Den svenske venstrefløj reagerer på den eneste måde, den svenske venstrefløj kan reagere på, efter terrorangrebet i Stockholm skriver Avpixlat

Under lördagskvällen arrangerar Röda korset och “Refugees welcome” en ljusmanifestation i Umeå med anledning av terrordådet i Stockholm. Demonstrationen är en protest mot rasism, säger arrangören.

På Facebook har evenemanget över 150 deltagare men initiativtagaren Hanna Jerndal hoppas att fler ska komma, säger hon till SVT Nyheter.

Ljusmanifestationen tar avstånd från terror men Hanna Jerndal understryker att det också är en “aktion mot hat och rasism”, skriver SVT.

Detta eftersom terrordåd som det i Stockholm på fredagen, som en utländsk muslimsk man sitter anhållen misstänkt för, kan framkalla “rasism” hos svenskarna, menar arrangörerna.

Et velkendt psykologisk syndrom, som Doktor David Wood er manden for at kurere - hvis man tør tage hans medicin

Alle politikere er rystede over endnu et møde med gentagelsen, dekade efter dekade - intet ændrer sig andet en frekvensen stiger støt og intensiteten følger snart efter. Ingen kan stoppe en gal mand, siger vores politi, livet går videre, siger vores Statsminister. På hvilke betingelser er underordnet blot vores tilgang er zen. Det er livet i en storby, siger Londons muslimske borgmester, det må man vænne sig til. Men sandheden er at det er livet med en stor muslimsk befolkning og det vil man ikke vænne sig til. Man vil smide dem ud eller lade sig trampe ned, men vænne sig til det vil man ikke. Den luksus har kun politikerne, der håber det ikke ramler, mens deres karriere er på spil. Et demografisk pyramide spil er der sikkert nogen der har kaldt det.

Andre lader sig ikke ryste så let

Forargelsen er stor over at billedet er gået viralt, et snapshot er ude af kontekst og ingen ved, hvad der foregår under et muslimsk tørklæde. Sådan var det ikke med den døde dreng i vandkanten, der blev selve symbolet på de lukkede europæiske grænsers grusomme konsekvenser. Men drengens familie var ikke flygtninge, de boede trygt og tyrkisk og ville til Canada selv om de havde fået afslag. Medierne labbede også den muslimske brud, der lagde blomster efter terrorangrebet i Australien til sig - et så flot billede at man næsten skulle tro, det var til ære for fotograferne, hvis ikke ens menneskesyn var bedrevidende. Og medierne faldt også på halen da den ensomme muslimske kvinde i ikke kunne finde en plads blandt de afvisende danskere, selvom historien var den modsatte.

Men billedet af den tilsyneladende indifferente muslimske kvinde der krydser ummeans spor fortæller den grundlæggende sandhed, som den europæiske islamofobirapport anno 2016 forsøger at benægte på imponerende 612 sider. Det samme gør Theresa islam-er-fjong May der ved at en historie skal frames hurtigt, hvis den skal overleve mands minde i nyhedsstrømmen.

Taking on the role of a theologian, Theresa May insisted: “It is wrong to describe this as Islamic terrorism. It is Islamist terrorism. It is a perversion of a great faith.”

Speaking in Parliament, she also said the attack showed “the importance of all of our faiths working together, and recognising the values that we share”.

Adding: “This act of terror was not an act of faith. It was a perversion; a warped ideology, which leads to an act of terrorism like that and it will not prevail.”

Men ak, nyhedsstrømmen udtrykker også den bedrøvelige sandhed, her fanget ved tilfældige screenshots fra Al Jazeera

I vores broderland, der importerer så meget fætterkultur, er politikerne rystede over at våben strømmer ind over landets grænser og det sker via Danmark. Politichefen i Malmø siger at det er mest til kriminelle, men “De er ikke spesielt organiserte, mer kamerater som kjenner hverandre og bygger ulike nettverk” og det lyder jo langt mere hyggeligt og tilforladeligt. Og ikke et ord om islam.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Venstrefløjens medier har siddet så længe på den offentlige mening at de ikke længere kan acceptere debat og ser dissens som kontroversielt og det kontroversielle er altid et skridt fra racisme, nazisme eller en eller anden metastaserende fobi. Som de presses af faldende tillid og spirende alternativer, gør de hvad de gør om ikke bedst så hvad de magter, og skruer op for defameringen af, ja alle efterhånden. Frank Gaffney skriver i Breitbart

In 2011, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promised the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to use “some old fashioned techniques of peer pressure and shaming” against those whose exercise of free speech “we abhor.”

(…)

Three good men Donald Trump has selected for key strategic and national security positions are currently getting the Big Lie treatment: his White House Counsel Steve Bannon, Attorney General-designate Senator Jeff Sessions, and incoming National Security Advisor Lieutenant General Michael Flynn. They are being relentlessly vilified as “racists,” “bigots” and “haters.”

I feel these able public servants’ pain. Indeed, I know what it’s like to be subjected to the Big Lie. For years, the Islamists and their allies on the hard Left – notably, the discredited (for example, here and here) Southern Poverty Law Center – have used character assassination and vitriol against me (for example, here, here and here) to protect what they otherwise cannot defend: the totalitarian program its adherents call Sharia. The false assertion last week that I had been asked to serve on the Trump transition team sent these rogues into fresh paroxysms of hateful denunciation, repeated like a mantra by their media echo chamber (for example, here, here, here and here).

Af en eller anden grund, skal disse udskammelser af meninger ‘vi foragter’ gentages i danske medier. Danmarks Radio spørger i en “slår Trump stadig konen” overskrift “Trump afviser at omstridt rådgiver er racist” og beretter

Demokrater, borgerrettighedsorganisationer som Rådet for Amerikansk-Islamiske Relationer og selv en række republikanere kritiserer Trump for at have valgt den stærkt højreorienterede Stephen Bannon som sin chefstrateg.

Kritikerne siger, at Trump dermed lukker en racist, antisemit og fortaler for hvidt overherredømme ind i Det Hvide Hus.

Bannon blev hentet ind i Trump-valgkampen sidst på sommeren fra det højreradikale Breitbart News. Det er et medie, der har fremmet alt-right-bevægelsen.

Breitbart News beskrives af amerikanske medier som eksempelvis radiostationen NPR for at være en løs gruppering af racister, nynazister, antisemitter og folk, der arbejder for hvidt overherredømme i USA.

Det er altså den yderste venstrefløj, der i sin nederlagsforbitrelse fremturer med beskyldningerne. Så lad os lige kontekstualisere lidt - det bliver vigtigt længere nede. Middle East Forum sammensatte en top 10 over “campaign contributions from individuals who subscribe to the same Islamic supremacism as Khomeini, Bin Laden, and ISIS” for 1015-16 sæsonen. Og ikke overraskende var der “nine Democrats, one independent (Sen. Bernie Sanders accepted $9,285), and no Republicans”

Hillary Clinton tops the list, raking in $41,165 from prominent Islamists. This includes $19,249 from senior officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirateson November 15, 2014.

For example, Mrs. Clinton has accepted $3,900 from former CAIR vice-chairman Ahmad Al-Akhras, who has defended numerous Islamists in Ohio indicted – and later convicted – on terrorism charges.

Among other current presidential candidates, Jill Stein has accepted $250. Donald Trump and Gary Johnson have not received any Islamist money.

Og Rådet for Amerikansk-Islamiske Relationer (CAIR) er selvfølgelig ikke en borgeretsorganisation, men en islamisk pressionsgruppe med bånd til HAMAS, der, som alle muslimske organisationer, kun har til formål at drage omsorg for islamiske interesser, omsorg som at sikre at ordet ‘jihad’ ikke indgår i en negativ sammenhæng. Grundlæggeren af CAIR, Omar Ahmad, har sagt følgende om de amerikansk-muslimske relationer

“Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.“

Derfor var det også naturligt at CAIR drog omsorg for San Bernadino terroristens familie PLO-style, som det er naturligt for deres formand at ville styrte den amerikanske regering, som det var naturligt at de propaganderede for Ahmed the Clock Boy, som man betvivlede faldne amerikanske soldater deres ære…

Hvad angår radiostationen NPR, så skylder Danmarks Radio måske at fortælle at det er en offentligt finansieret radiokanal, blot så man ved, hvor man har den i det politiske landskab. Og fordi offentligt finansierede medier ikke behøver at repræsentere andre interesser end de politikere, der skaffer finansieringen, så bliver det nødvendigt med en Ombudsmand der officielt skal sikre institutionen mod at blive overrendt af lange marcher, men som i realiteten selv er marcheret ind i institutionens hjerte til sikring af den officielle fortælling. Og denne ombudsmand Elizabeth Jensen, var så bestyrtet over at Breitbarts Joel B Pollack i et live interview fik chancen for at forsvare Trump og Bannon fermt mod nazi-, og sårn’ beskyldninger, at hun foreslog aldrig at lave live interviews med folk med kontroversielle holdninger. Og hvad der er kontroversielt ved vi fra Danmarks Radios liste af anklagere mod Bannon/Trump er dissens fra venstrefløjens fortælling. Breitbart skriver

Pollak, who serves as Breitbart’s Senior Editor-at-Large and In-house Counsel, defended its Executive Chairman Stephen K. Bannon from false and defamatory claims of antisemitism and “white nationalism.” He also turned the tables, pointing out that NPR has “racist programming,” including a story that called the 2016 election results “nostalgia for a whiter America.”

NPR listeners were apparently outraged that anyone from Breitbart News had been given an opportunity to defend the website and its chairman.

In her response, “Listeners: Two Recent Interviews Are ‘Normalizing Hate Speech’,” Jensen concluded that the live format had allowed Pollak to get the better of host Steve Inskeep.

She suggested that future interviews be taped: “In addition, in my opinion, these interviews should not be done live. Inskeep is an excellent live interviewer, but live interviews are difficult, especially when there is limited time. A little contextualizing never hurts.”

Jensen went on to argue that “contextualizing” had worked for a similar interview with former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, as well as for an interview Nov. 17 with white nationalist Richard Spencer. (Pollak responded to the latter interview in an article Nov. 18 rejecting NPR’s attempt to link Bannon and Breitbart with white nationalism.)

(som en sidebemærkning så havde BBC, endnu et offentligt finansieret medie en overskrift der lød “The Trump resistance movement builds” og indholdet skuffede ikke overskriften) Venstrefløjen og dens medier er en selvforsynende fødekæde af defameringsmaskiner.

“Democrat Hillary Clinton has a 9-point lead over Republican Donald Trump in Ohio following the news of Trump’s vulgar talk about women and after the second debate between the candidates, according to a statewide poll released today by Baldwin Wallace University in Berea.” kunne man læse for to uger siden på Cleveland.com. Gode nyheder for Hillary Clintons kampagne da Ohio er en vigtig sving-stat.

Mange meningsmålinger, der giver Hillary Clinton et stort forspring er blevet masseret og medierne kolporterer dem ukritisk, men de forvrænger billedet af, hvad der er betydningsfuldt og hvad der er ligegyldigt. En mere en 10 år gammel optagelse af en lummer Donald Trump fra dengang han optrådte i radioprogrammer med sin lummerhed, blæses op til en skandale, mens Hillarys skrantende helbred, kriminelt lemfældige omgang med fortrolige oplysninger og hendes udsalg af amerikansk udenrigs- og sikkerhedspolitik til fremmede og fjendtlige magter. Imens tæskes Trumps tilhængere til vælgermøder. Det er ikke gratis at afsløre sine sympatier, hvis ikke  de harmonerer med det venstreorienterede mediekonsensus.

Et konsensus er stærkt fordi det demoraliserer modet til at sige sin mening og endda tale sandhed. Fortællingen om et konsensus kan fortrænge kritik og hvis det er vedholdende længe nok ændre mentaliteten hos en befolkning. Men et konsesus fortrænger også evnen til selvkritik og tiltrækker eftersnakker, hysterikere og ja-mænd og begynder hurtigt at udhule sin egen troværdighed. Diskrepansen mellem en stadigt grummere virkelighed overfor en stadigt mere virkelighedsfjern ekspertise får autoriteterne til at tage sig stadigt mere fjollede ud. Det ender i Komiske Ali, men vejen går over talkshows

Being President is a tough job. It’s one of the only jobs where you get a new approval rating every day. Now that we have this thing called social media, the President gets hundreds of judgments every hour of every day, many of them unpleasant. For the second time, President Obama has agreed to read them for our second-ever Presidential Edition of #MeanTweets.

Det kan være at Obama er ganske charmerende og demonstrerer en bedre komisk timing end hans pap-lignende tv-vært. Indrømmet, Obama som stand-up komiker er mere overbebevisende end Hiullary Clinton, som muskelbundt. Men er det virkeligt overbevisende at den amerikanske præsident og en fri tv-station i et stykke velforberedt politisk propaganda? Får den tavse vælger en fornemmelse af at Obama og Hillary kampagne står med de gode kort på hånden? Tænker den tavse vælger ikke at medierne virkeligt er i lommen på Hillary Clintons kampagne?

Donald Trumps slogan hedder “Make America Great Again!”. Modsat Trumps højenergiske selvcentrerede retorik, som “I’m gonna build a big beautiful wall”, “And I’m rich, I mean, I’m really, really rich!” og “I’ll grab ‘em by the pussy!”, så er hans slogan helt uden afsender. Det er en appel eller et bud og det er op til at alle, politikere, vælgere, medier, at gøre USA fantastisk igen. Trump sælger, under alt sit vulgære bravado, et budskab om fællesskab og ydmyghed og storhed.

Og, hvad handler det så om for den sjove, cool præsident Obama, der giver honnør med caffe latte, hvis budskab til iværksættere er “You did’nt build that!”, mens det var ham selv der fik ram på Osama bin Laden? “Well, @realDonaldTrump, at least I will go down as a president”. Så det kan godt være at han er den værste præsident i amerikansk historie, men ingen ulykker han kan lavet, er så slemme, at hans personlige ambition ikke er bedre.

Så er tvivlen begyndt at nage? Er der begyndt at være sprækker i den fortælling centrum venstre konsensus selv har konstrueret? For et par dage siden skrev det meget, meget venstredrejede Think Progress, at “?Ohio might turn out to be “Trump country” after all” fordi “Hillary Clinton are in a dead heat in Ohio, while Republican Sen. Rob Portman is trouncing former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland by more than 15 polling points“.

But before the president took the stage, Ohio Democratic Party chair David Pepper strode to the podium and, citing polls showing Donald Trump with a slight lead in the crucial swing state, launched into what he called a “pep talk.”

“Do you think we’re a Trump state, Ohio?”

“No,” the crowd roared.

“I don’t think so,” he called back to them. “We’re the state that elected President Obama in 2008 and 2012. We are the state that elects [Senator] Sherrod Brown, the progressive lion, again and again.”

“One more reminder,” he shouted as the crowd cheered. “Donald Trump couldn’t even win the primary here. This isn’t Trump country.”

Ked af det, men The Trump Train er på vej!

“og hvor kort der er mellem moske og gerningssted” skrev en god ven til mig og fortalte

D. 7. januar i år gik Edward Archer hen til en politibil i Philadelphia og åbnede ild mod betjenten i bilen. Han affyrede 13 skud, men betjenten blev kun ramt af de 3, der alle traf venstre arm. Betjenten kom ikke desto mindre ud af bilen, optog forfølgelsen og skød og sårede Archer med et enkelt skud i bagdelen. Andre betjente anholdt ham derefter.

Abdul Shaheed angav godt nok, at han fulgte Allah, og sværgede troskab til Den Islamiske Stat, og han angav godt nok at han valgte en betjent fordi politiet håndhæver love der er imod Sharia, men det imponerede ikke myndighederne. Philadelphias borgmester Jim Kenney kunne hurtigt slå fast, selv efter at have set overvågningsvideo med Archer iført islamiske gevandter mens han åbnede ild mod politibilen, at

In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on the screen….It is abhorrent. It is terrible and it does not represent the religion or any of its teachings

Politiet var lidt mere tilbageholdende, men var også mystificerede over hvad Archer dog mente med det han sagde:

“It wasn’t like laying it out completely, chapter and verse for us,” Ross told reporters at the department’s headquarters as Archer was being questioned upstairs. “We’re left to say, ‘OK, he’s leaving a trail for us. Where’s it going to lead us, if anywhere?‘”

Imamen i has lokale moské kendte ham ikke engang. Eller, det gjorde han ikke indtil en anonym kvinde tippede politiet om, at Archer var del af en gruppe på fire, og at han ikke var den mest radikale af dem. Så kom imamen i tanke om at, jo, han kendte ham måske nok, for han kom gerne til mindst tre daglige bønner, og arrangerede vistnok også sportskampe for moskeen som frivillig.  De kendte ham bare under hans muslimske navn, Abdul Shaheed (”Martyrernes slave”). Moskeen hedder for øvrigt Masjid Mujahedeen (”Moskeen for de der begår jihad”), og den ligger under 200 meter fra gerningsstedet. Archer selv bor næsten 4 kilometer væk.

Detaljen om nærheden mellem moske og gerningssted var jeg nødt til selv at finde ud af. Lidt gravning gav mig adressen på gerningsstedet, og moskeen har sin egen hjemmeside. Der er åbenbart ikke andre end mig der har lagt to og to sammen der….eller også har ingen lyst til at nævne det.

Man behøver ikke at være et geni for at tænke at de mange angreb fra ‘ensomme ulve’ er inspireret af den seneste palæstinensiske terrorbølge mod Israel. Men det er ikke, hvad man ser i medierne, der er kriminelt forsigtige med at præsentere udviklingen som den tager sig ud. Paul Joseph Watson giver en glimrende gennemgang

Barak Hussein Obama repræsenterer en ide om at man ikke blot kan påvirke virkeligheden, men ændre den til sit eget billede, ved at italesætte den anderledes. På Breitbart kan man se ‘White House press secretary’ Josh Earnest forsvare ideen om at forfølge en politik ud fra en forvrænget virkelighed overfor Fox News Martha MacCallum

MACCALLUM: You mentioned earlier today you believe it’s a narrative battle we’re fighting. I think that for people who have shrapnel in their shoulders this morning—they might have a hard time accepting that—that it is a narrative battle we’re fighting against ISIS. Explain what you meant by that?

EARNEST:  I meant very specifically, Martha, we’re taking fight to them on the ground in Iraq and Syria. The president has organized an international coalition—5,000 airstrikes in Iraq and Syria last couple years. What is important in the context of political debate is to remember ISIL is trying to assert a narrative, that they represent the religion of Islam in a war against the west and in a war against the United States. That is mythology. That is falsehood. That is not true. That is bankrupt ideology they are trying to wrap in the cloak of Islam. And to suggest that somehow we should treat Muslims differently or suspect them as terrorists just because of their religion…

MACCALLUM: Nobody is talking about that.

EARNEST: We certainly have heard that inflammatory rhetoric from Republicans.

MACCALLUM: We’re not talking about that here.

EARNEST: This is the context that I was asked the question about the ISIL narrative earlier today. it is important we don’t play into the narrative. Too many Republicans are willing to do…

MACCALLUM: This is the ISIS narrative. This is what they said in their recent publication. ISIS states that disbelievers should be slain wherever they may be. This includes the businessman riding to work in the taxi cab, young adults in engaged in sports activities in park, the old men waiting in line and buying a sandwich, striking terror into the hearts of all non-believers, Muslims and non-Muslims is the Muslim duty. So what people have a hard time with you know—you have to take them at their word they mean to do what they say because we see it happening here in the United States. So, it feels sometimes like the White House doesn’t like to make the connection between those two things. Is that wrong?

EARNEST:  Well I think we’ve been quite clear. The president has demonstrated, you don’t have to take my word for it. The president demonstrated seriousness, which he has taken this fight to ISIL.

Den forestilling har forplantet sig i efterretningstjenesterne. FBI havde en mistanke om at muslimen Omar Mateen skulle realisere sin muslimske tro, men stoppede efterforskningen efter 10 måneder fordi hans radikalisering så ud til at være et resultat af “being marginalized because of his Muslim faith”. Omar Mateen gik senere ind på en bøssebar i Orlando og myrdede 49 mennesker.

Den mistænkte for bomberne i New York og Jersey, Ahmad Rahami, har tidligere sagsøgt det lokale politi, som han hævdede diskriminerede og forfulgte ham ifølge Daily Mail.

Professor ved Institut for Engelsk, Germansk og Romansk ved Københavns Universitet Peter Harder mener  at “Information fortjener ros for at gøre diskussionen om det postfaktuelle samfund til genstand for en hel serie“. Jeg gruer for at læse den serie, men ifølge Harder er åbningsartiklen “en god begyndelse” fordi den slår fast at “faktualiteten aldrig har hersket i politik, og at elitens hegemoni i meningsdannelsen er svække“. Men, alt er ikke ved det gamle, mener Harder

Der er en dæmon, som skal proppes tilbage i flasken igen. Det drejer sig ikke om, at mængden af vrøvl er øget – men om de normer, som styrer den politiske kultur. Det farlige og nye er, at en del af offentligheden – herunder indflydelsesrige offentlige personer – synes, det er o.k. at argumentere på en måde, som blæser på spørgsmålet om faktualitet.

(…)

Det er underordningen af faktualitetsnormen under det politisk ønskværdige, der er farlig for demokratiet. Og her er der faktisk urovækkende tendenser.

Og når en ængstelig humanist i Information, der taler postfaktualitet, også nævner “Durkheim, sociologiens fader” kan der ikke herske tvivl om hvad der kommer

Trenden viste sig først på dramatisk vis i USA under George W. Bushs regering. Det første sted det blev offentligt udtalt, at normerne var ændret, var i et interview med Karl Rove (oprindelig anonymt) i New York Times.

Karl Rove fortalte intervieweren, at han som politisk journalist repræsenterede ’the reality-based community’, der tog udgangspunkt i den foreliggende virkelighed. Men sådan fungerede verden ikke mere, sagde Karl Rove. Nu skabte regeringen sin egen virkelighed.

Tendensen optræder i forstærket form hos Donald Trump. Bl.a. har han flere gange påstået, at amerikanske muslimer jublede offentligt i Jersey City i New Jersey, da tårnene faldt den 11. september.

Da en journalist konfronterede ham med, at det lokale politi benægtede, at det var sket, holdt Trump bare fast ved, at sådan var det, uden forsøg på dokumentation.

Dette er – i modsætning til vrøvl og løgnagtighed i al almindelighed – noget nyt. En kommentator på Washington Post formulerede dette ved at formulere næste sætning: »I mean.What.The.Actual.Hell«. Kommentatoren understregede, at han ellers ikke plejer at blive chokeret over noget i politik.

Dæmonen ligger i detaljen. Harders artikel er fra 14/9 2016. Hvis han havde været vågen 2/12 2016 kunne han på Breitbart læse at hans påstand om Trumps postfaktualitet i forbindelse med jublende muslimer er “Outright lies,” som medierne gentager

Not only have eyewitnesses and contemporaneous reports proven Donald Trump 100% correct about Muslims celebrating 9/11,  a just-uncovered  local CBS News (WCBS-TV in New York) report completely vindicates Trump’s claim of “thousands and thousands” of Muslims celebrating the fall of the World Trade Center.

Just a couple of blocks away from that Jersey City apartment the F.B.I. raided yesterday and had evidence removed, there is another apartment building, one that investigators told me, quote, was swarming with suspects — suspects who I’m told were cheering on the roof when they saw the planes slam into the Trade Center. Police were called to the building by neighbors and found eight men celebrating, six of them tenants in the building.

The F.B.I. and other terrorist task force agencies arrived, and the older investigators on the task force recalled that they had been to this building before, eight years ago, when the first World Trade Center attack led them to Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, whose Jersey City mosque lies between the two buildings getting attention today. And the older investigators remember that the suspects that eventually got convicted for the first Trade Center case … lived in the building where these same eight men were celebrating the destruction that they saw from the roof. Calling this a hot address, the task force investigators ordered everyone detained.

(…)

Just two days earlier you have read this in the New York Post:

Here in New York, it was easy to get angry listening to Egyptians, Palestinians and the Arabs of nearby Paterson, N.J., celebrate as they received word of the murderous attack in New York and Washington. But Mayor Giuliani (who has been tireless and magnificent in this crisis) rightly warned New Yorker-ers that is would be wrong to take their anger our on the city’s Arab and Muslim residents. Attacks on Arab-Americans in Paterson or elsewhere are utterly indefensible.

You hear radio news reports about Muslims celebrations.

MTV runs a news report about Muslim celebrations.

En ængstelig Durkhein-nævnende humanist der taler om postfaktualitet i Information. Jeg mener. Hvad.Kronkret.I.Helvede.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(noget om den ikke vestlige verdens primitivitet)

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

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

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

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

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

Det palæstinensiske selvstyre vil sagsøge briterne for alle de ulykker, palaraberne har bragt over sig selv. Det er Balfourerklæringen udstedt i 1917, som er de skyldiges forbrydelse, der ved at love jøderne et hjemland i jødernes eget land har gjort det helt umuligt for arabere i den ganske region at tage sig noget som helst fornuftigt til lige siden. En god ven ønskede dem held og lykke og mindede om at oprettelsen af Israel var unilateral og ikke noget Storbritannien stod bag

Om noget bør de sagsøge Nationernes Forbund og efterfølger-organisationen de Forenede Nationer - det er under dets charter, at jødernes ret til at vende hjem til deres hjemland er fastlagt. Så løber de bare ind i det problem, at det er FN der er deres stærkeste støtte…..og at at det er gennem FN-organisationen UNRWA, at de fleste palarabere lever på permanent bistand.

United With Israel havde spurgt en lokal ekspertise

Director of Israel’s Foreign Ministry Dr. Dore Gold derided the Palestinians announcement that they intend to sue the United Kingdom for the Balfour Declaration, a document written almost 100 years ago by then UK Foreign Secretary Lord Arthur James Balfour which expressed support for the establishment of a Jewish national homeland in the land of Israel.

Saying the move is “revealing,” Gold stated that “apart from the obvious lack of any legal basis” for the Palestinian lawsuit, the “initiative itself demonstrates yet again the continuing refusal of the Palestinian side to recognize the legitimate and indigenous connection of the Jewish people to their ancient homeland.”

He pointed out the legal significance of the Balfour Declaration emanated from the fact that it was incorporated by the League of Nations into the 1922 Mandate for Palestine. “That mandate recognized the historical connection of the Jewish people to that area and that it provided the grounds for them to reconstitute their national home there.

The League of Nations’ mandate transformed Balfour’s stated policy into an internationally recognized legal obligation to “give effect to the inherent right of the Jewish people to self-determination in their ancient homeland,” Gold added.

Rights that were recognized by the League of Nations in that period were preserved by its successor organization, the United Nations, through Article 80 of the UN Charter.

Den venstreorienterede engelske avis Guardian anser da også søgsmålet for “a symptom of desperation about the Palestinian cause” og “a cry of anger and despair” ifølge Elder og Ziyon, fordi fredsforhandlingerne går trægt. Måske er det desperat, men næppe på grund af de fredsforhandlinger som palaraberne aldrig har været interesseret i. Langt mere er det nok et symptom på dels det umulige i at skade Israel med våbenmagt og dels den manglende succes med at fravriste Israel sin legitimitet, så massivt muslimer fra hele verden godt assisteret af vestens venstreorientede forsøger.

En af metoderne man har haft store forhåbninger til var at isolere Israels økonomi og gøre landet til en international paria igennem BDS (Boykot, Divest, Sanction). Og det er seriøse metoder nede på mikroniveau der helt ublut viser sit antisemitiske ansigt. Israel Hayom beskriver en del af virkeligheden, som den ser ud på de notorisk hysteriske amerikanske campus

On a recent campus tour, members of the Reservists on Duty Israel advocacy organization discovered the extent of anti-Semitism displayed by BDS activists, who posted “eviction notices” on the dormitory doors of Jewish students, demanding that they evacuate in three days or have their property thrown out.

Students for Justice in Palestine, one of the better known campus BDS groups, is responsible for this type of anti-Semitic prosecution. The notices they posted went on to state that the Israeli military does the same thing to Palestinians.

SJP typically undertakes these types of activities during “Israeli Apartheid Week,” an annual event during which activists screen films and organize protests, lectures and exhibitions that accuse Israel of apartheid, ethnic cleansing and war crimes.

(…)

These anti-Semitic tactics are common at a range of well-known American universities, particularly on the east coast. Jewish students have reported to Reservists on Duty about similar incidents at universities including New York University, the University of Pennsylvania, Connecticut College, Harvard University, the University of California, the University of Oklahoma, the Claremont Colleges, Vassar College and other schools.

In some cases, students approached the campus administration for help in dealing with the situation, but for the most part, the colleges avoided taking action to stop the phenomenon.

Men ak, ud over at være en gene for andre mennesker, som venstrefløjen mest er, så har de ikke formået at gøre en forskel for Israel. “Foreign investments in Israeli assets hit a record high last year of $285.12 billion, a near-tripling from 2005 when the so-called Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement was started by a group of Palestinians, skrev Bloomberg og i New York går det endda modsat, hvor guvenør “Andrew Cuomo issued an executive order on Sunday, commanding government agencies to divest funds from, and refuse to do business with, companies and groups participating in the Palestinian-backed boycott of Israel.” En BDS-BDS med andre ord. Så palaraberne er efterladt med det eneste talent de har, at udnytte at alle andre, selv deres fjender, kerer sig mere for palarabernes børn, end de selv gør

Men måske palaraberne kunne sagsøge Kuwait for den etniske udrensning af pal-arabere i kølvandet på den Anden Golfkrig?

During the first hours of the Iraqi invasion, the Kuwaiti government left to Saudi Arabia. This encouraged Kuwaitis to leave the country, as well. They received financial aid from their government (in-exile) and other Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states. No government offered Palestinians any help; therefore, they had no other alternative but to stay in Kuwait throughout the crisis, the war, and the stage of persecution that followed.

A terror campaign against Palestinians in Kuwait started during the Iraqi rule. They were the target of several explosions that also killed Iraqis and workers from other countries. In particular, the Kuwaiti resistance was responsible for four major explosions and several small explosions before the war. The explosions occurred in the predominantly-Palestinian neighborhoods of Al-Adasani, Al-Hassawi, Khitan, and Amman Street. They resulted in Killing 46 and injuring 99 people most of whom were Palestinians.

The first explosion was in October 1990 in Al-Hassawi neighborhood, which was inhabited by Palestinians and workers from India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and the Sudan. The explosion resulted in killing twenty-two and wounding thirty-five people. There were five Palestinians and four Iraqis among the dead. The rest were from different nationalities. The Second explosion was also in October and occurred in Al-Adasani neighborhood, which was inhabited mainly by Palestinians. It resulted in killing three and wounding twenty-three Palestinians and one Indian. The third explosion was in November 1990, in Al-Hassawi neighborhood, killing seven and wounding thirty-seven people. While majority of the injured were Palestinians, the dead were four Iraqis, two Palestinians, and one Kuwaiti. The fourth explosion occurred in Khitan neighborhood, in December 1990. It resulted in killing eleven and wounding eighteen people. Among the dead were six Iraqis, three Palestinians, a Syrian, and an Asian worker. The wounded were eight Palestinians, three Bidoons (without citizenship), two Iraqis, and the rest were Asians. Finally, in January 1991, several small explosions targeted Palestinians in a commercial area known as Amman Street. Six people were killed and twenty were injured the vast majority of whom were Palestinians.

After the war

The terror campaign against Palestinians intensified after the war reaching a persecution stage. The Emir, the Crown Prince, and other senior members of Al-Sabah family led the campaign from the beginning. The Crown Prince reiterated his threats of vengeance against Palestinians of Kuwait in an interview with Robert Fisk of the London newspaper, The Independent, on February 21, 1991. He called for “cleansing” Kuwait of “fifth columnists.” On March 13, the Guardian cited government officials expressing the need to “clean out” the Palestinian neighborhoods. On April 3, a Kuwaiti army officer boasted to the American newspaper “USA Today” that the country was being “cleansed” of Palestinians. In his speech of April 8, 1991, the Emir also urged Kuwaitis to continue the campaign of “cleansing” Kuwait of the alleged “fifth columnists.” On May 8, 1991, the government newspaper, Sawt Al-Kuwait, claimed that Palestinians committed a collective crime during the crisis when they engaged in a “concerted attempt to cripple Kuwaiti civil disobedience against the Iraqis.” In the August 6, 1991 issue, the newspaper stated that Kuwait could not be secure as long as the fifth columnists are still inside the country. Apparently, the “fifth columnists” is a reference to Palestinians, Iraqis, Sudanese, Yemenis, and other Arabs whose countries supported the Iraqi position.

The terror campaign after the war started as early as the arrival of the Kuwaiti forces on February 26, 1991. Kuwaiti militants were quoted saying that they would shoot suspected Palestinians when they found them in their apartments. Four main militia groups and two state institutions participated in a concerted effort to terrorize and persecute Palestinians in Kuwait. Two of the militias were headed by the state security officers Adel Al-Gallaf and Hussain Al-Dishti. The third was headed by Amin Al-Hindi, a gangster who specialized in rape, torture, stealing, and killing. The fourth was the group known as August 2^nd, which specialized in psychological warfare against Palestinians. The army and the police forces represented the two state institutions that were involved in this terror campaign.

Two Palestinians were shot dead near a traffic circle, on February 27. On March 2, Kuwaiti tanks and soldiers rolled into Palestinian communities, mainly Hawalli. House-to-house searches for weapons and alleged collaborators resulted in the arrest of hundreds of Palestinians. People were also arrested at checkpoints for no reason other than being Palestinians. Typically, they were beaten instantly then taken to police and detention centers where they were tortured for confessions.

Despite the military censorship, newspapers began to report a dramatic rise in the number of injured Palestinians in Mubarak Hospital. Scores of people were treated from severe beating and torture. Six Palestinians were brought to the Hospital shot dead in the head, execution style. By the third week of March, hundreds of people were treated from torture injuries and thousands stayed in detention centers for interrogation. Amnesty International reported that the torture of Palestinians was continuing in Kuwait by the third week of April. A 24-year-old Palestinian had been beaten for hours, had acid thrown over him, and had been subjected to electric shock torture.

The terror campaign continued throughout 1991 achieving its main objective: terrorizing Palestinians enough so that they would leave the country. To expedite the process, the government took several other measures to evict those who did not leave. First, Palestinians working for the government were fired or not rehired. Second, Palestinian children were kicked out of public schools and subsidies for their education in private schools were stopped. Third, new fees became required for health services. Fourth, housing rents increased and people were asked by Kuwaiti landlords to pay rent for the entire crisis-period.

More important were the feelings of injustice and insecurity Palestinians began to experience as a result of the terror campaign. It became unsafe to walk in streets or to stay at home. Rape stories functioned as a decisive pushing factor for the remaining Palestinian families. The “censored” Western media rarely reported on this part of the campaign. The CNN TV network covered one of these rape stories. Lubbadah told the same story together with many others. The Middle East Watch group also told several stories of rape.

On May 27, 1991, several members of a Kuwaiti militia group entered the apartment of a newly married Palestinian couple. They divided themselves into two groups. One group took the twenty-six year old bride, Najah Yusuf As’ad, to one room where they raped her one after the other then they shot her with nine bullets in the head. The other group took the thirty-year old groom, Muhammed Musa Mahmood Mustafa, to another room where they also raped him one after the other then they shot him with four bullets in his spine. When they finished committing their crimes, they sat in the apartment, drank tea, then called the bride’s family several times telling them what happened to their daughter. Another story was about A.M.M., an eighteen-year old Palestinian girl. She was kidnapped and gang-raped for two days then was brought to Mubarak Hospital on May 25, 1991. Her family said that she was kidnapped in front of her house by Kuwaiti young men. A third story was about S.M.A.D., a twelve-year old Palestinian girl, who was also kidnapped in front of her house in Al-Rumaithiyah, on June 6, 1991. She was also gang-raped for two days by a group of Kuwaitis. A fourth story was about F.M.A.F, a fifteen-years old Palestinian girl, who was kidnapped in front of her house in Al-Farwaniyah, on June 4, 1991. She was raped for two days then was brought to Al-Adan Hospital. Finally, a Palestinian woman in her fifties was kidnapped and raped by a group of Kuwaiti men about the same age. A Kuwaiti man approached her offering help. He gave her an address where she can receive social assistance. When she went to the address, she was kidnapped and raped for a week by several Kuwaiti men who then left her in a deserted area.

The government also intensified its efforts to evict the remaining Palestinians directly through deportation. Between the middle of June and the first week of July 1991, about 10,000 Palestinians were deported to the Iraqi border. On July 8, the Minister of Interior Affairs, Ahmed Hamoud Al-Jaber Al-Sabah, announced that there were about 1,000 more Palestinians in detention camps waiting for deportation. Actually, these deportations forced tens of thousands of other Palestinians to leave, mainly family members, because they could not practically stay when the head of the household or the main bread winner was deported.

The deportees were dumped at the Iraqi border near Safwan. Gradually, it became known as the Safwan Refugee Camp. Many of the deportees to this camp were tortured and brutally beaten by Kuwaiti troops. In most cases people were simply “dumped” there without any legal deportation procedures. Typically, people were arrested at checkpoints, then beaten and tortured to admit that they were collaborators. If they did not admit, they would be deported to Safwan Camp. One of the Camp deportees was Fayiz Nadir, a 23-year-old Palestinian. He was burned 10 times with an iron on his arms, feet, and head. Another one was Abdul Qadir, a 30-year-old Algerian. He was arrested together with Fayiz Nadir for two weeks. He saw 109 men in the detention center with their hands tied behind their backs, often blindfolded. When the men were brought to the interrogation, they were kicked and jabbed with gun butts. Electrical wires were put on their fingers and temples. They were given water twice a day and food once every four days. A Sudanese truck driver, Mustafa Hamzah, was arrested and blindfolded for two weeks in the Salmiya Girls’ Secondary School. He named the Kuwaiti 1st Lt. Abdul Latif Al-Anzi as the person who was in charge of that detention center. A Palestinian deportee told the New York Human Rights Group that he was tortured in that school. They burned him with a cattle brand, beat him, then dumped him by a roadside.

Se, det lugter lidt mere af Haag.

Man kunne tro at Donald Trump var arketypen, eller en lidt vulgær variant, af den amerikanske drøm, men i New Yorker kunne jeg læse at Obama mente at Trump er uamerikansk. Kristeligt Dagblad assisterede min bedagede forståelse det amerikanske og præsenterede “det nye USA der hepper på Hillary Clinton”

Demokraternes præsidentkandidat skal samle et kludetæppe af mindretal for at vinde over Donald Trumps hvide vælgere ved USA’s valg i november

Det Demokratiske Partis nye ansigt er folk som Zak Davidson fra Columbia, Ohio. En hvid, veluddannet ateist på bare 22 år.

Det er 64-årige Norma Davenport, der har levet hele sit liv i et traditionelt afroamerikansk arbejderkvarter i Philadelphia.

Det er den homoseksuelle flådeveteran Ron Helms og hans jødiske veninde Joanne Goodwin fra Florida.

Og det er Sue Langley fra Virginia, der for 34 år siden immigrerede fra Thailand til USA med sine forældre.

Og det nye USA ser sådan her ud

At råbe “Intifada! Intifada!” og “Death to the USA!” mens man brænder israelske flag er i sandhed langt fra, hvad den negerlignende Steven W Trasher kalder “a rabid, dwindling and angry white electorate” af Trump støtter. Trasher er bange for at de rabiate, svindende, vrede hvide vælgere er nok til at bringe Trump til Det Hvide Hus til november fordi Hillary ikke kan begejstre, “just watch Hillary Clinton being booed at her own party convention”. Den slags intern dissens får man ikke indtrykket af i medierne, især ikke de danske, men Townhall forsøgte at opgøre omfanget af udvandringen fra konventet, da Hillary blev nomineret

The level of media bias in reporting the Democratic National Convention is as high as I have ever seen outside of North Korea and the old Soviet bloc. The GOP convention was declared a disaster many times during its four-day run, but the DNC, reeling from revelations of the rigging of the primary contests, is getting far more benign descriptors, as the media avert their eyes from unpleasant realities.

Among the most unpleasant realities for Democrats and the media is the anger of Bernie supporters now that it is clear the campaign into which they threw their hearts and souls was fixed all along. Somehow, that anger must be minimized, trivialized, and eventually extinguished if Donald Trump is to be stopped. And in the eyes of the media, that threat is so overwhelming that no restraints whatsoever are justified in making the case against him as propagandists rather than honest observers and reporters.

So the focus last night at the DNC was “history being made,” (no Y chromosomes at the top of the ticket) and a soft focus look at Hillary’s record as a left wing activist using children as a front for demanding leftist policies and selected aspects of her personal relationship with Bill Clinton, the most popular living Democrat (if you ask Democrats).

As propaganda, it was skillful.

Godt dog at ISIS overhovedet blev nævnt for ifølge Breitbart blev det eller jihad eller terror slet ikke nævnt på konventets første dag. Til gengæld blev andendagen åbnet med af islamisten Sherman Jackson, der mener, om ikke sit, så hvad islam lærer ham om del af det nye USA der er homosexuelle, jøder etc. Man skal helst ikke nævne islam, ifølge Obama, ikke blot fordi det er “offensive to Muslims”, men “the kinds of rhetoric that we’ve heard too often, from Mr. Trump and others, is ultimately helping do ISIL’s work for us”. Omvendt med Hillary “She will stand up to ISIS”, som Martin O’Malley (ham er der spræl i) uambitiøst erklærede. Men at stå op imod ISIS er alt man tør på et demokratisk konvent, hvor al tale om faktisk at bekæmpe kalifatet fører til protester fra salen.

Jeg er ikke helt klar over hvorfor befollkningsudskiftning er blevet så salonfähig i medierne. Men det nye USA kommer måske til at vente four more years, da Trump fører i meningsmålingerne og Assange truer med at der er mere slim i røret.

Frederik Stjernfelt skriver fjernt fra positionalisterne om troendes diversificerede tilknytning til deres tro og religion

Der er tale om en art arbejdsdeling: Man har hellige mænd til at drive institutionen og udvikle teologien, man har almindelige troende til at udgøre dens skattegrundlag, og man har aggressive unge mænd til at tage sig af sammenstødene med de vantro og de konkurrerende konfessioner.

Og så er der dem, der luller os i søvn, ved at foregive at terroransatster er dagligdag. Som sagen med Alisiv Ceran, den unge studerende, der blev forvekslet med en terrorist fordi han opførte sig besynderligt. Eller hr. Tara, med det uskyldige fornavn Jihad, der pludselig ville overvære et Trykkefrihedsarrangement i skyggen mordforsøget på Trykkefrihedsselskabets daværende formand Lars Hedegaard. Eller tag dette eksempel fra Daily Mail

A Muslim teacher called Islam was told to remove a hoodie with his name on it because a barman said it was upsetting customers.

Humiliated Nurul Islam, 32, had arrived to meet fellow teachers at a local pub when the man told him his top was ‘offending people’ after last week’s Nice atrocity.

84 people killed were in a terror attack in the French city, with a further 303 injured.

Nurul, a father-of-three who is not practising, refused and has now reported the incident to police who are investigating it as a possible hate crime.

Ja, ikke? Det var bare hans navn og hans navn må han da vel bære på sin hættetrøje når han skulle have sig en muslimsk kæp i øret. Det ville jo være lige så normalt som hvis man hed, åh skal vi sige Adolf Hitler og besøgte synagogen. Så næste gang de ser noget uhyrligt, så antag venligst at det er helt naturligt eller risiker et sagsanlæg og udskamning som racist. David Wood forklarer her, hvorfor man ikke skal dølle sig i søvn ved ideen om de mange fordrukne muslimer, som ellers foregiver at være sækulariserede og integrerede (og det er en dyster advarsel om hvor umuligt det er at integrere muslimer ind i liberale samfund)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(…)

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

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

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

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

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

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

Obama-administrationen vil ikke associere islam med terrorangrebet på bøsse-baren i Orlando, der kostede 49 mennesker deres liv. Det vil efter Obamas opfattelse dæmonisere for mange muslimer og overlade definitionsretten til islam til de forkerte mennesker. Derfor var det meningen at transkribtionen af Orlando-morderens opkald til alarmcentralen ikke skulle indeholde det egentlige motiv, nemlig islam. Hårdt presset må den fulde tekst dog offentliggøres, skønt man stadig havde oversat Allah til Gud. Obama vil dog gerne gøre alle legale våbenejere, samt republikanerne til hovedproblemet. Venstrefløjen hader højrefløjen for at have ret.

I England vil Juliet Samuel gerne definere den yderste højre, når hun i Telegraph slår fast at mordet på den engelske labor politiker Jo Cox var højreorienteret terror. Jeg er ikke kommet langt nok i denne kedelige sag til at kunne konkludere, hvad der drev Cox morder Thomas Mair. Selv talte han efterfølgende om hævn, så helt forkert virker Samuels påstand ikke. Men Samuel fortæller om Jo Cox “The killing of a serving MP who had so much to contribute to our democracy has triggered a national period of sorrow, sobriety and reflection.” At Cox havde masser at byde på på er grangiveligt rigtigt, men hvis man med “our democracy” mener England er det tvivlsomt. Annie Dieu-Le-Veut skriver i The Holistic Health Store at Jo Cox “was so busy paving the road with good intentions that she didn’t look up to see that they were leading to Hell.” og citerer Francis Carb Begbie i Occidental Observer

Jo Cox wanted to make the world a better place and it was a cause for which she was willing to travel halfway across the globe. Whether consoling rape victims in Darfur or bombed out villagers in Afghanistan, it seemed the jet-setting international aid worker was rarely far from the action.

Lately it had been the struggle of Syrian war refugees to get to the West that touched her heart, and their plight was a subject she returned to again andagain after becoming a Member of Parliament. It seemed there was no victims anywhere she could not empathise with.

Except, perhaps, with one striking omission.

And that would be the White child rape victims of Muslim grooming gangs in her own back yard. For her West Yorkshire constituency is near the epicentre of the Muslim child rape epidemic that has been sweeping the Labour heartlands of northern England, largely ignored or covered up by social services workers, police and politicians.

For it is a striking omission that of all the subjects she enjoyed sounding off on, this world-famous crisis affecting the poorest Whites on her doorstep was not one of them. One cannot help wonder if this shrewd silence was connected to the fact that her lavishly paid MPs job in the constituency of Batley and Spen largely depended on the support of the local Muslim community.

Co-incidentally, just as Jo Cox was shot and stabbed to death outside her constituency office in Birstall last Thursday,  sentencing was about to take place at Leeds Crown Court after a long trial involving a horrific case of Muslim child exploitation.

(…)

Tribute after tribute bore witness to Jo Cox’s uniqueness. But in reality, nothing could have been further from the truth.  In fact, women like Jo Cox are ten a penny across the West these days — bland, compliant functionaries who have been marinated in political correctness and are happy to regurgitate the platitudes and attitudes of their political masters. And are well-rewarded for doing so. Elizabeth Warren (AKA Pocahontas) in the US comes to mind.

She was that toxic combination of self-rightousness and entitlement which believed itself possessed of a special moral insight into the moral shortcomings of their own people. Never slow to parade her compassion, she was also calculating enough to help more dubious causes, as when she lent her name to a government minister who was lobbying for Britain to begin bombing in Syria. Bombing and babies; it was all business for Jo Cox.

Og Dieu-Le-Veut tilføjer

Today, with her body barely cold,  her husband Brendan Cox is tweeting out a Go Fund Me link to his wife’s ‘favourite causes’ and one of those is the White Helmets.

Manden, Brendan Cox har tidligere været inde i en af disse godhedens skandaler, kan man læse på Daily Mail.

Safe Spaces gælder selvfølgelig ikke jøder på de amerikanske campus. Forklædt som Israel-kritik, ender debat-arrangementer eller foredrag om Israel ofte i mod-demonstrationer, mødeterror og uroligheder. På Algemeiner kan man læse om hvorledes venstrefløjen retfærdiggør sin mentalitet

Members of two prominent student groups who took part in a violent protest against a pro-Israel event at the University of California, Irvine (UCI) are attempting to justify their actions, following intense backlash and calls for legal action against them.

UCI’s Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) each released separate statements defending their sponsorship of and participation in the demonstration against a Student’s Supporting Israel (SSI) event featuring Israel Defense Forces (IDF) veterans and the screening of a movie about the army.

As The Algemeiner reported, anti-Israel students at UCI blockaded attendees. One female student was harassed and chased, to the point that she was forced to flee and take refuge inside a nearby building. Police were eventually called in, but allowed the protest to continue. Protesters shouted ,“Long live the intifada,” “f*** the police,” “displacing people since ‘48/ there’s nothing here to celebrate” and “all white people need to die.”

SJP said they were “wholly justified” in protesting the SSI event, because “the presence of the IDF, better known as Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF), and police threatened our coalition of Arab, Jewish, Black, Latinx, API, undocumented, trans, and queer students and the greater activist community. Our demonstration was held to protest the presence of military and police forces on campus, which threaten the lives of Black and Brown people every day.”

Bombarderet med had til Israel fra pressionsgrupper, undervisere og medier, skrider morgendagens elites, de studerene, opfattelse af moral ad absurdum

“Vi kan overvinde had ved at imødegå negative stereotyper og fordomme gennem dialog og næstekærlighed” skriver Ayan Yasin, “studerende og veninde med de to voldsofre”, i Politiken. De to voldsofre er Nada Musse og Ayaan Ahmed, der blev “verbalt og fysisk overfaldet af tre etniske dansker – en mand og to kvinder – efter et cafébesøg i Odense” og det var “en forbrydelse motiveret af had til og fordomme mod muslimer og er en konsekvens af folkevalgte politikeres indvandrerfjendtlige polemik og propaganda mod den muslimske minoritet i Danmark.”

Hvad kan vi lære af denne hadforbrydelse? Hvordan får vi vendt skuden? Al had er tillært og kan derfor aflæres. Vi kan overvinde had ved at imødegå negative stereotyper og fordomme gennem dialog og næstekærlighed.

Hadforbrydelser er et åbent angreb på vores danske værdier og skal bekæmpes med handlinger af godhed. Vi, flertallet, kan ikke tie længere. I lyset af had er tavshed dødbringende. At tie er at samtykke, og apati kan tolkes som accept.

Godt de stakkels ‘Sharia-aktivister‘ ikke var fra Politiet. Men jeg modstår fristelser om at nævne moskeer, koraner, Muhammeds udsagn, kriminalstatistikker, Frankrig i undtagelsestilstand, terror mod jøder, Islamisk Stat…. Hmmm, Islamisk stat og tonen i debatten, det minder mig om noget jeg læste tidligere i debatten. Åh jo, “Socialdemokraten Jacob Lund, der sad i Folketinget for sit parti i et år frem til valget sidste sommer” og “ i dag er lokalformand for Socialdemokraternes partiforening på Nordbornholm” tweetede “IS er en muslimsk version af DF” fordi Dansk Folkeparti vil “tage opholdstilladelsen fra flygtninge og sende dem hjem.” skriver Berlingske Tidende

Overfor politiko.dk uddyber Jacob Lund sin holdning:

»De har begge to frygten for det fremmede. Begge parter vil jo gerne udrydde dem, der ikke hører hjemme hos dem selv. Det kan godt være den ene skyder på dem, og de andre bare fortæller dem, at de skal flygte, men målet er jo det samme,« siger Jacob Lund.

(…)

At man ønsker, at flygtninge og immigranter skal sendes retur, er vel ret forskelligt i forhold til IS, der slår folk ihjel?

»Nej, de skræmmer jo også.«

Men IS slår folk ihjel?

»Ja, på den måde er der forskel, men begge parter vil gerne have sit eget område for sig selv.«

Måske er det svært med dialog hvor muslimer og venstrefløjsere ikke kan tænke en ærlig tanke, men måske skulle man prøve med næstekærlighed - eller måske blot med noget juhu, mens det hele går ad helvede til, så luk øjnene og dans dialog ind i dit hjerte

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It is easy pickings.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[...]

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

Og der er også et par vers

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(…)

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

(…)

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

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