Whitewashing Amsterdam’s Islamization


Muslim_Lakemba-420x01I love Amsterdam. I’ve loved it ever since I first visited it in 1997, and when I moved there from New York a year later, after three more visits, I was still bewitched. Not until I’d lived there for several months did I grasp that this beautiful city, which had played such a pivotal role in the development of the modern concept of individual liberty, faced a serious threat from a certain pre-modern, liberty-hating religion to which I realized I’d been paying insufficient attention. I haven’t lived in Amsterdam for fourteen years, but I’ve returned to it many times, and I’ve witnessed the dire consequences of its steady, and increasingly manifest, Islamization. I still love it, but I tread more carefully now on those cobbled streets; and precisely because I do love it, I worry about what’s happening to it.

Russell Shorto also professes to love Amsterdam. A longtime New York Times Magazine contributor, he’s lived there since 2008, serving (until recently) as director of the city’s John Adams Institute, which, according to its website, seeks to reinforce Dutch-American cultural ties by hosting talks by “interesting American thinkers and writers…such as Al Gore, Toni Morrison, Jesse Jackson, Jonathan Franzen, Madeleine Albright, Spike Lee, Paul Auster and Francis Fukuyama.” (Don’t worry: as its website is careful to underscore, it’s not the kind of “’patriotic’ organization” that “waves a little American flag and tries to promote America.”)

A few years back, Shorto wrote a book about the Dutch influence on New York City – and, by extension, on the entire U.S. Now he’s written a book called Amsterdam: The History of the World’s Most Liberal City. It’s receiving the kind of adoring reviews in the usual places that strong suggest that, whatever its other merits or demerits, it doesn’t vigorously challenge any mainstream-media orthodoxies about the current state of affairs in Europe. When I read Janet Maslin’s review in Monday’s Times, one sentence, in particular, jumped out at me. Shorto, Maslin wrote, “cites two contrasting approaches to tensions between Islam and the West: the radical position of the outspoken Somali-Dutch feminist Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and a two-man Muslim-Jewish team of leaders who tilt toward conciliation.” “Radical”? “Outspoken”? These are the two adjectives Maslin chooses to describe the courageous, principled Ayaan Hirsi Ali? Also, I knew which “two-man Muslim-Jewish team” Maslin was referring to: the Jewish half of the team, Job Cohen, is the man who, while mayor of Amsterdam (2001-2010), urged “accommodation with the Muslims,” up to and including toleration “of orthodox Muslims who consciously discriminate against their women. (As I asked in my book Surrender:“Where would he draw the line? At forced marriage? Wife-beating? Rape? Honor killing?”) Plainly, I needed to take a look at Shorto’s book, and pronto.

And so I did. Most of the way through, it’s not a bad book, although its contours and highlights will be familiar to anyone who’s read earlier histories of the city. Shorto explains, as other writers have done before him, how Amsterdam’s position as a hub of international commerce bred a culture of tolerance that, over time, spread far beyond its precincts, helping to lead the Western world out of the Middle Ages and into modernity. Hence, he argues, we should regard Amsterdam, more than France or Britain or anyplace else, as the cradle of the Enlightenment – the place where the medieval world of nobles and serfs first began to be transformed into the world we know today. It’s no stretch, indeed, to describe Shorto’s book as a celebration of free-market capitalism as the foundation of modern freedom: “while feudalism held sway elsewhere in Europe,” he writes, “people in these low-lying provinces were protocapitalists” whose innovations in business and trade would liberate economies around the globe.

It’s curious, then, that instead of using the word “freedom” or “liberty” or “capitalism”  in his subtitle, Shorto uses “liberalism,” which obliges him to explain, early in the book, that he’s not talking about the statist, social-democratic values that go by that name in America today, but, rather, about the ardent belief in the individual’s inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness that is at the heart of America’s founding documents. Why, then, not just use the word “freedom” or “liberty” or “capitalism” in his subtitle? Could it just possibly be because, in the cultural-elite circles Shorto apparently moves in, no one is viewed with more contempt than a cheerleader for capitalism, and a subtitle that spun “freedom” or “capitalism” in a positive way would come dangerously close, in the eyes of New York Times book-review editors and their ilk, to sounding like (horrors!) Ann Coulter?

Shorto spends a lot of time pondering – as I did, too, when I lived in Amsterdam – what can, at first blush, seem like a paradox: how, as he puts it, can a people with such a “collective sensibility” be, at the same time, so “tied to what we think of as extreme individualism”? His example of this paradox: generations ago, the Dutch came together in communities to construct dikes and reclaim land from the sea – but instead of deciding to own and cultivate that land communally, they opted to parcel it out among themselves. But this isn’t really as much of a paradox as it appears: the more you look at such behaviors on the part of the Golden Age Dutch, the more they bring to mind American pioneers who, for instance, got together to raise somebody’s barn. What we’re talking about here are voluntary, grass-roots initiatives driven by a genuine communal need, not projects imposed from on high by some distant, all-powerful authority – although, yes, this openness to collective activity eventually made it easier to persuade the Dutch to buy into social democracy. (Shorto, for one, certainly buys into it: he considers the Netherlands “freer” than the U.S. because its government pays him a child subsidy plus an annual sum of vacation money equivalent to eight percent of his salary; it doesn’t seem to occur to him that all that cash isn’t falling down from the skies but is pinched from the pockets of childless self-employed people some of whom undoubtedly earn far less than he does. Just saying.)

Shorto’s book is mostly history, but also contains personal passages in which he tries to explain his enthusiasm for the city. Some of them resonate with me pretty strongly. Visiting Paris, he observes that its

grandiosity is to Amsterdam’s canal house cityscape what mythological figures are to ordinary people. Amsterdam relates to who we are today: it is, in a sense, where we began, we as modern people who consider individual human beings to be more important than institutions. These sleepy canal-side streets, with boats moored on one side and gabled brick houses on the other: this is the cradle of our focus on ourselves. It can’t help but seem charming to us.

True, and nicely put. Then again, as I wrote myself when I visited the City of Lights while living in Amsterdam:

Paris is built on a scale that makes Amsterdam, by contrast, seem insubstantial, a toy town, a train set….You couldn’t replace those delicate-looking old canal houses with buildings of any size: they’d sink. The city is built on land that is only barely land. The whole place – unlike Paris – is one step from being a total illusion.

Paris reminded me, I wrote, “of what a city can be; I’m reminded that I’m a New Yorker.” Which brings to mind the character in The Fountainhead who says he’d “give the greatest sunset in the world for one sight of New York’s skyline….The sky over New York and the will of man made visible. What other religion do we need?” All of which is simply by way of saying that Amsterdam may be modernity’s cradle, but New York is its apex, its crowning achievement.

Shorto’s book contains so much that’s smart and engaging that one is especially appalled by his take on the trials and travails of the Netherlands today, because he quite obviously knows better. The first hint of how he’s going to handle these issues comes early on, when he tells us about his kid’s babysitter’s relatives in Morocco, who had trouble securing Dutch tourist visas because immigration authorities thought they might try to stay on illegally. Reading this, I was pleased to know that the Netherlands, after decades of massive and incredibly damaging illegal immigration from Islamic countries, was taking serious steps to try to get it under control. Shorto, however, professes to be outraged that “a city famed historically for championing the notion of tolerance now seemed to be charting odd new frontiers of intolerance.”

Okay, one thinks. So it’s going to be like that, is it? And, indeed, so it goes. Recalling his first days in Amsterdam in 2005, he writes that “immigration was the big issue….After years of relative openness, Amsterdam…now wanted to close the doors. People with white skin were talking bluntly and angrily about the unwillingness of nonwhite newcomers to integrate.” Not until he’s managed, in this wily way, to place firmly in the reader’s mind the suggestion that racism was in the air does he acknowledge that the Dutch people’s concerns about integration weren’t race-based. Moving on, he claims that “anti-immigrant talk has since died down” (well, the “talk” definitely spiked after Theo van Gogh’s murder in November 2004, but I wouldn’t say it’s “died down” when viewed over the long haul), but adds that “the underlying issue – how and to what extent Western societies should welcome immigrants – remains.” Again, the issue isn’t immigration generally; it’s Islam. But Shorto doesn’t want to go there.

When the time comes to mention Geert Wilders, Shorto doesn’t identify him as a champion of the Dutch liberty that he’s been celebrating throughout these pages but, on the contrary, reviles him as – what else? – a “golden-haired far-right” leader of “the anti-immigrant, anti-Islam movement” who “preaches a gospel of intolerance of outsiders.” Shorto is no kinder to Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose frank talk about the religion of her birth catapulted her into the Dutch Parliament but ultimately – in one of the most disgraceful episodes of modern Dutch history – spurred the cowardly political establishment, including her own party’s leaders, to turn against her, revoke her citizenship, and drive her from the country. Yes, admits Shorto, Hirsi Ali was “a near-perfect advocate for Amsterdam and its liberal tradition,” and, yes, “[r]eligious absolutism has been a huge force for ill,” and “we all need as many Voltaires – and Spinozas – as we can get.” You can hear the but coming, and you know exactly what form it’s going to take: “But Hirsi Ali’s attack on Islam itself, and on all who practice it, was too much for me.” Of course it was! For a New York Times Magazine contributing editor, and an aspiring member of the Dutch cultural elite, it’s permissible to rap “[r]eligious absolutism” in vague, general terms, but it’s verboden to venture any specific criticism of the one faith that’s far more absolute than any of the others, and that represents a colossal menace to the Dutch liberty that Shorto claims to cherish so dearly.

“In the Netherlands,” he continues, “where she didn’t shrink from the attention but used it to further her strident attacks on Islam, she became too controversial to be endured.” Let’s set aside the snotty word “strident” and the suggestion that Hirsi Ali’s an attention hog (he goes on to call her a “fashionista”), and go straight to the question: exactly what is Shorto saying here? The sentence seems deliberately ambiguous – written in such a way that it’s impossible to be sure whether Shorto approves or disapproves of the fact that, in today’s Netherlands, anyone who refuses, as Ayaan Hirsi Ali did, to compromise Enlightenment values one iota will be deemed “controversial” and read out of polite society (or, if possible, kicked out of the country) for having “gone too far.” Certainly Shorto seems eager to avoid facing up to the fact that when the Dutch establishment kicked Hirsi Ali to the curb, it was betraying the same Dutch heritage of liberty that of which this book is supposedly a celebration. You’d think the saga of Hirsi Ali would be front and center here – that Shorto would recognize it as the ultimate illustration of just how imperiled Dutch liberty is in this era of rampant Islamization and rank appeasement. But – again – Shorto doesn’t want to go there.

Contrasting sharply with his mendacious smearing of Wilders and Hirsi Ali is his depiction of the aforementioned Job Cohen, whom he portrays as a veritable wonder-worker, a “conciliator.” But “conciliator” isn’t the mot juste. Try “appeaser.” Or, if you like, “dhimmi.” Alas, Shorto does such a slick job here that if you didn’t already know the real history, you could easily end up convinced that Wilders and Hirsi Ali are bums and that Cohen’s a hero. Shorto is exceedingly skilled at juggling the facts to make his heroes – and his case – look good. It’s a shame, because this book, with a few small but significant changes, could have amounted to a stirring defense of the Dutch legacy of freedom and an indictment of the political and media establishment that has sold it down the river. Instead, Shorto has chosen to toe the establishment line. No big surprise there, I guess. Not only is he a Times stalwart who knows what’s fit to print and what isn’t; by book’s end it’s clear that he’s won a prime spot on the lap of the Dutch elite that he’s not about to risk losing. His acknowledgments pages are a glittering catalogue of that elite, up to and including “their Royal Highnesses Willem-Alexander and Máxima,” whom he thanks “for the courtesies they have extended me at various points over the past eight years.” Ugh. Willem-Alexander, of course, is the recently crowned king of the Netherlands – the man who, back in 2007, publicly (and quite improperly) chided Geert Wilders, an elected Member of Parliament, by saying: “Speech is silver, silence is golden.” Jerk.

Oh, well. There are two basic choices for a writer in Shorto’s position: you can be a truth-teller, or you can be a courtier. He’s made his choice – and, it appears, is reaping the rewards.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Hallgard Vormann

    I was in Amsterdam this autumn, and I have to say that although the Dutch have their problems with non-Western immigration, is it nothing against what you can see in Oslo or the major cities of Sweden. Amsterdam is following, but compared to the former, they are many years behind.

    While in Amsterdam I saw the brother of Norway’s own (imprisoned) terrorist leader Mullah Krekar with his family. He was sitting there with a long beard and a turban, appearing very similar to his more famous brother. His wife was of course covered. They all enjoyed a meal on McDonald’s!

  • Rivkah F.

    I am Jewish and my husband and I lived in Amsterdam in the 1970s. He worked there. I have not seen the book, but I’d like to know if and how Shorto dealt with Amsterdam under Nazi occupation. Some Jews were saved by brave souls, but many were betrayed for money. Many Dutch were collaborators and a lot of them were in Amsterdam were the largest Jewish community was located. The strike of the dock workers in February 1942 (?) actually resulted in harsher measures against Jews and the anti-Nazi resistance groups. Does Shorto deal with the cooperation of the Amsterdam municipality and police in rounding up Jews? Let us know. And Bruce Bawer, please continue to write your editorials.

  • marc brasil

    I grew up in ” slotervaart ” sort of a suburb , built in the 60s , of Amsterdam!
    It was a nice 4 room apartment, about 75m2.
    In the beginning of the 80s we welcomed the first turkish family in our midst ( with 12 children )
    No problem, they were welcome, and there were no problems at al with religoen etc.
    At the end of the 80s about 20% of our neighbourhood were foreigners( read muslims ) stil it went wel, altough we were questioning some things like why most of them didn,t learn to speak dutch, and why they were not working ( most of them anyway ) andthe goverment did nothing but supporting them not to learn dutch by suplying them with everthing in their own language ( panflets etc ) on how to get welfare etc
    To make a long story short: now about 80% of the neighberhood is muslim, it is called a so called ” vogelaarwijk ” wich means poor neigberhood, were people live in bad circumstances with few prospects of a better future !
    I wonder what is wrong with the nice appartment i grew up in?
    The islamization of amsterdam is almost complete, thats why i emigrated to a non muslim country, it,s a real shame !!!

    • defcon 4

      I’ll bet Dearbornistan has experienced a similar conquest. An interesting scenario occurred near Anaheim, CA. in which a muslime bought a trailer park and proceeded to triple the rents (no rent control for trailer parks). He forced all the najjis kaffir out of the park and managed to seize a few motor homes whose owners couldn’t get out in time. Strangely enough, it’s now an all muslime trailer park.

    • roder59

      Interesting. I grew up in Slotermeer, Geuzenveld and Osdorp in the sixties and seventies. Many, many Indonysians and Surinamees but no real problems with them. Then the MENA tsunami rolled in from the eighties and there you got big trouble. Wilders is right in recognizing Islam as premodern, totalitarian and anti-Liberal.
      I moved to Sweden, partly for my job, partly for flying Islamization in Amsterdam back in the eighties. Now, still living in Sweden, situation here is maybe worse than in good old Amsterdam.

    • Dyer’s Eve

      Same old story, man. The same thing is happening in Australia. It seems we’re just another dumbass Western country willing to sell ourselves down the river. Allah must be laughing his misogynistic bearded arse off. Let him laugh, for his day will come. The poofter! Let those floor-kissers have their fun… for now. Wait until we rebel. It’s only a matter of time. Shine a light, people! The West will wake up. And when it does…

  • Chezwick

    Another fascinating and up-close glimpse into the heart of Eurabia. Thank you Bruce, for being the eyes and ears of the anti-Jihad in Europe. Keep up the good work.

    • BS77

      The sheeple of liberal socialist Europe are soon going to have a very rude awakening….many already have…as they witness the decline and fall of their social order, traditions and political stability.. Remember, the wacko social engineers promised multiculturism and open immigration would enhance England, Holland Sweden etcetc….How wrong they were!!!!

      • DownTurn

        > How wrong they were!!!!

        No, they weren’t. The system is working fully as intended.

        The goal of Marxists is a “dehomogenization” of national states, and mass immigration is the tool to achieve that goal.

        In order to enable the EUSSR, they need loads of people who feel neither Swedish, nor French, nor German, to replace the Swedes, French and Germans who are unwilling to give up their sovereignities.

        In a funny way, Muslims immigrants will be the first “true” Europeans unhampered by local patriotisms, borders and interests, and the Swedes, French and Germans will be the “backwards” nationalists rambling about independence and clinging to the past.

        • Drakken

          It is rather amusing in a way, that now nationalism is coming back with a vengeance and it is scaring the bloody daylights out of the Marxist in charge, and the more they enact policies that keep the natives as second class citizens and coddle and encourage the 3rd world immigrant, the more a very bloody backlash will ensue, and it will be much sooner than anyone realizes and will be much much more brutal than a Serb can only dream of. Welcome to the coming Balkans on steroids, you leftist will deserve everything coming to you.

        • defcon 4

          I suppose if you look at it just right, with your head canted to the left, and looking over your shoulder, and one eye shut, the ummah might appear, to a morally challenged liberal, like a stateless society.

      • Omar

        England is not a country. England is one of four main internal divisions (along with Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland) of the country named the United Kingdom (or Britain). Calling the UK “England” is offensive to the people living in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland (the UK’s other three internal divisions). England has not been a country since 1707, when it (along with Wales) merged with Scotland to form the Kingdom of Great Britain. That is undeniable.

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    Shorto’s promiscuous tolerance of intolerance is as fashionable as it is suicidal. Pim and Theo show what happens. When Geert has to have continuous protection this is a war zone.

    Shorto prefers to equivocate between liberalism in its noble sense of individual liberty and liberalism in the paternal sense used by the left. In the same way he can’t distinguish between a culture of tolerance in the classical sense and an open door to a fundamentalist pre-modern intolerant illiberal religion.

    • Leftard

      No because that might slip over into identifying people as different from one another. We can’t have that now. That would be intolerant. We all know people are exactly the same only differing in what they believe at the moment. If only we could get rid of those pesky ideologies then all men could live in brotherly love in borderless bastions of diversity and enrichment.

  • http://www.clarespark.com/ Clare Spark

    http://clarespark.com/2010/09/02/spinoza-as-culture-critic/. “Spinoza as culture critic.” We are taught very little about the short-lived Dutch Republic, inspired in part by Baruch Spinoza. How the Netherlands are falling. Remember Schiller’s Don Carlos and weep. The linked blog gives a method inspired by Spinoza and adopted by Herman Melville in analyzing the ideological content of works of art and historical events too.

  • Gee

    Let me get this straight – the colonial Dutch who introduced slavery to New York City and still have overseas colonies are liberals?

    How does that work exactly?

    • defcon 4

      The Dutch still have colonies? Where?

      • Notalibfool

        They still have some islands in the Caribbean.

        • ziggy zoggy

          After WWII, Holland tried to retake Indonesia too. America forced it out with threats of economic sanctions.

          • defcon 4

            Too bad they didn’t retake Indonesia — too bad for the ten thousand kuffar slaughtered by Indonesian islam0nazis in E. Timor, too bad for the najjis kaffir in W. Papua New Guinea who are currently being persecuted and ethnically cleansed by Indonesian islam0nazis.

    • vladdy1

      You do not know the Dutch have a European socialist system?

  • abu assim golor

    So what is surprising? All of Europe is becoming Muslim, not just Amsterdam. It’s what Europe wants, or better said what the European elite wants. To commit mass suicide. It’s murdering it’s own children through abortions and then whining that it needs workers and imports people from other countries. At the same time Europe increasingly embraces a perversity called homosexual “marriage” which the Muslims will eliminate once they gain their power.

    • Drakken

      The muslims and the leftist Quislings really have no idea of the Pandora’s Box they are opening, what is coming is going to make a Serb blush by comparison.

      • Notalibfool

        When it happens, who do you think the Left will side with? Will they finally show some common sense, or will they take up arms to fight against their own countries?

  • Trampoline

    Why do you focus on the Jews? Are you a Jewish ethnocentrist/racist?

    • defcon 4

      Why do you care? Are you a delusional antisemite?

      • venicementor

        TOUCHÉ

      • Trampoline

        Why do you troll around this website? Did they let you out of funny farm?

      • Trampoline

        Does your Mom know you sneaked out of the basement?

  • theoprinse

    Russel Shorto segment 16.40
    http://www.uitzendinggemist.nl/afleveringen/1372936

    Today my party the Freedom party of mr Geert Wilders welcomed Marine le Pen in the Hague

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24924372

  • Braindoctor

    The reason behind the Islamization of Europe and 3rd World immigration to the West in general is simple: Germany was defeated in 1945.
    The Jews won the war so from then on everything that had any aspect of white identity, white nationalism or racial integrity was suppressed.

    Massive brainwashing propaganda was instituted to destroy any sense of racial identity, always using Germany and the Nazis as a the bogeyman.

    Soon thereafter the assault on the very existence of the European gene pool began, spearheaded by the Jews. The gates to immigration by Third World hordes to Europe, America, Australia and New Zealand was opened wide.

    Watch Barbara Spectre letting the cat out of the bag:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8iJbgmoiXQ

    Here is an excellent video in response to Barbara Spectre:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKDeyuM0-Og

    Anybody who opposed it was declared a Nazi. “Hate crimes”, an Orwellian concept, were invented out of thin air by the ADL and pushed down the throats of Western populations by massive Jewish pressure. Thus the door was opened to criminalize and imprison any patriot, after branding him a Nazi.
    They are pushing even farther, trying to set up a truly Orwellian Soviet style surveillance apparatus to stifle and criminalize even the slightest resistance.

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/former-heads-of-state-call-on-eu-to-set-up-state-surveillance-of-intolerant
    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/libe/dv/11_revframework_statute_/11_revframework_statute_en.pdf
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1rQPzl85-4

    Now that some Jews are feeling threatened by the monster they unleashed on the Goyim of the West they are alarmed, but most of them are too hypocritical and cowardly to stand up to the Jewish power structure. Eugene Girin is an exception an I salute him for his moral backbone: http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/2013/09/10/australia-the-evil-hypocrisy-of-the-jewish-establishment/

  • theoprinse

    As to Dutch King Wim van Amsberg.
    His father Claus von Amsberg was member – mitglied of the Hitler Jugend.
    The grandfather of Wim von Amsberg – Bernhard von Lippe Biesterfeld – was member of the SS.
    The spous of Wim von Amsberg – Maxima Zorreguietta – is the daughter of Jorge Zorreguietta.
    He was Argentine secretary of agriculture in Videla’s government and the arvhitect of the mass murder perpetrated on 30.000 Argentinians.
    Bernard von Lippe Biesterveld and the grandfather of Maxima Zorreguietta met each other in the thirties in Bariloche.
    The vacation resort Bariloche was a known nazi center.
    The Swastika flag was still flying form the schools after 1945.
    Just a few weeks ago nazi Erich Priebke died in Italy.

  • Omar

    It is such a shame that he sucks the money from productive workers. When the muzlims are raping his sons and terrorizing his wife and daughter it will be much too late to confess the truth.

    • defcon 4

      He and his entire family will convert to islam long before that happens.

  • A Z

    “What we’re talking about here are voluntary, grass-roots initiatives driven by a genuine communal need, not projects imposed from on high by some distant, all-powerful authority”

    That is nicely written. Maybe some people can learn this truth in some sort of post post doctoral program, but only after they have had years of psycho therapy. The rest of us will consider it common sense.

  • Race_Dissident

    A tremendous review, Mr. Bawer. It has the unmistakable tang of truth.

  • Me2

    And the point is?

  • A Z

    Mr Shorto is grasping for words and failing rather badly. As an experienced, professional writer, he is no doubt a better writer than I. but when he cannot speak the truth and then has to wordsmith a lie, I think most people would write much better than he would.

    He called a Hirsi Ali a fashionista?

    I looked it up, because I knew what it meant in general, but I wanted to see if i had missed something. I did not miss anything, but Mr Shorto is missing a lot.

    merriam-webster >> a designer, promoter, or follower of the latest fashion designer, promoter, or follower of the latest fashions

    urbandictionary. >>

    A person devoted to fashion clothing, particularly unique or high fashion.
    A person not to be called a fashionista would be someone who obsessively follows trends. REAL fashionistas do not believe in trends.

    One who believes in the power of fashion. Fashionistas are typically either stylish women or homosexual men.

  • ricpic

    How is it that Hirsi Ali’s “stridency” became “too controversial to be endured?” I thought Mr. Shorto, by his own lights, had thoroughly internalized enlightened tolerance, Amsterdam style. And yet Ali’s exposure of Islam as the worst possible enemy of enlightened tolerance cannot be endured. How deeply Ali’s courage must shame the dhimmi.

  • El Rubio

    The Dutch elite, from the royal house to the political class and their miriad of arogant courtiers have always been part of Dutch society. They are the first ones to leave the country in times of war and the first ones to return to their place of parasitic control within Dutch society when things are peaceful, and will make sure that the culture of elitism and culturally acceptable behaviour to further their own interest will continue in whatever form it takes. With some very few exceptional historical instances (no room here to go into details), the Dutch population has never learned to deal with these parasites or have taken the chance to restart their country as, for example the USA did. I sure hope they will do sometimes in the near future, but won’t hold my breath.

  • Gid

    It wasn’t the Jews. Consider the following quote:
    “The huge increases in migrants over the last decade [in Britain] were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by [Labour] ministers to radically change the country and “rub the Right’s nose in diversity”, according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.”

    You antiSemites blame all sorts of movements in your societies on the Jews, but those movements would exist without Jews. I remember reading of Adolf Hitler witnessing a massive March by German Communists before he took power. These were not Jews. Hitler, by the way, killed vast numbers of non-Jewish Poles and Russians. The Poles he killed were not Communists. I also read the memoirs of a French woman who described the bombs dropping on French civilians before France surrendered to Hitler. People lost limbs and worse. Don’t make Hitler your hero. As a Jew, I am against immigration by followers of a totalitarian faith – Islam.
    One last thing – I’ve been on the receiving absolutely appalling and disgusting and petty behavior by non-Jews. There is a Mafia – made of whites, black, latinos, etc. that has developed drugs that they use on people – drugs that they can spray at you. These are drugs that affect the brain. They can knock you out, they can affect your urges. Truly shocking.

    • Braindoctor

      Before you open your mouth to utter some meaningless, mindless platitude/label such as “you anti-Semites” you should check your facts.
      Regarding the quote by Andrew Neather: who was the Labour minister most responsible for the attempted genocide on Britain? Who bragged in interviews that her Jewish background compelled her to open Britain to Third World hordes to alter irreversibly the racial makeup of Britain?

      Barbara Roche, of course. Google “Barbara Roche Labour immigration” and you will know who this snake is.

      Ignorant statements such as the “German Communists were not Jews” hardly deserve a refutation. While the vast majority of the German Communists were not Jews, almost all the leaders, organizers and financial backers were Jews, and I am not talking about the Father of Communism Karl Marx, who was a German Jew who hated the Jews. Rosa Luxemburg and the Spartakists and the leaders of the Bavarian Soviet Republic immediately spring into my mind.The fact that the worldwide Communist movement was overwhelmingly Jewish is such an elementary fact that there is no reason to waste my time educating someone about it.

      Winston Churchill wrote this in 1920:http://www.mosaisk.com/revolution/Winston-Churchill-Zionism-Versus-Bolshevism.php

      As far as the bombs dropping on French civilians is concerned, the British killed far more French civilians through bombings of Vichy France than the Germans did. And there was no state of war between Britain and Vichy France. The deliberate terror bombings of German cities such as Dresden and Hamburg by the British under “Butcher” Harris are the darkest chapter in the history of Western Europe, with close to a million German women and children murdered.

  • Robin-Frans Winkel

    We should be optimistic. Jihadists in Syria are finding out that Classical Arabic is unsuitable for effective international communication. Classical Arabic, the language of the Koran, is the cornerstone of Islam. This means Islam, again, is proven wrong.
    Pray for their conversion, as eternal hellfire will be otherwise their fate.

  • Robin-Frans Winkel

    Churchill = “Islamophobe”
    Stalin = “Islamophobe”
    Hitler = no “Islamophobe”

  • cigpapers
  • cigpapers

    The Coudenhove-Kalergi Plan – The Genocide Of The People Of Europe:

    http://cigpapers.wordpress.com

  • Duran

    Left NL decades ago, the Dutch don’t speak out against the filthy fooqprophet MoHAMmed and his filthy rapist followers. Only Wilders spoke out and now he has to be surrounded by 20 security agents at all times just to survive. Bye bye A’dam… thanks for all….