Category Archives: Top News

Will the Dutch Protect their ‘Decadence’ from Islamic ‘Redeemers’? by Giulio Meotti

  • “Erasmus… came to Holland because it was a haven for freedom of thought.” — Han ten Broeke, candidate for foreign minister in Prime Minister Mark Rutte’s government.

  • The Islamic supremacists in the Netherlands see themselves as redeemers, rescuing the West from Fortuyn’s “decadence”: drugs, prostitution, gay life, a blasphemous press. But will the Dutch establishment be able to defend these freedoms?
  • You can be gay, decadent and willing to fight for your freedoms. If you are just gay and decadent, you are doomed.

General elections in the Netherlands are over, but now begins a much bigger campaign: who will defend the famous Dutch freedoms?

Only in the Netherlands is it conceivable that a politician such as Geert Wilders, a brave maverick who for 13 years, 24 hours a day, has lived under police protection; held rallies while wearing a bulletproof vest; moved from one secret location to another one and was guarded as if he were an Asian potentate. The country has already had two political assassinations related to Islam: the politician Pim Fortuyn, and the filmmaker, Theo van Gogh. Another Dutch MP at the time, Ayaan Hirsi Ali — whose name, with Wilders’s, was next on the hit-list pinned with a knife to van Gogh’s corpse — ended up fleeing to the United States. Only Wilders’s protection, generously provided by the Dutch government, has so far avoided a third political murder.

The Netherlands has already had two political assassinations related to Islam: the politician Pim Fortuyn (left), and Theo van Gogh (right), a filmmaker. (Image sources: Van Gogh – Wikimedia Commons; Fortuyn – Forza! Nederland video screenshot)

In the Netherlands, the philosopher Baruch Spinoza became the prophet of tolerance, Karl Marx investigated capitalism and John Locke penned his “Letter on Tolerance”. The mainstream media has claimed that Wilders’s rise and the new “populist” shift of Prime Minister Mark Rutte (who, in January, told immigrants to “act normal or leave“) has been a betrayal of that Dutch tolerance. Exactly the opposite is true.

It is from this tolerance that hard Dutch liberalism gets the will to fight against intolerance. Tolerating the intolerant does not sound like the way to have tolerance continue. This is how the Dutch multiculturalists turned their great legacy upside-down. The Dutch see themselves as “Enlightenment fundamentalists“, upholding the values of Enlightenment — even in the Islamic world.

The question now is: will the Dutch defend these freedoms or instead gradually dismantle them? Dutch Minister of Justice Piet Donner recently suggesting introducing Islamic sharia law into the Netherlands by democratic means.

The “hard liberal” Dutch tradition goes back to Pim Fortuyn, a homosexual proud of the supposed “decadence” of his country, its tolerance, and the freedoms it offers. As the late British journalist Alexander Chancellor wrote:

“The Muslim fanatics berate the West for its decadence, and many in the west guiltily agree that they have a point, but Fortuyn did not think so. He crusaded on behalf of what many would regard as decadence, and was so concerned for its survival”.

Fortuyn considered permissiveness the heart of Western culture. He was a “hard liberal”, militantly defending the post-9/11 Judeo-Christian, Western values ​​against Islamic intolerance, in the same way as Oriana Fallaci, Bat Ye’or, Michel Houellebecq and Geert Wilders have been trying to do.

After last week’s Dutch elections, it is time for the Netherlands to rediscover Pim Fortuyn’s legacy and ideas. A flamboyant, shaven-headed homosexual who taught sociology, Fortuyn wore elegant Italian suits, lived in a palatial home in Rotterdam and wrote a great book entitled, “The Islamization of Our Culture“. He promised resistance against Islam, “a cold war against Islam“, as he called it in an interview in Rotterdam’s Dagblad.

“You have said”, the newspaper Volkskrant reported in an interview, “that foreigners snatch all our blonde women, and then turn around and call them ‘whores'”. “No”, Fortuyn calmly corrected him. “I said Islamic men do that. That’s quite different, sir, than ‘foreigners'”. Then, the Volkskrant asked, in what would become the defining moment of Pim Fortuyn’s life, “why the hate toward Islam?”. “I do not hate Islam”, Fortuyn said. “I find it a backward culture. I’ve traveled a great deal in the world; and wherever Islam rules, it is appalling”.

The Islamic supremacists in the Netherlands see themselves as “redeemers,” rescuing the West from Fortuyn’s “decadence”: drugs, prostitution, gay life, a blasphemous press. Will the Dutch establishment be able to defend these freedoms?

“Decadence” can become lethal for a country when it turns into hedonism, devirilization, the decline of education, and loss of historical memory. By “decadence”, however, Islamic supremacists seem to mean all Western freedoms, not just Dutch permissiveness. But these freedoms are what we should be proud of. And these are what we must be ready to fight to protect. Fortuyn did, and he paid the ultimate price: his own life. Theo van Gogh also did with his film on the submission of women under Islam. After van Gogh was slaughtered by Mohammed Bouyeri, the film immediately disappeared from public view.

The Dutch Left also needs to rediscover its roots. A debate about integration was started in the Netherlands not by the “xenophobic” right wing parties, but by Paul Scheffer, a respected academic belonging to the Labour Party, who in 2000 wrote an essay entitled, “The Multicultural Disaster” — before Fortuyn and Wilders had ever entered the picture. Scheffer wrote of a lenient Dutch people whose multicultural policies had failed to promote the Dutch culture in immigrant communities. Unfortunately, the Dutch Left took the opposite path and that is why it was severely beaten in the election last week.

Mark Rutte’s party also has a lot to learn from this hard liberalism. It was the liberals who put into practice many of Fortuyn’s ideas: banning the burqa, which many Muslims call a way of “protecting” their women, but others call a symbol of Islam dominating women. Prime Minister Rutte’s reaction against the Turkish Republic’s interference in Dutch life would be unthinkable in other European countries: Rutte, fearing Wilders’ rise, stood for his country’s independence and refused to bow to Islamist pressure to allow Turkish President Erdogan’s ministers to address a rally in Rotterdam.

In France, in fact, the authorities allowed Turkish rallies, and thereby showed a submissive mentality to political Islam. Rutte and the Dutch would be wise continue on their road, which is what allowed Rutte to retain his government. Fiscal conservatism may be important, but Western values are, too.

After Fortuyn’s murder, Wilders set himself as the “defender of liberalism“: on gender equality, separation of church and state, and personal autonomy. Unlike many liberals in the United States and Canada, however, Wilders is not willing to surrender these freedoms to Islam. Liberals and feminists in the United States refuse to stand for women’s rights in the Muslim world. They never raise the question of the separation of mosque and state. Instead, they blamed the carnage that the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo suffered in 2015 on freedom of expression.

Did the Dutch “hard liberals” ever think about Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s brave battle for female rights under Islam, Theo van Gogh and other Dutch journalists, or the crusade Wilders has been leading to protect the country from Islamist intolerance?

Why are the LGBT militants not condemning the crimes of Islam, as Pim Fortuyn did? The editor of an LGBT magazine in Bangladesh was just hacked to death by Islamists; how come no one from the LGBT community in the West condemned or spoke out about it? Why are gay activists keeping silent about homosexuals being murdered by Islamists after, in Florida, a Muslim terrorist butchered 50 of them?

You can be gay, decadent and willing to fight for your freedom. If you are just gay and decadent, you are doomed.

Han ten Broeke, a candidate for foreign minister in Rutte’s government, recently justified the Dutch ban of Turkish ministers by noting that Erasmus came to the Netherlands “because it was a haven for freedom of thought”. This Erasmian tolerance remains very strong at the heart of the Dutch identity, but the presence, among them, of non-European, illiberal Muslims keeps testing the limits of it. The Dutch libertines and libertarians in line with Fortuyn and Wilders do not seem willing to commit suicide, unlike the liberals of Middlebury College in the US, who seem busy trying to lynch any conservative who stops by their campus.

The Dutch and the Europeans should be proud of what Islamic fundamentalists call “decadence”, but they also must be ready to fight to defend it. “Safe spaces” are not enough. The world does not provide them. Otherwise, they will all end up in one of the “safe houses” that Geert Wilders’s puritanical tormentors have obliged him to spend his life in. “I am in jail”, he has said; “They are walking around free”.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

Will President Trump’s Visit to Saudi Arabia Tackle Terrorism and Promote Religious Freedom? by A. Z. Mohamed

  • A number of recently published books on the history, culture and internal workings of Saudi Arabia cast doubt on the ability of the kingdom to undergo the kind of change required to tackle extremism when its chief aim is to preserve and enhance the power of the royal family.

  • The government in Riyadh neither believes in nor permits religious liberty and free speech for its own citizens or for Muslims elsewhere. Indeed, the kingdom’s human rights record is abysmal at best.
  • Although Trump is right that America should not “dictate to others how to live,” he needs to consider how he can “build a coalition of partners” whose entire way of life is indelibly linked to the cause and spread of the very extremism, violence and global terrorism that he aims to eradicate.

As part of his first official trip abroad at the end of May, U.S. President Donald Trump will visit Saudi Arabia, Israel, Italy and Brussels, Belgium.

According to a statement released by the White House, Trump’s meetings with King Salman and other key figures “will reaffirm the strong partnership between the United States and Saudi Arabia and allow the leaders to discuss issues of strategic concern, including efforts to defeat terrorist groups and discredit radical ideologies.”

The goal may be commendable, but it is hardly attainable in a country like Saudi Arabia, ruled politically by an absolute monarchy and theologically by Wahhabism, both immensely radical.

Saudi Arabia is ruled politically by an absolute monarchy and theologically by Wahhabism, both immensely radical. Pictured: U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis (left) visits Saudi King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud (center) on April 19, 2017 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. (Image source: Jonathan Ernst – Pool/Getty Images)

In testimony before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs’ Subcommittee on Terrorism, Nonproliferation, and Trade, Georgetown University professor and Middle East expert Daniel Byman explained the “paradox” this presents:

“On the one hand, the Saudi government is a close partner of the United States on counterterrorism. On the other hand, Saudi support for an array of preachers and non-government organizations contributes to an overall climate of radicalization, making it far harder to counter violent extremism.”

Byman is not alone in this assessment. A number of recently published books on the history, culture and internal workings of Saudi Arabia cast doubt on the ability of the kingdom to undergo the kind of change required to tackle extremism when its chief aim is to preserve and enhance the power of the royal family.

That the announcement of Trump’s trip coincided with the signing of an executive order on “Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty” could not have been more ironic. The government in Riyadh neither believes in nor permits religious liberty and free speech for its own citizens or for Muslims elsewhere. Indeed, the kingdom’s human rights record is abysmal at best.

Moreover, during his speech in the Rose Garden to introduce the executive order, Trump said that another reason for his upcoming foreign trip was to “unite Islam, Judaism and Christianity in the common cause of fighting ‘intolerance'” — a claim just as jaw-dropping, given Saudi Arabia’s role in the persecution of Christians across the Middle East.

This is not to say that the U.S.-Saudi relationship is not valuable or crucial in many respects. Both countries consider ISIS and al-Qaeda to be serious threats. Neither wants Iran to obtain regional hegemony, while hoping for a Palestinian-Israeli peace deal. Both want to guarantee the flow of oil through the Persian Gulf.

In addition, Saudi Arabia remains a key U.S. investor and trading partner, and is the largest recipient of American-made arms. Even during the years of the Obama administration, when relations were strained, the U.S. provided Saudi Arabia more than $115 billion in weapons. Today, the Trump administration is pushing through tens of billions of dollars’ worth of arms sales to Riyadh; and garnering American support in its raging conflict against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen is at the top of the Saudi agenda.

In a piece in Foreign Affairs last summer, Professor F. Gregory Gause III — head of the International Affairs Department at the Bush School of Government and Public Service, Texas A&M University — wrote that the relationship between Washington and Riyadh serves immediate American interests, but in the long term, Saudi Arabia is far from being a faithful and effective partner in battling radical ideologies. The Saudis simply do not have the same values, worldview or strategic vision as their U.S. counterparts.

In his Rose Garden address, Trump said:

“Our task is not to dictate to others how to live but to build a coalition of friends and partners who share the goal of fighting terrorism and bringing safety, opportunity and stability to the war-ravaged Middle East.”

Although Trump is right that America should not “dictate to others how to live,” he needs to consider how he can “build a coalition of partners” whose entire way of life is indelibly linked to the cause and spread of the very extremism, violence and global terrorism that he aims to eradicate.

A.Z. Mohamed is a Muslim born and raised in the Middle East.

Will Obama Try to Blackmail Israel? by Shoshana Bryen

  • President Obama is looking at the fires he lit in the Middle East and North Africa, and desperately hoping to salvage something, anything, from the conflagration before he leaves office. Israel will be pushed to provide at least one “victory.”

  • Iran has come closer to nuclear weapons competence in the past eight years. And Obama’s abandonment of dissidents and pro-democracy advocates in Cuba, Venezuela, China, Turkey and Iran paves the way for waves of repression and bloodshed around the world.
  • It is estimated that more than 17,000 civilians were killed in Iraq in 2014, four times as many as 2012, after the U.S. withdrew its combat forces. This is a far cry from 2011, when Obama announced the U.S. was leaving a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq.”
  • He needs to find a “success.” Cue the Middle East “peace process.”

As Vice President Biden arrived in Israel this week, word leaked about yet another “peace plan” designed by the Obama administration. There isn’t much new in it. According to The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. might support a UN Security Council resolution calling on “both sides to compromise on key issues,” and it might involve the Middle East Quartet. Israel would be told to stop building in the territories and recognize East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian State. The Palestinians would be told to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and give up the “right of return” for the original 1948/49 refugees and their descendants.

Just do it and voila! Problem solved.

As Vice President Biden arrived in Israel this week, word leaked about yet another “peace plan” designed by the Obama administration. (Image source: Israel Prime Minister’s Office)

Why and why now? Because President Obama is looking at the fires he lit in the Middle East and North Africa, and desperately hoping to salvage something, anything, from the conflagration before he leaves office and needs another job. Israel will be pushed to provide at least one “victory.” Consider the list of Administration failures right now and the terrible destruction they have entailed:

In his first foreign visit, President Obama opened the door in Egypt to an uprising not only of “Google people” in Tahrir Square, but also to the Muslim Brotherhood. Brotherhood representatives were front and center at the President’s speech in Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, to the dismay of longtime ally Hosni Mubarak. After Mubarak’s overthrow, the White House pressed for the inclusion of the Brotherhood in Egyptian elections despite its history of terrorism. Since then, the U.S. and Egypt have been unable to find a way to communicate constructively, despite Egypt’s increasing closeness to Israel and their joint interest in controlling the terrorist Hamas and Iranian-sponsored jihadis in Sinai.

The Muslim Brotherhood was emboldened in Syria by its successes in Egypt.

The Syrian civil war and the rise of ISIS — both in some measure precipitated by the U.S. withdrawal from Iraq – have killed upwards of 350,000 people (more than 55,000 in 2015) and displaced nearly 4 million more. Chemical weapons, starvation, beheadings and aerial bombing are weapons of choice by various sides. Russia is calling the shots (literally) in Syria, while Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia continue to fund various jihadi groups, and Iran operates freely in both Iraq and Syria. Hezbollah, despite taking enormous casualties in Syria, continues to add to its missile arsenal in Lebanon.

This is a far cry from 2011, when President Obama announced the U.S. was leaving a “sovereign, stable and self-reliant Iraq.” An Iraqi non-governmental organization estimated that more than 17,000 civilians were killed there in 2014, double the number from the previous year and four times as many as 2012, after the U.S. withdrew its combat forces.

Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey have all been destabilized by an influx of refugees from Syria and Iraq. Lebanon, a fragile country of less than 4.5 million people divided into Shiites, Sunnis, Christians and Druze, now has more than one million Syrian refugees.

Afghanistan was the “good war” in President Obama’s narrative. At West Point at the end of 2009, President Obama announced an additional deployment of 30,000 American soldiers to stabilize Afghanistan and nuclear-armed Pakistan. Six years later — 15 years after we got there — American military leaders told him the Afghan government still couldn’t survive without a continuing American military presence. Since the administration decided to leave a contingent of nearly 10,000 soldiers for an indefinite period of time, the Taliban has refused to continue peace talks with the Afghan government, and we’re looking at another bloody summer. Terrorist bombs in Pakistan are a daily occurrence.

Libya was supposed to be a test of our “responsibility to protect.” It also had, from the President’s point of view, the benefit of “leading from behind” and having “no boots on the ground.” After successfully ousting Moammar Gaddafi — who had turned his WMD program over to US and UK intelligence, kept al-Qaeda from moving from Egypt to Western North Africa, and paid reparations for terrorism — the U.S. acknowledged as many as 30,000 Libyan deaths in two months of war.

The war in Mali was a direct result of the demise of the Gaddafi government and the raiding of government weapons depots by al-Qaeda-supported Tuareg forces. Only the direct involvement of French troops saved the government there. The deaths of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Sean Smith, Tyrone S. Woods, and Glen Doherty are attributable to the rise of al-Qaeda there as well. Today, there are as many as 1700 armed gangs across Libya and ISIS controls Sirte, a city of more than 100,000. The Pentagon is drawing up plans for U.S. military action to force ISIS out, we are again bombing Libya and there are American Special Forces on the ground.

Meanwhile, the U.S. bombed an al-Shabaab training base in Somalia this week, killing more than 150 members of the group.

Iran has come closer to nuclear weapons competence in the past eight years. And President Obama’s abandonment of dissidents and pro-democracy advocates in Cuba, Venezuela, China, Turkey and Iran paves the way for waves of repression and bloodshed around the world.

The widespread wreckage and carnage that accrues to President Obama’s policies and fantasies should disqualify him from further activity on the international stage when his term ends. But since retirement doesn’t appear in the offing, he needs to find a “success.”

Cue the Middle East “peace process.”

Shoshana Bryen is Senior Director of the Jewish Policy Center.

The World Prophecy Of Majeshi Leon Version (l) TWPV

Dated:Sunday, 24 July 2011. 15:11hrs

The Journal Inyangenews.com interviewed MAJESHI Leon about his Prophecy which will be published in three parts.We’ll publish what Prophet Majeshi Leon said about the removal of President Pasteur BIZIMUNGU from power; his being replaced by Paul KAGAME;the removal and fleeing of Prime Minister Pierre Celestin RWIGEMA; the fleeing of Parliamentary Speaker Joseph SEBARENZI KABUYE;the RPF elections; the exiling of General KAYUMBA Nyamwasa and Colonel Patrick KAREGEYA; the assassination of Paul KAGAME; the ensuing war; the return from exile of the Rwandan King KIGELI V NDAHINDURWA, and the return of Jesus.

Kenya Prophecy of Majeshi Leon

 

HERE IS THE NEXT KENYAN PRESIDENT GOD HAD PREDESTINED HIM TO SUCCEED PRESIDENT MWAI KIBAKI:


Fulfilled Prophecy:

Sept 17, 2012 God foretold the outcome the presidential election in Kenya, and that UHURU KENYATTA from the country of Kenya, is going to be the next Republican President; and in addition, he is going to be the vessel through which God is going to use to raise that nation, upon the condition that he accepts to do what God requests of him. Even, that the La-Haye lawsuit against him, shall be terminated as the rainfall dwindles down. God also declared that a man, known as MUSALIA Mudavadi shall face insurmountable challenges, and that this shall be a fortune opportunity for UHURU KENYATTA to rise up towards becoming a President.

Page 175 of 176
1 173 174 175 176
Skip to toolbar