From Left to Right: Andrew Bostom, Geert Wilders, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller
Fascism’s new face in Europe, parliamentarian in the Netherlands Geert Wilders, proposes taxing Muslim women who wear hijab (head covering) 1000 Euros. He is a close friend of Robert Spencer who has proclaimed that “everyone should support Geert Wilders.” Wilders has also called for the banning of the Quran which he equates to Hitler’s Mein Kampf , has stated that Muslims are colonizing the Netherlands and has advocated the denial of religious freedom to Muslims.
Geert Wilders has done it again. The leader of the far-right Freedom Party managed to make the Dutch headlines during the annual general political debate.
Wilders’s newest proposal is to tax the Muslim headscarf. Any Muslim woman who wants to wear a headscarf - which he described as a ‘head-rag’ - would have to apply for a licence, and pay one thousand euros for the privilege. Wilders says the money raised would go toward women’s emancipation programmes.
Alexander Pechtold from the liberal D66 Party gives his reaction:
The rest of the Dutch parliament reacted to the proposal with disbelief. One after another, they asked Mr Wilders if this was a serious proposal. For instance, would he include other types of head covering in the tax? And how about orthodox Christian women who wear a headscarf quite similar to the Muslim version?
In reaction, Mr Wilders said he would actually prefer to ban the headscarf altogether, but that appeared to be legally impossible. He would not tax the Christian form of the headscarf, but he did not say how policy would make that distinction.
Mr Wilders has acquired a reputation for making shocking statements during general debates. Two years ago, he called for the banning the Muslim holy book, the Quran. Last year, he warned that Muslims were colonising the Netherlands. Last spring, he and his entire fraction walked out at the beginning of a debate.
The government still has to defend its new budget as part of the general debates. But in an unusual move, Mr Wilders has already announced that he plans to submit another motion of no-confidence in the entire cabinet. That will be the Freedom Party’s eighth motion of no-confidence.
September 21st, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Wow, these are nasty, evil, mean-spirited, hate-speech-spouting, miscreants, all of them. Is their message going mainstream or are they mainly offering comfort and encouragement to one another, as the photo suggests? These four are currently the darlings of countless Orthodox and Conservative synagogues, where their messages of hate are actually RENTED and given publicity by people who are equally nasty, evil, and mean-spirited. Does Wilders actually think applying a tax like this is going to fly in the Netherlands? As concerned as some segments of society are in the Netherlands, this seems merely to be pure spite and will not be embraced by more than a handful of Wilders’ quasi-Nazi supporters.
September 21st, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Thanks for keeping us updated. It’s unbelievable! Let’s be glad that the rest of the parliament feels the same.
September 21st, 2009 at 3:27 pm
OstEuropa I agree it is unbelievable. I don’t think the Dutch will long have a tolerance for such speech. It is also inconceivable to me that something like this could ever become law.
David, I agree with your sentiments. This is very Nazi like though I know this is something different. Europe, I like to believe has seen so many atrocities in the name of different ideologies that I don’t see a return to a time where a Wilders viewpoint is the dominant one. The European Union highlights a new age, or is supposed to, one which moves from the nationalisms of the nation states and towards a global outlook where regional interests are preserved in blocs such as the EU.
The Jews were the bogeyman during the days of nation states, when questions of what does it mean to be a German, Italian were asked. Today, what is being asked is what does it mean to be a European and Muslims find themselves in the same spot as the Jews in relation to nation states, it is something for Europe to look in the mirror and comes to grips with. Can Muslims be Europeans?
September 21st, 2009 at 4:08 pm
Wow! That’s all I have to say.
September 21st, 2009 at 4:53 pm
I would think this blog is heavily censored but i’ll give it a try anyway…
The hijab is a discriminatory symbol not just towards woman but to all non-Muslims. It’s of the same nature as swastika’s or white KKK sheets or celtic crosses yellow stars of david or other such racist symbols.
Hijab bans in the public space are taking effect all over the EU and the Netherlands lags far behind in measures against this discriminatory garb.
September 21st, 2009 at 5:36 pm
Durendal,
What a ridiculous comment. We moderate off topic or racist content. Also, it is no surprise that you agree with Wilders as no matter how off-the-wall, insane or false a statement or opinion is of an Islamophobe his/her Islamophobic supporters will go to any length to defend it — even lie.
September 21st, 2009 at 8:17 pm
“I would think this blog is heavily censored”
Maybe you’re confusing Loonwatch with Atlas Shrugs.
September 21st, 2009 at 11:00 pm
So is the media whore wilders going to ban ultra orthodox womens wigs or the turbans of sihks? Anyone who supports this needs to take a long look at why they think they have the right to do so.
September 22nd, 2009 at 3:22 am
Durendal, are you comparing the hijab to “white KKK sheets?” You are a loon.
September 22nd, 2009 at 5:22 am
If the hijab is a symbol of hate and discrimination, then what feelings may various Western flags connote? The British and the United States’ flags, for example. The past and present day actions of these two countries when it comes to hate and discrimination should, perhaps, warrant a ban? Slavery, colonialism, genocides, apartheid, wars–they have done it all, and their flags are symbols of their past and present acts and policies. Add to that European colonialism and the countries that were its most vehement actors and supporters.
Indeed, Durendal’s comment about an ordinary veil is equally ridiculous (and, no, I have nothing against the aforementioned countries or their citizens ;-)).
Perhaps sneakers should be banned because one might associate them with slave labor and exploitation?
September 22nd, 2009 at 9:09 am
so Durendal, by your definition head scarf and garb worn by nuns are also discriminatory? Ban them too? get a sense!!!
September 22nd, 2009 at 3:54 pm
@Durendal- how exactly is it discriminatory to women and non-Muslims?
You really need to stop being scared of a scarf on a woman’s head and get some therapy. What me and my sisters wear is none of your business.
September 22nd, 2009 at 4:34 pm
“Wilders says the money raised would go toward women’s emancipation programmes.”
What I love about islamophobic loons is their schizophrenic pretentious ability to actually believe that they are benevolent humanitarians even as they engage in the worst kind of unadulterated bigotry.
September 22nd, 2009 at 8:31 pm
My screen cracked from all the ugliness in that photo.
September 22nd, 2009 at 9:17 pm
“Durendal” is an idiotic British Nazi troll whose rantings can be found on a number of Islamic sites. Islam is here to stay, cry me a river and see if I care.
No integration or assimilation with Nazi scum.
September 23rd, 2009 at 12:14 am
Why is Geert dying his haair bleach bloonde.. oovercompensating for soomething my Dootch friejnd? Taax the Baastard.
September 23rd, 2009 at 5:34 am
why in the world is this happening, this makes no freakin sence. imagine banning shurch bells and the bible, no muslim wants that, even with power. then why are the ppl with power actin lyk this, why are ppl actin sooooo acared of muslims, we are ppl just like any one else, then why are we treated sooooo differently.,,….. telllllll meeee
September 23rd, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Musilms are not really people. We make T-shirts in the State of Texas and even operate 3 locations in this State that sell anti- Musilm gear. Are T- shirts we make state this. “Islam is not a religion its a disease.”
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Apparently Hijabs are a bigger threat to Western Civilisation than Legalised Prostitution, Human Trafficking and Drug Abuse. At least to Geert Wilders.
Why does he bleach his hair? He is trying to hide his partial Indonesian ancestry, as was revealed in a recent Dutch news story.
September 24th, 2009 at 3:30 pm
The virgin Mary (May Allah shower his blessings on her) is always depicted with a very Islamic Hejab. So is Mother Teresa. The hejab that is not forced unto a women but is worn by choice, is a powerful symbol of sisterhood. The hejab brings equality to women when models and actresses infuse imbalance into how a women is viewed, measured, and objectify.
September 25th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
American women will never forced to wear the Racist Hijab. American women will shoot Wifebeating muslim males dead if they try to make them wear the Hijab. Nuns where their covering because they want to and not cause man tells them to. When is the Muslim male who honor kiled 2 teen aged girls in texas because they were too westernized according to the muslim dad who married a American women. when will their be justice for Theo Van Goah who was murdered for question islam. when will their be justice for Hersi Ali and all the people who leave islam and have to leave in hiding do to threats of violence toward them. In the end islam will bow to Jesus as the devil muhammed did
September 26th, 2009 at 10:53 am
So do you have any real evidence to back up your claim? For the record, when did Muhammed ever bow to jesus. 2.) Honor killings are part of arab tribal customs, not islam. Three; It’s sad Hirsi Ali must remain in hiding, but personally, I think she’s a total hypocritical idiot. She criticised people who lied to get asylum when she herself did the same damn thing; four, no one’s forcing the women to wear a hijab; if a muslim women wants to wear one you can’t force her not to? As to the American muslim dad; just because one case happened doesn’t mean all muslim men do this; I knew this Pakistani Muslim girl who wore american outfits, and who was friends with “western girls” as you would call them, and who was so assimilated that I didn’t know she was a muslim until I was flat out told; Also, is a woman walking around half naked any more demeaning then being totally covered?
September 26th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
If i’m allowed i’ll respond to some of the comments made.
First of all comparing Islamic coverings to flags or nuns habit, it seems to me that flags represent nations and nations can change there opinion or views. It has no defined meaning other then denoting a certain nation state and it’s people.
A nuns habit has no meaning other then identifying a nun as belonging to a certain convent certain nun habits resemble some Islamic coverings but others do not.
Clearly neither of these would fall under the terms of being a racist and discriminatory symbol.
Also i’m not British and certainly not a National Socialist. Hitler was by the way a great admirer of Islam and even had a special Islamic SS division called the Handschar.
September 26th, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Funny enough as great the admiration of Adolf Hitler was for Islam, Winston Churchill refered to Mein Kampf as the new Qu’ran.
Also responding to Nissa, Islam considers woman inferior to men giving them unequal rights and status.The same is true of non-Muslims in general.
One could say that the Islamic coverings are both a yellow star of David as the symbol of female inferiority as well as a swastika as a symbol of Muslim superiority towards non-Muslims. This is also how it’s described in the Qu’ran. (Let them be know as Muslims so they don’t get bothered)
I don’t see why you should be allowed to pollute other peoples minds and publicaly offend them by wearing these symbols of oppression and discrimination.
By the way mr.Wilders does not go for a ban which is different from the French,Belgian,German and other countries measures.
September 26th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Also responding to the concept of paintings of the virgin Mary with what seems like a Islamic hijab covering.
From the earliest Christian icons to the later renaissance paintings the object was often to depict both Jesus Christ as well as the saints and the Virgin Mary as royalty.
Hence one finds many variations of this theme in paintings and depictions.
Most of the European renaissance paintings have her wearing expensive silk cloth which sometimes even has Arabic script golden embroidery meaning the shahada. This was because Arabs held a monopoly on silk and other expensive cloth trade that European royal families desired.
1st century Jews had very different looks and mode of dress but the desire of the artists was not to be historically accurate but to show the majesty and regal status of Jesus and the Virgin Mary or any of the saints.
September 26th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Also the same reason todays Muslims are confused about the “hijab” of the Virgin Mary is the same reason why Jesus is often viewed as a white European royal.
This very populair image of Jesus which is often found in pictures,paintings, cookies and toast and on doors , is historically inaccurate.
Jesus (if he existed) was a religious 1st century Jew, a semite not a white, often pale, European royal.
One famous feature of Jesus as having long hair for example is completely false.
Jesus most likely had short maybe even shaved hair as all religious Jews of the period.
September 28th, 2009 at 3:49 am
@Durendal
blah. The same old tired nonsense. I wear my hijab proudly. It is an act of worship, a symbol of my identity, and a sign I reject a lot of the cultural and traditional baggage my parents had. It makes me feel powerful…even when it makes me a walking target…so you clearly know nothing about Muslim women and should stop acting like you do.
As for the Hitler thing….read a history book. He used Christianity to mobilise support, his own little Hitler church was based on Chrisitan motifs, many Christian clergy supported him….
one SS division with Muslims….and? They had their own national interests at the time…Muslims fought against him too but of course the poor colonial soldiers forced into fighting for their colonisers against a potential coloniser always get forgotten.
If you only ever look at things from your little ‘i hate Muslims’ prism of course you will have a very skewed impression of the world.
September 28th, 2009 at 4:38 am
Andrew Bostom: His Moustache offends me ; so therefore he should pay tax,
Geert Wilders: should get a hair cut - and his hair colour offends me so therefore he should pay tax
Robert Spencer: Is in need of a dire shave: it totally offends me that he has so much facial hair : so therefore should pay tax
Pamela Geller: she has too many split ends in her hair which offend me dearly - therefore should pay tax
September 28th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Hate to burst your bubble, but hitler was a proud Christian, as evidenced by this websitehttp://www.creationtheory.org/Essays/Hitler.xhtml. As for churchill, he wasn’t exactly tolerant (he advocated dropping bioweapons on arabs. Plus, one Muslim SS unit doesn’t = all muslims being involved in the holocaust.
September 29th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
@Nissa Aaaahh but who were the first colonizers of the countries you mentioned?
I will remind you in case you don’t know.
That islam originates in Arabia what is it doing outside of Arabia?
My…why…could Muslims have colonized the countries in which Islam is now a prominent religion?
September 29th, 2009 at 7:09 pm
@Nissa who taught Europeans everything they know about war and colonizing?
My was it..why it can’t be ..was it the Muslims? Attacking them first in Spain and then in Southern France where there advance was halted?
Was it the Ottomans that introduced Europeans to the fine art of gunpowder when they assaulted Constantinople and the Balkans and there constant invasions of the Habsburg lands?
Using by the way Colonized Janissary soldiers? You know how they got hold of Janissary soldiers? They would go into occupied Balkans and kidnap Christian children.
September 29th, 2009 at 7:19 pm
@Nissa The Muslims that invaded Spain and Southerm France in the 8th century taught the Europeans the fine art of riding warhorses with stirrups.
Thanks to this Europeans started learning to fight mounted warfare.
Charles Martel defeated the Muslims with phalanx and spears but after this were born the mounted knights in Europe something the Muslims came to regret a few centuries later.
September 30th, 2009 at 3:01 am
@Durendal
Yes…Muslims are to blame for everything bad EVER. Christianity was also a Middle Eastern religion….how did it spread so far?
No Muslim armies went to Indonesia- and it is the most populous Muslim country in the world.
Europeans had been attacked and colonised by Romans (and each other). Seriously, please get some therapy.
September 30th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Durendal,
It is a completely ridiculous and altogether false, as well as Islamophobic claim to make that Adolph was a great admirer of Islam! The reason you bring that up is to attempt to tie Islam to Nazism. That is disgusting and lame. The fact is Nazism/fascism arose in the West and had within it a pagan core, and though Hitler proclaimed himself Christian the reality was he was a pagan at heart. Islam is opposed to all forms of paganism.
To other profundities you proclaim: “Why is Islam out of Arabia?” Fact is people from all these countries embraced Islam. The fight against both the Byzantines and the Persians was a defensive war.
The Europeans didn’t need any help from Muslims to learn about war or colonizing. They were happily chopping each others’ heads off for centuries before the Muslims came. Take the Visigoths for example, they were known to be the most oppressive rulers of Iberia, so much so that the Muslims who landed into Iberia were viewed as liberators and in fact it was the Jewish community that helped Muslims land in Iberia. It is also the reason why Muslims faced so little resistance from the local populations up until Tours.
Please do a little research next time.
September 30th, 2009 at 3:46 pm
That is why I am happy to live in the Netherlands: Freedom of speech. I am calling myself liberal and even vote for D66 (of the Pechtold guy in the interview), but I am glad that people can say such things here, even if it is controversal.
And of course many people in Holland think this is ridiculous and will tell it to Mr. Wilders (like Mr. Pechtold did), but that is how the game is played. Geert Wilders is a clown and he knows it, but he keeps the Netherlands awake and makes politics interesting. Only to see how other politicians are playing upset is worth the show.
And to shine a light on the whole situation:
It was during a discussion about where the dutch goverment has to get its money from after buying the Fortis/ABN AMRO bank for several billions EUR. All political parties had there share and since the PVV (Mr. Wilders is fraction leader of the PVV) is almost a one issue party with a focus towards integrationpolitics, they proposed this taxation.
His reasoning: “We’ve spend lots of money on integration of muslims, while they cost us a lot of money anyway (the average muslim in the Netherlands rely strongly on social services); since everybody has to bleed, lets let the not integrated muslims pay their part!” (according Mr. Wilders the headscarf is a symbol of non-integration of the muslim woman).
September 30th, 2009 at 5:04 pm
@Nissa
If hitler was a christian please explain this quote:
“It is through the peasantry that we will really be able to destroy Christianity, because there is in them a true religion rooted in nature and blood.”
If hitler was a Christian why did the nazis invade Christian lands and kill Christians? Also it amuses me how you defend people who had a role in the holocaust, they weren’t a few poor boys forced into nazi uniforms, no one forced them to kill Jews. The Hanzar Division of Nazi Muslim Soldiers in Bosnia created by Amin Al Husseini was the largest division of the nazi army and that’s only part of the nazi muslim alliance. How would you react if a uber nationalistic serb came on here and refused to condemn the people who carried out the srebrenica genocide and even went as far as to claim that the mass murderers were forced into it?
September 30th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
@Ryan
Read what I posted about hitler, also it wasn’t just one SS unit like I said the muslim Hanzar division was the largest divison in the nazi army, the nazis had a hand in the creation of the muslim brotherhood and numerous pro-nazi groups sprang up in the middle east (ie young egypt) Heinrich Himmler, Head of SS, and close colleague of Amin Al-Husseini, financed and established Islamic Institute (‘Islamische Zentralinstitut’) in Dresden under Amin Al Husseini. Plus one hundred thousand (100,000) Bosnian Muslims joined the Nazi ranks (I’m waiting for Nissa to try to make them out to be victims and tell me how the poor dears were forced into it), so the fact is that muslims and Arabs were very much involved in the nazi war machine.
“I have nothing against Islam because it educates the men in this division for me and promises them heaven if they fight and are killed in action. A very practical and attractive religion for soldiers.”
-Heinrich Himmler
September 30th, 2009 at 11:20 pm
Barry Lyndon,
It is a lie, and a humongous factual error to say that the Hanzar division was the largest in the Nazi army. It plays well in your Islamophobic argument though. It never fails to surprise me how people can rewrite history and project their own prejudices of the present onto the past.
The Hanzar division was a part of the Waffen-SS, which grew to have 38 divisions, and was different from the regular army (Heer). It was Hitler’s command that the Waffen SS “never be integrated into the regular Army.” In the beginning it was open only to the “pure Aryan races” which Bosniaks of course did not fit into because they were Slavs. It wasn’t until the exigencies of Realpolitik made themselves ever present that the Nazis opened it up for other races.
After the fall of Sarajevo on 16 April, 1941 to Nazi Germany, the extremist Croat-nationalist and Fascist Ante Pavelić (who had been in exile in Mussolini’s Italy) was appointed Poglavnik or leader of a new Ustaše state - Nezavisna Država Hrvatska (NDH, the Independent State of Croatia). The Yugoslav provinces of Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and parts of Serbia were reconstituted as a pro-Nazi satellite entity under joint Nazi and Italian occupation. The Ustaše almost immediately launched a vicious campaign of violence directed at unarmed Serb civilians.
On July 6, 1941 Pavelić’s Culture and Education Minister, Mile Budak, announced that the Ustaše considered the Bosnian Muslims an integral part of the NDH : “The Croatian State is Christian. It is also a Muslim State where our people are of the Islamic religion.” Pavelić ordered a property in Zagreb be converted into a mosque that he modestly named after himself in his efforts to secure the loyalty of the Bosnian Muslims : the Poglavniks Mosque.
Bosnian Muslim clerics issued three declarations (fatāwa), all publicly denouncing Croat-Nazi collaborationist measures, laws and violence against Jews and Serbs: that of Sarajevo in October 1941, of Mostar in 1941, and of Banja Luka on 12 November, 1941.
Despite Pavelić’s assurances of equality, it wasn’t long before many Bosniaks became dissatisfied with Croatian rule. An Islamic leader reported that not one Muslim occupied an influential post in the (local) administration. Fierce fighting broke out between Ustase and Partisans. A number of Ustase units believed that the Bosniaks were communist sympathizers and burned their villages and murdered civilians. Serb victims of the violence were inclined to view the Bosniaks as collaborators.
The Fall of 1942 saw SS Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler and SS-General Gottlob Berger approach Hitler with the proposal to raise a Bosnian Muslim SS division. Both the Wehrmacht and the SS were concerned about the rapidly deteriorating security situation in the NDH that tied down German military personnel that could be better employed elsewhere. By the New Year of 1943 over 100,000 Bosnian Muslims had been killed (9% of all Bosniaks at the time) and 250,000 had been expelled from their homes - mostly by Serb Chetniks. “The Muslims” remarked one German General, “bear the special status of being persecuted by all others”.
October 1st, 2009 at 3:04 am
@Barry Lyndon
So you are saying Christians have never attacked Christians? As to Amir-al-Husseini…he was appointed by the British in opposition to the Turks, he allied with Germany because he wanted to stop Jewish immigration to Palestine…many other Palestinian leaders at the time allied with the British…he wasn’t the only Arab leader alive then.
Yes Muslims and Arabs were involved….it was a World War, genius. They were on both sides, just like Christians.
Some Muslims also supported Apartheid and some were locked up for contesting it- you do realise we are not a homogenous block and religion is only part of why people, nations and governments make certain choices (or is that too rational for you?)
Hitler was smart enough to use one religion against another and play on the ethnic divisions already present as Ustadh pointed out.
The Japanese collaborated with the Nazis….so did the Indians (Chandra Bose to this day is a national hero)…
I never said anyone joining the Nazis were victims…I said they had their own national interests and to suggest Islam influenced Nazism is plain wrong and really shows how desperate you are to demonise all Muslims.
Plus…Germans are not blamed for their ancestors actions anymore…why should Arabs or Bosnians be?
October 1st, 2009 at 4:57 am
Barry is clearly an Islamophobe, repeating the rhetoric that “the Muslims supported the Nazis.”
I will quote from an article written by Zaid Shakir:
The shameless allegation that Islam is the new fascism would be bad enough were it presented in isolation. However, it is coupled with allegations that Muslims supported Hitler and the Nazis during World War II. Such allegations are a foul misrepresentation of the historical record and serve to dishonor the memory of all of the courageous Muslims who selflessly fought and died in defense of the European democracies, even though many of their own lands were still suffering under the yoke of European colonization.
At the heart of these baseless and base allegations is the fact that the Palestinian Mufti of Jerusalem, Al-Hajj Amin al-Husayni, had close ties to the German leader Adolf Hitler, and even spent part of the war in Berlin. While this much is true, al-Husayni’s sentiments were not those of the overwhelming majority of the Palestinians, to say nothing of the rest of the world’s Muslims. To use al-Husayni’s ties to Hitler as a means to defame and discredit Islam and Muslims as fascists is misleading and has to be challenged.
In fact, there were several Palestinian brigades and tens of thousands of Palestinians in the British Army who actively fought the spread of fascism. The existence of these Palestinian brigades was more indicative of the mood of the Arab and Muslim masses than al-Husayni’s misguided actions. Therefore, when al-Husayni issued his call for a Muslim jihad against the allied forces his plea was largely ignored. The fascist jihad never materialized. The reason for that is simple. It had no significant support from the masses of Muslims.
The Palestinian Muslims were not alone in terms of their participation in the anti-fascist effort. Hundreds of thousands of North and West African Muslims assisted in the liberation of France from the German occupation and the French Vichy government. As many as half of the free French forces that landed in southern France in 1944 were Africans, the overwhelming majority of them Muslims. Among their ranks was a group referred to as Senegal’s Secret Soldiers, a group of Senegalese Muslims who played a significant role in the liberation of France from Nazi occupation.
One of this country’s staunchest Muslim allies in the struggle against the fascist menace was the Moroccan king, Muhammad V. He not only worked strenuously to insure that Moroccans supported neither the French Vichy government nor the Nazi effort in North Africa, but he also courageously supported Moroccan Jews during the war years, saving them from extermination at the hands of the Vichy regime. Muhammad V’s efforts were so heroic in this latter regard that the Moroccan Jewish community has initiated an effort to have him become the first Arab to receive Yad Vashem’s “Righteous Among the Nations” award.
Farther east, hundreds of thousands of Muslims enrolled in the British Indian Army. On January 1, 1945, there were 447,580 Punjabi Muslims in the British Indian Army. This number constituted 32 percent of the army’s troop strength, a percentage tremendously greater than the percentage of Muslims in the overall population. These Muslim soldiers were deployed in all of the major theaters of battle in the fight against the Axis powers and performed admirably. They were firmly supported by the political leader of the Muslims in India, Muhammad Ali Jinnah, a staunch critic of Hitler.
The claim of widespread Muslim support for Hitler is further belied by the fact that Turkey, at that time the strongest independent Muslim nation…The Turks broke all diplomatic and economic relations with the Germans in August of 1944, and declared war against Germany, February 23, 1945. These moves were instrumental in the defeat of fascism. Besides the political importance of Turkey’s declaration of war against the Axis forces, its entrance into the war on the side of the Alliance deprived Germany of one of its major suppliers of chromite, an essential element in steel production.
Perhaps the greatest testimony to the Muslims who actively opposed fascism is the work of the Paris Mosque in protecting Jewish children from the Nazis, who were sending French Jews-men, women, and children-to perish in the death camps of Eastern Europe. The mosque itself was built by the French government in appreciation of the 500,000 Muslims who had fought for France during World War I, with 100,000 losing their lives in the trenches. It is estimated that the mosque helped to save over 1,700 Jewish children, by providing them with shelter, transit, and Muslim names. A pamphlet that circulated among Algerian Muslims in Paris at the onset of the Nazis’ campaign against the Jews in France stated:
“Yesterday at dawn, the Jews of Paris were arrested. The old, the women, and the children. In exile like ourselves, workers like ourselves. They are our brothers. Their children are like our own children. The one who encounters one of his children must give that child shelter and protection for as long as misfortune-or sorrow-lasts. Oh, man of my country, your heart is generous.”
————————-
As for the Muslims League of India (the precursor of Pakistan), they backed the Allies, providing hundreds of thousands of soldiers. Winston Churchill said about them:
“We must not on any account break with the Muslims who represent a hundred million people and are the main army elements [in India] on which we rely for the immediate fighting.”
(The Commonwealth in South Asia, by Sadashiv Prabhakar Aiyar p.210)
So please Barry, save us from your Islamophobic rhetoric.
Sincerely,
Danios.
October 1st, 2009 at 10:39 pm
“Barry is clearly an Islamophobe repeating the rhetoric that “the Muslims supported the Nazis.”
I didn’t say that all muslims were nazi fanboys; I simply pointed to Ryan and Nisa that there were more pro-nazi muslims than one ss unit and it kind of irritated me how nisa tried to make them out to be victims. I didn’t include the entire scope of Muslim involvement in World War two since I was trying to keep my post short since the last time I tried to post a large reply it was cancelled.
“So please Barry, save us from your Islamophobic rhetoric.”
Historical facts are ‘bigotry’ all of sudden? Also cut the name calling, I’m not anti-muslim bigot seeing as I’m not exactly a Rob Spencer fan. I haven’t used any anti-muslim rhetoric I haven’t used cliches like ’stealth jihad’ or crap like that.
October 1st, 2009 at 11:22 pm
“So you are saying Christians have never attacked Christians?”
Of course not, I’m critical of religion in general, however the topic is about Islam and I don’t see a reason to include an ‘oh yeah Christians have done bad things too’ footnote next to every post about Islam.
“Yes Muslims and Arabs were involved….it was a World War, genius. They were on both sides, just like Christians.”
Of course they were, however you tried to minimalize it and even tried to make them out to be victims, my post wasn’t meant to be about the entire scope of muslim involvement in WWII. I was trying to show how silly your comment was and I was trying to keep my post short since quite a few of my longer posts on here weren’t approved.
“you do realise we are not a homogenous block and religion”
Of course, an American muslim is obviously going to be different from a muslim in Saudi Arabia. However I didn’t claim that all muslims were pro-nazi.
“Hitler was smart enough to use one religion against another and play on the ethnic divisions already present as Ustadh pointed out.”
I wouldn’t credit hitler with too much brain power, the guy invaded Russia for heaven’s sake.
“I never said anyone joining the Nazis were victims.”
Really? Because it sure sounds like it to me:
“but of course the poor colonial soldiers forced into fighting for their colonisers against a potential coloniser always get forgotten.”
In other words you think the poor dears were forced into it.
“I said they had their own national interests and to suggest Islam influenced Nazism is plain wrong”
I didn’t say it influenced nazism, I simply pointed out that Hitler and Himmler (in their own words) admired the religion. Oh wait or am I an ‘islamophobic intolerant bigot’ for pointing that out?
“and really shows how desperate you are to demonise all Muslims.”
Yes I’m an anti-muslim bigot, that must be why I cricized Robert Spencer and didn’t call all muslims nazis. I suppose if I point out French pro-nazi activity I’m trying demonize French people? Accusations of bigotry or intolerance are silly and they lower the quality of a debate, all the ‘I tawt I taw a wacist’ tactic does is anger the person you’re debating.
“Plus…Germans are not blamed for their ancestors actions anymore…why should Arabs or Bosnians be?”
Where on earth did I say that they should be blamed for their ancestors’ actions? Oh that’s right I didn’t.
October 2nd, 2009 at 7:56 pm
It’s sad how mean everyone is being on here. The question you need to ask yourself is simple: Do people have the right to wear what they want or not?…and for any freedom-loving individual the answer should be obvious…People should have the right to wear what they want and if people don’t like it, don’t look. I’m a Christian who head-covers. I wear a full head scarf and living in America am almost always taken to be “Muslim” just because I follow this ancient Christian tradition. Most people don’t realize that Jews, Christians, and Muslims ALL have a tradition of head-covering for women. Head-covering is a Christian tradition as much as the “hijab” is for Islam, feminism and modernism have simply killed it here in the west. Women in modern society are the ones who are oppressed. Women are not seen as people in modern society….they are sexual objects! Girls are raised to believe that they are only worth something if a man finds them sexually attractive and hence women are more unhappy than ever before. Modesty for women is freedom and true happiness. Oh, and I love my Muslim and Jewish Sisters who cover! People are only responsible for themselves not for others so please stop grouping people and putting responsibility on their heads for things to which happened in the past. I’m no more responsible for the crusades as a Christian than a Muslim is for a terrorist bombing a building. It’s simple people: “Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you. Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me remove that splinter in your eye’, while the wooden beam is in your eye?” Matthew 7:1-4 If someone wants me to remove my headscarf in the future…sorry it’s not going to happen! God Bless, Kel
October 3rd, 2009 at 8:09 pm
Awww, and they’re all together in the post! How darling! What would poor little Geert think of the fact that I frequently wear a headscarf even though I’m an American Roman Catholic woman? HAHA! What about freedom and choices for women? Take away our right to vote as well, Geert? If so, start here and with Pammycakes Geller. Then tax her botox. Then tax Spencer simply for being so incredibly f******g ugly (and incredibly annoying). Aww, now I sound so petty. My apologies. We all know that these petty taxes are good for everyone. More revenue, more persecution……
….. and oooops, there I go jumping into another thread ranting about hijab. But ohhhh, that picture….too hard to resist. Loonwatch has sucked me in AGAIN!
P.S. I linked your site today in an article (about hijab), so if my readers come back after my long break from blogging, eh who knows. I’m sure you’ve surpassed me by a long-shot by now!
October 3rd, 2009 at 9:08 pm
“Women in modern society are the ones who are oppressed.”
If you truly believe that you are deluded, nobody forces a western woman to wear a miniskirt, on the other hand we have lovely stuff like this taking place in the middle east:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/1874471.stm
“Women are not seen as people in modern society.”
Actually you haven’t backwards, women aren’t seen as people in the middle east which is why the United Nations Development Fund for Women reports that nearly 90 percent of Afghan women suffer from domestic abuse.
“they are sexual objects!”
So just because somebody doesn’t follow your values they’re automatically a ‘brazen hussy’? That would be amusing if it wasn’t just plain sad, of course you left out women who authors, politicians, artists and so on.
“Girls are raised to believe that they are only worth something if a man finds them sexually attractive and hence women are more unhappy than ever before.”
So every single parent in the west raises their daughter to be a ‘whore’? What a bigoted statement, that’s as bigoted as claiming that every Islamic parent raise their children to be terrorists.
“Modesty for women is freedom and true happiness.”
In your opinion, which isn’t worth much seeing as you think a few miniskirts is ‘oppression’ but widespread domestic abuse isn’t.
October 4th, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Barry, I don’t judge anyone for what they choose to wear. I said in my post that I judge no one. I’m simply stating my opinion on how I felt as a girl raised in the west and based on my observations and relationships with other women. I think it’s great that women can choose to wear what they want, even if I don’t agree with it, but the truth is that if you dress modest in the Western-world you are looked down on and ridiculed while if you wear showy clothing (not that everyone does) nobody has a problem with it. Doesn’t that seem wrong to you? Girls are dying for the attention of men and using their bodies to get it. I know because I used to be one of them. I used to think I was doing it for me, because I was liberated! What a joke…it was all for the attention of men! All every girl I’ve ever known wanted was to walk down the street and turn heads to get some validation of their worth through their bodies. Women are fed the idea that they have to conform to a certain standard of beauty and if they don’t they aren’t worth anything. Oh, and domestic violence is not a Middle Eastern problem, it’s a universal problem. If the west is so enlightened to the plights of women how come domestic violence still happens as much as ever? Just cause I don’t agree with what girls wear doesn’t mean I think they are whores….you are the one jumping to that conclusion…I love everyone no matter what they choose to do with their life or bodies…that’s between them and God. Maybe what you should be asking yourself is why you so unbelievably angry at those who choose to dress modestly? Afraid you’ll be missing out on a few extra shows of leg (etc.) for the cost of a smile or wink?
October 4th, 2009 at 10:32 pm
It is very strange how Barry seeks to divert any topic dealing with Muslims into an Islam bashing or blaming Muslims exercise. Anything to divert from the topic at hand such as the craziness of Geert Wilders.
Anti-Liberty laws have been passed in France which deny Muslim women who choose to wear the headscarf their right.
October 5th, 2009 at 3:46 am
@Barry
“but of course the poor colonial soldiers forced into fighting for their colonisers against a potential coloniser always get forgotten.”
You might learn how to read…that was in reference to the colonial soldiers fighting for the allies who so often get forgotten.
Point out that Hitler admired Islam, he also admired the Japanese religion and was influences by Paganism (which is what he was referencing in that peasantry quote.) No one tried to deny Muslims were involved…we all objected to Durendal’s use of it to demonise all Muslims…
You seem to jump all over me for something you misread but don’t seem to correct Durendal for claiming Muslims taught and brought war to Europe..
As for the Saudi Fire link….that story was more than was reported..most girls died in a stampede inside the building and when a staircase collapsed. Many people did help them outside, the guard denies he locked the gate and the Mutaween were severly criticised for trying to block girls leaving and people ignored them and contiued to help them leave.
I would not defend the Mutaween in a million years, they are a disgrace and are not popular in Saudi either.
Domestic abuse is a global problem….and banning or fining women for wearing what they want is ridiculous wherever it happens.
October 5th, 2009 at 10:10 am
FYI Nissa - Hitler admired Buddhism as well and considered them as one of the fountains of Aryan knowledge, he sent a expidition to Buddhist monistries.
October 8th, 2009 at 5:32 am
Nissa Says:
September 30th, 2009 at 3:01 am
All imperial powers claim they invade other peoples countries to liberate them and that the subjugated were overjoyed.
This was true then and it’s true now with the exception that Muslims are still busy excusing it and feel no desire to condemn it or be self critical of there past. Quite to the contrary it’s generally viewed as a glorious past one which they strive to repeat.
Western Europe during the first Muslim contacts was not as developed as the Islamic world and much of the later resurgence of Western Europe came as a result of Islamic-Western European contact.
It’s no accident that the great voyages of discovery of Columbus and others orginated in the lands recently liberated from Islamic rule.
Arabs were colonizing long before Western Europeans.To stick with your example of Indonesia never being settled by Muslims , Arab merchants created various settlements and outposts as early as the 11th century.From which Islamic kingdoms originated that subsequently fought other kingdoms for territory and influence in the Indonesian archipelago.
@Ustadh Says:
September 30th, 2009 at 10:50 am
I look upon Islam as something seperate from National Socialism but sharing many common traits.
It’s founder according to Islamic sources was a totalitarian ruler who engaged in violent warfare,implementated various discriminatory measures , engaged in genocide and ethnic cleansing and who claimed the superiority of the Muslims over all peoples of the world and that all should submit themselves to his idealogy giving all others a second class status or worse.This is obvious for anyone who has ever opened a Qu’ran and read it.
It’s not much different from the National Socialist idealogy that white “Aryans” should rule the world while all other races are to be subjugated and made into second class or worse.
October 8th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
@Durendal…Seriously? Now you are blaming Muslims for the genocide in the New World?! Well if everything bad Europe has ever done is because of contact with Islam…is everything good also because of contact with Islam?
you fail to see how ridiculous you sound when you whine Muslims don’t condemn their past when you try to excuse that of Europe by blaming Muslims for it!!
Please continue to think we are all bloodthirsty supremacist fanatics….whatever gets you through your hate filled paranoid day.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:44 am
@Nissa Why do you think Westen Europeans set out on there voyages of discovery? The establishment of the crusader states in the 11th and 12th centuries brought us into contact with things Western Europeans hadn’t seen in centuries.It opened the eyes to a world that was lost. Most of these resources were monopolized by the various Islamic empires forcing Western Europeans to find alternative routes to regain access to them.
Western Europeans regained access to the Greek learnings which form the basis of modern science. What the Muslims brought us through invasion , colonization and war, Western Europeans improved on.
It is not excusing Europe’s past it’s showing you that before Europeans did any of this Muslims were busy doing it.
And while Europeans have learned to look critically at there past Muslims look upon there past as something glorious that was lost and that needs to be restored,pegged on I should say, by oil funded Western apologetic scholars that glorify the history,the Islamic conquests and there colonial rule.
As for supremacy don’t all Muslims believe there book Qu’ran? It repeats it over and over and over again.
3:110 “Ye are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors.”
October 9th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
@Durendal
As for that passage…and? Every faith has an element of supremacy and exclusivity. What would be the point if believers and non-believers were all the same in their faith? I am a heathen in Christianity…I am not one of the Chosen in Judaism…
The Quran also teaches me to treat others how I wish to be treated…regardless of their faith because I will answer to Allah for how I behaved towards his creations.
Yes…because before Muslims had contact with Europe is was a paradise of peace and marshmallows. You have clearly not learned to look critically at the past….and FYI Europe has not learned from it very recent colonial past- that much is obvious in how it deals with the world it screwed up.
It is worthless to debate with you.
October 12th, 2009 at 5:38 pm
Also to bring it into the present, people do not like being colonized by Islam and Muslims.
As is currently the case in many European countries.
Which explains the resistance that is growing.
It is the same resistance as the one that grew in the areas which were previously colonized by Europeans.
It’s a struggle for national liberation and sovereignity.
Which silly enough gets called “nationalist-supremacy” on this blog.
I wonder how they would then view other such incidents in history where a native population overthrows a colonial power and sends them packing.
October 14th, 2009 at 5:54 am
Yes, lets deal with the present. I, like most Muslims of immigrant ancestry are in Europe because of colonialism. We have the same claim as anyone else to live work and prosper in Europe. There are also indigenous converts to Islam…
where exactly will you be packing us all off to? I am British. I don’t belong anywhere else.
How you think a group that makes up 5% of all of Europe, is socio-economically disadvantaged, with little or no political power and living in a current climate of scrutiny and demonisation (with no military upper hand) are colonising Europe is beyond me.
You have no grip on history or reality.
October 14th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Mr. Wilders has millions of followers, not just a few. Before and durung WW11 there were millions of Netherlanders who joined the Nazi Party voluntarily, called The Social Democrats. After the war that segment of the society never was forced to face their participation as brutal fasicsts, as Germany was forced to. Many of Mr. Wilders adherents, and, enthusiastic they are, are probably children, grandchildren and great grandchildren of those Dutch Nazis. After all fasicsm starts at home, the political movement to succeed is always one that is culturally approved, not an aberration.
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:22 pm
First in response to several comments about how negative Islam is.
people need to stop confusing Islam as a religion with Middle Eastern culture. like any other culture there are many faults with Middle Eastern cultures and traditions. along the lines these have become confused as customs brought on by Islam, which is NOT the case.
A simple proof of this is to merely go back to reading the Quran in context. not singling out a verse but reading all related verses.
You will see that Islam as a religion can work in any culture and does not violate any cultural values, be them Western or Eastern
Second
About forcing women to take of their Hijab.
Myself and all my friends who wear the Hijab were never forced by husbands, i wore the Hijab long before i got married, nor by family.
As hard as it is for alot of people to understand the Hijab is a choice. Women DO choose to wear it out of devotion and love for God not to oppress themselves. it also does not oppress in anyway.
I work, learn, participate in all the activities i wish while wearing the Hijab.
If people who are Islamophobic are for some reason scared of women wearing the Hijab and eventually force them to take it off some how.
that won’t affect their belief! I mean even with out the Hijab these women are still Muslims. Being a Muslim is a way of life, it’s in your heart and mind. The Hijab is just an outer garment that symbolizes women’s devotion.
i personally know Muslims who don’t wear the Hijab and i see them more devote and religious that some who do.
Third
The idea that all Muslims are immigrant. That is really untrue.
There are a lot of European and American Muslims who are not from Middle Eastern descent.
For people attacking Islam and reading this blog i would simply advise you to read the Quran or a translated version of a credible source. And read it with understanding of the context, don’t take one verse and leave the rest but read all verses that are related to each other.
this is not to make you give up your own religion or belief but to understand Islam. Islam respects all religions and respects that people have different beliefs.it’s up to Muslims to truly abide by this and for others to show the same respect.
@Durendal
In response for your quote of the Quran, it’s true that exists and i urge you and others to read the whole verse which it is shown.
there are other verses such as:
” Say (O Muslims), “We believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrahim (Abraham), Isma’il (Ishmael), Ishaque (Isaac), Ya’qub (Jacob), and to Al-Asbat [the twelve sons of Ya'qub (Jacob)], and that which has been given to Musa (Moses) and ‘Iesa (Jesus), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islam).” 2:136
“ Surely, those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah, in His Messenger Muhammad SAW and all that was revealed to him from Allah), those who are the Jews and the Sabians and the Christians, - whosoever believed in Allah and the Last Day, and worked righteousness, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. “
5:69
3:45“ (Remember) when the angels said: “O Maryam (Mary)! Verily, Allah gives you the glad tidings of a Word ["Be!" - and he was! i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus) the son of Maryam (Mary)] from Him, his name will be the Messiah ‘Iesa (Jesus), the son of Maryam (Mary), held in honour in this world and in the Hereafter, and will be one of those who are near to Allah.”
November 12th, 2009 at 12:52 am
To Durendal:
You seem to be associating Nazism to Islam, did you know that Nazi soldiers had a Christian cross on their belt-buckles to symbolize their righteous war? Thankfully we Muslims are intelligent enough to know the difference between Nazism and Christianity. Yet our faith is put on trial daily for the mistakes of individuals, this is one of the greatest injustices of our time.
November 12th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
Geert is a scumbag, are we really still discussing this guy’s insane hatred and lack of democratic values?
November 12th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
Best quote:
“What I love about islamophobic loons is their schizophrenic pretentious ability to actually believe that they are benevolent humanitarians even as they engage in the worst kind of unadulterated bigotry.” -Mexican_lunch
Stop speaking on our behalf and call us oppressed, Geert! We never lodged a complaint of being oppressed or appointed you to be our Muslim women’s spokesperson– how did you come to the conclusion that we are oppressed?
Let me speak for myself:
Modesty is not an oppression. A head garb on any woman Christian, Muslim or Jewish is the same thing; a piece of fabric. How fabric on a Muslim becomes oppressive and fabric on a nun’s head is not, I fail to see the distinction. If you want to talk about oppression, nuns:
1. wear a head garb and cover themselves;
2. wear monotonous outfits i.e. black and white only (that I’m aware of);
3. lock themselves away in a Convent!
4. never get married….
Muslim women are out in the public, can enjoy conjugal life, can change different outfits– and they cover their hair with fabric. Oppressed, much? I read law in university and now I’m a lawyer; hmm, a professional hijab woman, oppressed really?
If anyone can tell me exactly how is it I’m oppressed when I have exercised my own freewill in all the decisions of my life, feel free.
Agreeing with Kel:
Women are sexually appealing by nature, I personally feel there is no need to sex it up lest you become more of the sex part than the person part thus objectifying yourself as a sex object.
Though some women feel the need or prefer to sex it up a little; this always reminds me of Sex & the City– from 20 something all the way to 40 something; hey, I look good that makes me happy! And yet, the way they weave in and out of sexual relationships, the emotional ups and downs caused by this man or the other, being so SUBJECT to whatever man they allow into their lives and somebody in the room is going to throw the word “skank” if they feel like it! This, is freedom? And I know the women of Sex & the City are representative of the general trend of women in any urban setting.
Not saying they are wrong, but these are choices people can consciously make and if they choose beautiful fabulous clothes with what comes after it is their freedom to do so. I choose…. beautiful fabulous modest clothes
Dior, Hermes and any other fashion house is a personal freedom of choice too
November 12th, 2009 at 9:36 pm
Best quote:
“Mexican_lunch Says:
September 22nd, 2009 at 4:34 pm
“Wilders says the money raised would go toward women’s emancipation programmes.”
What I love about islamophobic loons is their schizophrenic pretentious ability to actually believe that they are benevolent humanitarians even as they engage in the worst kind of unadulterated bigotry.”
It is pretentious of Wilder to presume responsibility of Hijab-women spokesperson and allege on our behalf that we are oppressed when we can definitively say for ourselves: “WE ARE NOT”.
November 25th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Wilders is vile.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Durendal, you remind me of a little boy trying to figure out how to blame the broken window on his sister.
For the record read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/13th_Waffen_Mountain_Division_of_the_SS_Handschar_(1st_Croatian)
Hitler did NOT like Muslims, but used certain Muslims in the area who happened to be just simply bad people. The Scholars back then issued fatwa’s AGAINST Hitler and his methodology.
“Bosnian Muslim clerics issued three declarations (fatāwa), all publicly denouncing Croat-Nazi collaborationist measures, laws and violence against Jews and Serbs: that of Sarajevo in October 1941, of Mostar in 1941, and of Banja Luka on 12 November 1941 [2].”
Please take the Aluminum Foil hat off, climb out of Mommy’s basement and go out into the scary Muslim filled world and educate yourself… or better yet get a job and stop wasting time on the internet splattering your conspiracy theories and hatred.
When you grow up, please stop by and we can have tea or coffee, your choice… but be sure you have your Mommy’s permission first.
February 3rd, 2010 at 12:47 pm
OMG, I just took mt kids to school, and as it is a bit cold, so I just grabbed it, and it on hijab style. All the sudden when I get to the drop mthr od hll rthe (WWWWWWAYYYYY to slow drop off; and all the other Moms stared and glared, all these Escalade/Hummer/YukonXL/ ‘drivers’. I couldn’t believe it AGAIN! Headscarves are just very handyI think they arI in this weather, I wasn’t trying to make a statement or anything, I was just wearing a head scarf. I got the worst stares, people looking at me glaring so hard that eyes were just slits.
I have to get off of these muscle relaxants, this stuff just makes me a make mee unable to leave anynomous. Thzf c cr a wrexk….o crap tje dose is kicking in,S-r
February 4th, 2010 at 11:15 am
Return of the inquisition in Europe.
February 4th, 2010 at 11:18 am
@Durendal,
Amercian, British bankers financed Hitler including President G. Bush II grandfather.
February 7th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
Let’s tax Bikinis as well! They are also a political statement! G Strings will pay higher taxes! Seriously thou: women should have the right to wear whatever they want for whatever reasons they have. If they want to wear Burkas and Hijabs no one has the right to prohibit them or punish them for doing so. This fallacy called white Euro-American democracy has brought to much evil to the world already with its wars, support of tyrants in Central and South America that killed and tortured millions of people with the support and training of our beloved CIA and NSA agents, and everything our big corps did in the world in “the name of democracy and freedom”. Time to stop that thing! I am American, a war vet, and White but everything that comes out of a mouth of a white politician is usually wrong and will bring this world close to destruction.
February 27th, 2010 at 7:33 am
Wilders for PRESIDENT!
February 27th, 2010 at 7:34 am
Geert Wilders cant walk in Freedom cause of muslim threats…now who are here the true fascists?
February 28th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
Hope they win , Greetings from Sweden
March 8th, 2010 at 4:52 am
What Geert Wilders is proposing comes down to persecution on the basis of sex and religion. He does not merely want to tax head covering he only wants to tax Muslim women who cover their head. He is fine with people wearing crosses, other non-Muslim symbols and non-Muslim religious head coverings.
As far as I am concerned, civil servants and medical personnel should not wear religious, political and/or other ideological symbols during work hours. They are supposed to serve the general interest as impartially as possible. However, Mr Wilders is does not want the State to be neutral when it comes to religion. He wants the Dutch state to actively discriminate against Muslims, particularly ethnic Moroccans. He has made that very clear.
March 8th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
In a strange sick way I hope he wins. Then we can get to see his peverted govt discrimination fantasies into play.