Showing posts with label threats to freedom. Show all posts
Showing posts with label threats to freedom. Show all posts

Monday, May 13, 2013

"Dangerous" labeling by AIVD: Why painting a flower is now a threat to the Netherlands' national security

Flower drawing:
A  security threat to the Netherlands.
Why painting a flower is now 'extreme leftist' and "dangerous" activity. " One of the ways to justify the trouncing of human rights and individual freedoms by security and law enforcement is to label a person or group involved with an issue with a label that signals "threat and danger."  This is part of what we in Critical terrorism and security studies call "securitizing" an issue in the process of Securitization, which move the issue out of normal political discourse and into security and existential threat discourse. Actions - including human rights violations - can be taken against those viewed as posing the existential threat. The Dutch State typically does against Muslims and the political Left - and the narratives are built from discourses surrounding the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh.

The (ab)use of the murders of Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh have enabled certain actors - especially the AIVD and NCTb - to create stigmatizing labels that signal existential threat to the public and the mass media. This is achieved through narratives and discourses among security, law enforcement - and especially mass media that describes a person or interest group as posing existential threat.  Part of this security and law enforcement regime is to place stigmatizing labels that signal existential threat on persons and groups. Labels like "radicalized Muslim" and "extreme Left" are the most common labels available to Dutch intelligence and law enforcement. We could be witnessing yet another attempt by the Dutch State to label against asylum seeker advocacy groups.

It is well-known to this author that the "intelligence and security activities" by the AIVD to "protect the democratic legal order of the Netherlands" are quite selective along political lines. The AIVD's stated mission is largely defined in the paper From Dawa to Jihad (it also draws Robert Spencer's "stealth jihad" conspiracy theory) and what its actually doing undermining the democratic legal order in the form of undermining rights for Muslims and political opposition groups. The From Dawa to Jihad paper also contains a template from which any person or group can be branded as a "threat to the democratic legal order" and be politically demonized and ostracized from the political system. The use of stigmatizing labels is also intended to deter other law abiding citizens from taking part in non-violent and legally acceptable protest actions - as one could be labeled an "extreme Leftist." The AIVD's activities of labeling strike at the heart of the Dutch people's sense of protesting and fighting back against injustices and wrongs -a Dutch national characteristic that dates back to the revolt against Habsburg Spain.

The Muslim is, by far, the favorite volksduivel (folk devil) of the AIVD and the rest of the Dutch State - but there is another favorite folk devil: The political Left, especially the extreme left, which leads to justification of all sorts of human rights abuses. The pinning of these labels - all a part of securitizing discourses and narratives of existential threat in the Netherlands - then justifies spying, brutal police actions, jailing for minor or faked crimes, and, of course, government actions to inhibit an innocent person's life activities, like being put on a "no fly list" and personal disruption measures against "radicalized Muslims." None of these types of actions would be justified against "normal" protest groups - but the result of Securitization where a groups and individuals are viewed as a existential threat to the national security and "survival of our way of life." 

The over use of force by the Marechaussee
Excessive force in arrest of "dangerous," "threatening" and  "extreme leftist" for petty vandelism? NOPE!  One of those activities against "threats" that is being tolerated is the manner in which the woman was arrested at the Schiphol detention center this weekend. While it many be a bit childish to paint a flower on the side of a wall - painful police "compliance holds" and handcuffs were excessive force in itself. Part of the reason for this excessive force is yet another AIVD accusation against the asylum seekers' advocacy movement that was published in the De Telegraaf Wednesday about members of the No Border Network.  It was said that extreme leftists might want to "take" Fred Teeven (who is himself an LPFer), what ever that means. This flows with the narrative following the murder of Fortuyn - assassination by an extreme leftist - and there is similar narrative (jihad in the Netherlands) that plays into "threats against Geert Wilders" related to the Theo van Gogh murder.

 One important thing you should keep in mind here, dear reader, is that these kinds of labels, with signals of "threat to the democratic legal order," are never placed on extreme right groups and persons in the Netherlands - and if you know the policy platform of Geert Wilders and the PVV - you can see that a woman painting a flower on a wall is NO threat to democratic legal order when in comparison. 

Watch this video - and realize that the brutal mishandling of this harmless woman by the Marechaussee border guards is in the backdrop of "extreme leftist agitation" and linked to the psychology of the Pim Fortuyn murder. This very innocent woman is a "dangerous extreme leftist" to the AIVD and the Marechaussee. This woman should not have been subject to painful compliance holds and handcuffs for simple vandalism to a wall!

Denk voor jezelf! The Dutch people really need stop treating new outlets like De Telegraaf as if they are the the absolute truth - and denk voor jezelf (think for yourself) and opposition groups in the Netherlands need to be wake up and be taught how to counter AIVD and Dutch state labels that are intended to create a sense of threat from a person or group. The Dutch people, once they are made aware of this situation - will fight back and protest and they do - the "credibility and legitimacy" of the AIVD and the the Marechaussee be damned! We all need to help the Dutch people to get to this realization. 

See:

Links-extremistisch bloemetje tekenen: geboeid afgevoerd

- See more at: http://www.krapuul.nl/overig/nieuws/106625/linksextremistisch-bloemetje-tekenen-geboeid-afgevoerd/#sthash.mTFitXTp.dpuf

Links-extremistisch bloemetje tekenen: geboeid afgevoerd

- See more at: http://www.krapuul.nl/overig/nieuws/106625/linksextremistisch-bloemetje-tekenen-geboeid-afgevoerd/#sthash.mTFitXTp.dpuf
Links-extremistisch bloemetje tekenen: geboeid afgevoerd

'Extremisten jutten hongerstakers op'

Cross-posted at: Burning Tulips - Dutch security insanity: Why drawing a flower is a national security threat to the Netherlands

Links-extremistisch bloemetje tekenen: geboeid afgevoerd

- See more at: http://www.krapuul.nl/overig/nieuws/106625/linksextremistisch-bloemetje-tekenen-geboeid-afgevoerd/#sthash.mTFitXTp.dpuf

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Freedom of speech and the 'Bedreigen Wilders' speech crime - future projects

In that aftermath of the "Innocence of Muslims" hate film as "freedom of speech" an opportunity has now opened to demonistrate the hypocracies of the Western notions of what is freedom of speech and what is speech crime.  We now accept the notion that radical anti-Muslim and Islamophobic extremists can make videos that cause an international crisis, while it is strafbaar to make anti-Wilders videos in the Netherlands where one must face the rechtbank for the bedreigen Wilders speech crime.

...and as is typical with "Muslim control" in the Netherlands - everything is shamefully justified -SURPRISE! SURPRISE! - from narrative of the murders of "Pim and Theo."

[youtube id="5VHP6iVIUwo" w="300" h="300"] [youtube id="QIKaM4EuFRg" w="300" h="300"]

We know that this American extremists who made the anti-Muslim hate film  (some are also backers of Wilders) claim "freedom of speech," but their record is that they are actually opposed to freedom and liberty for their critics and opponents. Geert Wilders in the Netherlands trampled over the freedom of speech of his critics and people have been prosecuted criminally for speech crimes against Geert Wilders. In the video above, a Rotterdam rapper is getting straf (punishment) for creating a bedreigen Wilders (to threaten Wilders) video. I will be working on a full academic paper (in PDF also) about those victims who have been persecuted for this speech crime (and I may even try to contract some of these victims) and post some of their videos...

Crazy religious extremist talk is also freedom of speech!!! The are also a couple of goofy groups running around Belgium and the Netherlands calling themselves "Sharia4Holland" and "Sharia4Belgium." Most people laugh at these loud and obnoxious groups as they shout how much they'd like sharia for their countries (not likely to ever happen).

[youtube id="hMK34cG80eA" w="300" h="300"]

As a (near) flaunt speaker of Dutch, I can understand about 85% of what this fellow is saying. People DO have the freedom of speech to talk crazy and talk about sharia and the economic crisis in our streets! I applaud these religious zealot-nutcases for their courage!  BLIJVEN PRATEN!  Deze zijn je mensenrechten!

Now - this fellow above was fined 450 euro for his speech crime against Cry Baby Geert Wilders (the real juvenile delinquent here) - an act of speech crime that is actually harmless compared to the anti-Islam film that has deliberately cause harm between the US and the Arab world.Shouting that you want sharia law to rule in Belgium and the Netherlands should not - in a democratic and free societyNEVER warrant any national security investigations, or intelligence spying, having your bank accounts sifted ----- let allow charges for a criminal act. However - knowing the AIVD (Dutch intelligence service) like I do, this is no laughing matter. The AIVD is as genuinely Islamophobic of an organization as one can imagine, and I suspect the AIVD uses the discredited NYPD  "radicalization model"- and given this assumption - the fellow and his friends have probably been labeled as "radicalized Muslims" a long time ago.

Not all 'threats' should be viewed as legitimate. Usually, but never the case with the bedreigen Wilders speech crime, what is a legitimate crime is weighted against the ability to carry out a threat. The fellow has no ability to harm Geert Wilders as much as getting his sharia law dreams for Europe. We must realize that this fellow  simply has no means with which to carry out his threats against Wilders.  These public statements being heard by people in the street have the appearance of street theater, not actual threats to take action against Wilders.

If somebody wanted to actually harm Wilders, he would not tell people in such a public place and he would be an expert assassin, and such an expert assassin would not waste his time on Wilders. It is highly likely that al-Qaeda has higher value targets than Geert Wilders.  So, we should see the occasional reports of "somebody threatened Wilders oh my" as childish methods to bring about social control of Muslims and justify the speech crime of bedreigen Wilders. We know that  Geert Wilders in the Netherlands trampled over the freedom of speech of his critics and people have been prosecuted criminally for speech crimes against Geert Wilders.

Geert Wilders has NO claim to be some "protector of freedom of speech!"

In reality, it's the AIVD that is becoming quite radical and this intelligence agency works against freedom of speech (as well as other freedoms) for Muslim citizens. I have some projects for the future that are going to expose the AIVD and the Dutch counter-terrorism unit NCTb and their brand of Islamophobic bullshit to the free world. In reality, AIVD needs something else better to do than Muslim social control!

Here's an ad from the CDA political party against the PVV and Wilders that avoided the prospect of criticizing Wilders as "threatening him."  Yet - is it good that child actors had to be out through this?

[youtube id="jht-LQCozB4" w="300" h="300"]

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Islam is not to blame for Middle East violence; free speech also applies to Muslims

Islamophobic radicals and extremists provoke violence, they find it fun. Like the hate merchants that they are, this violence in Yemen,  Egypt and the murders in Libya are partly to be blamed on those Islamophobic radicals and extremists who produced this video in the first place.  These radicals know full well what they are doing - and what the results would be - and it is right that good people everywhere condemn them and their "free speech." These radicals get some kind of twisted pleasure out of provoking other radical and extremists in the Middle East - and who created this outrageous movie is also a mystery, but it's believed to be a person by the name of Sam Bacile,  a Coptic Christian.



Now - while they argue that these hate merchants have "freedom of speech and expression" - let us first talk about also those in the Western world, living among Western security and police forces, who do not have the same level of "free speech" as these video producers. As I have written here before, if you wear a beard, robes, become a devout Muslim and express so-celled "anti-Western views"  - all supposedly protected by the First Amendment and the ECHR - YOU will be branded as "radicalized" and place on watchlists, watched by police and intelligence services, which could also include tampering with your freedom of movement, especially in the use of passenger air travel. [Faulty and biased terrorism studies field behind NYPD’s radicalization model].

No religious Muslim expressing "anti-Western views" should be placed on a watchlist anymore than this film-maker should be placed on a watchlist.

The provocation of violence when it is known that violence will occur - is never allowed from either the political Left, as well as Muslim communities - yet these producers of this knowingly proactive film have caused riots. As of now, it should be suspected that at least al-Qeada elements wanted to attack our embassy in Libya on the anniversary of September 11th - and the upheavel over the "Innocence of Muslims" video may have been used as cover and a coincidence. There may be elements of Gadaffi's army that may have participated in this attack against our embassy. [ Libya pledges to help US catch American officials' killersEgypt's Mursi condemns embassy attack, protesters clash ] "Western partner" Turkey also condemned the violence:
"Turkey has consistently emphasised that terror has no religion or nationality, and is a crime against humanity. Turkey continues to believe that the effective combating of terrorism requires the unity and the solidarity of the international community."

We must understand that Islam is not responsible for these murders and Muslims are not collectively guilty.  The fact remains that the violence is a from a few people in the country - and not accepted by governments or the larger public.  The majority of Libyans are outraged by the deaths of Ambassador Chris Stevens and the three other Americans. Hundreds of Libyans turned out to protest against terrorism in their countryMohamed Magariaf, the Libyan President, is involved in finding the perpetrators.

What Arab and Muslim countries can and must do - fight for human rights for Muslims. It would be a better project, as I have said before, for Arab and Muslims nations to engage in the first for human rights and religious freedoms for Muslims living in the Western world. This is actually a better alternative that taking away anybody's freedom of speech. What is also possible is for pressure to be placed on YouTube (a private entity) to remove this video and create posting policies the prevent the posting of this type of proactive videos that are bigoted, hateful and cause violence. Those of use who use Internet services like YouTube know that there are policies against bigotry, hate and violence - and perhaps thsi video should have been removed. We know that often these services are slow and non-responsive to users who violate Term of Use policies.

"Western partner" Turkey really needs to step up and speak out in the OSCE and CoE against the civil rights and human rights abuses against Muslims by Western security and law enforcement. It is actually a better fight to fight for equal speech, political and religious rights that allowed this film to be posted without ramifications against the film-makers. It is a better fight to fight back against biased TSA agents, biased law enforcement training materials, abolition of the NYPD "radicalization model." It is a better fight to fight for freedom for Muslims than fight to restrict the freedoms of others.

 

Sunday, July 22, 2012

One year after Breivik and nothing has changed

















[caption id="attachment_2267" align="alignright" width="300" caption="Breivik: A terrorist and enemy to Western democracy and freedom!"]Anders Behring Breivik[/caption]















Norway after Breivik. It was one year ago when right-wing terrorist, Anders Behring Breivik, committed the "twin terrors" on his own nation of Norway. "The bomb and the shots were intended to change Norway. People responded by embracing our values. He failed, the people won" said Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Rather than allow the tolerance and democratic society of Norway to change, Norwegians have embraced more democracy and values of openness.  In his "sanity trial" Breivik rants about the court in which he is being tried as "supporting multiculturalism," and therefore "illegitimate."   What the so-called "terrorism experts" in Western security, intelligence and law enforcement fail - utterly - to realize is that Breivik and his sympathizers are actually opponents and enemies of their own liberal democratic nations, they are also enemies of freedom, individual liberty, as well as equality before the law and the rule of law in liberal democratic nations. Breivik and those of his ilk are anti-democratic  and have placed themselves as enemies of Western liberal democracy!

[youtube id="VoiXqU_NgxE" w="250" h="250"] [youtube id="HiSM6obdlMQ" w="250" h="250"]

Yet - Norway has now taken the footsteps of anti-Muslim, oriented counter-terrorism in outlawing "training in a terrorist camp" (what ever that means) - while Breivik never "trained in terrorist camp."  This is a sure sign that we are back to the notion that Muslim communities are "threatening," even in Norway. Yes - one year after Breivik mercilessly butchered teenagers at the Utøya summer camp - Western security, intelligence and law enforcement act as if Norway, July 22, 2011 never happened - or was not as bad as it really was - compared to the mere presence of bearded, dark-skinned Muslims with loud, "anti-Western views" living in their own "suspect communities" in our countries.

Right-eye blindness continues to be a real problem with Western security. In other European countries, "political leaders" holding Breivik's views sit in parliaments and in security and intelligence agencies. Breivik and his sympathizers have nothing to fear from Western security, intelligence and police agencies, in contrast to outspoken Muslims and the political left engaging in legally protected speech acts, the targets of Breivik terrorism. "Terrorism" continues to be something that only Muslims do and violent criminal acts by suspects of a Muslim background are now "lone-wolf jihad."  Violence and suspicion of violence by Muslims is still viewed, in a discriminatory and Islamophobic sense, as more dangerous than the prospect (or likelihood) of another Norway attack. We still see discourses out of agencies, like Europol and the Dutch AIVD, that actually downplay the attacks in Norway and the security threat from the radical, dangerous European right-wing.

Over this past year, we have seen the unchecked growth of the radical, and possibly dangerous right, with several violent acts by members of the English Defense League, the most serious threat to the security of the UK. A couple of weeks ago, and EDL member was sentenced to prison for a knife attack on his neighbors. This week convictions were secured against EDL members for breaking the jaw of a Muslim man who was attacked while walking near his home with his brother.

In November, we have learned of the killings of mainly Turkish shopkeepers in Germany by the National Socialist Underground and that German intelligence may have know about this terrorist group.  As I have demonstrated, German intelligence has a blind right eye, as the victims of the NSU are Muslims and, therefore, "deserving victims." The NSU was believed to have carried out the murders of nine shopkeepers between 2000 and 2007 and a nail bomb attack against Cologne’s Turkish community. There was a German intelligence officer known as “little Adolf” who was believed to be present, or at least nearby, when one of the murders took place. This right-wing terrorist group was allowed to terrorize at liberty because, as I demonstrate, some in Germany police and intelligence may have viewed the Turkish-Muslim victims as "deserving victims" and not deserving of equal police protection.

"Terrorism" that is viewed as acceptable by a larger society (terrorism against Muslim communities) tends to provide tacit support for the terrorist groups that perpetrate terrorist violence against "deserving victims." The reality is that the EDL is the Number One threat to the security of the United Kingdom, yet, we still see Muslims "arrested" under the so-called "Terrorism Act" of the UK - which - as in the Netherlands - appears to be a law that only Muslims can be charged with ...


Yes - police DO, indeed, make up "terrorist plot" evidence. We know how British police made up "evidence" against a graduate student of terrorism studies, Rizwaan Sabir, at Nottingham University and levied  accusations of a "terrorism plot" (yep - here we go). Sabir obtained a document about al-Qaeda terrorism from a US government website. It's not what happened to the student, who was also being slandered  by Nottingham University - but what happened to his professor, Rod Thornton, a former intelligence officer in the British Army and terrorism expert, who became outraged by the student's treatment by British police.  Professor Thornton spoke out and authored a paper about the ill treatment his student received from British police - and was essentially persecuted and punished (in violation of academic freedom rights) for his noble efforts. Professor Thornton said of the ordeal he and his student were put through by British police:
"The police were totally unprofessional. After their mistakes they tried to cover them up. I've seen some altered police notes, I've seen evidence made up. The whole thing seems to be a complete tissue of lies, starting from the cover up of their mistakes in the first place."

"What should raise alarm bells is how and why the police think it is acceptable to make up information to send innocent Muslims to prison as terrorists. The onus is now on the IPCC to conduct a full and proper investigation into this matter."

Even after the the lies of the British police were exposed, Rizwaan Sabir continued to be stopped and has been stopped numerous times since his 2008 "arrest."
In June 2011 for the Equality and Human Rights Commission found that “for some Muslims, these stops have become a routine part of their travel experience, and that―this power is silently eroding Muslim communities ‘trust and confidence in policing.’”

Those on the receiving end of Schedule 7 stops report: intrusive questioning over social, religious and political views or community activities; the taking of their bio-data despite not being under arrest; officers refusing to wait the arrival of a solicitor before conducting the search and questioning; the stress caused to the person stopped and to those travelling with them, as they worry about missing flights or losing baggage; and the seizure of mobile phones and credit cards.

And - do they seriously think this tyrannical and utterly useless busy-work is  "keeping us safe from terrorism?" What rubbish! What outrage! How stupid! How counter-productive!!!

[youtube id="nKsFQYGiqGE" w="250" h="250"] [youtube id="ZUK1KsrcttQ" w="250" h="250"]

Well - this week we were shown just how safe the "counter-terrorism practice" in the Western world keeps us. Unless you were sleeping in a cave this week, you know that there was the massacre at a movie theater in Colorado. The accused in is James Holmes a white, upper-income "good kid" - non-Muslim- which is what makes him totally undetectable for "terrorist activity."   Holmes is a brilliant  bomb-maker as he was a neurobiology student - as he booby-trapped his apartment so well that police bomb experts had to do a lot of careful work to defuse his handiwork.  Holmes was described as having ordered 6000 rounds of ammunition from the Internet. Where did he get his ballistic vest, helmet and the smoke grenades?  Isn't James Holmes a terrorist who perpetrated a terrorist attack - in a "Mumbai style" of shooting people with firearms in a movie theater?

Nope - as the saying goes: Not a Muslim, not a terrorist!

[caption id="attachment_3589" align="alignright" width="150" caption="Holmes: Not a Muslim, not a terrorist!"][/caption]

Western counter-terrorism efforts continue to be backwards oriented and utterly useless in protecting us. There is plenty of other evidence that Western security and counter-terrorism efforts have forgotten about Norway and have gone back to chancing the phantoms of "Islamists and jihadists" - and perhaps fabricating evidence or exaggerating "terrorist plots."   In fact - it is quite arguable that the Western security and law enforcement agencies charged with protecting us from real terrorism are utterly useless and serve as nothing more than agencies to chill religious freedom and speech of Muslims and the political Left.

If the victims of terrorism are Muslims or their "leftist allies" - then this is hardly "terrorism," but something else less than "terrorism" - as Muslims and the "leftist allies" are deserving victims of "terrorism."

Yes --- what we don't hear about the Colorado movie theater murderer is the T-word, either in the media or from the FBI. Mohammad... uhhh ... James Holmes is a brilliant bomb maker and in the spread of his message - what ever message that is supposed to be. But - wait - what if the alleged killer's name was Mohammad Holmes? Why - we'd be talking about "possible links to al-Qaeda" and Holmes "radicalization process." We'd also hear about "radical imans" and "lone wolf jihad." Since James Holmes is a "good" -  white - upper-class kid and non-Muslim (like Breivik) he cannot possibly be branded as a "terrorist" and his killings at the movie theater are never "terrorism."  "Terrorism" is something only Muslims do...just ask any terrorism expert in any Western security and intelligence agency.

See/zie:

Trying to Forget Breivik: One Year After the Norway Massacre

Utoya remembers one year after Anders Behring Breivik massacre

Norway tries to put pain of Breivik behind year on

Anders Behring Breivik

A year after Breivik's massacre, Norway tightens antiterror laws

Rod Thornton's suspension is a serious attack on academic freedom

Sabir on Security | Police fabricated evidence against me but civil liberties concern us all

 

Saturday, July 21, 2012

Geert Wilders is NO Dutch patriot!

[caption id="attachment_3572" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Dutch patriotic art in Alva's Tyranny."][/caption]

The phony "patriotism" of Geert Wilders. Geert Wilders is promoting a very curious brand of "patriotism" that has more of it origins in the American neoconservatives that fund and support him than in real Dutch patriotism grounded in Dutch history and traditions. The very fact that Geert Wilders hates and actively seeks to oppress a religion- Islam- is contrary to Dutch patriotism and Dutch traditions. The Dutch have, basically, always been religiously tolerant and permissive (even as there were setbacks) toward the practice of religions, from the time of William or Orange's pressure in 1572 to allow the practice of both Protestantism and Catholicism.  

The reality is that Geert Wilders - and Pim Fortuyn before him - actively sought to tear down Dutch traditions, and slander them as "linkse hobbies" (leftist hobbles) and threatening to Dutch society. A willing Dutch media followed and American conservatives, who hate Dutch tolerance and progressive identity - cheered on and have played an active part in the destruction of the Dutch national identity. Geert Wilders' active opposition to the Dutch tradition of religious tolerance is well known, but Wilders has now dragged the Dutch flag into his anti-Dutch antics against his own nation and its European Union membership. The Dutch tricolor flag has its roots in the House of Orange, of William of Orange, who, as stated above, allowed the practice of both Protestantism and Catholicism.

Religious liberty: What Dutch nationalism is and Dutch heritage in religious freedom. Dutch patriotic images are found in the art of the period,  and the character of Dutch nationalism is totally different from British or American nationalisms. The liberties that Wilders speaks of has nothing to do with being "free" of the European Union or the accusations against Muslims of the Islamisation myths (myths that have been disproven many times on this site).  Dutch nationalism and patriotism became synonymous with Calvinism in the late 1500s struggle against Spanish rule, including unhindered expression of religious conscience. Dutch nationalism rests in defense of religious liberty of all Dutchmen, not opposing religious freedom for anyone.

In fact - patriotic Dutchmen should rally against Geert Wilders and the PVV and in support of religious freedom for Dutchmen that practice Islam. Defending  freedom of worship and freedom of conscience of Dutch Muslims is a part (or should be a part) of the Dutch national tradition.

"Freedom of Dutchmen" (as Wilders seems to put it) was about freedom of worship and freedom of conscience, and forcing any Dutchman against his freedom of conscience was the main issue with the Spanish rulers. Benjamen J. Kaplan tells us that propagandist pamphlets from the Dutch Revolt took up the theme of Netherlanders' "as exceptional lovers and advocates of their liberty and enemies of all violence and oppression" along the lines of religious liberty (2002, 179 - emphasis mine):
It is the refusal - to a certain extent sacrilegious - to legislate in the religious domain, while everywhere else divine right was still called upon to impose limitations, which marked out the Dutch Republic in the seventeenth century. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the social arrangements and political procedures, to which religious diversity based on freedom of conscience gave rise, made the Dutch Republic a testing-ground for peaceful co-existence, then for toleration. In the more or less long term, according to which contemporaries we consult, it was established in Europe as a model to be followed.

We can see what Dutch nationalism is as described by Arend Lijphart in his classic book on Dutch politics, Politics of Accommodation (1976) and, although the Netherlands was divided by social and religious cleavages, the Dutch managed to build a successful democracy of peaceful co-existence.  Dutch nationalism, according to Lijphart, is toward ones own bloc (Catholic, Socialist, Liberal) as well as to the common nation, and this nationalist feeling is an important factor to the consensus to preserve the system and the nation from civil war (78-79):
Holland is also one of the most notable examples of a successful democracy. The social fragmentation of the Dutch people has not been an insurmountable obstacle to the development and firm persistence of a stable, effective, and legitimate parliamentary democracy which has served the people well and which has by and large enjoyed their active support or acquiescence (Lijphart, 1976, 2).

Lijphart tells us that for Catholics the Calvinist-based Dutch patriotism was a hard concept, with the House of Orange as a major actor in the expulsion of harsh Catholic rule. But - the Catholics have never revolted even as their own religious practices were banned - and have always worked within the Dutch nation to improve their position (80-81). Just as today, Dutch people that practice Islam have their loyalty to their nation questioned, just as Dutch Catholics once had their loyalty questioned. Likewise, today, some Muslims and Muslim groups are choosing non-violent means to fight for better position in Dutch society,  just as Catholics once did...

It is the duty of every Dutchman to stand up to Geert Wilders! The whole, main idea of the Dutch Revolt was to resist the forceful imposition of the Catholic Church on the Dutch people.  The Dutch should now resist any attempt by the likes of Geert Wilders and his PVV fascists to oppress a religious faith - Islam - as it is the heritage of the Dutch people to oppose religious bigotry, especially against Muslims! Likewise - the Dutch should oppose any attempts by Wilders and his PVV fascists to define Dutch patriotism as being anti-Muslim and anti-European Union.

Messing with anybody's religious freedom should make the majority of patriotic Dutchmen angry!

While Wilders accuses Dutch citizens that practice Islam of horrible crimes and conspiracies against their own nation that are hateful myths (with accusations the used to be directed against Catholics), he attempts to bring about a nationalism that is more like the American Tea Party. If Wilders ever got his wish to remove the Dutch nation from international and European structures, the economic price to Dutch businesses and national standing will be devastating and take a long time to fix. If anything - Geert Wilders and his PVV are traitors who are bringing treasonous policies to the Dutch nation, as well as undermining Dutch traditions and nationalism steeped in religious tolerance (permissiveness).

As Wilders drags the Dutch flag through the mud - it is a sickening site to see - along with his continued attacks on Dutch traditions and culture. Geert Wilders is as much of a Dutch patriot as Adolf Hitler was a German patriot! Both have and are leading their nations to ruins and misery.



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Geert Wilders is GEEN Nederlandse patriot!

De"patriottisme" van Geert Wilders. Geert Wilders is het bevorderen van een zeer nieuwsgierig merk van "patriottisme" dat er meer van oorsprong in de Amerikaanse neoconservatieven dat fonds en steunen hem dan in het echte Nederlandse patriottisme geworteld in de Nederlandse geschiedenis en tradities heeft. Het feit dat Geert Wilders haat actief en probeert te onderdrukken tot een religie-de islam-in strijd is met Nederlandse patriottisme en Nederlandse tradities. De Nederlanders hebben altijd al religieus tolerant, liberaal (zelfs als er tegenvallers) in de richting van de praktijk van religies, vanaf het moment van druk Willem van Oranje in 1572 tot de praktijk van zowel het protestantisme en het katholicisme toe te staan.

De realiteit is dat Geert Wilders - en Pim Fortuyn voor hem - actief gezocht om af te breken Nederlandse tradities, en laster ze als Linkse hobby's en te dreigen met de Nederlandse natie. Een gewillige Nederlandse media gevolgd en Amerikaanse conservatieven, die een hekel Nederlandse tolerantie en permissiviteit - toegejuicht en hebben een actieve rol gespeeld in de vernietiging van de Nederlandse nationale identiteit. Geert Wilders 'actief verzet tegen de Nederlandse traditie van religieuze tolerantie is bekend, maar Wilders heeft nu sleepte de Nederlandse vlag in zijn anti-Nederlandse aanvallen tegen zijn eigen volk en zijn EU-lidmaatschap. De Nederlandse driekleur heeft zijn wortels in het Huis van Oranje, Willem van Oranje, die, zoals hierboven vermeld, kon de praktijk van zowel protestantisme en katholicisme.

Religieuze vrijheid: Wat Nederlandse nationalisme is en Nederlands erfgoed in de vrijheid van godsdienst. Nederlandse nationalisme bestaat, maar zijn karakter is totaal verschillend van Britse of Amerikaanse nationalisme. De vrijheden die Wilders spreekt van heeft niets te maken met te brengen vrij van de Europese Unie of de beschuldigingen tegen moslims van de islamisering mythen (mythen die zijn vele malen weerlegd op deze site). Nederlandse nationalisme en patriottisme synoniem geworden met het calvinisme in de late jaren 1500 strijd tegen het Spaanse gezag, en het calvinisme had een bevoorrechte positie in de Nederlandse samenleving in de 19e eeuw. Nederlandse nationalisme rust in de verdediging van de godsdienstvrijheid van alle Nederlanders, niet tegen de vrijheid van godsdienst voor iedereen.

Verdedigen van vrijheid van godsdienst en vrijheid van geweten van de Nederlandse moslims is een deel (of moet een onderdeel zijn) van de Nederlandse nationale traditie.

"Vrijheid van Nederlanders" (zoals Wilders lijkt te zeggen) ging over vrijheid van godsdienst en vrijheid van geweten, en het dwingen van een Nederlander tegen zijn vrijheid van geweten was het probleem met de Spaanse heersers. Benjamin J. Kaplan vertelt ons dat propagandistische pamfletten uit de Opstand nam het thema van de Nederlanders '"als uitzonderlijk liefhebbers en voorstanders van hun vrijheid en vijanden van alle geweld en onderdrukking" langs de lijnen van de godsdienstvrijheid" (2002, 179):
""Het is de weigering - tot op zekere hoogte heiligschennis - om wetgeving op het religieuze domein, terwijl overal elders goddelijk recht is nog steeds op de naam van de beperkingen, die gemarkeerd de Nederlandse Republiek in de zeventiende eeuw op te leggen. Gedurende de zeventiende en achttiende eeuw de sociale regelingen en politieke procedures, waarin religieuze diversiteit gebaseerd op vrijheid van geweten leidde, maakte de Nederlandse Republiek een proeftuin voor een vreedzame co-existentie, dan voor tolerantie. In de min of meer lange termijn, volgens welke tijdgenoten we te raadplegen, werd vastgesteld in Europa als model te volgen"" (Benjamin J. Kaplan, 2002, 179).

We kunnen zien wat de Nederlandse nationalisme zoals wordt beschreven door Arend Lijphart in zijn klassieke boek over de Nederlandse politiek, Politiek van Accommodatie (1976) en, hoewel Nederland werd gedeeld door sociale en religieuze breuklijnen, de Nederlanders in geslaagd om een ​​succesvolle democratie van vreedzame samenwerking op te bouwen bestaan. Nederlandse nationalisme, volgens Lijphart, is in de richting van de eigen blok (katholiek, socialistisch, liberaal) en aan de gemeenschappelijke natie, en dit nationalistische gevoel is een belangrijke factor om de consensus op het systeem en de natie van de burgeroorlog behouden (78 -79).
Nederland is ook een van de meest opvallende voorbeelden van een succesvolle democratie. De sociale fragmentatie van het Nederlandse volk is niet een onoverkomelijk obstakel voor de ontwikkeling en stevig persistentie van een stabiele, effectieve en legitieme parlementaire democratie die gediend heeft goed de mensen en die over het algemeen genoten van hun actieve steun of het gedogen (Lijphart 1976, 2 ).

Lijphart vertelt ons dat voor katholieken de calvinistische op basis van Nederlandse patriottisme was een harde concept, met het Huis van Oranje als een belangrijke speler in de uitzetting van harde katholieke overheersing. Maar - de katholieken nog nooit in opstand gekomen, zelfs als hun eigen religieuze praktijken werden verboden - en heb altijd gewerkt binnen het Nederlandse volk om hun positie (80-81) te verbeteren. Net als vandaag, Nederlandse mensen die de praktijk de islam hun loyaliteit aan hun land hebben ondervraagd, net als de Nederlandse katholieken hun loyaliteit vraag had. Ook vandaag, zijn sommige moslims en moslim-groepen kiezen voor niet-gewelddadige middelen om te vechten voor betere positie in de Nederlandse samenleving, net als de katholieken vroeger ...

Het is de plicht van iedere Nederlander op te staan ​​over Geert Wilders! Het geheel, belangrijkste idee van de Nederlandse Opstand was om de krachtige opleggen van de Katholieke Kerk verzetten op het Nederlandse volk. De Nederlandse moet nu verzetten tegen elke poging van de wil van Geert Wilders en zijn PVV fascisten naar een religieus geloof te onderdrukken - de islam - want het is de erfenis van het Nederlandse volk om religieuze onverdraagzaamheid tegen te gaan. Ook - de Nederlandse moeten verzetten tegen elke poging van Wilders en zijn PVV fascisten aan de Nederlandse patriottisme te definiëren als zijnde anti-moslim en anti-Europese Unie.

Terwijl Wilders beschuldigt de Nederlandse burgers dat de praktijk de islam van de gruwelijke misdaden en complotten tegen hun eigen volk (beschuldigingen van de gebruikte te zijn gericht tegen katholieken), dat zijn hatelijk mythen, probeert hij te komen tot een nationalisme dat is meer als de Amerikaanse Tea Party. Als Wilders ooit kreeg zijn wens om de Nederlandse natie te verwijderen uit internationale en Europese structuren, zal de economische prijs voor Nederlandse bedrijven en nationale positie zijn verwoestende en een lange tijd op te lossen. Als er iets - Geert Wilders en zijn PVV zijn verraders die verraderlijke beleid te brengen aan de Nederlandse natie, maar ook als een aantasting van Nederlandse tradities doordrenkt van religieuze tolerantie (permissiviteit).

Als Wilders sleept de Nederlandse vlag door de modder - het is een misselijkmakende site om te zien - samen met zijn voortdurende aanvallen op de Nederlandse tradities en cultuur. Geert Wilders is net zo goed van een Nederlandse patriot als Adolf Hitler was een Duitse patriot! Beiden hebben en leiden hun land tot een ruïne en ellende.

 

References

Kaplan, Benjamen J. 2002.`Dutch' religious tolerance: celebration and revision. In R. Po-Chia Hsia and Henk Van Nierop, eds. Calvinism and Religious Toleration in the Dutch Golden Age . Kindle Edition.

Kooi, Christine 1995. Popish Impudence: The Perseverance of the Roman Catholic Faithful in Calvinist Holland,1572-1620. The Sixteenth Century Journalhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/2541526 . Accessed: 25/03/2012

Lijphart, Arend. 1976. The Politics of Accommodation. Pluralism and Democracy in the Netherlands. U. of California Press:Berkeley, CA.

Nierop, Henk van . 2007. Alva's Throne—making sense of the revolt of the Netherlands. In Graham Darby, ed. The Origins and Development of the Dutch Revolt Taylor & Francis. Kindle Edition.

Pettegree, Andrew . 2007. Religion and the Revolt. In Graham Darby,ed. The Origins and Development of the Dutch Revolt. Taylor & Francis. Kindle Edition.

Also see/zie ook:

Sawyer, Andrew. The Tyranny of Alva: the creation and development of a Dutch patriotic image.

Ben Vermeulen. The Historical Development of Religious Freedom. Catholic University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands.

Sophie C. van Bijsterveld. Freedom of Religion in the Netherlands.

Monday, July 9, 2012

Muslim round ups in the UK ahead of Games

[caption id="attachment_3549" align="alignleft" width="206" caption="Why the way he's dressed and his obnoxious views - he must be planning a terrorist attack!"][/caption]

British police have no idea what a "dangerous individual" looks like, but think it looks like a Muslim. There is NO better demonstration of the dubious security, intelligence and police "work" than what we are currently seeing in the UK in the run up to the Olympic Games.  We see round ups of Muslim individuals on rather dubious "terrorist plots" while members of the English Defense League (EDL) remain highly radicalized and dangerous - and on the loose in the community.

At the same time, a member of the English Defense was sentenced to 9 years in prison for a knife attack against his neighbors ... we have round ups of Muslims with dubious and questionable police and intelligence work ... including accusations of unstated "terrorist plots" ... while the EDL remains at large to carry out violent "demos" against communities through out Britain.

The real threat to British security does not come from the Muslim community, but from the EDL, however, to the British police and MI5, a "dangerous terrorist" has nothing to do with an actual plot of real violence- but what a religious Muslim says and how the religious Muslim dresses. If actually plots of real terrorism were the goal of British security and intelligence - members of the EDL would have been put in prison a long time ago.

The "arrest" for "terrorism" appears to fit the NYPD profile: It is now criminal in the UK and elsewhere to appear as a devout Muslim with "anti-Western views." A devout Muslim who is outspoken and politically active, but a lacks a real "terrorism plot,"  is viewed as "radicalized" and is a "criminal."  As  I have predicted, the NYPD profile is now being used to arrest people for both their religious devotion and their political and social views. When we take a look at the articles over this "plot" we see very little evidence of violent planning, and this means justification for their arrests are probably based on legally protected religious and political viewpoints.   When we see the picture of Richard Dart above - we see the same long beard and dress that was highlighted in the NYPD "profile" - but these are legally protected activities and not "dangerous" and "violent."

We see that Richard Dart is a Muslim convert who adapted "anti-Western" views, and said that he would encourage others to go to Afghanistan to fight against British troops.

My response is sooooooooooo what! Such a statement is highly offensive - but these are words - not actions or behaviour!  Words are not bombs! Show us the evidence - as all we have are statements from police and government. So far - from current reports - Richard Dart does not appear to have engaged in ANY criminal activity!

Richard Dart should have the right to his religious freedom and freedom of speech - including obnoxious view - and be free from this kind of UK government harassment. "Extremist views" are not grounds for arrest and prosecution in  democratic societies with individual liberty. The manner of one's dress and speech maybe unusual and obnoxious, but people living in democratic societies with individual liberty - have a right to their manner of dress and views - without harassment of the likes of Scotland Yard and  MI5. UK Muslims now live in fear, thanks to British unchecked Islamophobia as "free speech" and personal abuse of Muslims now includes having their doors smashed in by British police:
Have you ever been called an Islamist? How about a jihadist or a terrorist? Extremist, maybe? Welcome to my world. It's pretty depressing. Every morning, I take a deep breath and then go online to discover what new insult or smear has been thrown in my direction. Whether it's tweets, blogposts or comment threads, the abuse is as relentless as it is vicious.

To say that I find the relentlessly hostile coverage of Islam, coupled with the personal abuse that I receive online, depressing is an understatement. There have been times – for instance, when I found my wife curled up on our couch, in tears, after having discovered some of the more monstrous and threatening comments on my New Statesman blog – when I've wondered whether it's all worth it. Perhaps, a voice at the back of my head suggests, I should throw in the towel and go find a less threatening, more civilised line of work. But that's what the trolls want. To silence Muslims; to deny a voice to a voiceless community. I shouldn't have to put up with this abuse. But I will. I have no plans to let the Islamophobes win. So, dare I ask: who's with me?

The "arrest" of Richard Dart and his friends shows that European security and intelligence remain focused on largely made up threats from the Muslim community - while highly dangerous and radicalized members of threat groups, like the EDL, do not get the same treatment police gave to  Richard Dart.  There needs to be a growing protest against this type of tyrannical and abusive police and security activity - along the lines of religious and political rights, human rights, the Universal Declaration of Human rights, as well as the European Conventions - and there needs to be some kind of world protest against these dubious and outrageous activities by the British State.

We need to start to realize that much of Western police and security, post-September 11, does very little to protect Western society from actual terrorist threat - note the attacks in Norway, July 22, 2011 and the Doner murders in Germany - and serve more as a tyrannical form of Muslim community control and to put on a brutal show to the rest of the world.

Now - last question: What makes the United Kingdom no better than rogue regimes, like Cuba, which also "arrests" its "troublemakers" before high profile events?

Instead of being "impressed" with British security - we need to be outraged and take vigorous actions against British security!

 

---

See:

We mustn't allow Muslims in public life to be silenced

East London EDL supporter threatens Muslims

Mosque protest leader guilty

Man arrested after demo by South Wales National Front in Swansea

EDL thug gets 9 years in prison for racist attack on neighbours

More time for 'terror plot' quiz

6 Muslims arrested in UK terror raid near Olympic Stadium

Muslim arrested under anti-terror laws

White Muslim one of six arrested over ‘terror plot'

Police may be arresting marginal terror suspects to clear decks for Olympics says watchdog

ANTI-MUSLIM VIOLENCE: PICTURE ACROSS UK from TELL MAMA

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Terror cells in the Netherlands? BULLCRAP! AIVD show us the evidence!

[caption id="attachment_3461" align="alignleft" width="208" caption="AIVD: Handen af​​!"][/caption]

While many Dutch people expressed sympathy was for the Somali asylum seekers, the AIVD had yet another “terrorist alert.” In a “false flag” and faked “terror alert” fashion that we here in America know too well, the Dutch media posted a narrative about alleged Somali al-Shabaab terror cells in the US, Britain and the Netherlands.

Supposedly, a former al-Shabaab fighter, now with the army, told a BBC reporter in Somalia that there are al-Shabaab terror cells just waiting to spring, including in the Netherlands.  This former fighter, who vanished before he could be interviewed by intelligence agents, told the reporter that “al-Shabaab had recruited expatriate Somalis in Somalia and had trained them for terror attacks.” (Volkskrant)

Yea (roll your eyes!) right!

Now – a reality check. It has been widely reported that the BBC has engaged in this type of faked and false flag reports in the past. The FBI is well known to have paid informants. Was this fighter tortured or embellishing?  If there are terror cells in our countries, we should demand that they be arrested, but there is the greater chance that the “informant” was paid to say these things. Where are the arrests of the “terrorists” and where is the evidence? Before we allow intelligence and security agencies – like the AIVD – to run amuck among religious and ethnic minority communitieslet’s see the evidence!

Why the AIVD could be doing this…

  1. Muslim control. Remember,  this type of report also serves the political interests of some people in the Dutch State, and not just to justify the AIVD’s “Muslim control” activities.

  2. Maintaining the “jihad in the Netherlands” narrative. The creation of “terror alerts” by the elements of the Dutch State, as with “security interests” of all State governments serves some purpose of the State and/or its political apparatuses.

  3. FEAR! We can suspect that the purpose is to – as it has been in the Netherlands since the antics of Fortuyn, to create fear in the Dutch people.

  4. Justify surveillance. The purpose is to justify the surveillance of groups and individuals involved in efforts to help in Somali asylum seekers in the Netherlands. To further demonize and allow for police sweeps against the Somali asylum seekers.  After all, the AIVD is out to protect the Netherlands, or more likely, protect against “illegal persons.”

  5. Keep Wilders happy. To serve the political and social interests of various actors in Dutch State, including the PVV and others who want conflict with the Islamic “civilization.”


Sharia4Holland is not a “national security threat!” There is also the establishment of the Sharia4Holland – a rather obnoxious band of religious lunatics that is supported by nobody – into a “national security threat against the Netherlands."  The other day, a passerby was arrested for engaging a debate with this pack of lunatics when a supposed threat to Geert Wilders was uttered. Keep in mind that death threats can be uttered against left political figures, like Job Cohen - and nobody is arrested - even after Anders Breivik’s rampage in Norway last summer.  It’s “free speech” to threaten Left politicians, but a criminal act to threaten the radical right thug, Geert  Wilders. Free speech my ass!

Don’t believe it! Expect a report of the AIVD’s activities against Somali asylum seekers and that band of lunatics called Sharia4Holland. When we see these reports, we will then know that the purpose of the Dutch State’s security apparatus is more about “Muslim control” than real security work. There appears to still be a lot of interest of the Dutch State and its intelligence and security apparatuses in maintaining the “jihad in the Netherlands” narrative. Even the head loon of Sharia4Holland, who stated that Geert Wilders “should have learned from what happened to Theo van Gogh” is playing the AIVD’s game and echoing the “jihad in the Netherlands” narrative. What is probably true is that murder of “Theo” was by a street gang member, Mohammed Bouyeri, to serve the purposes of Mohammed Bouyeri. This includes advanced status among his criminal peers.

Yes – Geert Wilders will die someday! We will all die someday, but I hope that Wilders can turn his life around before then and realize that he is wasting his obvious talents pursuing hate and destroying his own country’s culture, traditions and national identity.  But – I suppose that someday Wilders will make a death bed confession that he was wrong and regrets his wasted political career. What a pity!

Well – I promise you that the AIVD’s activities will, indeed, be dissected this summer.  It will have a TOUGH discourse analysis! Sunlight is the best disinfectant against the toxic activities of the AIVD!

Saturday, March 31, 2012

The French State and its abusive reactions to Toulouse shootings.

Going after the French State and its abusive response to the aftermath of the shooting by a "lone wolf," a lone gunman at Toulouse. The response of the French State is now one of an iron fist, which now includes "arrests" of "Islamists" in the phony problem of "Islamist network."  The misguided and anti-Muslim response to the shootings by a lone gunman, Mohamed Merah, also now include denying imams who have never preached violence entrance to the country for an annual Islamic Conference.

There is now the added element of the French elections and Sarkozy is looking for a bump in the polls. Sarkozy has traveled the road of persecution of with regard to the Roma which was followed by a rebuke from the European Union. The French State responded in a positive manner when it came to the presence of the Roma - it is unbelievable how the EU cannot come to the rescue of Muslim EU citizens that have to endure post-violence attacks on human rights and civil freedoms.

Islamist networks and the "threat" is probably a made up "threat." We now seen the "arrests" is "Islamists" by the French State. If these "Islamist networks" were such a danger - then why not close them down before this "lone wolf" shooting? It is quite possible that the people being arrested are being arrested for their religious faith and perhaps their political opinions - not their actual threat of "terrorism." These arrests, including of Merah's mother - should be closely followed by European and international human rights institutions.

Much to their credit, French police now believe that Mohamed Merah was not some "al-Qeada mission" - but was quite alone in his actions. That is not hard to understand, as anybody can claim to be an "al-Qeada operative" and this has been done by individuals in the past. Yet - we see the usual dubious claim of "an Islamist network" and the usual "clash of civilizations" response in collectively blame and punishment of the entire Muslim community. This misguided response is something we simply do not see against radical right networks, but only with "Islamist networks" (which may be nothing more that religious study groups. Expect Rob Wainwright and his Europol to explot the notion of "Islamist networks." Yes - I hope that "Islamist networks" do exist and that the limit their activity to discussion only.

In fact - now we are finding out that the Islamist group - the members that have now been arrested - had NO connection to Mohamed Merah. So - why on God's Green Earth are they being arrested?! What of THEIR freedom of expression and religion? What are the French State's obligations to the human rights of the Knights of Pride Islamist group!

That we will study...

That we will learn about...

That we will raise awareness about!

In a the ideal world, the French State lets the members of the Knights of Pride  go and leaves then alone - or suffers international rebuke and consequense for its actions against the Knights of Pride Islamist group as it did in its actions against Roma people!

So - some people like al-Qaeda  - so what - liking al-Qaeda has nothing to do with a person's involvement in "terrorism" -whatever the defination. Some people also think that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were also really great, but we don't see many arrests of Nazi networks around Europe. People that think that the Nazis were great are - well - ignored by Euroepan states and Rob Wainwright and his Europol. There is something very wrong here - in terms of equality before the law in the EU and in European states, as well as equal enforcements of the laws!

That will change, as the case study of the French State's abusive responses to the  Toulouse shooting is underway.The misguided and openly anti-Muslim response by the French state to the shootings by a lone gunman is now forming a case study that will lay the ground work for an even larger study of the Dutch Nation and its responses to the Theo van Gogh murder.  What appear to be constancies are that any violent act by someone of a Muslim background is now "terrorism":

1. then followed by claims of "our 9-11";

2.  then collective punishment, including "arrests" of "an Islamist network."

3.  Also throw in the claim that the attack by a lone perpetrator of Muslim background is "an attack on our values. 

Violent crimes by Muslims are now "terrorism," but beyond the collective punishment that follows is the unwillingness to include the voices of opposition to these abusive policies on the part of the "victim" State. The Muslim communities that fall victim to post-violence policies appear to be excluded from any debate about security issues and criminalization of the community appears to also occur.

The study framework - emancipation-advocacy approach from Critical Terrorism studies.  The framework I will be using uses a rational actor, "the French State" and what is referred to as emancipation-advocacy approach from Critical Terrorism studies. The approach includes removing the state centric approach and the view of the "French State as victim," used by orthodox terrorism studies and the global mass media’s coverage of the Toulouse shooting. The approach is from the view of the French Muslims who are now enduring oppressive measures and arrests in the aftermath of the shooting. Also a part of the approach will be the French State's obligations under European and human rights conventions, these "arrests" as part of an "Islamist network" as part of limits on religious freedom and expression, which is a part of the limits on freedoms of French Muslims, including attempts to close an up coming Islamic conference.

Question: What are the reactions of the French State after the lone gunman shootings at Toulouse and how do they square with the French State’s as a democratic, pluralistic society and international obligations to its Muslim citizens?

A couple of hypotheses:

  1. The responses of the French State to the shooting by a lone gunman amount to violation of human rights: freedom of speech, freedom of expression, religious freedom, among other possible violations.

  2.  "Islamist networks" are actually religious networks and  "arresting members" in the aftermath of violence is due to associations (real and over the Internet) the religious network has with the perpetrator.

  3. Violence by anyone of Muslim background is always branded as "jihad" and "terrorism."


Something will be done about these abuses of the French State. I will be mailing through standard posts this report to international institutions, including the United Nations,  and hope that awareness can be raised and actions taken against misguided and anti-Muslim responses by European nations in the aftermath of "Muslim violence." Again - this case study will lay the ground work for a larger study of the Dutch State. While Sarkozy intends to abuse the human rights of Muslim in the aftermath of this horrible shooting for his own political gains - I also intend to take full advantage in the name of advocacy for French Muslims, raise awareness of how much work needs to be done in Europe to advance human rights and frame proper responses to violence that do not collectively punish whole communities and criminalize the practice of religious faith or speech.

The paper will make recommendations for individuals and international organizations to get involved and to raise awareness that will based on study findings. Since European Union institutions, as well as other international institutions (like the United Nations) are not doing their jobs – we must do their jobs for them. The European Union, through Europol,, will probably join in efforts to collectively punish French Muslims from the crimes of a single person. There are important issues in terms of human rights, the rule of law and basic justice the French State must anser for in terms of its highly misguided and anti-Muslim response from the violent crimes of a single person.  This must not be allowed to continue!

[caption id="attachment_3387" align="alignleft" width="150" caption="Sarkozy, the French State's anti-Muslim thug. (From Wiki)"]Sarkozy, the French State's anti-Muslim thug. (From Wiki)[/caption]

 

---

NL - Gaan na de Franse staat en zijn misbruik reactie op de nasleep van de schietpartij door een "lone wolf", een eenzame schutter bij Toulouse. De reactie van de Franse staat is nu een van een ijzeren vuist, die nu ook "arrestaties" van "islamisten" in de nep probleem van de "islamistische netwerk." De misleide en anti-moslim reactie op de beschietingen door een eenzame schutter, Mohamed Merah, nu ook onder meer het ontkennen van imams die nog nooit geweld gepredikt ingang naar het land voor een jaarlijkse Islamitische Conferentie.

Er is nu de toegevoegde element van de Franse verkiezingen en Sarkozy is op zoek naar een hobbel in de peilingen. Sarkozy reisde de weg van de vervolging van met betrekking tot de Roma, die werd gevolgd door een berisping van de Europese Unie. De Franse staat reageerde op een positieve manier als het ging om de aanwezigheid van de Roma - het is ongelooflijk hoe de EU niet kan komen tot de redding van de islamitische EU-burgers die moeten na het geweld aanvallen op de mensenrechten en burgerlijke vrijheden te doorstaan.

Islamitische netwerken en de "dreiging" is waarschijnlijk een verzonnen "bedreiging." We hebben nu gezien dat de "arrestaties" is "islamisten" door de Franse staat. Als deze "islamitische netwerken" waren een dergelijk gevaar - waarom dan niet sluiten, voordat deze "lone wolf" schieten? Het is goed mogelijk dat de mensen die gearresteerd worden gearresteerd omdat hun religieuze geloof en wellicht ook hun politieke opvattingen - ". Terrorisme 'niet hun werkelijke dreiging van Deze arrestaties, onder meer van de moeder van Merah's - moeten nauwgezet worden gevolgd door Europese en internationale instellingen voor de mensenrechten.

Tot hun krediet, Franse politie nu van mening dat Mohamed Merah niet een of andere "al-Qeada missie" - maar was helemaal alleen in zijn acties. Dat is niet moeilijk te begrijpen, omdat iedereen kan beweren dat een "al-Qeada operatieve" en dit is gedaan door personen in het verleden. Maar - we zien de gebruikelijke dubieuze claim van "een islamitische netwerk" en de gebruikelijke "botsing der beschavingen 'reactie in collectief schuld en straf van de gehele moslimgemeenschap. Deze misleidende reactie is iets wat we gewoon niet zien tegen de radicale rechts-netwerken, maar alleen met "islamitische netwerken" (die wellicht niet meer dat religieuze studiegroepen. Verwacht Rob Wainwright en zijn Europol tot het begrip explot "islamitische netwerken." Ja - ik hoop dat 'islamitische netwerken' bestaan ​​en dat het hun activiteit te beperken tot discussie alleen.

In feite - nu zijn we uit te vinden dat de islamitische groepering - de leden die nu zijn gearresteerd - GEEN verbinding met Mohamed Merah had. Dus - waarom op Gods groene aarde worden ze gearresteerd? Welke van hun vrijheid od meningsuiting en godsdienst? Wat zijn de Franse staat de verplichtingen om de mensenrechten van de Ridders van Pride islamistische groep!

Dat bestuderen we ...

Dat leren we over ...

Dat zullen we de bewustwording over!

In een de ideale wereld, de Franse Staat laat gaan de leden van de Knights of Pride en laat vervolgens alleen - of lijdt internationale berisping en consequense voor zijn acties tegen de Ridders van Pride islamistische groep als zij heeft gedaan in haar acties tegen Roma!

Dus - sommige mensen, zoals al-Qaeda - zo? - liking al-Qaeda heeft niets te maken met betrokkenheid van een persoon in "terrorisme"-ongeacht het Begrip. Sommige mensen vinden ook dat Adolf Hitler en de nazi's waren ook echt geweldig, maar we zien niet veel arrestaties van de nazi-netwerken in Europa. Mensen die denken dat de nazi's groot waren zijn - goed - genegeerd door Euroepan staten en Rob Wainwright en zijn Europol. Er is iets heel erg mis hier - in termen van gelijkheid voor de wet in de EU en in Europese landen, en de gelijke versterkingen van de wetten!

Dat zal veranderen, aangezien de case study van misbruik van de Franse Staat reacties op de Toulouse-opnamen zijn underway.The misleid en openlijk anti-moslim reactie van de Franse staat aan de opnames van een eenzame schutter is nu de vorming van een case study die leggen de grondwerk voor een nog grotere studie van de Nederlandse natie en haar antwoorden op de Theo van Gogh moord. Wat lijkt te zijn constanten zijn dat elke gewelddadige handeling door iemand van een moslim achtergrond is nu "terrorisme":

1. dan gevolgd door claims van "onze 9-11";

2. dan collectieve bestraffing, met inbegrip van "arrestaties" van "een islamitische netwerk."

3. Ook gooien in de bewering dat de aanval door een enkele dader van islamitische achtergrond is "een aanval op onze waarden.

Gewelddadige misdrijven door de moslims zijn nu "terrorisme", maar verder dan de collectieve straf die volgt is de onwil om de stemmen van de oppositie tegen deze onrechtmatige beleid van de kant van het "slachtoffer" staat te nemen. De islamitische gemeenschappen die slachtoffer zijn van post-geweld beleid lijken te worden uitgesloten van elke discussie over veiligheidskwesties en criminalisering van de gemeenschap lijkt zich ook voordoen.

De studie kader - emancipatie-advocacy aanpak van kritische Terrorisme studies. Het kader dat ik zal gebruiken maakt gebruik van een rationele actor, "de Franse Staat" en wat wordt aangeduid als emancipatie-advocacy aanpak van kritische Terrorisme studies. De aanpak omvat het verwijderen van de staat centric aanpak en de visie van de "Franse staat als slachtoffer," wordt gebruikt door de orthodoxe terrorisme studies en de mondiale massamedia de dekking van de Toulouse schieten. De aanpak is vanuit het oogpunt van de Franse moslims die nu doorstaan ​​onderdrukkende maatregelen en arrestaties in de nasleep van de schietpartij. Ook een deel van de aanpak zal zijn van de Franse Staat verplichtingen op grond van Europese en mensenrechtenverdragen, deze "arrestaties" als onderdeel van een "islamitische netwerk" als onderdeel van de beperkingen op de vrijheid van godsdienst en meningsuiting, dat is een deel van de beperkingen van vrijheden van de Franse moslims, met inbegrip van pogingen om een ​​up komende islamitische conferentie af te sluiten.

Vraag: Wat zijn de reacties van de Franse staat na de eenzame schutter schietpartij in Toulouse en hoe ze zijn vierkant met de Franse staat is als een democratische, pluralistische samenleving en de internationale verplichtingen aan haar islamitische burgers?

Een paar hypotheses:

1. De reacties van de Franse Staat aan de beschieting door een eenzame schutter bedrag aan schending van de mensenrechten: vrijheid van meningsuiting, vrijheid van meningsuiting, godsdienstvrijheid, naast andere mogelijke overtredingen.
2.  "Islamitische netwerken" zijn eigenlijk religieuze netwerken en "arresteren leden" in de nasleep van het geweld is het gevolg van verenigingen (echte en via internet) de religieuze netwerk heeft met de dader.

3..Geweld door iedereen van islamitische achtergrond is altijd gebrandmerkt als "jihad" en "terrorisme".

Iets zal worden gedaan over deze schendingen van de Franse staat. Ik zal mailing met behulp van standaard berichten in dit verslag aan de internationale instellingen, waaronder de Verenigde Naties zijn, en hopen dat het bewustzijn kan worden verhoogd en de acties tegen misleidende en anti-moslim reacties van Europese landen in de nasleep van "moslim geweld." Again - dit geval studie zal de grondslag worden gelegd werk voor een grotere studie van de Nederlandse Staat. Terwijl Sarkozy is van plan de rechten van de mens van de islamitische misbruik in de nasleep van deze verschrikkelijke schietpartij voor zijn eigen politiek gewin - ook ik ben van plan om optimaal te profiteren in de naam van belangenbehartiging voor de Franse moslims, bewust te maken van hoe veel werk moet worden gedaan in Europa om de mensenrechten te bevorderen en kaderen de juiste antwoorden op het geweld die niet collectief te straffen hele gemeenschappen en criminaliseren van de praktijk van het geloof.

Het papier zal aanbevelingen doen voor individuen en internationale organisaties om betrokken te raken en het bewustzijn dat zal op basis van bevindingen van de studie te verhogen. Aangezien de Europese instellingen, en andere internationale instellingen (zoals de Verenigde Naties) zijn niet hun werk te doen - we moeten doen hun werk voor hen. De Europese Unie, via Europol, zal, waarschijnlijk aansluiten bij de inspanningen om gezamenlijk Franse moslims te straffen van de misdaden van een enkele persoon. Er zijn belangrijke kwesties op het gebied van de mensenrechten, moet de rechtsstaat en de fundamentele recht van de Franse staat anser in termen van de zeer misplaatste en anti-moslim reactie van de gewelddadige misdaden van een enkele persoon. Dit moet niet worden toegestaan ​​om verder te gaan!

 

L'Etat français et ses réponses abusives à terroriste Al-Qaïda à la suite de l'Toulouse

Sarkozy, the French State's anti-Muslim thug. (From Wiki)Après que l'État français et sa réponse abusive à la suite de la fusillade par un «loup solitaire», un tireur isolé à Toulouse. La réponse de l'Etat français est aujourd'hui l'un d'une poigne de fer, qui comprend désormais "arrestations" de "islamistes" dans le faux problème de «réseau islamiste». La réponse erronée et anti-musulmane aux fusillades par un tireur isolé, Mohamed Merah, comporte désormais des imams nier qui ont jamais prêché la violence d'entrée dans le pays pour une conférence annuelle islamique.

Il est désormais l'élément ajouté des élections françaises et Sarkozy est à la recherche d'une bosse dans les sondages. Sarkozy a parcouru la route de la persécution de ce qui concerne les Roms, qui a été suivie par une réprimande de l'Union européenne. L'Etat français a répondu de manière positive quand il est venu à la présence des Roms - il est incroyable de voir comment l'Union européenne ne peut pas venir à la rescousse des citoyens de l'UE musulmans qui ont à endurer la violence post-attaques sur les droits de l'homme et des libertés civiles.

Réseaux islamistes et la «menace» est probablement un composé "menace". Nous avons maintenant vu les "arrestations" est "islamistes" par l'Etat français. Si ces «réseaux islamistes» ont été un tel danger - alors pourquoi ne pas les fermer avant cette «loup solitaire» de prise de vue? Il est fort possible que les gens qui sont arrêtés sont arrêtés pour leur foi religieuse et peut-être de leurs opinions politiques - ". Le terrorisme" ne pas leur menace réelle de Ces arrestations, y compris de la mère de Merah - devrait être suivie de près par les institutions européennes et internationales des droits de l'homme.

Une grande partie de leur crédit, la police française croient maintenant que Mohamed Merah n'était pas un "al-Qeada mission» - mais il était tout seul dans ses actions. Ce n'est pas difficile à comprendre, comme n'importe qui peut prétendre être un «al-Qeada opératoire» et cela a été fait par des individus dans le passé. Pourtant, - nous voyons la demande habituelle douteuse d'un «réseau islamiste» et l'habituel «choc des civilisations» dans la réponse collective blâme et la punition de toute la communauté musulmane. Cette réponse erronée est quelque chose que nous n'avons tout simplement pas voir contre radicales bons réseaux, mais seulement avec les «réseaux islamistes» (qui peut être rien de plus que les groupes d'études religieuses. Attendez-vous à Rob Wainwright et son Europol à explot la notion de «réseaux islamistes». Oui - J'espère que «les réseaux islamistes" existent et que la limite de leur activité à la discussion seulement.

En fait - maintenant, nous constatons que le groupe islamiste - les membres qui ont été arrêtés - n'avait aucun lien avec Mohamed Merah. Alors - pourquoi sur Terre verte de Dieu sont-ils arrêtés?! Qu'est-ce de leur liberté od expression et de religion? Quelles sont les obligations de l'État français aux droits de l'homme des Chevaliers du groupe islamiste fierté!

Que nous allons étudier ...

Que nous en apprendre davantage sur ...

Que nous sensibiliser!

Dans un monde idéal, l'Etat français permet aux membres des Chevaliers de la fierté aller et laisse alors seulement - ou souffre réprimande internationale et consequense pour ses actions contre les Chevaliers du groupe islamiste fierté car il a fait dans ses actions contre les Roms!

Donc - certaines personnes comme Al-Qaïda  - aimer Al-Qaïda n'a rien à voir avec la participation d'une personne dans le «terrorisme»-quelle que soit la defination. Certaines personnes pensent aussi que Adolf Hitler et les nazis étaient également très intéressant, mais nous ne voyons pas de nombreuses arrestations de réseaux nazis à travers l'Europe. Les gens qui pensent que les nazis étaient une grande sont - bien - ignoré par les Etats Euroepan et Rob Wainwright et son Europol. Il ya quelque chose de très mal ici - en termes d'égalité devant la loi dans l'UE et dans les Etats européens, ainsi que l'égalité de renforts des lois!

Cela va changer, que l'étude de cas des réponses abusives de l'État français à la prise de vue Toulouse. The erronée et ouvertement anti-musulman de réponse par l'Etat français à la fusillade par un tireur isolé est en train de former une étude de cas permettra de jeter les travail sur le terrain pour une étude encore plus grand de la nation hollandaise et ses réponses à la assassiner Theo van Gogh. Ce qui semble être constances sont que tout acte de violence par une personne d'une origine musulmane est maintenant le «terrorisme»:

1. ensuite suivie par les revendications de «notre 9-11»;

2. puis une punition collective, y compris "arrestations" de "un réseau islamiste."

3. Aussi jeter dans l'affirmation selon laquelle l'attaque par un seul auteur d'origine musulmane est «une attaque contre nos valeurs.

Les crimes violents par les musulmans sont maintenant «terrorisme», mais au-delà de la punition collective qui suit est la réticence à inclure les voix de l'opposition à ces politiques abusives de la part de l'État «victime». Les communautés musulmanes qui sont victimes de la violence post-politiques semblent être exclus de tout débat sur les questions de sécurité et de la criminalisation de la communauté semble également se produire.

Le cadre de l'étude - l'émancipation-plaidoyer approche à partir d'études critiques contre le terrorisme. Le cadre que je vais utiliser utilise un acteur rationnel », l'État français» et ce qui est visé à l'émancipation-plaidoyer approche à partir d'études critiques contre le terrorisme. L'approche comprend la suppression de l'approche centrée sur l'État et la vue de «l'État français en tant que victime," utilisée par études sur le terrorisme et la couverture orthodoxes les médias mondiaux populaire de la fusillade Toulouse. L'approche est du point de vue des musulmans français qui sont maintenant supporter des mesures oppressives et des arrestations à la suite de la fusillade. Aussi une partie de l'approche sera obligations de l'État français en vertu de conventions relatives aux droits européens et humaines, ces "arrestations" dans le cadre d'un «réseau islamiste» dans le cadre de limites sur la liberté religieuse et d'expression, qui est une partie des limites sur les libertés des musulmans français, y compris les tentatives de fermer une conférence à venir jusqu'à islamique.

Question: Quelles sont les réactions de l'État français après la fusillade tireur isolé à Toulouse et comment font-ils place avec l'Etat français est aussi une société démocratique, pluraliste et obligations internationales à ses citoyens musulmans?

Un couple d'hypothèses:

1. Les réponses de l'Etat français à la fusillade par un tireur isolé à montant violation des droits de l'homme: la liberté d'expression, la liberté d'expression, la liberté religieuse, parmi d'autres violations possibles.

2.  «Réseaux islamistes» sont en fait des réseaux religieux et "membres" d'arrêt à la suite de la violence est due à des associations (réel et sur Internet), le réseau religieux entretient avec l'auteur.
3. La violence exercée par toute personne d'origine musulmane est toujours stigmatisés comme «djihad» et «terrorisme».

Quelque chose va être fait au sujet de ces violations de l'Etat français. Je serai de diffusion à travers les postes standards dans ce rapport à des institutions internationales, y compris l'Organisation des Nations Unies, et nous espérons que la sensibilisation peut être soulevée et les actions prises à l'encontre des réponses erronées et anti-musulman par les nations européennes à la suite de "la violence musulmane." Encore une fois - cette étude de cas permettra de jeter les bases d'une étude plus vaste de l'État néerlandais. Alors que Sarkozy a l'intention d'abuser des droits de l'homme de musulmans à la suite de cette fusillade horrible pour ses propres gains politiques - J'ai également l'intention de tirer pleinement parti au nom de la défense des musulmans français, de sensibiliser le volume de travail à faire dans l'Europe pour promouvoir les droits de l'homme et définir des réponses appropriées à la violence qui ne sont pas punir collectivement des communautés entières et de criminaliser la pratique de la foi religieuse.

Le document fera des recommandations pour les particuliers et les organisations internationales à s'impliquer et à faire prendre conscience que sera fondé sur les conclusions de l'étude. Depuis institutions de l'Union européenne, ainsi que d'autres institutions internationales (comme l'Organisation des Nations Unies) ne font pas leur travail - nous devons faire leur travail pour eux. L'Union européenne, par le biais d'Europol,, sera probablement unir leurs efforts pour punir collectivement les musulmans français des crimes d'une seule personne. Il ya des questions importantes en termes de droits de l'homme, la primauté du droit et de justice fondamentale de l'État français doit anser en termes de sa réponse très erronée et anti-musulmane des crimes violents d'une seule personne. Cela ne doit pas être autorisé à continuer!