Heidegger

—– Original Message —–
From: “Tudor Georgescu”

> Mrs. Ali lied about her country of origin, lied about her reasons to
> request
> asylum in the Netherlands, lied about having a tyrannical husband (he
> actually paid her the money needed for her travel to the Netherlands), she
> followed an Islamic school, but only because that was the school for elite
> children in her residing town, and her family was far from being fanatical
> about their faith, and I’m inclined to think that her story about being
> genitally mutilated is an urban legend, because I would more probably
> believe as a fact something told by baron Munchausen, rather than by her.
> At least Munchausen did not have a political agenda.

as very clearly do you. your believability, then?

> In her short political career in the Netherlands (she made up to the
> status
> of “elected by the people”, i.e. in the second chamber of the Parliament),
> she succeeded to polarize the discussion in terms of
> enlightened-progressive
> Westerners vs. awkward-retrograde Muslims (thinking in dualist “either
> black or white” categories, which says something about her intellect),

sorta like, democracy = farcical rule by low IQ imbeciles? your intellect,
then?

> and she
> totally ignored the unwritten but very demanding Dutch political customs,
> which require from the politician to show always respect for opponents,
> and keep the discussion as dispassionate and objective as possible.

as do you?

> She did a terrible disservice to her party, VVD (right centre
> libertarians),
> party which she joined after years of working for a leftist party (PvdA),
> she joined it after being offered an easy Parliament seat. She provoked a
> political crisis in the Netherlands, having as consequence the demission
> of the second Balkenende cabinet.
>
> To draw the balance, if she did any service to the Netherlands, it was
> because she could not do harm only (it would have been far too suspect) in
> her career as political agitator. All she could think of was bashing the
> Dutch Muslim men for real or alleged mishandling of women, and insulting
> their religious sensibilities in every possible way (which is a criminal
> offence in the Netherlands, according to the Dutch Book of Criminal Law,
> art. 147 and 147a).

“insulting religious sensibilities” = against the law … exactly George
Will’s point:

“Holland evidently tolerates everything except skepticism about the
sacramental nature of multiculturalism. One million of the country’s 16
million residents are Muslims, and the political left has appropriated the
European right’s traditional celebration of identity grounded in racial and
ethnic traditions and culture. But the recoil of many Dutch people from
Hirsi Ali suggests that the tolerance about which Holland preens is a
compound of intellectual sloth and moral timidity. She was more trouble than
the Dutch evidently think free speech is worth.”

> She got offered a position in an extreme-right (for European
> sensibilities)
> neo-conservative institute, the American Enterprise Institute for Public
> Policy Research. As the rumor goes, if that is true, she was later turned
> down by that institution.
>
> She was not only a troublemaker, but she showed in general little respect
> for the requirements of having a civilized debate. I think she was unable
> to
> comprehend the idea that people could disagree with her without having to
> be in bad faith in order to maintain such stances.

sorta like, democracy = farcical rule by low IQ imbeciles? your level of
comprehension, then?

Posted on Thursday, September 21st, 2006 at 1:00 pm
comment | rss 2.0 | trackback