Langballe burde kunne sove roligt

Diverse — Drokles on June 12, 2010 at 5:00 pm

Jesper Langballe blev i ugen, der gik anklaget for at have fremsat racistiske ytringer. Og det må man nemlig ikke for det er synd for nogle. Selv hævder han blot at have sagt sandheden. Det store postyr er centreret om Langballes støtteerklæring til Trykkefrihedsselskabets formand Lars Hedegaards snaldrede genereliseringer, som optakt til en våd julefrokost. Langballe skrev i et læserbrev

“Selvfølgelig skulle Lars Hedegaard ikke have sagt, at der er muslimske fædre, der voldtager deres døtre, når sandheden i stedet synes at være, at de nøjes med at slå døtrene ihjel (de såkaldte æresdrab) - og i øvrigt vender det blinde øje til onklers voldtægt.”

Som jeg og mange andre har lagt vægt på tidligere er der i Langballes formulering på ingen måde tale om genereliseringer idet der ikke står “alle muslimske fædre” eller bare “de muslimske fædre”, men blot “der er muslimske fædre” fulgt op at forbeholdet “sandheden synes at være”. Ved almindelig læsning af dagspressen kan man vel vanskeligt heller komme til andre konklusioner end Langballes uanset, hvor store anstrengelser journaliststanden ellers gør for at omskrive eller sløre virkeligheden bag et arsenal af eufemismer og udeladelser.

Så Langballe har ikke sværtet alle muslimske fædre eller onkler i al almindelighed, men bramfrit talt om et tabuiseret privatlivsproblem i det muslimske samfund. Så hvis man skal forarges er det enten fordi man ikke vil høre sandheden, som derfor åbenbart skal forbydes eller fordi man bestrider sandheden ud fra en forestillign om at fænomenets størrelse ikke er signifikant forskelligt fra det omgivende og stigmatiserende danske samfund eller intet har med religionen islam at gøre. Forleden fremkom en videnskablig undersøgelse der ganske klart konkluderede at islamisk tanke førte til vold. Et udtryk for denne vold finder man i de af Langballe nævnte æresdrab og som Middle East Quarterly, der har studeret netop dette fænomen kan fortælle så er det en ganske muslimsk praksis

The study’s findings indicate that honor killings accelerated significantly in a 20-year period between 1989 and 2009. This may mean that honor killings are genuinely escalating, perhaps as a function of jihadist extremism and Islamic fundamentalism, or that honor killings are being more accurately reported and prosecuted, especially in the West, but also in the East. The expansion of the Internet may account for wider reporting of these incidents.

The worldwide average age of victims for the entire population is twenty-three (Table 1). This is true for all geographical regions. Thus, wherever an honor killing is committed, it is primarily a crime against young people. Just over half of these victims were daughters and sisters; about a quarter were wives and girlfriends of the perpetrators. The remainder included mothers, aunts, nieces, cousins, uncles, or non-relatives.

Honor killings are a family collaboration. Worldwide, two-thirds of the victims were killed by their families of origin. (See Table 1). Murder by the family of origin was at its highest (72 percent) in the Muslim world and at its lowest in North America (49 percent); European families of origin were involved almost as often as those in the Muslim world, possibly because so many are first- or second-generation immigrants and, therefore, still tightly bound to their native cultures. Alternatively, this might be due to the Islamist radicalization of third or even fourth generations. Internationally, fathers played an active role in over one-third of the honor murders. Fathers were most involved in North America (52 percent) and least involved in the Muslim world; in Europe, fathers were involved in more than one-third of the murders.

Worldwide, 42 percent of these murders were carried out by multiple perpetrators, a characteristic which distinguishes them considerably from Western domestic femicide. A small number of the murders worldwide involved more than one victim. Multiple murders were at their highest in North America and at their lowest in Europe. In the Muslim world, just under a quarter of the murders involved more than one victim. Additional victims included the dead woman’s children, boyfriend, fiancé, husband, sister, brother, or parents.

Worldwide, more than half the victims were tortured; i.e., they did not die instantly but in agony. In North America, over one-third of the victims were tortured; in Europe, two-thirds were tortured; in the Muslim world, half were tortured. Torturous deaths include: being raped or gang-raped before being killed; being strangled or bludgeoned to death; being stabbed many times (10 to 40 times); being stoned or burned to death; being beheaded, or having one’s throat slashed.

Finally, worldwide, 58 percent of the victims were murdered for being “too Western” and/or for resisting or disobeying cultural and religious expectations (see Table 1). The accusation of being “too Western” was the exact language used by the perpetrator or perpetrators. Being “too Western” meant being seen as too independent, not subservient enough, refusing to wear varieties of Islamic clothing (including forms of the veil), wanting an advanced education and a career, having non-Muslim (or non-Sikh or non-Hindu) friends or boyfriends, refusing to marry one’s first cousin, wanting to choose one’s own husband, choosing a socially “inferior” or non-Muslim (or non-Sikh or non-Hindu) husband; or leaving an abusive husband. There were statistically significant regional differences for this motive. For example, in North America, 91 percent of victims were murdered for being “too Western” as compared to a smaller but still substantial number (71 percent) in Europe. In comparison, only 43 percent of victims were killed for this reason in the Muslim world.

Less than half (42 percent) of the victims worldwide were murdered for committing an alleged “sexual impropriety”; this refers to victims who had been raped, were allegedly having extra-marital affairs, or who were viewed as “promiscuous” (even where this might not refer to actual sexual promiscuity or even sexual activity). However, in the Muslim world, 57 percent of victims were murdered for this motive as compared to 29 percent in Europe and a small number (9 percent) in North America.

Ved mordet på Ghazala Kahn var ikke blot det meste af familien indvolveret, men tillige en større styrke fra især pakistanske taxachauffører, der tjente, som gadeovervågning. Volden er altså udtryk for god moral i muslimsk forståelse. Og derved også xenofobisk og paranoid…

One might argue that the stated murder motive of being “too Westernized” may, in a sense, overlap substantively with the stated and unstated motives involved in Western domestic femicide. In both instances, the woman is expected to live with male violence and to remain silent about it. She is not supposed to leave—or to leave with the children or any other male “property.” However, the need to keep a woman isolated, subordinate, fearful, and dependent through the use of violence does not reflect a Western cultural or religious value; rather, it reflects the individual, psychological pathology of the Western batterer-murderer. On the other hand, an honor killing reflects the culture’s values aimed at regulating female behavior—values that the family, including the victim’s family, is expected to enforce and uphold.

Further, such cultural, ethnic, or tribal values are not often condemned by the major religious and political leaders in developing Muslim countries or in immigrant communities in the West. On the contrary, such communities maintain an enforced silence on all matters of religious, cultural, or communal “sensitivity.” Today, such leaders (and their many followers) often tempt, shame, or force Muslim girls and women into wearing a variety of body coverings including the hijab (head covering), burqa, or chadari (full-body covering) as an expression of religiosity and cultural pride or as an expression of symbolic resistance to the non-Muslim West. Muslim men are allowed to dress like Westerners, and no one challenges the ubiquitous use of Western technology, including airplanes, cell phones, the Internet, or satellite television as un-Islamic. But Muslim women are expected to bear the burden of upholding these ancient and allegedly religious customs of gender apartheid.

It is clear that Muslim girls and women are murdered for honor in both the West and the East when they refuse to wear the hijab or choose to wear it improperly. In addition, they are killed for behaving in accepted Western or modern ways when they express a desire to attend college, have careers, live independent lives, have non-Muslim friends (including boyfriends with whom they may or may not be sexually involved), choose their own husbands, refuse to marry their first cousins, or want to leave an abusive husband. This “Westernization” trend also exists in Muslim countries but to a lesser extent. Allegations of unacceptable “Westernization” accounted for 44 percent of honor murders in the Muslim world as compared to 71 percent in Europe and 91 percent in North America.

Så Langballe burde kunne sove roligt. Han har ikke talt om, hvad alle muslimer gør og dermed ikke genereliseret, hvilket vil sige at han ikke forhåner nogen uanset og han har tillige fremsat ytringer, der trods deres forbehold er ganske let underbyggelige og sande. Det er ikke bare nemt at slå fast at der er flere muslimer der myrder deres afkom end danskere, men også at deres religion, netop det der gør dem til muslimer er årsag til dette. Og islam har gennem sit forskruede moralkodeks og gudsfrygt ikke blot æresdrab, som et uheldigt sideprodukt, men som et ideal - hvilket gør æresdrab til muslimsk modus oprandi. Godnat Langballe, sov godt så du kan være frisk til i morgen.

3 Kommentarer »

  1. Denne må du huske at se, Drokles. Der kommer altid en embed-url få timer efter forelæsningen derinde. http://www.heritage.org/Events/2010/06/Climategate

    Comment by Universalgeni — June 12, 2010 @ 5:56 pm
  2. Tak jeg venter i spænding. Brian Sussman er iøvrigt gæst i radioprogrammet Coast To Coast, som tilfældigvis er lagt på Youtube i denne uge. Han insinuerer at Al og Tipper Gore er ved at blive separeret så Al kan overføre alle sine uhæderligt tjente penge til hende når og hvis klimasagen skulle ramle og Al anklaget for svindel. Det hedder Skyldnersvig på juridisk.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30vmIXaiMhU

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCogUeaqoig

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aw08NsWR33E

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq5-eBXM05s

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP6KIZ-G9Hg

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIcaEy1Z7kw

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNBpfXuXoeM

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yum9jxROkSg

    Comment by Drokles — June 13, 2010 @ 4:27 pm
  3. Det havde jeg ikke engang tænkt på, men det er vel en mulighed, at han vil redde sine penge på den måde…

    Comment by Universalgeni — June 13, 2010 @ 9:02 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Kommentér indlægget...

Monokultur kører på WordPress