Hirsi Ali to EU Lawmakers: “I Don’t Want to Die”

Yesterday, the French press agency AFP ran a report about Ayaan Hirsi Ali under the above title. Ms. Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born former member of the Dutch Parliament, was in the European Parliament in Brussels trying to raise funds to protect her from Islamist death threats. “I don’t want to die, I want to live and I love life. I find myself in a very desperate position,” she said at a press conference in the parliament building.

The press conference was organized by a French Socialist MEP (Member of the European Parliament). The Socialists are, however, deeply divided about Ms. Hirsi Ali’s initiative. There were only 6 Socialist MEPs at the press conference: three Frenchmen, two Walloons and one Portuguese. The 6 Socialists were joined by 3 other MEPs: Paul van Buitenen, a former whistleblowing European Union civil servant who is currently an independent Dutch MEP aligned to the Greens, and two MEPs from the Flemish-secessionist Vlaams Belang.

Ms. Hirsi Ali proposes the establishment of a European fund to protect people threatened by assassins. The journalists tried to corner her into distancing herself from Geert Wilders, a member of the Dutch Parliament, who is also under an Islamist death sentence. The press wanted to know whether the fund should also be used to protect members of the “far-right.” She answered that the only criterion should be whether people’s lives are effectively threatened.

Like Geert Wilders at the moment, Ms. Hirsi Ali has in the past been living under tight protection from the Dutch police. The Dutch authorities, however, stopped paying for her protection one year after she left the Netherlands for the United States. She resigned her seat in the Dutch Parliament and moved to America in May 2006 to work for the American Enterprise Institute in Washington after the Dutch authorities discovered that she had lied about her age and name in her Dutch asylum request. Ms. Hirsi Ali, whose real name is Hirsi Magan, had entered the Netherlands in 1992 from Germany, falsely claiming to be an asylum seeker arriving from Somalia.

As the United States government does not pay for the protection of individuals either, she was forced to move back to the Netherlands in October 2007 where she lives at a secret place under police protection. The Dutch authorities, however, do not pay her protection when she is out of the country. Wouter Bos, the leader of the Dutch Labour Party and the Deputy Prime Minister of the Netherlands, says that there are no cases where a state continues to provide protection for a national who left the country without prior agreement.

Since October I have been fund-raising full-time [for my protection],” Ms. Hirsi Ali said in Brussels. “It has become swiftly apparent that the best I can do is raise enough money to pay for the security detail that accompanies me to fund-raising meetings. When the money runs out I am confined in hiding.

The French Socialist MEP Benoît Hamon has launched a petition to secure support for EU funding to protect people who are under threat for their opinions. It could be financed to the tune of 50 million euros by a fund that the parliament has at its disposal each year. The petition is, however, unlikely to receive the required backing from half of the European Parliament’s 785 members. AFP reports that only 82 MEPs have signed so far.

The petition is to be signed during the EP’s plenary session next week in Strassburg. Philip Claeys, a Vlaams Belang MEP, has announced that the three MEPs from his party will also sign. In February 2006, Ms. Hirsi Ali told a Flemish newspaper that she would “ban the VB because it hardly differs from the Hofstad group [an Islamist terror network in the Netherlands]. Though the VB members have not committed any violent crimes yet, they are just postponing them and waiting until they have an absolute majority. On many issues they have exactly the same opinions as the Muslim extremists: on the position of women, on the suppression of gays, on abortion. This way of thinking will lead straight to genocide.”

Mr. Claeys says Ms. Hirsi Ali, who at the time was a member of the Dutch Liberal Party, had been misinformed about his party by the Flemish Liberal Party of Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt. Neither the Belgian nor the Dutch Liberal MEPs are willing to sign the petition in favour of Ms. Hirsi Ali’s protection.

Most parties, including the majority of the 215 Socialist MEPs, oppose the establishment of a European fund to protect people under death threats from extremists. So far only three (Mr. van Buitenen and two Green politicians) of the 27 Dutch MEPs have signed the petition. “This initiative is going nowhere,” Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert, a Dutch Liberal MEP, told Radio Netherlands. “It’s tragic for Ayaan because she needs security but the EU is not the place to provide it. She is being made to believe in something that does not exist.”

Yesterday’s press conference must have been a humiliating experience for Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The European politicians do not seem to realize that it is a humiliating experience for Europe as well. It proves that Islamist terrorists, who threaten to kill citizens who speak out against them, have won. There is no freedom of speech in Europe, where the state authorities are unable and unwilling to protect their citizens, although the latter have to pay taxes. Would it not be appropriate then to give these citizens the right to bear arms and protect themselves? Or is this an obnoxious, undemocratic question?

Cheering for safety

Moral support? What does she buy with moral support? The matter is:

- what legislative body can (on the short term)supply adequate protection within the current legal (inter)national framework and

- who is going to pay the bills

The title of the very first comment of this thread: bulls-eye.


I meant 'legitimate' body

do I have to do all the brainwork right here? please!

Fantasy planet, dissected

@ Zen Master

1)  For your benefit, I will recapitulate the main points of my position on this article.

- Ms Ali is receiving death threats from islamo-fascists in Holland and around the world.

- Ms Ali is denouncing these threats and is seeking moral support from anyone who cares to listen and practical support from governments who can provide such support.

-  As usual, a number of people can not focus on the matter at hand, but instead raise a variety of different issues, that are not directly related to the core issue at hand which is freedom of speech (as a prerequisite for maintaining a democratic society). 

2) You, Zen Master, claim that I am "half right, and half wrong".  I would be very interested to know which half is right and which is wrong!  You elaborate besides the point that it is easy for me to make courageous statements because of my supposedly safe environment and that it is Ms Ali's throat that is under threat.  May I say that you know nothing about my environment, at least I hope so, and that Ms Ali is speaking out of her OWN CHOICE, and not because of mine or anybody else's urgings.  For us the relevant choice is as follows: do we support her in her efforts to denounce death threats, or do we not.  You telling her that she should go and "hide in fly-over country" is not exactly good advice.  Viewed from her personal perspective, it is totally useless to her.  That is not why she went to Brussels to talk to European MPs and journalists.  And, viewed from society's perspective, your 'advice' is destructive, for we need to support any signs of moral courage rather than dissuade resistance to barbarism.

3) I am afraid that your choice of pseudonym does suggest a certain degree of "head in the sand".


@marcfrans, as usual is half right & half wrong

As usual Marcfrans has some good thoughts, but it is easy for him to make bold and courageous statements.  His throat will not be cut, so he can be bold. Ms. Hirsi Ali is the one who worries about suffering a cut throat. I will not insult him, but I think much of his thinking comes from a safe ‘university type of environment.’ 


The EU leaders need to show courage in dealing with the murderous criminals they have allowed to enter their countries.  Why don’t they deport the worst of the Islamic troublemakers and stop allowing more of them to immigrate?  Why compound an existing problem by allowing more of them to join you?



Hirsi Ali's citizenship

 The Dutch questioned her citizenship, reviewed the process and confirmed her citizenship.  So forget that.  It's a non-issue. 

Since all EU nations are ceding their authority to the EU, that is certainly an appropriate place for the question of protection of European citizens to be considered.  This is not just a Dutch question.  People are hiding from Muslim would-be murderers in Denmark, the UK and France as well as Holland.  Yet the EU is planning on inviting even more Muslims to Europe and letting them carry on their way of doing things. 

Either the EU should pay up or require each EU nation to provide personal security for its citizens wherever they live. Of course, what the EU should also do is aggressively act to put an end to Muslim violent alien behavior and reverse the immigration process.

Many heads in the sand

@ Di Montani, Zen Master

You are living on a fantasy planet too, just like 'Tell', but a different one.  This has nothing to do with secularism, theocracy lessons, George Soros, etc..... This is simply a matter of democratic 'rule of law', of whether the average citizen still has an ounce of common decency, of whether government is performing its core function of providing security for its citizens.   The last thing Ms Ali, Mr Rushdie etc... should do is go and hide in "the rural US" or "flyover country".  On the contrary, they should raise 'hell' and force the body politic to face up to its responsibilities.  If the latter (i.e. the people really) does not do so, well that is on their conscience.  Ms Ali at least tried to stand up for her human right of free speech, and on that score she deserves to get support instead of silly 'advice'. 

@ Mimi

You are mixing apples and oranges.  Everybody has lied in their life at one time or another and, ideally, everybody (including yourself) should face appropriate consequences. I agree with you that there should be 'penalties' for breaking immigration laws.  But that is a totally different debate than this one.  Here the issue is the imperative for democracy to maintain freedom of speech and to resist intimidation from violent islamo-fascists and their 'useful idiot' allies among naive-left westerners.   

Zen Master Fantasy Planet

Yo, Zen Master. I know that you are neither. I know Zen, and I know Masters, but I do not know you. You appeal to democracy and the rule of law, as if it came from ZEN, Hirohito, Buddha, Japan, or something!?!!! (Anything but Western Civilization and Christianity, to be certain.) This of course is ludicrous beyond all discussion, and it is truly important to note that no one is listening to you. Who cares about Zen Master? (Put your real name down there, like Montani.) True, we should all, from the ever-flowing fount of our "common decency" raise Holy Hell!!! Then again, Zen folk, most Europeans, very few Slavs, Americans, and Asians, don't raise holy hell...nor subscribe to a Universal concept of human decency, but, I digress. I like flyover country, and I will always like fly-over country. No one automatically deserves support, dear sir...they can only pray to be worthy of it, humbly appealing to REAL people, and not a fantasm of "what-should-be-cuz-I-think-it-should-be-so." Fly-over people have lives, too. Ms. Ali is worthy of all assistance, by my standard, but she has placed her camp within the confines of a secularist anti-religious world-view. AS a result, to them she appeals for help. This is the problem, they have NO interest in helping her, if it is not in their interest, why should they? This is the answer to Hitchen's famous challenge...what great thing done by a Christian could not also be done by an atheist (or Zen?) No humanist government comes to her aid, but i will.
The only help that she has hope of will come from people in whose interest it is NOT. Only those who invoke a higher authority, can justify bequething to her safety. (Like me!) We all applaud Ms. Ali for her very brave efforts, and if truth be told, we owe her a great debt. In fact, we need learn from her...but, she needs learn from "us," the anti-secular western Christians. Christianity was once very strong in Egypt, Ethiopia, and all of the middle east and North Africa. Let Ms. Ali re-discover her roots...her present captivity is in-vain, otherwise...and no appeal that you invoke will ever save, cure, or liberate anyone, much less Ms. Ali. Of this, you can be absolutely certain! You and your calls are without ultimate substance. Like Zen, your opinions are empty and meaningless. I ask you, ZEN MASTER, who can endure forever, caught between the two worlds of meaninglessness, and meaning...as you seem evidently seem to be. (The Cosmic Buddha, you have not yet met.) Sooner or later, you will have to make the same choice as she. Look at your money, you count every cent. No room for liberality or spaciousness there, indeed. Featherweights, all! It is not Rome you smell burning, it is but you yourselves, and those similar to you. Of this, you can be also quite certain.

A United States of France?

The lies of Hirsi 'Ali' may seem insignificant, they however might as well be regarded as a deliberate attempt to avoid European law, which states that a country can reject asylum if an earlier request (in another European country) has been denied.

True, giving exclusive rights to people with high esteem who dare to speak freely would be a firm political gesture. But why making something exclusive of the freedom of speech? Should we on the other hand, withdraw rights to people who do not (dare to) speak freely?

The gesture would need firm political belief that the struggle of Hirsi is the struggle of the greater part of Dutch society. Her main concern however is the rights of Muslim woman, fed by her experience in Somalia and where people of 'high esteem' all too easily obtain exclusive rights.

So, why does Hirsi not arrange her own security? Would the cost exceed her budget? Wouldn’t there be some legal restrictions for private security companies with regard to the access to certain information? I guess the answer is both.

You should have seen how French officials on TV guided their boiling sentiments into a flaunt with a woman that owns her success largely to a political climate very different from theirs. The officials called the disapproval of the Dutch government to finance her protection (although she was living in the US for a while) a shameful cowardly act.

Could it be something French, to have little clue about the specific, historically grown legislative structures within countries other then themselves?

Hirsi Ali lied

It doesn't sit well with me that Ayaan Hirsi Ali lied to get the refugee status. She should by law be deported. Yes, I recognize her bravery and admire her for it. But should it excuse her breaking the law? This sets a really bad precedent. Perhaps the way to remedy this is to start the official proceedings for her deportation, and then she should be "pardoned" and allowed to stay, thus sending a message that this is strictly an exceptional case.


Hirsi already resigned from MP position and left Holland, admitting she lied to get into that country.

How many immigrants who have not lied about their status and work experience and in their applications for welfare?

Why Government?

Ms. Ali is an extraordinary asset, and such a lady should not have to seek government assistance, God forbid!  (This is a great disgrace, and an appeal to the beast that besets you.  There is no salvation there!) But, as an admitted secularist...it may be her only appeal.  Ah, that's the problem. Secular humanism and leftist allegiance with Islamo-fascism.  Shoot!  OK.  Look, where are Soros and Gates when you really need them?  Where are NOW and NAACP?  Damn...I guess I will have to do it.  OK!  I'll do it.  I have the knowledge, capability, and the infra-structure, this is beyond doubt. But, she will have to undergo theology lessons. And even worse, they will have to be theology lessons from me. No one else is capable of dealing with such an entrenched paradigm of perdition.   That's for sure...and no visit from Dawkins or Hitchens either. At least until she has recovered from so many years of mis-education in Holland, and Hitchens is verifiably sober.   As a recovering secularist, my heart goes-out to her...finding sanctuary in the rural US is entirely possible, and she won't have to plead and appeal for her love of Life to those who only worship death back in the EU, disguised as it is as moral superiority, intellectual elitism, and a transcendent faux-compassion commonly shared only among the properly initiated. Ms. Ali should not be looking to them, at all. This is upsetting to me, she is appealing to her abusers. As a secularist, upon whom does one trust in situations such as these??? The government? Clearly, this is the watershed between EU and USA. Mankind shall place their trust in no man, save but for He who is not.   

Maybe she can return to the US as a ‘Protected Witness'

There are so many immigrants in America; she can easily vanish, never to be found again.  She could use an assumed name and write her books safely from ‘fly- over country.’  Most of America is fly- over country.  

Get a place in the country with good neighbors, get a ‘concealed carry’ pistol permit, take several good classes in combat martial arts.   Have several geese in a pen near her house, they are very protective of their new home.  Two large well trained dogs, a good security system, and she would be able to relax some.


Her life is not impossible, but difficult in the PC EU. The EU countries would worry about ‘offending’ their Islamic guests, by giving shelter to an ‘enemy of Islam.'  A federal witness protection program would be good, but not possible for her in America.



Head in the sand

@ Tell

1) Firstly, you did say: "I don't believe Ms Ali wants to be safe".   That is a clear sign of living on a fantasy planet, i.e. lack of common sense, or letting your 'feelings' towards Ms Ali cloud your judgement.

2) Secondly, you will recall that Ms Ali was 'evicted' from her appartment building because of the death threats, and subsequently lost a court battle about that.  Apart from the lack of moral fibre shown by her Dutch neighbors, what does that say about the quality of jurisprudence in the Netherlands?  You will also recall that the Dutch interior minister threathened to take her citizenship away, and actually acted on that threat for a while (but was later reversed).  One could be forgiven for departing to the US for less.

3) Thirdly, your moral compass is out of wack.  This article is about the lack of moral and material support she is receiving from EU MP's, and also about the moral depravity of at least some members of the press corps.  IN THAT CONTEXT, it would have been appropriate for you to question whether the EU parliament is the appropriate place to raise this kind of issue, or to discuss the kind of protection she is actually receiving in the Netherlands, and elsewhere in Europe, etc... But it is totally irrelevant to bring up the fact that she took up a job in the US. 

4) Fourthly, you originally wrote that she "should keep a low profile".  That is exactly what the islamo-fascists want.  They want to put islam beyond criticism. They want to intimidate the populace, just like they have already achieved a long time ago in the muslim world.  She knows the 'reality' of this, whereas you obviously do not.  Thus, contrary to what you advise, she should do the opposite.  Instead of keeping "a low profile", she should 'raise hell' about this kind of situation, and force the European 'body politic' to face up to its 'condition' and to its moral duties.   At least she has exposed the situation for what it is, i.e. a gradual descent into dhimmitude by that 'body politic'.  Rest assured, in the end she will end up for good in America, as so many other European refugees before her.    

First of all, I never said

First of all, I never said that she didn’t deserve to be protected nor anything about her lies. Instead I made a question to Onecent about that. A question mark means a question as far as I know or am I wrong?

By the way, I’d never believe that Dutch government could revoke her citizenship.

And NO I don’t believe anyone deserves to die in particular because of the right of freedom speech.

What I said in my first post is that she flew to US instead of first try another EU country. As far as I know she has been protected in US for a year at Dutch expenses.

Yesterday, at the local news, one of her colleagues at the Dutch parliament said that if she had stay in Holland they would have protected her.

Ok let’s assume that Holland is not safe for her anymore but that does not mean that Europe is not safe because if it is so that means we have already lost our freedom of speech. My question is: why does she have to live outside EU? There are 26 other countries in EU + Switzerland where she can live. Probably not all countries are safe but there are others.

Thomas Landen said:

“The fact is that the European states have to guarantee freedom of speech to people living here and have to guarantee their safety. That is what we pay taxes for. If we accept that Islamists can silence people then soon we all have to remain silent.”

You’re absolutely right. I agree 100% but as you said: people living here and that is my point does she need to live abroad?

I was questioning exactly that. Why does she have to keep traveling, Can’t she lives in a city, in Europe, find a job and be protected by the government as the danish cartoonist does?

What I don’t agree is that EU pays for her protection (it’s a people right) and she decides to live abroad because she doesn’t want to live in Europe anymore. Do you think EU has to keep protecting her in US or somewhere else?

Can you imagine the danish cartoonist retiring and going to live in the Caribbean islands and still being protected with EU funds?

Tell is absolutely wrong

Tell says: You’re absolutely right. I agree 100% but as you said: people living here and that is my point does she need to live abroad?

She is one of the formost voices against the jihad. Why would Europeans be so cheap as to not be glad to pay her way. She may help save you. She had the credibility to tell the truth regarding the Jihad.

Pierre Legrand

The Pink Flamingo Bar


Tell, Europe has a lot more Muslims than America does. Commonsense would tell you that stalking her in parts in America would be a lot harder. For the shame that it will bring the Dutch if she is murdered, their shoddy treatment of her would be revisited, it would be cheaper to pay for her security.

The Danish government is a lot more serious in protecting that cartoonist, ultimately he may need to move. Hirsi Ali has every reason not to trust the Dutch. Is America supposed to pay for the protection of the ever increasing European high profile free speech martyrs? I think not.

'Tell' takes the cake!

People issue death threats to other people, and all 'Tell' can see is that the victim went to the US.  How envious and ideologically-blinded can he be?  He even asserts that he does "not believe that Ms Ali wants to be safe".  Presumably he thinks that she wants to be dead.  

Tell is not "braindead", but he certainly is 'blind' to reality, as most ideological 'followers' are.   One must be an independent thinker in order to be able to 'see'.

So lying about your age means its ok to be murdered?!?!

I think perhaps it was a legitimate question to wonder about your capabilities.

Submitted by Tell on Fri, 2008-02-15 19:45. new

Was that because this technicality means that she lied?

And whether she lied or not she deserves the states protection from murderers. Lying does not grant anyone the right to murder you. Else all of us are laboring under a death penalty...all of us lie to one degree.

Pierre Legrand

The Pink Flamingo Bar


I don't believe Ms. Ali wants to be safe. If so, why she decided to go to the US?

Tell, are you brain dead?  She went to the US because the Dutch government was threatening to revoke her citizenship on a technicality. It was their cowardly way of telling her to leave the country.  They didn't want to protect her or have her interfer with their appeasement of Muslims.

@ Onecent

..."She went to the US because the Dutch government was threatening to revoke her citizenship on a technicality. It was their cowardly way of telling her to leave the country."...

Was that because this technicality means that she lied?

And no, I'm not a brain dead but I think that in first place she had to ask help to EU as she's doing now and not taking the first plane to the US. And what about all other EU countries or even Switzerland? Would they deny her a safe place? No, I don't think so. But she preferred to go to US even knowing that US does not provide the kind of protection she was looking for.


You are brain dead. The Dutch Government placed her with body guards in the US for her safety at one time. They recognized the US was a safer place for her. She is a high profile citizen, an ex-Parliament member of Holland, they need to pay for protection services where she is safest.

Who cares if she lied years ago on her asylum application, lots of people do. It's a distraction.

Free speech and the protection of those that exercise it in the face of grave danger doesn't seem to resonate with you.

What Hirsi Ali did wrong doesn't matter

It does not matter what Hirsi Ali did wrong or not. (This website has been fairly critical of her in the past.) The fact is that the European states have to guarantee freedom of speech to people living here and have to guarantee their safety. That is what we pay taxes for. If we accept that Islamists can silence people then soon we all have to remain silent.


Islamic assassins are NOT allowed to assassinate, which btw is an arabic word. They just do it, to protect the name of their vengeful god, just like robots are instructed to do. Their eventual action can't be predicted on individual basis, because any of them can go bunker unexpectedly. No amount of police can prevent that. The only real remedy is to isolate them back in their countries, which is not practical. Just look at what Israel has been doing in that regard. Barriers.

Something is wrong

I don't believe Ms. Ali wants to be safe. If so, why she decided to go to the US? Now she wants that EU pays for her protection while she travel all around the world with the money from contributions to pay her bodyguards and to collect more money. Something is really wrong.

 As far as I know people who wants the State protection should keep a low profile.

Humbling experience

@ Landen

Another great piece from your 'pen'.

One comment.  I do NOT think that the press conference was "humiliating" for Ayaan Hirsi Ali.  Like you say, it was "humiliating"  for Europe (as it was revealing of the poor moral character of many of its politicians).  And, if 'the' press was implying that members of the so-called "far-right" do not deserve protection from assassins, then it was a humiliating experience for Europe's journalists (opinionmakers) too, for it revealed their lack of 'democratic' attachment to the principle of EQUAL protection under the law.  But then, we know what the poor state of democracy is today in Europe.   

If it was not a "humiliating" experience for Ayaan Hirsi Ali, perhaps though it was a HUMBLING experience for her.  One that should encourage humility.   After all, she can now see how most of her former friends (from her naive 'younger' days) on the left have dropped her like a stone. Even in the face of death threats! And all this because she dared to speak her mind in a non-pc way.  At the same time, she can now also see that among her few open supporters one can find some of these same so-called "extreme-rightists" whom she - in her foolish younger uninformed 'socialist' days - was willing to "ban".  

NO, this press conference was not a humiliating experience for her, but she should surely see it as a humbling one.   Tragedies, including intimidation from islamo-fascist assassins, have a way of clarifying what the true 'nature' of many people really is. 

@ Kapitein Andre

Her case is exactly the same as Salman Rushdie and the Danish cartoons.Our reaction should be the same for her as for the other 2.
A sovereign country MUST protect its citizens, otherwise it's no Country anymore.

what about interpol ?

I think this is more an international problem with terrorism than a specific european affair. Interpol should protect the people confronted with this kind of islamist threats. Participant countries would have to take their responsibilities against threatening people, too, or face financial penalties.