Saturday, May 06, 2006

Europe is being "Suicided" (by Islamists, who else?)

Europe's Suicide?
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com April 26, 2006


In this interview, Morten Messerschmidt for the

Danish Bigot's Party
, sorry, the Danish People's Party, shares with us his wisdom [ahem...] on the "Islamic threat" and the annihilation of Europe's cultural heritage. Interview by Jamie "slightly glazed over" Glazov, from the arch-rightwingers of FrontPageMagazine. But this isn't really an interview: it's two likeminded racists patting each other on the back. Anyway, enjoy this rightwing rant from the country that so generously gave us a piece of its cultural genius: Danish bacon, sorry, I meant the Danish "cartoons". Am I "anti-Danish"? No, not in the slightest, but don't push me...

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Morten Messerschmidt, a member of the Council of Europe and of Denmark's Parliament for the Danish People's Party. He is involved in the debate about the effects of Muslim immigration to Europe, Islam and terrorism.

FP: Tell us the impact that Muslim immigration is having on Europe.

[Yes, do tell us, we're all dying to hear it from racist islamophobes like "Messy"].

Messerschmidt: We are seeing over the entire continent how the extreme groups of Islam are trying to impose their fundamentalist ideology, which has created awful results in the Middle East, to our part of the world.

We see it in the mosques, where the imams preach hate towards Western values; we've seen it in the many claims of respect for Islamic way of life, claims for the right to maintain halal-buggering and other right of special treatment. And we have seen it in the terror attacks and attempts which in many cases have been organized inside Europe.

Speaking about the impact on Europe, nobody can neglect the serious consequences to our economy and stability in society. It is well know that the Muslim immigrants are disproportional in representing crime records; that the hate towards Jews is increasing in Europe, because of these groups. The serious mistreatment of women, which we see in the Muslim world, is now also taking place in Europe. Therefore, we know that the lack of labor-participation, which is connected to these people living on welfare, is an economic threat to the stability of our societies. In many European countries we speak about the necessity of changing the welfare-payments, but the truth is that if we did not have the Muslim burden, many of these changes would not be required.

Bizarre how rightwingers, not exactly renowned for their strong stance on women's rights, always refer to the "serious mistreatment of women, which we see in the Muslim world". And the "welfare-payments", which usually they'd sooner abolish than look at. The welfare state being a leftie thorn in their reactionary backsides, that is...
FP: Some critics maintain that the Left was naive in its immigration policy, that it did not see this all coming. I think to the contrary. The Left knew exactly what it was doing in promoting this kind of immigration process. It is part of its overall weapon to wage war and destruction on its own home society. What is your view?

Messerschmidt: The left wing has an ideological interest in destabalising the belief in cultural heritage. Therefore the achievement of their ideology goes hand in hand with the multiculturalism that'll break down any cultural starting point.


Messerschmidt sound just a tad..., well, German actually. Is it possible that Herr Messerschmidt's cultural heritage isn't exactly of a pure Danish pedigree? Vroom, vroom, bombs away!

FP: It is incredible that while Islamists in Europe are literally destroying the continent and annilihating all the values that Europeans hold dear, that a large percentage of Europeans continue to see America as a greater threat and refuse to articulate any criticism of Muslims. This is a pathology. No?

Messerschmidt: I very much agree. And I believe the main course has to do with an extremely political press. No doubt there are objective journalists in Europe, but the overall picture is that the newspapers will be presenting the US as the problem-maker and the EU as the peace-maker. I strongly disagree with this point of view, but cannot disregard the fact that it is the general opinion of the majority of the press.


Yes, FP, it is a pathology: yours, that is...
FP: The Muslims bringing their anti-Semitism, misogyny and homophobia with them would, you would think, outrage the Left -- which has prided itself greatly on its supposed progressive stand on women, gays and minorities. Yet the Left has been deafeningly silent. Why this shameless hypocrisy and silence in the ranks of the Left?

Messerschmidt: Everybody should have expected that the leftwing would be the first to cry out against the Muslim intolerance. But for some reason only a few have done so. It has to do with a screwed up idea of cultural relativism, due to which violations of human rights apparently can be justified when it’s religiously recognized. I keep wondering if the leftwing would have had same approach to it Hitler if he had found a religious belief instead of a political ideology.

Secondly I believe it has to do with power – it is well known that the Muslim minorities in Denmark are voting for leftwing parties. And some politicians – in Denmark as well as in many other European countries – are deliberately campaigning for these votes. Of course you wouldn’t like to disturb the people handing you your paycheque.


Equally bizarre is how these self-professed islamophobes fail to see the parallels between their "views" and 20th century anti-Semitism: the conspiracy, the projected world take-over, the stereotyping, it's all there...

FP: What do you think the recent cartoon controversy signified?

Messerschmidt: It has played a very good role in exposing the serious trouble we face with the Muslim minorities in Europe, who are also containing the extreme groups that neither respect nor tolerate the fundamental rights of human beings, such as freedom of the press or of free speech.

Unfortunately the immigration has led to a re-birth of these anti-democratic ideas in Europe. And to enlightening that fact the controversy about the cartoons have played an eminent role. It is my firm believe that we now must demand for the Muslims in Europe to take there stand. Either you are with democracy - or you are against it. There can be no middle way. And if you define yourself as being against democracy, for instance by supporting Sharia legislation, the European Continent should not be your home. There are plenty of countries in this world, building upon the fanatic ideology of Islam - and if you are you attracted to these thoughts, we should gladly help you to leave to one of these countries.

Let me see, where have I heard that one before: "with us or against us"...

FP: So do you think it is possible that Europe will be able to eventually have laws that will prevent the immigration, and engage in the deportation, of Muslims who yearn to live under Sharia law? How can a democracy take the steps to do this?

Messerschmidt: It is not the question “if Europe can do so”, it is only the question “how does Europe do so”. Only ignorant people believe that we can solve the problems in the Middle East through emigration to Europe – demographically it’s an outrageous thought, looking at the fact that the Muslim Civilisation has a net increase in population of the size of Spain each year.

Therefore the only way to help these people getting good lives, is to start reforming those regimes in the Middle East which severely violate human rights. Instead of using billions on the impossible integration of Muslims in Europe we should rather be supporting the internal opposition groups in these countries – and even in some cases do the job ourselves – as we’ve seen in Iraq. Unfortunately the case of Iraq hasn’t been as promising as many of us had hoped, but the idea of removing a dictator and thereby giving freedom to the suppressed is indeed a good one.

Talking of what can be done in the European countries, I think we need three sets of rules of immigration. One for Europeans, who will be regulated by EU-law. One for people from the rest of the Western World, including parts of East Asia, South America, etc. And then a third set of rules for the third world, who in general do not really offer anything we can benefit from, speaking of education, labour craft and knowledge. And as for the second initiative we must stop paying welfare to people without Danish citizenship – and make much harsher regulations for those only coming for economic reasons.


FP: So what are some more steps Europe can do to defend itself from these threats? What if it will not have the ability or will to do so?
Messerschmidt: First, as I have said, we have to get rid of those groups opposing democracy. That can be done be prohibiting organizations like Hizb-ut-Tahrir, the Muslim Brotherhood, etc.

Second, immigration from Muslim countries must be limited. It is beyond any doubt that this immigration is damaging the continent as explained earlier - and any idea of the specific "humanity" in allowing these groups to immigrate must be given up, regarding the fact that the Muslim world each year growes with a population of the size of Spain.

FP: What do you think will happen in the next 10 to 20 years if Europe does not wake up in the manner you warn it must?

Messerschmidt: Europe will – maybe not in 20, but rather 30-40 years from now – have a Muslim majority of population, if nothing is done. That’ll mean the end of our culture and the end of European civilization.

FP: Wow, one wonders from where the instinct comes that an entire continent yearns to commit suicide. But I guess World War I and World War II were clear instincts of this craving already and what we are seeing now is just a continuation of that urge. Thank you for joining us today sir.

Messerschmidt: It is me who thanks you. It is highly important that the media deals with the crucial and increasing problem with growing Islamism all over our civilization. I wish you the best in enlightening the West of the consequences of Muslim immigration.

Yawn.

We also need forced emigration of the Messerschmidts of this world to Montana, US. Now. This is a pressing matter. There they will be able to create a Neo-Europe together with their friends from the BNP, the Flemish "Vlaams Belang" and other fringe, racist pseudo-democrats and assorted bigots. Racially pure and without these horrible Muslims they will be able to create a "pure" Western culture, devoid of polluting external influences and safe of interference in the mountains of their idyllic Distopia. Quacks of the world, unite!

Keywords:
, ,

6 Comments:

At 12:12 PM, Blogger Sophia said...

These are the same people who could have deported jews to Auschwitz. May be their parents did so. Now they are turning on Mulsims because they are an easier target. Hate must find its way unbridled ! And I think the neo-cons are playing actively the game of turning Europe's Muslims into the new 'jews'. In both cases, Europe will bear the burden again.

 
At 12:57 PM, Blogger Gert said...

To people like Messerschmidt, Muslims are indeed the new Jews. Their "Blut und Botem" attitude smacks of Nazism and in the political spectrum the neo-Nazis are only just to the right of them.

 
At 6:27 PM, Anonymous David Zarnett said...

Sophia and Gert: For the most part, both of you are right to assert that both the early 20th century European Jew and today's European Muslim find themselves in a similar (perhaps only differing in degree) situations.

I just want to make one point. Anti-Semites in the early 20th century would make claims against the Jewish minority that resembled those of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion: That they were working against the interest of the State and therefore constituted enemies of the nation. This view, that was shared by most anti-Semites, seemed to lack one thing - concrete evidence. Had the anti-Semitic academic Goldwin Smith (born and educated in England, lived in Toronto) interacted with the established Jewish community in Montreal or Toronto in the early 20th century he would have found anything but subversion. This is clearly illustrated in their newspaper the 'Jewish Times'.

Similarly, Henry Ford relied on a forgery to support his views. Both Smith and Ford spoke in sweeping terms infused with a deep racism that rationality could not combat.

As Gert points out, Messerschmidt also speaks with a similar racism as seen in his statement regarding mulit-culturalism and a culture's starting point. But in regards to the European Muslim minority there does seem to be concrete evidence that supports the view that some (a minority) are subversive against their country and proponents of an interpretation of Islam that rejects multiculturalism and tolerance. Is it not worrysome that the speeches made by Abu Hamza and the acts of Mohammed Bouyeri (who killed Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh) have a following and growing audience? Either the media has done little to express the voices of Muslims who reject such views or those Muslims have failed to get their point across effectively. Not to mention the European tendency/history of racism, ethnic preferientalism, etc...

I have come across little evidence that indicates that any Jewish leaders in the early 20th century in Canada or Europe were speaking in a similar way to that of extremist Muslim leaders like that of Abu Hamza. It is this "concrete evidence" that some have exploited to legitimize their views of the Muslim community on the whole.

 
At 3:37 PM, Blogger Gert said...

Hi David,

I agree with your assessment that to justify 20th century anti-Semitism, entirely fake evidence had to be concocted and propagandised. The forgery "Protocols of Zion" was one such source, other essentially neutral texts were misquoted and pulled seriously out of context. This then (broadly speaking), together with entirely fabricated "science" on the "Aryan master race" formed the basis for the Nazi genocide of Jewish people (as well as other "non-desirables").

You assert that "in regards to the European Muslim minority there does seem to be concrete evidence that supports the view that some (a minority) are subversive against their country and proponents of an interpretation of Islam that rejects multiculturalism and tolerance". Whilst your assertion is correct (I'll come back to it below), you are also falling into a trap set by demagogues like Morten Messerschmidt, Nick Griffin, Jean-Marie le Pen and many others.

Islamophobia existed in Europe long, long before 9/11 and falls into the general category of xenophobia, directed mainly (but not only) to immigrant groups. The phenomenon undergoes a renaissance in the eighties when the need for immigrant workers starts to fall and the common man starts to ask questions about the need to have an imported labour force. Far right-wing political leaders then see their chance to rekindle the fire of xenophobia to serve their populist political means. Muslims immigrant population groups have been at the receiving end of this kind of attacks all throughout the eighties and nineties. Before 9/11 the slogans also went: "they take our jobs", "they take our benefits", "they replace our churches with mosques", etc, up to the even more ridiculous "they take our women", culminating in a typical "one country, one people" summary of far right ideology.

In that respect Islamophobia is similar to anti-Semitism or any other form of racism or xenophobia. The parallels are definitely stronger than the dissimilarities. The fact that anti-Semitism is the most loaded term of all terms specifying a specific form of xenophobia does in essence not change that.

In today's context (post 9/11), to these same demagogues, Muslim extremism is gefundenes fressen. To them it is further proof that we need to distrust these people and that they are even potentially undermining our State. But from those who previously used (and continue to use) falsehoods regarding our Muslim population (and it's grossly exaggerated growth rates), these arguments ring very hollow.

Last but certainly not least. The rise of Muslim radicalisation worldwide and including on the home-front is troubling for all of us. The scenes we witnessed in London (e.g.) regarding the "cartoons", no matter how despicable I personally find these, brought back images of the Rushdie protests and the fatwa and greatly disturbed me.

Abu Hamza and consorts are also a troublesome and worrying phenomenon. But we need to respond in an effective, measured, sensible way, to avoid actually making matters worse. You know the latter is what I believe the two invasions have achieved: a net negative result, rather than any gain. We're further radicalising a number of disenchanted and already radicalised Muslims, many merely youths, to rally behind an anti-Western cause.

Much better results could have been achieved by dialogue and improved homeland security (terror-specific and effective policing). Instead the illusion of an entire Ummah pitted against Western values has been created, a very dangerous situation in my honest opinion. On the Christian far right, they lap it all up, it fuels their phantasmagorical wet dream of an all ending, Biblical conflict ...

 
At 9:21 PM, Anonymous David Zarnett said...

Agreed, the comparisons are striking even today. Whether its the far right blaming European Muslims and Islam or the far left blaming Israel and Zionism.

 
At 8:21 PM, Blogger Wolfie said...

Nice Fisking Gert. Also your comment in response to David's is spot-on, thank you.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home