De Kerchove’s statement comes against a background of infighting within the EU over counter-terrorism policy. The European Commission has been working for several years on a paper analysing militancy in Europe and outlining policy to combat radicalisation. The Council of Ministers is still waiting for the now long-overdue paper, on which future policy will be based.
EU officials claimed last week the delay was because Jacques Barrot, the French Commissioner for justice, freedom and security, had grave reservations about the definition of terrorism in the commission’s policy paper and had delayed signing the policy document as it ‘went too far in blaming Muslim communities’. >>>>>
He should not be in office. This attack on Islam for job security, or worse yet, mere hatred shows that he has not done his homework on Islam or terrorism for that matter. While no doubt Muslims have gone astray, so have Christians, Jews and those who believe or disbelieve otherwise.
However, it still remains that the West went into an illegal war against Iraq; and continues to be in denial with Afghanistan; while at the same time preparing war(s) against other Muslim nation(s), with the support of many European countries. If he took an approach to deal with actual and valid cases of terrorism, this would be more credible.
He hasn’t. He stands for something more sinister and buys into the conspiracy theories that the official governments have to offer. The facts brought about by independent parties have become part of the propaganda that contributes to what the government(s) want us to believe are conspiracy theories.
These very same European countries that have a hatred for the immigration that stands to eventually significantly challenge their so-called ‘democracies’ because of the newly formed voting citizens and their potential for population growth in comparison to the ascendants of people who actually chose the non-democratic, barbaric approach when colonizing and exploiting the countries these immigrants came from.
Someone of his political position should be more objective with his assessments and even moreso with his rhetoric. It doesn’t take much to figure out his other political leanings and alliances with just this one statement.