View Full Version : Gooooooooo leftie!
This is fun,
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21745_Dutch_Socialist_Leader-_Islamic_Terror_=_Resistance_Against_Nazis#comments
Here we have ubercommie Ma(o)rijnensen, more red then mars.
http://www.geenstijl.nl/mt/archieven/images/marijnm.jpg
Can you believe it? He actually compares dutch resistance hero's to boomski's, I am not sure if he calls terorists freedom fighters or freedom fighters terrorists.
“During World War II, Dutch people thwarted nazi Germany’s destruction machine by blowing up town halls, because this was where the Jews were registered. Things are not all that different in the Middle East. Islamic fundamentalism, including the terrorist wing, is a reaction to Israel’s occupation of Palestine, to America’s presence in the Middle East and to the West’s support of undemocratic regimes in the Middle East.”
:dizzy2:
Of course these comments aren't really apreciated. I agree with the commentor that said this: 'Socialists will get in bed with ANYONE if it will harm democracies'.
aye to that.
Banquo's Ghost
07-26-2006, 09:26
*sigh*
Whilst I don't know the record of this gentleman, I have a fair knowledge of yours, dear Fragony. :smile:
So I took the liberty of trying to find a source for his comments which wasn't a rabid right-wing site.
Thus, from the NIS News Service (http://www.nisnews.nl/public/220706_1.htm): (I have of course chosen snippets to suit my agenda, something I know only a liberal would do).
"Terrorism occurs in all times and places and its objective is usually to make things as unpleasant as possible for the occupier", he says in an interview for Penthouse magazine.
Not much that's controversial about that start, apart from choosing Penthouse magazine: :laugh4:
"During World War II, Dutch people thwarted nazi Germany's destruction machine by blowing up town halls, because this was where the Jews were registered. Things are not all that different in the Middle East. Islamic fundamentalism, including the terrorist wing, is a reaction to Israel's occupation of Palestine, to America's presence in the Middle East and to the West's support of undemocratic regimes in the Middle East."
In the context of his start, this is a widely accepted point of view illustrated by a reasonable, if emotive comparison. I imagine the German occupiers considered the Dutch and French Resistance as terrorists, thus illustrating that the word is way too broad to be useful except to demagogues.
If you don't agree that many of the contributory factors to Islamic terrorism can be found in the sources he described, where has it come from? Did they all wake up one day and think, yeah, time to blow myself up for no reason? Almost every serious thinker I know, right or left leaning would accept his points as causes. Not excuses mind you.
If Marijnissen had to choose he would rather see Iran build up a nuclear arsenal than US military intervention in that country. "If I had to make a choice between the two options then at this moment I would certainly say: do not attack, it is the most stupid choice possible". According to the SP leader, the Iran issue can be traced back to American hypocrisy. "Surely it is immoral to deny countries their right to nuclear energy when you own nuclear weapons yourself!?"
If he had to choose. US military intervention scares even the Bush administration. Iranian nuclear power may be inevitable without a land war that would make Iraq look like a Women's Institute picnic. Not a pleasant prospect either way.
No-one can doubt that his last sentence is correct, as the other thread on India shows - we have different rules for our friends than for our enemies. This is certainly hypocrisy and get's us into some intellectual difficulties, but it is also realpolitik and unavoidable. However, I can't see why it is communism to point out a simple hypocrisy.
The SP is doubtful whether Turkey should become an EU member. "Look at the human rights there, the position of the army, the Cyprus issue, the way they deal with the Kurds. I think membership may be considered in ten or fifteen years at the very earliest. And not until then will the matter be raised of how to tackle the migration issue. We see what is happening now with Poland. The Socialist Party is opposed to opening the borders, because the Dutch are being displaced by cheap Polish labourers on the job market."
Frankly, I would have thought that viewpoint was right up your street and that you would be offering to have his babies. As with the next quote:
SP is not taking a classically leftwing position on the issue of the integration of immigrants in the Netherlands. Marijnissen is in a positive mood. "Only a few things are necessary to live together with foreigners who wish to build up their future here. They need to learn Dutch, largely adjust to our culture and integrate. And if we put our efforts into mixed education and mixed housing, the rest should take care of itself".
The following seems to me to be a novel idea which bears examination. I see nothing at all communist about it, indeed it strikes me as being a very capitalist idea, like investing in a failing company to turn it round rather than spreading state subsidies around in an undisciplined manner.
As to development aid, Marijnissen has launched the idea to adopt one country and invest all money and energy into that one country. "Within the SP, the plan received a sceptical response. But I have sounded out some people in the development branch and they do not regard it as a strange plan at all. Suppose we took on Surinam, for example, for a period of ten years. People from Surinam would come here to study and would then return: we use our know-how to develop infrastructure there."
In short, from this article, the fellow seems rather rational, typically Dutch, willing to think beyond simple left/right demagoguery and a credit to your nation.
As to to the terrorism part, if we cannot try to understand why people take to such measures and merely condemn unthinkingly, we will never stop it.
In the context of his start, this is a widely accepted point of view illustrated by a reasonable, if emotive comparison. I imagine the German occupiers considered the Dutch and French Resistance as terrorists, thus illustrating that the word is way too broad to be useful except to demagogues.
Ya it is very reasonable to compare blowing up a postoffice to prevent jews from being exported to blowing up a bus full of children in the name of the allmighty, the nuance is all over the place.
If he had to choose.
He already did.
Don't even get me started on their program, it changes more then the weather.
I do have to comment on this,
SP is not taking a classically leftwing position on the issue of the integration of immigrants in the Netherlands. Marijnissen is in a positive mood. "Only a few things are necessary to live together with foreigners who wish to build up their future here. They need to learn Dutch, largely adjust to our culture and integrate. And if we put our efforts into mixed education and mixed housing, the rest should take care of itself".
The following seems to me to be a novel idea which bears examination. I see nothing at all communist about it, indeed it strikes me as being a very capitalist idea, like investing in a failing company to turn it round rather than spreading state subsidies around in an undisciplined manner.
So you truely think it is a good idea that the government decides where to live and what school to pick for your kids? I don't....
Banquo's Ghost
07-26-2006, 11:21
Ya it is very reasonable to compare blowing up a postoffice to prevent jews from being exported to blowing up a bus full of children in the name of the allmighty, the nuance is all over the place.
If you think the Resistance against the Germans never caught innocents in its attacks, you need to do some reading. However, I agree with you that the terrorist attacks by Islamic militants are unwarranted and evil in their choice of targets. Where we seem to differ is the intepretation of Mr Marijnissen's comments. I see him trying to explain why militants have turned to terror tactics using the example of an occupation more familiar to the Dutch, whereas you seem to think he is glorifying the evil that results from their choice.
Don't even get me started on their program, it changes more then the weather.
Well, I can't comment as I don't know the SP's program. I was addressing this particular article and how you presented it.
I do have to comment on this,
SP is not taking a classically leftwing position on the issue of the integration of immigrants in the Netherlands. Marijnissen is in a positive mood. "Only a few things are necessary to live together with foreigners who wish to build up their future here. They need to learn Dutch, largely adjust to our culture and integrate. And if we put our efforts into mixed education and mixed housing, the rest should take care of itself".
So you truely think it is a good idea that the government decides where to live and what school to pick for your kids? I don't....
I see nothing at all in what he said that indicates he was advocating the government making those choices for people. I see him arguing that immigrants should learn Dutch and integrate into Dutch cultural norms, and not hide away in ethnic ghettos. So if he's suggesting the government uses incentives and planning and education reforms to achieve immigrants integrating into Dutch society rather than being excluded, then yes, I agree. I wish some of our left-wing politicians would talk about proper integration with the country's culture rather than being politically correct and avoiding any discussion of ghettoisation and thus exclusion and disenfranchisement of immigrants.
Having said that, my comment:
Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost
The following seems to me to be a novel idea which bears examination. I see nothing at all communist about it, indeed it strikes me as being a very capitalist idea, like investing in a failing company to turn it round rather than spreading state subsidies around in an undisciplined manner.
was made in relation to the paragraph quoted below, to whit:
As to development aid, Marijnissen has launched the idea to adopt one country and invest all money and energy into that one country. "Within the SP, the plan received a sceptical response. But I have sounded out some people in the development branch and they do not regard it as a strange plan at all. Suppose we took on Surinam, for example, for a period of ten years. People from Surinam would come here to study and would then return: we use our know-how to develop infrastructure there."
which I found an interesting perspective.
I admit I changed the order of 'quote' 'comment', 'quote' 'comment', to 'comment' 'quote' which was wicked of me, but I did leave a clue with the words; 'The following....' now bolded above for clarity.
I know you and I will not agree on the issues at hand, which is fine, but I do think context is quite important, and I don't see why his views are particularly outrageous in the context of the article, as opposed to a selective quoting on that website designed to get the unthinking to froth at the mouth.
Duke John
07-26-2006, 11:45
He should have also compared it to droppings of the A-bombs on Japan, the greatests acts of causing terror to date. It's sad how people see civilian deaths of the enemy as collateral damage and civilian deaths on their own side as the only victims to mourn for. It seems that the lifes of civilians have values at the Stock-Exchange:
Lebanon civilians have dropped 16 points as result of rockets being fired this week by the Hezbollah. It is expected that they will continue to drop as long as the Hezbollah keep attacking. Israelian civilians on the other hand continue to rise as the Western world keeps supporting Israel.
:shame:
If you think the Resistance against the Germans never caught innocents in its attacks, you need to do some reading. However, I agree with you that the terrorist attacks by Islamic militants are unwarranted and evil in their choice of targets. Where we seem to differ is the intepretation of Mr Marijnissen's comments. I see him trying to explain why militants have turned to terror tactics using the example of an occupation more familiar to the Dutch, whereas you seem to think he is glorifying the evil that results from their choice.
Not only is he glorifying evil, he is also calling our hero's the same trash as exploding radical beardnecks. That the validity of such a comparison has to be discussed means that Maorijnensen isn't the only one without any historical consience whatsoever. No real communist or socialist can have historical consience really, it's just impossible. He actually did apoligise for his comments, something like 'I am sorry you guys can't read'. What I just got.
I see nothing at all in what he said that indicates he was advocating the government making those choices for people.
Well, that it is. He isn't the first leftist party to come with that one, he actually wants to limit the people's freedom of chosing where to live, and where to put their children for their education. We shouldn't be so 'afraid of the unknown' (how odd, the unknown, people usually prefer the schools to be close to their homes, so I doubt the unknown has anything to do with it, rather the opposite, disgust of the familiar)
which I found an interesting perspective.
Very interesting indeed, especially this, 'People from Suriname would come here to study and would then return'. I am sure they would be thrilled to go back to the heart of darkness after a life of luxory in lalaland, especially interesting because Maorijnensen usually goes berserk when the word 'returning' is mentioned, and is never too busy to walk in a pro-immigration demonstration or twohundredandtwo.
I admit I changed the order of 'quote' 'comment', 'quote' 'comment', to 'comment' 'quote' which was wicked of me, but I did leave a clue with the words; 'The following....' now bolded above for clarity.
That's not wicked, but this is :laugh4:
as opposed to a selective quoting on that website designed to get the unthinking to froth at the mouth.
Vladimir
07-26-2006, 17:06
He should have also compared it to droppings of the A-bombs on Japan, the greatests acts of causing terror to date. It's sad how people see civilian deaths of the enemy as collateral damage and civilian deaths on their own side as the only victims to mourn for. It seems that the lifes of civilians have values at the Stock-Exchange:
Brush up on your history. The fire bombing of Tokyo killed 100,000 people in one day, more than died in either of the two cities nuked. Do you know why we did this? It's because of how the Japanese placed their factories. They didn't have anything similar to modern zoning laws but instead had them dispersed through out the entire city making targeted bombings impossible.
Terror you say? Aye. The A-bombs successfully frightened the Japanese into surrendering and avoided at least a million casualties. Compare that to the "Death to [country x]" crowd you're feeling sorry for.
LeftEyeNine
07-26-2006, 21:39
Islamic fundamentalism, including the terrorist wing, is a reaction to Israel’s occupation of Palestine, to America’s presence in the Middle East and to the West’s support of undemocratic regimes in the Middle East.
Good morning, Tinky Winky.
No terrorism is justifiable but one should admit the factors told here are somehow contributors to the growth of this root.
One Afghan friend had said: "Well they fed those mullahs, Taliban, against USSR. And now they call them terrorists and fight against their very own monsters."
And now Mrs. Rice says it's time for a new Middle East. What's new aside from that now you are doing what you want openly ?
One that favors Israel's invasion supported by Big Bros will fail to see peace.
Crazed Rabbit
07-27-2006, 00:22
According to the SP leader, the Iran issue can be traced back to American hypocrisy. "Surely it is immoral to deny countries their right to nuclear energy when you own nuclear weapons yourself!?"
Ah, good ole moral relativity. What crock.
Crazed Rabbit
Vladimir
07-27-2006, 13:43
Ah, good ole moral relativity. What crock.
Crazed Rabbit
Agreed. When the US government starts sponsoring "Death to (country X)" rallies then I'll advocate against us having nukes. Iran's track record is quite different.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.