Humoren finder vejen frem i Sverige. Ligesom de i Israel enormt populære Ahmed og Salim, der har givet samtlige arabstater et nervesammenbrud. Det er også Farshad Kholghi´s råd : Tag gas på dem! Kan de ikke tåle det, er det endnu morsommere.
Malmøs polti har opgivet Rosengård
Det är för farligt och poliserna är för få för att gå in i Herrgården. Närpolischefen Börje Aronsson säger att polisen inte kan lösa problemen i bostadsområdet.- “Det finns en grundläggande problematik som jag försöker påtala i alla forum, för politiker i kommunen och ministrar, att Herrgården är en katastrof. Den dagen jag kan placera ut en poliskonstapel i varje hörna i Rosengård, dygnet runt, sju dagar i veckan, den dagen kommer aldrig att infinna sig. Så enkelt är det. Jag kan inte svara på det. Fick jag 300 poliser skulle jag inte lösa det ändå. Icke sa nicke .”
Vi mäktar inte med problemen”.Det store interne rivegilde på Malmø Rådhus er gået i gang, den sørgelige sandhed er at toget er kørt for mange år siden, så de kan skændes alt det de vil, de er sat hjælpeløst af. Selvom der var noget at gøre, er viljen ikke tilstede. Imens hældes der ufortrødent nye “flygtninge” på i den anden ende, som om intet var hændt, og som vi har sagt mange gange – der er endnu ikke nogen vilje i befolkningen til at stoppe politikernes dødsridt. Hvem ved, ved valget næste år ? (SE også Video: TV4 om Black Cobra i Rosengård. Kartläggning: Black Cobra, Dom för dom.)
FN bagvasker svenske mænd
Problemet når man ikke har en etnisk ærlig voldtægtsstatistik, og det har Sverige ikke, er at der åbnes for mytedannelse. Den mytedannelse benytter FN og Amnesty sig af til at fremføre deres egen ønsketænkning. Overfører vi norske og danske procenter på Sverige – og hvorfor ikke ? – så må FN´s Yakin Ertürk være fuld af løgn, hvis man undskylder mit franske:
Sweden’s image as an international forerunner in the fight for gender equality has been damaged by recent reports comparing rape statistics across various countries. Sweden needs to do much more to clamp down on rapists, according to reports from Amnesty International and the United Nations. ……..They are usually imagined as somewhat ‘deviant’ – unemployed, uneducated, alcoholic or from non-Western backgrounds, and so on. However, as Ertürk challenges: “In absolute numbers, the vast majority of the perpetrators of intimate-partner violence are ‘ordinary’ Swedish men. Swedish rapists ‘enjoy impunity’: Amnesty International
För några enskilda brottstyper var andelen utrikes födda särskilt hög. Andelen utrikes födda som registrerats som misstänkta för våldtäkt var 4,5 gånger högre än andelen registrerade bland dem med svenskfödda föräldrar.
Og BRÅ´s oplysninger kan man roligt regne for “konservative”. Derudover gælder de kun “udenrigsfødte”, ikke efterkommere. Hvordan det kan blive til “the vast majority of the perpetrators of intimate-partner violence are ‘ordinary’ Swedish men”, skylder fru Ertürk en forklaring på.
Polygami skal stoppes
Lone Nørgaard , lektor, cand.mag. og Britta Mogensen, antropolog
Taimullah Abu-Laban har et indlæg i avisen 25. april under overskriften “Polygamidebatten dæmoniserer islam“. Vi skal ikke komme videre ind på en velkendt rygmarvsreaktion, der betegner enhver kritik af islam ‘dæmonisering’. Det er ikke islam, der står på programmet her. Derfor skal Abu-Laban heller ikke slippe af sted med at forskyde problemet ‘polygami’ til en diskussion om sexslaver. For nu handler det altså om polygami, hvor juraen er glasklar. I Danmark er det ikke tilladt at have flere ægtefæller på samme tid. Derfor må en mand med to koner enten flytte et sted hen, hvor flerkoneri er tilladt, eller også må han lade sig skille fra den ene kone.
På den baggrund skal foden nu langt om længe sættes hårdt ned over for uautoriserede imamvielser, som myndighederne hidtil bekvemt har vendt det blinde øje til. En mands ægteskab med kone nummer to er nemlig ikke altid indgået i mandens hjemland. Den polygame vielse kan udmærket have fundet sted i Danmark – foretaget af en imam. Hvis en mand vil leve i et polygamt forhold i henhold til sit eget lands religiøse regler, har han ingen problemer med at skaffe en imam til at forrette vielsen. Det er politikernes pligt at finde en løsning. Vel at mærke en løsning, der tilgodeser de kvinder, der er tvunget ind i disse kvindefjendske forhold. Den stærkt kvindeundertrykkende idé om, at mænd skal serviceres af flere ægtefæller, er et kulturelt begreb, der ikke er foreneligt med en moderne, demokratisk tankegang om kønnenes lige værd. Information | 28.04.2009
Bandekrigen: Aben tørres af på danskerne
Det er ikke demokratiske danske institutioner der skal “passe på”, det burde være forbryderne der i dén grad burde “passe på” at de ikke kom rigtig galt afsted i forhold til voldsmonopolets overvældende ildkraft. Thorkild Høyer kan slet ikke satse på – min betegnelse for en velkendt slags debattomgang – en kollektiv besindelse der aldrig kommer. Høyer burde tage udgangspunkt i at det demokratiske samfund opfører sig som et demokratisk samfund nu en gang må gøre, og indrette argumentationen herefter. Når han ikke gør det, men maner til at flere instanser skal handle i overensstemmelse med hans egen indfaldsvinkel, er det selvfølgelig en manøvre der forlods placerer skylden for hvad der måtte indtræffe hos lovlige danske institutioner.
Det er så ulideligt velkendt efterhånden: De ædle vilde har ingen fri vilje, men handler helt reaktivt på de valg som vi (der har spist af æblet i Paradisets Have) gør. Og at Berlingskes journalist bevidstløst refererer denne manipulation og ikke laver en kritisk perspektivering er også lige efter bogen (LFPC).
[…] Bandekonflikten kan meget hurtigt ryge af sporet, mener Thorkild Høyer, fordi større grupper af befolkningen risikerer at gå ind i konflikten – hvis ikke politi, presse og politikere passer på.
– Der er en reel fare, at det kunne udvikle sig til en meget mere omfattende konflikt.
Faren ligger ifølge advokaten i den ophobede vrede over det nydanskerne oplever som forskelsbehandling og småracisme. […]Rockermægler: Bandekrigen bliver værre
Christopher Caldwell is author of “Reflections on the Revolution in Europe: Immigration, Islam and the West,” published by Allen Lane on 7th May. This article is an edited extract
That was a big difference between Europe’s challenges and similar American ones. In the US, there was a ‘‘race problem’’ and an ‘‘immigration problem,’’ and the two did not always have much to do with one another. In Europe, the immigration problem was the race problem. So declaring immigration a success and an ‘‘enrichment’’ became the only acceptable opinion. To hold immigration a failure was to reveal oneself a racist; to express misgivings about immigration was to confess racist inclinations. The philosopher Pierre-André Taguieff coined the term immigrationisme to describe the ideology that immigration is always ‘‘both inevitable and good.’’ Real discussions about the increasing ‘‘diversity’’ of European society, and whether it was a good or a bad thing, were all but shut down.
Non-European immigrants may not have been enviable in a socioeconomic way, but they were enviable in an existential way. They were cooler. They were aristocrats of identity. This was the message of a fascinating newspaper, Gringo, that was founded in the heavily immigrant suburbs of Stockholm. The ghettoised svartkalle—‘‘black head,’’ in the Swedish slang—was stereotypically downtrodden and excluded. But in the pages of Gringo ethnic Swedes were patronisingly called Svennar, the ‘‘Svens,’’ much as American ghetto slang used to refer to white people as ‘‘Chuck.’’ Native Swedes were clueless people who probably didn’t know how to dance. Every issue carried the motto ‘‘Sweden’s Most Swedish Paper.’’ The magazine’s editor, Zanyar Adami, sometimes said that Gringo’s project was to create a new Swedish national identity. This meant, one assumes, getting rid of the dead weight of the old one. Prospect Magazine
Betalt udvandring
Af Nicolai Sennels
Efter 40 år med konstant stigende problemer med muslimske indvandrere i Europa, er det nu klart for enhver: Integration af muslimer i vestlige samfund kan ikke lade sig gøre. Løser vi ikke problemet, vil de menneskelige, økonomiske og samfundsmæssige konsekvenser være katastrofale.
Findes der en win-win løsning, hvor alle parter bliver tilgodeset? Ja: Betalt udvandring. Ifølge Nationalbanken koster en ikke-vestlig indvandrer i snit to mio. kr. Den ene million kan man give til udvandreren som velment hjælp til en sikker og værdig ny start i et land, hvor han/ hun føler sig hjemme.
Den anden million går til modtagerlandet som goodwill og udviklingsstøtte. Muligheden for at bo i et land, hvor man forstår kulturen og tilstrækkeligt med penge til at forsørge sig selv og sin familie, vil i sig selv bidrage enormt til livskvaliteten for den enkelte. Samtidig vil de udvandrende muslimer kunne gøre det, som de forhåbentligt alle har et stort ønske om: At forbedre de samfundsmæssige forhold, som de i sin tid flygtede fra.
Med vestlig skolegang, et indgående kendskab til velfærdssamfundets mange fortræffeligheder og oplevelsen af velfungerende demokratier og den store tryghed det er at leve under ægte menneskerettigheder, vil de virke som ambassadører for friere og mere demokratiske samfund i den på disse områder hårdt trængte muslimske verden. Fyens Stiftstidende | 29.04.2009
Er ytringsfriheden en by i Rusland?
Mødet foregår på engelsk:
Mød tre russiske intellektuelle, der kan berette om de faktiske forhold for den frie meningsudveksling i Putins Rusland.
Sted: Vartov, Farvergade 27, 1463 København K
Tid: Lørdag d. 2. kl.13 – 17, trykkefrihed@trykkefrihed.dk.Mødeleder: Lars Hedegaard. Program:Trykkefrihedsselskabet
DF og Osama
Egon Clausen – 30 år på Danmarks Radio og 69 års kamp med en indremissionsk baggrund. Fra før verden gik af lave og P 1 blev et “livsstilsprogram”. Sådan lød det og sådan lyder det stadig :
Der findes magtfulde mennesker i Danmark, som kæmper for et ultra-nationalt Danmark, og som egentlig har meget til fælles med … tankegangen hos Osama bin Laden og hans despoter. I begge lejre er man opfyldt af gensidigt had – hvilket blandt andet giver sig udslag i deres holdninger til menneskerettigheder og ytringsfrihed. Det mener forfatteren Egon Clausen – og i rubrikken – ”Tanker i tiden” uddyber han sit synspunkt med eksempler på en proces, som her i landet startede tilbage i oplysningstiden. Tanker i tiden ”Osamas danske venner”
Rosengård: En allians mellan extremvänster och islamism
En recession ville blotlægge det svenske konfliktpotentiale, det kunne enhver se på lang afstand. Man kunne næsten sige, i hvilke ghettoer det ville vise sig først. Nu er det svært at se en øvre grænse for, hvor galt det kan gå de næste par år. Man kan følge de daglige fortrædeligheder her: Flera brandmän slutar– trötta på hoten ,”Nu får det vara nog“, Kommunpolitiker vill ha utegångsförbud, Ungdomsgänget styr Herrgården. “Dialog” har været en syg vittighed i mange måneder. Malmøs uduelige bystyre har nu nogle beslutninger foran sig, de ikke har haft fantasi til at forestille sig. Svenske statsministres “vision” fra Olof Palme over Thorbjörn Fälldin, Ola Ullsten, Ingvar Carlsson, Carl Bildt, Göran Persson til Fredrik Reinfeldt, er i færd med at materialisere sig. Det har været smerteligt at overvære et godt stykke tid. Axess baggrundsartikel:
Minnena haglar samtidigt som stadsdelen skakas av våldsamma detonationer från slangbomberna. En bomb rullar in under en fullsatt polispiket. Mobben jublar och en sekund väntar jag på katastrofen, en övertänd bil med innebrända poliser. Men nej. Inget annat händer än ytterligare en våldsam detonation. Kravaller har jag upplevt tidigare, Paris 1973, Santiago under diktaturen 1986, Göteborg 2001, men under några utdragna ögonblick känns det faktiskt farligare här och jag vågar inte gå ända fram, brandröken gör det dessutom svårt att andas. Och vad händer om Shellmacken antänds?
150 års jødisk historie lakker mod enden i Malmø. Hvis det ikke var gået hen og blevet lidt hverdagsagtigt, ville man svinge sig op til at kalde det flere generationers værste skandale i Sverige. Det er ikke 1937 i Sverige, men det er måske hen på efteråret 1932. Historien om de gode hensigters onde virkninger. Hvordan kan svenskerne beherske deres vrede mod den herskende klasse – eller rettere, hvordan vil den vise sig, når den ikke længere kan tøjles ? Flere svenske politiker-mord? *
“Vi kommer ikke til at blive i Malmø. Vi forlader Malmø. Det er kun et spørgsmål om hvornår, og om vi skal forlade Sverige helt.Vi har mistet håbet om at der findes en fremtid for os her. Flere af vores bekendte har besluttet det samme. Jeg vil ikke være den der ikke flyttede fra – nu skal jeg ikke sige, det ER sådan – de der blev tilbage i Tyskland i 1936, 1937, 1938, der var mange som flygtede, men langt, langt fra alle, og da de lukkede grænserne i 1939, – jeg vil ikke være blandt dem, der havner på den forkerte side af hegnet.” ” (fra SR, P 1, 17 marts 2009)
Unga judar väljer bort Malmö. De ser inte sin framtid i staden. På senare tid har de upplevt sin tillvaro som allt mer osäker, glåpord och hot har blivit allt vanligare och många väljer att inte skylta med sin tillhörighet offentligt. Jag tror att när man resonerar om sin framtid, så resonerar man inte om Malmö, utan om andra städer, andra länder. Enligt Brottsförebyggande rådets statistik är det just de antijudiska hatbrotten som har lägst uppklarandegrad, bara 4 procent.Unga judar väljer bort Malmö
*Jeg er flere gange for nylig i Danmark stød på den opfattelse, at Anna Lindh blev myrdet af en utilregnelig sindsssyg. Hvis det bare var så vel. Mihailovic kunne ikke selv med den største umage erklæres utilregnelig. Viljen manglede ikke, men han var og forblev apsykotisk. Mordet var mere “fishy” end som så, hvis man ridser bare lidt i lakken. Lindh er blevet noget typisk svensk, et traume man ikke vil påmindes, man ser hende aldrig nævnt. : Ulf Nilson: Mijailovics motiv, tack!,Skräddarsydd måttbeställning.
“Sverige är ett märkligt land. I vilket land på denna jord kan man tänka sig en rättegång där domstolen på tre dagar, knappt 10 timmars förhandling och med hjälp av totalt tre vittnen klarar av att behandla ett mord på landet utrikesminister”?
LEIF GW PERSSON, professor vid Polishögskolan i Stockholm
“Andenhåndssøgende” – families familie
Detta berättar en migga lätt uppgivet:
Anhöriginströmningen kommer att öka. Klart dominerande är fortfarande irakier och somalier. Jag kan se en ökning av, vi kan kalla dem andrahandsansökande, det vill säga sådana som själva kommit som anhöriga, fått PUT, skilt sig och nu vill ta hit en ny maka/make.“Andrahandssökande” – ett nytt ord begrepp i den svenska asylinvandringsvokabulären.
The Telegraph har i Ambrose Evans-Pritchard åbenbart deres egen Dr. Doom. Perspektiverne han opruller er skrækkelige i sig selv, men hvad jeg gerne ville vide er hvilke demografiske konsekvenser det ville få hvis den Gamle Verden blev reduceret til et “backwater”. Den magnet som velfærdsstaterne udgør for de fallerede staters trætte og fattige vil så være forsvundet, så det i det mindste ikke er livslang forsørgelse på skatteydernes regning der vil trække dem hertil. Hvad der synes oplagt er, at den “træthed” på det kulturelle og åndelige plan der lige nu bliver holdt i ave af historisk uset rigdom, i et økonomisk forarmet fremtidsscenarie vil få kontinentet til at implodere. Når ethvert forsøg på at hævde europæisk historie og kultur i dagens verden bliver skudt ned som politisk anløbent, hvad sker der så den dag krybben er tom? Hvem overtager fallitboet? (LFPC)
[…] A disturbing number of states look like Iceland once you dig into the entrails, and most are in Europe where liabilities average 4.2 times GDP, compared with 2pc for the US. “There could be a cluster of defaults over the next three years, possibly sooner,” he said.
Research by former IMF chief economist Ken Rogoff and professor Carmen Reinhart found that spasms of default occur every couple of generations, each time shattering the illusions of bondholders. Half the world succumbed in the 1830s and again in the 1930s. […]
Great bankruptcies change the world. Spain’s defaults under Philip II ruined the Catholic banking dynasties of Italy and south Germany, shifting the locus of financial power to Amsterdam. Anglo-Dutch forces were able to halt the Counter-Reformation, free northern Europe from absolutism, and break into North America.
Who knows what revolution may come from this crisis if it ever reaches defaults. My hunch is that it would expose Europe’s deep fatigue – brutally so – reducing the Old World to a backwater. Whether US hegemony remains intact is an open question. I would bet on US-China condominium for a quarter century, or just G2 for short. Ambrose Evans-Pritchard: The capital well is running dry and some economies will wither
Sverige – Europas voldtægstcentrum
I Sverige anmäls flest våldtäkter per invånare i Europa. Tidig sexdebut och hög alkoholkonsumtion pekas i en ny EU-rapport ut som förklaringar. Men jag är övertygade om att det är en större benägenhet att anmäla som ligger bakom, säger Klara Hradilova Selin, utredare på BRÅ. AB
I Sverige anmäls 46 våldtäkter per 100 000 invånare. Det är dubbelt så många som i England som redovisar 23 anmälningar. Det är fyra gånger fler än i de övriga nordiska länderna, Tyskland och Frankrike och upp till 20 gånger fler än vissa länder i Syd- och Östeuropa. SVD
Nu er gode dyr rådne. Sverige skal ikke sammenlignes med syd- og Østeuropa, men med Norge, Danmark og Finland. Dernæst – det passer ikke, som SvD skriver, at Sverige har fire gange flere anmeldte voldtægter end Danmark. Anmeldelsesfrekvensen er mindst otte gange højere: 5446 anmeldte i 2008, (Danmark 467 anmeldte i 2008.), som man ser ved hurtig hovedregning. Hvordan skal man nu forklare så høj en overhyppighed ?SvD prøver med: “Tidig sexdebut, hög alkoholkonsumtion, “fri sexualitet” och “rätten till ett sent nej” ger helt enkelt fler våldtäkter, enligt studien.” Det kan man mene, selvom det virker noget usubstantielt som forklaring til så stor en forskel, ja for ofrene er det er en helt utilstrækkelig sludder for en sladder. “Långsökt” på svensk. “Far-fetched” på engelsk.
En svensk netbesøger har korreleret BRÅs tal for voldtægt og opholdtilladelser, og fundet denne kurve. Her skal man huske, at Sverige også er suverænt Europa-førende hvad angår opholdstilladelser, på svensk kaldet PUT. En lige så god forklaring som Svenska Dagbladets, kunne nogle mene, hvis de turde. I et land med en normalt fungerende presse, ville man nu gå i gang med at endevende dette grundigt. Men i Sverige er pressen allerede i gang med at tale det ned og væk, inden nogen overhovedet har gjort ophævelser. Det kunne tolkes som, at sandheden om dette er aldeles uvelkommen. Endda at den vil være omvendt proportional med det antal forskere, der sættes på sporet efter den. I Universitetssprog: “not nice to know”, lig med “ikke- karrierebefordrende viden.” – Vi siger ikke at denne grafik er forklaringen, men den er i det mindste ikke så langt ude i hampen som Svd og Aftonbladets næsten fornærmende forklaringer:
Fjordman sender sit essay og sin anbefaling af konferencen i Köln den niende maj.
I’m tired of people who are busy losing this world war because they are still obsessed with the previous one, which ended generations ago. Anti-Nazism has mutated into a permanent witch-hunt on an imaginary enemy. The notion that “neo-Nazis” constitute a prominent group today is nonsense. The most dangerous people by far are those running the European Union, who are busy dismantling European civilization and enlarging the borders of the EU to include the Middle East and North Africa, those flooding their own countries with tens of millions of Muslims and other hostile aliens without consulting the native population. This makes the EU the largest criminal entity on the planet, preoccupied with destroying an entire continent, dismantling the greatest civilization that has ever existed and replacing the native population with others. I have described this in my book Defeating Eurabia, which is available online. Why We Need Germany
Jägersros brandchef siger op
‘Under en lång tid har han och hans kollegor försökt få igenom en del åtgärder som, enligt Henrik Persson, skulle förbättra säkerheten, framför allt i Rosengård. På ett möte nyligen sa polisen att vi måste vara beredda på att ungdomarna kan slänga molotov cocktails på oss. Som det är nu känner jag att jag inte kan garantera säkerheten för mina kollegor, säger Henrik Persson. På måndagsatten brann det återigen på Rosengård – den här gången i en sopstation på Bennets väg.
Fathi El-Abed (SF) – den kloge narrer den mindre kloge
Opskriften er enkel: Et muslimsk medlem af et af de gode, følsomme og anstændige partier griber en sag der i disse dage vækker opmærksomhed langt ud over vores små cirkler her, og indtager et for hans fløj skarpt og konsekvent standpunkt, helt uden den berøringsangst og blødsødenhed hans parti ellers er berygtet for. Men det kan han også sagtens, for skurken bor langt væk i et af de varme lande; chancen for at få kravet efterkommet er ikke større end Muhammeds chancer på dommedag, og: Fathi El-Abed ved aldeles udmærket at journalisten ikke vil begynde at stille kritiske spørgsmål til hvad El-Abed, sådan, selv står for.
Efter at have set den grusomme videooptagelse af en arabisk sheikh, der torturerer en kornhandler, kræver SF’s spidskandidat til Europaparlamentet den kongelige torturbøddel straffet. “Jeg får helt ondt i maven af at se det. Det her er jo ikke bare nedværdigende. Det er dybt umenneskeligt,” siger Fathi El-Abed, SF’s EU-spidskandidat […]
“Jeg har boet i Emiraterne og jeg ved, at de er helt ved siden af, når det handler om menneskerettigheder. Her er det en sheikh mod en kornhandler – det er simpelthen topmålet af ulighed, og jeg mener, EU bør kræve sheikhen stillet til ansvar,” siger Fathi El-Abed til jp.dk.[…] EU-kandidat: Arrester sheikhen
90 brande i Rosengård siden nytår, knap én om dagen. Alvoren er trængt frem til TV 4 : “Jeg er meget påvirket og overvældet. Jeg vidste ikke, det var så alvorligt. Jeg tror det er for sent for myndighederne at komme det til livs.” (TV 4 ´s kriminalreporter, 27 april.)
Pakistaner danner norsk parti – via Nordpakistan
Synspunkter: Nemmere adgang til indvandring, statsbetalte imamer, forbud mod kritik af Islam, forbud mod homoseksuel praksis, mere modersmålsundervisning, jøderne stod bag 9-11, nå ja, og fortsæt selv og så mener han at Oslos borgmester om tre år er nordpakistaner og statsministeren det samme om 15 år. Nordmændene er ved at komme i konkurrence med svenskerne om at blive :
spørger Peter Whittle i sin inledning til Melanie Phillips* tale. Han mente – fra Rushdie i 1989 til England 2009 og lader svaret være op til tilhørerne, men henviser til brandbomben mod Phillips´ forlægger for nylig. Er vi kommet langt i Danmark siden efteråret 2005? Nogle er, andre ikke en centimeter. De der har fået øjne åbnet og har flyttet sig, synes at være indfødte danske, der har opdaget mere om den globalisering, de modvilligt har fået smidt i nakken, de ser vi er kommet langt dybere ud i en sump. Sandheden er, at vi er påført en magtkamp, af politikere og af folk hvis tilbøjelighed til vold er større end vores, og at vi når som helst kan stå midt i en ny Muhammed krise (svenske journalister sætter udtrykket i citationstegn, man aner hensigt….),der meget vel kan koste menneskeliv. Vi kan tage den på os eller tabe den, for eksempel ved fortrængning, som i Sverige. Danmark bliver ikke det første europæiske land, der synker ned i borgerkrig, selvom vi ser en mini version af den på Nørrebro i øjeblikket. Man kvier sig ved at bruge ordet, men der er ingen vej udenom. Det er et scenarie der må medtænkes, især for dem med børn og børnebørn.
Muslimerne i Danmark “går ind for demokrati”, men det er ligesom med velfærdssamfundet på nyde-planet, ikke når der skal ydes, og skræmmende mange savner den mest elementære viden om begrebet. Hvis bare 5 % vil sætte vold bag deres uvidenhed og manglende accept, så er Balkan for alvor ankommet til Danmark og værdikampen er kun lige begyndt, og det med streg under kamp. Også Lars Hedegaard er pessimist i dette canadiske interview. (* Phillips´ københavner-tale er kommet på tryk idag.)
Judges could be forced to bow to Sharia law in some divorce cases heard in Britain. An EU plan calls for family courts across Europe to hear cases using the laws of whichever country the couple involved have close links to.
That could mean a court in England handling a case within the French legal framework, or even applying the laws of Saudi Arabia to a husband and wife living in Britain. The Centre for Social Justice think tank today attacked the so-called Rome III reform as ludicrous. […]
(klip fra Il Ventre Dell’architetto, The Architects Belly) – Interesant interview med Greenaway her på Politiken (min.5:25) Greenaway hylder You Tube og mener at filmmediet sidste gang gav livstegn fra sig, da Fassbinder levede. Jeg ville måske udstrække det til 1999, da Kubrick døde. Jeg går heller ikke meget i biografen, engang imellem hen på det jeg stadig kalder Filmmuseet. Forleden så jeg Righteous Kill, hvor Brian Dennehy også medvirker (sammen med Al Pacino og Robert de Niro, der spiller sig selv som sædvanlig, det er derfor man ser dem.) Han er blevet ældgammel. Kvalitets-tju-bang. Det er sådan noget som gode skuespillere fordriver deres og vores tid med at lave. Lidt som dansk teater der næppe uddeler Reumert priser for de forestillinger, de stakkels skuespillere skal medvirke i. Skuespillerne kan leve af det, publikum kan ikke. I Politiken interviewet siger Greenaway, at H.C. Andersen jo var homoseksuel. Det er en myte med 199 liv, første gang tilbagevist i Hjalmar Helwegs indfølte bog om Andersen fra 1927. Så måske genopstår filmen også fra de døde ? Men se de fem minutter fra Politiken, man kan godt læse avisen, bare man er god til overspringshandlinger.
“Asien börjar i Malmö”
Genom decennier har danskarna blickat klentroget och med rynkade näsor över Sundet, mot Malmö, staden där Asien börjar, mot det karga, vindpinade, svenska Storebrors- och förbudssamhället, där social permafrost dödat all individualism, där en glädjelös, nyttomaximerande överhet med byråkratisk nit lägger livet till rätta.
Hvorfor har vi ikke kommenteret de artikler, spørger nogle. Svaret er, at vi gider ikke. Det var noget Strindberg sagde, det forår 1887 han boede i Skodsborg og sad og kiggede østover Øresund. Jeg kan ikke huske hvor han skriver det, men jeg ved jeg husker rigtigt. Den smule har jeg tilfælles med Søren Kierkegaard – udover at have gået på samme skole og at der også er meget jeg ikke giiider – at jeg aldrig kan huske hvor jeg har læst tingene. Det var forresten hos Kirkegaard, jeg første gang opdagede at man kunne “træde i Characteer”. Så gik der mange år uden at nogen trådte i karakter, og idag træder alle og enhver i karakter i tide og utide og uafprut, som min gamle ven advokaten sagde, bare de skal en tur i Netto. Jeg vil ikke træde i den. Hvem ved, om man har én at træde i, hvis det endelig skulle være ?
UK: Behov for opførelse af et hus hvert sjette minut de næste 20 år
Tilvandringen er løbet fuldstændig ud af kontrol i det ellers gennemkontrollerede Storbritannien, med et tilsvarende eskalerende behov for opførelse af nye boliger. Absurditeten i dette land er på Monty Python’sk niveau, dog ikke spor sjovt for briterne. Sketchen her har en vis relevans for denne problematik (LFPC).
THE United Kingdom will have to build one house every six minutes, day and night, seven days a week for the next 20 years to meet the current scale of immigration, Labour MP and former minister Frank Field warned yesterday.
He said immigration would account for 70% of population growth in the next 20 years – that is seven million, or seven times the population of Birmingham. In 2007, immigrants were arriving at the rate of almost one every minute.
He recalled that he and Tory MP Nicholas Soames had established a cross-party group on balanced migration, designed to stimulate and inform a non-partisan and calm debate about the issue.
“For many years, probably a generation, immigration has been a no-go area to British politics. ‘Racist’, ‘Little Englander’, ‘xenophobe’ – those who have raised the subject have been insulted, abused and, all too often, silenced.” […] Field hits out over immigration levels
Christopher Caldwell: How benefits can be a divisive force in a pluralist society.
Immigration and welfare are a bad mix in other ways, too. Comprehensive welfare systems (transfers, pensions, healthcare) tend not to arise in societies of mass immigration, such as the United States. In the present downturn, many assume that one path to recovery is to give up some economic dynamism and return to the welfare model that existed from Attlee to Thatcher. But Britain is not the place it was until the 1970s. Welfare states require consensus and society may now be too multicultural to provide it.
Muslimer i Danmark er røde. I hvert fald vil kun en ud af ti muslimer stemme på regeringen og dens støttepartier, hvis der var valg nu. DR har fået foretaget en analyse af analyseinstituttet Capacent blandt muslimer i Danmark, og til spørgsmålet om, hvilket parti de ville stemme på, hvis der var valg nu, løber Socialdemokraterne med 58,3 procent af de muslimske stemmer. Omregnet i mandater svarer det til 103. Samlet set ville den nuværende opposition, Socialdemokraterne, De Radikale, SF og Enhedslisten få 89,1 procent af stemmerne. Regeringen og Dansk Folkeparti får lille opbakning
Muslimerne i Danmark stemmer rødt, Muslimerne er vilde med Helle Thorning, Sådan er undersøgelsen foretaget. Resultatet er ikke just nogen nyhed, sådan er det overalt i Europa. I Sverige så ekstremt, at hvis 500.000 svenske muslimer og godt 1 million andre indvandrere kunne mobiliseres til at stemme (dem med stemmeret, naturligvis), ville landet ikke få en borgerlig regering mere i overskuelig fremtid, hvis nogensinde. At Alliancen overhovedet kunne vinde med den snævrest tænkelige margin i 2006, var allerede lidt af et mirakel, der ikke ret sandsynlig gentager sig, de seneste meningsmålinger til trods. I det perspektiv er statsminister Reinfeldts uændrede asylpolitik, i realiteten et politisk selvmord i fuld offentlighed. Hele det politiske billede er parallelforskudt, og trods ringe idésammenfald med venstrefløjen, er det med til at cementere et ægteskab mellem de to parter, der har store konflikter indbygget i sig fra fødslen.
Journalistik under islam
A large majority of Dutch journalists say that they no longer work in certain neighbourhoods because they fear they will be targets for violence, shows a survey held on behalf of journalists’ union NVJ. NVJ asked criminologist, professor Frank Bovenkerk to examine the nature and scale of aggression against journalists on the streets. Of the 691 journalists who filled in Bovenkerk’s questionnaire, 492 said they now avoided certain neighbourhoods when doing their work.
At some time in their career, 374 of the 691 journalists had been confronted with physical aggression or threats. Those working for regional media were most often the victims of violence, in particular cameramen and photographers. A total of 75 journalists reported damage to their equipment or vehicles. There were 36 who reported physical assault, leading to hospital admission in 6 cases. Vast Majority of Journalists Avoid “Certain Districts”
Nogle nøjes med at henstille verbalt til en “pæn tone”, men danske journalister kunne sagtens tale med om mere håndfaste metoder, hvis de turde (se “»Intern instruks til DR medarbejderne«), men det er tys tys. Som man kan se af de hollandske tal, er journalisterne dér allerede tyranniseret betydeligt på retræten. Nylig var der lignende tal fra Sverige og Norge. Melanie Phillips skar torsdag i København det valg ud i pap, som heller ikke en fri journalistik kan undslå sig:
“This is the paradox we are facing: A liberal society has to exercise very robust, muscular and indeed sometimes illiberal measures to defend itself. If it does not do that, it will not survive as a liberal society. That is the paradox of liberalism. If you don’t want to do that….fine, it’s your choice sunshine, but you are gonna have a country that’s going to be engulfed by islamization and violence. Liberalism is in danger of disappearing up its own backside.”
Var fjärde ungdom står utan jobb i Sverige – 24,3 procent. Det är bara Spanien i hela Europa som har en högre siffra. Ändå har det tills nyligen varit relativt tyst om detta jätteproblem. I teorin lever vi i den mest solidariska av världar. De “svaga” hjälps upp av teoritunga yrkesutbildningar som ger entrébiljett till universiteten, av höga ingångslöner och lagskydd mot lynniga arbetsgivare.I praktiken lämnar vi ungdomar, lågutbildade och invandrare i sticket. Anna Dahlberg: Sveket mot de unga
Hvad Dahlberg ikke skriver om, for det kan man ikke, er hvorfra arbejdsløsheden også kommer, og hvor pengene forsvinder hen, for det er historien om Riksdagens godhedskrig mod den dårligtst stillede del af den svenske befolkning, ikke mindst syge, børn og gamle. Dens “generøsitet” koster trecifrede milliardbeløb,(se også her) men ingen journalist eller forsker, der har sin karriere kær, vil røre ved den historie. Et lille eksempel her fra Fria Nyheters serie om Kommunefakta:
2007 var kostnaden för ekonomiskt bistånd 1049,3 miljoner kronor. Av dessa gick 738,5 miljoner kr till utrikesfödda och flyktingar, vilket motsvarar 70,4 % av det totala biståndet. Andelen utrikesfödda var 21 % den 31 december 2007.
Nicolai Sennels gør op med tidens farligst vandrehistorie: At integrationen går fremad.
Som tidligere psykolog i Københavns Kommune har det altid været mig en gåde, at venstrefløjens og en række borgerlige integrationsministres udokumenterede påstand om integrationens langsomme, men sikre succes, lever så velgående. Denne vandrehistorie har desværre fået samme sandhedsværdi som ordsproget om, at tiden læger alle sår. For det gør tiden jo som bekendt ikke altid: Efter lange skænderier ender mange med at blive skilt, og efter et overbevisende antal trafikuheld bliver fatale vejkryds heldigvis nedlagt. I virkeligheden …………
Man behøver ikke hedde Samuel Huntington for at se, at der i disse dage, måneder og år udspiller sig en global kamp på værdier og viljestyrke, ideer og identitet. Kampen er nok militær og konkret, men den har også en mere abstrakt karakter af en kamp om hjerterne, der udkæmpes overalt, hvor islamister tester vores fundamentale principper.Det sker i FN, det sker i EU og mange andre internationale fora. Men det sker også i Danmark.
Og her havde vi i går besøg af en ægte kulturkæmper. I skikkelse af den britiske journalist Melanie Phillips, som lagde vejen forbi et København badet i sorgløs sol. […]
Som Melanie Phillips står på talerstolen, ligner hun ikke ligefrem en kulturkæmper. Tynd, nærmest ranglet, taler hun tidens politiske dogmer midt imod. Hun beskriver dem som en fortælling om uimodsagt dyd. Er man uenig i dyden og dydens nysprog, er man at regne for kætter. Afviser man FN’s åbenbaringer, hedder det, at man stiger af verden. Verden har nemlig kun én retning; deri det skræmmende perspektiv, siger Phillips. Verden er blevet unilateral. Tvivler du på FN-ideologien om harmoni, tolerance og afskaffelse af had, drager du verden i tvivl og står ganske udenfor. Politik er blevet et manikæisk spørgsmål om at være for eller imod. Den europæiske elite er for. De umoralske masser uden almen dannelse er imod, og skal rette ind, og gør de det ikke frivilligt, så skal de tvinges. Michael Jalving i Jyllands Posten
Melanie Phillips, speech, the Sappho Award, 4/23/09
Freedom of speech is one of the core values of the free world. Without free speech there can be no free thought. Yet freedom of speech is under threat as never before; and as with the threat to the free world in general, it is a threat being mounted both from outside and from inside. The onslaught from without is being facilitated by erosion from within.
The onslaught from without comes from the Islamic jihad. A few weeks ago, the United Nations Human Rights Council approved a resolution calling upon member states to provide legal ‘protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions and incitement to religious hatred in general.’
Since the proposal came from Pakistan and had the backing of the 57-government Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the UN’s largest voting bloc, it was clear that Islam was the only religion the drafters had in mind.
And now ‘Durban II’ — the second World Conference on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance under way this week in Geneva – threatens to prohibit criticism of Islam as a form of incitement.
This all part of a relentless strategy to use the UN as a vehicle for the jihad to rewrite international law and overturn the core values of the west.
In March last year, the OIC developed what the Associated Press called ‘a battle plan’ to use the law against ‘Islamophobia’ by curbing free speech. That month, it changed the mandate for the UNHRC’s rapporteur on freedom of expression, who was now to be expected to report to the Council on all instances in which individuals ‘abused’ their freedom of speech by giving expression to racial or religious bias. In short, the UN voted to force the official charged with protecting freedom of expression to suppress it instead.
In June last year, the UNHRC president Doru Romulus Costea announced that criticism of sharia law would not be tolerated. This followed pressure by Islamist delegates after NGOs tried to raise the plight of women under sharia. In a curious turn of phrase, the Egyptian delegate claimed that silencing these NGOs was necessary to ensure ‘that Islam will not be crucified in this Council’.
As we have seen from the ‘Durban 2’ meeting in Geneva this week, the UNHRC has turned the human rights it is supposed to protect into a mockery of the term. This is because it has been hijacked by the Islamic states which have turned the UN — the iconic embodiment of western liberal values of reason and negotiation, justice and peace — into a kind of metaphorical suicide bomb strapped to the underbelly of the free world. In the form of the UN, the west now unwittingly embraces a deadly weapon that threatens to destroy it.
Just as the west can’t see that the UN club of terror in fact promotes the negation of freedom, so the west is being equally undermined from within by a crisis of confusion over the core values it is supposedly trying to defend.
It has repeatedly sold the pass over freedom of speech. First there was the fatwa against Salman Rushdie over the Satanic Verses in 1989 when Britain failed to prosecute a single person for threatening to murder him. Then there was the Mohammed cartoons furore.
Now London has turned into a magnet for libel tourism, with the draconian British libel laws being successfully used by wealthy Arabs to intimidate authors and publishers into censoring exposes of the hidden links between Islamic terror and its financing.
You might call this the ‘jihad of the word’ — the suppression of free speech which is such a crucial part of the global jihad. For terrorism is by no means the only threat we are facing. What we are up against is a pincer movement by global Islamism to attack the free world, using both terrorism or hard jihad and cultural infiltration or soft jihad. The two work both together and separately to advance the same end: the Islamisation of the west.
And that’s because the real ground on which we are being attacked – even though so many of us don’t recognise this – is the battleground of the mind. The Islamists understand very well that if they can control public discourse and what is in people’s minds, they will win this great war of civilisation. The ‘jihad of the word’ both recruits terrorists to the cause and confuses, demoralises and terrorises the designated victim population.
All over Europe, elites are caving into the soft terrorism of the ‘jihad of the word’. But Britain is the principal target and recruitment centre for both kinds of jihad, because it has allowed the creation of the most extensive network of terrorism and radicalisation outside the Muslim world.
The reason for that is the hollowing out of British culture, which has paralysed it through the prevalent doctrines of multiculturalism, human rights law and cultural Marxism otherwise known as political correctness. These have rendered Britain’s political, security and intellectual establishment incapable of acknowledging this pincer movement and therefore dealing with the threat. They fully realise the threat of terrorism; but they fail to acknowledge the true nature, origins and full strategic dimension of the attack. They fail to grasp the cultural dimension of the onslaught because they refuse to acknowledge that this is a religious war.
Instead they think it’s terrorism driven by ‘grievances’, that it’s fuelled by a ‘distortion’ of Islam, and that the antidote is to win the hearts and minds of Britain’s Muslims by acceding to their demands that Islam is afforded a privileged status in British society which afforded to no other minority group. So instead of holding the line for western and British values, the government and security establishment show at every juncture that they will cave in to intimidation.
Thus the British government and security world won’t use the word ‘terrorism’ in conjunction with the words ‘Islam’, ‘Islamic’, ‘Islamist’ or ‘Muslim’. One senior official said: ‘We must talk in a language which is not offensive.’ Another said that the terrorist threat must not be described as a ‘Muslim problem’. In a speech on counter-terrorism earlier this year, Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, even declared the ‘violent extremism’ that threatens us to be ‘anti-Islamic’.
But if we can’t even name the threat we’re up against we will never defeat it. The problem in the UK is further that the government defines this threat as ‘violent extremism’, not ‘religious extremism’. It does not regard religious fanaticism as a threat; and so when Muslims refuse to tolerate any criticism of Islam, it doesn’t see this as a threat to British values.
On the contrary, so anxious is the British government to pacify the Muslim community that it genuflects to their demand that no offence should be caused to their religion. The government believes it can thus defuse anger and control ‘violent extremism’. But it is the British government being controlled and led by the nose to surrender its core values.
Moreover, in so doing it is abandoning the many truly moderate British Muslims who are neither violent nor extreme and do not subscribe to the interpretation of their religion being imposed by Islamist fanatics. Instead they subscribe to the separation of religion and state and the value of free speech and want to live as British citizens under one law for all. But by seeking to appease the extremists, the government makes it much harder for such moderate Muslims to stand up to them.
The reason the government is so bamboozled and confused is that Britain and Europe have been weakened by their own internal cultural confusion and erosion of core values – a confusion the Islamists are busily exploiting. This is true of two issues in particular: multiculturalism and the fear of giving offence.
Many people think multiculturalism just means showing respect and tolerance to other cultures and faiths. If that were so, it should be unarguable. We should all support respect and tolerance. That’s what a liberal society requires. But that’s not what multiculturalism is at all. It is a specific doctrine which holds that all minority values must have equal status to those of the majority. Any attempt to uphold majority values over minorities is a form of prejudice. That turns minorities into a cultural battering ram to destroy the very idea of being a majority culture at all. And so, since no culture can assert itself over any other, liberalism cannot assert itself as a dominant cultural force. Instead society must fragment into a kaleidoscope of equal — and opposing —values, and liberal values must give way to their opposite.
That is what happened over the Mohammed cartoons. Freedom of expression is a key liberal precept. But under multiculturalism, that cannot trump the doctrines of a minority faith which holds that to publish these images is to give offence. So the minority wins over the liberal majority, and Europeans decry not the violence and intimidation, the kidnappings, riots and murder which followed the publication of the cartoons but the offence to minority religious feelings that was given in publishing them.
Worse still, multiculturalism has reversed the notions of truth and lies, victim and victimiser. Since minorities can do no wrong, they cannot be held responsible for acts such as suicide bombings — which must instead be the fault of their victims if they are from the ‘oppressive’ western world. This key confusion, which has caused intellectual and moral paralysis in the west, plays directly into the pathological Muslim victim culture which makes dialogue impossible. Because so many Muslims genuinely believe they are under attack by the west, which is a giant conspiracy to destroy Islam. So they perceive their own aggression as legitimate self-defence, and the west’s defence as aggression.
This fundamental untruth has created a dialogue of the demented. Instead of treating it as the mad discourse that it is and refusing to play along with it, Britain regards it as an extension of its own multicultural, minority rights doctrine which routinely reverses victim and aggressor where any ‘vitim’ or minority group is concerned. So the untruths driving the terror are merely deepened – particularly since the left, which controls British and European culture, demonises America and Israel. So the central Islamist perception of the Big and Little Satan — based on the Big Lie that America and Israel are not the victims of Islamist terror but instead are aggressors seeking to destroy the Islamic world — is echoed in mainstream British discourse where anti-Americanism is rampant and Israel is well on the way to being delegitimised altogether.
This acts as an echo chamber for Muslim prejudice, reinforcing it and fuelling the sense of paranoia and victimisation. And it has also released the virus of Judeophobia, with claims of a world Jewish conspiracy that are a re-run of the medieval blood libels leading to rising numbers of physical attacks on Jews. Our debased liberalism thus negates the power of reason, the key characteristic of liberal thinking, promotes murderous prejudice and weakens the west in its defence against Islamism by paving the way for its distortions and twisted thinking to take even deeper root.
Another example is the insistence that Islamic terrorism should be represented as having nothing to do with Islam and that to link them is evidence of ‘Islamophobia’. This in itself is the jihadi tactic of using the west’s own corrupted values to sow confusion and be fashioned into a weapon against the west. The west’s victim culture, the belief that all minorities are victims of the majority and so any attempt to hold them to account is a form of prejudice, is used to label all attempts to tell the truth about Islamic violence or cultural conquest as a form of prejudice in order to silence it. Because of the dominance of victim culture and the terror of being accused of prejudice against an ethnic minority, as well as the implicit threat of violence unless this demand is met, the west has caved into this.
This has turned freedom inside out. In London, Islamists freely demonstrate on the streets with their calls for infidels to be beheaded or death to the Jews tolerated by the police as their right to free expression. By contrast, enraged passers-by who protest at such displays find themselves threatened with arrest. Thus defending western liberal values is criminalised by a society exercising tender liberal regard for the interests of minorities.
In similar vein Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch Freedom party who defends western freedom against Islamic violence, faces prosecution in the Netherlands for criticizing Islam. It was Geert Wilders who was banned by the British Home Secretary from entering Britain for threatening public order — while allowing into the country a procession of Islamists who preach death to the Jews, the destruction of Israel and the defeat of the west. This is because it is Muslims who threaten violence when hearing something that displeases them — while the authorities know that whatever vile threats or libels are thrown at the Jews, they will never harm anyone. So in Britain, the doctrine of free speech has now been replaced by the doctrine that violence pays.
It’s not just fear that has turned all this inside out. It’s the overriding importance within western society of not giving offence, which has paralysed us when we are faced with the same demand made of us by Muslims. The prohibition against giving offence arises from the importance we now attach to the subjective individual, and thus the primacy of respecting their feelings. With the rise of group rights and victim culture, the giving of offence is seen as an assault on someone’s very identity. It is therefore classed as prejudice regardless of whether it is well-founded in truth. Prejudice is the crime of crimes, and so the giving of offence is criminalised as hate speech.
British authorities repeatedly cave in over this question of giving offence to Muslims. In Britain, attempts to criminalise as hate speech truth-telling about the jihad took the form of a law against incitement to religious hatred. This was watered down after a campaign which seemed driven mainly by outrage that popular comedians would no longer feel able to tell jokes about religion on TV. But the law was nevertheless still passed.
A TV Dispatches programme uncovered disturbing evidence of incitement to the murder of homosexuals and the killing of British soldiers along with hatred of ‘unbelievers’ going on below the official radar in ostensibly respectable British mosques. But instead of prosecuting such fanatics, the police turned on the Dispatches producers, accusing them (in a complaint eventually thrown out by the broadcasting watchdog) of selective editing and distortion and undermining community cohesion.
On another occasion, a Muslim police community support officer stopped two Christian preachers from handing out Bible extracts in a Muslim area in the Midlands. They were told they could not preach there and that attempting to convert Muslims to Christianity was a ‘hate crime’. The officer involved did not uphold the law of the land, which gives people the freedom to say in public whatever they want within the law. Instead he upheld the Islamist principle that this particular area of an English city was a Muslim area, within which it was not permissible to do anything contrary to Muslim principles such as preach Christianity.
Such developments have been made possible by the acceptance within Britain and Europe of the need to prevent ‘hate crime’. Hate crime marches under the banner of human rights. Yet hate crime criminalises the wrong kind of thought. So it is actually a totalitarian measure that is contrary to human rights. This apparent contradiction has come about because ‘human rights’ have been transformed from the rights of the individual to the rights of the group — which has turned ‘human rights law’ from a tool of freedom into an instrument of oppression.
European elites now use hate crime legislation to silence people with opinions that do not conform to prevailing orthodoxy. Under it, favoured minorities are being treated differently from the majority, for whom freedom is restricted and justice stood on its head.
In 2000 Alison Redmond Bate was convicted of obstructing a police officer who stopped her preaching with her mother on the steps of Wakefield cathedral after a crowd of more than a hundred gathered and shouted at them to shut up. The previous year, she had been found guilty of wilful obstruction after allegedly ‘unsettling’ the crowd by warning them not to turn their backs on God. Allowing her appeal against conviction, Lord Justice Sedley upheld true liberal principles when he observed that free speech had to include ‘the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative’.
But this ringing re-statement of western core values certainly didn’t apply to George Staunton , a 78 year-old war veteran who embellished posters he was putting up on a wall for the UK Independence Party — which opposes British membership of the EU — with the legends ‘Don’t forget the 1945 war’ and ‘Free speech for England’. As a result, he was arrested and charged with racially aggravated criminal damage – a case that was eventually dropped by the police, who boasted nevertheless of having launched a ‘dramatic, painstaking, dawn-till-dusk surveillance operation against racist graffiti’ –which netted one 78 year-old man whose crime was to believe that Britain should be independent of Europe to uphold the liberties for which it had fought .
In Britain last year, a law banning incitement to hatred on the grounds of sexual orientation was amended in the House of Lords to include a ‘free speech’ clause, exempting from prosecution general discussion or criticism of homosexuality — a move which campaigners hailed as providing protection for comedians (again!) and those opposed to same-sex unions. However, another bill (the Coroners and Justice Bill) has now overturned this legal protection for free speech; as a result, the crime of inciting homophobic hatred could in theory could now target Christians and others expressing a religiously principled opposition to homosexual practices, for which they would face a maximum sentence of seven years in prison.
All these are examples of my point that, far from expanding liberty ‘human rights law’ diminishes it. It has become a tool to enforce the power of minorities against the majority and enforce a narrative of unchallengeable virtue — even if this is actually a narrative of lies — by shutting contrary views out of public discourse altogether. By a ‘narrative of unchallengeable virtue’, I mean attitudes which are considered to be expressions of some absolute truth which brook no dissent whatever and are impervious to any counter-argument, mediating context or factual evidence because they are held to embody a kind of secular version of metaphysical belief.
One of the most conspicuous examples of this is Israel, the target of a systematic campaign of demonisation and delegitimisation based on lies which are regarded as uncontestable truths. This particular ‘narrative of unchallengeable virtue’ has led to an eruption in Britain and Europe of prejudice, bigotry, bullying and physical attack against Israel and the Jewish people. And it has also created the Orwellian situation where blood libels which incite hatred, peddling the calumny of a cosmic conspiracy by Jews who are deemed to have hijacked public policy and control the world, are now considered perfectly acceptable in mainstream debate; but any protest by Jews at this true hate-speech is deemed to be proof positive of the sinister Jewish power to control public debate, thus creating an argument it is impossible to refute.
But then Jews can never be the victims of one of those fashionable ‘phobias’ because Jews fall foul of the prevailing Marxist definition of prejudice, which holds that only those with power can be guilty of prejudice and can never be its victims. Since Jews are seen as controlling western capitalism, they are never to be seen as victims – despite, ironically, thus being conspicuous victims of the bigotry of that very observation. But Muslims are always powerless because they are of the third world, not the capitalist west; and so they can claim to be victims of ‘Islamophobia’.
Thus lies are given precedence over truth — because I suggest that truth can never constitute prejudice. Real prejudice inescapably involves lies or distorted thinking. Although some people are indeed truly prejudiced against Muslims – just as some people are prejudiced against any people or creed – ‘Islamophobia’ is a myth. A phobia is not a type of hatred but a type of fear; and fear of Islam is not a prejudice but a reasonable reaction to the violence and assault on western freedoms being carried out in its name.
Yes of course many Muslims reject this interpretation of their religion; but the fact is that holy war against the free world is being perpetrated in the name of Islam, sanctioned by the highest religious authorities in Islam and in accordance with its theology and history. It is as absurd to say anxiety about this is a ‘phobia’ as it would have been to say resistance against Nazism was a phobia towards Germans. There are, after all, Muslims who bravely speak up against Islamic extremism; are they too to be deemed ‘Islamophobic’? That’s how absurd this is. Yet while ‘Islamophobia’ is being used to shut down legitimate and indeed essential debate about Islam and what is being done in its name, no such attempt is being made to stop the gross defamation of Judaism rampant in the Arab and Muslim world which is fuelling the jihad and hatred of the west.
So where should a liberal society draw the line when it comes to the giving of offence? My own view is that giving offence should never be criminalised. Take Holocaust denial, which is a form of antisemitism. In Britain, this is not a crime and I do not think it should be one. After all, if antisemitism were to be criminalised much of English literature would have to be censored.
But the problem is that such prejudice can easily shade into incitement; and the difficulty is over where that line should be drawn. For example Hizb ut Tahrir, which works towards the overthrow of the west and the restoration of the Caliphate but whose activists in Britain are not associated with violence, is recruiting thousands of impressionable young British Muslims to the cause of overthrowing the British state and inspiring hatred towards their fellow Britons, along with Americans and Jews. Should it be allowed to do so?
I suggest that context makes a difference. For example, Holocaust denial should not be a crime in the UK because there it is unlikely to lead to much harm. But in countries like Austria or Germany where Nazism remains a serious potential threat, those sentiments can become an active risk to the security of the state. So criminalising Holocaust denial there is much more understandable.
Similar considerations should surely apply to Muslim extremism, which does not take place in a vacuum. In Britain and Europe, radical Islamist sentiments are being used to recruit terrorists and radicalise young Muslims against their own country and fellow citizens. Those sentiments are therefore an active danger to the security of citizens and the state.
In other words, freedom of expression is a core principle of our western liberal democracy — but it is not the only principle and not the supreme principle. It has to be balanced against other principles, such as the preservation of life and liberty.
In some quarters, any diminution of free speech is said to undermine our liberal values. But the paradox of liberalism is that it can only defend itself against attack if it sometimes uses robust and even illiberal measures. If we take the view that any such measures are out of the question because freedom cannot ever be constrained without liberalism being destroyed, the consequences of such doctrinal preciousness may well be that liberalism simply disappears up its own backside.
Unless we understand not just the values we need to uphold but also the vulnerability of our own culture and the internal contradictions within post-Enlightenment liberalism, we will not be able to defend it against the onslaught being waged against it. Which is why organisations like the Free Press Society and gatherings like this of people like yourselves are so important.
Folkekirken: “Det kommer ikke til at ske i Danmark”. Javel, ja.
The Central Mosque of Brent was previously a church built around the 18th century but it is now used exclusively for Muslim ceremonies.
The Forest Gate Church, now a mosque, was built by Henry Wright in 1886 and was a Christian church for over 120 years.
St Mark’s Cathedral in Peckham is now called the New Peckham Mosque.
The Brick Lane Church is more than 250 years old, being built in 1743 as a French Protestant Church. By 1819 it had became a Methodist Chapel and in 1898 it was converted into the Spitalfields Great Synagogue. It now serves the local community as a mosque.
The Wembley Central Mosque in Middlesex near west London is yet another church which has been converted into a mosque.
The Glodwick Baptist Church in Oldham was opened in 1927, but is now the Glodwick Jamia Mosque, Dar-Ul-Aloom Nasqshbandia and Muslim “Community Welfare Centre.”
The Green Lane Mosque is based in Birmingham and is one of the biggest and well known mosques in the United Kingdom. It was first used as a church in 1890. Via Des églises converties en mosquées en Angleterre, videos fra et udvalg af kirkerne.
Selektive svenske markedskræfter
Sverigedemokraterna (SD) får inte sända reklam i TV 4. Det meddelar kanalen redan innan partiet har hunnit söka reklamplats. Kanalen har bestämt att bara riksdagspartierna får köpa partireklam inför EU-valet den 7 juni och Moderaterna, Kristdemokraterna och Folkpartiet har tackat ja till erbjudandet. TV 4 säger nej till SD-reklam
Den kommercielle trashkanal, TV 4 slægter svensk public service på. Som bekendt har også den som politik, at kun siddende riksdagspartiet kommer i TV inden riksdagsvalg. Det gælder om at gøre systemet så uflytteligt og selvpræserverende som muligt, og det lykkes udmærket. Svenske medier lever i registreret partnerskab med magten.
The people in question are Tamil Canadians. The banners they have long waved are the colours of the Tamil Tigers, a terrorist group banned in Canada whose goals (if not methods) are supported by most of Canada’s 200,000-strong Tamil community. They want Canada to intervene in the bloody civil war that may now be in its final stages, as the Sri Lankan government bears down on the Tigers’ last stronghold. Is this our fight? I’d say no. But Tamil Canadians see it differently. . ….There’s another question: How will Canada evolve when so many people have multiple allegiances, to homeland and to host land? Can you belong to more than one nation?
“I think it’s fair to say that she’s a singular and particular courageous voice in Britain. She is perhaps the best known journalist to the majority of people. Her voice is singular and unique….
She was “Young journalist of the Year 1976, and she was the winner of the Orwell Prize for Journalism in 1996, the most prestigeous prize for journalism in Britain. Perhaps it’s her formidable work that means her critics, when they are attacking her, are often reduced to personal abuse, as opposed to actually answering the questions she poses in her work. In the case of one particular interview that Melanie did in 2003 in the Guardian, that she used to work for, the interviewer said with a certain amount of wishful thinking on his part, that she was “tiring of the battle”, as he put it. Well, he hadn’t seen anything yet, because in 2006 Melanie produced Londonistan, her most important work yet”.
Et endnu hypotetisk scenarium med store konsekvenser for verden: Hvis/når Pakistan kollapser i en række Taliban-lignende ministater styret af sharia, er ét af de helt store spørgsmål hvad der så sker med landets ca. 100 atombomber. De umiddelbare perspektiver er oplagte, og skræmmende, men et afledt spørgsmål man kun kan gisne om på nuværende tidspunkt vil være, hvad de vestlige Gutmenschen og socialister vil sige, hvis USA som her antydet ‘går ind’ og sikrer kontrollen med bomberne. Vil det blive en gentagelse af selvsvinget over den ‘ulovlige angrebskrig’ mod Irak? Vil sortklædte autonome gadekorps foranstalte uroligheder fordi ‘Pakistan har lige så meget ret til atomvåben som USA’? Skal der virkelig et atomangreb mod en europæisk by til før gammelt tankegods om at forsvare os selv og påføre fjenden størst mulige tab bliver gangbart igen? Via Jihad Watch (LFPC):
[…] The prospect of turmoil in Pakistan sends shivers up the spines of those U.S. officials charged with keeping tabs on foreign nuclear weapons. Pakistan is thought to possess about 100 – the U.S. isn’t sure of the total, and may not know where all of them are. Still, if Pakistan collapses, the U.S. military is primed to enter the country and secure as many of those weapons as it can, according to U.S. officials.[…] Does Pakistan’s Taliban Surge Raise a Nuclear Threat?
Den gensidige afhængighed
På Rosengård finns 2 fritidsgårdar, 1 friluftsbad, 1 vattenlekplats, 1 spontanidrottsplats, 2 sporthallar, 1 ishall, 1 vanlig idrottsplats med 1 gräsplan för 11-mannafotboll, 1 grusplan för 11-mannafotboll, en grusplan för 7-mannafotboll och skolfriidrottsytor i norra delen av Rosengård, och ytterligare 1 med 2 gräs- och en konstgräsplan för 11-mannafotboll, 1 tävlingsarena för friidrott, 1 basketplan, 1 sandplan för fotboll och 2 tennisbanor med asfalt. 9 källarmoskeer samt europas största församling i mokseén Islamic Center. Läxhjälp av studenter från Malmö högskola alla dagar i veckan. Är det det detta Alliansen skall rusta upp för 20 miljarder med sannolikt anlitade polacker. De 20 miljarderna tänker de slussa från barn, gamla och sjuka.Stenkastningen kommer INTE att upphöra. Tvärtom. – Metoden har ju vistat sig ytterst lönsam.. MB
Hvis der er noget der passer som hånd i handske, er det svenske pædagoger og politikere og indvandrere i Rosengård, der tér sig som psykotiske 12 årige i verdens flotteste ghetto. For femte nat i træk har pædagogernes uvorne unger skabt sig tosset, og for 127 gang vil pædagogerne “vidta åtgärder” (cirka lig med “tiltag”, standard lingo når man gerne vil lyde af noget, uden at blive konkret.), altså sende flere penge og pædagoger. Det ikke bare ikke hjælper, det gør det være og være og værre. Og meget dyrt. Det er ikke tragisk, det er komplet latterligt at se to parter, der supplerer hinanden så godt, fordi de aldrig nogensinde kommer til at tale samme sprog. Nya bränder på Rosengård i natt, Jag kommer aldrig att åka tillbaka till Rosengård.
Storbritanniens åbenbart uendelige ressourcer til befolkningskontrol
Historien her skulle vist være tænkt som pikant underholdning, men læser man den i sammenhæng med andre historier fra dette land om drakonisk overvågning og sindelagskontrol bliver morskaben så som så. Hvad der burde være en banal sag om husspektakler af den mere uskyldige slags bliver til noget med anholdelser, “anti-social behaviour”, tilhold, trussel om fem års indespærring og, I kid you not, en vaskeægte “environmental Health Officer”. Men briterne finder sig jo pænt i regimentet, så hvad skal man sige? (LFPC)
A woman who was given an Asbo for engaging in noisy lovemaking with her husband has breached it after just five days. Sunderland magistrates issued Caroline Cartwright with a four-year order preventing her from “making excessive noise” last Thursday.
But she has been arrested by police officers after reports she was flouting the ban with husband of 24 years, Steve. Now she could find herself jailed for up to five years when she appears at Houghton Magistrates on Monday.
Last Thursday, Cartwright, 48, of Washington, Tyne and Wear, was convicted for five breaches of a noise abatement notice and fined a total of £515. Magistrates considered whether or not an anti-social behaviour order was necessary to restrict her behaviour.
An environmental Health Officer told the court Sunderland Council had received 250 complaints on its logging system and recordings made from a neighbour’s house – through a soundproofed wall – were played in open court. […] Women arrested for breaching ‘noisy lovemaking’ Asbo
Far-Right Crimes Up Sharply in Germany
Interessante kontraster mellem denne historie, og historien fra Holland nedenunder. Hvad skal man konkludere af denne stigning? Man kunne jo alternativt lave en anden modstilling end mellem højre/venstre eller tyskere kontra ‘udlændinge’ – hvordan ser billedet ud hvis man kigger på kriminalitet, herunder vold, begået af politiske og religiøse ekstremister under ét (oftest forenet ved antisemitisme), kontra kriminalitet begået af islamkritikere i almindelighed? Artiklens fokus kan desværre risikere at blive udlagt som en begmand for ‘sådan nogle som os’. Begge historier via Gates of Vienna (LFPC):
Political crime is on the rise in Germany, and far-right crimes in particular rose 16 percent in 2008, according to new government figures. Part of the increase is a result of new statistical standards, but the numbers on the right include two murders. […]
Far-right crimes accounted for two thirds of all “politically motivated” crimes last year, which reached 31,801 — an increase of 11.4 percent and the highest level since 2001. […]
But the rise was also driven by a growing far-right youth scene whose members dress like left-wing anarchists, in black-hooded jackets. “They are attracting young people to a greater extent than the conventional far-right scene has been able to so far,” Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble said in a statement. Left-wing politically motivated crimes rose 14.6 percent to 6,724. Far-Right Crimes Up Sharply in Germany
Hollands efterretningstjeneste: “Extreme Left more Dangerous than Extreme Right”
Som altid skal de officielle vurderinger af ‘moderat’ og ‘ekstrem’ islam vægtes ud fra et udgangspunkt hvor det er vores langsigtede interessers overlevelse der er kriteriet. ‘Moderat’ er ikke bare et spørgsmål om de benyttede metoder og om fravær af erklærede antidemokratiske mål, eller en moderat placering på en islamisk skala. Ægte moderat vil betyde, at selv ved stigende muslimsk befolkningsandel vil de vantro ikke opleve forringelser af levevilkårene. At “the resistance within the Turkish community to radical Islamic ideologies in general remains great” er et pauvert grundlag at basere en fremtid på. I Tyrkiet selv, der i årtier har været regeret af streng kvasi-sekulær kemalisme som modvægt til islam, er den ikke-muslimske befolkningsandel faldet til omkring 1%. Vil selv de allermest moderate hollandskboende muslimer være en garant mod en lignende udvikling? Jeg er ikke i tvivl om at dette spørgsmål ikke er blevet stillet, så meget desto mere fordi der ikke findes nogle beroligende eksempler at holde op (LFPC).
THE HAGUE, 23/04/09 – The AIVD secret service is concerned about far left and Islamic extremism. Conversely, there is scarcely any threat from the extreme right, according to the AIVD annual report on 2008.
The AIVD warns that radical Muslims often wear a mask. The service “has observed in the past year that the well-known Salafist centres (…) express themselves more moderately in public than in closed circles. Outwardly, they try to create the impression of fostering integration of Muslims into Dutch society, while behind closed doors, polarising statements are made that could have a negative effect on society in the longer term.”
