 |
22 March 2008
The professor of "social cohesion" is a joke, but he's not funny
Ashin Ellian's latest blog is on a program the Dutch police are testing under which people can anonymously report (wait for it) "hatecrimes" to the police. (It is not a typo. The Dutch run their compound words together.) The reader, whether Dutch or English-speaking, will be immediately alerted to the PC nature of this program by the English formulation. And anyone familiar with the sort of games the PC-class play with legislation and other official government bodies will expect this to be yet another avenue for highly revved homosexual activists to advance their political campaign. I was not disappointed.
The NOS bulletin specifically mentions homosexuals as the prime target of such "hatecrimes" Almost ingenuously the report says:
The present number of reports of racist violence and aggression against homosexuals is very low. The initiators of this site are hoping that witnesses and victims will report more quickly, so that not only more information is received, but it will be seen more quickly where hate crimes appear.
Well, we can't have a situation where the number of "acts of aggression" against homosexuals is low, can we? Let's do some manufacturing so we can boost the figures to a politically desirable level.
A spokesman for homosexual activists in Holland was interviewed about the proposal. He was fulsome in his approval saying that feelings of shame are often a reason homosexuals don't report violence against them. As an example he cites "three great big fellows" (homosexuals) who were beaten up by some "kids" (jochies). They were so ashamed of themselves that they did not report the beating to the police. Come on, the Dutch cannot be so gullible.
This sets the scene then for Ashin Ellian's blog which he entitles: "Police program Hate Crimes is stupid and dangerous". The reader must not think he is experiencing the same sort of cynicism as me. It's likely no one in the Dutch media would dare to say such rash things about the political campaign of the homosexual lobby. His beef is with another aspect of the police program.
In brief, he says that anonymous reports about such crimes without any responsibility on the part of the informer are unlawful and the weapon of totalitarian regimes. People who report a crime must make themselves known. That corresponds with the commonsense of the ordinary person. So far, so good. He goes on to examine in detail the categories of who could be the victim of hate crimes. He finds it such a waffly explanation that he declares finally:
Well, we all know what it's about: Islam.
But he adds:
Because if homosexuals are mistreated, they have to go to the police station, anyhow, to verify their mistreatment.[my emphasis]
Backing away, Ashin. Don't dare say anything to spoil the political manipulation of your mates.
The Leiden University professor is right about the program being discriminatory in offering special protection to the Islamic community in Holland. It's part of the PC-class's way of dealing with "Islamophobia". That the program is being set up when Geert Wilders is preparing to show his film on Islam is no coincidence. The government is bending over backwards to coddle the Islamic community while casting Wilders and his supporters in the role of the villain. Such a lack of backbone cannot be funny for Wilders.
Nor is it funny to pour out one's indignation over one aspect of the hate crime program and ignore another equally important political aspect. Everybody knows that anti-vilification programs in the West are for the benefit of homosexuals and the Islamic community, no matter how many weasel words spin around the issue. It's a way of shutting people up who challenge PC orthodoxy on these issues. The highly contentious anti-vilification legislation in Australia has been used twice: once against radio announcers who made low-level vulgar jokes about a few homosexuals, and once against a protestant minister who attacked Islam.
And it's not funny that the professor of "social cohesion" can display such vulgar back-alley ignorance about the Catholic Church and its history - and be so casual in his contempt for its faithful. He should try a little more consistency and a little less double standards.
Returning to his snide remarks about The Inquisition and alleged unspeakable punishments, let me quote from a book recently published. This quote is also directed at the dope who sent me a rambling near incoherent email in broken English claiming among other things that the Catholic Church killed 68 million people.
Contemporary historians have now established that the horrific images of the Inquisition are largely a myth concocted first by the political enemies of Spain...
Henry Kamen's book The Spanish Inquisition is subtitled "A Historical Revision", and it is a long book, because Kamen has a lot of revising to do...
How many people were executed for heresy by the Inquisition? Kamen estimates that it was around 2,000. Other contemporary historians make estimates of between 1,500 and 4,000. These deaths are all tragic, but we must remember that they occurred over a period of 350 years. (What's So Great About Christianity? Dinesh D'Souza, Regnery, 2007, pp. 206 & 207)
NB: I'm very happy to receive emails from Holland, but unless your English is very good, please stick to Dutch. You will express yourself accurately and I will not have to unscramble what is being said.