I'm probably the only person who's thinking about Pim Fortuyn today, but something in
got me thinking. In 2002 my Swedish teacher was from the Netherlands, so when Fortuyn was killed it actually registered with me. I didn't follow it closely (this was back when I was fingers-in-ears), but I at least knew the basics of Fortuyn's controversial politics. Today I started trying to find out more about him and what happened. I read lots of stuff on this
"for the sake of The Netherlands' Muslim population". It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's conflict, Muslims are somehow involved.
I'd take this a step further: "wherever in the world that there's conflict (sic)," racists are involved.
Posted by: Alex at June 13, 2004 12:18 PM (SvvYR)
Yesterday at the movie theater a young muslim women wearing on of her stupid shawls cut in front me in line. I kicked her in the back and beat her until she bled.
Then when her husband tried to help her I pulled out my knife and I stabbed him. I didn't get to see the movie as I had to run away but at least I can assert that you are correct that "everywhere" in the world there is conflict it involves muslims.
(jesus Christ you are stupid.)
Posted by: filchyboy at June 13, 2004 12:41 PM (3soAl)
Gee, thank you so much for explaining things so clearly. Until now I couldn't figure out the cause of the troubles between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, but after reading your insight I realize that it is all the fault of Muslims.
"It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's conflict, Muslims are somehow involved."
Such a generalized statement is remarkably similar to what Hitler would say:
"It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's problems, Jews are somehow involved."
Posted by: Kevin at June 13, 2004 01:05 PM (AaBEz)
Wow, such an amazing insight!
So the conflict in Northern Ireland--that was caused by Muslims trying to impose shariah in Belfast!
The ETA in Spain are angry because the government won't let their women wear hijab!
The FARC in Colombia are fighting to establish a fundamentalist state!
The Bosnian Muslims were the aggressors against poor, defenseless Slobodan Milosevic!
If you are, in fact, a teacher, and you are spreading such propagandist lies to your students, you are no worse than one of my junior high-school English teachers, who stated in class that "all Moslems are gun-toting terrorists who worship Aaala."
Throwing around generalities which have no real basis in fact to impressionable minds is one of the reasons why there is so much conflict and violence in the world today. As a teacher, I would have thought that you would be among the first to realize this--not be someone responsible for the dissemination of such vitriol.
The key to peace is understanding one another's differences, accepting them, and learning to live with them.
I hope that you represent an outlier in the ranks of American educators today. I fear for the future of America's youth if you are not.
Posted by: Won't suffer fools at June 13, 2004 01:52 PM (gUA7O)
"It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's conflict, Muslims are somehow involved."?????? What the??? What's that supposed to mean? What about....oh forget it, if I have to give you counterexamples, it's a waste of time. I thought some of the earlier posters were a little harsh condemning you, but this statement just sends me. And you teach? With this level of knowledge, you teach?
It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's ignorance, ignorant teachers are somehow involved.
Posted by: Coriolanus at June 13, 2004 03:43 PM (KZeI/)
"Sarah" (ho ho ho), under that curly wig you're really a fat smartarse dude jerking our chains by doing an Onionesque parody, right? I could almost believe an ignorant yet opinionated fool could write this post, but put that together your hilarious one about stats, and your mention of your "students" and it's clear to me this is a Jean Teasdale kind of joke.
Posted by: MrMOB at June 13, 2004 03:58 PM (+EUV1)
Thank you, Sarah, for being a walking, breathing stereotype. I always love when all my worst assumptions of the moral corruption of conservatives is validated.
My god, you are heinous.
Posted by: Patriot at June 13, 2004 04:44 PM (3oc7t)
For the US counterpart to Pim Fortuyn see the Aryan Nation or your local skin head group. I'm sure you'd be welcomed with open arms. Seeing, that you are very ignorant and unable to deal with simple math.
Posted by: andrew r at June 13, 2004 05:45 PM (3E2MO)
Northern Ireland: All the Muslim's fault.
(Dammit, if only Thatcher knew!)
Posted by: Bill O'Really at June 13, 2004 06:46 PM (tXhUe)
It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's conflict, Muslims are somehow involved.
I'd call you a moron but that would be an understatement. I'm sure Fat Andy is proud of you, since you list his blog as an inspiration.
And your comments on polling were hysterical, really.
Posted by: Clif at June 13, 2004 07:58 PM (PwiTq)
Sarah, you are one scary person. Unfortunately, your style of thinking (ie. racist), permeates the Right.
The greatest tragedies of the 20th century were perpetuated by non-Muslims. While few cultures or religions can claim to be free of violent dogmatic aspects, Christianity has certainly had the fire power to do the most damage.
Posted by: Gpilot at June 14, 2004 11:17 AM (lKUxU)
Ok, as a Dutch person living in the UK I feel I have to comment. First of all the guy who killed Pim Fortuyn was an econut, so if you want to blame a group for it (not that I think you should) you are better of blaming Greenpeace or someting
Secondly, Pim Fortuyn was actually a very interesting figure. As you may or may not know, he was gay, and the Netherlands are far, far more tolerant of homosexuals than the US (or the UK for that matter). The problem he had with Muslims was with their intolerant outlook. He believed that in accomodating their religion into Dutch culture, homosexuals would lose their rights. Now, I do not agree with him, but I do think he had a valid point: how to maintain a tolerant society when a segment of society is not tolerant? And quite apropos the current situation in the US as well
I do think it is quite funny that you seem to admire him, because I think you would have found his 'lifestyle' abhorrent.
Posted by: Frank at June 14, 2004 01:15 PM (7YyB7)
I've been reading an amazing book written a few years ago about our troublesome friends from the middle east. Here's a short passage. It's worth reading, I think you'll find it quite educational:
"...if the Arabic people's instinct of self-preservation is not smaller but larger than that of other peoples, if his intellectual faculties can easily arouse the impression that they are equal to the intellectual gifts of other races, he lacks completely the most essential requirement for a cultured people, the idealistic attitude.
In the Arabic people the will to self-sacrifice does not go beyond the individual's naked instinct of self-preservation. Their apparently great sense of solidarity is based on the very primitive herd instinct that is seen in many other living creatures in this world. It is a noteworthy fact that the herd instinct leads to mutual support only as long as a common danger makes this seem useful or inevitable. The same pack of wolves which has just fallen on its prey together disintegrates when hunger abates into its individual beasts. The same is true of horses which try to defend themselves against an assailant in a body, but scatter again as soon as the danger is past.
It is similar with the Arab. His sense of sacrifice is only apparent. It exists only as long as the existence of the individual makes it absolutely necessary. However, as soon as the common enemy is conquered, the danger threatening all averted and the booty hidden, the apparent harmony of the Arabs among themselves ceases, again making way for their old causal tendencies. The Arab is only united when a common danger forces him to be or a common booty entices him; if these two grounds are lacking, the qualities of the crassest egoism come into their own, and in the twinkling of an eye the united people turns into a horde of rats, fighting bloodily among themselves.
If the Arabs were alone in this world, they would stifle in filth and offal; they would try to get ahead of one another in hate-filled struggle and exterminate one another, in so far as the absolute absence of all sense of self-sacrifice, expressing itself in their cowardice, did not turn battle into comedy here too."
Of course, I should mention that the above passage is from Mein Kampff, written by a German scholar by the name of A. Hitler. All I had to do was swap "Jew" for "Arab".
Pretty cool, huh?
Fuckin' Ragheads. Let's just gas 'em all, eh Fraulein?
Posted by: a conservative student of history at June 15, 2004 04:58 PM (sj6jn)
To set the record straight: Van der Graaf did not kill "for the sake of The Netherlands' Muslim population." His motif was, according to the court, that he viewed Fortuyn "as a growing menace for the vulnerable groups in society". Vulnerable groups being a Dutch eufemism for the poor, they not only consist of the recent Muslim immigrants, but also of other groups like the pensioners, the long-term ill and the handicapped.
Posted by: Balko at June 16, 2004 09:02 PM (C0qxt)
Sarah, I discovered your blog only a few days ago, and have been enjoying it. I was a bit surprised by how much I agreed with you, and where I disagree I am usually still glad for the opinion. But, damn it, to say that "It's no lie that everywhere in the world that there's conflict, Muslims are somehow involved" is so beneath your intellect. I'm undyingly proud to be an American, but I don't wonder that people burn our flag if that is the kind of sentiment they see as representative of our nation. As an American abroad, and an Army wife no less, you should act as a representative of what is best and most admirable about our country, it's history and ideals. I'm really disappointed.
Posted by: Disappointed admirer at February 07, 2005 11:17 AM (z1qWa)
| Add Comment