Our Flemish correspondent VH reported two days ago about the controversy caused by Filip Dewinter when he gave a speech at the colloquium “Islam can damage your freedom”. The Vlaams Belang leader had the audacity to refer to the imam Nordin Taouil as a “pimp of Allah”, and this flagrant disrespect for Islam has already caused “youths” in Antwerp to begin rioting.
For the edification and inspiration of Gates of Vienna readers, VH has kindly translated the entire text of Mr. Dewinter’s excellent speech (which can be found here):
Speech by Filip Dewinter
September 24, 2009
Ladies and Gentlemen,
“The Islamic expansion is a fact. It is controlled by the divine hand.” [GVA-June 25, 2009].
This quote, expressed by a young Muslim woman from the Antwerp Atheneum, perfectly summarizes why a headscarf ban is necessary. The headscarf ban not only has to do with respect for the equality between men and women and the rejection of discrimination against women, but must also be a signal call for a halt to the Islamization of our society. For the headscarf has become the symbol of the Islamic conquest. The headscarf is the propaganda weapon of choice for the establishment of an Islamic society in Europe. Who defends the headscarf out of reasons of tolerance and pluralism, has little or no understanding of Islam. The hidden agenda behind the veil leads to segregation, to a cultural, social, and religious apartheid-regime Islam wants to control our civilization with and eventually dominate it.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Muslim leaders such as Nordin Taouil do not care a bit about the young women that for so-called religious reasons — the headscarf is not mentioned anywhere throughout the Quran — they compel to wear the headscarf. Imams such as Nordin Taouil are the pimps of Allah, who with moral blackmail force Muslim women to religiously prostitute themselves. The wearing of the headscarf has nothing to do with Islam as a religion, but it is part of the cultural Jihad, the duty of every Muslim to combat the kaffir, the unbelievers — that is us — and establish the domination of Islam. The Iranian-French writer Chahdortt Djavann writes: “The veil is the symbol, the flag, and the final piece of the Islamic system”.
It is therefore incorrect to compare the headscarf worn by a Muslim woman with the cross on a necklace of a Catholic or the yarmulke of a Jew. The veil, the headscarf, is not a religious but a political symbol. The veil, the headscarf, is the flag of a political ideology in which the individual religious experience is not central, but the realization of a theocratic society based on Sharia, Islamic law. That the self-proclaimed intelligentsia, the so-called cultural elite who bring in their wake slowly but surely the political world, have come realize this on the issue of headscarves, has much, if not everything, to do with the educational pioneering by Vlaams Belang. On this issue we have shown the way, we have broken taboos, and we, and only we, have taken the lead. If there is a headscarf ban in Flanders today, then without hesitation we may put that feather in our cap.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
– – – – – – – – –
The headscarf ban was immediately followed by the announcement of the planned foundation of Muslim schools. The political world responded to that with shock. The Islamic schools would be bad for integration, they would become prisons for the disadvantaged, they were apartheid schools… This is all true, but why did the ladies and gentlemen politicians who are so outraged now not have the same insight when Islam was officially acknowledged as a religion, when the mosques were approved and supported; when imams were subsidized, segregated swimming for men and women was approved, Islamic holidays were introduced in education, halal food in the school lunch rooms, when ritual slaughter was anchored as an exception to the animal welfare laws? By providing Islam the same rights and facilities as other recognized religions such as Catholicism, Protestantism, and Judaism, the basis had been laid for the creation of the Islamic pillar. The Islamic pillar they now say they oppose was created by politicians of CD&V [Christian Democrats], SP.a [Socialists], VLD [Liberal Democrats] and N-VA [Flemish Alliance, Center-Right]. Politicians who today pretend to be outraged about Muslim schools have apparently never set foot in areas such as the Maritiemwijk in Brussels-Molenbeek, Kuregem in Brussles-Anderlecht, in the Seefhoek, Stuivenberg or Borgerhout in Antwerp, in the Muide in Ghent, etc… With Arabic calligraphy on almost every shop window, with only halal products and an alcohol ban in almost all shops and catering businesses, with their own non-profit organizations, madrassas, and tea houses, with a mosque on every street corner, with imams who — as in Antwerp and Brussels — practice Sharia law, with schools that are up to 90 to 95% Muslim, these neighborhoods are the best evidence of the rapidly-growing Islamic pillar in our country and in Europe. The segregated society is already a fact, and the multi-culturalists have, blinded by their own self-righteousness, created and shaped it themselves.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Also with regard to the recent riots in a number of Brussels districts, multicultural Flanders again turns the ball the wrong way round. The severe riots are dismissed as drug incidents, while everyone knows very well they are about much more than that. What it really comes down to is that young Muslims, led by radical imams, seek to boss their own Muslim neighborhoods and refuse to accept any other authority but the mosque. I therefore have few illusions about the subsequent evolution of our multicultural metropolises. The increasingly violent riots will slowly but surely grow into some kind of ethno-religious guerrilla war. The demand by Vlaams Belang to deploy the army if necessary, to make law and order prevail once again, is therefore obvious. PS-politicians [Socialists] in Brussels like Philippe Moureau [at present Mayor of the troubled district Sint-Jans-Molenbeek] and Laurette Onkelinx [at present Health Minister] reap what they have themselves sowed. Who gives Islam a finger should note that he in time will lose his hand and eventually his arm. Winston Churchill once said: “Someone who always wants to be nice continues to feed the crocodile, hoping that he will be eaten last”. We therefore enter crucial times. Either we make it clear to the Muslim community that we want to be and remain bosses over our own country and in our own continent, and if necessary we act hard to crack down against Muslim radicals, troublemakers, and worse, or we give in to the false prophets of multiculturalism and dig Europe’s grave.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The multi-culture has not only broken the resilience of our identity and our cultural confidence, but has also rolled out the red carpet for Islam. In the eyes of many Muslims, Europe has long since surrendered. They consider the European governments to be weak and malleable. The European governments fold under the Islamic blackmail, especially given the power of the numbers. For the immigration flow from Islamic countries has turned into an invasion, whereby Islamization is a reverse colonization. The tens of millions of Muslims that flow over Europe via legal and illegal immigration are by Islamic leaders compared with an army without weapons. The Libyan leader Qadhafi was right when in 2006 he said on the Arab television station Al-Jazeera: “We have fifty million Muslims in Europe. There are signs that Allah will allow Islam a great victory n Europe, without swords, without guns, without conquests. The fifty million Muslims residing in Europe will, within a few decades, change it into an Islamic continent.”
Already today we see that certain European cities, districts and neighborhoods are unofficially controlled by Muslim authorities in accordance with Islamic Sharia law. In February 2008 the head of the Anglican Church, Rowan Williams, said that the introduction of elements of Sharia into the British legal system appears to be “inevitable” as a large number of his British compatriots have no ties with the British legal system. Williams believed that we should not commit Muslims “to a wrenching choice between Islamic culture and the British state”.
An important part of the Muslim community is isolating increasingly and more explicitly from our society. The radical Islamic strategy is clear: integration is anathema; under the guise of respect for religious freedom and freedom of expression, Western and democratic freedoms are increasingly called into question; and a concentration policy is pursued with Islamic majorities in neighborhoods and districts as goal, and ultimately in towns and cities. Muslim leaders do not believe in a secular society in which Islam is just one of the professed religions. Their aim is to make Islam the ruling, dominant religion in a theocratic society.
Mass immigration and demographic growth are useful means to change certain neighborhoods and districts in Islamic strongholds, where only halal food is served, no more alcohol is sold in shops and cafes, where men and women are segregated as much as possible, were women wear a chador or hijab and justice is administered by the local imam. The next step is the struggle for the introduction of Sharia (Islamic law) to replace civil law.
Al Hijra describes how mass immigration has always been an intentional strategy of Islam, to conquer territories and subjugate peoples through Islamic colonization. Due to the wave of Islamic immigration that currently engulfs Europe, Flanders and Europe in relatively short time risk falling as ripe apples into the hands of Islam. Currently this country alone already has 628,750 Muslims, which means that 6% of the population adheres to Islam. Of all children born in the Flemish region, 20% are of immigrants, and 15% are Muslim. In both Antwerp and Brussels, Muhammad the name registered most often for boys.
The increase in the number of immigrants and Muslims is typical for all of Western Europe. A brief overview of available statistics on the population composition and evolution of our neighboring countries indicates that the ethnic and religious composition of the population changes rapidly there as well.
The British newspaper The Telegraph warned on August 8, 2009 about the rapid increase in the number of Muslims in Europe, which was compared by the newspaper to a demographic time bomb: “During the past year five percent of the total population of the 27 EU-Muslim countries was already Muslim. But predictions show that the rising level of immigration from Muslim countries and low birth rates among the indigenous European population will make that figure 20 percent by 2050.” […] “In other predictions,” the newspaper writes, “Muslims might already be more numerous than non-Muslims by mid-century in France, and perhaps in all of Western Europe.”
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Radical Muslims have every reason to be optimistic. For them, mass immigration to Europe is a godsend. Not a week passes but some Muslim cleric or politician predicts — in line with the former Algerian President Houari Boumédienne or the Libyan leader Mu’ammar Al-Qadhafi — the conquest of Europe by Islam. In April 2009, on the Palestinian Al-Aqsa TV, a Palestinian Hamas MP, Yunis Al-Astals, welcomed the imminent conquest of Europe: “Rome will one day be the outpost for the Islamic conquests, which will spread through Europe and will then focus on the two Americas, and even Eastern Europe.”
Islam has been expelled from Europe twice. The first Muslim invasion of Europe from the south was stopped at Poitiers in 732. In 1492, the Muslims were expelled from Spain. A second invasion from the East was halted when the Muslims were smashed at the siege of Vienna in 1683. Islam still considers this defeat a temporary retreat. The rapid rise of the Muslim population in most European countries is nothing more nor less than the third Islamic invasion of Europe.
Naturally, the conquest of Europe is of no consideration for most of the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who each year migrate to Europe or Flanders. The guest workers who migrated from the Maghreb countries and Turkey to Europe during the sixties and seventies, did this for economic reasons. This applies also to most of the hundreds of thousands of Muslims who annually flow into Europe with family reunification or for marriage.
In contrast, for radical Islam, mass immigration to Europe matches their deliberate strategy to submit Europe to Islam. Necmettin Erbakan, the former radical Islamist Prime Minister of Turkey, said this at the Assembly of Turkish radical Islamic group Milli Görus in April 2001 about the Islamization of Europe by Muslim immigration: “The Europeans believe that Muslims came to Europe only to make money. But Allah has a different plan.”
Indeed, Allah has a different plan. The plan is called “Al Hijra”, and it means to conquer Europe through immigration.
Whoever studies the history of the expansion of Islam notes that some regions were subjugated to Islam with military force, but that in the conquest of quite a few other areas hardly any weapons were used. Entire countries were colonized by Muslim immigration and preaching. If a huge country like Indonesia with over 200 million Muslims — the largest Islamic country in the world — can be conquered relatively peacefully, then why not Europe?
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Radical Islam has considerable resources for the colonization of Europe. Since the 1980s, Saudi Arabia alone has spent an estimated €30 billion, $44 billion, on the construction of Mosques and Islamic cultural centers of all sorts around the world. Using this amount, 1,500 mosques and 2,000 Islamic cultural centers have been built from which Wahhabism, radical Islam, is propagated. Turkey and Morocco do the same via their Ministries for Religious Affairs. The Turkish Ministry of Religious Affairs manages through the Diyanet-structure about fifty Mosques in Flanders. Morocco sent no less than 150 imams to Europe in 2008, financed by the Moroccan government. Of these imams, 31 were sent to Belgium. This immigration invasion is supported with a lot of money, with logistical and material support, through infiltration of our political and social structures, but mainly with the unshakable belief that Islam will triumph and its flag wave over Europe.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Finally a symbolic quote from the British Socialist minister Shalid Malik (October 2008): “In 1997 we had our first Muslim MP. In 2001 we had two Muslim MPs. In 2005 we had four Muslim MPs. Insh’Allah (“with the will of Allah”), we will in have eight or ten Muslim MPs 2009 or 2010. In 2014 we will have 16 Muslim MPs. At this rate, he entire parliament will one day be Muslim.” In the end he said: “As the first Muslim minister, “I trust that Insh’Allah, in thirty years or more, we will have a prime minister who shares my religion.”
Last of all, please allow me to object against the title of this colloquium. The slogan “Islam can damage your freedom” is not correct. It should be “Islam damages your freedom”. At the current rate it is only a matter of time before Europe becomes Eurabia. Whoever wants to put a hold on the Islamization of Europe must first and foremost turn off the immigration tap, and renounce multiculturalism as official state ideology. Multiculturalism obliges us to capitulate and to collaborate with radical Islam.
At all costs we prevent Muslims from forming a state in a state, where only their rules, values, and norms are respected and implemented. Only by showing backbone and character, by again daring to re-center our singularity and cultural identity — completely averse to any uniform multicultural thinking — by daring to defend the superiority of our civilization, will it be possible to avert the Islamization of Europe, and give Europe back to the Europeans.
“The Islamic expansion is a fact. It is controlled by the divine hand.”
I would rather say it is controlled by an infernal hand. Islam is evil absolute.
Why take the word of an infidel on the head scarf and veiling?
No less an authority than Al-Quaeda’s #2 man Ayman Al-Zawahiri declared that Muslimas’ drapes make them warriors in his mission of Islamic world domination:
“I congratulate every Muslimah observant of her Hijab and chastity in the face of the fierce Crusade against the Hijab, which exposes their immorality, decline and degeneration. And she should know that the Hijab, symbol of her modesty and purity, tears them apart inside, because it exposes the depravity of their civilization. And I remind her that by holding fast to her Hijab and Deen, she is a soldier in the battle of Islam against the Zionist Crusade and its helpers, the traitorous idol-kings.”
Get that everyone? Every hijab wearing Muslim is a soldier in the army of jihad.
He said it perfectly. Will any of this get covered in the mainstream news networks? No.
Walking the streets in protest does nowhere near as much as taking out the reasons. Be they political or physical, remove the problem.
I suspect there are a few syntax errors that may cloud the speaker’s very well-phrased meaning:
… with schools that are up to 90 to 95% Muslim, these neighborhoods are the best evidence of the rapidly-growing Islamic pillar in our country and in Europe. [emphasis added]
I believe that, instead of “pillar”, the term “column” as in “fifth column” would be more appropriate.
Who gives Islam a finger should note that he in time will lose his hand and eventually his arm. [emphasis added]
Again, instead of “gives”, the term “lends” is probably closer. Either that or it should read “Who gives Islam the finger …”, but that is most likely another matter entirely.
The veil, the headscarf, is not a religious but a political symbol. The veil, the headscarf, is the flag of a political ideology in which the individual religious experience is not central, but the realization of a theocratic society based on Sharia, Islamic law.
It is gratifying to finally see people clearly stating the ideological and political nature of Islam. Wherever there is no separation of church and state, there is no church.
A belief system cannot simultaneously be both church and state while retaining any spiritual legitimacy. Faith that is enforced by legal compulsion is not any sort of genuine faith but merely the imposition of an artificial framework upon one’s personal spirit. The theocratic aspirations of Islam fly directly in the face of individual liberty and freedom. This inherent violation of human rights automatically earns Islam its political assignation.
Most telling of all is how the removal of legal compulsions from Islam would effectively render it alien with respect to its present form. Ending capital punishment for apostasy or blasphemy, voiding the imperative of jihad and countless other directives of shari’a law would leave Islam toothless and its practice an entirely voluntary decision.
I can only wonder if there has been even one single nation or culture in all history that ever voluntarily adopted Islam as opposed to having it imposed by force via military might or majority Muslim vote.
The adoption of Islam typically represents such a huge backward step for any culture that it is difficult to imagine such a retrograde action happening of one’s own free will.
“Islamic expansion is a fact. It is controled by the divine hand”…
As Mark Twain said: “Faith is when you believe in something you know isn’t true”.
We’re dealing with madness here.