| http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=12372
After 40 years or more of blowing feckless multi culti soap bubbles, the governments of some European countries have suddenly become alive to the dangers of being too tolerant towards Islamism, an ideology that is intolerant and crusading.
Two years after the brave and flamboyant homosexual Pym Fortuyn sounded the alarm in Holland regarding the threat of fundamentalist Islam to his relaxed and liberal homeland, the Dutch establishment, that had previously condemned him as a bigot, has suddenly done an about face and adopted his agenda.
It was Fortuyn who first noted in public what the Dutch had been noting in private for several years: that Holland’s Islamic population not only refused to assimilate into the host country but, indeed displayed a bitter intolerance for Dutch laissez-faire. He was so alarmed at the rising radical threat to Holland’s tradition of tolerance that he started a new political party, The List. The List demanded an end to Islamic immigration and demanded that the immigrant children be taught in Dutch. Within three months of its formation, The List had captured something like 20 per cent of Dutch constituencies.
His opponents, Holland’s traditional politicians, were robbed of the traditional weapon of the thought police, the charge of racism. Fortuyn’s present and former amours came in a wide range of colors and he had chosen as his deputy an articulate black immigrant. Accusations of racism would have been met by the electorate with dismissive laughter. Had he lived, Fortuyn would have been prime minister of Holland today, but he was assassinated as he left a radio station after an interview two years ago. For an outpouring of a public sense of loss, his funeral was second only to Princess Diana’s, four years previously.
On the surface, Dutch politics returned to normal, but the seed had been planted, and all those hundreds of thousands, if not millions, who had intended to vote for him did not forget his agenda.
Now, after years of pandering to the multi culti ethic, the Dutch government has suddenly admitted that the immigrant Muslims top the “no” list: they have the highest incidence of unemployment, domestic violence, disability payments, truancy and crime. And, after three generations in Holland, at least 30 per cent of them return to their “home country” to marry and bring back a spouse.
Dutch patience with fundamentalists on endless state benefits and allowances has snapped. Earlier this month, they hauled up the drawbridge and declared a four year moratorium on immigration, including so-called asylum seeking, to allow for assimilation. If the immigrant population still refuses to assimilate, I suspect the moratorium will be extended indefinitely. At the same time, they are repatriating over 26,000 “asylum seekers” whose claims for asylum were rejected years ago but who failed to leave the country. These are now demanding their “human rights” to continue to be supported on the generous Dutch welfare system, in Holland.
Notoriously, south of Holland, the French government has just let it be known that their patience with the zealotry, arrogance and imperialistic streak demonstrated by its own large unassimilated Muslim population has just run out.
In a jaw dropping statement, Chirac said that the wearing of the hijab by schoolgirls was “an aggressive act against the host nation”. And he is correct. It is not the wardrobe choice of little girls, but of their fathers and brothers who impose it on them because they don’t want men and boys “looking at” their females. France has come to the end of its tether with the tournantes – gang rapes as punishment for girls – both Muslim and indigenous – who dare to venture out of their homes in the projects without wearing a Muslim hijab. In many of the projects and nearby schools, Muslims constitute 50% or more of the population.
At the end of 2002, the movie The Squaw on this subject shocked not just French theater goers, but Jacques Chirac and French education minister Jack Lang. That was the genesis of the long and winding road to the headscarf ban. The film, although intended to highlight a grave and unacknowledged social problem, at the same time struck a killer blow to the governing elite’s multicultural dreams of European countries and immigrants from their former colonies living in happy accord.
Both France and Holland had now recognized that the immigrants were not the eager middle classes who come to the United States for their educations, or to settle. These are groups with an imperialistic, intolerant, colonizing mentality of their own.
While the liberal press and political multicultural proselytizers were still expressing shock at the Dutch and the French, who had decided at last to abandon constant appeasement and take control of Islamic zealotry and aggression in their countrie |
