Sad times for the Netherlands by mattsteinglass
March 6, 2010, 1:24 am
Filed under: Conservatism, Netherlands

Geert Wilders held a press conference in London yesterday. Among other things, he called the Prophet Mohammed “a barbarian, a mass-murderer and a pedophile.” As the Volkskrant describes the scene, the international press fell silent. Mr Wilders then referred to Turkish premier Erdogan as a “total freak”. On a perhaps slightly less objectionable note, he said his priority as prime minister, should he receive that post, would be to halt “mass immigration” from Muslim countries.

Ten years ago, when I was living in the Netherlands, the far-right party of Jorg Haidar joined the Austrian governing coalition, and all over Holland, mainstream Dutch called for the country to be boycotted. Times sure do change.


11 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Good grief, might he be PM? Is there some law of nature requiring an idiot to be a head of state at all times?

Comment by citifieddoug

Yes, times do change. Ten years ago, Dutch people had not yet been murdered in the streets for making political statements.

Comment by Ethan Epstein

So what you’re saying is that if Dutch politicians are calling the Prophet Mohammed a pedophile, it’s the Muslims’ fault.

Comment by Matt Steinglass

No, it’s the Muslims fault that they’re reacting with violence towards insults to Mohammed.

Comment by mfhorn

Mohammed married a girl called Aisha when she was 6 or 7 years old and consummated this marriage a couple of years later. What’s your term for a man who fucks a 10 year old?

From Wikipedia:
“Aisha stayed in her parents’ home for several years until she joined Muhammad and the marriage was consummated. Most of the sources indicate that she was nine years old at the time, with the single exception of al-Tabari, who records that she was ten.”

You never checked your facts, your journalism is lazy.

Comment by thales65

I’m with Ethan on this one Matt.

Moreover Mohammed would be judged today as pedophile in any civilized nation.

Is Wilders wrong to judge a historical figure by today’s standards?

We as humans do this all the time, with all other historical figures. It’s an indication that our ethics and sense or morality has evolved.

We don’t praise the Mayans for engaging in blood sacrifice. Most people today consider that savage and barbaric. The Catholic Church is rightly condemned for for not denouncing the Blood Libel until the 20th century.

Why should Mohammed be judged today by medieval standards?

Comment by kenmcgowan

Ken, I’ve flagged your comment for abuse. If I were the administrator of the site, I wouldn’t allow this bigoted comment to stand any more than I would allow similar anti-semitic comments.

In anti-christian diatribes in countries where Christians are oppressed, one sometimes encounters people claiming that Jesus advocated male castration. This is literally true (Matthew 19:3-12), but it’s also a ridiculous and distorted claim to make. You can always find silly accusations to make against other people’s religions if you comb through their texts with the intent of finding ways to antagonize them. Mature and intelligent people don’t go around hurling puerile insults at other people’s religious figures.

Comment by Matt Steinglass

You’ll have to explain to me how calling the Mayans savage and barbaric for engaging in blood sacrifice is bigoted.

Or speaking out against the Blood Libel is.

Do you support the Blood Libel or blood sacrifice?

Or perhaps it’s only pedofilia that you support?

I think it’s your morals and ethics that are in question here Matt.

Comment by kenmcgowan

You know perfectly well I’m not talking about the irrelevant statements you made about Mayans or Christians. But since you mention it, no, I don’t think it’s appropriate to call Christians “savage and barbaric”, despite the long centuries during which Christians embraced the blood libel and engaged in the torture and massacre of those who did not share their religion. Given that Christian Spain slaughtered or enslaved most of the Mayans along with the rest of the native population of the Americas, I think the use of terms like “savage” and “barbarian” probably does little to distinguish any one people or religion in that era from any other.

Comment by Matt Steinglass

Oh I see you only the support the raping of little girls by religious leaders.

That’s OK then

Comment by kenmcgowan

It seems this thread proves that inflammatory rhetoric does nothing to solve the misunderstandings between Christians and Muslims.

Comment by libtree09

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: