Seven senior political figures from different parties have come together to express alarm at what they believe to be the harsh tone in the debate about the relationship between native Dutch people and residents from immigrant backgrounds. The politicians warn Dutch society may become divided if something isn't done to promote a dialogue between the groups.
They are to present the manifesto "Eén land, één samenleving" (one land, one society) to the chairpersons of the youth wings of most of the main Dutch political parties in the The Hague on Tuesday.
The figures behind the initiative include former Liberal Party leader Hans Dijkstal, former junior minister Jos van Kemenade (Labour – PvdA), former D-66 minister Jan Terlouw, former MP Mohammed Rabbae (GroenLinks) and Anja Meulenbelt, a Socialist Party Senator.
"We have to combine our forces," Rabbae said on Monday. "If we do nothing we could be faced with major conflicts and collisions."
The seven have expressed concern about what they see as the "threatened emotional alienation" between native Dutch people and Muslims in the Netherlands.
Rabbae said his contacts with Muslims indicated to him how great the divisions had become since the terrorist attacks in the US on September 11. "The Netherlands was always a country of tolerance and freedom, but we are gradually becoming the pariah of Europe." Continue reading
Category Archives: Holland
Last September Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somalian-Dutch feminist leftist parliamentarian and target of jihadist assassination threats, showed her true leftist colors by seeking to have a small Christian Dutch party outlawed because it opposes homosexual “marriage” and abortion. But Ali is not stopping at trying to ban political parties in her adopted country. Now, according to the Brussels Journal, Ali has
told the Belgian authorities that they should ban the country’s largest party, the “Islamophobic” Vlaams Belang. In an interview with the Antwerp newspaper Gazet van Antwerpen (1 February), she said why she regards the VB as a dangerous party:
“I would ban the VB because it hardly differs from the Hofstad group [a Jihadist terror network in the Netherlands, involved in the assassination of Theo van Gogh]. Though the VB members have not committed any violent crimes yet, they are just postponing them and waiting until they have an absolute majority. On many issues they have exactly the same opinions as the Muslim extremists: on the position of women, on the suppression of gays, on abortion. This way of thinking will lead straight to genocide.”
So, enough of this business about Hirsi Ali’s courage in the face of Islamic death threats, which requires us to treat her as our hero. Her denunciation of a leading conservative European political party as Nazi-like shows that she is as much of an enemy to the West as she is to traditionalist Islam. Anti-Islamists who make Ali their hero are deluding themselves and weakening the West.
HT: View form the Right.
Well, this is very extraordinary. I thought she was fighting the right cause. But it seems now she is as intolerant as the people she is apparently fighting against. I mean, precisely if you are defending liberty of expression, anything can be defended. So it would be very good for someone to oppose homosexual marriage or abortion and for others to feel themselves offended, WITHOUT ANY VIOLENT ACT -or inciting others to do it-, and WITHOUT CALLING OTHER COUNTRIES TO INFLUENCE A GOVERNMENT IN INTERNAL POLICY.
And, by the way, where the Belgian conservative party has said they are going to "supress" -that sounds like Killing them- homosexuals, that the men can beat the woman, etc?
I just do not know what to make of this.
I agree with Paul Belien when he says:
The Dutch “integration test” illustrates the same attitude that seems to inspire Ms Hirsi Ali: Immigrants are welcome if they condone gays. They are not welcome if they oppose abortion. If this is how “good” immigrants are to be selected from “bad” ones, it will certainly not solve the basic problem of the West, its birth dearth. On the contrary.
Yes, now that I have seen what Hirsi Ali wants (dictatorship from another point of view), hmmm, I think that she is not pointing in the right direction. And by the way, in Holland the free expression was held as the basic motive for the publication of a book in which some Muslim clerics said homosexuals should be thrown from a tower. Why on earth someone can say things like that and not to say he/she is not convinced by the social need of homosexual "marriages"'? Moreover, nearly all the people are convinced that the homosexuals have to be united in some way for the State to know, but I really do not believe they are asking because of that to kill them or even to discriminate them.
You can vote this parties or not, you can be Christian or not, etc. That is a PERSONAL decision, no one is going to hurt you for that. But that doesn't mean that this people cannot unite themselves to defend democratically their points of view, that really are correspondent to Western Constitution. There are people that oppose to their views and so people can test their own views.
Lastly, I do not think that a totalitarism is fought by another. And with this act, Hirsi Ali is just doing the same (she intends not to have discussions on these subjects): forbidding the freedom of expression. But as the rest are not like the Islamofascists she can be totally calm and peaceful: no one is going to harm her for that. And if somone does it, surely his/her action is not going to be applauded even by the people who supports a ban of abbortion or says no to homosexual marriage.