Jordan Is Palestine — No, Really

Geert Wilders, for anyone who does not know the name, is the head of an extremely right-wing political party in The Netherlands, called — in the standard format of the name describing the opposite of what it actually is — the Party for Freedom (which, according to Wikipedia, is the third largest political party in that country). Wilders is also a member of The Netherlands’ House of Representatives.

Wilders is virulently anti-Muslim. He denies that Islam is a religion. He makes an absurd distinction between Muslims and Islam (there are moderate Muslims but there is no moderate Islam) in an obvious attempt to rebut charges of racism — but this is no more rational or legitimate an idea than saying there are moderate Jews but no moderate Judaism.  He sees cultural and religious diversity as one of the most dangerous evils of our time. And despite the references to anti-semitism and the Holocaust sprinkled generously throughout his public speeches — like the one I am about to quote from —  if you replaced “Muslim” or “Islam” with “Jewish” or “Judaism,” and substituted “international bankers” for “jihad,” you would have yourself a fine Nazi speech. There is no doubt in my mind that if this man had been around in the 1930s, he would have been supporting the Nuremberg laws and the rest of Hitler’s program.

Here is some of what Wilders said in a September, 2008, speech he gave at The Four Seasons in New York City:

The Europe you know is changing. You have probably seen the landmarks. The Eiffel Tower and Trafalgar Square and Rome’s ancient buildings and maybe the canals of Amsterdam. They are still there. And they still look very much the same as they did a hundred years ago.

But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world, a world very few visitors see – and one that does not appear in your tourist guidebook. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration. All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It’s the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corner. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe. These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe, street by street, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe. With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.
[…]
A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France. One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. A Dutch study reported that half of Dutch Muslims admit they “understand” the 9/11 attacks.
Muslims demand what they call ‘respect’. And this is how we give them respect. Our elites are willing to give in. To give up. In my own country we have gone from calls by one cabinet member to turn Muslim holidays into official state holidays, to statements by another cabinet member, that Islam is part of Dutch culture, to an affirmation by the Christian-Democratic attorney general that he is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey.

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. Some prefer to see these as isolated incidents, but I call it a Muslim intifada. I call the perpetrators “settlers”. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies, they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.
[…]
Politicians shy away from taking a stand against this creeping sharia. They believe in the equality of all cultures. Moreover, on a mundane level, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

Our many problems with Islam cannot be explained by poverty, repression or the European colonial past, as the Left claims. Nor does it have anything to do with Palestinians or American troops in Iraq. The problem is Islam itself.

Allow me to give you a brief Islam 101. The first thing you need to know about Islam is the importance of the book of the Quran. The Quran is Allah’s personal word, revealed by an angel to Mohammed, the prophet. This is where the trouble starts. Every word in the Quran is Allah’s word and therefore not open to discussion or interpretation. It is valid for every Muslim and for all times. Therefore, there is no such a thing as moderate Islam. Sure, there are a lot of moderate Muslims. But a moderate Islam is non-existent.

The Quran calls for hatred, violence, submission, murder, and terrorism. The Quran calls for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, to terrorize non-Muslims and to fulfil their duty to wage war: violent jihad. Jihad is a duty for every Muslim, Islam is to rule the world – by the sword. The Quran is clearly anti-Semitic, describing Jews as monkeys and pigs.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages – at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. He advised on matters of slavery, but never advised to liberate slaves. Islam has no other morality than the advancement of Islam. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad. There is no gray area or other side.

Quran as Allah’s own word and Mohammed as the perfect man are the two most important facets of Islam. Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means ‘submission’. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

Now, Geert Wilders is saying that Jordan should rename itself Palestine:

“Jordan is Palestine,” said Wilders, who heads the third-largest party in Holland. “Changing its name to Palestine will end the conflict in the Middle East and provide the Palestinians with an alternate homeland.”

Wilders added that Israel deserved a special status in the Dutch government because it was fighting for Jerusalem in its name.

“If Jerusalem falls into the hands of the Muslims, Athens and Rome will be next. Thus, Jerusalem is the main front protecting the West. It is not a conflict over territory but rather an ideological battle, between the mentality of the liberated West and the ideology of Islamic barbarism,” he said.

“There has been an independent Palestinian state since 1946, and it is the kingdom of Jordan.” Wilders also called on the Dutch government to refer to Jordan as Palestine and move its embassy to Jerusalem.

It’s fascinating to watch the same far right bloggers who shriek about Hamas wanting to push all the Jews out of Israel, or who insist that peace is impossible because Palestinians will never accept any deal that does not include the Right of Return, fiercely endorse a proposition that, aside from its inhumanity, relies on an idiotic reading of history and as a matter of practical contemporary political reality, is completely unworkable.

First, Robert Spencer at the odiously named “Jihad Watch”:

Wilders is right. There is no ethnic difference between Jordanians and Palestinians. In fact, there was no Palestinian nationality before the 1960s, when it was invented in order to reposition what was then universally known as the Arab/Israeli conflict. Up to the invention of “Palestinians,” the Israelis were the tiny, besieged people amidst a huge number of hostile Arabs; after that invention, the “Palestinians” themselves became the tiny, besieged people against the big, bad Israelis.

Don’t believe me? Fine. Maybe you’ll believe PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein, who said this in 1977:

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct “Palestinian people” to oppose Zionism.

Something this stupid does not deserve much of a response, but let me just say this: If you have to rely on something said (maybe) by one individual over 30 years ago and quoted in a publication that is to journalism as Orly Taitz is to law, then you really don’t have much of a case.

Then there is Pamela Geller, who thinks that Palestine belonged to the Jewish people before 1948 because a Jewish American journalist named Gershon Agron started a newspaper in 1932, in what was then the British Mandate of Palestine, which he called The Palestine Post. The Palestine Post is still published today; it’s called the Jerusalem Post:

Palestine was always Jewish. The Muslims have no claim to Israel. Just deception and lies to steal what is rightfully the Jewish people’s.

This is the newspaper of “Palestine” before 1948 — it’s Jewish. The Jews were fighting for their land long before the UN or Balfour. Rewriting history doesn’t change the reality.

I don’t know, this one really has me stumped. What do you say to someone whose “proof” that the Jewish people have sole ownership rights to Palestine is that a Jewish guy from America started a newspaper there?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect with Facebook