Arie Oostlander is the EU Rapporteur for Turkey.
Here’s what he said in an interview given on 18 November 2005 in Arnhem, about his work as that EU Rapporteur for Turkey:
“My approach was, strict, fair, and open. There are very humane consequences to Turkish EU membership, if Turkey is really able to change into a constitutional state. And I really believe that people can change. It is very Christian to believe that, and very un-Christian not to believe that. “¦
Turkish nationalism, the education of judges and the police, the violation of individual human rights; – all this has to change in Turkey. When Turks told me they were afraid to push the army to the barracks because this vacuum might lead to fundamentalist Muslims taking over, I said, ‘if you Turks are afraid of Islam, what then should I tell my constituency in the Netherlands? And if you are right, then there is indeed a structural problem between Turkey and the EU.”
Though very short, this statement manages to tell you a great deal about Arie Oostlander, EU Rapporteur for Turkey, about his hopes and dreams, his illusions and schemes, all based on his self-assured schoolgirlish belief that, as he puts it so well, “I really believe that people can change. It is very Christian to believe that, and very un-Christian not to believe that.”
This kind of misplaced hope, faith and charity is, of course, a menace to the Dutch, to the EU, and to the entire Infidel world, and Arie Oostlander should be discharged as the EU Rapporteur for Turkey (where he is, among other things, attempting to prevent the Turkish army from acting forcefully in its traditional role as the guardian of Kemalism).
Spare us all such “Christians” who believe that to understand that Islam is quite different from Christianity is “un-Christian.” The fact is that the Qur’an is taken as the literal word of God not by a handful of marginal Muslims, but by all Muslims other than the Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only Muslims. And because of this, and because there can be no rearrangement or reordering of the Hadith, and no changes made to the life of Muhammad, the Model of Conduct (uswa hasana), the Perfect Man (al-insan al-kamil), Islam will forever remain Islam: immutable despite the Arie Oostlanders of this world who are so deeply convinced that “everyone can change.” (But Islam is not an “everyone”; Islam is a Total Belief-System). If Arie Oostlander had meant that Muslims can cease to be Muslims, that would be one thing. Then he would have to tell us in what way, by what means, those Muslims would cease to believe what Muslims have believed for 1350 years. He would especially have to explain how they would give up believing in Muhammad as a Model for all time, and in the duty of participating, directly or indirectly, in the “struggle” or Jihad to remove all obstacles to the spread and then the dominance of Islam.
But this is not what Arie Oostlander did, because, you see, Arie Oostlander is, like everyone else, non-Muslim as well as Muslim, incapable of changing or “reforming” Islam. It has not been done. Ataturk did not “reform” Islam. Ataturk systematically weakened Islam, as a political and social force, in Turkey. He did it by exploiting his reputation as a war hero at Gallipoli, and his ability, as a ruthless despot, to get done what he thought had to be done, at a time when Turkey was on its uppers and he could present his project of taming Islam in the context of saving Turkey.
Notice how Oostlander himself pooh-poohs the worries of secular Turks, Turks who are supporters of Kemalism, who worry constantly about the resurgence of Islam among the primitive masses who in all Muslim countries form the overwhelming majority. He quotes himself as telling them: “if you Turks are afraid of Islam, what then should I tell my constituency in the Netherlands? And if you are right, then there is indeed a structural problem between Turkey and the EU.” Yes, he’s right. But he himself doesn’t realize that when he utters those sentences, makes that analysis, in the hope of telling those secular Turks to quiet down, he is attributing to them not a false analysis of the problem, but a true one.
And it is one that he, Arie Oostlander, because he is a “Christian” and because, according to him, it should be that of course “everyone can change,” including adherents of an immutable Total Belief-System, and that to think otherwise is simply….”un-Christian.” It should be this way because it would be too painful to deal with if it could not be this way.
He’s a perfect example of the mentality one can see all over the Western world, among political and media elites (and in such places as the World Council of Churches): people who cannot look at the evidence, cannot be logical, because to do so would force them to conclusions that for them would be too painful. And the threat then recognized would require too much effort, and what’s more, ironically, require those “Christians” of Arie Oostlander’s same ilk to “change” their assumptions about all kinds of things, and especially about the supposed benefits of every kind of unexamined “diversity” and “multiculturalism.”
This Mr. Arie Oostlander can’t do. He can’t, you see, discover new things, recognize new threats. He can’t change in that way. It’s just not in him.