Imagine There’s No Islam — It’s Easy If You Try!

by Baron Bodissey:

The following excerpts are from a speech given on the floor of parliament by Machiel de Graaf, a member of parliament for Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom (Partij voor de Vrijheid, PVV) in the Netherlands.

What an exhilarating, energizing, astounding speech this is! Geert Wilders was prosecuted twice, and is about to be prosecuted again, for saying things that were far more circumspect and far less inflammatory to Muslim sensibilities than these frank statements of fact and opinion by Mr. de Graaf. Presumably the speaker is enjoying the protection of his parliamentary immunity while speaking.

I hope this one goes viral on the Internet. Many thanks to SimonXML for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling:

Transcript at Gates of Vienna

Going Dutch – The Psychometric Tool Against Jihadism in the West

muslim-man-and-wife-afpby Esam Sohail
Special to IPT News
November 3, 2014

The famed laissez faire liberalism of the Dutch is only matched by their flinty commonsense. Two years after the brutal 2004 murder of filmmaker Theo Van Gogh at the hand of Islamist jihadists in Amsterdam, the Dutch government quietly introduced a form of personality testing for immigrants from certain backgrounds who wished to make the Netherlands their permanent abode. By showing a set of short video clips highlighting the culture of diversity, secularism, free speech, and gender equality to potential migrants from very different cultures and then allowing responsible officers to evaluate reactions of the audience, the Dutch government made a very business-like decision to ensure a proper fit for a person to his/her new home. The government of the Netherlands continues to monitor this new screening tool which went into effect as a pilot project in 2006 and will likely be rolled out on a larger scale in the years ahead.

Immigration, especially of people with high education and in their prime working years, remains vital to the economic prowess and social welfare systems of most developed countries. That said, that necessity is better coupled with wisdom. With tens of thousands of people from the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia moving to the Anglophone countries every year, the United States, Canada, Britain, and Australia do not have the luxury of waiting to institute large scale and focused immigrant testing that small Holland does. While security safeguards have been heightened in all of these desired immigration destinations, the common flaw remains the same across the board in the English speaking democracies: all potential immigrants are treated to the same battery of standardized screening procedures which often evaluate the Christian fleeing victimization in Bangladesh and Pakistan along the same lines as an Islamist engineer wishing to plant the flag of Islam for himself and his children in Canada. Neither the standard questions of the type “have you ever been part of a terror group” nor the routine check of law enforcement agency reports is going to do much diagnostic good in this regard. The Dutch figured this out finally and, instead, decided to tentatively use the science of psychometrics to detect potential trouble before it becomes actual trouble.

Let us be brutally honest about immigration from countries where Muslims are in big majorities. Almost all of these countries have cultures where Salafi Islamism is ascendant, where free speech and gender equality are increasingly dismissed as parts of some Western plot, and anti-Semitism is a staple for the most popular conspiracy theories. Not all immigrants from Pakistan, Bangladesh, Somalia, Malaysia, or the Arab world adhere to such Islamist tendencies. But many, including quite a few professional and educated types, do. And these are the ones that can quickly become the transmitters, organizers, sympathizers, funders, and even purveyors of jihadism in the civilized world (remember Palestinian Islamic Jihad board member Sami Al-Arian and would-be Times Square bomber Faisal Shahzad?). In the age of shadowy ISIS sympathizers in Chicago, jihadist murderers on London streets, and Muslims converts on rampage in Ottawa, it only make sense to quarantine the Islamist virus at the entry point whether it is dormant, passive, or active. The Dutch have shown the path to do so; the rest of the civilized world should improvise.

Psychometrics is not an exact science and no psychological evaluation or personality test is fool proof. On top of such uncertainty, these things cost time and money which are realistic constraints for visa evaluators and Customs agents. Yet, these tools are increasingly sophisticated and used in human resourcing decisions by growing number of major businesses and public entities; at the disposal of well-trained immigration professionals who have the flexibility of discretion and a relatively narrow focus, such psychometric instruments can be vital weapons against potential jihadist terror.

Potential long term immigrants from certain areas should be instructed – even provocatively so – on the fundamental importance of free speech, dissent, apostasy, equality before the law regardless of religion or gender, and basic personal liberties. They should be evaluated on their reactions through well developed and professionally benchmarked tests and such evaluations should be allowed to inform an immigration official’s decision to about a residency application. Indeed this kind of approach could lead to the penalization of certain beliefs; but if such beliefs include the rectitude of killing apostates and punishing women for wearing short skirts, should we be shedding too many tears? And even if we were to shed some tears at such scrutiny of those desiring to live in a pluralist society, isn’t it better than the shedding of blood that could happen otherwise?

Esam Sohail is an educational research analyst and college lecturer of social sciences. He writes from Kansas, USA

The “Explosive Growth” of Jihadism in the Netherlands

Gatestone Institute, by Soeren Kern, November 2, 2014:

“The increasing momentum of Dutch jihadism poses an unprecedented threat to the democratic legal order of the Netherlands.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“For adherents unable or unwilling to join the armed struggle in Syria or elsewhere, social media offers a form of involvement that allows them to identify themselves as jihadists… without actually having to fight. After all, the movement also considers ‘dawah’ — preaching the ‘call to Islam” — a form of jihad.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“Social media has made it possible for a person to go far more quickly from being a passive recipient of jihadist propaganda messages to a sympathizer and then a supporter… Some are also known to have been involved in atrocities, such as beheading prisoners… social media has changed the structure of the and cohesions of the jihadist movement… it has taken on the characteristics of a swarm (in the group behavior sense).” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“The jihadist movement can only genuinely be disrupted, in a way that prevents the emergence of new guiding figures and structures, if such efforts [not one-off actions] are maintained over an extended period.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

“Dutch jihadists are convinced that the caliphate is not some utopian dream but an achievable reality for Syria and other Muslim nations — and even for the Netherlands.” — Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

The home-grown jihadist movement in the Netherlands is experiencing sudden and explosive growth, according to a new report published by the Dutch intelligence service, AIVD.

The Dutch jihadist movement is not only growing in size and strength, it is also becoming increasingly open and provocative, both online and on the streets, according to the report, which warns that the increasing momentum of Dutch jihadism poses an unprecedented threat to the democratic legal order of the Netherlands.

The 58-page report, entitled “The Transformation of Jihadism in the Netherlands: Swarm Dynamics and New Strength,” provides an in-depth analysis of the various factors underlying the “new dynamism” of the jihadist phenomenon.

According to the AIVD, the Dutch jihadist movement began a process of far-reaching change in late 2010, when several jihadists were prevented from leaving the Netherlands to join fellow jihadists in Pakistan and Somalia.

Their subsequent interactions with Dutch police and judicial authorities prompted the jihadists and other members of their networks to improve their modus operandi, which eventually led to a wholesale internal professionalization of the movement.

At the same time, Dutch jihadists began adopting propaganda methods developed by fellow jihadists in Britain. Inspired by Islam4UK, a now-banned jihadist group founded by the British Islamist firebrand Anjem Choudary, Dutch jihadists launched their own activist movements, namely Sharia4Holland and Behind Bars/Street Dawah (Straat Dawah).

“By making use of activist techniques like demonstrations and leafleting to disseminate provocative jihadist propaganda openly, these groups were able to mobilize some fellow Muslims and attract new recruits,” according to the AIVD. “Many young people, in particular, found a way of venting their jihadist ideals through such activities.”

Social media has added another entirely new dynamic into Dutch jihadism. Beyond allowing far more intensive flows of information and communications between jihadists, both domestically and internationally, social media has also changed the nature of those flows.

Before the emergence of social media, information flowed vertically (hierarchical) from one to many. By contrast, information on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter flows horizontally (peer-to-peer) from many to many, thus greatly expanding opportunities for interactivity. According to the AIVD:

“Jihadists are constantly influencing one another through social media. Young people undergoing radicalization trawl Facebook in search of like-minded individuals and post jihadist material on their own profiles, thus influencing their own circle of friends. On Twitter, jihadists debate quite openly with each other and with their critics, who often face abuse or worse. They also post photographs of Dutch fighters in Syria on Facebook, which are then shared by members of jihadist communities. Lectures are announced as Facebook events, too, so that potential attendees can see whether people they know will be there as well. The Dutch jihadist world has become simultaneously large, small and fast-moving.”

Social media has also enhanced jihadist recruitment efforts:

“For adherents unable or unwilling to join the armed struggle in Syria or elsewhere, such activity provides another form of involvement that allows them to identify themselves as jihadists. It is their way of being part of ‘Syria,’ or the ‘holy war’ in general, without actually having to fight. After all, the movement also considers ‘dawah’—preaching the ‘call to Islam’—a form of jihad. This parity strengthens the links between those who stay at home to practice dawah and those who leave to fight.

“There is no doubt that the chance of coming into contact with jihadism—particularly on social media—has increased substantially in recent years. Consequently, it has become possible for a person to go far more quickly from being a passive recipient of its propaganda messages to a sympathizer and then a supporter. There is also a real danger that such new ‘online jihadists’ might continue radicalizing to the point where they actually commit acts of violence or leave for a conflict zone. In fact, this is exactly how many of the Dutch fighters now in Syria came to be there. They evolved very quickly from followers at home to front-line jihadists. The AIVD has established that a large proportion of them have been trained in Syria in the use of weapons and have taken part in actual combat. Some are also known to have been involved in atrocities, such as beheading prisoners.”

The Dutch-Turkish jihadist known as Yilmaz, pictured in Syria, has proven adept at the use of social media for jihadist “public relations”.

According to the AIVD, social media has changed the structure and cohesion of the jihadist movement in the Netherlands to such an extent that it has taken on the characteristics of a “swarm” (in the group behavior sense of the word). This means that it is highly decentralized, with numerous individual elements that are largely autonomous. Collectively, however, they maintain their cohesion and direction almost as if a single entity.

“The jihadist swarm may be very dynamic and changeable, but it still knows how to move like one tightly ordered body, despite sometimes seeming capricious and unpredictable,” the report says, adding:

“The upshot of all this is that government attempts to tackle particular jihadist individuals or structures will probably have considerably less effect now upon the movement as a whole than they previously would have done. Particularly when they are one-off actions. The movement can only genuinely be disrupted, in a way that prevents the emergence of new guiding figures and structures, if such efforts are maintained over an extended period.”

In addition to the internal and structural developments that have transformed Dutch jihadism, several contextual factors, both domestic and international, have also contributed to its growth.

Domestically, Dutch Salafism has undergone an important ideological shift.

Salafism is a movement that calls on Muslims to return to the form of Islam that was practiced at its inception. Its adherents reject many of the ideas and customs that have become part of Islamic tradition in subsequent centuries.

Present-day Salafism has three main strands: apolitical, political and jihadi. All three pursue the same ultimate objective: the establishment of a society based solely upon the tenets of “pure” Islam.

Unlike their jihadi counterpart, however, the apolitical and political strands argue that the principal means of reaching this goal should be “dawah,” or the “call to Islam” in the form of preaching and proselytization. By contrast, jihadi Salafism prioritizes the “necessity” of violent jihad.

In recent years, a new group of dawah Salafist preachers has emerged in the Netherlands who are more radical than their predecessors, and who have effectively blurred the lines between dawah Salafism and jihadism. The AIVD explains:

“Theirs is a radical message, which not only promulgates intolerance but also smooths over the ideological differences between dawah Salafism and jihadism in respect of the legitimacy of the ‘holy war.’ These preachers do not consider themselves part of a movement separate from that of the jihadis (a distinction the established dawah Salafists draw far more clearly). And it is they who exert the greatest influence over young people with jihadist tendencies or sympathies.

“Due in part to the emergence of preachers operating outside the established non-violent tradition, dawah Salafism has now become something of a breeding ground for jihadism in the Netherlands.”

Internationally, the conflict in Syria, which began in March 2011, has acted as a catalyst, amplifying the effects of all of the other developments to produce an explosive growth of jihadism in the Netherlands.

According to the AIVD, the large numbers of Dutch jihadists travelling to Syria show that “this particular conflict has significantly reduced the barriers to active participation in jihad.” It adds that the propaganda generated by the conflict is fuelling the growth of an “assertive Dutch jihadism” in which jihadist groups are “deliberately pushing at the boundaries of what is permissible under Dutch law.”

The AIVD concludes with a warning:

“Already, reports of jihadists’ supposed progress in Syria in establishing an Islamic caliphate under Sharia law are having a visible effect in the Netherlands, in that they are further radicalizing backers of that ultimate goal. Emanating primarily from groups like [the Islamic State], such stories convince supporters and sympathizers that the caliphate is not some utopian dream but an achievable reality for Syria and other Muslim nations—and even for the Netherlands.”

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter.

Geert Wilders: “War Has Been Declared against Us” A Speech in the Netherlands Parliament

Gatestone Institute, by Geert Wilders, September 4, 2014:

During the past ten years and two days, the ostrich cabinets did nothing. Every warning was ignored. They lied to the people.

Do not prevent jihadists from leaving our country. Let them leave. I am prepared to go to Schiphol [airport] to wave them goodbye. But let them never come back.

Madam Speaker, war has been declared against us.

Madam Speaker, actually I was expecting flowers from you. I am celebrating an anniversary these days. Exactly ten years and two days ago, I left a party whose name I cannot immediately remember. During these ten years and two days. I have been much criticized. Most importantly for always saying the same thing.

My critics are right. Indeed, my message had been the same during all these years. And today, I will repeat the same message about Islam again. For the umpteenth time. As I have been doing for ten years and two days.

I have been vilified for my film Fitna. And not just vilified, but even prosecuted. Madam Speaker, while not so many years ago, everyone refused to broadcast my film Fitna, we can today watch Fitna 2, 3, 4 and 5 daily on our television screens. It is not a clash of civilizations that is going on, but a clash between barbarism and civilization.

The Netherlands has become the victim of Islam because the political elite looked away. Here, in these room, they are all present, here and also in the Cabinet, all these people who looked away. Every warning was ignored.

As a result, also in our country today, Christians are being told: “We want to murder you all.” Jews receive death threats. Swastika flags at demonstrations, stones go through windows, Molotov cocktails, Hitler salutes are being made, macabre black ISIS flags wave in the wind, we hear cries, such as “F-ck the Talmud,” on the central square in Amsterdam.

Indeed, Madam Speaker, this summer, Islam came to us.

In all naivety, Deputy Prime Minister Asscher states that there is an “urgent demand” from Muslims to “crack down” on this phenomenon. Last Friday, in its letter to Parliament, the Cabinet wrote that jihadists are hardly significant. They are called a “sect”, and a “small” group.

This is what those who look away wish, these deniers of the painful truth for ten years and two days, the ostrich brigade Rutte 2.

But the reality is different. According to a study, 73% of all Moroccans and Turks in the Netherlands are of the opinion that those who go to Syria to fight in the jihad are “heroes.” People whom they admire.

And this is not a new phenomenon. Thirteen years ago, 3,000 people died in the attacks of 9/11. We remember the images of burning people jumping from the twin towers. Then, also, three-quarters of the Muslims in the Netherlands condoned this atrocity. That is not a few Muslims, but hundreds of thousands of Muslims in the Netherlands condoning terrorism and saying jihadists are heroes. I do not make this up. It has been investigated. It is a ticking time bomb.

Madam Speaker, is it a coincidence that for centuries Muslims were involved in all these atrocities? No, it is not a coincidence. They simply act according to their ideology. According to Islam, Allah dictated the truth to Muhammad, “the perfect man.” Hence, whoever denies the Koran, denies Allah. And Allah leaves no ambiguity about what he wants. Here are a few quotes from the Quran:

Surah 8 verse 60: “Prepare to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies of Allah.”

Surah 47 verse 4: “Therefore, when ye meet the unbelievers, smite at their necks”. We see it every day in the news.

Another quote from Allah is Surah 4 verse 89: “So take not friends from the ranks of the unbelievers, seize them and kill them wherever ye find them.”

Madam Speaker, the Koran on the table before you is a handbook for terrorists. Blood drips from its pages. It calls for perpetual war against non-believers. That Koran before you is the hunting permit for millions of Muslims. A license to kill. That book is the Constitution of the Islamic State. What ISIS does is what Allah commands.

This bloodthirsty ideology was able to nestle in the Netherlands because our elites looked away. Neighborhoods such as Schilderswijk, Transvaal, Crooswijk, Slotervaart, Kanaleneiland, Huizen, you name it. There, the caliphate is under construction; there, the Islamic State is in preparation.

During the past ten years and two days , the ostrich Cabinets did nothing. It has nothing to do with Islam, they lied to the people. Imagine them having to tell the truth.

But the people have noticed. Two thirds of all Dutch say that the Islamic culture does not belong in the Netherlands. Including the majority of the electorate of the Labour Party, the majority of the voters of the VVD, the majority of the voters of the CDA, and all the voters of the PVV.

The voters demand that, after ten years and two days of slumber, measures are finally taken. The voters demand that something effective happen. No semi-soft palliatives. Allow me to make a few suggestions to the away-with-us mafia. Here are a few things which should happen starting today:

Recognize that Islam is the problem. Start the de-Islamization of the Netherlands. Less Islam.

Close our borders to immigrants from Islamic countries. Immediate border controls. Stop this “cultural enrichment”.

Close every Salafist mosque which receives even a penny from the Gulf countries. Deprive all jihadists of their passports, even if they only have a Dutch passport. Let them take an ISIS passport.

Do not prevent jihadists from leaving our country. Let them leave, with as many friends as possible. If it helps, I am even prepared to go to Schiphol [airport] to wave them goodbye. But let them never come back. That is the condition. Good riddance.

And, as far as I am concerned, anyone who expresses support for terror as a means to overthrow our constitutional democracy has to leave the country at once. If you are waving an ISIS flag you are waving an exit ticket. Leave! Get out of our country!

Madam Speaker, war has been declared against us. We have to strike back hard. Away with these people! Enough is enough!

Click for a video of this speech.

ISIS a Jewish Plot? Propaganda and Islamic Jihad

by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
August 22, 2014

I1052t took her more than nine years of working in the Dutch Ministry of Justice and Security, but Yasmina Haifi finally uncovered the secret truth about the Islamic State: It isn’t Islamic at all. Actually, it’s a Jewish plot.

Yes, really: that terrorist group formerly known as ISIS, responsible for acts of genocide in Iraq, for the beheading of American journalist James Foley, and for the murder of countless women and children in their war to establish a new Islamic Caliphate, Haifi revealed in a recent post on Twitter, is in fact a “preconceived idea from Zionists deliberately to make Islam look bad.”

And IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is not a Muslim terrorist, either. He’s an agent of Mossad.

This, of course, is pure conspiracy theory, ranking in egregiousness somewhere between the blood libel and the theory that Jews are responsible for the 9/11 attacks. And yet, astoundingly, Haifi is not alone in her belief: numerous Islamic and Islamist websites claimNSA whistleblower Edward Snowden possesses documents proving the US, Israel, and the UK conspired to create ISIS in order to preserve the Jewish state.

And that is good enough for Haifi. Although she was dismissed from her post at the ministry immediately following her statement, she maintained in a subsequent radio interview, “I’ve read articles about it. There is plenty of evidence linking Israel and ISIS.”

This must come as surprising – and surely disappointing – “news” to any number of Muslims, including the leader of Holland’s own Muslim Unity Party (Partij van de Eenheid), Abdoe Khoulani, who earlier this summer announced his support for the terrorist group, posting on Facebook: “Long Live ISIS and inshaa-Allah on to Baghdad to take on all that riffraff there.”

And how, too, to explain the all-Muslim pro-ISIS rallies in Amsterdam, The Hague, in Paris and elsewhere across Europe? How to explain that those same ISIS supporters march the streets performing Nazi salutes and chanting “Death to Jews”?

The combination of events – first, the anti-Semitism expressed by IS supporters and, then, the anti-Semitism by calling IS itself a Jewish plot – is more than simply dizzying. It is treacherous. And it can lead only to the creation of more widespread Jew hate, and thorough confusion among politicians, security agencies, and the police.

That, in fact, is the situation already being played out in The Hague, where Mayor Josias van Aartsen’s response to pro-IS demonstrators who called for “All Jews to the gas” and threatened the execution of Jews and infidels worldwide, was to do absolutely nothing. Indeed, even after Dutch Parliament leaders demanded he cut short his vacation and return home to handle the issue, he defended his previous decision to remain on holiday in France during the unrest: “There was no chaos, no anarchy,” he said. “I saw no point in bowing down to this.”

Yet notably, many Muslims in The Hague – particularly those living in the neighborhood of the pro-IS marches – see it differently. Said one 34-year-old, identified only as Brahim, to a reporter for Dutch daily Telegraaf, “They need to get out of our [neighborhood] – or heads with beards are gonna roll.”

Locals Kurds also voiced complaints. “I fled Iraq 14 years ago,” one told the Telegraaf. Now I’m in Holland, and I have to deal with the same fundamentalists. No one protects me. The Netherlands has to crack down hard, before things get entirely out of hand.” Agreed Brahim: “Pick them up and lock them away, would you, please?”

And yet it doesn’t happen. The Josias van Aartsens of the West continue to wave off the threat of radicalized Muslims in European cities, American villages, the provinces of Canada. Think, for instance, of former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, who felt Sharia tribunals would “unify “Europe and former Attorney General Marion Boyd, who advocated involving Sharia law in Canadian family courts. Such examples bring to mind the wise words of former British Home Office Minister Mike O’Brien, who 14 years agoobserved that “multicultural sensitivity is not an excuse for moral blindness.”

Except “moral blindness” is only a beginning. That “chaos” did not erupt in The Hague on July 26 is not the point. The worst violence, the most devastating abuse, does not spontaneously blast its way out of the blue. It begins with words, and with the ideologies that well-placed words create. Those words can be as simple as “kill Jews” or as complex as “Jews created the terrorist group ISIS, which beheads Muslim men and slaughters and enslaves women and children.”

And as Brahim observed, during the demonstrations in The Hague, even toddlers “got a flag shoved in their hands, and cried allahu akbar” in support of IS – words, too, that drive the hate and brutal atrocities that define the Islamic State.

If we can no longer remain morally blind to the actions of the IS and its supporters, wherever they may live, then we can no longer, either, remain deaf to the words that, in their arsenal of hate and violence, form perhaps the most powerful weapons of their jihad.

Abigail R. Esman, the author, most recently, of Radical State: How Jihad Is Winning Over Democracy in the West (Praeger, 2010), is a freelance writer based in New York and the Netherlands

Dutch Jewish Advocate: Rising Anti-Semitism a “Crisis”

by Abigail R. Esman
Special to IPT News
August 6, 2014

Editor’s note: As a follow-up to her story and log illustrating the rash of anti-Semitism sweeping Europe, writer Abigail R. Esman interviewed Esther Voet, director of the Center for Information and Documentation Israel (CIDI). The CIDI is a Jewish human rights organization of the Netherlands.

“I believe that everyone has his own fight in life,” Esther Voet has said. “This is my fight.” She describes running CIDI as her “calling.”

From the start of the latest conflict in Israel-Gaza (known as “Operation Protective Edge”), the Netherlands’ Jewish community has confronted numerous anti-Israel and pro-ISIS protests throughout the country that have dissolved into blatant anti-Semitism. Dutch Jews are being threatened in increasing numbers, and more and more of them are considering emigrating to Israel. It is a sobering development in a country that still celebrates the bravery – and mourns the tragedy – of Anne Frank.

Abigail R. Esman: There have been a number of attacks on Jews since the start of the latest Israel-Gaza conflict. Can you tell me more about what is going on?

Esther Voet: Anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism [are] one for a lot of people – and they are expressing that in many ways right now. There is particularly a lot going on on social media; some people in the Jewish community are receiving threats, including me, on social media. On the other hand, NL is not France, where there’s really a huge problem.

ARE: And there was the pro-ISIS demonstration in the Hague, where people called for “death to Jews.”

EV: There have been several demonstrations. There was one on the 12th of July in the Hague, and there was a more broad one later. The ISIS demonstration was last Thursday the 24th. They talked about a stone where a Jew was hiding, and the stone said “Kill him” – it’s a passage from the Koran. And people were shouting, “Everyone says it’s Zionists, but we know that it’s the Jews, it’s the Jews.” I was there, tweeting in real time, and I called the spokesperson for the mayor about what was going on, and he said “if there’s anything that goes over the red line we will do something,” but they didn’t do anything, already one hour into the demonstration. Absolutely appalling. Appalling.

Now, though, there is a juridical investigation, and a lot of the press is appalled by what happened there.

ARE: Have you been threatened?

EV: There have been some threats – and the police have given me help with some precautions. But I am not afraid of the people who are shouting. I’m afraid of the silent ones.

ARE: Is it all from Muslims? Or also Dutch Christians?

EV: We also have from native Dutch, but if I were to estimate, it’s about 70 percent Muslim and 30 percent Dutch. It also used to be mostly Moroccans, but what I’ve noticed now is that there are also many Turks, which I call the “Erdogan effect”; for the first time, we’ve seen a lot of Turkish flags at demonstrations.

[Note: for examples of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s recent inflammatory rhetoric, see here and here.]

There was also one Moroccan rapper in Amsterdam who mentioned my name and that we were all allowing and approving the genocide, but I was in good company, along with the Minister of Foreign Affairs – his name was mentioned, too.

ARE: You testified at the Knesset about this recently.

EV: Yes – we went to the Knesset, along with several from European countries who are now in the frontline. And by the way, I was the only woman. I told them “I wanted to start with ‘ladies and gentlemen,’ but apparently I have to say only ‘Gentlemen,’ because there are no ladies around here.” More women should stand up for these issues. But in any case, there were people from the Jewish community from France, Germany, Austria, and Hungary, who did not dare to say anything, they claim everything is okay in Hungary though we know it isn’t. Also Great Britain. And there were some ambassadors there as well, including the Dutch Ambassador, to talk about the crisis right now.

ARE: Is it a crisis?

EV: Yes. Though I do need to say that the media in the Netherlands, although still not completely balanced, are doing much better than the crisis in 2009.

ARE: Was that as bad as this?

EV: In the press, it was worse. The thing is, now we have to deal with social media, which was in its nappy days in 2009. And the social media now is creating an environment that is so hostile that real aggression is around the corner.

 

Read more

Who is in More Trouble: Wilders or The Netherlands?

by Timon Dias:

“Freedom of speech is a great thing and we have said nothing that is not allowed.” — Geert Wilders, MP and leader of the Party of Freedom.

Now, the police have apparently decided to become part of the prosecution. They have drafted pre-filled “Wilders forms” to press charges and have offered to come to people’s homes to help them fill out the paperwork.

Dutch Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders again made international headlinesNazi comparisons are rampant, self-proclaimed victims are lining up to sue and now more than ever there is a chance that Wilders actually might be convicted of hate speech.

In an interview on the Dutch Public News Service [NOS] on March 12, Wilders said (10:10): “[People] will now be voting for a safer, a more social, and… in any case a city with fewer costs, and, if at all possible, with fewer Moroccans.”

 

Geert Wilders is interviewed while campaigning, March 12, 2014. (Image source: Video screenshot from Dutch Public News)

Wilders has the numbers to support his concern. Statistics show that 65% of all Moroccan youths have been arrested by police, and that one third of that group have been arrested more than five times.

Wilders emphasizes the inordinate costs associated with the disproportionately high number of Dutch Moroccans registered as social welfare beneficiaries and who are implicated in welfare fraud.

Based on those numbers, Wilders seems to imply that if there were not such a large number of Moroccans, Dutch crime rates and social welfare costs would significantly drop.

Wilder proposes that Dutch Moroccans who are habitual criminal offenders should be deprived of their Dutch passports and sent back to Morocco, an act that is possible as all Moroccans and their descendants are, by Moroccan law, prohibited from relinquishing their Moroccan passports.

Dutch Moroccan criminals are known to be highly indifferent to sentences in Dutch prisons, which are known for their comfort. In a majority, Dutch prisons are populated by Dutch Moroccans.

Moroccans also apparently derive status from prison sentences. Evidently, upon their release, many gloat. Apparently it is only the thought of having to trade the luxury of the Netherlands — even prison — for Morocco that strikes terror into the hearts of potential offenders. In Italy, the same threat is already in effect and acts as a successful deterrent. It seems as if it is only the threat of deportation, more than any other measure, that is likely to deter young Moroccans from a life of crime.

Although the proposal is being used by Wilders’s opponents as either a laughing stock or beating stick, the merits of the proposal are rarely elaborated on, including even by Wilders. A recent poll showed 76% of Dutch voters to be in favor of the measure.

The NOS, interviewing Wilders again on March 14, asked him if he actually meant what he had said regarding Moroccans in general, possibly expecting him to say that he had only been referring to Dutch Moroccan criminals. But Wilders stood firm. He emphasized that his concern lay with the number of Moroccans currently flooding the crime statistics, and repeatedly stated, “The fewer Moroccans, the better.”

“Can you imagine that people are startled by your remarks?” he was asked.

“It is unfortunate if people are startled by the truth,” he said.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Also see:

The Islamization of Belgium and the Netherlands in 2013

Belgian Salafisrby Soeren Kern:

In January, the gangland shootings of two young Moroccan men in downtown Amsterdam drew renewed attention to the growing problem of violent crime among Muslim immigrants. The two men were gunned down with AK-47 assault rifles in a shooting the mayor of Amsterdam, Eberhard van der Laan, described as reminiscent of “the Wild West.”

In March, the Dutch public broadcasting system NOS television reported that the Netherlands has become one of the major European suppliers of Islamic jihadists. According to NOS, about 100 Dutch Muslims are active as jihadists in Syria; most have joined the notorious Jabhat al-Nusra rebel group.

Belgium and the Netherlands have some of the largest Muslim communities in the European Union, in percentage terms.

Belgium is home to an estimated 650,000 Muslims, or around 6% of the overall population, based on an average of several statistical estimates. The Netherlands is home to an estimated 925,000 Muslims, which also works out to around 6% of the overall population. Within the EU, only France (7.5%) has more Muslims in relative terms.

Belgian and Dutch cities have significant Muslim populations, comprised mostly of Turkish and Moroccan immigrants, as well as a growing number of converts to Islam.

The number of Muslims in Brussels—where roughly half of the number of Muslims in Belgium currently live—has reached 300,000, which means that the self-styled “Capital of Europe” is now one of the most Islamic cities in Europe.

In 2013, Muslims made up approximately 26% of the population of metropolitan Brussels, followed by Rotterdam (25%), Amsterdam (24%), Antwerp (17%), The Hague (14%) and Utrecht (13%), according to a panoply of research.

Not coincidentally, Belgium and the Netherlands have been at the forefront of the debate over Muslim immigration and integration in Europe. What follows is a chronological summary of some of the main stories about the rise of Islam in Belgium and the Netherlands during 2013.

In January, the Belgian branch of the Dutch department store chain HEMA lost a wrongful termination lawsuitfiled by a Muslim shop assistant whose contract was not renewed because she refused to stop wearing a hijab, the traditional Islamic headscarf.

The woman, a Belgian convert to Islam, had been employed as temporary sales staff for two months, during which time she wore the hijab at work. But when customers complained, the store manager asked her to remove the headscarf.

After she refused to comply, HEMA declined to extend her contract in sales, but did offer her an alternative job in its warehouse, where she would not have direct contact with clients. She said the alternative job offer was unsatisfactory and then consulted a lawyer.

Lawyers defending the Belgian shop said that to maintain the “neutral and discreet image of HEMA, the shop did not want employees wearing any kind of religious symbols.”

But a labor court in the nearby Belgian city of Tongeren ruled that HEMA did not have a clearly stated policy on headscarves and thus had no valid justification to dismiss the woman. The court ordered HEMA to pay the 21-year-old woman €9,000 ($12,000), the equivalent of six month’s salary, as compensation.

According to the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism, an NGO that helped bring the woman’s case to trial, the main purpose of the legal action was to clarify how far a company can go in seeking to present a “neutral image” to its customers. The NGO believes neutrality cannot be invoked as a genuine and determining occupational requirement, and says it is not self-evident that neutrality can amount to a legitimate goal if and when it is chiefly invoked to please a private company’s clients.

Also in January, the gangland shootings of two young Moroccan men in downtown Amsterdam drew renewed attention to the growing problem of violent crime among Muslim immigrants. The two men were gunned down with AK-47 assault rifles in a shooting the mayor of Amsterdam, Eberhard van der Laan, described as reminiscent of “the Wild West.”

According to the Amsterdam-based newspaper Het Parool, young Moroccans continue their “unstoppable march to become the largest group of violent criminals” in the country, despite decades of government programs aimed at steering young Muslims away from a life of crime. Moroccan gangsters specialize mainly in robberies of banks and jewelry stores, as well as in drug trafficking, according to Het Parool.

Meanwhile, the Dutch newspaper Trouw reported that the Protestant Church of the Netherlands is planning to close up to 800 of its 2,000 churches around the country due to the dwindling number of practicing Christians. Critics of the move say many of these buildings are likely to be converted into mosques.

In February, Members of the Belgian Parliament introduced a bill that would limit the power of Muslim extremists who win elected office at the local or national levels and isolate themselves from the political mainstream.

The move came after members of the newly established Islam Party vowed to implement Islamic Sharia law in Belgium.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Dutch Islamic School’s Lies and Threats Offer Broader Lessons

by Abigail R. Esman:

Violence Against Women in Islam: Report by the Dutch Party for Freedom

Ghazala Khan

Ghazala Khan

G-Khan-murder

By Andrew Bostom:

Images above,  and the following text, via Pamela Geller, summarizing open sources“The killing of Ghazala Khan in Denmark by her brother may be the only instance where an “honor” killing has been photographed while being perpetrated. This  picture was captured on cell phone camera and shows the woman’s brother aiming the gun at his sister, lying on the ground. Her fiancee, also seen, was wounded, but survived. The killing was planned by her entire family, and Pakistani taxi drivers were used as spies to spot her and alert her family.”

****

 

Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom (PVV) has just released a compendious, seminal report on the doctrinal rationale for Islamic misogyny, and its violent consequences for Muslim women in The Netherlands. The report can be downloaded in pdf format, here.

The report argues that,

… in Islam women are victims of various crimes, such as child marriages, forced marriages, confinement, honor-related crimes including murders, forced sex, genital mutilations. The PVV report, which the party has presented to the Dutch authorities, concludes that Islam is the cause of the anti-female violence.

Geert Wilders, leader of the PVV, concludes:

Islam legitimizes violence against women, and even orders it. That is the core of the problem… If we want to root out this misery in the Netherlands, then female Muslims will have to liberate themselves from the prison of Islamic violence and [to] choose freedom.

I have reproduced the full text of the report, below.

***

 “Why do the human rights activists ignore their suffering as though they do not even exist? Why isn’t the cry of these millions of women heard, and why isn’t it answered by anyone, anywhere? Why? Why? Why?” [1]

Wajeha al-Huwaider

 

[1] Wilders, G. (2012) Marked For Death. Islam’s War Against the West and Me. Washington: Regnery Publishing

Introduction

With the mass immigration of recent decades, Islam has made its appearance in our society. And that has meant the arrival of an ideology which is alien to us. Western values such as individual liberty, freedom of speech, separation of church and state, and equality between men and women are achievements that do not exist in Islam. The growing influence of Islam in our society puts those freedoms under pressure. We witness increasing violence against homosexuals, censorship, Islamic anti-Semitism, serious threats against politicians, and even the assassination of a critic of Islam.

But it is not only the non-Muslim world that is faced with the excessive violence and the urge of Islam to curtail freedoms. Within Islam, violence and submission are the rule. The main victims are women. The Dutch government, instead of focusing on countering the Islamization process, combating this violence, and urging women to renounce Islam, gives in and facilitates absurd projects such as separate integration, separate swimming lessons and even separate theater performances. Giving in, looking away or leaving these women to their fate — as the politically correct Netherlands does — is not a solution.

In Islam, women are inferior beings who are subordinated to men in various ways. “Child marriages,” forced marriages, anti-female violence, confinement and shielding women from the outside world, honor-related violence, forced sex and genital mutilation are some of the forms of violence that large groups of Muslim women have to deal with. Within Islam, violence against women is not only legitimized, it is even mandatory.

The lack of attention given to the deplorable situation of women within this ideology and the still dominant, politically correct attitude among politicians and civil servants — which disconnects Islam from the violence against women within Islam — prompted the PVV group in the Dutch House of Representatives to write this report.

This publication presents the position of women in Islam in relation to violence. By letting the Islamic sources speak for themselves, we observe that the endlessly repeated assertion that the above-mentioned abuses have no connection with Islam is not based on facts. Islam legitimizes violence against women, and even orders it. That is the core of the problem. Various studies show that this violence (including forced isolation, honor-related violence and female genital mutilation) is widespread, in the Netherlands as elsewhere.

If we want to root out this misery in the Netherlands, then female Muslims will have to liberate themselves from the prison of Islamic violence and to choose freedom.

G. Wilders (Chairman of the Party for Freedom)

J.J. van Klaveren (MP, Party for Freedom)

The Hague, April 2013

Read more

Wilders in Australia and the “Islamic Problem” – Part I

images (10)By Mark Durie:

Wilders in Melbourne

 Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders’ recent speaking tour in Australia brought him to my home town of Melbourne.  I have been pondering his message since his visit, and this is the first of a series of blog posts which engage with it.

Wilders came to warn Australians about Islam: “I am here to tell you how Islam is changing the Netherlands and Western Europe beyond recognition. I am … here to warn Australia about the true nature of Islam.” (See the text of his speech here).  Wilders turns on its head the Islamic supremacist claim that the Islamic system is superior and Islam the solution to all humankind’s problems. For Wilders, “Islam is the problem, and we should not be afraid to say so.” (Marked for Death, p.64)

To attend Wilders’ Melbourne speech, guests had to make their way past a cordon of police and a hostile collection of left-wing protestors. Once inside, they then had to pass security checks before finding a seat in the auditorium.

The ‘warm-up’ for the evening was a brilliant presentation by Sam Solomon, a former Muslim jurist, now a convert to Christianity, on the Koranic theological basis for discrimination in the socio-political realm. He argued that Islamic theology supports the systematic elevation of specific groups over others: Muslims over non-Muslims and men over women. He invited Muslims to sign his Charter of Muslim Understanding, which affirms universal principles of peaceful co-existence, human dignity and mutual respect between people.

After a brief delay, apparently due to security concerns, Geert Wilders took the podium to address the question of Islam. By the ‘Question of Islam’ I mean the question whether Islam itself is the explanation for the disadvantage faced by Muslims and their non-Muslim neighbours in the world today, including poverty, abuse of women, religious discrimination and persecution, inequality and injustice, societal failure, inferior educational and health outcomes, despotism, violence, and economic backwardness.

Examples of these disadvantages abound.

Read more at Mark Durie’s blog

 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Islam

Ayaan Hirsi AliMichael Coren interviews Ayaan Hirsi Ali:

 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali Responds to Questions at Ohio University:

 

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an outspoken defender of women’s rights in Islamic societies, was born in Mogadishu, Somalia. She escaped an arranged marriage by immigrating to the Netherlands in 1992 and served as a member of the Dutch parliament from 2003 to 2006. In parliament, she worked on furthering the integration of non-Western immigrants into Dutch society and defending the rights of women in Dutch Muslim society. In 2004, together with director Theo van Gogh, she made Submission, a film about the oppression of women in conservative Islamic cultures. The airing of the film on Dutch television resulted in the assassination of Mr. van Gogh by an Islamic extremist. At AEI, Ms. Hirsi Ali researches the relationship between the West and Islam, women’s rights in Islam, violence against women propagated by religious and cultural arguments, and Islam in Europe.

See also:

The Counter Jihad Report’s Youtube playlist for Ayaan Hirsi Ali

Muslims Pressing for Blasphemy Laws in Europe

by Soeren Kern

The Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a bloc of 57 Muslim countries, is pressuring Western countries into making it an international crime to criticize Islam or Mohammed – all on the name of “religious tolerance.”

The Dutch parliament has approved a motion to revoke a law that makes it a crime to insult God.

Free speech activists say the move represents a significant victory at a time when Muslim groups are stepping up pressure on European governments to make it a crime to criticize of Islam or the prophet Mohammed.

Article 147 of the Dutch Penal Code was drafted in the 1930s and had not been used for half a century; leading legislators said there was no longer a need for it. The decision to abolish the law follows national elections in September 2012, in which two liberal parties (the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and the Labour Party (PvdA) emerged victorious.

The issue was brought to the attention of the Dutch parliament in June 2011, when Geert Wilders, a MP who crusades for free-speech, was acquitted after facing trial on charges of inciting hatred and discrimination against Muslims. The judge ruled that Wilders had the right to criticize Islam, even though his opinions may have insulted many Muslims.

Wilders, who leads the Freedom Party, had described Islam as “fascist,” and compared Islam’s holy book, the Koran, to Adolf Hitler’s political manifesto “Mein Kampf.” Amsterdam judge Marcel van Oosten said Wilders’s statements were directed at Islam, not at Muslims, and ruled that the statements were “acceptable within the context of public debate.”

Wilders said at the time that the verdict was “not only an acquittal for me, but a victory for freedom of expression in the Netherlands.” But many European countries still have blasphemy laws which restrict freedom of expression, and in some cases, such laws have been replaced with more general legislation that criminalizes religious hatred.

The decision to scrap the country’s blasphemy law has been hailed internationally by activists, who have long called it outdated and a threat to free speech.

The Venice Commission, the Council of Europe’s advisory body on constitutional matters, issued a report about “The Issue of Regulation and Prosecution of Blasphemy, Religious Insult, and Incitement to Religious Hatred.” The report noted that, in Europe, blasphemy is an offense in Austria, Denmark, Finland, Greece, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands and San Marino.

In addition, “Religious Insult” is a criminal offense in Andorra, Cyprus, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Lithuania, Norway, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain and Switzerland.

Britain, for example, abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales in 2008. But in 2006 the British government enacted the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, which created a new crime of intentionally stirring up religious hatred against people on religious grounds. The new law has led to zealousness bordering on the irrational.

In Nottingham, for example, the Greenwood Primary School cancelled a Christmas nativity play because it interfered with the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. In Scarborough, the Yorkshire Coast College removed the words Christmas and Easter from their calendar not to offend Muslims. In Scotland, the Tayside Police Department apologized for featuring a German shepherd puppy as part of a campaign to publicize its new non-emergency telephone number. As Islamic legal tradition holds that dogs are impure, the postcards used in the campaign were potentially offensive to the city’s 3,000-strong Muslim community;

In Glasgow, a Christian radio talk show host was fired after a debate between a Muslim and a Christian on whether Jesus is “the way, the truth and the life.” In Birmingham, two Christians were told by police “you cannot preach here, this is a Muslim area.” In Cheshire, two students at the Alsager High School were punished by their teacher for refusing to pray to Allah as part of their religious education class. Also in Cheshire, a 14-year-old Roman Catholic girl who attends Ellesmere Port Catholic High School was branded a truant by teachers for refusing to dress like a Muslim and visit a mosque.

In Liverpool, a Christian couple was forced to sell their hotel after a female Muslim guest accused the pair of insulting her during a debate about Islam. In London, Rory Bremner, a political comedian, said that every time he writes a sketch about Islam, he fears that he is signing his own death warrant. At the same time, Scotland Yard says that Muslims who launch a shoe at another person are not committing a crime because the practice is Islamic symbolism.

In recent months, however, Muslims have been lobbying to reinstate blasphemy laws in Britain. A petition reportedly sent to British Prime Minister David Cameron reads: “It is axiomatic that Great Britain is a key player in global harmony. British parliamentarians have made outstanding progress in eradicating racism, anti-Semitism, discrimination, inequalities and other factors causing hurt to all citizens. The trust and hope of millions of British Muslims is placed in yourselves as representatives and Members of Parliament to call for changes in the law to protect the honor of Faith Symbols of Islam and other faiths.”

In February 2012, it emerged that a Muslim activist group with links to the Muslim Brotherhood had asked the British government to restrict the way the British media reports about Muslims and Islam.

More recently, a Muslim lobbying group called ENGAGE launched an exhibition and a month-long campaign “Islamophobia Awareness Month,” highlighting the spread of “Islamophobia” in Britain. The exhibition was held in the British Parliament and ENGAGE activists pressed Members of Parliament to strengthen the existing religious hatred law to provide more protections for Muslims.

In Ireland, a new blasphemy law went into effect in January 2010. The Irish Defamation Act, which created the crime of blasphemous libel, makes “publication or utterance of blasphemous matter” punishable by a fine of up to €25,000 ($32,500).

According to the Irish Times, Ireland’s blasphemy law is being cited by Islamic states “as justification” for persecuting religious dissidents. Pakistan, for example, has cited the Irish statute at the United Nations to support its own blasphemy laws.

In Denmark, blasphemy is outlawed by Paragraph 140 of the penal code, which states: “Anyone who publicly mocks or insults the tenets of faith or worship of any religious community existing in this country legally will be punished by fine or imprisonment for up to four months.” The law has not been used since 1938. Measures were proposed in 2004 to abolish the blasphemy article, but the proposals were not adopted and the law remains on the books.

The rules against hate speech and racism are set down in the infamous Paragraph 266b of the Danish penal code, which states: “Whoever publicly, or with intention to disseminating in a larger circle makes statements or other pronouncements, by which a group of persons is threatened, derided or degraded because of their race, color of skin, national or ethnic background, faith or sexual orientation, will be punished by fine or imprisonment for up to two years.”

Free speech advocate Lars Hedegaard was prosecuted under this statute for remarks made to a blogger in December 2009 criticizing Islam. He was finally acquitted by the Danish Supreme Court in April 2012, which ruled that it could not be proven that he intended the statements to be published.

Also in Denmark, Jesper Langballe, a Danish politician and Member of Parliament, was found guilty of hate speech in December 2010 for saying that honor killings and sexual abuse take place in Muslim families.

Langballe was denied the opportunity to prove his assertions: under Danish law, it is immaterial whether a statement is true or false. All that is needed for a conviction is for someone to feel offended. Langballe was summarily sentenced to pay a fine of 5,000 Danish Kroner ($850) or spend ten days in jail.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute. He is also Senior Fellow for European Politics at the Madrid-based Grupo de Estudios Estratégicos / Strategic Studies Group. Follow him on Facebook.

“Islam to Topple Man-made Democracy”

By Soeren Kern:

Leaders of the group say the  purpose of Belgium’s first Sharia Law court  is to create a parallel  legal system to challenge the state’s authority as the  enforcer of the  civil law protections guaranteed by the Belgian  constitution.

Police in Amsterdam have arrested the spokesperson of the Islamist  group  Sharia4Holland on charges of making death threats against the  Dutch Freedom  Party leader, Geert Wilders.

Abu Qasim was arrested after a speech he gave in Amsterdam’s central Dam  Square on May 25 (video in Dutch here), when he warned that Wilders would be  “dealt with” once the Netherlands became an Islamic state.

Qasim also called Wilders “this dog of the Romans” and — referring to the  Dutch filmmaker and Islam critic who was murdered by a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim in  2004 — warned that  Wilders should learn lessons from “the case of Theo van  Gogh.”

Amsterdam’s multiculturally-minded police initially refused to intervene in the case. Although making death threats is a criminal offense in Holland, police instead arrested a passer-by who tried to challenge the Sharia4Holland speaker.

Qasim was not arrested until three days after the event, after local  politician Robert Flos,  speaking on AT5 television, asked Amsterdam’s left-wing  mayor, Eberhard  van der Laan, why city police did not intervene when Qasim  threatened  Wilders with death.

Qasim, a 29-year-old Islamist who lives in the central Dutch city of Woerden,  is now scheduled to appear in court on July 11.

Sharia4Holland — and its Siamese twin Sharia4Belgium — is a radical  Muslim  movement that wants to impose Islamic Sharia law in the  Netherlands, Belgium  and the rest of Europe. Over the past several  months, Sharia4Holland and  Sharia4Belgium have become increasingly  belligerent in their appeals to fellow  Muslims to overthrow the  democratic order in Europe.

Dutch Justice Minister Ivo Opstelten,  in testimony to the Dutch Parliament  on May 29, said that radical  Muslims are becoming more provocative and activist  and “there is a risk  that Sharia4Holland supporters could cross the line and  use violence.”

In December 2011, the Dutch Intelligence Service AIVD said it was concerned  about the rapid radicalization of Sharia4Holland.  AIVD issued the advisory  after Sharia4Belgium released a video in which  the Belgian Islamist Sheik Abu  Imran (aka Fouad Belkacem, who is  Sharia4Belgium’s main spokesman) declared  that the black flag of Islamic  Jihad will “soon be flying on top of all the  palaces in Europe.”

The December 11 video, which has been translated into English by the Middle  East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), shows Imran dressed in military  camouflage calling for the destruction of the Atomium, a monument in Brussels  that is the national symbol of Belgium.

Imran says: “This is a short message to the King of Belgium and  specifically  to the Muslims in Belgium. This is the flag [black flag of  jihad] that, Allah  willing, will soon be flying on top of that building  over there [the Belgian  royal palace]. There you see the flag [Belgian  flag] of the Taghut [idolaters],  the infidels, and soon the flag of  ‘there is no god but Allah’ will be flying  there, on top of that palace,  and on top of all the other palaces in Europe,  until Allah willing, we  reach the White House.We will not rest, we will not  stop, until this  flag flies on top of that building [the royal palace].”

The video then continues from another location in Brussels —  directly in  front of the Atomium. Imran says: “We can see nowadays how  people are taking  photos, and how people from all over Brussels and from  all over Europe, come  here for what is called ‘tourism’ and take photos  of this monument. They hold  on to this monument. On top, you can see  the Belgian flag. This monument is a  symbol of Belgium.Soon, Belgium  will fall apart. May Allah disperse them and  their country. Amen. Then  this symbol will be useless to them.”

Read more: Family Security Matters

The rapid rise of right wing parties in Europe has the left wing shaking in their PC booties

IS EUROPE LOST? NOT IF THE SURGE IN RIGHT WING PARTIES HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT

Bare Naked Islam:

Europe’s traditional liberal and tolerant policies, when directed toward the most intolerant people on earth (Muslims), are being challenged by right wing patriotic parties in virtually every country. Not surprisingly, this is not sitting well with the socialists, multiculturalists, and Muslim-apolgists who are trying to destroy European culture, traditions, and even Christianity.

Ukranian Week  The Breivik massacres are a brutal awakening for Europe’s politicians, who have tended to ignore the growing Islamophobia and opposition to immigration (justifiable anti-Islam sentiment and opposition to a flood of Muslim immigrants, most of whom live off the government dole, getting benefits that the native populations are not not entitled to) even in countries traditionally liberal and tolerant.

In Scandinavia, across central Europe and especially in France, as Marie Le Pen has just shown in the French elections, hundreds of thousands of people, especially the young, are rallying to parties that promise an end to the influx of immigrants and refugees, a harsh crack-down on Muslim activists and a new emphasis on Europe’s ethnic “purity” and Christian identity.

Across Europe there are now some 30 far-right political parties that are winning votes, entering parliaments, influencing mainstream politicians and even signing agreements with traditional conservative parties – as has happened in the Netherlands. Few of these groups openly espouse the more extreme ravings published in Breivik’s manifesto. But all share similar core beliefs, and all, like Breivik, are spreading these through right-wing websites.

Extremist Patriotic parties on the right are mainly motivated by their visceral opposition to immigration (especially of Muslims), to ethnic diversity and to multiculturalism, which they believe is a danger to European culture and identity. They appeal to latent nationalism, are hostile to pan-European institutions such as the European Union, and have no time for liberalism or “soft” social policies.

 

Nationalism is still a powerful force among far-right groups, which seek to whip up pride in past glories and hatred of any curbs on the right of the majority to enforce its views on minorities. In Hungary, the Jobbik party has made clear its contempt for post-communist democracy. “We are not communists, fascists or National Socialists,” said Gabor Vona, one of its leaders, in January. “But – and this is important for everyone to understand very clearly – we are also not democrats”.

The party received 17 per cent of the vote in elections two years ago. And although the mainstream press gives it little publicity, it disseminates its views effectively on Facebook and other social networking services. And far from being a party made up of social misfits or losers, studies have shown that most of its supporters are young, have jobs, a secondary education or even a degree. This profile is also true elsewhere: most of those who vote for populist right-wing parties in Europe come from the middle classes, and are people afraid of economic and especially social change (aka the welfare state), according to a study made recently by the University of Nottingham, in England.

Read more