*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: (I have of course chosen snippets to suit my agenda, something I know only a liberal would do).
Quote:
"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:
Quote:
"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.
Quote:
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.
Quote:
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:
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.
Quote:
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.
