English-Dutch Ian Buruma’s conference in Spain
Anglo-Dutch writer Ian Buruman has stated that there is no risk that the Muslim impose their religion in Europe, once they have entered it. But he has cautioned about an “Islamic revolution” in the Western countries made by immigrants who feel alienated and who are much more extremists.
During the conference “Multiculturalism’s tiranny”, he has supported Western democracies to let Islamist ideas be expressed freely, as other ideologies are tolerated under the freedom of expression. To confront the perils derived from Islamism, he has maintained that the “language of culture confrontation should be abandoned” and that “Western democracies should seek the support of the more moderate Muslim, who can contribute to stop radicalization.
He also maintains that the “fundamentalism” is much more probable in the sons and grandsons of the immigrants who arrived in Europe. The latter are much more interested in politics and feel they are somewhat excluded from Western society, but, at the same time, are not able to continue the traditions of their ancestors.
So must we consider as right, lawful and acceptable, statements which can be considered as racist, homophobe, illegal, menacing, … or which are simply trying to subvert the Constitution and to impose Sharia Law, kill the unbelievers… just because what? They are Muslims? This is not saying “I don’t like your God”, it’s saying “I’m killing you because you don’t believe in my God”. This is not saying “I respect/tollerate -not the same- your beliefs”, it’s saying “non-believers are apes and pigs and so inferior”.
Can’t understand that logic. What would happen if a white Christian person would have said that? Will he consider that person an “alienated one” who should be helped?