1) Charles Johnson emails: “Netherlands ‘Looking Into’ Hirsi Ali’s Past”:
Netherlands Integration Minister Rita Verdonk is “looking into†the citizenship status of Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
As Bruce Bawer wrote in an email, first they drove her out of her house, now they’re trying to drive her out of the country.
On Friday Verdonk said Hirsi Ali had nothing to worry about: Liberals don’t care Hirsi Ali lied to get asylum in 1992.
But today Verdonk’s spokesperson would no longer say that. They’re apparently planning to hold her to a standard that very few African immigrants to the Netherlands would meet, in spite of her accomplishments and courage.
Charles provides a link to Verdonk’s web page, which contains contact info.
Such is the nature of today’s Western European politics, I suppose, that when an easy way out presents itself, most politicians will rush to take it—using any manner of flimsy justification to do so. Courage and integrity have been replaced by expediency and defensiveness; and passing the buck has become all too routine.
And in such an atmosphere of frightened opportunism, sadly, vaunted European “tolerance” has tended to extend most to those whose intolerance is the only real tangible threat to European culture.
2) Active duty Air Force blogger Craig Sanders of the Sandbox has started a Saturday series, “Why I Fight,” which will feature thoughts and stories from current duty military on or about their service. Part I is here; part II, here.
****
update: “Netherlands Elites Calling for Hirsi Ali to Be Deported”:
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born Dutch legislator who has championed the rights of Muslim women, is returning from a book tour to a firestorm for lying on her asylum application when she fled to the Netherlands in 1992 to escape an arranged marriage.
Hirsi Ali, 36, said Saturday she was puzzled by the uproar since she publicly acknowledged the false refugee application when she stood for parliament in 2002.
“Have they all gone mad?†she said, accusing her rivals of a political vendetta.
“Yes, I did lie to get asylum in Holland. This is public knowledge since at least September 2002,†she said in a telephone call from Hamburg, Germany.
Political opponents want her stripped of her Dutch citizenship and deported. Others say she should be expelled from parliament.
Uh, deported where, exactly? Somalia? Why not just behead her themselves and been done with it?
U.S. lawmakers should immediately, and in a bi-partisan manner, offer Ali asylum and citizenship. Such a move would let the world know, yet again, who stands for universal individual rights, and who is willing to shoulder the risks associated with guarding those rights.
****
update: Allah gives his take. See also, Dutch blogger Michael van der Galien and All Things Beautiful.
This should shock no one. Holland has been looking for a way to capitulate since Pim Fortuyn was murdered, and now it seems they’ve found an “out” that will appease the Islamists. It’s the church scene from “High Noon” all over again – accommodating evil instead of confronting it.
So… how many of you still listen to the Rush Limbaugh Show regularly?
She’s in real trouble. They’ve asked Fitzpatrick to investigate her case.
The world has become a humorless, demented Monty Python sketch. Anyway, I agree that such a gesture would reaffirm our values, Jeff, but it would also bolster our resume as target du jour for islamists…and those who enable them. Bring her on over, I say.
This is the first time that I have been ashamed of my Dutch ancestry.
On the other hand, my great-grandfather had the good sense to bring his family to America in 1906. A visionary, he must have been, to get out so long before the country turned into a craphole.
Hmmm.
1. I haven’t listen to Rush Limbaugh, for more than 5 minutes, in years now. For one thing I get more information and in greater detail from blogs than I ever got from his show.
And I frankly don’t have time to waste listening to 5 minutes of Rush and 25 minutes of commercials out of every half-hour. In that same time I could read a dozen or more blogs and catch up on largely everything of note.
2. *shrug* does this really surprise anyone? Nobody should be surprised by anything Europeans do, on any subject. My decidedly low opinion of Europeans was formed when they protested the deployment of the Pershing missile. Their objection was that they didn’t want to be involved in a potential nuclear exchange. Which was rather offensive since the only possible reason for such an exchange would be a nuclear war instigated over Europe.
So on the one hand America offer her cities and citizens as a guarantee of Europeans safety. On the other hand Europeans were busy screaming “not us, them!” to the Soviets.
…
FUCK THEM. Give Ayaan Hirsi Ali an offer of asylum and citizenship. Tell the Europeans to go fuck themselves. Frankly I’m sick to death of them and their bitchy causes and anti-Americanism.
And if they complain, so fucking what? What are they going to do? Send the fucking Charles DeGaulle out to sea?
I have to say, Ed makes some compelling arguments. Besides,it would be the right thing to do. However, as regards bi-partisan, don’t hold your breath. I suspect many on the left (read democrat) sympathize with her persecutors.
Afterall, why fight evil when it’s so much easier to accomodate it.
Wavering allies are assured, not appeased.
When, eh?
Well, they haven’t beheaded dissidents in Western Europe for, hell, ‘bout thirty years. Gotta take a few on-deck swings to get that stroke back.
Patience.
If the Dutch throw her out, she can stay with me.
Go Dutch!
I’m personally looking forward to the arguments from Dr. Vic, the retarded telephone pole, etc., as to how she brought this on herself and why we’re “bedwetters” for caring about it.
Amen. I’d be damn proud to have her here.
Bolster our status as a target? What are they gonna do? Threaten to behead each of us twice?
I truly do not care whether our actions tick them off and turn them into koran-spouting scimitar-swinging whack-mobiles since it seems anything from saying “good-morning” on up does that. We do what we have to do, for our reasons not theirs, and to heck with ‘em. Offering her asylum would be the right thing to do, just like the tablet on the base of that statue in New York harbor says.
Obviously more than read your blog.
But isn’t it even slightly embarassing to shill your blog in the comments section on another blog, especially when your comments have nothing to do with the issue?
Oh and Chris, the plural of anecdote is not data.
So, are they gonna start holding every person claiming refugee status to the same standard? Or is just for people who upset the jihadis?
Look at it this way Robert, they’ll only deport the ones whose departure won’t cause rioting.
I, too, felt that her neighbors who wanted to get her kicked out of her home where total cowards. I was even motivated enough to pick up her book. But honestly, if she did lie about all the things in the expatica article I’d be pretty pissed.
Obviously it would be idiotic to deport her though.
Relax, semm11.
The data Ms. Hirsan Ali provided on her application for refugee status was false, but accurate. That’s the standard, isn’t it?
Regards,
Ric
Bonehead! Get your dick out of your ear!
No, and I doubt Jeff cares much either, I guess he can let us all know if he does. This looked a lot like an open forum given the format (a bunch of random stuff) and the question honestly interests me.
But thanks for the response
So… how many of you still read to Christopher Taylor’s blog regularly?
still???
I tried a trackback for my post but it said ‘Trackback unable to be accepted’
I like this ladies cause, but she is an illegal alien. Peace
Was that ”Dumb & Dumber” or “The Two Stupids”?
or, three or four. Take your pick.
Anyone?
Can I say “blindingly stupid” again? I know it’s been done before.
I wonder how long it takes imahophead to type out a comment.
I will motion to file that up for the record as Imhotep as being against illegal aliens and FOR deportation of illegal aliens.
Nothing further, your honors.
No, she’s a Dutch citizen. But what is it you think should happen to illegal aliens?
Remind me again why we give a rat’s ass what Europe does anymore… or what happens to it?
I like her because she’s an illegal.
And both actus and Imhotep post to be merely contrarian. Since there isn’t any actual thought involved in their doing so, I can with clear conscience advocate that both be ignored/banned.
There truly is nothing to see there, folks; move along.
word:miss “Won’t miss them because this site will pick up other kneejerk contrarian twits.”
Well, Jeff links to Dutch law student Michael Galien. I’ve had several pleasant exchanges with Michael, who semi-regularly comments at Greenwald’s blog. Indeed, he is a Greenwald fan:
http://freeandjustice.blogspot.com/2006/04/best-selling-greenwald_29.html
Galien is as correct about Ayaan Hirsi Ali, as he is about what is wrong with Bush’s theories that the Executive is above the law, and why the latter is not properly conceived as a right v. left controversy.
A *consistent* classical liberal, is Mr. Galien.
Mona —
Are you saying that I’m a hypocrite for NOT agreeing with everything Galien has to say, or for linking to something I DO agree with?
Remind me who the ideological, lockstep cultist is again?
Notice to Mona: I link to people I disagree with on certain issues all the time. You know why? Because I don’t think a disagreement on a particular issue necessary invalidates the person’s entire worldview.
Whereas you seem to have lost your mind.
I have been glad my West Frisian relatives (complete pig farmer, shite kickers all – God Love ‘em) decided to come here a while back. So glad they failed at farming in Iowa too (how hard is that? You drop an ear of corn for five minutes in Sheldon, Iowa, and 30 bushels worth of plants burst out of the earth! Good thing they ended up becoming excellent medical doctors). Now I am doubly glad of their wanderlust.
Jeff says:
If I had wanted to say that, Jeff, I know how to string the nouns and verbs together to do so. What I in fact am saying is that Michael Galien is an impressive Dutch law student, who lands on the correct side of issues with great frequency; he is driven by classically liberal principles. As am I, and that is why you think I have lost my mind.
Classical liberals understand that the rule of law is essential, and no more so than as applied to the govt.
Mona
I think you’ll recall that every time someone shouts out to Congress to “pass a law” … say to outlaw flagburning … someone rightly points out that Congress can only pass laws that don’t run afoul of Constitutional rights.
So please, let’s stop with the pretending that Congressional unConstitutional lawmaking only affects the citizenry and not the other branches of government.
Rule of Law doesn’t mean what I think you think it means.
actus
If someone is arguing they need to “strip her of her citizenship” then she’s not illegal.
Geez, no wonder the legal profession’s reputation has fallen on such hard times.
Darleen errs on multiple fronts:
Yeah, every time. Like when Congress passed, and then Bush signed rather than vetoing, McCain-Feingold. Bush had indicated he did not think the provisions of that bill were constitutional, but he violated his oath of office and decided to punt to the SCOTUS, which, guess what? Failed to find that it violates the First Am.
It is well-settled law that even in matters of national security, the Executive is bound by the legislative branch. SCOTUS precedent from 50 years ago holds that it must be that way, if we are to uphold the rule of law.
Didn’t she get it illegally? Thats’ what I understood. But in general I think that having sympathetic people being forced to break immigration laws is great. Because it helps to portray violators of these laws as sympathetic people.
Mona,
You need to throw away Actus’ class notes on Con Law.
Hi, Mona. How’s the plaintiff hunt going? Any prospects? Or are you and Greenwald to the point of dreaming up something specious yet?
Regards,
Ric
It is well-settled law that even in matters of national security, the Executive is bound by the legislative branch.
Really? So Congress could pass a veto proof law that the President is no longer allowed to …say… appoint judges anymore and it would stand?
Fascinating.
I am a little confused here, Mona, being a layman and all. Did Bush violate his oath of office by signing a legally drafted, constitutional law? Or by allowing the Supreme Court to determine that the law was consitutional? Or was he should he have went for a field goal instead of punting? I have a hard time with some of this legalese, you see.
I think mona’s point is that he thought it was unconstitutional
– What you see, accentened by the Libtard quixotic “NSA scandals”, where in all Americans are suddenly made aware that their telephone bills are actually recorded, is a systamatic shift to a new paradign from the old, the new “reach” for legislative control over the executive will try to replace their lost hegemony in the SCOTUS, and the “living document” warpage of the Constitution they managed by parlor trick and inside ringers, and allowed treating it like so much silly putty. The propaganda wars have already begun. “Bush above the law”, “Congressional oversight”, “Rogue leadership”, etc, hoping that the general public doesn’t really understand the true meaning of seperation of powers. Intrestingly, nothing will be put forth as to the most infantisimal reason that our Executive leadership would want to accomplish what in effect would be an overthrow of itself, given the speaker of the House is in fact the third highest member of the Executive, among his other duties, but non-the-less we’ll be treated to a constant drumbeat of this nattering bullshit until the left manages to do what they do so well yet again in 2008:
– Perfect at running polls that show without a doubt that only the left and their ideas have the favor of all americans.
– Perfect at finding fault with any GOP administration, and convincing the public of their own infallibility.
– Perfect of performing any and all possible acts of patriotism, by rote of leaks through the media, and outright fabrication of the most outreageous fabrications, showing their deep dedication to France.
– Perfect at running exit polls, distinquished by their absolute dedication to accuracy.
– Unable to win National elections.
– “Communism – Bringing the world 100 million corpses since 1907, and all I have to show for it is this lousy T shirt”
So… how many of you still listen to the Rush Limbaugh Show regularly?
Posted by Christopher Taylor | permalink
*************************************************
I must confess it’s one whole ten minutes or so on my drive to work (less than 5 miles RT)
But that is mainly because I have it tuned to that station so I can listen to Coast to Coast with Art Bell and George Noury on my way home from work.
Your point is?
Dan – The stock answer as always….
“Its all Bushs fault”….
Jeff
It looks like she’s coming to America.
Atop his head, I’m guessing.