Banning speech - banning
Fjordman the blogger from
wrote a piece exposing the fellowtravellers of Islam called: "I
am a terrorist groupie, hear me roar"
The title says it all. Go and read it anyway. That is an order!
Where was I? Where are my pills?
O yes. Fjordman. Let's lift a part out of the article that deals with the
heroic work of people who opposed Multiculturalism in the beginning, the
Genesis of the resistance against the suicidal Left. The first blossoming
of the force of Life in the great rotting corps, the fallen tree of
Christendom. Seedlings like "Carl I. Hagen, Pia Kjærsgaard of the
Danish People’s Party, Pim Fortuyn, Theo van Gogh and Geert
The seedlings of a new
These seedlings were set upon by the Ravens of the Left. Any opposition
against Multiculturalism, the great ideology of the Left met with
hysterical opposition, public trials by the press and the intelligentsia,
hell bent on taking us all with them into the end of history. The end of
One of the oddest seedlings flowered in The Netherlands in 1990. A man
called Mohamed Rasul wrote a book called: "De ondergang van
Nederlands - Het land van de naiëve dwazen" or "The coming
downfall of the
- The nation of gullible fools".
Gullible Fools - Harsh but Fair.
The author, a Pakistani called Mohammed Rasoel or Mohamed Rasul wrote a
short book on the threat of Islam, the treat of importing millions of
Muslims into a nation and a culture that had gone too soft to defend
itself. The book was published in 1990. Or in 1987. It has not been
translated into English, although the author originally put it together in
bad English and had it translated by René Kurpershoek, who perhaps had a
significant contribution in its composition. The real name of the Prophet Mohammed, for that is what nom de plume
Mohammed Rasul means, was Zoka F.
It was Rasul's intention to write a counter Qoran - his own Satanic
Verses. He began writing about growing up in a Muslim family in
, growing up to be a Pakistani, travelling to Europe and arriving in the
best and most gullible nation after
: The Netherlands.
He sees the Netherlander through the eyes of an outsider and shows their
great points: easygoing, self-critical, calm and ready to excuse any fault
in a foreigner in order to exell at the highest virtue of Dutch society in
the 70ies and 80ies. Tolerance and understanding of the Holy Other. To be
not Nazis. To be anti-Nazis. To be members of the post-war resistance.
Rasul prophesies: by taking the negative of Nazism as a blueprint of
society, the gullible Dutch will eventually end up at the same station as
the Jews. He makes more prophesies, some quite obvious to many observers
for instance to me at the same time, a teenager growing up in The
Netherlands, others quite perceptive due to the islamic insider
- there will be more crime, fuelled by moslim crime
- the Dutch will become more criminal too
- the Dutch will become cynical and untrusting, less gullible
- the value of a witnesses in courtcases will diminish, because Muslims
lie and deceive
- Dutchmen will lose the "look of innocence in their eyes"
- Dutchmen will become irritable and aggresive
- Corruption will become epidemic
- Islamic groups will impose parts of Sharia on Dutch law
- Different Muslim groups will clash with each other and not just with the
- The cosiness, the sense of humour, the sense for freedom of the
Netherlanders will dissapear
And others. And all this to no gain as Rasul points out. Because there is
no gain in replacing a native population and they will not adopt the laws
of the host population because those laws are weaker and less dominant
than the laws of Islam. Laws travel with populations. Rasul points out
there would have been no Mafia in the
if they had kept the Italians out. And lots of Americans would have been
better off that way.
Again: the Dutch are so scared of treating other like the Nazis treated
Jews that they will be like the Jews themselves.
Meanwhile, in 2006 all those Muslim fruits have come to fruition.
In the middle of the book Rasul describes the phenomenon of Political
Correctness, which was still nameless in 1990. He shows how anyone
critisizing Islam will be ostracized from civilized society, will be sued,
and found guilty by a Dutch Judge of "Discrimination". This is
the same that the illustrious Fjordman says
Only Rasul said it in 1990. Or even in 1987. A few years after Marcus
Bakker managed to get article 1 of the Dutch Constitution amended
in a way inspired by the Soviet Communism.
The Gem: the proof of Rasul´s allegation.
Rasul was proofed right. He was attacked by Dutch journalists and
academics for his stance on Islam and Muslims. He appeared in talk shows
Koenraad Elst, of Brussels Journal writes:
"The Dutch press frantically tried to uncover his real identity; a
television talk show host tried to grab his passport and pull off the
shawl with which he covered his face; a Muslim politician was ostensibly
willing to talk to him, only to pass his teacup onto the police for the
The Anne Frank Foundation, whose directors were the high priest keeping
the mysteries of the cult of Anne Frank, guardians of the taboo of the
Holocaust sued Rasul in 1992. Rasul was convicted of "discriminating
Muslims" of making "sweeping statements against Muslims".
"It proves that the general thrust of my book is correct, that
Dutch society is changing and becoming less tolerant. Freedom of opinion
is already being sacrificed. I don't blame this state attorney, he is a
nice man but rather dumb and naïve like most Dutchmen. . . . Muslims are
allowed to shout: kill Rushdie. . . . When Muslims say on TV that all
Dutch women are whores, it is allowed. . . . It is ridiculous and
scandalous that I have to justify myself in court for discrimination of
The Aftermath: the 90ies
The story did not end there. For a while leftist intellectuals such as
Teun A. van Dijk started a witchhunt against Dutch writers who were
accused of having actually written "the impending downfall of The
Netherlands". As a proof Teun van Dijk wrote "analyses" of
the writing style of, for instance Gerrit Komrij. The witchhunt had an
intimidating effect on discussion of the growing Muslim communities in the
90ies. Komrij has a sharp pen and defended himself ably against the
mediocre Van Dijk.
Perhaps he was chosen to be attacked because he had scathingly attacked
Multiculturalism. He became the "national poet" in 2000 (I
think). On 7 May 2002, the morning after the assassination of Fortuyn he
wrote a searing poem on the klammheimlicher joy of the established
politicians in his poem: the Established
The poem appeared in the NRC
Handelsblad, the newspaper for the "intellectual". On
six o’clock in the evening on May the sixth on the moment that Pim
Fortuyn´s body hit the pavement, killed by 6 bullets, the NRC Handelsblad
hit the doormat in thousands of Dutch homes. The editorial written
(Dutch, Theo van Gogh’s site) by Folkert Jensma, WARNED the Dutch voters
against Fortuyn: "sixty years after the war it may be a Prime
Minister Fortuyn with a wreath at the national monument, a man who thinks
Islam is "backward" and people from
do not belong in "modernity"? (...) It is the pride of The
that we do not prefer one culture over another culture. That people are
treated equally in an open society. That we keep far from racists and
xenophobes. It is a DISGRACE that we have to remind a politician in our
midst of those matters sixty years after the war".
Editor Folkert Jensma made all the effort to create a piece the Völkischer
Beobachter or Pravda would have been proud of. Not that it is anything
special. Our elite are decadent and have turned their backs on us. Their
inability to formulate societal goals and hatred
(Dutch) of those who do try to bring our Civilisation back to life are
proofs of that decadence. The utterances of pundits and politicians had
become more and more rabid as the number of people who said they supported
Fortuyn went up and up. A hatewave went through the country.
Getting back to Rasul and Fjordman: Fjordman selects a quote about
European Civilisation "that
has made repentance for old sins, perceived or real, the central point of
its identity, and something close to an obsession."
It is either the Crusades, or Colonization, the Holocaust or the Moral
Equivalency canard. It does not matter what it is. Europeans are not
permitted to think that their nations should be perpetuated. Europeans are
not permitted to think that the effort of survival can be worthwhile.
Basking in "unearned guilt" is the way to go.
It is the easy way to a position of individual moral superiority. The
difficult path is the path of a shared destiny as Westerners, a morality
of individual sacrifices on behalf of a collective, like family, people,
nation and religion.
That is just too much EFFORT.