Whirlwind Ayaan

There are two sides to the expulsion of Ayaan Hirsi Magan (a.k.a. Ayaan Hirsi Ali) from the Dutch nation and her resignation from the Second Chamber of the States-General, the Dutch Parliament.

Yes, she was a gain to Dutch society and politics. And yes, there was something thoroughly dishonourable about the action against her. Her well-to-do neighbours wanted to get rid of her bodyguard-encumbered presence because it brought the scary realities of multiculturalism a bit too close to home for comfort. Politician Hans Wiegel, a leading member of Ayaan’s own party, the Liberal Party VVD, and an establishment elitist who had earlier sabotaged the enactment of a bill instituting the right to citizen-initiated referendums, smugly commented: “We will not be hearing much from Ayaan anymore, and we will not miss her.”

Politician Hilbrand Nawijn, elected as a coattail to the late Pim Fortuyn, joined forces with the Red and Green defenders of Islam to destroy Hirsi Ali, the activist who survived the murders of Fortuyn and of her friend Theo van Gogh. Nawijn cried victory when his demand to annull her Dutch citizenship was implemented. The Calvinist Right never forgave her her liberal advocacy of a secular school system, which is a legitimate viewpoint but no grounds for wanting someone expelled. To me, the coalition of undeniable diversity that brought her down was itself reason enough to support her.

She was all the more irritating to the enemies of freedom because her skin colour made it difficult to dismiss her as a racist.  Indeed, her race is an anti-racist statement in itself. The Somali people are a mix between what old race theorists would have called the “Semitic” and “Hamitic” races. The old school frowned upon race-mixing and taught that it never yielded stable mix-races and that the mixed-race individuals were an ugly and unhappy lot, yet the Somali are on average among the most beautiful human phenotypes on earth. Ayaan Hirsi Ali also gave the lie to claims about low intelligence among Africans, for within a few years she acquired a mastery of the Dutch language that put many native speakers to shame.

Nevertheless the fact remains that she played and lost. The initial lie with which she gained asylum – and subsequently a successful future in Dutch society – caught up with her. I have known asylum seekers whom I personally liked and whom I considered an asset to our society, but who were nonetheless guilty of spicing up their stories to get accepted as legitimate refugees. They were lucky, but if their endeavour had failed it could not have been called unjust. Those were people whom I considered an asset to our society on specific grounds (as distinct from the silly dogma that any newcomer constitutes an “enrichment”), they were well integrated and fundamentally grateful to our country, but more importantly, they were individual cases.

Sympathy for individuals loyally struggling to find a place among us should not make us abandon our powers of discernment. A society can absorb individuals, not the teeming masses who would like to enter. The dramatic cases of individuals who have integrated but are legally required to leave the country should be avoided in the future by a firmer asylum policy which deals quickly with asylum requests and swiftly implements the decision whether to give or withhold the right to stay. This is not a harsh toughening of asylum policy but simply a matter of common sense. That is also why it was supported by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, who has consistently spoken out in favour of the restoration of integrity to the asylum process and a policy of selectivity in the admittance of labour immigrants, guided by the national interest. In other countries, too, it would seem that native politicians avoid the topic for fear of being called racists, but there is nothing particularly racist about upholding the rule of law.

When Ayaan Hirsi Ali was faced with the allegation that according to a strict interpretation of the law she was an illegal immigrant, she did not ask for special favours. Dissenting from the common opinion among her sympathizers she did not say: “I am among the good guys and so I have the privilege of overstaying my legal welcome.” Among other considerations, she knew that an exception for her would be used by asylum lawyers to argue for an extension of her exception to all illegal immigrants. And this is exactly what happened: when Minister Rita Verdonk announced that she would rethink her decision of expelling the passionaria of the struggle against Islamic oppression, hundreds of illegal aliens in The Netherlands seized the opportunity to file requests for a similar exception. Not that they had comparable merits to their credit, but the law is blind to such distinctions.

So Ayaan Hirsi Ali did the right thing by resigning and packing up. And since she had a job waiting for her in the USA, she could leave in style and show the petty Dutchmen that she does not need them. Whether they need her remains to be seen. Who will stand up and carry the torch of freedom and of resistance to Islamist intolerance and aggression?

personal questions, #2

@ Onellion

1) Good for you!  You did put your own name under that thrashy three-liner of yours.  It doesn't change the fact that it was 'thrashy', and it doesn't change the fact that I wouldn't put my own name under such thrash. 

2) You say "I did not bash Netherlands" ?  Come again? Let me quote directly from the last part of your thrash.

"...hypocritical...are the Dutch people. To be expected of the country that collaborated with the nazis even more than the French Vichy government. Dhimmis uber alles."

Does that count as an illustration of the lack of 'veracity' in some of your claims?  May I suggest that you first learn better how to 'qualify' some of your sentences, so as (for instance) not to confuse 'many Dutchmen' with THE Dutch people, etc...? 

However, I did like your "American joke" about never arguing with a fool.  

You will therefore understand why I am not addressing the rest of your 'analysis'.


Hirsi Ali

What seems to have been overlooked in the debate over Hirsi Ali's name and nationality is that in Muslim societies, pastoral societies and/or largely preliterate societies (all three apply in this case!) personal names are far more fluid than we are used to in Western Europe. For example the present leader of the Palestine authority is known at one and the same time as Mahmoud Abbas and Abu Mazen.

Furthermore, state boundaries in Africa are colonial artefacts which take little or no account of underlying ethnographic realities. For example Somali tribes are to be found in Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya, a situation that is further complicated by their pastoral migratory lifestyle.

personal questions about me

Dear "marcfrans":
Since you choose to address me personally, I'll gladly respond. Let's take your remarks in sequence.
1. One must assume that you are not putting your own name...
On the contrary, I am. Unlike so many on the Net, I only write for attribution. Can you say the same, anonymous one?

2. under your piece of mindless Netherlands-bashing...
Try again, anonymous one. I did not bash Netherlands. I did bash Mr. Elst.

3. I, for one, would be embarrassed to put mine under such ranting...
My, my. Why don't you try telling us your real name and coordinates, and find out?

4.  It is the sort of trash that might give the equally mindless anti-americanism, so prevalent in Europe today, some degree of misplaced 'respect'...
You're entitled to your opinion, of course. Still, it reminds me of an American joke: never argue with a fool, people might not know the difference.

5. It is clear that the subtleties in Mr Elst's exposition have escaped you...
As a matter of fact, there were no subtleties. Mr. Elst admitted that Ms. Ali said things that needed to be said. If that was his only point, why his remarks about the legitimacy of her being kicked out of the country?

6.  At least, he asked the right question: "who will carry the torch of freedom now" in Holland...
On this we are in agreement, hence my--accurate--description of Netherlands' history of appeasement.

7.  One can only hope that you would in similar circumstances...
Haven't had a chance to find out, so have no comment on this.

My thanks to the Dutch

I am anxiously awaiting for her arrival. (the USA) especially if she is radically left.  The left here needs a heavy dose of reality with regards to Islam.


It will be extremely hard for them to call her a racist or an Islamophobe.  No doubt that CAIR (Council of American Islamic Relations) will give it their best shot though.


It is likely that I will not agree with all she has to say but she may just be the only one able to bring the Left and the Right together in this country on the single most important threat this country has seen since WWII.


This next year will be interesting indeed.




Well the US congressional elections are set for November 8, so she will have at least one month to shake things up in D.C.

whirlwind #2

@ Marshall Onellion

One must assume that you are not putting your own name under your piece of mindless Netherlands-bashing.  I, for one, would be embarrassed to put mine under such ranting.  It is the sort of trash that might give the equally mindless anti-americanism, so prevalent in Europe today, some degree of misplaced 'respect'.

It is clear that the subtleties in Mr Elst's exposition have escaped you.  At least, he asked the right question: "who will carry the torch of freedom now" in Holland.   One can only hope that you would in similar circumstances. 


Whirlwind Ayaan

Mr. Koenraad Elst should stop his recto-cranial inversion; it is unhealthy. Ms. Ali told Dutch society in 2004 that she had lied on her initial application. No one made an issue of it until it was convenient for your political leaders, and she had become inconvenient. The Dutch government is simply hypocritical, as are the Dutch people. To be expected of the country that collaborated with the Nazis even more than the French Vichy government. Dhimmi uber alles.



Sometimes people may be imagining they are "winning" while, in fact, they are losing.

On the assumption that the effective maintenance of freedom of expression is an essential prerequisite for the maintenance of genuine 'democracy' over the long term for any political system, it is easy to see that the short-term comfort-seeking ("relieved" that Ali is leaving) of your "two Dutch women" turns them into losers.  

Hirsi will provoke likewise reactions in the US

Make no mistake. Hirsi Ali is not just against fundamentalist Islam. She is viciously anti-any-religion. On nearly every social issue her views put her squarely in the very radical liberal (left) camp in the Americal political spectrum. Which means she will clash hard and often with the US elite that brought her in (if she remains true to herself). It will be very interesting to see how this develops.

Hirsi Ali

The US is lucky at times. It would appear that the Dutch need someone like Hirsi Ali, but they are not interested. I've talked to two Dutch women and if not exactly happy they do seem relieved that she's leaving. I guess everyone wins. I'm glad she's coming here.