As you know, there is a section of this blog called, "Our real European Allies", which consists of various European blogs, some in English, some in native languages. One such blog is, A Future in Freedom". I have come across a post on this blog which is worthy of disseminating here. The article discusses the problems of free speech (vis-a-vis the Muslim immigrant community, Geert Wilders, and lack of assimilation in Dutch society. It is entitled, "No buts: We want freedom of speech", and is written by Mark Bogaers.
http://afutureinfreedom.blogspot.com/2008/01/on-my-dutch-blog-i-yesterday-addressed.html
Some of you readers may think Bogaers' comments are offensive (to Muslims). Nevertheless, they deserve thoughtful consideration. European laws on free speech are more restrictive than they are in the US. Thus, many Europeans are afraid to speak out lest they actually be prosecuted for hate speech. They need only look to Geert Wilders to confirm their fears.
Yet, in countries like Holland, they are faced with an immigrant community that has not assimilated into the host society. Many, not all, are outright hostile to the local society and aggressive in pushing their own Islamic agenda. Some are involved in crime. Many have stoked a resurgence in anti-Semitism-joined by the usual neo-Nazi skinhead types, with whom they find a temporary common cause.
I have no doubt that Muslims in Europe are not popular with the native populations. It is not because of racism. My advice to the Muslims in Europe would be to act like guests. At any rate, they should assimilate into the countries they have chosen to live in. Understand that in the West, religion is considered a private matter. Forget any illusions of making the West Islamic. Eventually, there will be a revolt against that- even in Europe.
If the Muslim immigrant population can achieve that, then they won't have to worry about Islamophobia. Am I optimistic? Not at all. In fact, I am being hopelessly naive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Tariq Ramadan, as quoted in the linked blog, is absolutely correct. He is engaged in legitimate free speech, giving what would be an entirely proper answer to the idiocy of Wilder's legitimate exercise of free speech. While rejecting the notion of restricting free speech as a response to "religious sensitivity," we should be clear that Muslims also have rights of free speech -- not rights to bludgeon or murder "blasphemers," but rights to present their viewpoint TOO.
Tariq Ramadan is one of those wolves in sheeps clothing. He poses as a moderate and has fooled many in the West.
I get the sheep's clothing Gary, but I have yet to see one iota of evidence that Ramadan is a world underneath it all. The site you linked to quotes him more than once, and what he said I fully subscribe too. Whatever else we disagree about, I am passionately committed to the First Amendment, whether it is challenged by Roman Catholic bishops or Muslim imams or over-wrought rabbis, and not matter what British courts, Canadian courts, or Russian Federation courts have to say. Show me how Ramadan is just posing.
Siarlys,
Tariq Ramadan. Here you go.
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1884
Gary, when you ask me for a source, I provide one or more published books, footnoted and cross referenced.
When I ask you for data (much less a source for the data), you provide me a link to a long-winded web site with an ax to grind, indulging in ad hominem "connections" and citing, e.g., that someone on DHS once revoked his visa on suspicion that what the accusations might be true. Not one quote from the man himself, not even a complete sentence that shows support for Wahhabism.
By the logic of that site, every one of Bernie Madoff's "investors" was an accomplice, because they had contact with him.
Post a Comment