Mentalitet

Medier, fagfolk og politikere har gjort det til en vane af affærdige ensomme ulve, der næsten altid synes at være godt assisteret, som værende psykisk ustabile socialt udsatte eksistenser. Belgisk politi har netop arresteret en 14 årig af slagsen og det er oveni de 29 andre ensomme jule-ulve.

Psykisk ustabile mennesker er fanget i deres egne unikke indre universer. Grupper opstår om noget medlemmerne deler. Selv hvis man som læser af Politiken skulle finde trøst i forklaringen om terroristens forvrængede virkelighed, kan man vanskeligt komme udenom at stille spørgsmålet; hvorfor er så mange muslimer, med de traditionelt grænsende over til det rent morderiske tætte sociale bånd, så udstødte psykofanter. For empirien løber ingen om hjørner med i sidste ende - man kan ikke skrive islam ud af ligningen for islamisk terrorisme.

For nyligt offentliggjorde Islamisk Stat en særligt grusom video i HD. To unge mænd, angiveligt tyrkiske soldater, bliver lukket ud af deres jern-bur i et goldt stenlandskab i Levanten, tvunget ned på alle fire og må kravle, ført som hunde, hen til eksekutions-stedet. Her blev de rejst op og via et langt bånd antændt og brændt ihjel i et roligt tempo, der tillader minutters dødskamp.

Deres dødsskrig akkompagnerer den hoverende islamiske messen, der danner det gennemgående lydspor, som det altid gør. Aldrig en pause for at tænke synes der at være i islamiske videoer. Det var en tilfredsstillende forestilling for jihad-krigerne, der som selve videoen svælgede i de grusomheder, man udsatte en i forvejen besejret og ydmyget fjende for.

Når eksperter og medier beflitter sig med Islamisk Stats propaganda videoer hæfter de sig ved at de er i HD kvalitet med en billedside, der mestrer både den lækre belysning, flere kamerastillinger og bevægelser, der fanger en koreograferet opsætning. Dette sættes i modsætning til Osama Bin Ladens grynede VHS bånd af ham selv, der holder monotone monologer i en hule i Bore Bora eller fra hans sidste bosted med den store pornosamling. Men, som jeg har skrevet før, så undgår eksperterne altid videoernes smertelige indhold, måske fordi konklusionen ikke er til at bære.

Propaganda skal lokke nye krigere til og islamisk stat lokker med grusomheder mod en slagen og ydmyget fjende. Kom og vær med, hug hoveder af, se dem vride sig i smerte, som flammerne fortærer dem, hør deres skrig, vær med til at nære angsten. Og deres målgruppe, muslimerne, lader sig lokke af de smukke billeder med det hellige indhold - skønt alt vi synes vores velfærdsregimer har gjort for at få dem inkluderet.

Julen er tid for religiøs krig, skriver Michael Finch i American Thinker og Syv migranter forsøgte at sætte ild på en hjemløs mand i Berlins undergrundsbane.  ‘Nogen andre’ forsøgte at brænde Emanuelskirken i Hamborg ned til grunden og i Sverige lykkedes det med et indkøbscenter. Og så er der nogen der bare synes det er sjovt at sparke en ældre hjemløs mand i asfalten.

Post traumatisk negersyndrom

Eller slavesyndrom, men tanken er at hvide skal betale til negre selv om negre også holdt negre som slaver hjemme i Afrika. Og det er ikke noget at grine af: “We still feel that pain. We suffer discrimination, we suffer from racism…in every walk of life.” Jamen, så skal de da også ha’!

Faktisk var negre den foretrukne vare som negre i Afrika handlede i med og da europærerne kom til Afrika blev resultatet af dette kultursammenstød til en stor international eksportvare, hvad negrene i Afrika anså som ganske fair trade. Eller, der var allerede et arabisk marked før europærerne begyndte sine relationer til Afrika og det fortsatte efter europærerne havde fortrudt at lade sin økonomi basere sig på sort energi. I Frontpage Magazine kan man læse

Professor Black condemns the exclusive focus on the Atlantic—or transatlantic—slave trade to the exclusion of the robust slave trade conducted by Arabs across the Sahara Desert. Or, across the Indian Ocean and the Red Sea to markets in the Middle East. This exclusive focus on westerners as slave owners and traders, notes Black, “fits with the [political] narrative of Western exploitation” of underdeveloped countries and their people.

The greatest development economist to live was Lord P.T. Bauer. As The Economist quipped, Bauer was to foreign aid what Friedrich Hayek was to socialism: a slayer. In his Dissent on Development (London, 1971), Bauer bolstered Black’s point well before the latter made it: “The slave trade between Africa and the Middle East antedated the Atlantic slave trade by centuries, and far outlasted it. Tens of millions of Africans were carried away—north through the Sahara, and from East Africa, by Arab and Muslim slave traders, well before Europeans took up the trade from West Africa.”

Arab affinity for slavery, ethnic prejudice and purges lives on today in the treatment, for example, of blacks in Darfur and Yazidi Kurds in Iraq.

Considering Europeans were not alone in the slave trade, Black, in particular, questions “the commonplace identification of slavery with racism,” given that, like serfdom, slavery was a device (albeit an inefficient one) “to ensure labor availability and control.”

At its most savage, child slavery still thrives in Haiti in the form of the “Restavec system.”

(noget om den ikke vestlige verdens primitivitet)

The cult of apology that has gripped America and Britain is uniquely Western. What other people would agonize over events they had no part in, personally, for damages they did not inflict?

Grievance is leveled at a collective, all whites, for infractions it did not commit: Africans who were not enslaved are seen as having an ineffable claim against Europeans who did not enslave them.

At its core, the argument against racism, at least as it works to further black interests, is an argument against collectivism. You’re meant to avoid judging an entire people based on the color of their epidermis or the conduct of a statistically significant number of them.

It is, however, deemed perfectly acceptable to malign and milk Europeans for all they’re worth, based on the lack of pigment in their skin and their overall better socio-economic performance.

Imens i Venezuela, prøver man nu om livegenskab kan redde den socialistiske drøm inden slaveriet bliver nødvendigt.

Paven ser tilsyneladende sig selv som leder af en morder-kult

Eller det må man i hvert fald formode, når han ikke kan skelne mellem islams og kristendommens forhold til vold. End ikke halshugningen af præsten Jacques Hamel, kunne få Paven til at forbinde islam med noget ifølge Breitbart

“If I speak of Islamic violence, I must speak of Catholic violence,” Francis said. “And no, not all Muslims are violent, not all Catholics are violent. It is like a fruit salad; there’s everything.”

In his response, Pope Francis seemed to suggest that jihadists killing innocent people in the name of Allah is not significantly different from a Catholic who kills his girlfriend or mother-in-law, presumably for motives unrelated to the Christian religion.

Francis acknowledged that there are “violent persons of this religion [Islam],” immediately adding that “in pretty much every religion there is always a small group of fundamentalists. Fundamentalists. We have them.”

The Pope asserted moreover that he knows how Muslims think, and that deep down they desire peace and harmony just as Christians do.

“I had a long conversation with the imam, the Grand Imam of the Al-Azhar University, and I know how they think,” he said. “They seek peace, encounter.”

“I do not believe it is right to identify Islam with violence. This is not right or true,” he said.

The Pope insisted that the Islamic State does not draw its ideology from the religion of Islam, but appeals rather to the emptiness of young people and a love for violence.

“How many young people, how many young people of our Europe, whom we have left empty of ideals, who do not have work… they take drugs, alcohol, or go there to enlist in fundamentalist groups,” he said. “One can say that the so-called ISIS, but it is an Islamic State which presents itself as violent . . . because when they show us their identity cards, they show us how on the Libyan coast they slit the Egyptians’ throats or other things.”

“But this is a fundamentalist group which is called ISIS… but you cannot say, I do not believe, that it is true or right that Islam is terrorist,” he said.

The Pope concluded by suggesting that Islamic terrorism does not stem from any violence inherent to Islam itself, but rather from other non-religious motives, such as poverty.

“Terrorism grows when there are no other options, and when the center of the global economy is the god of money and not the person,” Francis said. “You have cast out the wonder of creation — man and woman — and you have put money in its place. This is a basic terrorism against all of humanity! Think about it!” he said.

Dan McLaughlin kalder det farligt nonsens i National Review

First, there is no significant leadership in the modern Christian world – either religious or civil leadership – openly arguing for violence in the name of Christian doctrine, or providing it with a veneer of legitimacy. The leadership of the major denominations, from top to bottom, are foursquare against violence to enforce Christian morals, and the New Testament is notably short on violent punishments. “Yes,” I hear you say, “but Muslim leaders condemn violence too!” This is a debatable point in the specific case of violence against gays, as Andrew McCarthy has detailed, but even if you treat Islam-in-general as indistinguishable from Christianity-in-general in this regard, you still have to deal with radical Islam. Radical Islam is a significant, large-scale political movement around the world that is very much openly, proudly in favor of violence in service of the dictates of radical readings of Islamic law.

The radicals are not a small, isolated, fringe movement. They control territory, ISIS being the most extreme example, as well as Al Qaeda during its residencies in Afghanistan and Sudan. They have tens, possibly hundreds, of thousands of volunteers, and larger numbers of sympathizers, such as the many people in Muslim countries who tell pollsters they support the death penalty for leaving Islam. (ThinkProgress touted a Pew study a few years ago finding that 57% of the population of 11 Muslim countries had a negative view of Al Qaeda - which means the people who didn’t have a negative view of Al Qaeda are a minority of the general population comparable to supporters of Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders in the United States.) They have varying degrees influence in any number of governments (e.g., Iran, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan) – the ten countries where homosexuality is punishable by death are all Islamic, including Saudi Arabia and Iran. They are well-financed, including by wealthy donors and the Saudi government and religious establishments. They have major support from radical pulpits and extensive networks on the web, connections to which turn up regularly in “lone wolf” cases. It is true that most any belief system or creed, religious or secular, inspires some crackpots who turn it to violence. There are some radical Christians. But it is not realistic to suggest that Christianity, or most other religious or political causes around the world, has an active global movement of this prominence, influence, resources and infrastructure that endorses the use of violence for the cause.

Second, drawing these parallels completely ignores the scale of the problem. The State Department issues an annual report on terrorism around the globe, and the carnage is enormous: over the past ten years (2006-2015), the State Department reports 115,023 terrorist attacks, resulting in 190,008 people killed, 329,782 injured, 73,758 kidnapped or taken hostage. The pace is escalating: the past two years (even with State’s annual caveat of “conservative estimates of terrorism in Syria”) have seen an average of 12,619 attacks per year, 30,528 killed a year, 35,056 wounded and 10,809 kidnapped or taken hostage. And the attacks are heavily concentrated in nations with active radical Islamic movements (albeit, in a few cases, with counter-movements that commit their own atrocities).

omvendt

Og i The American Conservative spørger Rod Dreher “What’s wrong with Pope Francis?”

This — all of this — is not just stupid, it’s offensive. Or rather, it’s offensive because it’s so stupid, and does nothing but sow confusion.

Where to begin? Let’s start with the bit from Crux. The parallel between baptized Italian Catholics who kill family members and Muslim terrorists who slaughter Christians and others (including other Muslims they deem heretics) in the name of Allah is crazy. Guess what, Francis? All across the Islamic world, Muslim men steal, they beat their wives, they cheat their neighbor, and so on, not because Islam tells them to, but because they are human beings. Same in Christian countries, and in every society on earth. At issue is Muslim slaughtering priests at the altar, turning non-Muslim girls into sex slaves, blowing up churches, and carrying out all manner of barbaric evil explicitly and unapologetically in the name of their religion. You can call it a twisted interpretation of Islam, or condemn it for other reasons. In the cases of the baptized Catholic who kills his mother-in-law, or the believing Muslim who does the same, in neither instance is their religion a motivating factor in the crime. It is incidental to their violent acts. The terrorism that ISIS and its supporters carry out is done openly in the name of Islam, motivated by their interpretation of the religion.

I can’t decide whether it’s more disturbing if the Pope really cannot see the fallacy here, or if he is just saying what he figures is diplomatically correct.

Second, this idea of Francis’s that economics, not religion, is behind Islamic terrorism, is materialist claptrap that one would think a Pope is beyond falling for. The world is full of desperately poor people who do not slaughter priests. The world is also full of desperately poor Muslim people who do not slaughter priests, shoot up nightclubs, mow down people with trucks, and so forth. In fact, poverty is not much of a factor at all in who becomes radicalized by Salafi Islam.

Og førend han rammer en pæl igennem argumenter om at terrorister på nogen måde er motiveret af deres socioøkonomiske omstændigheder undrer han sig over at et religiøst overhoved vælger en marxistisk forklaringsmodel, frem for at se at religiøse værdier kan være vejledende for et menneskes handlinger. Robert Spencer skrev på sin Jihad Watch

The Pope is once again ignoring a simple distinction: while people of all faiths and backgrounds commit acts of violence, Islam is unique among world religions in having a developed doctrine, theology and legal system mandating warfare against unbelievers. Unless and until that is confronted, Muslims will continue to commit acts of violence against non-Muslims, including Christians. The Pope is betraying the Christians of the Middle East and the world, and all the victims of jihad violence, by repeating palpable falsehoods about the motivating ideology of attacks upon them, instead of confronting that ideology and calling upon Muslims to renounce and reform Islam’s doctrines of violence.

“The pope said that when he reads the newspaper, he reads about an Italian who kills his fiancé or his mother in law. ‘They are baptized Catholics. They are violent Catholics.’” Does Catholicism teach the murder of fiancés or mothers in law? No. Does Islam teach jihad warfare against unbelievers? Yes.

“The pope said that in every religion there are violent people, ‘a small group of fundamentalists,’ including in Catholicism.” There have been 28,923 violent jihad terror attacks worldwide since 9/11. How many violent attacks have there been in that span by violent Catholic “fundamentalists” doing violence in the name of Catholicism?

Og kalifatet selv tager også afstand fra Pavens naive læsning af islams essens, skriver Breitbart

In the most recent issue of Dabiq, the propaganda magazine of the Islamic State, ISIS criticizes Pope Francis for his naïveté in clinging to the conviction that Muslims want peace and that acts of Islamic terror are economically motivated.

“This is a divinely-warranted war between the Muslim nation and the nations of disbelief,” the authors state in an article titled “By the Sword.”

The Islamic State directly attacks Francis for claiming that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence,” saying that by doing this, “Francis continues to hide behind a deceptive veil of ‘good will,’ covering his actual intentions of pacifying the Muslim nation.”

Pope Francis “has struggled against reality” in his efforts to portray Islam as a religion of peace, the article insists, before going on to urge all Muslims to take up the sword of jihad, the “greatest obligation” of a true Muslim.

Despite the obviously religious nature of their attacks, the article states, “many people in Crusader countries express shock and even disgust that Islamic State leadership ‘uses religion to justify violence.’”

“Indeed, waging jihad – spreading the rule of Allah by the sword – is an obligation found in the Quran, the word of our Lord,” it reads.

“The blood of the disbelievers is obligatory to spill by default. The command is clear. Kill the disbelievers, as Allah said, ‘Then kill the polytheists wherever you find them.’”

The Islamic State also reacted to Pope Francis’s description of recent acts of Islamic terror as “senseless violence,” insisting that there is nothing senseless about it.

“The gist of the matter is that there is indeed a rhyme to our terrorism, warfare, ruthlessness, and brutality,” they declare, adding that their hatred for the Christian West is absolute and implacable.

Allerede sidste år leverede Trump den pointe, konfronteret netop med Pavens marxistiske syn på penge og menneskers motiver

ISIS wants to get you!

Den økumeniske dødssejler

Det er svært at følge med efterhånden. Et meme på Facebook hed “0 dage siden et muslimsk terrorangreb”. I Frankrig har en præst fået skåret halsen over af to muslimer, der angreb midt under gudstjenesten. Ud over præsten, der med sine mere end 80 år kun vikarierede for den ferierende præst, var der to nonner, hvor den enes liv endnu hænger i en tynd tråd, og to kirkegængere. Alligevel var det nok kristenpraksis til et muslimsk angreb.

skc3a6rmbillede-2016-07-27-kl-045253

Eller, jeg forivrer mig måske, for selv om muslimerne skreg Allahu Akbar som de skar halsen over på den gamle mand, kender myndighederne endnu ikke deres motiv. Og mens myndighederne begynder at tjekke de to muslimers kontakt til døgnpsykiatrien eller interviewer tidligere klassekammerater om eventuel mobning eller det hele bare var et desperat råb på hjælp efter et afslag på asyl så hæfter jeg mig ved at den angrebne kirke var en del af et økumenisk projekt, hvor muslimer og kristne forsøgte at se ud over deres uenigheder (som at muslimerne burde slagte alle kristne nu eller vente til senere).

Vidste muslimerne dette? Og i så fald havde jeg forestillet mig at de hellere ville slagte den involverede imam for at besudle Allahs morderiske lære med snik-snak i selskab med kuffars. Principielt gør det jo heller ingen forskel at den slagtede præst var, hvad man kunne kalde en venligboer, der er stadig tale om terror. Og terror er, hvad der rammer alle, også kristne, selv om man ikke hører så meget om det. Fox News skriver dog, hvorledes den nye normal antager et stadigt mere muslimsk ansigt

Unfortunately, similar attacks on Christians are rarely recounted, although ISIS has made its intentions clear: “the Christian community… “will not have safety, even in your dreams, until you embrace Islam. We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women….”

Certainly Islamist radicals have not ignored this proclamation, even though accounts of their successful efforts may be hard to come by.

Only a scouring of Catholic news reports exposes an ongoing litany of desecration, arson and abuse.  For example, a recent newsletter from Federation for Europa Christiana recounts (in French) the following:

“At Martigues…three successive attacks in May 2016: first the pastor extinguished a malicious fire on the altar of the church of the Madeleine. This same priest was later attacked and his eye was blackened….

“Then, at the Saint-Genest church, the same priest discovered the open tabernacle and communion wafers thrown to the ground…

“In April, 2016, all the crucifixes and crosses were shattered at the cemetery of La Chapelle-du-Bard….”

All told, 810 attacks on French Christian places of worship and Christian cemeteries took place in 2015.

Meanwhile, the National Catholic Register reported on June 6,

“In recent weeks, Catholics in France and Belgium — countries still recovering from brutal ISIS attacks — have been hit with numerous acts of violence and aggression, including fires set in churches, an assault on a priest, the desecration of a tabernacle.

“More than 100 Catholic websites… of churches and congregations were hacked by suspected Tunisian cyber-jihadists who call themselves the Fallaga Team.”

Og i Kososvo skyder muslimerne på serbere, der vil besøge resterne af deres kirker og klostre, som muslimerne har ødelagt

On Saturday, ahead of today’s holiday dedicated to Archangel Gabriel, a group of Serbs came under fire from automatic weapons as they were cleaning the grounds of the garbage and debris that local ethnic Albanians are dumping at the ruins of the desecrated temple. Nobody was injured during the incident, that has been reported to the Kosovo police.

Today, about 100 villagers and their guests from various parts of the Kosovsko Pomoravlje District, along with some citizens who had left the area as early as in the 1970s, gathered at the monastery and celebrated the day in peace, and without incidents.

“Visiting my hometown brings back beautiful childhood memories, but scenes like the desecrated grave of my former neighbor - which was done during the past year - point out to the reality and the difficult lives that people who remained are leading.” Mijomir Lalic, who now lives in the town of Smederevo, told Serbia’s state broadcaster RTS.

Nenad Kojic, a professor at the Pristina University, now relocated to Kosovska Mitrovica, said those who live in the village now “have no intention of leaving.”

“It’s all the same that they destroyed our holy places, they cannot destroy our faith and our hope,” said Kojic.

The Binac monastery, dedicated to Archangel Gabriel, is one of the oldest Serbian temples built in the 14th century. It was completely destroyed in July 1999, after the war in Kosovo and after the arrival of international forces there.

Og inden nogen skulle fristes til at påpege tonen i debatten, så går det samme vej for kristne i muslimske lande. Her en stemningsrapport fra Ægypten

Since late May, Christians in Egypt have been the victims of at least a dozen sectarian attacks, and activists and politicians say the government has done little to stop it, despite Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi’s early overtures to the Coptic community and their staunch support of him.

“It is escalating in a very short time,” said Mina Thabet, programme director for minorities and vulnerable groups with the Egyptian Commission of Rights and Freedoms.

Among the assaults was one in late May on an elderly Coptic woman in Minya, who was stripped, beaten and paraded naked because of a rumour that her son was having a relationship with a Muslim woman. Seven homes in the town were set ablaze.

Victims said the police response was late and insufficient.

Sectarian tensions heated up even more on June 30, three years to the day after the beginning of the protests that led to the overthrow of Egypt’s first democratically elected president, Mohammed Morsi, when a Coptic priest was gunned down in Al Arish, North Sinai in an attack claimed by the IS group. The group accused the priest of “waging a war against Islam”.

As gruesome as that attack was, the majority of the incidents have not taken place in the IS stronghold in northern Sinai, but in the Governorate of Minya, which is nestled along the Nile river about 250 kilometres south of Cairo.

(…)

Hours before the priest in Al Arish was shot, the under-construction house of a Coptic man in Minya was torched by a mob who thought he was building a church – despite his having signed an affidavit in the presence of police, the mayor and the local sheikh saying the structure would be a residence and would be used for no other purpose. The four adjacent homes, which belonged to his brothers, were also burned.

The building of churches is a flashpoint for sectarian tensions in Egypt. Per capita, there are far fewer churches serving the Christian community than there are mosques serving the Muslim community, and the building of new churches is strictly restricted under Egyptian law and requires special permissions. Christians for decades have had difficulty obtaining the necessary approvals and often face fierce opposition from Muslim neighbors.

While the recent violence has been concentrated in and around Minya, other Christian strongholds in the country have suffered as well. For example, an attack occurred on July 2 in the governorate of Sohag, which is about 500km south of Cairo and also has a large Christian population, when the teenage daughter of a priest was grabbed from behind by the hair and stabbed in the neck in what appeared to be a failed attempt to slit her throat. She was rescued by a bystander and survived the attack.

Tilbage til Danmark og et kig på venligboernes økumeniske projekt. For et par år siden vågnede den iranske kommunistpige op det umulige i et ægteskab med islam, om det var jøder, israelere eller progressive. Inger Holst husker tilbage til sommeren 2014

En lys og mild sommeraften samlede en flok mennesker sig på Christiansborg Slotsplads.

En taler bød dem velkommen: »Det kræver mod at komme her, det er svært at stå sammen om fred,« sagde taleren. Her var jøder, israelere, arabere, iranere, her var københavnere af alle slags. Det var i juli 2014 under endnu en voldsom konflikt i Mellemøsten.

Taleren var Jaleh Tavakoli, en af demonstrationens arrangører.

»Begge folk har ret til fred,« sagde hun.

»Begge folk har retten til et land.«

Imens hun talte, kom nye mennesker til. De kom fra Rådhuspladsen, hvor der var demonstration for palæstinensernes ret. Men ikke for andres. Jaleh Tavakoli var en af de få, der nåede at holde sin tale. Den startede med en erindring om hylende sirener og om den angst, hun selv havde oplevet i sin barndom under krigen mellem Iran og Irak.

Imens hun talte om disse minder, begyndte politisirener at hvine. Biler kørte med hornet i bund, med flag og fuckfingre strittende ud ad de nedrullede ruder.

De fleste af dem, der deltog i angrebet, var danskere med palæstinensisk baggrund.

Men blandt dem, der truende nærmede sig, kunne Jaleh Tavakoli genkende nogle af sine gamle, etnisk danske partikammerater fra Enhedslisten.

»Er det det her, du vil, Jaleh,« spurgte en af dem.

Et halvt år senere var Tavakoli medarrangør af det debatmøde om ytringsfrihed i Krudttønden, der blev angrebet af en herboende muslim. Der findes ingen frem med muslimerne, kun stilhed før massakren. Det positive er at mens folk på venstrefløjen skulle gøre sig anstrengelser for at registrere danske jøder og deres adresser på en særlig jødeliste, der skulle bruges, den dag den nu skulle bruges til hvad man dog ellers kunne bruge sådan en liste til så har vi allerede medlemslister af diverse partier og organisationer på venstrefløjen. Ikke at vi skal bruge den til andet end hvad Anne Grethe Holmsgaard havde tænkt sig med jødelisten, det er bare rart at have - hvis nu det skulle blive aktuelt med sådan en liste med navne og addresser.

Obama: “Just because Iranian hardliners chant Death to America does not mean that that’s what all Iranians believe”

Husker De det? Da Obama ikke lagde noget i at ledende kræfter i det iranske regime ønskede død over USA. Hans ræsonnement var at et flertal af iranere sikkert ikke ønskede, hvad lederne ønskede. Jo, og så slog han de, der advarede om truslen fra de dødstruende iranske hardlinere i hartkorn med de selv samme dødstruende iranske hardlinere. Derfor var det helt logisk at lade død-over-USA Iran starte deres eget atom-program og frigive de enorme summer, der havde været indefrosset i udenlandske banker siden Shahens fald.

Man kan håbe på at Hillary Clinton ikke vinder det amerikanske præsidentvalg i november. Og hvis den ulykke skulle være undgået, så kan man håbe at Trump holder noget af det han lover. I så fald vil USA, og det vil måske kunne trække det meste af Vesten med sig, skifte kurs fra Obamas farlige underdanighed overfor verdens tyranner i almindelighed og muslimer og deres månereligion i særdeleshed. Victor Davis Hansen, der altid er værd at læse, giver i Townhall på glimrende vis en forelæsning i konsekvenserne af eftergivenhed for bøller - at de tolker det som svaghed

When President Obama entered office, he dreamed that his hope-and-change messaging and his references to his familial Islamic roots would win over the Muslim world. The soon-to-be Nobel Peace Prize laureate would make the U.S. liked in the Middle East. Then, terrorism would decrease.

But, as with his approach to racial relations, Obama’s remedies proved worse than the original illness.

Obama gave his first presidential interview to Al Arabiya, noting that he has Muslims in his family. He implicitly blamed America’s strained relations with many Middle Eastern countries on his supposedly insensitive predecessor, George W. Bush.

The new message of the Obama administration was that the Islamic world was understandably hostile because of what America had done rather than what it represented.

Accordingly, all mention of radical Islam, and even the word “terrorism,” was airbrushed from the new administration’s vocabulary. Words to describe terrorism or the fight against it were replaced by embarrassing euphemisms like “overseas contingency operations,” “man-caused disaster” and “workplace violence.”

In apology tours and mythological speeches, Obama exaggerated Islamic history as often as he critiqued America. He backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. He pushed America away from Israel, appeased Iran, and tried to piggyback on the Arab Spring by bombing Libya. He even lectured Christians on their past pathologies dating back to the Crusades.

Yet Obama’s outreach was still interpreted by Islamists as guilt and weakness to be exploited rather than magnanimity to be reciprocated. Terrorist attacks increased. Obama blamed them on a lack of gun control or generic “violent extremism.”

(…)

Radical Islam never had legitimate grievances against the West. America and Europe had welcomed in Muslim immigrants — even as Christians were persecuted and driven out of the Middle East.

Billions of dollars in American aid still flows to Islamic countries. The U.S. spent untold blood and treasure freeing Kuwait and later the Shiites of Iraq from Saddam Hussein. America tried to save Afghanistan from the Soviets and later from the Taliban.

For over a half-century, the West paid jacked-up prices for OPEC oil — even as the U.S. Navy protected Persian Gulf sea lanes to ensure lucrative oil profits for Gulf state monarchies.

Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, the original architects of al-Qaida, were so desperate to find grievances against the West that in their written diatribes they had to invent fantasies of Jews walking in Mecca. In Michael Moore fashion, they laughably whined about America’s lack of campaign finance reform and Western culpability for global warming.

The real problem is that Islamic terrorism feeds off the self-induced failures of the Middle East.

Som Churchill sagde om tyskerne (I en anden tid! I en anden tid!) “They are either at your feet or at your throat!”

Saudi Arabia Uncovered

Her er en dokumentar om livet i Saudiarabien. Optaget med skjult kamera får vi et indblik i muslimsk liv, som det leves hvor det tages alvorligt. Fra The Muslim Issue

Saudi Arabia spent over $70 billion from oil revenues between 1984 to 2004 to spread Wahhabi Islam and terrorism all over the world. Our own trade budget is recycled and used to expand terrorism. Islamic terrorism accoding to the laws and dictates of prophet Mohammed. The amount has now surpassed $100 billion.

So why is the world still engaged in trade with the Saudis and the Muslim world in general, so intolerant and hateful of ‘the other’? Why are they allowed to get visas, diplomatic immunity, purchase properties, invest and fly in and out of the West with special previleges? This is a criminal alliance that is treason to the people in the West, their future and their security. This international association with the Islamic world is funding and enabling the spread of terrorism worldwide. The oil trade is the foundation of that door that opens to Saudi terror initiatives.

The Saudis have worked for decades to establish their roots in Bosnia and Herzegovina where they feel they gain easier access to spread Wahhabism into Europe. There they operate entire plagiarism operations and education on forging official documents. When Merkel Muslims illegally arrived into the mediterranean pre-planned through fraudulant claims in need of asylum Saudis didn’t offer them any shelters of ‘protection’ in their mutual Ummah. The Saudis quickly offered to fund 200 mosques. 200 Wahhabi mosques of hatred to be spread across Europe. There is already 5,000 mosques across Europe.

Det er dem! Og det er også os

Marxisterne har marcheret gennem uddannelsesinstitutionerne med stor succes og fortællingen er kun at se indand og bagud. Som en psykoanalyse, befamler du kun dine egne følelser og ender med at bebrejde din mor. På samme må fortæller medierne bistået af deres mange udvalgte eksperter og debattører kun om hvorledes ‘vi’ har svigtet, ikke været kulturelt sensitive nok, ikke givet penge nok og selv startet det hele i flere omgange, fra korstogene henover kolonialismen til George Bush. Journalisterne har instinktivt internaliseret den fortælling.

Fortællingen om Køln nytårsnat blev hurtigt til alt muligt andet, men mest om os selv og vores forhold til racisme. Nathalie Ostrynski formulerede i Berlingske Tidende at “[k]vinderne i Køln oplevede nytårsnat det, som mange danske kvinder hver dag oplever“, Kenneth Reinnicke mente at vi beskrev ting forskelligt alt efter om det var dem eller os, der gjorde det samme: “Hvis det er Muhammed, er det æresdrab, og hvis det er Peter, har vi en tendens til at forklare det med depression.” Det samme budskab kom Ulla Thornemand med da hun mindede om at “Herhjemme kalder vi det drengestreger, når hvide unge drenge og fyre i flok, i folkeskolen og på andre uddannelsesinstitutioner, blufærdighedskrænker, sexchikanerer og sexforulemper piger.

Irene Manteufel, der samler “danske kvinders beretninger om hverdagssexismeadvarede om “at debatten ikke skal handle om etnicitet”.

Signe Wenneberg sagde i en ellers ganske indsigtsfuld kommentar i Berlingske Tidende at “Det var afrikanere i kulturchok“, når det nok snarer var tyskerne der fik sig et kulturchok. En Lotte Lund linkede “Apropos debatten om mænds vold og overgreb på kvinder - på tværs af kulturer”, til en artikel om voldtægter/krænkelser på Roskildefestivallen, der tilsyneladende er sexkrænkernes paradis. Rune Engelbrecht Larsen mente at “det blot ét af utallige eksempler på, hvordan alt for mange mænd i alle farver og af alle nationaliteter stadig har absurd vanskeligt ved forstå og respektere kvindelig ligeværd og integritet.” helt på linie med Henrik Marstal der mente at massevoldtægterne “er et problem, der snarere er knyttet til mænds seksuelle adfærd som sådan

Men der er en anden fortolkning, som poseuren Mads Holger var halvt inde på da han sagde at overfaldene var en konsekvens af “vores egen kulturs totale fravær af maskulinitet” har mødt indvandrerne med “kvindagtighed“. Nemlig og i samme ånd er islam opkogt i forventning om en forestående sejr og Køln var et signal til den muslimske verden, skriver Stephen Brown i Frontpage Magazine

“The Cathedral was being used as background scenery, which reflects still other messages: that it concerns a strike against the culture of the European city as a meeting place and individual freedom, and that the attack was directed against the (Catholic) Church …,” Rossman states.

Besides acts of sexual and religious terrorism meant to break down German society, the attacks against the women and the cathedral were also a show of Islamic power. Women and religious minorities can be terrorised by Muslim mobs just like in Islamic countries. Their reach is growing.

But perhaps the most important message the New Year’s Eve events were meant to convey was directed at Muslims living in Germany and the Islamic world. And the message is that Germany cannot protect either its women or its religion. It is weak.

In fact, German Christians are so feeble that one of their greatest cathedrals suffered a humiliating attack during a religious service, presided over by one of Germany’s highest churchmen, without consequences. And by publicly molesting such large numbers of infidel women so boldly and brazenly without retaliation, German men are shown as equally weak.

But, just as important, the women’s molestation without retaliation showed that German men were also without ‘honour’. And honour is an esteemed concept among Muslim men, who kill female family members for the slightest sexual impropriety, real or imagined, to restore their ‘honour’.As a result of this feebleness and lack of honour, Germany deserves and is ready for conquest.

It is easy pickings.

Det var det muslimske forår, der sprang ud nytårs nat.

Pressen vælger gode historier fra

Det er i Vesten almindeligt at betragte vores medier, som værende mere pålidelige end ikke-vestlig medier. Russiske medier har en klar pro-russisk dagsorden og der er ingen reel markeds- eller demokratisk kontrol. Og sådan er det sikkert også i resten af den gamle østblok, hvor halvfascister som Victor Orban regerer og Romaer forfølges og bøsser ikke kan gifte sig. De vestlige medier selv er helt sikre på deres egen fortræffelighed. Og sådan var det også engang. Vesten var det eneste sted hvor der herskede frihed. Men det er længe siden.

En gruppe kristne kaste overbord til druknedøden af vrede muslimer, kunne man læse. Men det fik ingen konsekvenser for dækningen og vinklingen. Tyskland sorterer migranterne efter religion og etnicitet, ellers kommer de op at slås. Eller rettere, ellers overfalder muslimer ikke-muslimer og nogen gange også hinanden. Ingen synes at bekymre sig for, hvad perspektivet er i det, især hvis de skal herind at bo. Der advokeres for et multietnisk samfund, mens folk flygter fra sekterisk vold. De fleste migranter er ikke fra Syrien, men vinklen er stadig at alle er flygtninge fra krig. Ingen spørger hvilke af de stridende parter migranter støtter hvem de flygter fra eller synes at kere sig over om det overhovedet er relevant. Der er heller ikke noget perspektiv i at de fleste er mænd i den våbenføre alder. Da disse unge mænd aggressivt angreb grænsevagter i Balkan og Slovenien og hvor som helst, blev det til historier om hvorledes kvinder og børn fik tæsk. En migrant kastede brutalt sin kone med et spædbarn i favnen ned på togskinnerne og hoppede derpå selv ned over hende, mens han skreg at han hellere vil have sin og sin families død end ikke at komme til Tyskland - pressen viser at han ligger på togskinner med sin kone og barn mens grænsevagter står tæt omkring, som var det dem, der var de skyldige. Afrikanske migranter stormer spanske grænsehegn og som de løber gennem gaderne for første gang i det forjættede kristne land råber de Allahu Akbar - og ingen spørger hvad de mon mener med det.

Norsk politi fandt billeder af henrettelser og IS-falg hos flygtninge” skrev flere aviser. Det er politiet, der oplyser om deres fund og medierne refererer selvfølgelig politiet. Men så sker der ikke mere. Danske medier har ikke spurgt dansk politi om de har gjort lignende opdagelser. Hvad med andre lande? “Det, som ser alarmerende ud, kan have andre forklaringer end støtte til terrororganisationer” citerer man en leder for den norske sikkerhedstjeneste og så er det vel godt nok. Det kan betyde så meget, ja, men det kan også betyde at vi ikke ved, hvor mange tusind terrorister, og deres endnu flere sympatisører, der lukkes ind.

Og hvis ikke man vil foretage sin egen research, så kan man vel i det mindste vil ungarsk TVs tidligere reportage, hvor man ikke blot ser indholdet, men også har allieret sig med glimrende psykologer til at tolke billederne. Billederne viser unge mænd, der gennem gensidige prygl, gør sig kampklar til at modstå og håndtere smerte, når de når Europa. Og flere billeder af migranter, der går forbi TV stationernes kameraer og gestikulerer en halshugning så selv ikke eksperter burde være i tvivl om, hvad det mon kunne betyde.

En ungarsk journalist spænder ben for en løbende migrant med et barn i favnen. Skandale og det selv om det viser sig at migranten var jihad sympatisør - what are the odds? - forbliver den del af historien kun på blogs og sociale medier. Finsk TV bringer rørende historier fra flygtninge, der fortæller om deres situation. En af flygtningene har ladet sig fotografere før, back in the old country og genkendes, som MVLEHTI fortæller

terrorist-i-tv

terrorist-fra-tv-med-afhugget-hoved

What are the odds? (Billedet af terroristen med det afhuggede hoved har i øvrigt i målene 500-666 - what are the odds?). Hvorfor er det ikke en historie? Jeg sidder og tænker på at vi, eller i hvert fald jeg, er blevet så vant til denne parallelverden, mellem, hvad man selv kan finde på nettet, Youtube, Facebook og flere men mindre fremragende medier, blogs og hjemmesider og så den verden, der tegnes i de danske medier på statsstøtte, at jeg slet ikke stiller spørgsmål til, hvorfor danske medier, ja vestlige medier i det hele taget, slet ikke fokuserer på historier om hvem flygtningene egentlig er, hvad de kommer for og hvad vi allerede kan se af vold og trusler.

Det er jo gode og opsigtsvækkende historier. Men journalisterne vælger at messe kedelige fortællinger om uverificerbare , som kun venstrefløjen ser og det er kun af ren moralsk pligtskyldighed. Journalister har traditionelt set det som et kald at bringe sandheden for en dag. Siden har de set det som et kald at får sandheden til at ændre verden til det bedre. Siden har de retfærdiggjort den gode historie over sandheden, hvis blot den ændrede verden til det bedre. I dag caster de mest sig selv, mest som en dårlig vane, i det selvbillede de har arvet af at se Alle Præsidentens Mænd og Kinasyndromet med det samme skurkebillede af banditter i habitter og det samme billede af ofrenes forhutlede fremtoning. Det er faktisk mageløst at så mange journalister kan være så moralsk ukorrumperede i deres moralske kald, at deres fag ikke lokke med penge og prestige, hvis blot de opfylder fagets mindstekrav. At så mange journalister kollektivt ser helt bort fra indlysende gode historier, fordi de hellere selv vil være gode.

En verden af Fritzler

Slaveri og voldtægt er en del af islams krig mod sine omgivelser. På Memri kan man se en kvindelig muslimsk teolog fra Al-Azhar universitetet forklare den rette lære

In a September 12, 2014 Fatwa show, Al-Azhar Professor of Theology Suad Saleh discussed the Islamic concept of “those whom you own.” Speaking on Hayat TV, Professor Saleh said that Muslims who capture women in a legitimate war against their enemies may own them and have sex with them as slavegirls. “In order to humiliate them,” Prof. Saleh said, “they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives.” The video has been circulating in social media in recent days.

Suad Saleh: “‘Those whom you own’ (slavery) existed before Islam. It existed among all nations and countries, not just among pre-Islam Arabs. Anyone could trade in freeborn men and women. This is called the selling of freeborn people. It’s like the selling of human organs and trafficking in freeborn humans today. But when Islam emerged, it put (slavery) into order, by limiting it to legitimate wars between Muslims and their enemies. If we fought Israel, which is plundering land, and is an aggressor against people and their faith… Obviously, it is impossible that we will fight Israel, even though Surat Al-Isra in the Quran foretells this, and nothing is beyond the power of Allah… The female prisoners of wars are ‘those whom you own.’ In order to humiliate them, they become the property of the army commander, or of a Muslim, and he can have sex with them just like he has sex with his wives.

[...]

“Some opportunists and extremists, who only harm Islam, say: ‘I will bring a woman from East Asia, as (a slavegirl) under the status of “those whom you own,” and with the consent of my wife, I will allocate this woman a room in the house, and will have sex with her as a slavegirl.’ This is nonsense. This is not prescribed by Islam at all. Islam says that a woman is either a wife or a slavegirl. Legitimately-owned slaves come from among prisoners from a war, which is waged against the Muslims, a war to plunder land, a war against our faith, and so on. What some people are doing now is an aggression against Allah and against Allah’s legal texts in the Quran, and we must not be influenced by this at all.”

Og der er også et par vers

Quran (33:50) - “O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee”

Bukhari (41.598) - Slaves are property. They cannot be freed if an owner has outstanding debt, but they can be used to pay off the debt.

Daily Mail har nogle grufulde beretninger fra kvinder og piger der har overlevet Islamisk Stats sex-slavehandel. Tæsk, voldtægt, tortur, udsultning, mord, tvangskonverteringer var dagligdag i deres islamiske helvede. Blandt køberne er det især saudiarabiske ikke blot mænd, men hele familier. Men der er også købere fra Albanien, Syrien og USA, alle muslimer. Som en af de stakkels piger beskriver sin fangevogters hjem “The television was always on religious channels, reciting the Quran all the time.

We were in Tal Afar for two months then they brought us to Raqqa in Syria. There were about three hundred of us girls there, in a big hall. All the women had babies who cried because they were so hungry. The children were only given one egg a day.

The first night nine girls tried to flee. They tied their clothes together to make a rope and lowered themselves out of the window, but the ISIS fighters found them and brought them back. They hit all of us because we didn’t tell them about their escape.

They put us all in a big room, locked the door and didn’t give us any water. Then one day they brought us to another building. On the front was written something like ‘area for selling’ and there I was sold to a forty year-old man from Saudi Arabia.

He asked me to marry him and when I refused he pointed to three objects sitting on his table; a knife, a gun, and rope. He said he’d use all three if I didn’t say yes. I refused over and over again, so he beat me. He beat my niece, who is only 3 years-old.

I was sold again, this time to a single man who wanted to marry me. I refused with all my might and again was beaten, and again they beat my little niece. He tried to rape me and when he couldn’t he sold me again.

In the new house I did all the work: cleaning, cooking and washing. The man who bought me said that he had to sleep with me to make me a real Muslim. I told him that if he slept with me I would become his wife and then I would not be a slave any more. His wife threatened to leave if he slept with me.

She got very angry at my niece because she couldn’t speak Arabic: she put pepper in her mouth and locked her in a room without water; she beat her so much you can still see the wounds today.

They wouldn’t let me change her diapers for a week. We were only allowed to eat small portions of food because after all we were slaves and we shouldn’t expect to have much food.

muslimer-tager-slaver

They came to us and said that they would leave us alone. Then they came and told us we had to convert to Islam otherwise they would behead us. They gave us time to think and then they came back again saying that they would let us go, but instead they brought us to a school, took our money and our possessions. They separated the men from the women and left us inside. Then we heard the shooting. We thought they were killing animals not our men.

In Mosul sheiks and emirs came and looked at us. They were buying us. I was sold to a man who took me to Tal Afar. When we arrived I was forced into marriage. That night he tied my hands and legs and he blindfolded me. Then he raped me.

(…)

My whole family was taken at night except for one of my brothers. They brought us to a school and took our phones, money, gold; everything. They put the women and children on a bus and we were taken to Mosul at night, to be sold. I was sold to a man who came from Albania. He lived together with five other families and I became the group’s slave.

(…)

In Mosul we were inside a two-storey building, five hundred of us. A sheik came. He had a stick in one hand and a book in the other. He had come to convert us to Islam. We said the words he asked us to say and according to the man we were now Muslim and had to go with them. One morning at five they picked us up, forced us to put on black abayas, chained our hands, blindfolded us and forced us on to a bus.

Som Amal fortæller: “The saddest thing I remember, during those terrible months, was this little girl, 12 years old. They raped her without mercy.” Det er islam hele vejen. Hele familier tager slaver, som det naturligste i verden, fra hele verden kommer der muslimer for at være med i grusomhederne, lokket af grusomhederne selv (en pointe eksperterne helt overser), som Islamisk Stat stolt lægger på nettet i HD. Den islamiske verden er et samfund af Fritzler.

Nathalie Ostrynski: Kvinderne i Køln oplevede nytårsnat det, som mange danske kvinder hver dag oplever:

Sådan siger Nathalie Ostrynski i Berlingske Tidende, når hun indleder en oversigtsartikel om debatten om “hvorvidt de mange hundrede mænds sexovergreb på kvinder i Køln er et udtryk for etnicitet og patriarkalsk kultur”

En mandehånd, der klemmer brystet eller glider ned over numsen. Uden at man har sagt ja tak til hånden. Kvinderne i Køln oplevede nytårsnat det, som mange danske kvinder hver dag oplever: At en mand forulemper ens krop og tilraner sig adgang.

Endnu er der ingen billeder fra migranterne selv, hvor overgrebene kan ses eksplicit. Men siden dette ‘nye’ fænomen har fået sig et navn, taharrush gamea, så kan vi jo se på nogle billeder, der eksisterer, der for fænomenet er opfundet og udviklet, nemlig den muslimske verden, og så se om det ligner noget fra Danmark. Herunder er en kort videosekvens, fra Tahrir pladsen i Ægypten, hvor den amerikanske journalist, pludselig blev overfaldet og voldtaget af en mængde mænd, der angiveligt ikke havde andet at gøre med hinanden end at de stod i overfaldsafstand fra den lyshårede vesterlænding

Ligner det noget fra Roskildefestivallen? Fra en lummer chef? Er der overhovedet eksempler endsige billeder af en tilfældigt sammensat gruppe vesterlandske mænd, der kaster sig over en tilfældig kvinde på en overbefolket plads i hjertet af hen storby? Svaret er nej, det er aldrig sket.
Men Ostrynski stoler ikke på virkeligheden og vil hellere stole på ekspertisen, så hun spørger kønsforsker ved RUC Kenneth Reinicke. Reinicke skelner mellem marginaliserede mænd fra udkantsdanmark - “en marginaliseret arbejderklassekultur, hvor mænd eksempelvis søger mod at have en stor, svulmende krop for at vise magt” - og så folk fra København. Selv om marginaliserede mænd ønsker at vise at de stadig har “et seksuelt og fysisk våben“, kan han…

…ikke forestille sig, at en flok danske marginaliserede mænd fra Udkantsdanmark ville tage ind på Rådhuspladsen i København og begå samme type overgreb.

Dog ved vi med hensyn til Køln-begivenheden stadig ikke med sikkerhed, om mændene var tyske statsborgere eller ej.
»Tilhørsforholdet til den danske stat ville betyde, at man nok ikke ville få den tanke. På den måde har etnicitetsspørgsmålet en betydning. Der er noget med dem og os, som man kan læse ind i sexovergrebene i Køln. Hvis det er rigtigt beskrevet, at flere hundrede mænd og seksuelt forulemper de mange kvinder, så er det en helt speciel situation. Man har jo ikke set sådan noget i Europa i fredstid. Hvor man viser magt ved at koordinere et angreb på så mange kvinder på én gang,« siger Kenneth Reinicke.

Selv om Kønsforskeren ved RUC Kenneth Reinicke kan skelne så fint mellem marginaliserede mænd fra udkantsdanmark og de civiliserede mænd fra København, tror han at etnicitet og statsborgerskab er det samme, at man skifter etnicitet ved at skifte statsborgerskab. Det gør ham blind for at kunne besvare spørgsmålet om hvilken eller hvis magt  man viser “ved at koordinere et angreb på så mange kvinder på én gang”. Er det mandens overhøjhed over kvinden, så der er tale om taharrush gamea? Eller, hvis det er koordineret, som han antager, er der tale om rape-jihad. Begge dele kan vi sagtens opleve på dansk jord blive begået af (selv)marginaliserede mænd og store drenge boende i Danmark med dansk statsborgerskab. Men ikke af danske mænd.
Og interessant nok skelner Reinicke pludselig mellem danske og muslimske mænd med dansk statsborgerskab, når han skal frem til en anden pointe

Kenneth Reinicke giver [Ulla Tornemand fra Dansk Kvindesamfund] ret i, at der er forskel på om, hvorvidt det er Muhammed eller Peter, der eksempelvis går amok og slår sin kone ihjel. Hvis det er Muhammed, er det æresdrab, og hvis det er Peter, har vi en tendens til at forklare det med depression. Det sidder i os

Det sidder i ‘os’ at se forskelligt på Muhammeds og Peters mord på kvinder, mens æresdrab åbenbart ikke er et reelt fænomen, der sidder i ‘dem’. Reinicke overser at debatten om æresdrab, jalousidrab og andre familietragedier sker på baggrund af retssager, hvor gerningsmændenes motiver og sindstilstand er nøje granskede. Og hvis han tog æresdrab alvorligt, som noget virkeligt og ikke et udtryk for ‘vores’ fantasi, ville han se, at det udspringer af Muhammeds forhold til det andet køn som ejendom, præcis i forlængelse af masseovergrebene i Tyskland.
Ifølge projektansvarlig Irene Manteufel fra Everday Sexism Project Danmark, der samler “danske kvinders beretninger om hverdagssexisme“, fylder “mænd med en anden etnisk herkomst ikke mere i beretningerne end danske mænd“. Men selv om hun skelner korrekt mellem etniciteter og “begivenheden i Køln gav hende mindelser om det, der foregik på Tahrir-pladsen” advarer hun om “at debatten ikke skal handle om etnicitet”. Derpå skyder hun med en præcis observation helt forbi målet og trumfer med en selvmodsigelse

Det er bare ikke rigtigt, at det kun er i andre kulturer, at man gør dette. Så vidt jeg har forstået, var det ikke en homogen masse, der angreb. Det, de mænd har haft tilfælles, er en forståelse af, at det her kan man gøre mod kvinder. Det er en magtudøvelse, som ikke skal accepteres i nogen kultur, uagtet hvilken form den optræder i,« siger hun.

Det en selvmodsigelse, at hun underkender at det kun er i andre kulturer man ser “taharrush gamea” når hun samtidig lægger vægt på at en kulturelt fremmed uhomogen masse har en fælles forståelse af, hvad man kunne gøre mod kvinder.
Men det er en meget præcis observation at der var tale om en uhomogen masse, der angreb. Og det er en meget præcis observation, omend grænsende til en truisme, at det de “har haft tilfælles, er en forståelse af, at det her kan man gøre mod kvinder”. Men det underminerer hendes argumentation, fordi den fælles forståelse af hvad man kan gøre mod kvinder er antitesen til vestlig forståelse. Så meget i modsætning til vestlig forståelse af hvorledes vi behandler andre mennesker, at ekspertisen ser ud til at gøre sig store anstrengelser for ikke at anerkende hvor stort et kulturelt traume tyskerne oplevede nytårsnat at det ligner regulær benægtelse.
Massen var uhomogen når det kom til statsborgerskab, kultur og etnicitet, men den var kønslig homogen ved at alle var mænd, rimeligt aldersmæssigt homogen i at det var mænd i den våbenføre alder og så var den muslimsk. Da hverken køn eller alder i sig selv medfører specifik forståelse af kønsroller så er der kun værdisættet islam tilbage.
Islam er selvfølgelig elefanten i rummet. Som Reinicke er også Manteufel med på at der er tale om en magtudøvelse, men også hun savner eller ignorerer et begreb om dens indhold, som altså vil være en rape-jihad; at muslimerne demonstrerer islams magt over kristenheden og hedenskabet ved at overfalde og voldtage ‘vores’ kvinder.
Og vores kvinder “finder sig i meget” fra os, fortæller Manteufel og uddyber

Typisk tænker kvinder ikke over, at de oplever hverdagssexisme, men når de så skriver til os, er der ofte ti episoder startende fra barndommen, hvor mænd har kommenteret eller taget på dem. Når de spoler tilbage, kommer oplevelserne pludselig til dem. Det er episoder, som de ikke har fortalt om, fordi det var pinligt, eller fordi de var bange for ikke at blive taget alvorligt

Hvor billederne af Lara Logan lod os se rædslen i hendes ansigt, skånede den os for hendes skrig, som hun grangiveligt har måtte give fra sig. Med disse billeder, ligeledes fra den muslimske verden, skønt jeg ikke helt ved hvor (muligvis også Ægypten at bedømme på No Smoking skiltet?) ser vi ikke den arme kvindes ansigt, men vi hører hende rædselsslagne skrig. Jeg er sikker på at hun ikke behøver at spole noget som helst tilbage.

Hvorfor?

Da det muslimske ægtepar, pakistanske Syed Farook og Tafsheen Malik, begik massemord på en amerikansk julefest i det firma, hvor Farook selv arbejde, skulle man finde en forklaring. CNNs Erin Burnett foreslog at den kvindelige muslim måske led af en fødselsdepression. Og CNNs Gary Tuchman foreslog en enke til et af terrorofrene at det måske var hans egen skyld, kristent missionerende som han var. Council on American Islamic Relations fortalte CNN at terrorangrebet også var USAs skyld, med den førte udenrigspolitik in mente. Og sådan gik det til at det var en muslim der ved at argumentere for gengæld afslørede forbindelsen til islam for CNNs seere. På den amerikanske venstrefløj og blandt amerikanske muslimer var der forargelse over at medierne ikke havde respekteret Farooks massemyrdende kone Tafsheen Malik ved at vise et fotografi af hende uden hijab. Og mens de amerikanske universiteter analyserede teorierne frygtede man naturligvis et backlash.

Herhjemme advarede Poul Høi om ikke at være hurtig til at komme folk i “kasser og båse” og foreslog uden ironi at Syed Farook blev massemorder fordi hans barndom var ulykkelig med en drikfældig og voldelig far. Sammenhængen der viser at børn af alkoholiserede og voldelige fædre begår massemord antages blot at være sand fordi det er fra den samme kasse man forklarer al anden ondskab man ikke vil forholde sig til, og så var det vist konen Tafsheen Malik der fik ham til det. Med alle de børn af voldelige alkoholikere har Malik virkelig ramt en sekundær rekrutteringsåre.

Og så garnerer han sofisstisk med moralske betragtninger i psykologiske klæder som “Ingen massedrabsmænd er mentalt sunde”. Terror med politiske, religiøse, seperatistiske og sekteriske formål eksisterer altså ikke i Høis univers, hvis vi forstår mental sundhed i en klinisk forstand. Det giver ingen mening og sætningen er da også hentet i kassen for ondskab man ikke ønsker at erkende. Det er et moralsk udsagn som vi bruger om SS bødler, ISIS og lignende, men den tjener sproglig til at bakke Høis ide op. En tese han skyder i foden  når han som eksempel på Farooks integration i the american way of life skriver

Det følgende år indrykkede han [Syed Farook] en lignende annonce på et datingsite i Dubai, hvor han skrev, at han ledte efter en kvinde mellem 18 og 22 år, og hendes nationalitet og religion var underordnet.

Høi læser “nationalitet og religion var underordnet”, men overser at Farook ikke finder en kone i USA, men på et datingsite i Dubai! Med andre ord kan vi have en almindelig stærk formodning om at han ledte efter en araber som pakistaner og med religion mente at han ikke ville hænge sig i om hun foretrak Hamas frem for ISIS. Farrok havde fundet hjem førend han mødte konen.

Carsten Jensen mener modsat Høi ikke at Farook og Malik myrdede på grund af Farooks fars druk og vold. Han har sin egen kasse af forklaringer og den er fyldt med os andre end ham. Vi, som nationer, fører krige mod dem og det var os der startede. Mikkel Anderson leverer en anbefalelsesværdig nedsabling af Jensens realitetsforladte moralfortælling. Andersons centrale pointe begrænser sig ikke til Jensen, men er kardinal for hele venstrefløjens tænkning og skyld og ansvar

Dernæst fremsætter Jensen en af de sørgeligste travere, der altid hives af stalden, når vestlige venstreintellektuelle skal forsvare ikke-vestlig terror: ”Terroren har altid været den militært svage parts svar,” erklærer han.

Som nævnt udøver IS også rigelig terror, hvor de står stærkt. Men terror er et valg, ikke den nødvendighed, som Jensen vil have os til at tro.  Det er et valg, som intet har at gøre med, hvorvidt man er ”stærk” eller ”svag”. Den vilkårlige terror mod civile har altid været de totalitære og skruppelløses ”svar”, der så rigeligt også er blevet udført af ”de stærke”, hvilket Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler og en perlerække af andre fra verdenshistoriens rædselskabinet demonstrerer. Der er ingen automatik i, at en militært ”svag” part massakrerer tilfældige civile.

Desværre er de fleste af Jensens udsagn genfortalt af journalisten og jeg vil være varsom med at udlægge dem bogstaveligt, selvom om de er klassisk Carsten Jensen, som at anderkende ISIS ‘deres territorium’ uden at nævne folkemordene på de oprindelige indbyggere. Og fordi Jensen i store dele ses gennem artiklen fremgår de ikke klart hvor “vi” startede, da Jensen eksempelvis nævner Frankrigs for længst overståede Algier-krig uden at det fremgår som var der en direkte sammenhæng med nutidens civilisationskrig eller om det bare vare et eksempel på at det altid var “os” der starter.

Men et par enkelte af Jensens citerede udsagn fortjener måske et par kommentarer som overflødigt supplement til Andersons Jensenmassakre. For der er så mange besynderlige antagelser i venstrefløejens kasser så Informations journalist slet ikke mener at der skal følges op på et udsagn som “Islamisk Stat giver de unge mænds kamp en retning og et mål”, siger Jensen, som vælter danske unge mænd rundt i gaderne og uden mål og med halshugger tilfældige fodgængere. Eller, hvis det kun er logisk for muslimske unge mænd bare at være i kamp, var det så nu også os der startede? Hvem der startede bliver endnu mere forvirrende da Jensen fortsætter “Ekstremisternes våde drøm er, at typer som Søren Espersen får magten. Så har vi konfrontationen…”.

Men tilbage til San Bernadino og hvorfor det muslimsk-pakistanske ægtepar dog kunne finde på at kaste deres karrierer ud ad vinduet. Victor Davis Hanson leverer en fremragende diagnose i National Review af den næsten perfekte storm som muslimsk aggression og almindeligt kulturelt selvhad skaber

Why, then, is radical Islamism, so antithetical to Western values, still preached in American and European mosques? Do radical Muslims in the U.S. and Europe realize that if they had had their way, they would not have wished to emigrate to the U.S., given that it would resemble the homelands they abandoned? The worldview of Tashfeen Malik, if enacted, would eventually have turned San Bernardino into Islamabad; would Ms. Malik then have left it for Portland?

Why is ISIS apparently attractive to hundreds, if not thousands, of Western Muslim youth? Why is the FBI supposedly busy tracking down radical Muslims residing in America, who presumably came here of their own free will? Is it because the FBI is Islamophobic?

One obvious reason for these anomalies is a sort of paradox. The more a Muslim youth enjoys casual sexual hook-ups, easy access to liquor and drugs, and unapologetic secular indulgence, all the more the voluptuary feels he has betrayed his culture, religion, and very identity — and the more his eventual return to Islamic purity is likely to become extreme. No one forced Mohamed Atta and his band of killers to become Western sybarites. What made them slaves to their appetites was their very Islamic Puritanism, which turned what was commonly available into forbidden obsessions: the more taboo, all the more to be indulged in, and all the more to be regretted post facto and the indulgence blamed on others when passions are drained and probity returns.

Second, in many cases, the immigrant immediately asks upon arrival, “Why do they have so much here, while we have so little back home?” Do not expect him to cite everything from religious tolerance to consensual government to freedom and market capitalism — not when there is an accessible American dictionary of victimization, ranging from colonialism and imperialism to oil and Israel. The new arrival from the Middle East need not turn on Al Jazeera to be spoon-fed grievances, when he can listen to President Obama’s apology tours or Cairo speech or breakfast sermons about high-horse Christians and their millennium-old Crusades.

Third, we in America ask almost nothing of immigrants any more. We do not care whether they come legally and will obey the law once they’re here. We have no concern whether they can support themselves, or whether they will become wards of the state. One need only review the careers of Obama’s own immigrant aunt and uncle. We have no worries about whether they learn English. They can hate or love America, as is their wont. If an immigrant commits a crime against his hosts, we feel that we would commit a greater crime by sending our ungracious guest home. Is that why ICE released 36,000 alien lawbreakers in 2013 alone, preempting their deportation hearings, or why 347,000 criminal aliens are believed to be at large in the United States?

Citizenship as a cherished privilege has utterly vanished. So has any idea of gratitude. A hallowed notion of legality, of being more law-abiding even than native-born Americans, has disappeared among immigrants. Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez — the five-times-deported illegal alien and seven times repeat felon who shot Kate Steinle to death in San Francisco — was only the most extreme example of what is possible under current immigration law and practice.

At no time did Lopez-Sanchez thank the United States for offering him a better chance than Mexico had — at least if repeatedly committing felonies can be see as a form of not offering thanks. We deduce that he believed things were better here than in Mexico or he would not have reentered the country illegally so many times. Lopez-Sanchez, like the Tsarnaevs, knew that the U.S. leaves immigrants alone, or perhaps, better yet, romanticizes their difference, and provides, if not a legal amnesty for their crimes, a psychosocial one.

Fourth, immigrants sense an identity-obsessed culture, where diversity, not unity, brings career dividends. A teen can cross illegally from the oppression of Oaxaca and almost instantly qualify for victim status and affirmative action on the bizarre theory that American oppressions have earned him compensation and reparations, as if he were psychologically damaged by America while he was in Oaxaca or will be in America if he was not in Oaxaca.

Hyphenation, not conformity, is preferred — and wisely so. Poor George Zimmerman’s “white Hispanic” troubles arose from his Americanizing his mixed-race identity rather than emphasizing a constructed otherness by calling himself the more authentic-sounding Jorge Mesa. A fight between Trayvon Martin and Jorge Mesa does not reach the White House, because it furthers no particular agenda; it’s analogous to the weekend toll in Chicago rather than a Ferguson teachable moment. Apparently, Zimmerman did not learn the lesson that an upper-middle-class prep-schooler named Barry Dunham, whose conniving African father had abandoned him, would have been a mere statistic. But as Barack Hussein Obama he became a unique example of diversity, with all its resonance.

At best, if a Muslim immigrant fully assimilates, to the point where, as is true of most Americans, he cannot easily be identified by his religion, or if his religion becomes incidental rather than essential to his public persona, then he is rendered just an ordinary American. Perhaps he even is in some danger of joining the unattractive majority not subject to special dispensation. At worst, he can become a sellout in the eyes of his local mosque and immigrant enclave. Emphasizing identity to its logical extreme wins rewards in today’s America. We saw to what insane lengths this has gone in the cases of the fabulists Rachel Dolezal, Elizabeth Warren, Shaun King, and Ward Churchill.

Finally, the Muslim shooter understands that so many of his hosts are naïve, ashamed of their own culture, unsure of their heritage, and prone to apologize rather than criticize. They would likely not call the authorities even if they spied preparations for terrorist activities — believing that being called a racist is worse than possibly allowing violence to ensue against the innocent. Note that Ms. Malik never thought that she might have to tone down her suspicious activities, because her neighbors quite magnanimously did not call the police.

Appeasement is a psychological disorder that affects both the appeaser and the appeased. The more exemptions are granted the offender, the more the grantor feels good about himself, and the more the offender loses respect for someone seen as weak rather than magnanimous.

Nissen flytter med

Bestyrelsesformanden for Danfoss ser ifølge Jyllands-Posten et ‘kæmpe potentiale’ i migranterne. Ikke blot potentiale eller et vist potentiale, men et kæmpe potentiale. Med det kan man kun forstå potentialet således at det overstiger dansk arbejdskraft pund for pund. Det mærker man endnu intet til. I Weekendavisen uge 38 kunne man læse at”En undersøgelse fra Dansk Arbejdsgiverforening viser, at blandt syriske flygtninge, der er indvandret de senere år, er det cirka 13 procent, der har job efter fire år i Danmark.”. Og det betyder følgeligt at “den kommunale service til børn og ældre må nedjusteres i flere kommuner, da udgifter til flygtninge presser økonomien” skriver Jyllands-Posten ifølge Bornholms Tidende (så bliver min research ikke mere doven).

Jyllands-Posten skriver om  det multietniske samfunds byggematerialer, som de myldrer ind i Europa i hvert fald har et voldspotentiale af en anseelig størrelse.

Asylansøgere skal så vidt muligt nu fordeles på modtagecentrene efter deres etniske oprindelse. Det sker, efter at der i august opstod voldsom tumult på et overfyldt center i byen Suhl, hvor 120 betjente måtte rykke ud.

Balladen, som efterlod 11 flygtninge og 6 betjente såret, opstod, fordi en 25-årig mand havde revet sider ud af Koranen og skyllet dem ud i toilettet.

Først tirsdag, næsten seks uger efter episoden, anholdt politiet 15 mistænkte i sagen. De sigtes bl.a. for forsøg på manddrab.

Tysk præsident advarer mod for mange flygtninge

Siden har der været masseslagsmål på andre flygtningecentre, og ifølge formanden for det tyske politiforbund, Rainer Wendt, er det udtryk for et voksende problem.

“Vi har oplevet denne vold i uger og måneder. De slår sig sammen i grupper efter etnicitet, religion eller klanstrukturer og går løs på hinanden med knive og hjemmelavede våben,” siger han til Passauer Neuen Presse.

Han fortæller om “benhårde, kriminelle strukturer” med både religiøst og politisk motiverede konflikter, men også rene magtkampe.

De kan ikke med hinanden, derhjemme, hvorfor de kommer her. Og de kan ikke med hinanden i centrene og på et tidspunkt er visionen at de skal ud i samfundet - med hinanden. Og der møder de det offentlige der, som Politiken skriver, også får deres dosis vold. Så meget så “En ny opgørelse viser, at 93 socialpædagoger har fået anmeldt posttraumatisk belastningsreaktion (PTSD) til Arbejdsskadestyrelsen”. Lige nu bruger politiet de ressourcer de har sparet på manglende grænsekontrol i en intens menneskejagt på en flygtning, der har udfoldet sit potentiale.

Fjendtligboerne i Calais

Forleden skrev jeg at der trods danske mediers forkærlighed for venligboere udd og hjemme så er fjendtligboerne i flertal. I farten nævnte jeg ekstern lektor ved Sorbonne-universitetet i Paris Caroline Sanchez Boe der fortalte TV2, hvorledes venligboere i Calais havde taget så godt imod de afrikanske migranter at man undredes over hvorfor migranterne risikerede liv og lemmer for at komme videre. Men jeg fik ikke helt beskrivelsen af Calais  fantastiske venligboere med. På videoindslaget fortæller Sanchez Boe

Der er en meget, meget stor forskel på, hvad myndighederne gør og hvad de lokale gør. Altså, det, der er ret fantastisk her i Calais faktisk, det er, at de sidste 10-15 år, der har der udviklet sig enorm megen solidaritet med altså almindelige borgere som bo i Calais og som tager migranter ind for at tage et brusebad, bruge toilettet, som låner deres stik sådan så folk kan oplade deres mobiltelefoner og blive ved med at være i kontakt med deres familier derhjemme - hvis de i det hele taget har kontakt til dem. Der er blevet organiseret folkekøkkener, hvor folk fra omegnen simpelthen kommer med mad og hjælper migranterne.

Og til gengæld fra myndighedernes side så har der været enormt meget (utydeligt) …at staten eller andre har svigtet deres ansvar og det vil jeg sige… - det vil jeg gerne modsige fordi staten har simpelthen ladet denne her lejr udvikle sig i løbet af de sidste mange år, specielt i løbet af de sidste mange måneder. Og en af de ting, som myndighederne har gjort, det har været at forbyde maduddeling inde i Calais centrum og tvinge organisationerne og civilsamfundet til at give mad til migranterne uden for Calais, 10 kilometer udenfor Calais, ude ved klitterne. Et sted som er mere svagt beboet end Calais centrum.

Og det har gjort at man har holdt migranterne væk fra Calais centrum og også lidt mere væk fra lokalbefolkningen. Og for første gang i mange, mange år har Læger Uden Grænser og andre organisationer sat kriselejre op indenfor Frankrigs grænser, som de ville have gjort det i et andet af verdens brændpunkter.

Daily Mail har undgået civilsamfundet og derimod talt med uvenligboerne i Calais, som mener at migranterne ikke så meget låner, som de simpelthen tager. Enormt meget faktisk

Desperate locals in Calais are putting their houses on the market amid claims that migrants have been stealing their washing and Wi-Fi connections.

One farmer living in the area has even set up thermal imaging cameras and electric wires around a vacant house he owns for fear that squatters may take over.

A sign displayed at the entrance to the gates, which are reinforced with barbed wire, reads: ‘Traps!’.

2b11d73000000578-3184273-image-a-12_1438628098569

The road, Rue de Gravelines, which backs onto the camp known as ‘the jungle’, is also littered with ‘A Vendre’ (for sale) signs.

Another local yesterday told the Mail that he was moving out of his rented home because of the camp.

The man who would only give his name as René, 59, said that, of the four cluster of houses on the road, he was the second to move out as a result.

René, who is retired, has lived in the house for three years and enjoys the ‘tranquil’ setting.

But, he claims his 18-year-old daughter is now too scared to take the bus to and from Calais town centre at night because of the dozens of men travelling back and forth from the tunnel.

Islam i krise? II

Diverse, Forår?, Iran, Kristenforfølgelse, Ligestilling, Muslimer, islam — Drokles on August 5, 2015 at 1:34 am

Hvad er det helt præcist, at Obama-regeringen tror har ændret sig vedrørende Irans ledelse?” spurgte Douglas Murray på Gatestone Institute med reference til atom-aftalen. Måske ser han Change? Anden del af Ibn Warraqs artikelserie på Jihad Watch om et skrumpende islam har en længere passage om Iran

Iran is one of the most interesting of all the “rooms” that Garrison studied.

He observes that, “Of Iran’s population 64 percent were born after the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and have little affection for it. While Christianity is growing rapidly in the country, so too are many other worldviews as Muslim Iranians seek a respite from the state religion. It is common to find Iranian young adults walking away from Islam and turning to atheism, secularism, hedonism, drugs, and even ancient pathways such as Zoroastrianism and Buddhism.” [8]

I shall be discussing Iranian atheists in a later section, but I can personally vouch for Garrison’s latter conclusion. Over the last twenty years, I have given talks to Iranian groups in Paris, Stockholm, Chicago, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and New York; they have all been anti-Khomeini, and most have been atheists, and certainly secularists — thus, evidently, their flight from Iran. Garrison also points out, quoting journalist Scott Peterson, “‘hidden behind the mullah’s mask is the most unashamedly pro-American population in the Middle East’. The sentiment was expressed spontaneously after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in America, when 60,000 Iranians gathered on Tehran’s football stadium dressed in black to hold a candlelight vigil.” [9]

House churches are the most common place for Muslim converts to Christianity to worship. The House Church movement may have, as a conservative estimate, 100,000 followers, but “data from interviews with Iranian Christian refugees, and the number of correspondents to satellite Christian television programs give reason to believe that figure could be as high as a few million”. [10]

Garrison refers to Mark Bradley [11], who wrote, “If the figures from the survey carried out by Mohabbat TV were translated nationally, it would mean that 8 million people are interested in Christianity and nearly 3 million would actually want to become Christian”. The German online journal, Deutsche Welle [DW], cites other figures: “It is said that between 250,000 and 500,000 Iranians have converted, though the actual number is impossible to know.” [12]

DW then explains the reasons for conversions: “They are turning away from Islam primarily because they are disappointed in their government, which has tied politics and religion together so as to make them inseparable, and has curtailed many civil rights in the name of Islam.” [13]

Persecution of Iranian Muslim converts to Christianity has led many to flee to the West. The U.K. daily newspaper, The Guardian [14], describes the journey of these asylum seekers in Germany: mainly Iranian, and occasionally Afghan, émigrés who have given a new lease of life to the religious life of Germany. Many have paid as much as to $30,000 to be smuggled into the country with fake passports. Once in Germany they have usually adopted western names, and have added greatly to congregation numbers in several independent Lutheran, Evangelical and Presbyterian churches. They are now waiting for their baptism ceremonies as they rebuild their lives.

The last time Germany saw so many Iranians seeking entry was just after the 1979 revolution. The number of Iranian refugees has doubled every year for the last five years, from less than 1,000 in 2008 to 4,348 in 2012. Official figures from the federal office for migration and refugees confirm this trend. Over 3,500 Iranians were granted asylum last year, and Iran was one of the countries from which Germany saw a steep rise in asylum applications.

The Guardian gives the reasons for this exodus: “Spread across multiple churches and asylum camps, Muslim-to-Christian converts from Iran make up a noticeable population of asylum seekers who say a growing crackdown on Muslim-born Christian converts back home, and disillusion from decades of living under Islamic law, have led them to Germany. Though Iranian converts can be found in The Netherlands, Sweden and Austria, Germany’s economic stability and reputation as a major refugee hosting country has made the European country the most desirable destination.”

In the past, most of Iran’s Christians were ethnic Armenians and Assyrians who are allowed to practice their religion freely as long as they did not proselytize. Thanks to Christian satellite television broadcasts, in the last five to ten years, Iranian Diasporan Christian pastors have had an enormous influence over their fellow Iranians back home. Even ethnic Armenians and Assyrians have taken to spreading the gospel to their Muslim neighbours. The combined result is that the religion is taking hold throughout Iran. The Guardian tries to give estimates of the numbers involved, but notes: “The underground nature of the Christian conversion movement has made numbers impossible to determine accurately. Estimates range from 300,000 to 500,000 by various sources. Though these statistics cannot be independently verified, converts and pastors both in and out of Iran say the movement is strong and widely spread. Some converts have also been reported to travel to neighboring Armenia to become baptized.”

10336642_911794848834610_4005485964526682240_n

Sidste år skrev jeg: “I  2009-10 oplevede Iran masseprotester, optøjer og en truende revolution eller måske endda borgerkrig i kølvandet på Mahmoud Ahmadinejads genvalg som præsident. Mens de protesterende råbte valgsvindel og død over diktatoren svarede styret igen med vold og mord ved styrets bølle arme, den såkaldte Basij og affærdigede opstandende som startet og koordineret af zionister og CIA. Selv om opstanden fik en martyr i  Neda Agha Soltan holdt styret fast og udnyttede det til at rydde ud i oppositionen ved en række anholdelser og attentater.

Selv om opstandende ikke handlede om for og imod islam er den iranske befolkning splittet i et skizofrent forhold mellem de herskende konsekvente muslimer og en veluddannet liberal vestliggjort ungdom. Det er svært at se det som andet end et symptom på en voldsom identitetskrise når Irans egne myndigheder anslår at ca. 5 mill. iranere er narkomaner og mange flere tager stoffer jævnligt. Samtidig er der tilsyneladende et sammenbrud i de seksuelle normer, hvis man skal tro The Date Reports .”

Stadig svært at erkende kristenforfølgelsen endsige dens ophav

Eliza Grizwold skriver i New Yok Times fyldigt om muslimernes forfølgelse af kristne i Mellemøsten

From 1910 to 2010, the number of Christians in the Middle East — in countries like Egypt, Israel, Palestine and Jordan — continued to decline; once 14 percent of the population, Christians now make up roughly 4 percent. (In Iran and Turkey, they’re all but gone.) In Lebanon, the only country in the region where Christians hold significant political power, their numbers have shrunk over the past century, to 34 percent from 78 percent of the population. Low birthrates have contributed to this decline, as well as hostile political environments and economic crisis. Fear is also a driver. The rise of extremist groups, as well as the perception that their communities are vanishing, causes people to leave.

“‘‘If we attend to minority rights only after slaughter has begun, then we have already failed,’’ siger FNs Menneskerets Højkommissær Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein. Demokraten Anna Eshoo, der sidder i Repræsentanternes Hus for Californien siger “Christianity is under an existential threat”. Men alligevel har Det Hvide Hus uligt meget sværere ved at anerkende kristne ledere end muslimske skriver Raymond Ibrahim i Gatestone Institute.

During the height of one of the most brutal months of Muslim persecution of Christians, the U.S. State Department exposed its double standards against persecuted Christian minorities.

Sister Diana, an influential Iraqi Christian leader, who was scheduled to visit the U.S. to advocate for persecuted Christians in the Mideast, was denied a visa by the U.S. State Department even though she had visited the U.S. before, most recently in 2012.

She was to be one of a delegation of religious leaders from Iraq — including Sunni, Shia and Yazidi, among others — to visit Washington, D.C., to describe the situation of their people. Every religious leader from this delegation to Washington D.C. was granted a visa — except for the only Christian representative, Sister Diana.

After this refusal became public, many Americans protested, some writing to their congressmen. Discussing the nun’s visa denial, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said:

This is an administration which never seems to find a good enough excuse to help Christians, but always finds an excuse to apologize for terrorists … I hope that as it gets attention that Secretary Kerry will reverse it. If he doesn’t, Congress has to investigate, and the person who made this decision ought to be fired.

The State Department eventually granted Sister Diana a visa.

This is not the first time the U.S. State Department has not granted a visa to a Christian leader coming from a Muslim region. Last year, after the United States Institute for Peace brought together the governors of Nigeria’s mostly Muslim northern states for a conference in the U.S., the State Department blocked the visa of the region’s only Christian governor, Jonah David Jang.

Greenfield har en lang udførlig liste over den undertrykkelse kristne udsættes for i den muslimske verden, der er værd at gøre sig nedslået over. Men få politikere synes at kere sig. I Griswolds lange, velskrevne, detaljerede og på en gang indsigtsfulde og manipulerende artikel skriver hun, at det har været en topprioritet for både Bush og Obama ikke at tage sig ud sig ud som kristne korsfarere

It has been nearly impossible for two U.S. presidents — Bush, a conservative evangelical; and Obama, a progressive liberal — to address the plight of Christians explicitly for fear of appearing to play into the crusader and ‘‘clash of civilizations’’ narratives the West is accused of embracing. In 2007, when Al Qaeda was kidnapping and killing priests in Mosul, Nina Shea, who was then a U.S. commissioner for religious freedom, says she approached the secretary of state at the time, Condoleezza Rice, who told her the United States didn’t intervene in ‘‘sectarian’’ issues. Rice now says that protecting religious freedom in Iraq was a priority both for her and for the Bush administration. But the targeted violence and mass Christian exodus remained unaddressed. ‘‘One of the blind spots of the Bush administration was the inability to grapple with this as a direct byproduct of the invasion,’’ says Timothy Shah, the associate director of Georgetown University’s Religious Freedom Project.

More recently, the White House has been criticized for eschewing the term ‘‘Christian’’ altogether. The issue of Christian persecution is politically charged; the Christian right has long used the idea that Christianity is imperiled to rally its base. When ISIS massacred Egyptian Copts in Libya this winter, the State Department came under fire for referring to the victims merely as ‘‘Egyptian citizens.’’ Daniel Philpott, a professor of political science at the University of Notre Dame, says, ‘‘When ISIS is no longer said to have religious motivations nor the minorities it attacks to have religious identities, the Obama administration’s caution about religion becomes excessive.’’

Politisk korrekthed og hensynsbetændelse til muslimske vrangforestillinger betales af de kristne. Og politikerne høster veksler for deres kulturelle sensitivitet fra den smagfulde venstrefløj. Den umiddelbare historie og situation ridser Griswold op således

For more than a decade, extremists have targeted Christians and other minorities, who often serve as stand-ins for the West. This was especially true in Iraq after the U.S. invasion, which caused hundreds of thousands to flee. ‘‘Since 2003, we’ve lost priests, bishops and more than 60 churches were bombed,’’ Bashar Warda, the Chaldean Catholic archbishop of Erbil, said. With the fall of Saddam Hussein, Christians began to leave Iraq in large numbers, and the population shrank to less than 500,000 today from as many as 1.5 million in 2003.

The Arab Spring only made things worse. As dictators like Mubarak in Egypt and Qaddafi in Libya were toppled, their longstanding protection of minorities also ended. Now, ISIS is looking to eradicate Christians and other minorities altogether. The group twists the early history of Christians in the region — their subjugation by the sword — to legitimize its millenarian enterprise. Recently, ISIS posted videos delineating the second-class status of Christians in the caliphate. Those unwilling to pay the jizya tax or to convert would be destroyed, the narrator warned, as the videos culminated in the now-­infamous scenes of Egyptian and Ethiopian Christians in Libya being marched onto the beach and beheaded, their blood running into the surf.

The future of Christianity in the region of its birth is now uncertain. ‘‘How much longer can we flee before we and other minorities become a story in a history book?’’ says Nuri Kino, a journalist and founder of the advocacy group Demand for Action. According to a Pew study, more Christians are now faced with religious persecution than at any time since their early history.

Griswolds artikel kan absolut anbefales, hvis man vil være klogere på de kristnes situation og Mellemøstens morads. Men jeg skrev at den også var manipulerende og det er den i sin apologetiske omgang med islam. Selvfølgelig, fristes man nemlig til at sige.

Så skønt Griswold er langt fremme i erkendelsen af de kristnes ulykkelige situation i Mellemøsten (i hele  den muslimske verden, rent faktisk, og den kommunistiske også), og mens politikerne tøver, så er hun ikke nået dertil, hvor hun kan beskrive det reelle problem. Det er generiske “ekstremister”, der er problemet for Griswold, mens Condoleezza Rice trods alt vidste mere end det med sit “the United States didn’t intervene in ‘‘sectarian’’ issues” - og så svigtede de alligevel. Så civilisationernes sammenstød bliver derfor kun et narrativ for Griswold, en fortælling og ikke en beskrivelse af de faktiske forhold. (”Israel and Palestine” har en konflikt, en formulering, der betyder at Israel er en illegitim stat, der hvor Palæstina eksisterer).

Griswolds artikel er vævet over nogle flygtninges frygtelige historier med den 31 årige Rana og hendes mand som hovedroller. Ranas mand Diyaa beskrives som “a tyrant (…) who, after 14 years of marriage, wouldn’t let (), Rana, 31, have her own mobile phone. He isolated her from friends and family, guarding her jealously”. Han var tillige nærig. Jeg mindes ikke en historie om palæstinensiske ofre, der hænges ud som dumme svin. Nuvel, mennesker er mennesker og Diyaas karakterbrister drukner hurtigt i beskrivelserne af det muslimske vanvid. Bortset fra, at det gør det ikke helt, for islam holdes fri.

Lad os, som enhver god film, fokusere på parallelhistorierne. I det historiske afsnit hedder det fra Griswolds hånd

When the first Islamic armies arrived from the Arabian Peninsula during the seventh century, the Assyrian Church of the East was sending missionaries to China, India and Mongolia. The shift from Christianity to Islam happened gradually. Much as the worship of Eastern cults largely gave way to Christianity, Christianity gave way to Islam. Under Islamic rule, Eastern Christians lived as protected people, dhimmi: They were subservient and had to pay the jizya, but were often allowed to observe practices forbidden by Islam, including eating pork and drinking alcohol. Muslim rulers tended to be more tolerant of minorities than their Christian counterparts, and for 1,500 years, different religions thrived side by side.

One hundred years ago, the fall of the Ottoman Empire and World War I ushered in the greatest period of violence against Christians in the region. The genocide waged by the Young Turks in the name of nationalism, not religion, left at least two million Armenians, Assyrians and Greeks dead. Nearly all were Christian. Among those who survived, many of the better educated left for the West. Others settled in Iraq and Syria, where they were protected by the military dictators who courted these often economically powerful minorities.

De islamiske hære ankom, skiftet fra kristendom skete gradvist og naturligt, kristne var beskyttet mod et vist kontingent (en lille del af folks motivation for det ‘naturlige’ skift), de muslimske fyrster var tolerante og religionerne trivedes side om side. Men så kommer nationalismen som følge af Osmannerrigets sammenbrud og begår folkemord. Det er ikke islam, det er end ikke ‘religion’! Alligevel sker folkemordet på kristne.

Det er djævlen i detaljen. Fortællingen er tilstrækkelig upræcist formuleret til ikke at være direkte løgn, men vildledende. Folkemordet på de kristne skete ikke som følge af Osmannerrigets sammenbrud, det startede med tiltagende pogromer i 1890′erne og blev færdiggjort i 1919, inden sammenbruddet. Og det var en erklæret jihad mod de vantro. Derfor fandt grusomhederne også en naturlig klangbund blandt almindelige muslimer, der tog ivrigt del i grusomhederne. Den dag i dag er kirkerne i Tyrkiet på vej mod udryddelse. Og regionens diktatorer, hvem var det nu de beskyttede de minoriteterne imod?

Så lad os vende tilbage til Rana og Diyaa og de andre kristne minoriteters historie om da nutidens islamiske hær ankom til den kristne by Qaraqosh, hvor de boede. Flygtninge fra Mosul fortalte de lokale at “The militants painted a red Arabic ‘‘n,’’ for Nasrane, a slur, on Christian homes”. Just ankommet kendte den islamiske hær ISIS ikke de kristne i Mosul - men det gjorde de kristnes muslimske naboer, klangbunden og de malede ‘n’ for nasrane på de kristnes hjem.

De kurdiske styrker, peshmerga, der havde været ene om at give ISIS modstand, trak sig fra området. Da kurderne havde afvæbnet de kristne og ISIS afskåret vandforsyningnen, flygtede de fleste af Qaraqosh indbyggere og efterlod kun de svageste, gamle og syge og en enkelt fulderik tilbage. Og så Diyaa, der nægtede Rana at flygte fordi han ikke mente ISIS vil ankomme.

As Diyaa and Rana hid in their basement, ISIS broke into stores and looted them. Over the next two weeks, militants rooted out most of the residents cowering in their homes, searching house to house. The armed men roamed Qaraqosh on foot and in pickups. They marked the walls of farms and businesses ‘‘Property of the Islamic State.’’ ISIS now held not just Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city, but also Ramadi and Fallujah. (During the Iraq War, the fighting in these three places accounted for 30 percent of U.S. casualties.) In Qaraqosh, as in Mosul, ISIS offered residents a choice: They could either convert or pay the jizya, the head tax levied against all ‘‘People of the Book’’: Christians, Zoroastrians and Jews. If they refused, they would be killed, raped or enslaved, their wealth taken as spoils of war.

Således ser det ud når den islamiske hære ankom, skiftet fra kristendom sker gradvist forstået som et rykud, hvilket er naturligt omstændighederne taget i betragtning. Og de muslimske herrers tolerance var baseret på beskyttelsespenge. Således skal religionerne trives side om side, hvis altså ikke man foretrak at blive “dræbt, voldtaget eller gjort til slave”.

Men ISIS bløder op i dovenskab efter at rende og lede efter de sidste kristne og tilbyder “what they call ‘exile and hardship’”. Diyaa og Rana kommer frem fra deres skjul og melder sig til ISIS sundhedscenters ‘checkups’’, der er en slet skjult eufemisme for en visitering efter eventuelle værdier. Og, skal det hurtigt vise sig, så har mennesker også en særlig værdi i sig selv i det islamiske tankesæt

By 9 a.m., ISIS had separated men from women. Seated in the crowd, the local ISIS emir, Saeed Abbas, surveyed the female prisoners. His eyes lit on Aida Hana Noah, 43, who was holding her 3-year-old daughter, Christina. Noah said she felt his gaze and gripped Christina closer. For two weeks, she’d been at home with her daughter and her husband, Khadr Azzou Abada, 65. He was blind, and Aida decided that the journey north would be too hard for him. So she sent her 25-year-old son with her three other children, who ranged in age from 10 to 13, to safety. She thought Christina too young to be without her mother.

ISIS scanned the separate groups of men and women. ‘‘You’’ and ‘‘you,’’ they pointed. Some of the captives realized what ISIS was doing, survivors told me later, dividing the young and healthy from the older and weak. One, Talal Abdul Ghani, placed a final call to his family before the fighters confiscated his phone. He had been publicly whipped for refusing to convert to Islam, as his sisters, who fled from other towns, later recounted. ‘‘Let me talk to everybody,’’ he wept. ‘‘I don’t think they’re letting me go.’’ It was the last time they heard from him.

No one was sure where either bus was going. As the jihadists directed the weaker and older to the first of two buses, one 49-year-old woman, Sahar, protested that she’d been separated from her husband, Adel. Although he was 61, he was healthy and strong and had been held back. One fighter reassured her, saying, ‘‘These others will follow.’’ Sahar, Aida and her blind husband, Khadr, boarded the first bus. The driver, a man they didn’t know, walked down the aisle. Without a word, he took Christina from her mother’s arms. ‘‘Please, in the name of God, give her back,’’ Aida pleaded. The driver carried Christina into the medical center. Then he returned without the child. As the people in the bus prayed to leave town, Aida kept begging for Christina. Finally, the driver went inside again. He came back empty-handed.

(…)

As the bus rumbled north out of town, Aida sat crumpled in a seat next to her husband. Many of the 40-odd people on it began to weep. ‘‘We cried for Christina and ourselves,’’ Sahar said. The bus took a sharp right toward the Khazir River that marked an edge of the land ISIS had seized. Several minutes later, the driver stopped and ordered everyone off.

Led by a shepherd who had traveled this path with his flock, the sick and elderly descended and began to walk to the Khazir River. The journey took 12 hours.

The second bus — the one filled with the young and healthy — headed north, too. But instead of turning east, it turned west, toward Mosul. Among its captives was Diyaa. Rana wasn’t with him. She had been bundled into a third vehicle, a new four-wheel drive, along with an 18-year-old girl named Rita, who’d come to Qaraqosh to help her elderly father flee.

The women were driven to Mosul, where, the next day, Rana’s captor called her brothers. ‘‘If you come near her, I’ll blow the house up. I’m wearing a suicide vest,’’ he said. Then he passed the phone to Rana, who whispered, in Syriac, the story of what happened to her. Her brothers were afraid to ask any questions lest her answers make trouble for her. She said, ‘‘I’m taking care of a 3-year-old named Christina.’’

Trods disse utvetydige beskrivelser er Griswolds ellers glimrende artikel fuld af de standardbesværgelser der tynger de ledende medier. “No one has suffered more at the hands of ISIS than fellow Muslims”, hedder det pludselig, med henvisning til at flere muslimer end kristne dør af andre muslimer. Samme logik kunne man sige om tyskerne og jøderne under nazismen. Skønt interessant med Ellemannske observationer så er den relevante pointe at kristne næsten pr automatik dør i mødet med den ankomne muslimske hær, forrådt af sin muslimske nabo. Den kristne kan, som andre ikke-muslimske minoriteter, ikke komme uden om den direkte forfølgelse. Og den forfølgelse er islam.

Det sidste man hører om Rita er at hun “had been given as a slave to a powerful member of ISIS; Christina was given to a family to be raised as a Muslim”.

Grænser

Bloomberg skriver at grænsehegn er ved at blive dagens orden i Mellemøsten, som staterne forsøger at sikre sig imod terror

As they confront the rising threat of modern jihadist violence, many of the nations most at risk are retreating behind one of the oldest forms of defense.

Tunisia and Turkey are the latest to invest in border barriers, both announcing the plans in the immediate aftermath of attacks on civilian targets. A fence and watchtowers will guard Tunisia’s border with Libya, where the militants who killed foreign tourists on a Tunisian beach are said to have been trained. Turkey said late Wednesday it will fortify the border with Syria after a suicide bomb in a nearby town.

From Morocco to Saudi Arabia, boundaries are being fortified at a rate not seen since the months following the Sept. 11 attacks.

grc3a6nsehegn-i-mellemc3b8sten

Men, advarer eksperterne, fysiske grænsedragninger er ikke løsningen

“Of the Middle East’s most-famed physical defenses, the majority failed. Jerusalem’s ancient walls did little to halt a succession of conquerors, and Byzantine Constantinople’s elaborate fortifications didn’t thwart the Ottomans.

Though modern barriers may curb trafficking and illicit crossings in the short term, they almost never deliver prolonged security without cross-frontier cooperation.

“Israel’s barriers have worked well for them so far,” said Brent Sterling, author of “Do Good Fences Make Good Neighbors?” and a professor at Georgetown University. Long-term, though, they remove the incentive to try and reach a permanent accord with the Palestinians, he said.”

Fysiske grænsedragninger virker altså ikke fordi de bliver overløbet af en overlegen fjende. Når de så ikke bliver overløbet af en overlegen fjende er det dem der forhindrer fred. Alligevel er Mellemøsten ikke alene om at sætte grænser, skriver Gatestone Institute

Bulgaria has built a 33-km (21-mile), three-meter-high (10-foot) barbed wire fence along its border with its southeastern neighbor Turkey in an effort to limit the influx of migrants from Syria and other parts of the Middle East and North Africa. The Interior Ministry has also deployed more than one thousand police officers to patrol the Turkish border.

Greece has erected a 10.5-km, four-meter-high barbed-wire fence along part of its border with Turkey. The Greek wall is said to be responsible for diverting migration routes toward neighboring Bulgaria and, consequently, for construction of the wall there.

Spain has fortified fences in the North African exclaves of Ceuta and Melilla as record numbers of migrants are jumping over the barriers from neighboring Morocco. Border police registered more than 19,000 attempts to jump the fence at Melilla in 2014, up 350% on 2013, according to the Interior Ministry. Nearly 7,500 migrants successfully entered Ceuta and Melilla in 2014, including 3,305 from Syria.

The UK is setting up more than two miles of nine-foot-high security fencing at the Channel Tunnel port of Calais in northern France, in an attempt to stop thousands of illegal migrants breaking into trucks bound for the UK. Currently, more than 3,000 migrants are camped in and around Calais hoping to make it to Britain. More than 39,000 would-be illegal immigrants were prevented from crossing the Channel in the 12 months prior to April, more than double the previous year.

EU member states are implementing other emergency measures to halt the flow of immigration.

Austria has stopped processing asylum claims as of June 13, in an effort to make the country “less attractive” for migrants relative to other EU countries. According to Austrian Interior Minister Johanna Mikl-Leitner, Vienna was “stopping the Austrian asylum express,” whereby applications are processed within an average period of four months, faster than in any other EU country. Asylum requests for Austria rose nearly 180% in the first five months of 2015 to 20,620, and were on track to reach 70,000 by the end of the year.

Denmark on July 1 announced that it would slash benefits for asylum seekers to bring down the number of refugees coming to the country. It recently emerged that three out of four refugees who came to Denmark in the early 2000s are jobless ten years later.

France and Italy have sparred over who is responsible for hundreds of African migrants stranded at Ventimiglia on the France-Italy border after French police refused to let them in. France accused Italy of failing to respect the so-called Dublin Regulation, a law that requires people seeking refuge within the EU to do so in the first European country they reach. Italian officials argued that the migrants see Italy as only a transit country.

Hungary on June 23 suspended its adherence to the Dublin Regulation, which requires Hungary to take back refugees who have travelled through the country to reach other EU countries.

Meanwhile, the European Commission, the EU’s powerful bureaucratic arm, on May 27 announced a controversial “relocation plan” that would require EU member states to accept 40,000 Syrian and Eritrean asylum seekers from Italy and Greece over the next two years.

Eksperterne tror dog også at ISIS, med bombeangrebet mod en venstrefløjsdemonstration i Tyrkiet forleden og dagens skudvekslinger mellem ISIS og tyrkisk militær, måske forsøger at trække flere ind i det muslimske kaos. Nej, virkeligt. Snaphanen giver dette link til ISIS indre verden, Channel Four Dispatches: Escape From ISIS

Guardian har en længere fortælling fra en højtstående ISIS leder og New York Review of Books en større artikel, hvor de undrer sig over fænomenet ISIS. Ellers kan man allerede læse eller genlæse The Atlantics What ISIS Really Wants, der næsten er blevet en klassiker, som også venstrefløjen tør citere.

Jihadists vs. the Assad Regime: Syria’s Rebel Advance

Jeg kan ikke følge udviklingen i Mellemøsten, men det går tilsyneladende ikke så godt for Assad i kampen mod ISIS skriver Telegraph

The Assad regime has suffered a series of blows in recent weeks that have once again raised questions about how long Iran will continue to support it.

Since it took Palmyra three weeks ago, Isil has pushed on against a regime defence line that is withering.

It is now close to Homs, the capital of Syria’s largest province but more important as a symbol of the early, non-jihadist opposition to the Assad regime.

The defeat of a coalition of secular and “moderate” Islamist forces in Homs after a long siege by the regime was for a while seen as a turning point in the war.

In fact, it seems merely to have invigorated support for more militant varieties of rebel.

Vice News fulgte nogle jihadister

In just a few short weeks, a newly-united rebel coalition has captured almost all of northwest Syria’s Idlib province from government forces, overturning assumptions over the war’s course, and threatening the regime’s ability to defend its heartland.

VICE News filmmaker Salam Rizk secured rare access to the jihadist fighters at the spear tip of the battle for the strategic city of Jisr al-Shughour.

Brian Esbensen benægter folkemord på kristne

christian-homes-marked

Med Bent Jensens nederlag til Jørgen Dragsdahl i Højesteret forleden skal man passe ekstra på hvad man kalder andre mennesker uanset, hvor sandt det måtte være. Så jeg vil ikke bruge nogle som helst specifikke ord om Politikens faste blogger og Melløst ekspert ved Ræson Brian Esbensen blot fordi han benægter folkemordet på de kristne i Mellemøsten. Men det gør han på sin Facebook side. Ja, han anerkender end ikke at kristne forfølges

Forfølges de kristne i Mellemøsten? Nej, er det korte svar. Det lidt længere og uddybende svar følger her:

Kan I huske da kampe i det nordlige Irak, tæt på kristne og kurdiske byer og områder, havde det meste af verdens bevågenhed for et lille års tid siden? Civile - hvoraf mange var kristne - blev drevet på flugt, og begivenhederne blev af uforstandige personer set som (endnu) et bevis på, at kristne bliver forfulgt i Mellemøsten.

Det er sådan set rigtigt nok. De kristne forfølges og flygter; ligesom dem med brune, grønne, grå og blå øjne; og ligesom sunni-muslimerne, shia-muslimerne og dem der ikke tror på en skid; og ligesom de høje, de lave og dem midt imellem.

Irak (og er par andre steder i regionen) er et stort f**king anarki og folk flygter.

Lige nu kæmpes der i og omkring byen Ramadi og det er en rigtig god case til at illustrere, hvorfor ‘amatør-eksperterne’ som fx. Niels Ivar Larsen og Søren K. Villemoes fuldstændig fejllæser regionen, når de sidder i deres trygge kontorstole i København og fremfører ‘de-kristne-forfølges’-tesen.

Ramadi består næsten udelukkende af (sunni-) muslimer. Indtil USA, DK, UK o.a. besluttede sig for at bombe Irak tilbage til stenalderen i 2003 boede der cirka 700.000 mennesker. Da de nuværende kampe startede var tallet cirka 500.000 (altså var ca. 200.000 muslimer allerede flygtet). Indenfor den seneste måned melder UNHCR at 114.000 (muslimer) er flygtet og indenfor de seneste dage er det eksploderet med yderligere titusinder (muslimer) på flugt.

Summasummarum og pointen skåret ud i pap: Skillelinjen går ikke mellem kristne på den ene side og muslimer på den anden. Den går mellem de få radikale - hvoraf mange er tilrejsende tosser - og så alle andre, herunder de mange mange millioner moderate muslimer, der flygter i den største globale flygtningekatatrofe siden 2. verdenskrig.

I kommentarfeltet uddyber han sin pointe

Jeg kunne med udgangspunkt i data over flest døde i trafikken lave en lignende liste. Thailand er det farligste sted i verden for bilister. Jeg kunne med 100% sikkerhed lave en statistik, der illustrerede at ejere af grønne biler dør som fluer i trafikken i Thailand. Og, ja, det ville sådan set være helt korrekt, men det ville på samme tid også være uendelig uinteressant, da det samme gælder for ejere af røde, blå, hvide (you name it) biler. Det er i stor udstrækning det samme med ‘den kristne forfølgelse’ i Mellemøsten. En selektiv liste, hvor én religion (i et land i kaos) eller én bilfarve (i et trafikalt helvede) er udvalgt, fortæller os tæt på ingenting.

Esbensen argument er altså at fordi andre, inklusive andre muslimer, også forfølges af kalifatet så forfølges kristne ikke særskilt. Men dette er selvfølgelig forkert. Med varierende nidkærhed forfølges alle der opfattes som islams fjender og her forfølges kristne ikke blot for ikke at være muslimer, men for at være kristne.

Esbensens beskriver sine kompetencer

Faglig kompetence:
Demokratisering i en arabisk, muslimsk kontekst
Menneskerettighedsforståelser – kulturrelativisme, universalisme
Religion og kultur
Palæstinensiske flygtninges historie og situation
Konflikt, oprør og civilsamfund
Postmoderne udviklingsteori
NGO advocacy, lobbyisme
Regional kompetence:
Libanon, ophold og arbejde, 2002-2003 og 2005, 2012, 2013
Syrien, ophold og arbejde, 2004 og 2012
Jordan, ophold og arbejde, 2003-2004
Godt kendskab til Libanon, Syrien, Jordan, Israel, Palæstina, Balkan

Uddannelse og kurser

Cand.scient.soc., samfundsvidenskab, udvikling og internationale relationer, Aalborg Universitet
Tillægsmodul i skriftelig journalistik, Danmarks medie- og journalisthøjskole
“Modern history of Jordan and the M.E.”, University of Jordan

Ansættelser og anden arbejdserfaring

Journalist, kronikør og udviklingspolitiks kommentator, Kristeligt Dagblad m.fl. (for nuværende)
Foredragsholder, Det arabiske forår, Mellemøsten, Konflikten i Syrien (for nuværende)
Brian Esbensen er Mellemøst-redaktør, Magasinet RÆSON (ophørt august 2013)
Rådgivende Konsulent, Aarhus kommunes internationale kontor, Nis, Serbien (ophørt maj 2011)
Projektansvarlig, Arab NGO Network for Development, Beirut, Libanon (ophørt juni 2004)
Projektkoordinator og praktikant, Norwegian People’s Aid, Beirut, Libanon (ophørt jan. 2003)
Underviser, Dansk Røde Kors asylafdeling (ophørt sep. 2002)

Bestyrelser, tillidsposter og netværk

Tidligere medlem af Dansk Flygtningehjælps bestyrelse i Aalborgs frivillig-afdeling
Tidligere aktiv i diverse græsrodsarbejde

Produktion

Udgivelser:

Flere bidrag til e-bogen “Efter det Arabiske Forår”, RAESON, 2012 Se: http://raeson.dk/2012/ny-ebog-fra-r%C3%A6sonefter-det-arabiske-forar-%E2…

Kronikker, analyser, internationale kommentarer og baggrundsartikler i div. magasiner og dagblade, bl.a.

Artiklen “På flugt til fredens by”, Kristeligt Dagblad, om syriske flygtninge i Tyrkiet: http://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/artikel/460378:Udland–Paa-flugt-til-fr…

Kronikken “De islamiske partier har vundet – skal vi være nervøse?”, Kristeligt Dagblad, om de første frie valg efter det arabiske oprør: http://www.kristeligt-dagblad.dk/artikel/448338:Kronik–Deislamiske-part…

Personligt tilbageblik på Syrien-reportage tur, Politiken: http://politiken.dk/debat/profiler/brianesbensen/ECE2065475/sidste-aar-e…

International kommentar vedr. situationen i Syrien, Information: http://www.information.dk/313042

Kronik i Berlingske, Civilisationernes sammenstød er en farlig myte: http://www.b.dk/kronikker/civilisationskrig-er-en-farlig-myte

Sprog

Dansk - Modersmål
Engelsk - Beherskes flydende
Tysk - Godt kendskab
Arabisk - Noget kendskab

Opfordringer fra Brian Esbensens FB-vennerkreds til at sætte sig ind i virkeligheden, som ved at læse  Klaus Wivels: Den sidste Nadver eller læse Amnesty Internationals rapporter afviser Esbensen med at han allerede “har læst wivels makværk af en ‘bog’”. Jacob Mchangama kalder Esbensen for en skændsel og forsøger at højne debatten med nogle artikler fra BBCThe Guardian,CNNThe Independent, og The New Statesman, der alle utvetydigt beskriver muslimsk forfølgelse af kristne fordi de er kristne. Tidligere har jeg også henvist til BBC og Raymond Ibrahim. Men man kan også blot google det. De kristne bliver forfulgt fordi de er kristne. Esbensen har ingen undskyldning for ikke at vide det og ingen undskyldning for at benægte det.

Bo Lidegaard forfægter Politikens tradition

Ethvert synspunkt kan forfægtes” skriver Politikens chefredaktør Bo Lidegaard i sin PS Analyse: Demokratiet skal tale på Bornholm. Og det må man sige at han og hans avis har gjort en dyd af. Og denne seneste tour de force i selvmodsigelser og afsindigheder skuffer ikke. En sætning der indledes “Dem, som har sat sig for at gøre festen til et spørgsmål om dem eller os…” konkurrerer med udsagn som “Også demokratiets fjender har krav på samfundets skjold”. Emnet er selvfølgelig et af “konfrontationens europæiske ikoner” Geert Wilders - “rejsende i hadefuld retorik” - og hans deltagelse på Folkemødet i Allinge i juni måned. Og selvfølgelig mener Lidegaard at det er noget værre noget. For Folkemødet er forrygende, mens Wilders er den demokratiets fjende, der har krav på samfundets skjold.

I Allinge er demokratiet trådt i karakter som meget andet og mere end en formalitet – som et møde mellem mennesker, der kan finde ud af både at dele sig efter anskuelser, være rygende uenige, og at mødes over en fredelig hindbærbrus og hyggelig sammenstimlen på Gæstgiveren.

Men fredsommelig at dele sig efter rygende uenige anskuelser besværliggøres når der så faktisk deltager nogen man er rygende uenige med

Nu har dogmatikere på politiske yderfløje sat sig for at gøre festen forbi ved at påtvinge folkemødet deres sort-hvide politiske logik. De interesserer sig ikke for demokrati som kultur, men kun som princip.

(…)

Bag lysten til at bruge Folkemødets rummelighed til at kaste grus i gemytligheden står nogle af de grupper, der er mest fremmede for demokratiets væsen, og som skyer åben debat.

Det er en spændende tanke at rummelighed ikke kan indeholde sine fjender (disse fjender, har de krav på samfundets skjold?). Kunne man tænke sig at den logik gjaldt for hele Danmark, der nu oplever en islamisk invasion? Eller skal demokratiet kun træde i karakter et par hyggelige dage med hindbærbrus i Allinge?

Trykkefrihedsselskabet vil “ødelægge festen ved enten at vise, at Folkemødet ikke er rummeligt nok til at rumme også dem, eller ved at fremprovokere så meget opstandelse og risiko for voldelig terror, at hele mødet skal pakkes ind i sikkerhed

Sker det, er pointen vistnok at demonstrere, at demokratiet er truet af terror. Helt sikkert. Det kedelige er, at det er også truet af den vedholdende dumhed, hvormed fanatikere søger konfrontation og undviger debat.

Sådan skal det siges; selv ikke terrorangreb mod demokratiet netop dér hvor det træder i karakter er en trussel mod demokratiet. Ingen selvmordsbomber kan ødelægge den hyggelige sammenstimlen når blot, der er hindbærbrus, mere end de fanatikere, der uden brug af vold undviger debat ved i - må man nok indrømme - vedholdende dumhed, at afholde et debatarrangement med spørgsmål til Geert og Flemming. “Alle ville være velkomne i Allinge, inklusive dem, der hader og frygter netop Folkemødets åbne og direkte debat“.

Trykkefrihedsselskabet, der har det til fælles med sin politiske modpol, Hizb ut-Tahrir, at de udelukker politiske modstandere fra deres egne arrangementer, har inviteret den hollandske populist Geert Wilders, mens Danskernes Parti vil bidrage med en broget flok europæiske nyfascister.

Det er vel kun på Politiken, det kan være ufint at være politisk modpol til Hizb ut-Tahrir. Trykkefrihedsselskabet har så vidt jeg erindrer aldrig udelukket politiske modstandere fra sine arrangementer. Måske tænker Bo på at Trykkefrihedsselskabet udelukkede en fyr ved navn Jihad Taha, umiddelbart efter at en anden muslim havde forsøgt at myrde Trykkefrihedsselskabets daværende formand Lars Hedegaard? Jihad lagde sag an og krævede mere end 13.000 kroner i erstatning for de gyldne ord han ikke fik hørt live. Men ligesom som den anden muslim i sin jihad tabte pistolen, tabte Jihad søgsmålet, som man kunne læse bl.a i Politiken.

Til gengæld har Politiken ved daværende Chefredaktør Tøger Seidenfaden udvandret fra et møde i Trykkefrihedsselskabet. Han mente at medlemmerne havde “direkte afskyelige synspunkter på muslimer og islam” og kaldte dem bl.a

Mennesker, der skamrider den aktuelle sag til at lufte deres paranoia, deres hadefulde og rabiate verdensanskuelse, deres intolerante, indeklemte og smålige syn på millioner af medmennesker.

(…)

…med afskyelighed tænker jeg på nogle af de mennesker og i særdeleshed på den forening, der står bag arrangementet i aften, en forening der her i aften promoverer sig selv og snylter og nasser på vores allesammens selvfølgelige solidaritet. Jeg tænker på Lars Hedegaard, der vistnok er formand for selskabet. Jeg tænker på Helle Merete Brix, der har skrevet mange spaltekilometer paranoid, skinger og hadefuld tekst om muslimer hjemme og ude, og som f.eks. i ramme alvor mener, at de europæiske muslimer får børn eller ”formerer sig”, som de skriver, for med magt at overtage Europa indefra. Og jeg tænker på Kåre Bluitgen, der i en af sine tidligere bøger har opfordret til at væde koranen med menstruationsblod og smide den på bålet sammen med burkaer for at markere sin ekstreme foragt på vores største og mest pressede religiøse mindretal herhjemme.

Gamle Tøger var på Politikens vegne ikke gemyttet til det der med at “…finde ud af både at dele sig efter anskuelser, være rygende uenige, og at mødes over en fredelig hindbærbrus og hyggelig sammenstimlen“. Og hvem har også lyst til at sammenstimle med afskyelige mennesker? Det var det retoriske kneb Seidenfaden brugte, frem for argumenter. Han kaldte folk der tyede til vold for “moralske tabere” (en trøst de myrdede kan tage med i det hinsides) og tilsluttede sig det berømte Voltaire udsagn, som en “elementær norm”. Ved at storme ud af døren umiddelbart efter sin konfrontatoriske tirade undveg han at blive konfronteret med tomheden i at kalde voldsmanden en moralsk taber når han samtidig overlader ham vetoret.

01022010104_26-02-2_421505y2

Og dette er Politikens tradition, den tradition Bo forfægter. Man kan jo forfægte hvad som helst, eller i hvert fald, det som voldsmanden ikke har nedlagt veto imod. I øjeblikket er det mest tegninger. Og bøsser. Og jøder. Og kristne. Og ateister. Og hurtige damer. Og bloggere. Og så videre. Den komplette liste kan ses i koranen og haditogdutogdatterne. Så med den i ånden forfægter man derfor det synspunkt at kritikere af voldsmandens lange vetoliste er afskyelige, hadefulde, rabiate, paranoide, skingre. Bo har sine egne ord for “dette uskønne slæng”; “en håndfuld politiske plattenslagere”, “fanatikere og fundamentalister”, “yderligtgående”.

Og den slags menneskers argumenter imødegår man ikke med modargumenter så letpåvirkelige mennesker ikke lader sig vildlede. For det kan man ikke fordi man har taget fejl. Så man udvandrer, gør man. Ud til de letpåvirkelige læsere for at indpode dem at de ikke skal lytte til børn og fulde folk. At bringe terror på tale er at bringe terror på bane formaner man - ”modsat de kræfter, partier og bevægelser, der deltager i den danske politiske debat, skylder vi ikke disse personer særlig respekt – endsige interesse for deres synspunkter” er Bos appel til sine læsere. Hans egne 942 ord er opmærksomhed givet kvit og frit.

Kill The Christians

BBC dokumentar om muslimernes folkemord på kristne

Next Page »

Monokultur kører på WordPress