Skip to comments.Militant Islam rising
Posted on 11/22/2004 6:08:22 AM PST by Clive
Holland is not a 60-year-old story anymore about Canadian soldiers and liberation from the Nazis.
Holland is not a 20-year-old story anymore about lax drug and prostitution laws.
To talk seriously about Holland today -- Holland, once a global empire in its own right -- is to talk about whether it yet meets the definition as Saudi Arabia's first European colony, or if that definition will instead be met in five years, or 10.
In Holland today, there are more observant Muslims than either observant Catholics or Protestants (but not yet all Christians combined). The most common name for new baby boys in Holland is Mohammed.
Holland, liberal Holland, accepted Islamic immigrants by the hundreds of thousands. And so liberal it was that it didn't dare try to impress upon those new immigrants Holland's liberal values. The thing that invited in strangers was the very thing those strangers are most averse to.
But it is difficult to say such things, especially in liberal Holland, where political correctness about race and religion makes Canadian discourse look positively open-minded. And so the first political figure to really speak out against the Islamification of that country was an ultraliberal gay radical named Pim Fortuyn, whose sexuality granted him a Teflon coat of political correctness that allowed him to make comments about Muslim immigrants other Dutchmen could not.
Fortuyn didn't argue against massive Islamic immigration because he's a racist, or a reactionary, or a xenophobe. He argued against it because he saw that waves of Muslim immigrants were actually all those things -- they were intolerant of Holland's diversity and freedom and liberalism. In particular, Fortuyn was concerned with Islamic sexuality -- in his case, its capital opposition to homosexuality. So Fortuyn started a political party. And then he was assassinated.
Theo van Gogh, another Dutch liberal, a descendant of Vincent van Gogh, produced a movie, called Submission. Like Fortuyn, he focused on the social effects of Islam -- the submission of women.
Van Gogh was assassinated this month, and his Muslim killer pinned a call to jihad on his chest with a bloody dagger.
In response, a liberal artist in Rotterdam designed a fresco with the phrase "Thou Shalt Not Kill" on it. The Dutch police had it removed at the behest of an offended imam.
Better censorship than assassination, they must have thought. Freedom and rule of law didn't seem to be choices.
For a generation, the public square in Western civilization has been systematically voided of any Judeo-Christian moral content. And into that void has come a competing set of moral values: Militant Islam.
Nature and politics abhors a vacuum. For a generation, Europe -- and Canada -- has been told that nothing is right or wrong, there ought not to be Judeo-Christian morality in public life, and that the philosophical compatibility and integration of immigrants is not important. That may have worked before; but it does not work in the era of Osama bin Laden and al Jazeera. These are not people coming to join things.
They are coming to change things.
Moderate Muslims are too few or too terrified to speak up. True liberals like Fortuyn or van Gogh are assassinated when they do. The secular media that swears by separation of church and state has not yet figured out the threat to liberty comes not from suburban Christian conservatives, but immigrant Wahhabi jihadists.
Where will it stop in Holland? When the militant migrants are deported? Or when sharia law is declared? Which side would you bet on?
Not that I believe this message on this forum will be read by the correct demographic, but I hope every Gay person understands that radical Muslims want them dead. Hates them. Christians pray for them, Muslims stick daggers in their hearts. Make your choice, boys and girls.
When the Muslims have the majority, the community co-opted by militants, and innocents Christians die . . .
Then people will realize.
The Law Society is already discussing applying Sharia law in arbitration proceedings between Muslims.
And the only people actively opposing it are Muslim women who correctly see it as a threat to their liberties.
They're way too focused on their genitalia to notice that.
Osama Bin Laden is a Brain Muslim...
As always, the left is slow to realise or even admit there is a problem, much less actually take action. If action does take place, it will be too late for Holland, too late for France. Will it be too late for Canada and the US? Hopefully not. We have a different attitude in the west - we settled this land, and only recently in historical terms.
"The most common name for new baby boys in Holland is Mohammed."
Not 'Van Mohammed'?
It is a truism in tyrannies that those who would betray their own people would betray a tyrant as well, and are eliminated after their usefullness is over.
This historical fact not withstanding American and European liberals seem bent on self-destruction by aligning themselves with those who would kill them.
If Liberalism isn't indicative of a diseased society what is?
I have looked everywhere for an official link that verifies this, but the closest I find is www.stormfront.org, which invites everyone to a sunday meeting with David Duke...I'm a little suspicious of this website. Any idea where I can find out for sure?
I feel a bad moon rising......
The left uses any group it finds for political support thinking that when they win, they will find a way to command their supporters. The Muslims are smarter and better armed then the left realizes and they will wind up in charge if the left has their way. (There is not a clearer example of a death wish then liberals joining ranks with radical Islam.)
Holland has a choice, but neither choice is very attractive. (1) Give in to the Muslims, let them establish a Muslim run state and move or convert to Islam or (2) Stand up to the Muslims, demand they conform or be deported, and face an insurgency similar to the one in Iraq. Islam is basically in charge of the choices, but Holland gets to choose one. Interesting indeed is the fact that all the people would be better off with choice (2), but Holland is very tolerant and (1) would fit more in line with their idea of social experimentation.
Pragmatism isn't always attractive, but it has the advantage of cutting through doctrine, getting to the heart of a matter, and worrying about political consequences later.
In Holland's case survival demands pragmatism.
stormfront is pretty much single issue, and extremely anti christian among other things...
here's a link http://www.cbn.com/CBNNews/News/040322a.asp which says it is the most popular name in brussels too...
i googled around a bit, but couldn't find original source for this info..
It seems very hard, if not impossible to find any original source for this info....seems agenda driven to me.
Ah, that brings back good memories. My first visit to Amsterday, as a GI, was during some holiday that involved national remembrance. My friends and I were treated royally. I soon learned that Canadians were heroes to the Dutch, and Americans were almost as welcome. It was a moving experience, but also a jarring reminder, years after the war ended, how brutal the German occupation of Holland had been.
Yes, Holland must throw the radicals out, and watch out for the rest. Going Islam is never an acceptable choice for a western country.
Terrorists faking dead fires on Marines.