This is the kind of ‘let me be clear’ we can all appreciate:
Wilders slams Dutch-Turkish celebrations
Anti-Islam Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders says next year’s celebrations of the 400th anniversary of Dutch-Turkish relations should be called off. His commentsÂ which appearÂ in the opinion section of Dutch newspaperÂ de VolkskrantÂ on Saturday have been published online.
He writes that Turkish President Abdullah GÃ¼l is not welcome on a state visit to the Netherlands. He says there’s nothing to celebrate.
“GÃ¼l’s Islamic regime and his party colleague, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, are no friends to the West and therefore neither to the Netherlands. President GÃ¼l is not welcome. Turkey has no place in the community of European values and there’s no reason for a party.”
“Whoever looks further than his nose can see that the regime of GÃ¼l and Erdogan is busy killing off Turkey’s secular constitution in order to re-Islamise the country.”
Next year marks 400 years since the then Republic of the Netherlands set up its first diplomatic mission in Istanbul, at the time the capital of the Ottoman Empire. Major celebrations are planned to mark the anniversary.
Swedish Daily Pimps Arabic as ‘Just Another European Language’
Arabic, a European language like any other….?
We’ve heard worse, from no less than NicolasÂ Sarkozy: “Arabic Is the Language of the Future”Â
But don’t take my word for it. Just believe what the elites tell you and you’ll be right.
I’m astonished at how worse off the continent is than us, when most of their rulers don’t even have the excuse of an imperial relationship with their colonisers. Why do you think this is so?
I’m struck by how often I come across a comment from a European in one country talking about the Muslim invasion of another European country along the lines of: “Our Muslims aren’t as bad.”
For example, I’ve seen Germans commenting on the Muslim presence in Britain, saying the German experience with Turks wasn’t so bad; likewise I’ve seen French people, even French politicians, say things like “We don’t want it to get as bad as England here” in relation to Muslims. Likewise, Scottish people delude themselves into thinking that Scotland’s experience with Mohammedans has been less horrific than that of England, not because there are fewer of them there, but because Scotland’s superior moral qualities (vis-a-vis England) somehow rubbed off on the Muslims who came there, making them contented and good.
How to explain the difference in views? Probably people just progressively get used to thing they really shouldn’t get used to and learn to accept them as now standard features of their national life. Of course the Establishment media in each country is happy to assist in this process with its Muslim-friendly conditioning. Then, when they look at other countries, they are shocked by what the Muslims do there because they haven’t got used to them or received the media conditioning. Of course, as in the Scottish example, a residual sense of nationalism, a belief that each country has unique moral qualities which it somehow manages to imprint on its Muslims, is probably a factor too.
Most British people and politicians would be utterly shocked if, say, Pakistani politicians routinely turned up in Britain, urging their people not to assimilate, proclaiming that forcing people to learn English was a violation of human rights, and demanding that Urdu-language schools be set up with Paki teachers flow in from Pakistan. Likewise, they would be profoundly shocked if the Pakistani state owned and controlled most of the major mosques in Britain and, in fact, was the leading building contractor in Britain. If third-generation Pakistani immigrants often couldn’t speak English, this, too, would disturb the consensus in Britain. Even more so if the Pakistani government summoned “British” politicians of Pakistani ancestry to Islamabad to instruct them on how they could best advance the interests of Pakistan within the British power structure. All of these things would be so shocking, in fact, that the the political and media elite probably wouldn’t accept it. They would demand legislative changes that would bring this state of affairs to an end. Yet this is exactly what goes on in Germany, with Turks instead of Pakistanis and the Turkish state in place of the Pakistani state.
But most Germans would probably be shocked if their country was a major hub for the international jihad, as Britain undoubtedly is. Britain not only regularly suffers the effects of jihad domestically but exports it abroad. Even the Pakistani government has complained that “British” extremists are helping to radicalise Pakistan. Many of the jihadists now in office or campaigning for office in the Middle East following the so-called Arab Spring lived in Britain. Likewise, scandals like the Pakistani rape gangs or the massive Muslim vote fraud that (according to the Muslim Baroness Warsi) determined the outcome of the last general election in Britain would provoke astonishment and outrage in Germany and probably political demands for immediate change.
Many people think of France as being the country that has sunk furthest into the Islamic darkness. And I think that is probably true, based on the sheer numbers of Muslims who live there. Some aspects of what is going on in France seem astounding to the outsider. In particular, the no-go areas (Zones Urbaines Sensibles) stand out; and the crime epidemic in Marseilles where the Muslims outgun the police with their AK-47s. Overall, Muslims are about two-thirds of the French prison population. Amazing. Quite a few French people think it’s not that bad, though.
And there are aspects of the French experience that are actually far more favourable than that of the other countries of Europe. The French republican ideology “We are all French” has had some effect. It’s very rare to hear of Islamic terror plots originating among Muslims raised in France – far, far more rare than it is in Britain or even Germany. And when these plots do occur, they tend not to target France but some other country.
All in all, it’s a bit like the old metaphor of a frog boiling in water. If you only turn the heat up gradually, the frog doesn’t notice and will let itself be boiled alive. If you put it straight into a pan of boiling water, though, it will jump out again straight away. If you could somehow immediately apply the Muslim-imposed conditions of France to Britain, or Britain to Germany, or Germany to France or any possible combination, it would be like putting the frog into already-boiling water. There would be shock, outrage and immediate demands for change. But when it creeps up on you slowly, it’s OK.
About the historical roots of Muslim colonisation, France did have colonial ties, like Britain. In fact, in France’s case, it was worse because there were many Muslims who fought on the French side during the Algerian war and the French state felt an obligation to let them settle in France once the war was lost. With Germany, the thing was much more formally managed with the “Recruitment Agreements” the German state concluded with other countries, including, fatally, Turkey. The fact that the German state had publicly sought out and concluded these agreements gave the whole thing an air of being a German choice rather than something that had just happened, creating a sense of obligation.
With most other countries that have islamised much more recently, such as Spain or the Scandinavian countries, I’d say it’s primarily a case of ideological infection. The countries that had already embarked on the insane experiment of allowing non-Europeans to colonise Europe were forced to develop a multicult ideology as it started to go off the rails. Its core purpose was to make what was very bad seem like it was actually good. Some suckers elsewhere foolishly believed it then started to apply the ideology in their own countries, with calamitous consequences.
It’s the traditional do-gooder countries (Netherlands, Scandinavia) that are going down first. Their naive idealism was fatal. But, at the same time, they are also producing the first and most effective responses to the problem (Wilders, Danish People’s Party), although this seems to be happening much more slowly in Sweden. In some ways it’s easier for them to mobilise political change because they have smaller populations. In large countries like France, Britain, Germany or Spain, significant parts of the population may not see what is happening if they live outside of the main cities or far away from the worst-affected areas. And of course the media routinely screens out Muslim misdeeds so awareness spreads only gradually.