Please allow me, dear reader, to present some excerpts from a book written by a Muslim lady who now lives in the Paranoid States of America. I'll give you the title and the author's name later.
When massive immigration began in Holland, which wasn't until the 1980s, there was a sense among the Dutch that society should behave with decency and understanding toward these people and accept their differences and beliefs. But the result was that immigrants lived apart, studied apart, socialized apart.
Holland's multiculturalism -- its respect for Muslims' way of doing things -- wasn't working.... Holland was trying to be tolerant for the sake of consensus, but the consensus was empty. The immigrants' culture was being preserved at the expense of their women and children and to the detriment of the immigrants' integration into Holland.
Many Muslims never learned Ducth and rejected Dutch values of tolerance and personal liberty. They married relatives from their home villages and stayed, inside Holland, in their tiny bubble of Morocco or Mogadishu....
Surely Islam was some kind of influence in the underperforming segregation of so many immigrants in Holland? ...of all the non-Western immigrants...the least integrated are Muslims.... Muslims in Holland make disproportionately heavy claims on social welfare and disability benefits and are disproportionately involved in crime.
If Muslim immigrants lagged so far behind even other immigrant groups, then wasn't it possible that one of the reasons could be Islam?... Why was it racist to ask this question? Why was it antiraciszt to indulge people's attachment to their old ideas and perpetuate this misery?
If Mark Steyn (for instance) dared to publish those quotes in his blog, or say them out loud in a speech or podcast, he'd be hauled before a "human rights" commission by a group of Muslims and offended liberals. It's happened before. His defence would be that those aren't his words, but those of a Muslim, namely Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of Infidel (Free Press, 2007), from which those paragraphs are taken.
Ms Ali was born in Somalia, and lived the hard life of a good Muslim girl -- complete with gential mutilation -- in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, and Kenya, before fleeing to Germany, thence to the Netherlands, where she made which she admits was a bogus refugee claim. She did not give her right name, and, rather than saying she was running from an arranged marriage, said she was fleeing persecution, and in danger of her life.
Unlike many Muslimas, she did well in Europe, working her way through university with a degree in political science. Eventually she became a member of the Dutch parliament. Infidel is the story of her difficult physical journey, but also of her intellectual awakening and eventual rejection of Islam.
Ms Ali's political activism made her aq political superstar and champion of free speech. It also made her the target of threats from Islamic extremists and their apologists. But it wasn't she who paid for her supposedly Islamophobic views. It was Theo van Gogh [no relation. Ed.], who directed Submission: Part 1, a short film written by Ms Ali, which criticized the Islamic mistreatment of women. On 2 November 2004, Mr van Gogh was assassinated by a Dutch-Moroccan Muslim who objected to the film's "Islamophobic" message.
In the last quarter (or so) of Infidel, Ms Ali tells how she was taken into protective custody, sent into hiding in the USA, and (almost) stripped of her Dutch citizenship. All this in spite of being named one of Time's 100 Most Influential People of 2005, and Reader's Digest's European of the Year.
Within 24 hours of the announcement of the order declaring Ms Ali "unDutch" (later rescinded), she was offered a position with the American Enterprise Institute. Click here to read more about her on the AEI website. And do read Infidel!
Further reading: "Ayaan Hirsi Ali blasts Ilhan Omar over call to remake US, says 'I don't think we need a revolution'", by Charles Creitz, Fox News, 10/7/20. Read enough already? Here's the video.
No comments:
Post a Comment