Kill The Christians

BBC dokumentar om muslimernes folkemord på kristne

Krigen mod Boko Haram

Jihad, Kalifatet, Kristenforfølgelse, Muslimer, Sharia, Terror, islam, muhammed — Drokles on April 13, 2015 at 7:54 pm

Islam er i færd med endnu en reformation. Dem har der været mange af før og der vil, hvis islam ellers overlever, komme flere endnu. Islams absurditeter er ubærlige at leve med og umulige at bygge samfund på. Derfor vil muslimske samfund altid degenerere væk fra islam over i en mere tålelig tilstand af tyranni, korruption og uproduktivitet. Men med jævne mellemrum bliver den kognitive dissonans for stærk for de troende, der bebrejder de sørgelige samfundforhold manglen på tro og renhed. Og en vækkelse går sin blodig gang gennem de muslimske samfund og - hvis muligt - deres ulykkelige omgivelser. Al-Quada, Islamisk Stat, Salafisme, Muslimske Broderskab, Boko Haram. Forskellige navne for det samme fænomen; muslimer prøver at redde deres dødsyge religion gennem endnu en renselse, endnu en tilbagevenden til rødderne. Ali Sina skriver

Many westerners erroneously believe that Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, (1703–1792) was the founder of Salafism, an extremist sect of Islam. This is not true. Abdul Wahhab did not found a new sect. He was a reformer of Islam in the same sense that Luther was of Christianity.

The core of Abdul Wahhab’s thinking is that Islam is perfect and complete and its decline is the result of religious innovations (bid‘ah), and that an Islamic revival will result by purging the religion from foreign influences and by emulating Muhammad and his companions.

The concept that Islam was perfect in its early stages is asserted in the Quran. “Today have I perfected your religious law for you, and have bestowed upon you the full measure of My blessings, and willed that self-surrender unto Me shall be your religion.” (Q.5:3)

Abdul Wahhab proposed that Muslims should refrain from introducing any innovation and follow the examples of the salaf, (predecessors or early generations) hence the name Salafi.

This definition is not an invention of Abdul Wahhab, but is based on a hadith that reports Muhammad saying, “The people of my generation are the best, then those who follow them, and then those who follow the latter (i.e. the first three generations of Muslims).[2]

It is important to note that ibn Taymiyyah (1263 – 1328) was also a Salafi. He opposed the celebration of Muhammad’s birthday and the construction of shrines around the tombs of Sufi ‘saints,’ saying, “Many of them [Muslims] do not even know of the Christian [Catholic] origins of these practices. Accursed be Christianity and its adherents.”

There is a hadith where Muhammad says, “I am the best Salaf for you.” [3]

The desire to reform Islam and go back to its original pristine state is actually an old thought. Abdul Wahhab, however, succeeded to give shape to this concept, which took ground thanks to the Saudi kings who are his descendants through one of his daughters.

Vice News er taget til fronten i kampen mod Boko Haram

Mindre vold på grund af Oplysningen?

Lingvisten Steven Pinker har haft stor succes med at minde os om, hvor heldige vi er i forhold til generationerne før os. Trods indtrykket man kunne få fra nyhedsstrømmen bevæger historien sig stadigt længere væk fra vold. I 2012 kunne man læse et interview med Pinker i Reason

Just a couple of centuries ago, violence was pervasive. Slavery was widespread, wife and child beating were acceptable practices, heretics and witches were burned at the stake, pogroms and race riots were common, and warfare was nearly constant. Public hangings, bearbaiting, and even cat burning were popular forms of entertainment. By examining collections of ancient skeletons and scrutinizing contemporary tribal societies, anthropologists have found that people were nine times as likely to die violent deaths in the prehistoric period than in modern times, even allowing for the world wars and genocides of the 20th century. Europe’s murder rate was 30 times higher in the Middle Ages than it is today.

What happened? Human nature did not change, but our institutions did, encouraging people to restrain their natural tendencies toward violence. In more than 800 pages of data and analysis, Pinker identifies a series of institutional changes that have led to decreasing levels of life-threatening violence. The rise of states 5,000 years ago dramatically reduced tribal conflict. In recent centuries, the spread of courtly manners, literacy, commerce, and democracy have reduced violence even more. Polite behavior requires self-restraint, literacy encourages empathy, commerce changes zero-sum encounters into mutually beneficial exchanges, and democracy restrains the excesses of government.

Nogen mener endda at kunne bekræfte Pinkers teorier matematisk. John Gray er ikke sikker i på at det forholder sig så ligefremt med volden, som Pinker hævder. I Guardian peger han på flere forskellige faktorer, der også har indflydelse på nedgangen af vold, som eksempelvis kernevåben. De holder stormagterne i skak, mener han, og reducerer deres konfrontationer til proxy-krige. Derudover sætter han også spørgsmålstegn ved opgørelsen af ofre for konflikt kun skal tælles på slagmarken. Der var flere civile ofre under 2 Verdenkrig end Napoleonskrigene eksempelvis. Og hvor mange år af sit liv skal man miste førend man tæller med som offer (cancertilfælde efter Hiroshima osv).

Og så er der spørgsmålet om, hvad vold er. Korporlighed er helt klart trængt i baggrunden, men volden kan tage andre former. Var 1700 tallets gabestok værre end nutidens isolationsfængsel? Krige har ændret væsen og vi har ændret vores syn på vold. Men det betyder ikke nødvendigvis at vi er stoppet med at udøve vold, vi konfronteres blot sjældnere vores ofre. Modus operandi til side, så er Obamas droner og Kalifatets halshugninger krigsførelse, men blodet på hænderne er kun konkret i det sidste tilfælde. Alt sammen interessante akademiske indvendinger og nuanceringer, som jeg kun kan anbefale at man læser.

Men jeg vil hæfte mig ved den åndelige side af Pinkers teori, ideen om Oplysningens saliggørende effekter, thi disse antager løgnagtige former. Gray forklarer at arven fra Oplysningstiden ikke er et tag-selv bord af gode intentioner humanistiske idealer. Oplysningstiden satte mennesket i centrum, med alle dets implikationer til følge

Among the causes of the outbreak of altruism, Pinker and Singer attach particular importance to the ascendancy of Enlightenment thinking. Reviewing Pinker, Singer writes: “During the Enlightenment, in 17th- and 18th-century Europe and countries under European influence, an important change occurred. People began to look askance at forms of violence that had previously been taken for granted: slavery, torture, despotism, duelling and extreme forms of punishment … Pinker refers to this as ‘the humanitarian revolution’.” Here too Pinker and Singer belong in a contemporary orthodoxy. With other beliefs crumbling, many seek to return to what they piously describe as “Enlightenment values”. But these values were not as unambiguously benign as is nowadays commonly supposed. John Locke denied America’s indigenous peoples any legal claim to the country’s “wild woods and uncultivated wastes”; Voltaire promoted the “pre-Adamite” theory of human development according to which Jews were remnants of an earlier and inferior humanoid species; Kant maintained that Africans were innately inclined to the practice of slavery; the utilitarian Jeremy Bentham developed the project of an ideal penitentiary, the Panopticon, where inmates would be kept in solitary confinement under constant surveillance. None of these views is discussed by Singer or Pinker. More generally, there is no mention of the powerful illiberal current in Enlightenment thinking, expressed in the Jacobins and the Bolsheviks, which advocated and practised methodical violence as a means of improving society.

Like many others today, Pinker’s response when confronted with such evidence is to define the dark side of the Enlightenment out of existence. How could a philosophy of reason and toleration be implicated in mass murder? The cause can only be the sinister influence of counter-Enlightenment ideas. Discussing the “Hemoclysm” – the tide of 20th-century mass murder in which he includes the Holocaust – Pinker writes: “There was a common denominator of counter-Enlightenment utopianism behind the ideologies of nazism and communism.” You would never know, from reading Pinker, that Nazi “scientific racism” was based in theories whose intellectual pedigree goes back to Enlightenment thinkers such as the prominent Victorian psychologist and eugenicist Francis Galton. Such links between Enlightenment thinking and 20th-century barbarism are, for Pinker, merely aberrations, distortions of a pristine teaching that is innocent of any crime: the atrocities that have been carried out in its name come from misinterpreting the true gospel, or its corruption by alien influences. The childish simplicity of this way of thinking is reminiscent of Christians who ask how a religion of love could possibly be involved in the Inquisition. In each case it is pointless to argue the point, since what is at stake is an article of faith.

There is nothing new in the suggestion that war is disappearing along with the “civilising process”. The notion that the human capacity for empathy is expanding alongside an increase of rationality owes its wide influence to Auguste Comte, an almost forgotten early-19th-century French Enlightenment thinker. Comte founded the “religion of humanity”, a secular creed based on the most advanced “science” of the day – phrenology. While Pinker and Singer don’t discuss Comte, his ideas shape their way of thinking. For one thing, Comte coined the term “altruism”. Like Pinker and Singer, he believed that humankind – or at any rate its most highly developed portions – was becoming more selfless and beneficent. But he was also a sharp critic of liberalism who believed the process would end in an “organic” way of life – a “scientific” version of the medieval social order that, despite his hostility to traditional religion, he much admired. It was Comte’s virulent anti-liberalism that worried John Stuart Mill, another Enlightenment thinker who was in many other ways Comte’s disciple. Mill went so far as to suggest that the propagation of the species would in future become a duty to humanity rather than a selfish pleasure; but he feared that a world in which this was the case would be one without liberty or individuality. Mill need not have worried. Human beings continue to be capable of empathy, but there is no reason for thinking they are becoming any more altruistic or more peaceful.

It may be true that the modern state’s monopoly of force has led, in some contexts, to declining rates of violent death. But it is also true that the power of the modern state has been used for purposes of mass killing, and one should not pass too quickly over victims of state terror. With increasing historical knowledge it has become clear that the “Holocaust-by-bullets” – the mass shootings of Jews, mostly in the Soviet Union, during the second world war – was perpetrated on an even larger scale than previously realised. Soviet agricultural collectivisation incurred millions of foreseeable deaths, mainly as a result of starvation, with deportation to uninhabitable regions, life-threatening conditions in the Gulag and military-style operations against recalcitrant villages also playing an important role. Peacetime deaths due to internal repression under the Mao regime have been estimated to be around 70 million. Along with fatalities caused by state terror were unnumbered millions whose lives were irreparably broken and shortened. How these casualties fit into the scheme of declining violence is unclear. Pinker goes so far as to suggest that the 20th-century Hemoclysm might have been a gigantic statistical fluke, and cautions that any history of the last century that represents it as having been especially violent may be “apt to exaggerate the narrative coherence of this history” (the italics are Pinker’s). However, there is an equal or greater risk in abandoning a coherent and truthful narrative of the violence of the last century for the sake of a spurious quantitative precision.

I The Week tilslutter Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry sig stort set John Grays indvendinger og mener at det egentlige skifte er at vi er blevet mere sarte eller sippede når vi konfronteres med vold og andres ubehag. Og at vi derfor her fjernet os fra realiteternes verden (også ifølge Sean Penn). Vi konfronteres nødigt med processen bag vores vacuum pakkede kød for at tage et dagligt eksempel. Hitlers og Stalins grusomheder blev begået i fjerntliggende lejre og endda benægtet osv. Men Gobrys pointe er at hvis der overhovedet er tale om en nedgang i vold “it is due to Christianity”

By now, mainstream historians are slowly waking up to the realization that almost everything we like about the Enlightenment, from the rule of law to the scientific method to capitalism, had its roots in the extraordinary civilization of the Middle Ages.

Why is it that we modern persons are so much more squeamish, so much more likely to be stirred by the idea of harm?

One answer might be that our civilization had, for a millennium, at the center of its moral imagination, the battered and broken figure of a slave hanging from a gibbet, condemned to die by all rightful authorities and abandoned by his friends.

And it is worth noting that the increase in squeamishness in the West dates back from the takeover of the Roman Empire by Christianity.

A key indicator of cultural squeamishness is how a society treats children. As the historian O.M. Bakke shows in the tellingly-named book How Children Became People: The Birth of Childhood in Early Christianity, Pagan society considered children as little more than objects, with consequences of — to us post-Christians — astonishing cruelty. The practice of abandoning newborns was widespread and not frowned upon. While most abandoned infants died, those who did not were typically “rescued” into child sex slavery, which was a legal and thriving industry. The sources report that sex with castrated boys, in particular, was considered very titillating, and there are reports of babies castrated to serve that purpose. These were all practices that Christians famously condemned, and Bakke nicely traces how phrases by Jesus holding children up as examples and insisting on care for the “least of these” caused emerging civilization, for the first time in the history of the West, to regard children as full human beings endowed with rights.

Another good indicator of squeamishness is the treatment of slaves. While only by the High Middle Ages was slavery over in the West — the first time in all of human history that a culture had abolished slavery — as soon as Christianity became the state religion of the Roman Empire rafts of unprecedented laws were passed to reform the institution of slavery, typically “squeamish” laws such as banning sexual relations between slaves and masters, making it illegal to break up slave families, banning the branding of slaves (first on the face, and later anywhere). The first condemnation of slavery as an institution in all of recorded history was made by the Catholic bishop and Church Father Gregory of Nyssa, in strikingly “squeamish” terms, exhorting his congregation to see in their slaves the same image of God that dwells in them, and to free them.

Because human hearts are so hard and crooked, this rise in squeamishness was infuriatingly slow and incomplete (and still is), but if there is one starting point one could name, it would be the rise of Christianity. If the Enlightenment did anything, it was only to accelerate a process that had been ongoing for centuries.

3. The modern age doesn’t look so hot when you count abortion.

Abortion is a typical “squeamish” issue, where mere squeamishness leads us astray. It’s harder to get squeamish about a “clump of cells” than a live baby, even though there is no conceptual difference between the two. When it comes to disabled children in the womb, we all too often get squeamish in exactly the wrong way: we get squeamish about the pain they will endure, instead of getting squeamish about the idea of snuffing out innocent life. “Care/harm” makes us empathize more with those we recognize as our alter egos, but make us empathize less about those we do not include in our circle of fellowship.

According to the U.S. Abortion Clock there have been 55 million abortions in the United States since abortion was legalized in the U.S., and more than one billion abortions worldwide since 1980. One billion. If abortions are counted as homicides then the modern age sure doesn’t look so hot.

4. The dark side of the Enlightenment.

The one true sleight-of-hand practiced by Steven Pinker in his account of the decline of violence (which, as I have said, has a lot of truth) is that he tries to erase the inherently modern phenomenon of totalitarianism from the legacy of the Enlightenment, so that they don’t get put on the Enlightenment’s balance sheet.

But totalitarianism is an inherently modern phenomenon that would have been impossible without the Enlightenment. Late 18th century French society got squeamish about the public torture of Jean-François Damiens — and just a few decades later, they used the hygienic innovation of the guillotine to murder people in the name of Enlightenment values on a scale that would have been unthinkable in the Ancien Régime. Communism was inherently a modern phenomenon: atheistic, pseudo-scientific, and pseudo-rationalistic, driven by a post-Christian and “squeamish” concern for the fates of the working poor, universal in scope and ambition. And while Nazism got mileage out of reactionary rhetoric, it is also inseparable from roots in the movements of “scientific racism” and eugenics which argued for treating human genetics as a kind of technology and fixing it (with the power of the state if need be).

I make this point because I am a person who believes the Enlightenment is a very good thing, but that it also has its dark side. The modern age included a laudable squeamishness against tyranny, but it also included a nice dose of utopian hubris, and the special horrors of the modern age are incomprehensible without this Enlightenment idea. The Enlightenment is a glorious thing, but it is also a dangerous thing — it must always be rescued from itself. The first way to do it is to refuse to whitewash its true legacy.

Som en lille eftertanke vil jeg også nævne Quodlibetas Humphreys kritik af Pinkers oppustning af middelalderlige mordstatistikker, for at hamre hans pointe hjem i Oplysningens navn (en god ven indskød at der qua gennemsnitslevetidens stigning er flere ældre mennesker i dag og altså gennemsnitligt færre unge brushoveder til at begå vold). Ikke så meget for at hakke på Pinkers arbejde, men på grund af følgende anekdote

In 1355 in what became known as the ‘St Scholastic’s Day riot’ an argument in a tavern became a pub brawl which went on for the next 3 days. It began when a group of students at an inn near Carfax disapproved of the wine they were served. The inn-keeper having given them ‘stubborn and saucy language’ the clerks ‘threw the wine and vessel at his head’. The townspeople then seized the opportunity to arm themselves with bows and arrows and attack scholars. Gangs of academics and citizens clashed in the streets and academic halls were burned. Six students and scholars were killed.

st_scholastica

Dengang fandt folket sig ikke så let i elitens svigt.

Lidt rablen fra Yahya Hassan

Jeg ved ikke, hvem der er værst, men i det mindste får et par dumsmarte tv-værter en lille dosis virkelighed: Den fremmeste arabiske stemme er fuldkommen usammenhængende. Man orker ikke at gå i rette med al denne rablen, det er for uoverskueligt. Men når jeg siger ‘man’ indregner jeg ikke en Facebook ven, som straks skrev

Når man trækker paralleler til 2. verdenskrig, så lyder det så dumt hvis man er komplet historieløs.

Waffen-SS-divisionerne i Skanderberg og Handschar var rene muslimske divisioner, med egen moské tilknyttet.
De blev undervist i deres eget sprog om hvorfor jøder og muslimer altid vil være fjender, og hvorfor islam og nazisme passede så godt sammen.
Det var resultatet af en aftale mellem Hitler og stormuftien af Jerusalem - Haij Amin al-Husseini - hvor Hitler lovede at hvis muftien støttede det tredie rige, så ville tyskerne udrydde hele den jødiske befolkning i palæstina.

Og de var godt i gang, - mobile gaskamre blev afskibet mod Jerusalem via Nordafrika, men blev stoppet i Tobruk i Libyen, da Rommel tabte til Montgomery.
Da Nürnberglovene blev vedtaget i 1935 (Rigsborgerloven af 15 sept. 1935 - med underafsnit - ‘Lov til beskyttelse af tysk blod og ære) modtog Hitler lykønskninger fra ledere i hele den arabiske verden i Nordafrika og Mellemøsten.
Der blev oprette partier overalt i den arabiske verden, som kopierede Hitlers doktriner b.la. i Syrien, Libyen, Saudi og Marokko. I Egypten oprettes et parti der hed ‘Young Egypts’ men slagordet ” Et folk, et parti, en fürer” bl.a. af de senere præsidenter Nasser og Sadat.
Nasser som senere sagde: ”Og det glæder mig i øvrigt, at ingen efterhånden tror på Auschwitz-løgnen”

Efter krigen fik hundredvis af nazistiske krigsforbrydere asyl i arabiske lande, og den dag i dag er Mein Kampf stadig den mest solgte bog i de muslimske lande.

I 2012 under valgkampen i Egypten, holdt Mursi og hans folk utallige taler om hvordan de vil udrydde jøder.

Og linkede til en artikel i Jerusalem Post

The Arab masses and leadership gleefully welcomed the Nazis taking power in 1933 and messages of support came from all over the Arab world, especially from the Palestinian Arab leader, Mufti Haj Amin al-Husseini, who was the first non-European to request admission to the Nazi party.

Husseini, who was to be arrested for his role in the bloody Arab Revolt 1936-9, had fled to Germany in 1941 and was immediately granted a special place among the Nazi hierarchy.

The Mufti and Hitler relayed many declarations to each other explicitly stating that the main enemy they shared was the Jews.

However, the Mufti’s ideology transcended words and directed his actions. In 1945, Yugoslavia sought to indict the Mufti as a war criminal for his role in recruiting 20,000 Muslim volunteers for the SS, who participated in the killing of Jews in Croatia and Hungary.

Adolf Eichmann’s deputy Dieter Wisliceny (subsequently executed as a war criminal) in his Nuremburg Trials testimony stated: “The Mufti was one of the initiators of the systematic extermination of European Jewry and had been a collaborator and adviser of Eichmann and Himmler in the execution of this plan… He was one of Eichmann’s best friends and had constantly incited him to accelerate the extermination measures.”

On a visit to Auschwitz, Husseini reportedly admonished the guards running the gas chambers to work more diligently. Throughout the war, he appeared regularly on German radio broadcasts to the Middle East, preaching his pro-Nazi, anti-Semitic message to the Arab masses back home.

Even the Mufti himself explained that the main reason for his close cooperation with the Nazis was their shared hatred of the Jews and their joint wish for their extermination.

“Our fundamental condition for cooperating with Germany was a free hand to eradicate every last Jew from Palestine and the Arab world,” the man who was known as the “Fuhrer of the Arab World” wrote in his post-World War Two memoirs.

However, the affection, emulation and cooperation with the Nazis were not just found among the Arabs of Mandatory Palestine, they were replicated across the Arab world.

Many have suggested that the Ba’ath parties of Assad’s Syria and formerly in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq were strongly inspired by the Nazis. The most influential party that emulated the Nazis in the Arab world was “Young Egypt,” which was founded in October 1933.

The party had storm troopers, torch processions and literal translations of Nazi slogans – like “One folk, One party, One leader.”

Nazi anti-Semitism was replicated, with calls to boycott Jewish businesses and physical attacks on Jews.

Sami al-Joundi, one of the founders of the ruling Syrian Ba’ath Party, recalls: “We were racists. We admired the Nazis. We were immersed in reading Nazi literature and books… We were the first who thought of a translation of Mein Kampf. Anyone who lived in Damascus at that time was witness to the Arab inclination toward Nazism.”

There was of course the infamous pogrom in Iraq led by the pro-Nazi Rashid Ali al-Kaylani in 1941. Kaylani also asked of Hitler the right to “deal with Jews” in Arab states, a request that was granted. Apart from the secular pro-Nazi stance, there were many other religious Arab leaders who issued fatwas that the Arabs should assist and support the Nazis against the Allies.

(…)

In Libya, many Jews were sent not only to local concentration camps but also to European camps like Bergen-Belsen and Biberach. In a film titled Goral Meshutaf (“Shared Fate”), some Tunisian eyewitnesses claim that the Nazis had begun building gas chambers there. If the Allies had not won the decisive battle at El Alamain, perhaps the fate of North African Jews would have been the same as befell European Jewry.

A willing or indifferent local population was an important ingredient in the destruction of European Jewry and it was certainly present amongst the Arabs of North Africa.

Many of the current leadership in the Middle East owe their power base to the emergence of their predecessors during those dark times. The Palestinians still revere Husseini and many of terrorist groups are named after groups he founded.

The myth that the Arabs were innocent bystanders to the Nazi Holocaust is unfortunately widely accepted at face value. It is about time that this capricious fallacy was exposed, not just out of respect to those Jews who suffered at the hands of the Nazis and their allies everywhere, but also to deconstruct the simplistic notions used to explain the history of the conflict, especially that the Arabs were not responsible for the suffering that resulted from their continued incalcitrance.

Og igen til Children In History

SS Standartenführer Walter Rauff was placed in charge of Eisatzgruppen Tunis with the assignment of destroying the substantial Jewish population of North Africa. Rauff had played an important role in the killing phase of the Holocaust. He helped develop gas vans, essentially mobile gas chambers, used to murder Jews, disabled people, communists, and other targeted groups (1941-42).

As Rommel and the Afrika Korps advanced wast toward Suez and Egypt, SS commanders realized that there were Jews in Egypt and even more in Palestine beyond Egypt, some 0.5 million Jews. As a result SS authorities organized an Einsatzgruppe to kill Jews in the British Mandate of Palestine and Egypt. [Mallman and Cueppers, pp. 128-30.] The Einsatzgrupppe Ägypten was standing by in Athens, Greece, prepared to go into action as soon as the Afrika Korps reached Suez. The palm was to first exterminate the Jews of Egypt and then move into Palestine. Eventually the Jews in other Middle Eastern countries (Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran wiuld experience similar fates. SS Obersturmbannfuehrer Walter Rauff was assined to lead the Einsatzgrupppe Ägypten. It only included 24 members, but the olan was to enlist Arab collaborators. This would allow ‘mass murder would continue under German leadership without interruption’. The Arab collaborators would play promient roles in anti-Semitic radio propaganda, recruitimg Arab volunteers to staff killing operations, and in raising an Arab-German Battalion. Former Iraqi prime minister Rashid Ali al-Gaylani and Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem were enrolled to play prominant parts. [Mallman and Cueppers, pp. 128-30.]

11059507_10205343738946335_308594233442861405_n

Hvor ER vore dages Monuments Men?

261daf6400000578-2970270-image-a-3_1424957222890

ISIS er godt igang med at smadre alle kulturelle artefakter i det gamle Mesopotamien og omegn. Og som jeg har skrevet før, så har Vestens ledere ikke haft fantasi til at redde den del af verdenskulturarven, i modsætning til de amerikanske Minute Men under Anden Verdenskrig. Alle sidder på deres hænder og ser uerstatteligheder forsvinde for muslimers hænder. Daily Mail skriver

Islamic State thugs have destroyed a collection of priceless statues and sculptures in Iraq dating back thousands of years.

Extremists used sledgehammers and power drills to smash ancient artwork as they rampaged through a museum in the northern city of Mosul.

Video footage shows a group of bearded men in the Nineveh Museum using tools to wreck 3,000-year-old statues after pushing them over.

(…)

The articles destroyed appeared to come from an antiquities museum in the northern city of Mosul, which was overrun by Islamic State last June, a former employee at the museum told Reuters.

The extremist group has destroyed a number of shrines - including Muslim holy sites - in a bid to eliminate what it views as heresy.

Militants are also believed to have sold ancient artwork on the black market in order to finance their bloody campaign across the region.

Jeg havde i min tid på Geografi et par debatter med medstuderende om ægypternes krav på at få oldtidsartefakter ‘hjem’ fra British Museum. Hvor der var konsensus om at disse artefakter tilhørte ægypterne, thi de var hentet i ægyptisk jord, holdt jeg på at de tilhørte menneskeheden, eller den del der var civiliseret i hvert fald. Og, holdt jeg på, ægypterne var slet ikke i stand til at varetage verdenskulturen.

Under det Arabiske Forår, som selvsamme studiekammerater udtrykte store forhåbninger til, blev Egyptian (National) Museum angrebet og flere oldstidsartefakter ødelagt. I sommeren 2013 blev Malawi National Museum, der indeholdt masser af oldtidskunst, smadret af øhm, nogen. Samme sommer lukkede Arish National Museum på Sinaihalvøen og flyttede deres samling i sikkerhed, hvilket var klogt da museet blev angrebet tidligere på måneden. I januar 2014 blev Museum of Islamic Arts også angrebet.

Et islamofobisk angreb?

Tre studerende, et ungt ægtepar og den enes søster, er blevet myrdet, likvideret faktisk, i deres lejlighed i North Carolina. Her fra CNN

Was it a dispute over a parking space or something more sinister that prompted the shooting death of three students in an apartment near the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill campus?

Police said “an ongoing neighbor dispute over parking” might have been a factor in the shootings Tuesday evening but said they weren’t dismissing the possibility of a hate crime.

The victims — a newlywed couple and the bride’s younger sister — were shot in the head, sources told CNN affiliate WRAL.

Their families say the gunman had threatened the victims before, and they believe the shootings were a hate crime.

Muligheden for en hate-crime ligger i at de tre myrdede studerende var muslimer. På Facebook profilen Muslim I Danmark tog man derfor hurtigt historien til sig som et tegn på islamofobi

De her tre muslimer er lige blevet dræbt i USA af en islamafobisk mand. Det her er produktet af denne hetz imod muslimer!

Hvor er de som tager afstand? Hvor er de som gør det her til et problem som alle hvide amerikaner skal tage afstand fra? Hvad ville der ske hvis det var en muslim, som havde dræbt tre hvide amerikanere? Islam ville have fået skylden, hele verden ville tage afstand, medierne ville rydde forsiden til minde for ofrene og alle ville vise deres sympati samt kræve muslimer tager afstand. Men nu er ofrene jo tre muslimske studerende. Så lader vi det bare stå lidt for sig selv og håbe ingen roder lidt for meget i det..

Nemlig, det er i sandhed et historisk øjeblik, at en ikke-muslim her i Vesten myrder muslimer. Det burde præge nyhederne som havde en kongelig født to par siamesiske trillinger. Muslim I Danmark tog, som muslimerne i USA og resten af Vesten velsagtens (ja, det er blot en fordomsfuld antagelse) det for givet at mordene på de tre studerende var islamofobisk motiveret. Hvad ellers?

Og verden er et uforstående sted for de sande ofre mener flere muslimske læsere, der illustrerede deres følelser således

10360840_433796333460999_4220368414414308877_n

10801713_10205464423117655_4625420702868118212_n

10372569_724382037675951_215572977086477498_n

10985531_10205464423717670_3941019194978655807_n

Ja, hvad ellers kan man myrde en muslim for, hvis ikke det er for at være muslim? For en muslim er kun muslim, kun underkastet islam og kan ikke have relationer til resten af verden uden gennem islam og vice verca. En muslim er altså åbenbart ikke et menneske, der kan blive myrdet af allehånde andre grunde, som vi andre kan. En muslim er en muslim er en muslim. For en muslim åbenbart.

Men vi andre lever i menneskenes, for muslimer åbenbart, “Disgusting” verden. Robert Spencer skriver på Jihad Watch

Did Craig Hicks murder three Muslims in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, because they were Muslim? Certainly that is what the Hamas-linked terror organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), would have us believe. The problem with Hamas-linked CAIR’s narrative, however, is that from the looks of his Facebook page, Hicks is hardly the right-wing anti-Muslim Islamophobic redneck of their hysterical fantasies; instead, he is a hardcore Leftist and fan of Hamas-linked CAIR’s allies, the Huffington Post and the Southern Poverty Law Center.

On his Facebook page, Craig Hicks had a huge and revealing list of “Likes” that shows him much more preoccupied with Christianity than with Islam. He does post a chart likening “Radical Christians” to “Radical Muslims,” but that is about the extent of his mentioning of Islam at all. He likes the atheists Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Bill Maher, all of whom have criticized Islam, but his page includes none of their statements about Islam. He likes many anti-Christian groups but no groups that are critical of Islam, and he even likes a group praising Obama for supporting the Ground Zero Mosque.

Hvis nu alligevel motivet, eller en del af motivet, ligger i en modstand mod muslimer, bliver det interessant at se om medierne vil behandle denne sag på samme måde, som de behandler antisemitiske mord. Det første muslimer i danmark åbenbart tænker på er Israel At det selvfølgelig er frygteligt, men… Men med tanke på muslimsk forfølgelse af ikke-muslimer over hele verden og ISIS grusomheder, things like that, så er det ikke mærkeligt at en ateist slår igen. Og en ekspert eller blot menigt medlem af Enhedslisten der påpeger at denne islamofobiske vold stopper først når muslimerne kommer med ind i den moderne verden osv. Og i mellemtiden så kunne man lægge politisk pres på den muslimske verden ved at boykotte, hvad man nu kan boykotte af dadler og olie. Men jeg tvivler.

Trapped In Bulgaria: Europe Or Die (Episode 3/4)

3. del af Vice News serie om folkevandringen mod Europa. Fra omtalen på Youtube

Since 2000, more than 27,000 migrants and refugees have died attempting the perilous journey to Europe. With an unprecedented number of people breaking through its heavily barricaded borders in 2014, the EU continues to fortify its frontiers.

In episode three of Europe or Die, VICE News correspondent Milène Larsson visits Bulgaria to see Europe’s newest border fence and speaks to Syrians who, because of the EU’s Dublin Regulation, are trapped in one of Europe’s poorest countries.

Obama, den frie verdens forsvarer

Barak Obama udtalte som bekendt på FNs talerstol at fremtiden ikke må tilhøre de, der fornærmer islams stifter. Den stil har han holdt ved. Hot Air skriver at Obama mener det er en borgerpligt at tale imod blasfemikere

Noah already blogged the lowlight of this morning’s National Prayer Breakfast speech but don’t overlook this passage. The Washington Times didn’t.

There’s wisdom in our founders writing in those documents that help found this nation the notion of freedom of religion, because they understood the need for humility.  They also understood the need to uphold freedom of speech, that there was a connection between freedom of speech and freedom of religion.  For to infringe on one right under the pretext of protecting another is a betrayal of both.

But part of humility is also recognizing in modern, complicated, diverse societies, the functioning of these rights, the concern for the protection of these rights calls for each of us to exercise civility and restraint and judgment.  And if, in fact, we defend the legal right of a person to insult another’s religion, we’re equally obligated to use our free speech to condemn such insults — (applause) — and stand shoulder-to-shoulder with religious communities, particularly religious minorities who are the targets of such attacks.  Just because you have the right to say something doesn’t mean the rest of us shouldn’t question those who would insult others in the name of free speech.  Because we know that our nations are stronger when people of all faiths feel that they are welcome, that they, too, are full and equal members of our countries.

Watch him deliver that at 12:25 below. He floated the same idea of a trade-off on blasphemy in his now famous speech to the UN a few years ago when he told the General Assembly “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” Legal sanctions against blasphemers are a bridge too far, he conceded, but moral sanctions are not just warranted but obligatory. We’ll punish the blasphemer, just not with the power of the state. Re-read the boldfaced part above. Does this guy, who swore an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution, actually believe that our duty to defend a blasphemer’s right to free speech is no greater than our duty to condemn him for affronting religion?

13. januar skrev Jihad Watch at Det Hvide Hus vil hindre at medierne bringer historier, der gør terrorister sure

More self-censorship and voluntary acceptance of Sharia blasphemy laws. The President of the United States is now (again) signaling that terrorism works: he is saying he will act to curtail Americans’ freedom of expression because Muslims are committing mass murder in response of the freedom of expression. He could have said that he would defend those who say things that jihadis dislike from violent attacks, but no. He was as consistent as ever. And the freedom of speech will suffer for it. How long before he shuts down Jihad Watch, to appease our jihadi brethren?

“White House: Obama Will Fight Media To Stop Anti-Jihad Articles,” by Neil Munro, Daily Caller, January 13, 2015:

President Barack Obama has a moral responsibility to push back on the nation’s journalism community when it is planning to publish anti-jihadi articles that might cause a jihadi attack against the nation’s defenses forces, the White House’s press secretary said Jan. 12.

“The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing.

The unprecedented reversal of Americans’ civil-military relations, and of the president’s duty to protect the First Amendment, was pushed by Earnest as he tried to excuse the administration’s opposition in 2012 to the publication of anti-jihadi cartoons by the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.

The White House voiced its objections in 2012 after the magazine’s office were burned by jihadis, followings its publication of anti-jihadi cartoons.

Earnest’s defense of tho 2012 objections came just five days after the magazine’s office was attacked by additional jihadis. Eight journalists, two policeman and a visitor were murdered by two French-born Muslims who objected to the magazine’s criticism of Islam’s final prophet.

Og den altid fremragende Danield Greenfield skriver på Frontpage Magazine

When it comes to Islam, Obama is like the weather in Seattle. There are no surprises. If there’s a national prayer breakfast, then he’s going to slam Christianity and defend Islam.

But we also see faith being twisted and distorted, used as a wedge — or, worse, sometimes used as a weapon.  From a school in Pakistan to the streets of Paris, we have seen violence and terror perpetrated by those who profess to stand up for faith, their faith, professed to stand up for Islam, but, in fact, are betraying it.  We see ISIL, a brutal, vicious death cult that, in the name of religion, carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism  — terrorizing religious minorities like the Yezidis, subjecting women to rape as a weapon of war, and claiming the mantle of religious authority for such actions.

We see sectarian war in Syria, the murder of Muslims and Christians in Nigeria, religious war in the Central African Republic, a rising tide of anti-Semitism and hate crimes in Europe, so often perpetrated in the name of religion…

Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history.  And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ.  In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ. Michelle and I returned from India — an incredible, beautiful country, full of magnificent diversity — but a place where, in past years, religious faiths of all types have, on occasion, been targeted by other peoples of faith, simply due to their heritage and their beliefs — acts of intolerance that would have shocked Gandhiji, the person who helped to liberate that nation.

They’re not perpetrated in the name of religion, generic, but in the name of Islam.

Obama has to throw in slavery and attack Hindus in India, but he still can’t come up with anything happening today on the scale of Islamic genocidal violence and conflicts with non-Muslims.

There simply isn’t anything like it.

Og nu, hvor denne posterings tema er gledet fra Obamas angreb på ytringsfriheden over i relativering vil jeg lige medtage den også altid fremragende Thomas Sowell på Townhall om hvad Obama så gik og talte med inderne om på hans og Michelles tur til Indien

In his recent trip to India, President Obama repeated a long-standing pattern of his — denigrating the United States to foreign audiences. He said that he had been discriminated against because of his skin color in America, a country in which there is, even now, “terrible poverty.”

Make no mistake about it, there is no society of human beings in which there are no rotten people. But for a President of the United States to be smearing America in a foreign country, whose track record is far worse, is both irresponsible and immature.

Years after the last lynching of blacks took place in the Jim Crow South, India’s own government was still publishing annual statistics on atrocities against the untouchables, including fatal atrocities. The June 2003 issue of “National Geographic” magazine had a chilling article on the continuing atrocities against untouchables in India in the 21st century.

Nothing that happened to Barack Obama when he was attending a posh private school in Hawaii, or elite academic institutions on the mainland, was in the same league with the appalling treatment of untouchables in India. And what Obama called “terrible poverty” in America would be called prosperity in India.

Med venner som disse….

Islamist Militants on Israel’s Doorstep: The War Next Door (Full Length)

Antisemitisme, Arabere, Arabiske forår, Diverse, Irak, Israel, Jihad, Kalifatet, Muslimer, Syrien, Terror, islam — Drokles on February 7, 2015 at 7:28 am

Fra Youtube

In August, al Nusra Front jihadists took control of Syria’s side of the border crossing with Israel and kidnapped over 40 United Nations peacekeepers — who have since been released.

But al Nusra Front, an al Qaeda-affiliate, isn’t Israel’s only threat from Syria. President Bashar al-Assad’s military, in a possible effort to bait Israel into its civil war to shore up Arab sympathies, has been lobbing mortars across the border. Just a few weeks ago, the Israeli military shot down a Syrian plane flying over the Golan Heights — the first time it has done so since the 1980s.

VICE News travels to Israel’s “quiet border” in the Golan Heights, where members of al Nusra Front are now a visible threat.

Read “The Explosive End of Israel’s ‘Quietest Border’” - http://bit.ly/1xcm7DB

Read “Islamic State Fighters Capture Jordanian Pilot After Downing Coalition Warplane in Syria” - http://bit.ly/1B5Fn6g

Read “The Syrian Regime Will Now Allow Desperately Needed Aid Into Rebel-Held Regions” - http://bit.ly/1t7ejoq

Read “New Evidence Suggests Israel Is Helping Syrian Rebels in the Golan Heights” - http://bit.ly/1BroztZ

Watch “A Fugitive and his Family: Escape to the Islamic State” - http://bit.ly/1rNVpwy

Check out the VICE News beta for more: http://vicenews.com

Death Boats to Greece: Europe Or Die (Episode 2/4)

Fra Youtube omtalen

Since 2000, more than 27,000 migrants and refugees have died attempting the perilous journey to Europe. With an unprecedented number of people breaking through its heavily barricaded borders in 2014, the EU continues to fortify its frontiers.

VICE News presents Europe or Die, a new four-part series that documents the efforts of those risking their lives to reach Europe, and the forces tasked to keep them out.

In episode two of our series, VICE News correspondent Milène Larsson travels to the border between Greece and Turkey, where Syrian and Afghan refugees are paying large sums of money to take “death boats” to Greece.

In part two of our second episode, VICE News correspondent Milène Larsson continues her visit to the border between Greece and Turkey to find out what happens to the many migrants who perish while attempting to cross Greece’s dangerous Evros river.

Muslimerkongen er død

Kong Abdullah af Saudiarabien er død og verdens statsledere har udtalt deres sorg over den store mand. Her nogle reaktioner samlet af den venstreorienterede Think Progress

King Abdullah, 90, who died early Friday morning, is being hailed as a reformer, despite condoning human rights abuses and forwarding only very measured efforts to promote democracy in his oil-rich nation.

One of the most scrutinized aspects of the Saudi Arabia’s rights’ record is its so-called “male guardianship system,” women are not allowed to travel, obtain a passport, marry, or continue their education without the approval of a male relative.

The King’s own daughters are hardly an exception to the harsh rule. Four of his daughters claim that the are being forcibly held in a dilapidated palace with little in the way of food and water. “Our father said that we had no way out,” Sahar Al Saud, 42, wrote in an email to the British broadcast network Channel 4, “And that after his death our brothers will continue detaining us.”

“We are just an example of so many families, of what so many women, go through. Just a tiny, tiny example,” the princess who once enjoyed international skiing and shopping trips said.

(…)

President Barack Obama praised the king for having “the courage of his convictions,” and for promoting security in the region, but steered clear of commenting on Saudi Arabian social policies.

“In a very discreet way, he was a strong advocate of women,” Christine Lagarde the head of the International Monetary Fund said from the Davos Economic Forum in Switzerland.

Even news reports heralded King Abdullah’s track record on civil rights, though the laudatory language was often followed by only vague or contradictory examples from his 9-year tenure as the head of Saudi Arabia.

CNN called him “a cautious reformer” citing “steps toward broader freedoms” without giving clear examples. The New York Times Douglas Martin and Ben Hubbard referred to the autocratic ruler as a “force of moderation,” although the already tempered phrase was followed by examples in which the King failed to carry out the reforms he publicly vowed to carry out.

(…)

On Friday, Saudi authorities again postponed the flogging of the progressive blogger Raif Badawi. Although the British foreign secretary raised concerns about brutal sentence awaiting the blogger with the Saudi ambassador to Britain prime minister was among those praising King Abdullah’s commitment to his people.

“He will be remembered for his long years of service to the kingdom, for his commitment to peace and for strengthening understanding between faiths,” David Cameron said.

skc3a6rmbillede-2015-01-27-kl-074444

Flere og overlappende reaktioner her. Også tidligere præsident George Bush var ked af den store mands død, som han skrev på Facebook

“Laura and I are saddened by the death of a man I admire and with whom I was honored to work. I have very fond memories of my visits to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and of the King’s visit to our ranch in Crawford. He was an important and able ally and a force for modernization in his country. King Abdullah served his nation honorably with strength and vision. We send our heartfelt condolences to the King’s family and all who will miss him.”

bush-og-kong-abdullah

Islam opstod, som bekendt, på den arabiske halvø som en kodificering af arabisk kultur og moral. Som islam spredte sig udvikledes et væld af variationer, så man hurtigt ikke længere kunne tale om et islam. Seneste skud på stammen er islamisk stat, hvis forskelle og ligheder i forhold til den saudiske variant gør enhver islamofob til skamme. Washington Post stiller det pædagogisk op

b7z1hcscuaelirf

Disses væsensforskellige forskel i samfundsindretning kommer af den fleksibilitet, der er i islams lære, her i sammenligning med koranen

comparingquranis
Og i praksis er der da også milevid forskel på Islamisk stat og kalifatet. Daily Telegraph skriver om lov og orden i den nye Islamisk Stat

On January 15, 2015, the Islamic State (ISIS) released a collection of images showing the enforcement of the hudud (Koranic punishment) in Ninawa, Iraq. The images show the execution of two men convicted of homosexuality by throwing them from a tall building; the crucifixion of two men convicted of armed theft; and the stoning of a woman convicted of adultery.

g

i

Således holdes der også orden i Saudiarabien på åben gade

Som man kan se, helt forskellige straffemetoder, der vidner om islams mange ansigter. Men det er den samme folkelige deltagelse, der vidner om islam som fredens religion

sandheder og forudsigelser fra Sennels

Arabere, Demografi, Indvandring, Jihad, Kalifatet, Multikultur, Muslimer, Videnskab, islam, venstrefløjen — Drokles on January 21, 2015 at 11:55 pm

Dagbladet Arbejderenhar samlet 10 af de mest kontroversielle citater fra Pegidas danske bagmand” Nikolaj Sennels og de citater vidner om en ganske fornuftig ung mand, der fortjener at blive gentaget

Et groft skøn viser, at næsten halvdelen af alle verdens muslimer er indavlede. En stor del af de indavlede muslimer er født af forældre, som selv er indavlede – hvilket øger risikoen for mentale og fysiske skader meget. Massiv indavl indenfor den muslimske kultur de sidste 1400 år kan have gjort katastrofal skade på deres genpulje. Indavl kan være forklaringen på, hvorfor det kun er lykkedes ni muslimer at modtage den prestigefyldte Nobels Fredspris.
Europenews.dk, 9.8.2010

Hvis du vil udvikle dine evner til beskyttelse, så bliv stærk, lær kampsport og overvej at gå med i Hjemmeværnet. Hvis du er involveret i politiske aktiviteter, så hold bureaukratiet på et minimum, bliv gode venner og lad være med at konkurrere med dine anti-jihad-kammerater.
10news.dk, 31.12.2014

Når man arbejder psykologisk med muslimer, bliver det klart, at man ikke kan opfordre en muslim til at lægge sin vrede fra sig. Det ville svare at bede en cowboy om at lægge pistolerne hjemme på kommoden, inden han skal ud og duellere: det virker absurd i hans øjne.
Snaphanen.dk, 11.6.2008

Jeg kan ikke lide islam og alle, som mener at islam bør have en plads i verden. Jeg bryder mig heller ikke om de negative konsekvenser, som muslimsk indvandring har ført med sig. Men jeg hader ikke alle muslimer. Obama er en af dem, jeg ikke bryder mig om, og som jeg mener er blandt de mange, som burde rejse hjem, hvor han kommer fra.
Amerikanske perspektiver JP.dk, 12.10.2009)

Jeg blev spurgt fornyligt: Hvorfor bekæmpe islam? Det korte svar er fordi islam bekæmper os og da islam ikke kender nogen grænser og ikke kender nogen medlidenhed, vil islam blive ved med at bekæmpe os indtil vi er besejrede eller - forhåbentlig - stopper dem for evigt.
10news.dk, 31.12.2014

Terrorplanerne mod Jyllands-Posten viser, at avisen havde ret, da den med Muhammed-tegningerne pegede på korandyrkere som en trussel mod menneskets frihed og ret til at sige det man tænker.
Kulturkløften, JP.dk, 28.10.2009

Vi får formentligt undtagelsestilstande og guerillakrige i vores europæiske byer inden for en håndfuld år. Kampene i sig selv vil gøre vores lande ukendelige i en årrække, og selvom vestlige magter endnu ikke har vundet en krig mod guerrilla-krigere, så har vi vi trods alt overmagten - hvis vi vil bruge den… Men der går nok et halvt århundrede, førend vi kan trække vejret dybt og frit igen.
Kulturkløften, JP.dk, 28.10.2009

Det ligger således meget dybt i os vesterlændinge, at vi selv har ansvar for vores forstyrrende følelser… Denne refleksionsproces er netop det, som udgør den største psykologiske forskel mellem vesterlændinge og folk, som er vokset op i muslimske familier.
Snaphanen.dk,11.6.2008

Inden fem år vil vi have reel guerillia-krig i vores storbyer med skudvekslinger mellem muslimske grupper og vestlige autoriteter. Vi vil se fronte og barikkader, døde politimænd, hævnangreb med selvmordsbomber, hæren griber ind, voldelig selvtægtsgrupper på begge sider og vi vil få vores egne Gaza-striber hvor stadigt mere permanente undtagelsestilstande er en realitet. Tryghed, velfærdssamfundet, økonomi og håb for fremtiden vil være skudt i sænk. Samtidigt vil mere eller mindre officielle organisationer i den muslimske verden støtte deres ‘brødre’ med viden, våben, mandskab og politisk og økonomisk pres.
Kulturkløften, jp.dk, 22.11.2009

At sikre os selv og vores efterkommere mod denne cancer, som allerede gnaver i alle vitale dele af vores samfund, kræver særdeles vedholdende politisk og folkelig beslutsomhed. Når vi slår tilbage vil det provokere vores selvudnævnte fjende og styrke deres verdensberømte barnlige vrede og offermentalitet. Men der er ingen grund til at undgå konfrontation, da der ikke er nogen vej uden om et virkeligt sammenstød uanset hvad – og jo før det kommer, jo færre og jo dårligere organiseret vil de være.
10news.dk, 31.12.2014

Som man kan læse trækker Sennels i flere af citaterne på sit virke som fængselspsykolog, altså en nøgtern formidling af den ‘grimme’ virkelighed. I andre citater forudser han den udvikling, der senest med angrebne på Charlie Hebdo, det jødiske supermarked i Paris og gidseltagningen i Belgien, som flere europære er vågnet op til. Når 80.000 franske politifolk og sikkerhedsstyrker sendes på gaden så deler myndighederne den bekymring. Og som Syriensfarerne vender hjem utilfredse med kommunens psykologbistand, uddannelsesforløb og jobtilbud kontra massemord på vantro er vi endnu kun i begyndelsen af en terrorbølge ingensinde før oplevet på europæisk jord. Og på den baggrund opfordrer Sennels ganske logisk til at man bør forberede sig på at beskytte sig selv og sit land, som myndighederne svigter deres opgave gennem stadig fornægtelse.

Men det er selvfølgelig bemærkningerne om indavl, der er uæstetiske for venstrefløjen, siden Stalin opgav sin abe-neger hær.

I en artikel fra september 2010 på europenews.dk, en engelsksproget hjemmeside der formidler stærkt islamkritiske blogindlæg, skriver Sennels blandt andet, at “næsten halvdelen af verdens muslimer er indavlede” og at indavl fører til “lavere intelligens”.

Ikke nok med at Sennels påstår at muslimer er indavlede, men han rakker oven i købet ned på indavl. Men Sennels er blot nøgtern. Forrige år udtalte den tidligere Minister of State for Borders and Immigration hil Woolas ifølge Daily Mail at der var et genetisk problem som følge af muslimsk fætter-kusine praksis

Referring to the culture of Muslim arranged marriages between cousins, environment minister Phil Woolas said: “If you have a child with your cousin the likelihood is there’ll be a genetic problem.”

Mr Woolas, whose views were supported today by medical experts, said the practice did not extend to all Muslim communities and that most cases occur in families from rural Pakistan, where up to half of all marriages are thought to involve first cousins.

According to today’s Sunday Times, the minister, who represents Oldham East and Saddleworth said: “If you talk to any primary care worker they will tell you that levels of disability among the . . . Pakistani population are higher than the general population. And everybody knows it’s caused by first cousin marriage.

(…)

Research for BBC2’s Newsnight in November 2005 showed British Pakistanis accounted for 3.4 per cent of all births but have 30 per cent of all British children with recessive disorders.

I 2010 kunne man på Europe News læse

Massive inbreeding within the Muslim culture during the last 1.400 years may have done catastrophic damage to their gene pool. The consequences of intermarriage between first cousins often have serious impact on the offspring’s intelligence, sanity, health and on their surroundings

The most famous example of inbreeding is in ancient Egypt, where several Pharaonic dynasties collapsed after a couple of hundred years. In order to keep wealth and power within the family, the Pharaohs often married their own sister or half-sister and after a handful of generations the offspring were mentally and physically unfit to rule. Another historical example is the royal houses of Europe where royal families often married among each other because tradition did not allow them to marry people of non-royal class.

(…)

A rough estimate shows that close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred: In Pakistan, 70 percent of all marriages are between first cousins (so-called “consanguinity”) and in Turkey the amount is between 25-30 percent (Jyllands-Posten, 27/2 2009 More stillbirths among immigrants”

Statistical research on Arabic countries shows that up to 34 percent of all marriages in Algiers are consanguine (blood related), 46 percent in Bahrain, 33 percent in Egypt, 80 percent in Nubia (southern area in Egypt), 60 percent in Iraq, 64 percent in Jordan, 64 percent in Kuwait, 42 percent in Lebanon, 48 percent in Libya, 47 percent in Mauritania, 54 percent in Qatar, 67 percent in Saudi Arabia, 63 percent in Sudan, 40 percent in Syria, 39 percent in Tunisia, 54 percent in the United Arabic Emirates and 45 percent in Yemen (Reproductive Health Journal, 2009 Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs.).

A large part of inbred Muslims are born from parents who are themselves inbred - which increase the risks of negative mental and physical consequenses greatly.

The amount of blood related marriages is lower among Muslim immigrants living in the West. Among Pakistanis living in Denmark the amount is down to 40 percent and 15 percent among Turkish immigrants (Jyllands-Posten, 27/2 2009 More stillbirths among immigrants”.).

Several studies show that children of consanguineous marriages have lower intelligence than children of non-related parents. Research shows that the IQ is 10-16 points lower in children born from related parents and that abilities related to social behavior develops slower in inbred babies:

“Effects of parental consanguinity on the cognitive and social behavior of children have been studied among the Ansari Muslims of Bhalgapur, Bihar.

IQ in inbred children (8-12 years old) is found to be lower (69 in rural and 79 in suburban populations) than that of the outbred ones (79 and 95 respectively). The onset of various social profiles like visual fixation, social smile, sound seizures, oral expression and hand-grasping are significantly delayed among the new-born inbred babies.” (Indian National Science Academy, 1983 Consanguinity Effects on Intelligence Quotient and Neonatal Behaviours of nsari Muslim Children”).

I 2009 kunne man læse i BT

Når fætter og kusine får børn sammen, er der dobbelt så stor risiko for at få et handicappet barn - det koster kommunekasserne dyrt.

Handicappede indvandrerbørn koster danske kommuner millioner.

I Københavns Amt alene er antallet af handicappede børn i alt steget med mere 100 procent på 10 år.

Forklaringerne er mange:

Flere kvinder føder i en høj alder.

Flere handicappede børn overlever.

Men det viser sig altså også, at indvandrere sætter flere handicappede børn i verden end danskerne gør.

En stor del af forklaringen skyldes de mange fætter-kusine-ægteskaber blandt indvandrere.

Samme år ifølge Metro Xpress

Tyrkiske, pakistanske og somaliske mødre har dobbelt så stor risiko for at føde dødfødte børn som etnisk danske kvinder.

Sådan lyder konklusionen på et forskningsprojekt fra Syddansk Universitet.

Her har en gruppe forskere gennemgået alle fødsler i Danmark i 1980-2000 for at undersøge sammenhænge mellem moderens etniske baggrund og barnets sundhed.

Forskningsprojektet viste ikke kun, at børnedødeligheden blandt tyrkere, pakistanere og somaliere er særlig høj, men samtidig at den for eksempel er meget lav blandt libanesiske kvinder.

»Det er ret overraskende, at der er så stor forskel mellem nationaliteterne,« siger Anne-Marie Nybo Andersen, der er en af forskerne bag projektet, til magasinet NyViden.

En af årsagerne kan være tendensen til at gifte sig inden for familien.

Jaymans Blog kommer med en fin grafik

inbreeding-gradient-europe-d

Eller et Verdenskort måske? Man kan læse mere i Consanguinity and reproductive health among Arabs, Consanguinity Effects on Intelligence Quotient and Neonatal Behaviours of nsari Muslim ChildrenBehaviour GeneticsA study of possible deleterious effects of consanguinityInfant death and consanguineous marriage og Nature.

Og for de der gerne vil miste forstanden

Det er hårdt

Det er hårdt at være mig i denne svære juletid, måske ikke så som at være Knausgaard, men hårdt. Liverpool spillede pludselig fodbold, men til ingen verdens nytte. Mit højre knæ døjer med betændelse, mit højre håndled er forstuvet og min højre skulder brækket. Ja hele mine højre fløj er så syg at ironien næsten ikke er til at bære. Familiens store vareombytningsdag tager glæden ud af julen, dog ikke som Per Nyholm, der med krav om at den danske klamme og selvbedrageriske jul skal åbne sig for alle verdens velfærdssultne folkeslag tillige vånder sig over “bøvede julefrokoster og deres efterspil”. Jeg har kun været til een julefrokost og der var desværre intet efterspil - som sædvanlig. Og jeg burde foretage så mange andre ting end det jeg konstant er i gang med at jeg ender med at foretage mig meget lidt.

Teorien om mænds dumhed ‘male idiot theory‘, om hvorfor mænd har en højere tendens til at blive dræbt er komme slemt til skade kastede en del tragikomiske anekdoter af sig. Bl.a om manden der kom slemt til skade da han brugte en rystepudser som et sexlegetøj og derpå lappede sit scrotum med en klipsemaskine. Ubetvivleligt et udtryk for maskulin idioti. Men det er alligevel normativt og kulturelt, hvad man betragter som idioti, og mange kvinder går derfor fri. For, hvad skal man mene om de hundredevis af unge kvinder der drømmer om at gifte sig med jihad-krigere? Andet end at der er et låg til hver en gryde.

Og hvad skal man egentlig sige til Politikens overskrift “Bilist pløjer ind i menneskemængde i Frankrig“? Bilisten var muslim og råbte Allahu Akbar får vi at vide længere nede i teksten, men det er ikke så vigtigt som at han er bilist. Hvilket i sagens natur vel blot er en truisme. En anden ‘bilist’, som Jyllands-Posten ophøjede til ‘chauffør’  gentog dåden dagen efter. BBC havde samme overskrift ved en lignende muslimsk terrorhandling i Israel

10534090_10152916036499954_6442349501464347508_n

Anne Hertzum Alling skrev i øvrigt under overskriften “Hey Hamas, jeg tror, I er ved at smadre Palæstinas fremtid” i Information at jødedrab er kontraproduktivt og indledte med følgende anekdote

I sidste uge kørte jeg gennem Jerusalems gader sammen med en af mine palæstinensiske venner. Da vi passerede den gamle by, skruede han ned for popmusikken på anlægget. »Hvis jeg kører galt nu, vil medierne eksplodere med nyheden om endnu et terrorangreb i Jerusalem. Hvis jeg overlever, vil politiet med stor sandsynlighed skyde på mig. Ja, måske endda slå mig ihjel,« sagde han med både ironisk distance og et glimt i øjet. Vi grinede begge to, men blev hurtigt meget stille. Jeg er ret sikker på, vi tænkte det samme. At det desværre overhovedet ikke var usandsynligt. At det sørgeligt var uden for diskussion.

Ja, det er sørgeligt at arabere kan risikere det mindste ved at køre nogen ihjel i Israel. Det er den egentlige pris for terror. Derfor det ‘rørende øjeblik‘ en muslimsk brud lagde blomster for ofrene for terrorofrene i Sydney. Medierne og venstrefløjen ser undtagelsen, iscenesat som den sikkert var, som bekræftelse på at reglen ikke eksisterer. Folk klappede i deres hænder måske uden at gøre sig den tanke at det var fordi de så noget ekstraordinært.

2433516700000578-0-image-a-19_1419164255003

Hvad skal man egentlig mene om islamisk terror, når man ikke tør tale om islams væsen? Midt under gidseltagningen, hvor den muslimske terrorist tvang sine gidsler til at holde et islamisk flag op i vinduet slog den australske premierminister Tony Abbot koldt vand i blodet

“We don’t yet know the motivation of the perpetrator, we don’t know whether this is politically motivated although obviously there are some indications that it could be,”

Samme tanke havde “tidligere operativ chef i Politiets Efterretningstjeneste (PET) Hans Jørgen Bonnichsen, der advarer mod at drage forhastede konklusioner”

Vi er alt for hurtige til at råbe Islamisk Stat. Gidseltagninger er jo ikke noget nyt i kriminalhistorien. (…) jeg synes, man lige skal trække vejret og se, hvordan dagen og situationen udvikler sig

De fleste af os nøjedes nu også blot med at tænke islamisk punktum. Men det er et farligt ord for medier og politikere. Danmarks Radio skrev  da også forsigtigt under overskriften “Knivmand tre franske betjente på politistation

20-årig mand råbte Allahu akbar, da han angreb betjente. Motivet tyder på at være islamistisk, siger kilde.

Træk nu vejret, knivangreb er jo ikke nyt i kriminalhistorien. Og det er konstateret uden at “talkneppe”, som Trine Bramsen frivolt affærdigede Fyns Politis forsvar for nærpolitiet i Vollsmose. Klart en kandidat til årets citat. Men mesteren i absurditeter om islam havde inden da sikret sig sit mesterskab. Obama slog ved nyheden om ISIS slagtning af den amerikanske hjælpearbejder Peter Kassig nemlig fast at

“ISIL’s actions represent no faith, least of all the Muslim faith which Abdul-Rahman adopted as his own,” the president said, using another name for Islamic State.

Såeh, det ligner mere end kristen eller buddistisk handling? Og så havde man svært ved for meget succes på Langeland

- Vi føler ikke, at vi kan magte mere her på øen. Men jeg forstår ikke, hvorfor der ikke er flere kommuner, der går ind i det her. Her på Langeland har det skaffet 85 nye arbejdspladser og mere omsætning til lokale håndværkere og forretninger. Der er ikke noget at være bange for, siger Bjarne Nielsen.

For meget af det gode kan ellers være skønt ifølge Mae West. Elefanter er der nok af. Jacob McHangama forklarede en journalist hvorledes det kan være omfattet af racismeparagraffen at citere koranen uden at nogen af dem, hverken den skarpe jurist eller den nysgerrige journalist bragte koranens indhold og islams væsen på banen. Eller tør man trøste sig med socialdemokraternes integrations- og fygtningeordfører Mette Reismanns ord om at der blot skal være fred i een større by i Syrien for at man kan (men vil man?) sende de syriske flygtninge hjem? Og hvorfor undrer ingen sig over, hvorfor det kun er syriske mænd, der redder sig i sikkerhed? Måske var kønskvotering den største fejl da Titanic sank?

skc3a6rmbillede-2014-10-24-kl-135848

Som da skuespilleren Shoshana Roberts vandrede i New York og stort set kun fik seksuelle tilråb fra ikke-hvide

The video is a collaboration between Hollaback, an anti-street harassment organization, and the marketing agency Rob Bliss Creative. At the end they claim the woman experienced 100-plus incidents of harassment “involving people of all backgrounds.” Since that obviously doesn’t show up in the video, Bliss addressed it in a post. He wrote, “We got a fair amount of white guys, but for whatever reason, a lot of what they said was in passing, or off camera,” or was ruined by a siren or other noise. The final product, he writes, “is not a perfect representation of everything that happened.” That may be true but if you find yourself editing out all the catcalling white guys, maybe you should try another take.

What are the odds? Daily Mail ramte til gengæld tidens absurditeter i een sætning

The National Union of Students has come under fire after it refused to condemn ISIS - because of fears it was ‘Islamophobic’.

Herligt med sarkasme. Camilla Plum trådte derimod øvet op i bolledejen da hun rasede over nationalretten fordi hun tilhører den eksklusive gruppe der ikke forstår at alt nationalt er diskriminerende

‘Så er man da sikker på, at vores indvandrere ikke kommer til at føle sig sådan rigtigt danske, Fy Dan…det er skamfuldt , når man nu kunne have brugt også denne lejlighed til mere favnende statements….eller er det igen en besked, som hedder, at før de dersens indvandrere får lært at spise vores svinekød, så kan de godt glemme alt om at være helt rigtigt danske?’

Flere mente at hun måske foretrak en ret baseret på strandslagtet pony. Og Said Mansour blev ikke smidt ud af landet på grund af hans tilknytning til det svinespisende Danmark han hader og vil destruere. “Et statsborgerskab skal man ikke skalte og valte med.” sagde Marianne Jelved for år tilbage. Men det holdt dem ikke tilbage. Men i det mindste fik Morten Storm ført til rettens protokol og lagt ud til alverden at læse at muslimernes profet og eksempel på det perfekte mennesker er pædofil

Profeten Muhammed var pædofil og et narhoved. Han havde sex med en pige på ni år. Han blev gift med hende, da hun var seks og havde fuldbyrdet samleje med hende, da hun var ni år - det kalder jeg for pædofili.

Men det er selvfølgelig hårdere at være svensker når ens statsminister ser ned over det enorme og smukke land og deklarerer at der er plads nok til mange flere muslimer. Plads og rum er ikke det samme - rum er begrænset af de fælles regler som ironisk bliver stadigt strammere jo flere der skal favnes. Fra samhällets nye bund beskrev en svensk pensionist at “Det känns som att man vill rensa bort sådana som mig från samhället. Det är ett hemskt sätt att leva.” Og med de ord, glædelig jul!

Dokumentar: ISIS Sex-Slave Raping & Selling Girls

Olien presser ondskaben

Olieprisen falder i disse tider “not by any action (or inaction) of the Saudis” skriver Peter Coy og Matthew PhilipsBusiness Week “but by the American shale producers, who are simply producing all the oil they can to maximize their profits”.

The world’s biggest oil companies faced ruin in the summer of 1931. Crude prices had plummeted. Wildcatters were selling oil from the bonanza East Texas field for a nickel a barrel, cheaper than a bowl of chili. On Aug. 17, Governor Ross Sterling declared a state of insurrection in four counties and sent 1,100 National Guard troops to shut down the fields and bring order to the market. A month later the Railroad Commission of Texas handed out strict production quotas.

That heavy-handed intervention in the free market was remarkable enough. Even more remarkable was who pulled it off. The person in charge of shutting down the wildcatters, National Guard Brigadier General Jacob Wolters, was the general counsel of Texas Co., an ancestor of Chevron (CVX). And the Texas governor who ordered Wolters in was a past president of Humble Oil and Refining, a forerunner of ExxonMobil (XOM). Big Oil played hardball in those days.

Russell Gold beskriver i Wall Street Journal hvad der “has set up a battle for market share that could reshape the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and fundamentally change the global market for oil”

Vikas Dwivedi, energy strategist with Macquarie Research, says a widespread deceleration of global economic growth sapped some demand. At the same time, several Asian currencies weakened against the U.S. dollar.

The cost of filling up a gas tank in Indonesia, Thailand, India and Malaysia rose, just as these countries were phasing out fuel subsidies. In Jakarta and Mumbai, drivers cut back.

“The fact that supply growth was strong shouldn’t have taken anybody by surprise,” Mr. Dwivedi says. But demand for oil “just fell off a cliff. And bear markets are fed by negative surprises.”

Rising supply and falling demand both put downward pressure on prices. Throughout the summer, however, fears of violence in Iraq kept oil prices high as traders worried Islamic State fighters could cut the countrys oil output.

Then two events tipped the market. In late June, The Wall Street Journal reported the U.S. government had given permission for the first exports of U.S. oil in a generation. While the ruling was limited in scope, the market saw it as the first crack in a long-standing ban on crude exports. Not only was the U.S. importing fewer barrels of oil, it could soon begin exporting some, too. This news jolted oil markets; prices began to edge down from their summer peaks.

On July 1, Libyan rebels agreed to open Es Sider and Ras Lanuf, two key oil-export terminals that had been closed for a year. Libyan oil sailed across the Mediterranean Sea into Europe. Already displaced from the U.S. Gulf Coast and eastern Canada, Nigerian oil was soon replaced in Europe, too. Increasingly, shipments of Nigerian crude headed toward China.

Oil prices began to decline.

Og det er dårligt nyt for mange fjendtlige regimer og ideologier, hvis magt bygger på høje oliepriser. De små fracking firmaer i Texas ændrer vilkårerne

The stressed-out giants of today are Saudi Arabia and its fellows in the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. The descendants of the 1930s wildcatters are today’s producers of oil from shale, who are driving down the world price of crude by flooding the market with millions of barrels of new oil each day. At $64 a barrel, Brent crude is down 44 percent since June. The twist is that today’s upstarts aren’t draining oil from neighbors’ plots, as happened in the 1930s. And OPEC can’t call in the National Guard against them. All it can do is gape at the falling price of crude and contemplate the destruction of their cartel at the hands of the Americans, whom they thought they had supplanted for good 40 years ago. Energy economist Philip Verleger says shale is to OPEC what the Apple II (AAPL) was to the IBM(IBM) mainframe.

(….)

Collectively, their breakneck production is breaking OPEC’s neck. This is the remorseless, leaderless free market at work.

OPEC used to be something to reckon with. For a brief period in the 1970s its influence was so strong, it could set prices to the penny for scores of crudes, says Bhushan Bahree, senior director for OPEC Middle East research at market researcher IHS (IHS). Its power has waned considerably, but until this year Saudi Arabia could still be counted on to cut output for the good of the cartel when gluts emerged. The Saudis’ refusal last month to take one for the team is historic, says Michael Wittner, head of oil research at Société Générale (GLE:FP) in New York. “That is such a tremendous, dramatic change,” he says. “It’s hard to think of a way to exaggerate how fundamental it is.”

Men det er ikke blot Rusland og regimerne i OPEC, der mærkes af den økonomiske nedtur og amerikansk driftighed. Også den grønne mafia går svære tider i møde, skriver The Independent

A new “era of cheap oil” would be good news for consumers and motorists – but analysts say the consequences for politics, industry and the climate could be even more radical.

(…)

“Renewable energy subsidies have been mostly sold to the public on the basis of the economic benefits,” said Peter Atherton, an energy analyst with Liberum Capital. “But the economic arguments hinged on the idea that fossil fuel prices would get more expensive, while expensive renewable subsidies would be able to come down over time. That’s looking doubtful now.”

Anne Robinson, director of consumer policy at the uSwitch price comparison website, said: “More subsidies are likely to be needed [for green power] as the gap between the cost of fossil fuel power and renewable power gets bigger.” The extra subsidies would be borne by households in the form of higher energy bills.

Green energy technologies such as solar and wind had been banking on sharp increases in fossil fuel prices to make them increasingly competitive and help to attract the huge amount of investment required to build renewable power plants. But that “economic case” is now in danger of being lost, with the environmental argument seen by many as being insufficient to drive through high levels of green energy investment.

Så der er da andet end Julen at glæde sig over.

Islamisk analitet

Det vakte international debat da Rusland indførte restriktioner på hvor meget man må lufte sin homoseksualitet førend det bliver propaganda der korrumperer ungdommen. I en sønderlemmende protest stemte europærerne på en transvestit som vinder af Melodi Gran Prix, men Rusland stod stadig. Mindre debat vækker den muslimske verdens forhold til homoseksuelle. En homoseksuel palæstinenser måtte flygte fra det anderkendelsesværdige Palæstina til Israel af frygt for sine landsmænd, skriver Danmarks Radio

Tel Aviv er kendt og kåret som en homo-venlig by, hvor der er plads til alle, uanset seksualitet.

Men det de fleste medier glemmer at tilføje er, at det ikke gælder homoseksuelle palæstinensere.

De er ikke velkomne, og indtil videre har ingen palæstinensere fået asyl i Israel, men mange, især homoseksuelle, har forsøgt.

- De israelske myndigheder nægter at give palæstinenserne asyl og nægter at hjælpe dem, selvom de ifølge FN er berettiget til det, fortæller israelske Yariv Mozer, der står bag dokumentarfilmen Invisible Men fra 2012.

Flygter fra familien

Filmen følger tre unge, homoseksuelle palæstinensere, der, efter at være blevet tæsket og truet på livet af deres familier, flygter til Tel Aviv.

Ja, Danmarks Radios vinkel er Israels forbrydelser. Kalifatet går tilsyneladende endnu hårdere til værks end palæstinensere i almindelighed og kaster homoseksuelle ned fra hustage til senere stening skriver Daily Mail

Chilling new images released by ISIS militants show a group of fighters throwing a man off the roof of a building for being gay - as others pictures emerge of bloodied ‘rapists’ being strung up in the streets of the same town.

Moments before he is flung to his death, a mob of at least eight men can be seen atop of the building that is believed to be somewhere in northern Iraq.

The images were posted on a jihadist website just hours after US senate report - described a ‘a stain’ on American values - revealed the sadistic abuse of CIA detainees in a network of secret prisons around the world.

23f0826a00000578-0-after_dragging_the_man_to_the_top_of_a_building_the_mob_threw_hi-m-7_1418213810995

Men ISIS er et langt mere pluralistisk projekt som alt islamisk er når det kommer til homoseksuel praksis. Og det har vakt en rasende spændende teologisk debat blandt skriftkloge i Ægypten, skriver International Business Times

A prominent Egyptian cleric has accused the Muslim Brotherhood of sanctioning ‘anal jihad’ for Islamic militants who are fighting in locations thousands of miles from their wives.

In his televised comments, which were broadcast by the al-Tahrir channel, the preacher Mazhar Shahin said the Muslim fighters are being authorised to freely practice homosexuality under the pretext of waging “jihad in the name of Allah.”

The idea was compared with ’sex jihad’ - where women are either kidnapped and forced to have intercourse or females who offer themselves to the fighters who are waging jihad. However, the Islamic cleric say the Muslim Brotherhood holy men’s approval of homosexual acts is a “catastrophe”.

Så i Ægypten bliver der slået hårdt ned på utidig jihadsteri i badstuerne skriver A Paper Bird

At about 10 PM last night, December 7, police carried out a massive raid on a hammam (bathhouse) in the Ramsis area of Cairo, not far from the main railway station. They arrested many men — dozens, reportedly — and hauled them, stripped naked like concentration-camp inmates, to the trucks. Someone living nearby who watched the assault wrote on social media that “police together with Central Security forces attacked the bath.” (Central Security, Amn el-Merkezi, is an army force mainly composed of raw recruits; it takes over many policing duties in an increasingly militarized Egypt.) “40 people were arrested. Some were beaten up in the baths, and they were all arrested with no clothes.”

Så næste gang din lokale muslim råber “Jeg kommer og knepper dig!” er det ikke en tom trussel.

En tidligere Associated Press journalist beskriver mediernes anti-israelske fortælling

Matti Friedman arbejdede for det store nyhedsbureau Associated Press i Jerusalem mellem 2006 og 2011 og skønt han erklærer sig selv som venstredrejet (liberal i amerikansk terminologi) kan han ikke længere stå inde for, hvad han betegner som “a hostile obsession with Israel” i den almindelige nyhedsdækning. I en længere og højst anbefalelsesværdig artikel fra august i år i Tablet Magazine fortæller han om den overeksponering af Israel med sin tidligere arbejdsgiver som illustrativt eksempel. At de havde mere end 40 medarbejdere til at dække Israel-Palæstina, hvilket var mere end resten af Mellemøsten til sammen og kun ved særlige lejligheder vægtes andet end Israel højest.

To offer a sense of scale: Before the outbreak of the civil war in Syria, the permanent AP presence in that country consisted of a single regime-approved stringer. The AP’s editors believed, that is, that Syria’s importance was less than one-40th that of Israel. I don’t mean to pick on the AP—the agency is wholly average, which makes it useful as an example. The big players in the news business practice groupthink, and these staffing arrangements were reflected across the herd. Staffing levels in Israel have decreased somewhat since the Arab uprisings began, but remain high. And when Israel flares up, as it did this summer, reporters are often moved from deadlier conflicts. Israel still trumps nearly everything else.

The volume of press coverage that results, even when little is going on, gives this conflict a prominence compared to which its actual human toll is absurdly small. In all of 2013, for example, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict claimed 42 lives—that is, roughly the monthly homicide rate in the city of Chicago. Jerusalem, internationally renowned as a city of conflict, had slightly fewer violent deaths per capita last year than Portland, Ore., one of America’s safer cities. In contrast, in three years the Syrian conflict has claimed an estimated 190,000 lives, or about 70,000 more than the number of people who have ever died in the Arab-Israeli conflict since it began a century ago.

News organizations have nonetheless decided that this conflict is more important than, for example, the more than 1,600 women murdered in Pakistan last year (271 after being raped and 193 of them burned alive), the ongoing erasure of Tibet by the Chinese Communist Party, the carnage in Congo (more than 5 million dead as of 2012) or the Central African Republic, and the drug wars in Mexico (death toll between 2006 and 2012: 60,000), let alone conflicts no one has ever heard of in obscure corners of India or Thailand. They believe Israel to be the most important story on earth, or very close.

Det der er vigtigt i en Israel-Palæstina historie, argumenterer Friedman, er Israel. Palæstinenserne anerkendes ikke som selvstændige aktører  og eksisterer kun som passive ofre. Korruption er altid interessant, men kun israelsk. Friedman fortæller at han ikke kunne komme igennem med en artikel om palæstinensisk korruption fordi “that was not the story”. Således angribes enhver skævhed i det israelske samfund nidkært; Israelsks lovforslag til pressefrihed, antallet af ortodokse jøder, bosættelser, kønssegregering osv, mens der er meget få artikler om lignende palæstinensiske forhold.

Hamas formålserklæring, som handler om et udslette Israel og alle jøderne og deres graven terrortunneller ind under Israel er ikke vigtigt for medier og nyhedsbureauer, men det er derimod Israels angreb på Hamas. De fleste rapportere, siger Friedman, opfatter essensen af deres arbejde at rapportere om israelske overgreb: “That’s the essens of the Israel story”!

Og denne fortælling sættes ind i den ramme der hedder Israel-Palæstina konflikten eller variationer heraf. Her er det Israel, der er den store og dermed aggressoren hvor sandheden er at jøderne kun optager 0,2% af Mellemøsten og der er 5 millioner jøder overfor 300 mio. arabere. Det var den samlede arabiske verden, der ville udslette Israel fra begyndelsen og den palæstinensiske sag blev først interessant efter 1967 krigen, hvor Israel indtog de resterende områder fra delingsplanen fra Ægypten og Jordan, der ellers havde annekteret dem uden protester fra den arabiske verden.

For centuries, stateless Jews played the role of a lightning rod for ill will among the majority population. They were a symbol of things that were wrong. Did you want to make the point that greed was bad? Jews were greedy. Cowardice? Jews were cowardly. Were you a Communist? Jews were capitalists. Were you a capitalist? In that case, Jews were Communists. Moral failure was the essential trait of the Jew. It was their role in Christian tradition—the only reason European society knew or cared about them in the first place.

(…)

When the people responsible for explaining the world to the world, journalists, cover the Jews’ war as more worthy of attention than any other, when they portray the Jews of Israel as the party obviously in the wrong, when they omit all possible justifications for the Jews’ actions and obscure the true face of their enemies, what they are saying to their readers—whether they intend to or not—is that Jews are the worst people on earth. The Jews are a symbol of the evils that civilized people are taught from an early age to abhor. International press coverage has become a morality play starring a familiar villain.

(…)

You don’t need to be a history professor, or a psychiatrist, to understand what’s going on. Having rehabilitated themselves against considerable odds in a minute corner of the earth, the descendants of powerless people who were pushed out of Europe and the Islamic Middle East have become what their grandparents were—the pool into which the world spits. The Jews of Israel are the screen onto which it has become socially acceptable to project the things you hate about yourself and your own country. The tool through which this psychological projection is executed is the international press.

Men det er på alle måder den forkerte historie der fortælles, skriver Friedman. Reportere ser alt gennem en israelsk optik og ser derfor ikke islams undertrykkelse og forfølgelse af minoriteter, hvor der med ISIS nu er tale om folkemord

A knowledgeable observer of the Middle East cannot avoid the impression that the region is a volcano and that the lava is radical Islam, an ideology whose various incarnations are now shaping this part of the world. Israel is a tiny village on the slopes of the volcano. Hamas is the local representative of radical Islam and is openly dedicated to the eradication of the Jewish minority enclave in Israel, just as Hezbollah is the dominant representative of radical Islam in Lebanon, the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and so forth.

Hamas is not, as it freely admits, party to the effort to create a Palestinian state alongside Israel. It has different goals about which it is quite open and that are similar to those of the groups listed above. Since the mid 1990s, more than any other player, Hamas has destroyed the Israeli left, swayed moderate Israelis against territorial withdrawals, and buried the chances of a two-state compromise. That’s one accurate way to frame the story.

Men i mediernes og nyhedsbureauernes fortælling er Israel vulkanen, en vulkan der ikke eksisterer i den sammen geopolitiske virkelighed som resten af Melleøsten. Historen om Israel er ikke om nyheder men om “something else”.

Victor Davies Hanson om Obamaæraen, der rinder ud

Hanson skrev forleden i National Review at den amerikanske vensfløj (liberalism) lå i ideologiske ruiner. “Barack Obama has accomplished, in the fashion of British prime minister Stanley Baldwin in the Twenties and Thirties, will be to avoid minor confrontations on his watch — if he is lucky — while ensuring catastrophic ones for his successors.” konkluderede han og pegede på de 11 mio. illegale indvandrere, som, hvis det står til Obama, skal have amerikansk pas. Hanson minder ikke blot om at prisen først og fremmest betales af den amerikanske middelklasse og de nye jobsøgende, men at de iblandt de illegale, hvis tilstedeværelse i USA i første omgang er gjort mulig at de har brudt amerikansk lov findes en stor minoritet, der ikke deltager aktivt eller lovlydigt i det amerikanske samfund.

Henover den sekulære dyrkelse af klimaet “that filled a deep psychological longing for some sort of transcendent meaning” til Obamas opdyrkelse af racestridigheder fra Trayvon Martin til Michael Brown, godt assisteret af mediernes memer

After the disastrous Obama tenure, the U.S. will either return to the melting pot and the idea that race and tribe are incidental, not essential, to our characters, or it will eventually go the way of all dysfunctional societies for which that was not true — Austria-Hungary, Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Iraq.

Og Hanson ender med følgende skudsmål

Obama will go down in history as presiding over the most corrupt administration of the last half-century, when historians finally collate the IRS, VA, GSA, and Secret Service scandals; the erosion of constitutional jurisprudence; the serial untruths about Benghazi, amnesty, and Obamacare; the harassment of journalists; the record shakedown of Wall Street lucre in 2008 and 2012; and the flood of lobbyists into and out of the Obama administration. Eric Holder – with his jet-setting to sporting events on the public dime, spouting inflammatory racialist rhetoric, politicizing the Justice Department, selectively enforcing settled law, and being held in contempt of Congress for withholding subpoenaed documents — managed what one might have thought impossible: He has made Nixon’s attorney general John Mitchell seem a minor rogue in comparison.

Men det er udenrigspolitikken der har lidt værst, midt i en periode med stigende udfordringer. Hanson skriv i går ligeledes i National Review at der er paralleller

We are entering a similarly dangerous interlude. Collapsing oil prices — a good thing for most of the world — will make troublemakers like oil-exporting Iran and Russia take even more risks.

Terrorist groups such as the Islamic State feel that conventional military power has no effect on their agendas. The West is seen as a tired culture of Black Friday shoppers and maxed-out credit-card holders.

NATO is underfunded and without strong American leadership. It can only hope that Vladimir Putin does not invade a NATO country such as Estonia, rather than prepare for the likelihood that he will, and soon.

The United States has slashed its defense budget to historic lows. It sends the message abroad that friendship with America brings few rewards while hostility toward the U.S. has even fewer consequences.

The bedrock American relationships with staunch allies such as Australia, Britain, Canada, Japan, and Israel are fading. Instead, we court new belligerents that don’t like the United States, such as Turkey and Iran.

Og

Under such conditions, history’s wars usually start when some opportunistic — but often relatively weaker — power does something unwise on the gamble that the perceived benefits outweigh the risks. That belligerence is only prevented when more powerful countries collectively make it clear to the aggressor that it would be suicidal to start a war that would end in the aggressor’s sure defeat.

What is scary in these unstable times is that a powerful United States either thinks that it is weak or believes that its past oversight of the postwar order was either wrong or too costly — or that after Afghanistan, Iraq, and Libya, America is no longer a force for positive change.

A large war is looming, one that will be far more costly than the preventive vigilance that might have stopped it.

“Vi vælger at rejse til Månen” proklamerede Kennedy på Rice University i 1962, “Ikke fordi det er let, men fordi det er svært!”.

[B]ecause that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win

For Kennedy æraen handlede det om at presse sig selv mod nye mål. “Yes we can” derimod sigter til det vi allerede kan. Det fornægter på sin vis ‘american exeptionalism’ i stedet for den teoretiske akademikers drøm om at kunne omdefinere verden væk fra dens iboende problemer. “Yes we can” siger ikke meget andet end at man vil gøre, hvad der er let, frem for, hvad der er rigtigt.

Martin Lidegaard beskyldes for uvidenhed

Bent Jensen har i Jyllands-Posten ikke tiltro til Martin Lidegaards basale viden om Mellemøsten og vil gerne vide, hvad Lidegaard egentlig mener Israel skal gøre

Hver gang jeg ser og hører ham tale så tilsyneladende forstandigt og overbevisende, spørger jeg mig selv: Ved manden i virkeligheden, hvad han taler om? Er han ordentligt inde i sagerne? Har han læst på lektien, og har hans embedsmænd forsynet ham med alle de nødvendige oplysninger om konfliktens rødder – og jeg understreger alle? Eller lader han blot munden løbe?

Det meste af Mellemøsten befinder sig i et omfattende kaos. Israels nabostat Syrien er hærget af en blodig borgerkrig, der foreløbig har kostet 200.000 mennesker livet og drevet millioner på flugt. Oprørsstyrkerne i Syrien har svoret at ville udslette Israel. Det samme har Assad-regimet i Damaskus. For nylig flygtede de udstationerede FN-styrker fra syrisk territorium. Hvorhen? Til Israel, hvor de fandt sikkerhed.

(…)

Jeg synes i fuld alvor, at Lidegaard skulle forholde sig seriøst til de reelle problemer, der her er omtalt. Og der er flere endnu. Hvorfor behandler han palæstinenserne som uansvarlige børn? Hvorfor stiller han ikke krav til dem, hvis de vil have egen stat? Hvorfor siger Lidegaard & Co ikke til både Hamas-lederne og til Abbas og hans mafia i Ramallah, at de skal standse myrderierne på jøder og indstille deres anti-jødiske hadkampagner i skolebøger og i palæstinensiske medier – inklusive de officielle trykte og elektroniske Hamas- og PS-medier.

Som ansvarlig minister ved Lidegaard naturligvis, at disse afskyelige hadkampagner kører hele tiden. Men hvordan forestiller han sig så, at der skal kunne blive fred og fordragelighed mellem jøder og arabere på det diminutive område, som Israel og selvstyreområdet udgør, når den ene part hele tiden dyrker hadet til den anden part, nægter dens ret til eksistens og vil have en jødefri zone?

Samtidig skrev en foruroliget Flemming Rose ligeledes i Jyllands-Posten om Lidegaards manglende viden om Rusland

I weekenden bragte Berlingske et interview med udenrigsminister Martin Lidegaard. Ministeren afslørede her en sjælden uvidenhed om russisk økonomis tilstand, effekten af sanktioner, og hvad der venter i den nærmeste fremtid. Interviewet var aftalt på forhånd, så der er ikke tale om, at Lidegaard uden varsel fik stukket en mikrofon i hovedet.

Det gør hans udtalelser foruroligende, for hvis kendskabet til Rusland, Danmarks største sikkerhedspolitiske udfordring, ikke er større, så er risikoen stor for at begå fatale fejl. En anden mulighed er selvfølgelig, at Lidegaard bevidst misinformerer, men det gør det ikke bedre. Om russisk økonomi siger han:

»Noget af det mest bekymrende er, at den russiske økonomi er i frit fald. Vi står over for en reel risiko for russisk økonomisk kollaps. Det skyldes vores sanktioner kombineret med en stærkt faldende oliepris. Underskuddet i staten stiger, inflationen stiger voldsomt. Den almindelige russers købekraft bliver udhulet dag for dag.«

I fredags, altså nogenlunde samtidig med at Lidegaard fremsatte sin dystre vurdering, noterede The Wall Street Journal, at Rusland med en vækst på 0,8 pct. i årets første ti måneder har klaret sig bedre end ventet, på niveau med eurozonen. Det får ikke én til at tænke på en økonomi i frit fald.

I virkeligheden passer Lidegaards udtalelser på et andet land i regionen, nemlig Ukraine, der befinder sig på randen af en finansiel nedsmeltning.

Lidegaard må lægge sig lidt mere i selen, hvis virkeligheden skal moraliseres væk. Begge indlæg bør læses i deres helhed, hvis man vil vide mere end Lidegaard.

Insisterende benægtelse hos de liberale

Lørdag skrev jeg optimistisk at der var små sprækker af erkendelse hos venstrefløjen. Selvfølgelig er der ikke det, der er kun positionering. Men den positionering afslører, hvilke flanker man vil dække af overfor vælgerne. Så på en måde kan man godt glæde sig over at den muligvis kommende socialdemokratiske leder Mette Frederiksen ikke kan lide burkaer, som hun omtaler som et fængsel. Feministen Karen West opdagede at man ikke kan kritisere islam på nogen som helst måde uanset tonen. Özlem Cecik fra Socialistisk Folkeparti slog til lyd for at det bedre kan betale sig at lytte til politiske modstandere, frem for at udskamme dem (nu Dansk Folkeparti står til at få hver femte stemme, som erfaringerne) og på Modkraft støvede man sin gamle Marx af og ærgrede sig over at det altid var så akavet for venstrefløjen at kritisere islam. Og så har regeringen med Mette Frederiksen i spidsen og i modstrid med Radikale Venstre ønsker besluttet at Danmark ikke skal gøre FNs menneskerettigheder til dansk lov, da “inkorporering indebære en risiko for en forskydning af kompetence fra Folketinget og regeringen til domstolene”.

Men der er snart valg og politikere siger så meget. Det gør de liberale også og de vil i deres moderne internationale udsyns ånd gerne distancere fra Danmark, måske ved at samle desillusionerede vælgere op fra netop venstrefløjen? Rune Kristensen glæder sig i hvert fald over at hans parti med det vildledende navn Konservative vil lægge “en klar distance til V og O” i deres nye udlændingeudspil, hvor grænserne skal åbnes for kvalificeret arbejdskraft. Og han…

…finder det fantastisk, at 24-års reglen skal lempes, da den ikke virker og i øvrigt rammer de forkerte mennesker. Hertil er jeg også særligt glad for, at beløbsgrænsen for personer uden for EU sænkes fra 375.000 til 315.000 kr. – dette her jeg tidligere skrevet om her på bloggen.

Uagtet fokus på de åbne grænser, så savner jeg en strategi for integration via arbejdsmarkedet i mit partis udspil. Det er her integrationen virker. Derfor er starthjælpen også helt tosset at genindføre. Hvis ikke folk kan forsørge sig selv, hvorfor så komme hertil?

Rune Kristensen er en kapacitet der har skrevet “bachelorprojekt om politisk islam versus det liberale demokrati” og derfor kan han ydermere konkludere

“Om man spiser flæskesteg eller halalkød er ikke det afgørende. Man kan godt blive dansk statsborger og holde ramadan. Det handler om at overholde loven og om at bidrage til samfundet. Så skal vi ikke være så nervøse for en kulturel mangfoldighed, som er helt naturlig i et moderne globalt orienteret samfund. Andre kulturer har alle dage påvirket Danmark”.

Men nok om den slags intetsigenheder for Rasmus Brygger har i Politiken skrevet 10 principper for en udlændingepolitik, som alle burde efterleve. Og det er selvfølgelig opløsningen af Danmark som suveræn nation til fordel for en åben jurisdiktion. “Forskelle mellem os mennesker skal hyldes” for det er “hamrende udansk at kræve, at vi alle skal ligne hinanden”. Statsborgerskab skal ikke kunne fratages, hvis man vælger halshugning med ISIS, 24 årsreglen skal væk og mennesker skal dømmes på deres handlinger. Her hedder det som det første meget sigende “Muslimer er ikke per definition ansvarlige eller medskyldige i andre muslimers gerninger”. Nej, men tanken ligger lige for, også når man hedder Rasmus Brygger.

Meninger kan ikke brydes når de ophøjes til indlysende og objektive sandheder, hvorfor Brygger og hans sort betragter dissens som moralsk forkasteligt. Især punkt 4 udtrykte dette, da det ikke var et princip, men en besværgelse

4. Indvandrere, der kommer til Danmark, er et plus for landet uanset, hvor de kommer fra

Danmark har kun godt af, at der kommer flere til landet. Fokuseres der alene på de arbejdende nydanskere, bidrager de stort til den danske økonomi. Men indvandring er ikke kun et spørgsmål om økonomi, men også kultur. Det liberale perspektiv er, at det er sundt for et samfund, når forskellige livsopfattelser og kulturer mødes. Det er gennem kulturkonkurrence og –udveksling af kultur, at det danske samfund har udviklet sig, ikke gennem isolation og nationalisme.

Kun i selvretfærdighedens univers, hvor enhver fremmed er en ven der endnu ikke har stukket en kniv i maven på dig giver udsagnet mening. Men det gør det ikke hos Brygger, der allerede i punkt 2 slår fast at “Alle, der kommer til Danmark, er velkomne, så længe de er selvforsørgende“. Ikke nok med det, så “Nydanskerne fortjener respekt og tolerance, så længe det er gensidigt“, hvilket vil sige at vi må møde dem med en vis skepsis, indtil de har gjort sig fortjent. I samme ånd skal kriminelle udlændinge udvises ifølge punkt 9. Hummus og spraglet burka kan altså alligevel ikke redde en langfingret dovenlars. Så meget for Bryggers kulturelle værdier.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Monokultur kører på WordPress