4
   

Anti-Muslim Dutch politicians in hiding after death threats

 
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 12:01 pm
nimh wrote:
The big news in Holland this week is the expulsion of controversial former minister of Immigration and Integration, Rita Verdonk, from the rightwing liberal party VVD, in which she had been the number two politician.

For the backstory, see:

VVD in crisis after dismissing Verdonk.

Verdonk, who acquired the nickname "Iron Rita" for her hardline immigration and asylum policies in the two previous governments, is reserving the right to stay in Parliament as independent MP and possibly establishing her own party - and polls accord her anything between 12% and 18% of the vote if she would.

Note: that would be 12-18% on top of the numbers for Geert Wilders' anti-immigrant Party. His Freedom Party would in that scenario be left with another 5-7% -- making for a cumulative 19-23% for the anti-immigrant right.

Rita Verdonk has now been told by the board of the VVD party that she should either resign her seat in parliament or face being expelled from the party.

She chose to stay in Parliament and preempt being expelled by stepping out and founding her own party instead.

Her party is called "Trots op Nederland", or "Proud of the Netherlands." (Yes, really.)

Depending on whether you trust the rather staid Political Barometer poll or the rather sensationalist NIPO poll, she can count on 10% or 20% of the vote. If you add the numbers for Geert Wilders' Freedom Party, you have either 19% or 25% for the anti-immigrant, populist/nationalist right.

I find that scary.

So on the one hand we now have a small underground clique of crazed Islamist zealots willing to commit violence or even murder for their religion; and on the other we have up to a quarter of the national population ready to sign on to stridently xenophobic, nationalist politics.

It's two very different kinds of scary, but it's both pretty friggin scary.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 12:32 pm
Here's some reports in English:

Rutte: Verdonk's decision was inevitable

This article was published on the 16th after Verdonk gave up her party membership before she was expelled. It retraces and summarises the background of how it all came about.

Verdonk founds nationalist movement

This very short article was published after the news of Proud of the Netherlands first broke.

In addition to the two polls I just mentioned, there was one by the country's third pollster, Maurice de Hond, which found that 25% of respondents said that there was "a fairly large chance," "a large chance," or "(near-)certainty" that they would vote for her party.

Going on those three, it seems that Verdonk's new party would predictably almost halve the support of Geert Wilders' Freedom Party, and take over a third of the votes of the VVD with her. But she would also take something like a fifth of the Christian-Democratic party's supporters, and one in eight or so supporters of the hard-left Socialist Party.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Oct, 2007 12:43 pm
Meanwhile, in other news:

Quote:

Summary:

Quote:
Every day Amsterdam police chief Bernard Welten is aware of the fact that the situation in Slotervaart can escalate and riots like we saw in Paris last year could break out, he has said. There has been unrest in the district since the 22-year-old Bilal B. was shot and killed at a police station by a police officer after he stabbed two officers. Youths set fire to cars and threw stones at the police station and a media van. Welten blames a hard core of some 35 teenage troublemakers.


Regarding what happened with Bilal B., the Radio Netherlands Press Review of 16 October 2007 said:

Quote:
* Suicide by cop

The other story making all of the papers again is Sunday's stabbing in Amsterdam's Slotervaart neighbourhood. More information has emerged about the man who walked into the Slotervaart police station and stabbed two officers before being shot dead. "Culprit known to police" headlines Trouw while AD writes, "Bilal B. connected to terrorist group".

Trouw writes that he was part of a group of mostly Moroccan youths that hung around in the neighbourhood and came into regular contact with the police. He had been convicted for theft and grievous bodily harm but also suffered from schizophrenia and had spent some time in a psychiatric clinic.

He was discharged in August but checked himself in again on Friday saying he felt suicidal. He was out on a supervised walk on Sunday but managed to abscond and made his way to the police station. Trouw writes he committed 'suicide by cop', a phenomenon more common in United States.

De Volkskrant writes that he had contact with the Hofstad group, a group of radical Dutch Moslems that includes Mohamed Bouyeri, who murdered filmmaker Theo van Gogh, and Samir Azzouz, who was recently convicted of planning terrorist attacks in the Netherlands. The paper quotes a Hofstad group source as saying," we only had fleeting contact with Bilal, are they trying give him a bad name, or make it less horrible that they shot him dead?"
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Oct, 2007 04:24 pm
Crossposting this from the Sarkozy thread..

Encouraging article below!

It seems that Sarkozy has found the right way to send out the message on extremist Islamism, on several different levels.

Summarising:

  • Accentuate the positive. (Praise the mainstream Muslims who have cooperated in the fight against extremism.)
  • Give credit where credit is due. (Go out of your way to emphasise their contributions.)
  • Isolate the extremists. (By pitting them as the enemies of mainstream Muslims, who threaten the wellbeing of normal Muslims.)
  • Describe the extremists as unislamic. (Instead of conflating extremism with Islam overall, which drastically expands the group that feels excluded into the enemy camp.)
  • Be fierce and clear that there will be no refuge and no pardon for violent extremists. (And contrast this with an ironclad guarantee that uninvolved muslims will always be treated as equal citizens.)
All of this is fine but incomplete without one important last point:

  • Show that you're not just about empty talk. When you emphasize that you are open and exclusive towards normal muslims - when you try to undermine the impression among minority youth that they are so systematically excluded and discriminated against that they might as well turn radical - you've got to have the beef to show you're for real.
Sarkozy, it seems, has "gotten" this. When it comes to his assertion that "in France, we respect those who practice Islam," there is a lot to be caught up with in reality. But it does help tremendously that he can point out that "some members of his own government were observing Ramadan" too - that French Muslims have been let in, included, at the level of substantive government positions. That gives Sarkozy's message a credence that previous French Presidents - or most of his counterparts in other EU countries for that matter - singularly lack.

Quote:
Sarkozy praises French Muslims

The Scotsman
Mon 1 Oct 2007

French President Nicolas Sarkozy praised the country's Muslim minority on Monday as peaceful and tolerant, adding that any extremists who wanted to upset this calm would be expelled from France.

He spoke at an iftar dinner breaking the Ramadan fast at the Grand Mosque of Paris, whose moderate rector Dalil Boubakeur is head of the French Muslim Council (CFCM) that Sarkozy created in 2003 when he was interior minister.

"Thanks to you, our country has not seen any increase in tensions in relations between Muslims and non-Muslims," the president told Boubakeur and other CFCM leaders.

"Many envy us for this peaceful situation. Some extremists want to end it," he said. France's five-million-strong Muslim minority is the largest in Europe.

"Those who want to kill or commit violence in the name of Islam, who detest others in the name of Islam have nothing to do on French soil," he said. "Those who do not want to spread the message (of peace) will be expelled from French territory."

France occasionally expels radical preachers, sometimes with much fanfare and sometimes quietly. [..]

After praising religious tolerance in France, Sarkozy urged Muslim countries to treat their non-Muslim minorities better.

"In France, we respect those who practice Islam," he said. "I wish countries with Muslim majorities had the same respect for differences and other people's identities."

Without mentioning names, he said some members of his own government were observing Ramadan, the Islamic fasting month due to end around October 13.

Justice Minister Rachida Dati and State Secretary for Towns Fadela Amara come from a Muslim background. Amara accompanied Sarkozy to the dinner at the mosque.


--------------------------

However, to keep our feet on the ground for a moment still, also do read this:

FRANCE: Two Years After Riots, Little Has Changed
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Oct, 2007 05:03 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Steve 41oo wrote:
Its time to engage in a battle of ideas. I'm not clever enough to do so, but I did come up with this

fight

Fundamentalist
Irrational
Religious
Extremism

with

Factual
Intelligible
Rational
Explanation.


Well, how do you fight your own extremistic ideas? In a country lead by the head of a Christian church? Proud of what is is and got by invading foreigners?

I could imagine that such is rather difficult to handle ... especially, if you want to act lawfull - laws, made under a religious spirit by a religious inspired society.


Walter

It is very hard for me to believe that you can know so much about American politics and history and so pitifully little about the same subjects as respects the UK.

So how am I to explain your post?

Clearly the UK is not a theocrasy.

Almost as clearly the IRA was not fighting the UK on a theocratic front.

If your point is that Muslim theocrasies (eg Iran) are only figuratively theocratic or that extremist groups like Al Qaeda are only conveniently theocratic (Just like European counterparts!), than you have really disappointed me.

Sad to say though that your defense can only be:

"No, I am not being spectacularly disingenuous, I really believe this tripe!"
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2007 01:50 am
You intoduced the term "theocratic" here. Now. Neither did I use it nor had itbeen mentioned re this subject before here.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Oct, 2007 05:06 pm
Walter Hinteler wrote:
You intoduced the term "theocratic" here. Now. Neither did I use it nor had itbeen mentioned re this subject before here.


Now you are being disingenuous.

You challenged steve with the assertion that he lives in a country led by the head of a Christian church.

I am convinced you don't believe that the Queen is, in any meaningful way, the "head" of the Church of England, or that she, in a substantive way, "leads" the UK.

Therefore I can only assume that you are trying to establish some equivilence between a "theocratic" UK and a "theocratic" Iran.

You don't need to use the word "theocratic," to imply it.

Since the UK is clearly NOT a theocrasy, I can only assume you are suggesting steve, and others, should not consider Iran a theocrasy, or more to the point, that muslim extremists are using their religion as a shield for their political goals much as Henry VIII and the IRA did.

First of all, while Henry did, the IRA did not.

Secondly the comparison you suggest is only valid when considering a Christian monarch of hundreds of years ago and a modern Islamic Supreme Leader. Clearly, Elizabeth II is not disguising political interests behind religious veils.

Finally, the real issue is not whether or not the Theocrats are true religious zealots, but whether or not they are successful in firing up a significant number of their followers on a largely religious basis.

Henry was, Elizabeth and the IRA never tried.

The would be Caliphs of modern Islam, very definately are trying, and succeeding.

In any case, avoid my assumptions by more clearly making your point.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Oct, 2007 02:37 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:
You intoduced the term "theocratic" here. Now. Neither did I use it nor had itbeen mentioned re this subject before here.


Now you are being disingenuous.

You challenged steve with the assertion that he lives in a country led by the head of a Christian church.

I am convinced you don't believe that the Queen is, in any meaningful way, the "head" of the Church of England, or that she, in a substantive way, "leads" the UK.
Actually Finn Queen Elizabeth is Head of State and Head of the Established Church of England. So Walter is right in a way. In anycase I wouldnt challenge him on his knowledge of this country...he knows more about it than me...and probably you and the Queen too...Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Oct, 2007 03:12 am
Actually, HM the Queen is the "Supreme Governor of the Church of England", and as Sovereign, HM the Queen is both Head of State and Head of the Government. :wink:
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 31 Oct, 2007 03:23 pm
See I told you. She's probably related to some Hanoverian as well.................




as Walter.


Good Evening Your Majesty, and Mrs Majesty Smile
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 08:34 am
Quote:
Nine days in Slotervaart
Radio Netherlands
2007-10-19

Summary:

Quote:
In an unusually violent week in Amsterdam's Slotervaart district, cars were torched and youths clashed with police on consecutive nights after a Moroccan was shot dead at a police station. He was killed by a policewoman he had just stabbed.

The issue of often Moroccan problem youths in the Netherlands goes back to a problematic immigration history, but the problems in Slotervaart are caused by a limited group of around 35 criminal youths.

Experts and Minister ter Horst reject a comparison with the French riots: there is far more poverty, unemployment and racism in the Paris suburbs. The Dutch government spends millions of euros on Slotervaart, and police are in regular contact with religious leaders and community representatives.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Nov, 2007 08:36 am
Quote:
One in 20 Dutch is Muslim
Expatica
2007-10-24

Summary:

Quote:
About 5% of the Dutch population is Muslim, according to new figures for 2006 from Statistics Netherlands (CBS). The figure is based on a new, more reliable methodology, and is lower than earlier estimates. It comes to about 850,000 people, when old calculations had put the number at more than one million.

Previously the CBS based its estimates on external research and the percentage of Muslims in the country of origin. Now the agency uses data from its Ongoing Survey into Living Conditions. In this survey people themselves indicate what religious congregation they consider themselves a part of.

Almost half of people of non-Western background in the Netherlands follow Islam. Turks and Moroccans are the largest groups of Muslims, but there are also 12,000 native Dutch Muslims.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 Nov, 2007 12:48 am
Dutch MP makes anti-Qur'an film
Quote:
A rightwing Dutch MP said yesterday that he was making a film to highlight what he calls "fascist" passages in the Qur'an, in his latest high-profile criticism of Islam.

The interior and justice ministers expressed concern but said they had no authority to stop Geert Wilders screening his film. Wilders plans to depict parts of the Qur'an he says are used as inspiration "by bad people to do bad things".

Less than 10 minutes long, the film is expected to be shown in late January. It will show "the intolerant and fascist character of the Qur'an", said Wilders, whose anti-Islam campaign helped his Freedom party win nine seats in parliament in last year's election. In the past, Wilders has compared the Qur'an to Adolf Hitler's book Mein Kampf. He has claimed the Netherlands is being swamped by a "tsunami" of Islamic immigrants.

In 2004 a film director, Theo van Gogh, had his throat slit by an Islamist after his film Submission portrayed abused Muslim women with Qur'anic texts written on their near-naked flesh. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who wrote the screenplay, was threatened in a note left on Van Gogh's body.
A justice ministry spokesman, Wim van der Weegen, said the government was "taking measures" before the broadcast.

Wilders said he was not afraid of reprisals. "I have lived with 24-hour protection for three years," he said. "I will make the film and see what reaction it creates."
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Dec, 2007 02:37 pm

Summary:

Quote:
Three out of four Muslims residing in Spain say they are happy to do so, according to a new government-sponsored poll that officials argue highlights the "absolute integration" of approximately one million Muslims immigrants into Spanish society. Among those who have been there more than 10 years the figure rises to 83%.

The freedom to practice their religion was the principal factor respondents cited for their happiness. However, the poll also showed that 2% support the use of violence to spread their beliefs.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Dec, 2007 03:34 am
20,000 Muslims in Spain believe in spreading their religion through violence!
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Dec, 2007 07:19 am
Not many, if you think about the past 711 years ...
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Dec, 2007 07:34 am
I think that's an amazing statistic. So much that I would like to know exactly what the question was. Islam is not prohibited in Spain. They can worship quite freely, yet 2% feel they have a right to use violence to spread their beliefs! What percentage of German Catholics believe in spreading Catholicism through violence?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Dec, 2007 10:15 am
Steve 41oo wrote:
I think that's an amazing statistic. So much that I would like to know exactly what the question was. Islam is not prohibited in Spain. They can worship quite freely, yet 2% feel they have a right to use violence to spread their beliefs!

Unless it was a survey of a massive scale, 2% is a near-meaningless number. Say the margin of error in the poll was what it is in US election polls, about 3%, then it's a number that might represent up to 5% of Muslims, or might well represent 0%.

Eg: say the survey was of 1,000 people - I have no idea, but that would be a fairly typical polling sample - then we're talking 20 respondents who said that the use of violence to spread their beliefs is in principle OK; and then you'd in turn talk about a fraction of that again who would themselves be willing to use it - i.e., 0 or 1 persons in the sample.

There's just not much to read stuff into on that count, here. The survey must have yielded lots of info about what the mainstream of Spanish Muslims think, the majority of them or respective significant minorities of them on any one question -- but result groups constituting one or two or three percent of the sample, that's akin to meaningless.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Dec, 2007 12:02 pm
The poll was taken between Juin 25 and July 16, 2007, with N=2.000 and an error of ±2,2%.

Source:

(And thus the conservative and right-wong Spanish media headlined something like "nearly 5% of Spanish Muslims support radical Islamists" whilöe the more social-democratic and left leaning didn't focus on this topic.)
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 17 Dec, 2007 01:02 pm
nimh wrote:
Steve 41oo wrote:
I think that's an amazing statistic. So much that I would like to know exactly what the question was. Islam is not prohibited in Spain. They can worship quite freely, yet 2% feel they have a right to use violence to spread their beliefs!

Unless it was a survey of a massive scale, 2% is a near-meaningless number. Say the margin of error in the poll was what it is in US election polls, about 3%, then it's a number that might represent up to 5% of Muslims, or might well represent 0%.

Eg: say the survey was of 1,000 people - I have no idea, but that would be a fairly typical polling sample - then we're talking 20 respondents who said that the use of violence to spread their beliefs is in principle OK; and then you'd in turn talk about a fraction of that again who would themselves be willing to use it - i.e., 0 or 1 persons in the sample.

There's just not much to read stuff into on that count, here. The survey must have yielded lots of info about what the mainstream of Spanish Muslims think, the majority of them or respective significant minorities of them on any one question -- but result groups constituting one or two or three percent of the sample, that's akin to meaningless.
It was a representative sample. Therefore the results are representative. Overall there may not be 20,000 muslims in Spain who think violence is justified, it may be more or it may be less, but it aint zero[/i], and the results from the poll are statistically significant or no polling organisation would use them or publish them for fear of being totally discredited.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/20/2019 at 02:06:13