had already decided the fate the EU Constitution, and they still came out to stomp a little harder on this fait accompli.

Once again, Prima, hoor!

Posted by: BigSleep at June 2, 2005 9:52 PM