Brussels: "An attack is just a matter of time"

Arthur van Amerongen, a Dutch journalist, had spent many years as a war correspondent in the middle east. He had spent the past year submerging himself in the Muslim world in Brussels. His sensational and sharply written book BXL Eurabia is as startling as it's hallucinatory. Belgian magazine Knack had seen the manuscript and invited the author for a talk.

In 2006 Van Amerongen won the prize for Dutch journalism (Prijs van de Nederlandse journalistiek) for a well-balanced story about Moroccans in Het Parool. In 2005 he won the Zilveren Reissmicrofoon (a prestigious Dutch radio award) for Inburgerking (Integration King), again a show about Moroccans.

Q: In Het Parool you wrote that you love Moroccans, despite the cowardly murder of Theo Van Gogh. After more than a year infiltrating the Muslim world in Brussels, you write that you can't stand most Moroccans. Where did it go wrong?

ARTHUR VAN AMERONGEN: Now I've left Brussels and there's some distance [between me and] my subject, I also have my powers of perspective back. In addition several incidents during the end of my stay in Brussels have somewhat branded me. I was molested by a group of Moroccans in Hoogstraat after they first called my girlfriend a whore and in reply I shouted at them "your sister". I also went through a couple of robberies. So the feeling for nuances disappeared.

I also had enormous difficulties with the double morale of their culture: on the one hand they're fanatical about their exalted morale and the superiority of Islam, on the other hand there's a growing contempt for our achieved liberal ideas. There's a sort of lawlessness among Moroccans because they look down on our culture. Our women are all whores. By the Moroccans the honor of the woman is supposedly maximally protected. There are also looking constantly at how far they can go. Their attitude is often provocative.

Q: Moroccans in Brussels are strongly under the influence of Jihad. Is the tension there really so much more than in Amsterdam?

ARTHUR VAN AMERONGEN: a specific group of Islamic youth is fascinated by Jihad. I do think that Brussels is a time bomb. Moroccans are totally marginalized there. Look at the statistics of unemployment, poverty, the bad accommodations, the discrimination in the labor market, the criminality. I think that Moroccans in the Netherlands, or even better in Amsterdam, have it a bit better than the Moroccans in Molenbeek. For many youth Islam is the only consolation. I have been to many lectures in Brussels in Islamic association halls. They were attended by all possible youth, from those dressed hip to those dressed as if in Mecca. That phenomenon doesn't exist in Amsterdam.

Q: Will there be a Muslim attack in Brussels?

ARTHUR VAN AMERONGEN: It looks to me like a matter of time. If you see how many people had been arrested in Brussels in the past seven years you know that the city is a time bomb. There's an urban legend that says that there has always been an agreement between the terrorist groups and the government. It wasn't for nothing that the Afghan mujaheddin could open an office here undisturbed in the beginning of the 80s, because they fought the Soviet Union in Afghanistan - typical Cold War politics. The same goes for the Algerian FIS: Terrorists wanted in Algeria got political asylum in Belgium. In the end all those extremists left for Londonistan with all the results of that for the United Kingdom. Belgium is of course not in Iraq or Afghanistan, but that doesn't have to be the only reason for an attack. You only need one crazy person with their own agenda. Above all, there are naturally interesting targets such as NATO and the European Parliament. A lot will depend on the foreign policy of the European Parliament.

Source: Knack (Dutch)


Anonymous said...

What a hoax. As if the marginalization is the cause instead of their own segregation and discrimination of Belgium's. I guess it's for us Westerners to hard to understand that Allah is greater than life...

FreeSpeech said...

Check "Future Jihad" by Walid Phares

It changed my idea of Jihad. There is the offensive Jihad and the soft, invisible one. They both have the same purpose.

The book ist seminal even though it focuses on the US

Anonymous said...

What might be easier for you (Islama-muslim-phobic)is you read up what Jihad actually means. Find out from Arabic text and not from western weak text. Jihad means struggle and not war with white or western folks, as what the west teaches you. But then again when you are a Islamaphobic then anything relating to Islam is a threat to western civilisation.

For example, the west wants to bring democracy into Middle East and the civilisation calls this western terror, the civilisation is fighting off the western terror in their own homeland but the west calls this terrorism when in fact the people who are resisting western terror are actual freedom fighters (which includes, Muslims, Christians and people of other faiths) but of course you wont hear about this because your "Islamaphobic" and nothing less.

Michiel said...

Tell me, Infidel&Kafir watch, what kind of freedomfighters blow up 100 fellow Muslims for every Westerner, as they do in Iraq. Most don't fight Westerners but they fight among themselves and kill all. The Taliban fight a government, chosen by the Muslim population of Afghanistan. They use terror to get the 'support' of the people. They are scum.

You see them as freedomfighters, that makes you scum as well.

Esther said...


thanks for the tip. I had ordered several books about terrorism in Europe/the West, but not this one, yet.

Anonymous said...


Don't fool yourself thinking that the west cares or provides anyone outside of Europe or USA any support or help. All that interests the west is resources and how make rich business owners more richer.

Afghanistan chose Taliban to bring stability and a good standard of life but the west had other (oil pipline) ideas for which they bought out small opposition (with US tax payers money) to resist and gave them weapons which they otherwise could not obtain.

The west has a history of divide and rule, this is just another example of it. while people on basic level fight for survival the west sucks out their resources and secretly gives contracts to western companies.

What kind of nation totally destroys a country (Iraq) under a false belief of WMD or links to Al-Qaeda? Which country imposes total sanction on a country for over 15 years starving them from the basic resources for survival before which they destroy during a (golf) war. what type of nation pours down bombs falling anywhere and everywhere day and night for 30 days and killing millions of people and displacing millions of more. The nation that does that is the same nation that used a nuclear weapon to eliminate an entire nation, and yet intends to police the world. The US will have its down fall.

You sponsor this terror around the world, and yet point the finger on anyone who is a Muslim. No Muslim ever came across to Europe or US and declared war, but the vice vera is true.

Michiel, you are just like the other Islamaphobic terrorist. Nothing changes here

Anonymous said...

"No Muslim ever came across to Europe or US and declared war, but the vice vera is true."

Islam was the imperialist power of the past and it was barbaric. It invaded the middle east, India and Europe. Islams imperialist past stretched to the gates of Vienna and to southern France. They were defeated then. Now the Islamic imperialists are bringing their weapons in rucksacks and their dictatorial religion in numbers and trying to destroy democracy from within. Any doctrine that has a law such as Sharia where women are flogged, hands are cut off and apostates killed does not deserve to be called civilised.

Anonymous said...


This is the problem with Infidels and Kafirs, when it suits them, death and destruction is permissible as long as the people on the receiving end are Muslims. Europe only got invaded because of the Crusaders who were nothing more than evil Christian demons and the only way to stop them was to destroy them and maintain the position in Europe.

You might want to read the history of palestine.

In terms of doctrine have you not read the bible. The bible was the doctrine which created the crusaders or have you forgotten that.

If you dont think the bible has poison in it then visit the link below to find out the truth about the bible and why people want it banned.

You make me laugh, come up with a better argument.

Anonymous said...

You should know that the word kafir is a term of abuse. As you call me a kafir I would like to explain why Islam is the devil's religion and Muhammad is the anti-christ.
Muslims were the invaders of the middle east. They were pillaging and making war on the Byzantine Empire. The emperor called on his fellow christians to help him against the muslim aggressors. And what happens? You then claim that because chrisitians went to the defence of fellow christians you then use that as an excuse to invade bulgaria, Serbia, Spain, Portugal etc. Yet muslims always claim the right to defend fellow muslims. Islam is a religion with double standards and of deceit. The master of deceit is the devil.
Muhammad did not know who was speaking to him and got duped as Rushdie has shown in the satanic verses. Islam is a devils religion.
Just as muslims always find an excuse for murder & barbarity so Muhammad had an excuse for murdering 900 unarmed prisoners of war after the Battle of the Trench. After their murder he made slaves of their wives & children. The only god who murders unarmed people and makes slaves of women & children is the devil. Islam is the devil's religion. Jesus taught people to love thy enemy. Muhammad taught people to kill thy enemy. jesus never killed anyone. Muhammad killed thousands. Muhammad is the antichrist.

Anonymous said...

An Interesting article!

As are the comments and replies at the bottom of the article... Personally, I see this as typical bickering between the religions that has rumbled on for Millennia and will not stop until one or other religion dies out... or is wiped out through terrorist action and counter action. My personal sentiment is that they are both as bad as each other pretty much. Both teach brain washing and prejudice towards their fellow man/woman in the name of reason and moral standards. Both excuse their actions because some book tells them to do it and of course, their books are infallibly correct - regardless of whether its mass murder or whatever other crime generally not condoned in their faith, there is always a get out clause that justifies such actions. Any religion will do anything to protect its own survival even if it is clearly morally reprehensible such as blowing people up or other acts of war. These two (the Christian and Islamic religions) are just better at it than most...

Although I am not for sanctions like banning of books as I'm not a prohibitionist (I don't believe this is the way to enable people to grow up and become sensible, balanced, human beings that seek the good of all people and all views). People need to learn that nothing is all someone else's fault - nor is it all their own fault. People need to learn perspective and stop finger pointing - its pointless (pun intended!). They also need to stop pointing to the past and saying what you did or what they did in retaliation. Draw a line under it and move forward or you'll never get anywhere!