Imams banned from charity event

[Nerissa]

I would like to hear your opinion on this. A while ago, word came out that there was to be a fund-raising event in the Netherlands where several foreign imams would speak, attempting to raise money for a good cause. Some of these imams were considered to be "controversial". It appeared to be mostly a matter of public opinion, because only after demonstrations from civilians, especially those in Rijswijk where the event was supposed to take place, the government stepped in. The imams were actually denied access to the Netherlands. However, on what grounds exactly, never became quite clear.
More and more Muslims are seen as dangerous, potential IS fighters. Muslims are being displayed as ticking time bombs, and allowing them in your country would be like saying "We're on the side of IS!"
It was a charity event, for crying out loud!
I'm using this event as an example of what has been going on here for a while now. What I'm really trying to say is, I think it's scary that there's such a divide, such "us against them-thinking". It's as if they are trying to convince us that if we don't watch our backs, each and every single Muslim is going to transform into a suicide bomber. I didn't mind when it was just people saying it, but if even officials start spreading this image, isn't that outright dangerous?

Muslim charity shocked after controversial imam visas are cancelled
Uncategorized February 18, 2015

Islamic foundation Rohamma said on Wednesday it is shocked by the decision to withdraw visas for three imams due to address a fund-raising event on March 8.

Foreign affairs minister Bert Koenders cancelled the visas on Tuesday citing ‘new information from the counter-terrorism unit NCTV’.

‘Normal procedures’ had been followed when the visas were granted and the three men ‘were not flagged up in databases’, Koenders is quoted as saying by the Telegraaf.




He did not say what the new information is and which imams have been banned from coming to the Netherlands, the Volkskrant reports.

MPs had asked the minister to explain why several imams were given visas to attend what the Telegraaf dubbed a ‘jihad gala’ in Rijswijk.

The aim of the event is to raise money for various charities involving orphans, the handicapped and homeless all over the world.

Click here for the source

 

[Nietzsche]

Question. Was it all Immans or three in particular?

 

[Poeticus]

A country's gotta do what a country's gotta do.

 

[Nerissa]

A country's gotta do what a country's gotta do.

I agree. But what exactly is it they are doing?

 

[Nerissa]

Question. Was it all Immans or three in particular?

Three of them. There were seven in total. Some them were already living in the Netherlands or Belgium and obviously could not be denied access. The others were from four different countries, but authorities refuse to say which imams have been rejected and why. They only state that they were not on the so called "flag list" (which apparently is a list they put your name on when you threaten to bomb places or inspire others to do so).

 

[CMike]

I would like to hear your opinion on this. A while ago, word came out that there was to be a fund-raising event in the Netherlands where several foreign imams would speak, attempting to raise money for a good cause. Some of these imams were considered to be "controversial". It appeared to be mostly a matter of public opinion, because only after demonstrations from civilians, especially those in Rijswijk where the event was supposed to take place, the government stepped in. The imams were actually denied access to the Netherlands. However, on what grounds exactly, never became quite clear.
More and more Muslims are seen as dangerous, potential IS fighters. Muslims are being displayed as ticking time bombs, and allowing them in your country would be like saying "We're on the side of IS!"
It was a charity event, for crying out loud!
I'm using this event as an example of what has been going on here for a while now. What I'm really trying to say is, I think it's scary that there's such a divide, such "us against them-thinking". It's as if they are trying to convince us that if we don't watch our backs, each and every single Muslim is going to transform into a suicide bomber. I didn't mind when it was just people saying it, but if even officials start spreading this image, isn't that outright dangerous?

Muslim charity shocked after controversial imam visas are cancelled
Uncategorized February 18, 2015

View attachment 8206Islamic foundation Rohamma said on Wednesday it is shocked by the decision to withdraw visas for three imams due to address a fund-raising event on March 8.

Foreign affairs minister Bert Koenders cancelled the visas on Tuesday citing ‘new information from the counter-terrorism unit NCTV’.

‘Normal procedures’ had been followed when the visas were granted and the three men ‘were not flagged up in databases’, Koenders is quoted as saying by the Telegraaf.




He did not say what the new information is and which imams have been banned from coming to the Netherlands, the Volkskrant reports.

MPs had asked the minister to explain why several imams were given visas to attend what the Telegraaf dubbed a ‘jihad gala’ in Rijswijk.

The aim of the event is to raise money for various charities involving orphans, the handicapped and homeless all over the world.

Click here for the source

What you posted provides the answer.

Foreign affairs minister Bert Koenders cancelled the visas on Tuesday citing ‘new information from the counter-terrorism unit NCTV’.

It seems that they were terrorists. Sounds like a sound decision to not let the terrorists into the country.

 

[columbus]

More and more Muslims are seen as dangerous, potential IS fighters. Muslims are being displayed as ticking time bombs, and allowing them in your country would be like saying "We're on the side of IS!"

This because more and more Muslims are dangerous potential ISIS fighters.
Not all Muslims, but the number of ISIS supporters is growing or ISIS would be shrinking, which it is not.

Tom

 

[gsa]

Should we open our borders up to theocrats who hate us, fund violent terrorist attacks to kill us, and only want to promote the subversion of our societies?

I'm increasingly convinced we should not, and that we should be prepared to defend the liberal democratic values we have worked so hard to create and sustain. If that means shutting out Islamists, so be it. Imams are a special case, and I doubt the Dutch government is being overly paranoid.

 

[Nerissa]

It seems that they were terrorists. Sounds like a sound decision to not let the terrorists into the country.

But they were not! That is to say, there is not a single shred of evidence to state that they are or have any intention of becoming one. I'm amazed that so many people are willing to believe that they "probably" are, simply because of who they are and where they are from, without anything to back it up. It makes me sad, because I always thought that this was what terrorist intent to do: divide us. I believe that being on speaking terms with each other is more important now than it ever was.

 

[gsa]

But they were not! That is to say, there is not a single shred of evidence to state that they are or have any intention of becoming one. I'm amazed that so many people are willing to believe that they "probably" are, simply because of who they are and where they are from, without anything to back it up. It makes me sad, because I always thought that this was what terrorist intent to do: divide us. I believe that being on speaking terms with each other is more important now than it ever was.

What do we have to talk about with Radical Islamism? Terms of surrender? They're inherently expansionist and violent, and most Muslims are terrified of them (since their primary victims are other Muslims).

Travel visas are not a right. If he believes he was unfairly or unjustly excluded, he should use available channels to challenge it, just like the Islamist Tariq Ramadan did in the US.

 

[gsa]

Also, the government said it was relying on counterterrorism intelligence, and it didn't exclude all the imams. It is farcical to suggest they are being targeted because of their religion.

 

[Augustus]

If they are well known enough to be invited from overseas, they probably have plenty of material online that can be accessed. It wouldn't take too great a stretch of the imagination to believe that some of these views were a touch 'controversial'.

If the headline was 'Holland bans far-right anti-gay hate speakers who demand horrific punishment of homosexuals' from charity event, would it be much of a problem?

There is no legal right for people to come to your country and tell you how evil you are and how you are going to burn in hell and how certain minorities in your country are disgusting, immoral animals who deserve eternal punishment.

I can almost guarantee that these chaps, at the very least, weren't a big fan of the gay community.

 

[CMike]

But they were not! That is to say, there is not a single shred of evidence to state that they are or have any intention of becoming one. I'm amazed that so many people are willing to believe that they "probably" are, simply because of who they are and where they are from, without anything to back it up. It makes me sad, because I always thought that this was what terrorist intent to do: divide us. I believe that being on speaking terms with each other is more important now than it ever was.

The government believes otherwise.

 

[columbus]

But they were not! That is to say, there is not a single shred of evidence to state that they are or have any intention of becoming one.

Neither you nor your link will actually say who these people are. It is you against the Dutch authorities.

They see some danger from these people and frankly I think European authorities are generally too lax. So I am assuming that the Muslims in question are dangerous. And I see no reason to believe that you know more about them.

Tom

 

[Nietzsche]

The government believes otherwise.

I feel like playing Devil's Advocate here;

What would you've said if these were Israelis or just Jews who were denied entrance?

 

[morphesium]

I would like to hear your opinion on this. A while ago, word came out that there was to be a fund-raising event in the Netherlands where several foreign imams would speak, attempting to raise money for a good cause. Some of these imams were considered to be "controversial". It appeared to be mostly a matter of public opinion, because only after demonstrations from civilians, especially those in Rijswijk where the event was supposed to take place, the government stepped in. The imams were actually denied access to the Netherlands. However, on what grounds exactly, never became quite clear.
More and more Muslims are seen as dangerous, potential IS fighters. Muslims are being displayed as ticking time bombs, and allowing them in your country would be like saying "We're on the side of IS!"
It was a charity event, for crying out loud!
I'm using this event as an example of what has been going on here for a while now. What I'm really trying to say is, I think it's scary that there's such a divide, such "us against them-thinking". It's as if they are trying to convince us that if we don't watch our backs, each and every single Muslim is going to transform into a suicide bomber. I didn't mind when it was just people saying it, but if even officials start spreading this image, isn't that outright dangerous?

Muslim charity shocked after controversial imam visas are cancelled
Uncategorized February 18, 2015

View attachment 8206Islamic foundation Rohamma said on Wednesday it is shocked by the decision to withdraw visas for three imams due to address a fund-raising event on March 8.

Foreign affairs minister Bert Koenders cancelled the visas on Tuesday citing ‘new information from the counter-terrorism unit NCTV’.

‘Normal procedures’ had been followed when the visas were granted and the three men ‘were not flagged up in databases’, Koenders is quoted as saying by the Telegraaf.




He did not say what the new information is and which imams have been banned from coming to the Netherlands, the Volkskrant reports.

MPs had asked the minister to explain why several imams were given visas to attend what the Telegraaf dubbed a ‘jihad gala’ in Rijswijk.

The aim of the event is to raise money for various charities involving orphans, the handicapped and homeless all over the world.

Click here for the source

Islam is not a peaceful religion. 23% of the world population are Muslims, but they contribute to 95% of world terrorism. Thus Islamic preaching makes a person 65 times more violent than an average non-Muslim. (77% non-muslims contribute to just 5% of terrorism).
They have a centralized teaching system and a percentage of the zakat money (the charity fund of Muslims) is spent for supporting terrorism. Source here, wikipedia link on Saudi Arabia and here.
Their population multiply like rats and once they reach majority - they will start to rampage. Bring back the laws supporting child marrages, stoning to death, lashing, death for blasphemy etc. They will null scientific growth. they will burn all books, destroy research centers and organisations. they eventually will push every country that has a dominant Muslim population to dark ages to the times of prophet muhammed.

Islam is a ticking time bomb.
I really appreciate the government if they take harsh steps to control the growth of Muslims in any country.

 

[Lyndon]

Terrorism is just a small percentage of total violence, if we look at murder statistics, much more common than terrorism, you're just as likely to be murdered in America as in a Muslim country, if not more so, so obviously when we look at actual violence statistics, not the small percent of such classified as terrorism, Muslim countries are no more violent than America, and much less violent than South America and Southern/Central Africa.

 

[Nerissa]

There is no legal right for people to come to your country and tell you how evil you are and how you are going to burn in hell and how certain minorities in your country are disgusting, immoral animals who deserve eternal punishment.

Well, actually, don't they have the right to say whatever they want? We have a politician here who is allowed to make pretty much the same statements about Muslims. You are probably right about the imams views - but isn't that what we stand for? The right to express ourselves? Or is it all one-sided? We can say all Muslims are vermin, but not the other way around.

Maybe you are right and this is the only way to stop such ideas from spreading. But still, it feels wrong to me. It feels hypocrite and snobbish. I always thought that the only way to resolve an argument was to keep talking until we find something we can all agree on, but perhaps I'm just being naive.

 

[S_J]

I feel like playing Devil's Advocate here;

What would you've said if these were Israelis or just Jews who were denied entrance?

I guess if their were world-wide organizations at the moment violating laws of guest countries, trying to bring terrorism to as much of the civilized world as possible and publicly decapitating people whenever some state doesn't change it's political decisions according to their will and temper.. In other words, if some organization would declare and act out WAR on at least all of Western civilization in the name of being Jews (in the name of Jehove if you'd like to put it that way), asking all Jews to support that war and obviously being successfull in that .. I would perfectly understand if Jews who are in a position similar to those who support that war would get some tight security check before gaining entrance to some place.

I mean, if you happen to be a balanced muslim, sorry, if a state cares for the security of their citizens, don't blame those states .. blame your fellow muslims.

 

[Augustus]

Well, actually, don't they have the right to say whatever they want? We have a politician here who is allowed to make pretty much the same statements about Muslims. You are probably right about the imams views - but isn't that what we stand for? The right to express ourselves? Or is it all one-sided? We can say all Muslims are vermin, but not the other way around.

Maybe you are right and this is the only way to stop such ideas from spreading. But still, it feels wrong to me. It feels hypocrite and snobbish. I always thought that the only way to resolve an argument was to keep talking until we find something we can all agree on, but perhaps I'm just being naive.

Dutch people, within reason, have the right, people from overseas don't have the right to enter your country though if their presence is likely to be harmful to society.

This isn't a discussion to each understanding anyway, but someone coming to spread their message. It is also unlikely that their views are open to compromise, you reach agreement when you agree they are right.

It goes back to the question of how much you have to respect the right to free speech of those who don't believe in that right themselves.

Popper grasped the concept more clearly than many of today's apologists for intolerant and hateful ideologies:

“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.” -Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945)