The latest revert to make a splash is Joram van Klaveren, like van Doorn a member of the PVV Party who was close to Wilders himself. His story is the most dramatic, for he had in the past campaigned ad nauseam in the Lower House of the Dutch Parliament against Islam in the Netherlands, calling it “a lie,” and referring to the Quran as “poison.” He had also pushed for a ban on the burqa and on mosque minarets. At the time of his conversion, which took place in October 2018, but was not made public until this February, he had been researching a new book, From Christianity to Islam in the Time of Terror, when he had his remarkable change of heart. “If you believe that there is one God and that Muhammad was one of the prophets, besides Jesus and Moses, then you are formally Muslim,” van Klaveren told a local radio station after his conversion. That’s a misstatement of the faith: Muslims believe Muhammad was not just “one of the prophets,” but the last of the prophets, the Seal of the Prophets. And that’s not the only belief required of a Muslim. As van Klaveren well knows, Muslims are commanded to wage Jihad against Unbelievers, until Islam everywhere dominates, and Muslims rule, everywhere. Is it possible that after years of opposing Islam, and seeing so little being accomplished in Europe, where May and Macron and Merkel seem incapable of grasping the mortal threat of Islam, where every month ever more Muslims arrive in Europe, where they cause mayhem, and yet even the Pope has endorsed “authentic Islam” as having “no room for violence.” and continues to defend that faith on every conceivable occasion, that van Klaveren simply had become sufficiently disheartened, after so many years of opposing Islam, that he gave up, and rather than strengthening his resolve, despairingly threw in his lot with what could certainly appear to be the winning side?
And what should be the reaction to these three reverts? Muslims, of course, feel a sense of triumphalism. Does that mean we should feel a sense of despair? Of course not. These reverts to Islam do not represent an unstoppable wave, but are very much sui generis. Arthur Wagner is certainly a bizarre creature, choosing to become a Muslim only in order to express his disapproval of his Protestant church’s acceptance of homosexual marriage. Arnoud van Doorn is another doubtful character, has been involved in several criminal activities, including selling drugs to the young. And he has been accused of sending a group of Muslims to gang-rape one of his political opponents. Not exactly a sterling example of rectitude. And who knows what material benefits have come to this high-profile revert as President of the European Da’wah Foundation, and Ambassador of Celebrity Relations for the Canadian Da’wah Association in Europe? And what does he derive from his travels to the Gulf, where Muslim Arabs might have shown their appreciation in tangible ways?
As for Joram van Klaveren, I suspect that, as stated above, it was not the truth and beauty of Islam, as Muslims allow themselves to believe, that finally led him to turn Turk and embrace the faith, but rather, to repeat, his own mental exhaustion and despair over Islam’s steady expansion in Europe, and the failure of so many of Europe’s leaders to recognize the meaning, and menace, of Islam. Not for the first time, defeatism would have claimed its victim.
Meanwhile, let’s think of all the morally and intellectually advanced people, very different from these three curious “reverts,” who have converted the other way, to Christianity from Islam, or have left Islam for Unbelief. These include such figures as Magdi Allam, the brilliant writer and political figure who, born a Muslim in Egypt, in Italy converted to Christianity — with Pope Benedict himself presiding at his baptism — and since Oriana Fallaci’s death has been the most effective opponent of Islam on the Italian scene. There is Ibn Warraq, who is both a profound scholar of early Islam and author of Why I Am Not A Muslim. There is Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who long ago abandoned Islam as a murderous cult, and whose autobiographical works — Nomad, Infidel –have had an important effect in revealing for Unbelievers what the texts and tenets of Islam inculcate. There is Wafa Sultan, the author of A God Who Hates, who considers herself a “cultural Muslim” even though she does not believe in any part of the faith: “I even don’t believe in Islam, but I am a Muslim.” Imposing figures, every one, and all of them exceedingly brave because, as publicly-declared apostates from Islam, they are under a permanent death threat. Those who revert to Islam, on the other hand, face no threats or harmful consequences.
There are other bizarre figures among the converts to Islam. There was French “philosopher” Roger Garaudy, an antisemite and Holocaust-denier who, unsurprisingly, found his spiritual home in Islam. There is Tony Blair’s sister-in-law. Lauren Booth, who converted following an “inspiring experience” while visiting Iran. What was that was so inspiring? The women being picked up by the religious police if they weren’t correctly covered? The mass rallies where people screamed “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”? The public executions of homosexuals? Lauren Booth is also a great friend of the “Palestinians,” and has been since long before she converted to Islam. She described Gaza as “the largest concentration camp in the world,” but made the mistake of having photographs taken of her in a well-stocked Gazan grocery story. She’s been honored by Hamas with a VIP Passport.
On October 23, 2010, wearing a hijab, she made a video: “My name is Lauren Booth, and I am a Muslim.” She attributed her awakening to her experiences in Palestine as a reporter. She has given hundreds of speeches on her conversion, also attributing her conversion to her experiences with Palestinian families in the West Bank and Gaza. How much might she have earned from those hundreds of speeches?
We know she has a great interest in money, that has been known to get her into trouble. It seems that Lauren and her Muslim husband have been helping themselves to funds meant for others. In June 2011, Booth joined Cageprisoners as a patron. However, from 2015 Booth was no longer a patron of the organization. Apparently Lauren Booth and the chief executive of Peacetrail (another NGO), her husband Sohale Ahmed, were disqualified from holding any trustee positions after the Charity Commission could not account for about half of Peacetrail’s income. It seems that Lauren Booth and her Muslim husband had a particular interest in helping only certain Muslims — namely, themselves.
Another high-profile female convert to Islam is Sinead O’Connor. She has changed her name twice: to Magda Davitt, and then to the more Muslim Shuhada Davitt. You can see her at YouTube, giving the Call to Prayer. She famously tweeted, after her conversion, that she found white people “disgusting”: “I’m terribly sorry,” her tweet said. “What I’m about to say is something so racist I never thought my soul could ever feel it. But truly I never wanna spend time with white people again (if that’s what non-muslims are called). Not for one moment, for any reason. They are disgusting.” Make of that bizarrerie what you wish.
On one side, we have such converts to Islam as Arthur Wagner, Arnoud van Doorn, Joram van Klaveren, Lauren Booth, and Shuhada Devitt. And then there are also many “reverts” among prisoners in the West who, in converting to Islam, become part of an instant community of fellow Muslims, who provide security as the strongest prison gang. Furthermore, as Muslims, these converts will now be subject to a Complete Regulation of Life, which will replace their previous mental disarray.
On the other side, we have, among those who have abandoned Islam, such people as Magdi Allam, Ibn Warraq, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Wafa Sultan. A most unequal contest.
The Camp of Islam gets the worst people from our world, and we get the best people from theirs. No contest. People are waking up and deserting the Camp of Islam. We are winning. Just keep up the good work, and don’t lose heart.
Terry Gain says
I’m not going to get upset unless Robert Spencer or President Trump convert.
FYI says
It is not uncommon for Far Right nazis or Far Left bolsheviks to convert to islam.
“haters gonna hate” and so they find in islam a religious justification for their evil proclivities: a religion that sanctions hatred,especially towards the Jews.
The Far right,Far left and islamic supremacists have one thing in common: a violent ant isemitism and a contempt for christianity{the koran CURSES Jews and Christians k9:30}
Conversion to islam comes with an islamic package of goodies:-
Automatic antisemitism and hatred for Israel
Antichristianity
al walaa wal baraa{a Doctrine of HATE}
Freedom to violate God’s Exodus 20 commandments as the koran teaches
The Entitlement to bear FALSE witness
The jihadist fantasy of martyrdom{just as some people like to be mercenaries,islamic supremacist ideology attracts a certain type..}
allah’s path is the path described in I Kings 18 v 21 “if baal be your god follow him”{islamic} which is in the opposite direction to “If the Lord is God follow Him”{Jewish and Christian}In order to facilitate free will,God gives a choice..
Those who convert to islam make the foolish and unwise choice,the consequences of which are explained in 2 Thessalonians 2 v 10-11.
allah “the best of deceivers”,k3:54,his GREATEST ENEMY is “Malik Al-AMLAK” or “king of kings”,a title applicable to only ONE man…Jesus Christ{Revs 19 v 16}
{Sahih muslim vol 5 hadith #5611}
In an age when many muslims are seeing through the errors of allah’s “perfect” koran and the appaling immoral example of its “prophet”-thanks to the internet-it is extremely foolish to convert to islam,a religion whose god has as his greatest enemy,Jesus Christ.
Of course most converts to islam won’t know that fact.
allah/islam/koran’s Greatest Enemy is MALIK AL-AMLAK:Jesus Christ
Terry Gain says
Good list but you forgot 4 wives and 72 Virgins and the greatest prize of all in tiday’s world – Victimhood.
Kay says
Interesting commentary. I have heard similar hopeful thoughts at a talk supporting the persecuted Christians around the world (but the latter with spiritual overtones).
Thanks. I believe it too.
Naildriver says
It is strange that a high profile anti-Islam figure would convert, but the world is full of all sorts of possibilities besides those mentioned; from sleeper agent, bribery, to threats to loved ones or person, and various enticements to vices and weaknesses such as racism in prisons, to homophobia, as mentioned, which Islam’s devotees would have no problem in advancing.
The article is well presented, and needed; as conversion to Islam is indeed another form of treason as well, since, in effect, it is a nation, complete with language; capital; law system, and a citizenry, ummah, all of whom are expected to wage jihad — and atom bombs in Pakistan and soon Iran.
The sooner we get politicians into office willing to represent this threat from Islam; and prevail upon our government to denounce Islam as unfit for our society, as was done with communism and the Nazi; and openly defend and protect those who stand against the barbarities and threats Islam demands its followers practice, then more people would be less enticed to convert — because Islam is not ok.
Terry Gain says
Western politicians won’t defend against Islam until it is overwhelming accepted that it is an evil, totalitarian conquest ideology which is irreligious.
So let’s agree that there is a consensus. 97% of rational people agree that Islam is not a religion.
gravenimage says
Geert Wilders opposes the threat of Islam, as does Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff. So did Winston Churchill. Your idea that no Western politician can take a stand against Islam unless the definition of religion is altered is mistaken.
Naildriver says
I know of no politicians who are openly anti-Islam and who present remedies to slow or alter Islam’s progress in the USA. Such is the resistance from the news media, the left, and the religious establishment who worry of their own lawful influence to convert upon a huge atheistic population.
I suspect many would throw in with anti-Islam charismatic politicians with such courage as a Churchill or Wilders, Graven, but even then, in today’s world, I would doubt it would be effective for long. All such attempts would get branded as white supremacy or against the Constitution and the freedom of religion by both parties at present.
Trump has shown himself to be weak if not duplicitous in dealing with Islam with his cabinet of traitors — though he has excised the worst of them – and halting immigration of Muslims in any effective measure hasn’t materialized since he was pilloried by the press for the mere suggestion — but it got my vote as well as many others. That support needs to be illuminated somehow.
I suspect Trump may reverse even that with even more Muslim immigrants with his new proposal to fill certain corporate labor needs. It is disheartening.
Franklin Graham could be one potential voice against Islam should he enter politics, or one like him; as at least he could keep the far religious right from capitulating to Islam against the ‘godless’ left — which is likely to happen when more millions of Muslims affect the voting demographics – since then Muslims will become more conservative — already in Lodi CA Republicans enjoy Muslim votes.
And, should the Democrats find a politician that is openly anti-Islam at the same time, it could at least give courage to others to stand up and make it an issue against these double dealing enemy Muslim hoards. I suspect only much more terrorist activity from Islam will produce anti Islam political results — and then there is this current policy from the government to say ‘terrorism’ is this country’s enemy — not Islam; which effectively suppresses anti- Islam voices too. The laws for security are made to silence the government’s political threats that might even include PETA, but certainly, any militia oriented white groups that might resist Islamism.
Since 9/11 Islam has made incredible progress between using terrorism and racism – as in our prisons — and have ginned up racial hatred, immigration – and have infiltrated into our very government’s highest levels, with even a president! Obama was effectively Muslim anyway.
People should be frightened at this state of affairs. But sadly, it is not even an issue among most Americans.
scherado says
It’s not easy. Getting less easy for me.
brane pilot says
Both the state and the Christian Church have mainstreamed hard-core sexual deviance into the primary school system, and have made it a huge ‘civil rights’ issue.
For people who have a moral problem with this, Islam is the only game left in town that is not putting lipstick on a pig and calling it Progressive.
The West is utterly determined to destroy and replace itself.
That is the outcome we need to prepare for at this point.
gravenimage says
brane pilot wrote:
Both the state and the Christian Church have mainstreamed hard-core sexual deviance into the primary school system, and have made it a huge ‘civil rights’ issue.
For people who have a moral problem with this, Islam is the only game left in town that is not putting lipstick on a pig and calling it Progressive…
…………………….
brane pilot has written similar posts on other threads recently.
He does not say why he doesn’t consider the horrors of Islam–which include FGM, child “marriage”, forced marriage, polygamy, wife beating, rape, “Honor Killing”, and sex slavery.
Note that he doesn’t consider any of *these* horrors to be sexual deviance.
Unlike what he pretends, there is *nothing* moral about Islam.
gravenimage says
In fact, I now wonder if brane pilot is poised to take the same step van Klaveren did–I hope not, but given his increasing apologia for the horrors of Islam, I am not sure I would be all that surprised.
gravenimage says
Leftist “journalist” blames Islamic anti-Semitism on Netanyahu’s embrace of “ethno-nationalists”
……………….
I’m disgusted by anyone who *knows* how ugly Islam is, and goes over to the dark side anyway.
simpleton1 says
Many may feel a frustration of trying to bring effective change, particularly to the dead end political philosophy of islam, and how to help people to even bother to resist its encroaching ways.
For myself I have wondered when others say that islam is ok, and it is peaceful, then would my message be more effective if I acted out as if I had truly joined islam.
That is to be able to say for example, that truly; fgm should be practiced on my niece! My sister would more seriously consider just what is islam about. That I could help her to achieve this by buying air line tickets, or knowing a nurse and Mohammad’s advice that the cut should not be too deep.
Even better still to say that I seek to become betrothed to her, just as Mohammad, the “perfect man” would do, and talk about setting a wedding date.
Would that jolt my wider family’s complacency about islam, to have a genuine full on muslim pursuing their dearest.
Then they would heap scorn and derision on me, then I would answer that they are disdaining allah and his messenger of islam, and some muslims have a duty to deal to such people.
Would that make them have to look doubly not only at your self, but then to all muslims, and to realize what its creed actually means.
It means going under-cover, to be, to act, in full a total muslim, to all your friends, family and community.
Their rejection of you, will mean that you can personalize the effect making you a victim of their “racism” “ignorance” while you act as a full on muslim; with “intolerance’ and “arrogance” showing how to be ‘supremacist’ and above them.
You can question and challenge them, why are they now uncomfortable about having a muslim around them.
Being a pariah in your family, in your community, and as a muslim, not keeping to your self, but to keep espousing the blunt end of what islam wants. Would that make them learn more to counter you?
Going to the mosque, I do not think that you would learn much as other muslims would be on guard, but just things you see and notice, may help in surveillance, and if need be another angle on how that mosques plans to bring in more immigrants, how the gangs may work, and how other muslims view their imam.
So you can see it is a total dedication, a version of counter islam, with intensity but not to convert the infidel. 🙂
If really into it then some funds, sponsorship, as a price extracted from islam.
Well I have acquired a few korans from muslims that have helped in further studies of that despicable scripture, though I would never let a real muslim read the notations that I have made. 🙂 as it may be an “off with his head” for desecrating a koran.
It just helps in part of the debate at this stage.
———————-
I have done this with strangers a little bit, in different cities, saying that I find that islam is ideal, and this is what I would expect to be allowed to do. Why not?
Talk about seeing the barriers go up, as they click they do not want some of those ideas around their nearest and dearest, and still they believe that the majority of muslims are peaceful.
They think it is extremist, fundamentalist, etc.
So when asked why can not one just be a pious, observant, devout, dedicated, faithful follower of Mohammad in all ways of life and peace, following his sayings, deeds, and actions, 4 wives and a few more children, etc.. and how tempting, creating mischief, shirk for muslims etc. then surely unbelievers should be dealt to as guided by Mohammad.
————————
In the mean time, whether it is enough or not, at least now we seem to have some people and though hard to measure, perhaps a little bit of ground swell of understanding that is becoming more effective in awakening the knowledge of the problem of islam.
Long live free speech, free expression, jokes, wit, sarcasm, books, articles, songs, bill boards, cartoons, frank expression etc…Still to make movies, and life of Mohammad, as per koran, hadith and sira, just the truth, with some good actors etc. 🙂
Thanks to Robert Spencer, HUGH FITZGERALD, and many other posters and commentators.
It has been a long war with islam, but the truth must keep hammering on to find any angle it can to open up islam to its diabolical systems!
UNCLE VLADDI says
Van Kraven only “reverted” for the usual reason: Hypocrisy!
At all levels of human interaction, from the individual to the group or gang models of the family, clan, tribe, nation, state, and empire – all human psychology is eventually faced with the hypocritical reaction to endless fears of pains.
Hypocrisy is all about double-standards: where one is always right and everyone else is always wrong. This means they must embrace both paranoia (“you’re always all out to get me!”) and masochism (“So I must Submit to the inevitable, that, as I’m completely out-numbered and powerless to resist you, I can do nothing to help either my self, or anyone else, ever”)!
They imply Submission to extortive, “inevitable” force (slavery) is both impossible to resist, AND the logical “choice!”
Which is why they hate those ‘hypocrites’ (hypocrisy is thus also always only about ‘projection’) who resist this simple logical truth (aka “fitna”).
The hypocritical immoral pretense of Submission to extortive slavery IS “islam,” and vice-versa. Like all hypocrite criminals (and all criminals are hypocrites, and all hypocrites are criminals) they still put them selves first, and thus come up with endless lists of “ethical” rules to assuage their chosen, attack-first victim-blaming stance of immorality.
So the first lie all selfish, greedy and self-promoting hypocrites have to tell is (of course) that it isn’t all about or for them after all – no, their obviously jealous, greedy fear-focus is really only altruism and so it’s for some other group of victims. And thus was the group-might-makes-right identity-politics and social “justice” victimology (extortion and slavery) industry born.
It’s how all totalitarian (total control) collectivists begin to enslave individuals in the name of group rights at the direct expense of all truly equal universal human rights.
ALL politicians are professional hypocrites who always only take other people’s money to promote them selves as saviours.
If and when criminal hypocrites can induce others to defer their own rightful responsibility to think, choose, and act for them selves onto others (thus effectively voting to enslave them selves) then the Golden Rule of Law can be exploited to defeat its self – if and when everyone votes to agree in advance to accept any and all crimes and attacks-first, then there are no longer any crimes nor criminals to commit them! The letter of the law is fulfilled and it’s spirit broken.
The false moral high ground is reached (“If and when I ALLOW you to act like you’re better than me and oppress me, it’s all your fault, and, since it is all your fault, then none of it’s my fault, so I’m still better than you, ‘God!’ Whee”)!
Thus the main stance and alibi of criminal hypocrites everywhere, to excuse their own criminal desires and actions, is not only that they are always being “inevitably” forced to do so, but also the argumentum tu quoque (“You all do it, too”)!
😉
And this entire pre-chosen “pre-emptively defensive” static stance of hypocrisy used to be known as “idolatry” and is now currently most often known as “psychopathy” – because of it’s literally dynamic thought-killing intent and because, as a so-called “mental illness” it also embodies its own “inevitable force” excuse: “I didn’t do it! My brain made me do it!”
…
In any Democracy, politics IS pity.
The pity party (liberals) usually wins because people instinctively see government correctly – as the largest collectively-owned insurance company – which only exists to pay out to victims. But when using emotions, one gets into a trance-like state where all objectively dynamic causes and effects are ignored in favor of static images – so the temporary situational circumstances of diversely unequal individual victims becomes a permanent image of “Victim groups” in general, and it tends to stay that way simply because politicians have no incentive (“There’s No Money In Solutions”) to change it. So, being angry at (“hateful” towards) criminals is now the most vile sin, while pitying (“tolerating”) them all as “fellow victims,” is to be deemed the highest moral virtue, these days! “Anyone who doesn’t automatically pity all criminals as fellow victims should be hated!” Thus, hurting criminals’ feelings by accusing them of their crimes, is now a hateful” crime in itself!