Barrel Strength

You have all read by now the acquittal of Geert Wilders on hate-speech. Some of the commentary upon the acquittal  shows, better than anything conservatives could say, that the left believes that Europeans should

a) cease to exist as culturally dominant majorities in their own countries; and

b) should be punished by law for any attempt to resist that wave of immigration.

On the subject of Wilders acquittal, see here in Vlad Tepes, here in Robert Sibley’s excellent Ottawa Citizen blog; here in the Daily Mail.

For wet hand-wringing on the subject of Wilders, there is no lack. See Tom Rawstorne in the Daily Mail of 2009 (”Is he about to engulf Britain in a holy war?”).

Particulalry hideous is the reaction to the acquittal from Ubaldus de Vries in the Guardian. De Vries,a lecturer in legal theory at the University of Utrecht,  says that though Wilders is technically innocent, we all know he is guilty of thoughtcrime:

“In doing so, Wilders adopts nationalism as a mode to gather momentum, support and power. It feeds on fear and abuses this fear. Whether the fear is real or imaginary is irrelevant. Fear is a powerful and explosive instrument of power. Many “indigenous” Dutch are threatened and frustrated by developments in the globalised world that they do not want but cannot control, such as immigration, and Wilders talks about “a tsunami of an alien culture that increasingly dominates local culture”. The feeding of this fear is an attempt to increase the existing polarisation and segregation of Dutch society, potentially leading to banlieue-type unrest. Unless we all start realising the futility of the attempt – and the court should have given just such a signal.”

Shall we parse that piece of nonsense for a moment?

1) “Whether the fear is real or imaginary is irrelevant.”

So, rational apprehension of risk is not relevant. To what, pray tell? Or to whom? The difference in all kinds of situations rests on the valid apprehension of risk or danger. Distinguishing the direction of a car towards a toddler’s pram will determine whether you will be exonerated for ramming that car with your own, if you were under a valid apprehension of imminent danger to the child. And if you were wrong, you probably face jail time, rather than a favourable review on the local press.

The left constantly wants Europeans not to face the concrete reality of what Islam is: a jurisprudential system called shari’a, which governs every – I mean every – aspect of life, based on a flawed revelation and backed up by a complete refusal to engage in philosphical discussion. It is a totalitarian political ideology as much as a religion. But that is irrelevant, apparently.

Whether the car is heading for the pram is not relevant?

2) “Many “indigenous” Dutch are threatened and frustrated by developments in the globalised world that they do not want but cannot control, such as immigration.”

Since when was it determined that the natives of Europe have no right to determine the ethnic composition of their societies? Note that Ubaidus de Vries does not even bother to pretend that the native population of Holland has any right to deterrmine this question.

3) “Unless we all start realising the futility of the attempt” ….to do what? To stop “a tsunami of an alien culture that increasingly dominates local culture”.

What can one say to the naked proposal that the Court ought to have signalled that any attempt, no matter how rational, to stop the immersion of white europeans in an unstoppable tide of Muslim immigration will be met with jail, fines, and public humiliation?

The article, published in today’s Globe and Mail, and derived from the Guardian, has to be read in the complete inverse of its intentions:

-the result looks likely to sully the country’s image abroad

-the vote represented a triumph for the far right Swiss People’s Party

-the vote also reflected an act of mass defiance of the national establishment

Well, what else would they say? That it was a triumph of the ordinary white Christian Swiss who says he wants to live in a white Christian country? And moreover, have a say on the direction of his own country’s basic nature? No, the Guardian could never say that. That would be….. wait a minute…. uh, racist!!

From an AP report:

“The nationalist Swiss People’s party (SPP) described minarets, the distinctive spires used in most countries for calls to prayer, as symbols of rising Muslim political and religious power that could eventually turn Switzerland into an Islamic nation.

“Muslims make up about 6% of Switzerland’s 7.5 million people, many of them refugees from the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s. Fewer than 13% practice their religion, the government says, and Swiss mosques do not broadcast the call to prayer outside their buildings.”

I seem to recall a Turkish Prime Minister, Tayyip Erdogan, who  had publicly read an Islamic poem including the lines: “The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers…”

  Maybe someone listened to him.

PS: It should be noted that Switzerland is a republic, not a disguised monarchy, and that voter initiatives are allowed.  That would explain the difference between Switzerland, say, and Belgium, France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and so forth.

I always thought we were, in Catholic eyes. A Jesuit tells his fellow conservative believing Catholics that we are not. Sheesh! What does it take?

Hats off and best wishes to the unpronouncable Deborah Gyapong (Japong?, Gyapong?) for this one).

The Reverend Father Oakes says:

“I do hereby conclude: When the Western Church fissiparated in the sixteen century, the Reformers took a portion of the essential patrimony of the Church with them, and they thereby left both the Roman Church and themselves the poorer for it.”

And further:
“All I can say is this: We live in strange times when I find greater doctrinal fellowship among many Protestants than I do among far too many Catholic theologians!”

To which I can add, welcome to the club, dude.

Rev. Oakes’ article is far more interesting than these teaser excerpts.