Well...

I've received quite a few reactions to my 'quitting' this blog. I must say, it's nice to hear people tell me they appreciate my rants, asking me not to quit, telling me they find something worthwhile in my posts.

So I've reconsidered. I also said I might still rant once in a while. The way I look at it now, I might rant a bit more often than I had planned. I may go back to posting the way I did. I'm not sure yet. I guess a part of me needs this form of 'release', as there are no Muslim extremists for me to shoot in the head (which I would pay money for to be able to do, and I'm not kidding).

I really wish I was 20 years younger and still in the Marines. I would be in Afghanistan now, hunting Taliban and Al-Qaeda. It would not solve or even change a thing, I'm not that deluded, but I'd feel good about it.

Now it seems I'm limited to trying to 'educate' people. My preferred method for that is using a verbal sledgehammer and beating people into submission with facts, arguments and the relentlessness that is one of my trademarks.

I am actually losing friends over this. I cannot let it go. I will not start conversations over Muslim immigration, integration, terrorism, the Arab-Israeli conflict and its causes, anti-Semitism, and the many other topics I cover on this blog. I refrain, because I get too intense, always, even when I just get very sarcastic. But when others start, or God forbid, ask me what I think on the subject... I just get too intense. People don't wanna hear it, and that just pisses me off even more. It convinces me that my view of the basic problem in Europe is the correct one, namely that people are in trouble exactly because of their indifference, their lack of commitment, their disbelief of the building crashing down around them, the enemy at the gates. I'm pretty sure I now know what most Romans acted like while their empire was crashing down around them: They were busy betting on who'd win tomorrow's fight at the Colosseum, or gossiping about the neighbours' new chariot. In other words, even when they knew that all the lands they used to once rule were now amassing at the borders, they could not be bothered. There simply was no collective sense of self-preservation.

The Romans had a few good excuses for the implict consent to their own demise. They had been the Earth's ruling people for a milennium. It may have been just their time. I guess a certain dynamic is necessary for maintaining a world empire, and it doesn't seem possible to remain dynamic after ten centuries.
Also, the Romans didn't have Internet, satellite TV or any other form of instant communication. There was no way to confer on the average citizen what was actually happening to their empire. They could legitimately claim ignorance as an excuse for inaction, indifference, resignation.

We don't have those excuses. The West has been an 'empire' for perhaps two hundred years. Have we lost all dynamism already?
As for the second excuse, WE know EXACTLY what is going on anywhere in the world, at any time. Or to be more precise, we CAN know, if we choose. The Mainstream media are biased as hell, but even they can't hide the ugly truth, and when it gets too bad, even they start using words like 'terrorist'. And quite apart from the MSM, the Internet affords everyone WHO CHOOSES IT the access to news and information from sources from every color of the political spectrum. No one has the excuse anymore that they didn't know. Sticking your head in the sand never took more effort for a human being than it does now, at the start of the 21st century. And yet, more and more people seem to have little else to do.

My in-laws are a case in point. Upper middle class, semi-retired. They live in a rich suburb of Amsterdam, where very few 'allochtonen' (non-native Dutch) live. They only go to parts of Amsterdam where 'autochtonen' (native Dutch) make up the majority (which are few in Amsterdam, and in fact, they rarely go to Amsterdam at all). They only go out to places where their friends go out, or to family. They read the tabloids, which report only on celebrities. They do not watch the news, or current affairs.

They don't wanna know, and unlike the Romans, THEY have to make a conscious effort to look the other way.

And even then they can't escape. When Theo van Gogh was shot, stabbed and nearly decapitated, they were of course fittingly shocked. They are aware that I am interested in such affairs, and asked me why Mohammed Bouyeri murdered van Gogh, and in such a bestial manner.
But I saw their eyes glaze over when I told them why. Not because I'm a sleep-inducing orator, but because they don't wanna know about such large numbers of radical Muslims in their midst. They don't wanna hear that in the Netherlands, as in France, every third new born baby is a Muslim. They don't wanna be confronted with the fact that a third of all the people in Holland's four major cities is Muslim, and more than half of all the people under eightteen.
They don't wanna know that of all the names for newborn baby boys, "Mohammed" is the most popular and registered.

And when they weakly counter my 'panic mongering' by asking what harm the average Muslim really does, I tell them that already they decide for us what art we can display in our streets. If it offends them, it doesn't get placed, or placed somewhere uninhabited by Muslims (but these locations are becoming increasingly rare).
I tell them that the very threat of Muslim violence effectively causes politicians, commentators and journalists to censor themselves, when they would otherwise speak out against wrongs in the Muslim community.
I tell them that schools feel forced to adjust their curriculum, skipping lessons about the Holocaust and anything else that offends the increasing number of Muslims kids (in the major cities a majority in most schools). Teachers are intimidated and threatened when discussing subjects that Muslims studens feel they somehow have a stake in.
I tell them that shops in predominantly Mulsim neighbourhoods start catering to Muslims, and stop offering wares that offend Muslims. Butchers, in order to compete with Muslim butchers, stop selling pork. Market economy at work? Not when there is still a demand for pork, but merchants no longer feel comfortable offering it to the natives.
I tell them about the numerous areas in Amsterdam where intimidation by Moroccan gangs is so ingrained that people don't even complain to the police about it anymore. There's no use, and only repercussions to look forward to. Better to move somewhere where this cancer has not yet spread.

And so I see their eyes glaze over. They know that what I'm saying is true. They feel powerless to stop it, they don't wanna know, and anyway, it'll last their time. "Apres nous le deluge". And I get angry (although I hide it from them), as far as I'm concerned they are a prime example of good stock Dutch sheep to me. Ready to be slaughtered with nothing more than some bleating when the time comes.

As an individual, you have to be careful about what you do. It wouldn't be that hard to kill a few Muslim extremists. It would be a good thing to force the issue. Muslims all over Holland would explode in rage if a few of them were murdered, and it might even cause a small form of civil war. Polarization is what is needed here, and at present, the natives will still win a confrontation like that. A confrontation that is sure to come, but it must come while we have both the law and the majority still on our side. In a law-abiding nation like the Netherlands, we need the Muslims to be the offenders. Not a difficult proposition, but it will take a catalyst to make it so.

And there's the problem: Like many, I have too much to lose. I too am too 'bourgeois' to start this 'revolution'. I would not mind going to jail for killing the next Mohammed Atta-wannabe if that would provoke Muslims into such misbehaviour that the Dutch (and the Europeans in general) finally feel justified in kicking them out. But I have a wife and two kids to take care of too, and lucky for them, I feel the greater responsibility lies with them.

I regard Islam as a hostile entity, its followers as people who ALL, to varying degrees, are out to destroy Western society.
So Islam needs to be fought. We can still do so by civilized, democratic means. We can democratically decide for example, to deport Muslims to their countries of origin. We can democratically decide to create criteria for citizenship that Muslims cannot meet. Democracy is being used against us, but we CAN use it in our favour. It takes political will, nothing more. And it will force Muslims to show their real face. They will not go quietly, but it's a fight they can't (yet) win.

It is what needs to be done. In thirty years from now, THEY will use democracy to disband the constitutional monarchy of the Netherlands. It will be completely legal. And anyone resisting THEN will be outlawed, and subject to the rules that currently still work against the terrorists. Penalties will be Islamic, and therefore draconic. And the rest of us will be second-class citizens in our own country.