30
mar
Seneste opdatering: 31/3-08 kl. 0715
11 kommentarer - Tryk for at kommentere!

nu de har tilkaldt hollands ambassadør i Teheran: Fitna tekstet på farsi (persisk). Den findes intil videre på tolv sprog  (Updated List of “Fitna” Download Sites)

 Ayaan Hirsi Ali on Fitna

 Ayaan Hirsi Ali is targeting the Dutch government for its incompetent handling of Geert Wilder’s documentary Fitna. In an interview with Jyllands-Posten she criticizes the government for having tried to stop a movie that it hadn’t seen, a movie that it denounced without knowing its content and a movie that had the government prepare evacuation plans for its citizens in the Muslim world.   […]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali thinks that a far more controversial cartoon animation is in the making in the Netherlands. The apostate and former member of the Social Democratic party Ehsan Jami is preparing an animation about the violent and oppressive character of the prophet Muhammed. According to reports from the Netherlands the movie will depict Muhammed with an erection in the company of a six year old girl.

”If the Dutch government wants to concern itself with movies, this should be it. It may cause a tsunami of reactions in Europe and the rest of the world.” Fl. Rose

Anerkendelse til Fitna fra højst forskellig side
De sidste par dage har vi kunnet se Wilders’ film angrebet dels for ikke at handle om alle muslimer på én gang, men om nogle påtrængende problemer, dels for det håndværksmæssige – en ny undvigemanøvre har vundet indpas, nemlig den hånlige affærdigelse af islamkritiks håndværksmæssige og kunstneriske niveau. Endelig ser man eksempler på de evindelige ‘eksperter’ der ser filmen i rette lys, omend fra så forskelligt udgangspunkt som tænkes kan:

Et øjenbryn hæves på den anerkendte israelske islam-forsker Moshe Sharon, da han på en hjemmeside læser om den hollandske regerings afstandtagen fra Geert Wilders’ film, ”Fitna”. Så popper nyheden om EU-formandens kritik af filmen frem på skærmen. Det får iransk-fødte Moshe Sharon, der under sine studier har tilbragt årevis i samliv med muslimske beduinstammer på Sinai-halvøen til at rømme sig. Han ønsker at kommentere sagen.

– Det er mærkeligt, at europæerne selv kritiserer Geert Wilders film så hårdt, siger Moshe Sharon. Hvorfor? – Fordi filmen rent faktuelt er 100 procent korrekt. Korancitaterne er præcise, og intet er taget ud af en sammenhæng. Men også fordi den blot er en gentagelse af, hvad muslimer selv offentliggør på deres egne hjemmesider. I øvrigt er debatten mellem muslimer langt hårdere end den debat, der finder sted mellem ikke-muslimer og muslimer.

Er filmen efter din mening som ekspert på området generaliserende over for islam? – Jeg forstår godt spørgsmålet og ved, at mange muslimer føler sig ydmyget af filmen, fordi de ikke tilslutter sig den militante islam. Men ikke desto mindre er det denne form for islam, der i dag anslår tonen. Det er wahhabisme, Osama bin Laden, salafi-islam og andre fundamentalister, der repræsenterer islam i dag. Ikke de moderate muslimer, der selvfølgelig også findes. Ekspert: Wilders-film er holdbar

Den indlysende pointe at Wilders dokumenterer jihadisters egen sammenkædning af Koranen og deres ugerninger, snarere end han postulerer en sådan sammenhæng, skulle logisk nok betyde at samme jihadister kunne acceptere filmen langt hen ad vejen, hvis instruktørens kritiske tilgang til emnet blev fjernet fra den. I flere af de viste sekvenser er det endog jihadister der har ført kameraet, som i klippet med en halshugning. Når de islamofile derfor kritiserer filmen, har det derfor udspring i deres manglende evne eller vilje til at se den korrekt, ikke i billederne eller Wilders’ montage af dem. En bekræftelse af dette kommer fra uventet side, men altså logisk nok set i dette lys (via Jihad Watch) (LFPC):

Omar Bakri, the Libyan-based radical Muslim cleric who is barred from Britain, did not think the film was very offensive. “On the contrary, if we leave out the first images and the sound of the page being torn, it could be a film by the [Islamist] Mujahideen,” he said. […] Muslim reaction to Dutch film is muted

»Islamiseringsbarometret«
(New English Review) As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:

United States — Muslim 1.0%
Australia — Muslim 1.5%
Canada — Muslim 1.9%
China — Muslim 1%-2%
Italy — Muslim 1.5%
Norway — Muslim 1.8%

At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:

Denmark — Muslim 2%
Germany — Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom — Muslim 2. 7%
Spain — Muslim 4%
Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.They will push for the introduction of halaal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. (United States).

France — Muslim 8%
Philippines — Muslim 5%
Sweden — Muslim 5%
Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris — car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam — Mohammed cartoons).

Guyana — Muslim 10%
India — Muslim 13.4%
Israel — Muslim 16%
Kenya — Muslim 10%
Russia — Muslim 10-15%

After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%
Chad — Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:

Albania — Muslim 70%
Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%
Qatar — Muslim 77.5%
Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%
Egypt — Muslim 90%
Gaza — Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%
Iran — Muslim 98%
Iraq — Muslim 97%
Jordan — Muslim 92%
Morocco — Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan — Muslim 97%
Palestine — Muslim 99%
Syria — Muslim 90%
Tajikistan — Muslim 90%
Turkey — Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

100% will usher in the peace of “Dar-es-Salaam” — the Islamic House of Peace — there’s supposed to be peace because everybody is a Muslim:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%
Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%
Somalia — Muslim 100%
Yemen — Muslim 99.9%

Of course, that’s not the case. To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

“Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; and the tribe against the world. And all of us against the infidel. — Leon Uris, “The Haj”…

Adapted from Dr. Peter Hammond’s book: Slavery, Terrorism and Islam: The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat NER

Ovenstående er en beskrivelse af hvordan det er gået. Ikke hvordan det nødvendigvis vil gå. Koorektioner modtages gerne, dog ikke på procenterne, der bygger på CIA Factbook, og derfor er omtrentlige. Hvis nogen vil påvise, at det hele kun er “fobi”, ville det skam kun være dejligt.

Det uendelige potentiale for krænkelser

Det er beklageligt at debatten om ting der opfattes som ‘krænkende’ for muslimer efterhånden er reduceret til spørgsmålet om hvad vi kan tillade os at gøre, som at tegne Muhammed eller lave film om hans bevægelse. Beklageligt, fordi der tilsyneladende herved er opstået en opfattelse af at muslimers vrede skyldes noget vi har gjort forkert. Glemt er tilsyneladende de mange bizarre historier om banale fænomener eller genstande fra den vestlige kulturkreds som har udløst vrede af mere eller mindre forståelige grunde. En følge har derfor været, at debat om og fokus på det forhold, at vi for at undgå disse krænkelser måtte lægge urimeligt bånd på os selv, glimrer ved sit fravær. Ærgerligt, fordi disse forhold taget under ét med de mere spektakulære sager om tegninger m.v. ville tydeliggøre, at vi står over for en alvorlig udfordring af vores frihed, ikke bare et spørgsmål om at vise respekt, hvorefter alt vil blive godt igen. Og selv om det var så enkelt, ville det stadig forudsætte en kollektiv besindelse fra onde islamofober som os, en besindelse som i virkelighedens verden aldrig kommer.

Alt dette er selvfølgelig velkendt stof for vores læsere, men det kan være interessant, synes jeg, at hive nogle af de groteske sager frem fra glemslen. Jeg har her (gen)fundet et lille udvalg fra The List of Things That Offend Muslims – hvis dette ikke var eksempler på en mere og mere påtrængende virkelighed ville det have en vis surreel underholdningsværdi (LFPC):

British prison officers who wore a St. George’s Cross tie-pin have been ticked off by the jails watchdog over concerns about the symbol’s racist connotations. Race fears spark St. George ban

icecream.jpeg

Cone-demned … ’spinning whirl’ ice creams look similar to the world Allah written in Arabic script The Sun

British banks are banning piggy banks because they may offend some Muslims. Piggy banks ‘offend UK Muslims’

A school in Amsterdam has halted lessons on rural life because the Islamic children refused to talk about pigs. School Scraps Nature Course As Pigs Enrage Muslim Pupils

Muslim medical students are refusing to obey hygiene rules brought in to stop the spread of deadly superbugs, because they say it is against their religion. Female Muslim medics ‘disobey hygiene rules’

Annoncer fra Danske Partner-Ads:


Donér engangsbeløb?Kan du forpligte dig til fast betaling?

  • This ‘breakdown’ completely ignores both reality, and the more important data of demographics, population spread and national policy on schools etc which might affect what Muslims want. The US, Australia, and Canada regularly feature on the news with demands and requirements, despite having less than 2% Muslims. Conversions and missionizing in jails happens anywhere there is a Muslim prisoner population. The countries which suffered terror attacks or terror attempts, are spread all over your chart. Same goes for female genital mutilation and honor murders (which are based more on ethnicity)

    Former British colonies such as India and Israel have different attitudes towards personal law (marriages, divorces). It’s impossible to look at percentages and jump to conclusions.

    The chart even ignores itself, talking about Paris and Amsterdam when speaking of countries with more than 10% Muslims.

  • You wrote in your own blog 2007 :Paris – 7.38% (155,000 of 2.1 million) (EUMAP)

    http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2007/11/muslim-population-in-europea n-cities.html

    Thats the number other sources sets for the whole of France, whereas it must be a great deal more in Paris. So I dont really get that particular part your point. Besides that, the whole thing is hardly meant to be taken too litterally, but more : does one recognize the larger picture?

  • But that’s exactly my point. You can’t look at France and say, there’s 8% Muslims there so Muslims must demand more than in the US, or that France and the Netherlands are even facing the same issues. You need to look at Paris and say, there’s 7.38% Muslims there, and France has a very strong separation of church and state. Then you look at Amsterdam and say that there’s 24% Muslims there, and a national policy of allowing private schools for different denominations.

    What I’m saying is, if you’re serious then you can’t generalize like that. The only generalization I’m willing on with this article is that there is no freedom of religion in a Muslim country. There’s no real freedom of religion in the Vatican either, and it’s quite new in countries like Spain, if you want to argue the point (I don’t 🙂

  • I agree that this breakdown in specific percentages probably obfuscates rather than clarifies. And “State run cleansing and genocide,” last I checked, had not been instituted in, say, Morocco or Jordan. Nor have they been even in Iraq, where I believe the ethnic cleansing is perpetrated by the militias, not by state authorities per se.

    Nevertheless, numbers do matter, although not in this simplistic way. What you could say about Jordan or Egypt, for example, is that even without the state actively participating in genocide, a high percentage at some point will render state power impotent, even assuming it wanted to protect its minorities.

    If anything, reality may be even more bleak; with LiveLeak having to cave in to threats, freedom of expression has effectively been curtailed in the US of less that 2% Muslims.

    The writing on the wall is clear: we are living at the tail end of a long period of freedom. In a few decades, open debate and criticism of Islam will probably be far too dangerous, and will be driven underground (and adding to that, draconian hate speech laws will probably aid and abet our enemy).

    These are the bleaks facts that we cannot communicate to the dhimmis and the apologists. They seem to assume that if only we would talk nicely, things would turn out fine. In my experience, the barriers against getting the obvious point across that this is not the case are insurmountable. For whatever reasons, suppression of unpleasant facts or whatever, most people do not want to face this fact, but will have to learn the truth the hard way.

  • Anders Wellebeeke

    I largely agree with Esther that we should not generalized too much. But I also agree with Steen that Islam is intrinsically intolerant of competing political-religious paradigms, and that the risk of trouble rises with the percentages. It seems to me that Muslims are not so much offended by Islamosceptic utterances, but simply by any situation in which Islam is not dominant. Throughout the history of Islam, respect has been enforced by domination. As the result of this cultural heritage, any lack of respect is perceived as a lack of dominance. This ‘unjust situation’ then legitimizes jihad against the ‘offenders’, which include both critics of Islam and unbelievers; orthodox Islam really does not distinguish between the two categories.

    As to Esthers argument: In addition to tradition (cf. laïcité), there is another important factor that hampers islamogenic violence: ethnic identity. In Albania, for example, there are no religious troubles, even though 70% of the population is Islamic. I am inclined to think that amongst the Albanians ethnic identity overrides religious identity. At times of jihad, however, Islamic identity always overides ethnic identity. In the case of Moroccans ethnic and religious identity coincide, which is especially unfortunate for those who whish to integrate them into the different West European populations.

  • What we lack is a counter example of a Western democracy that consistently and assertively has kept Islam within well defined limits, and rejected attempts to accommodate demands for concessions. For a variety of reasons, such as a perceived clash with our own ideals, international law, not to mention naivety about the nature of Islam, no such policy has ever been instated as far as I know. We simply lack empirical data on the viability of such an approach.

    And yet, perhaps Turkey or Israel do provide us with significant clues: Turkey, for decades quasi secularized under the banner of Kemalism which brutally has held Islam within certain bounds, is slipping back to its old ways; Israel, which is a Western country albeit with its own unique history and place in geography, is not exactly known for mollycoddling terrorists, and effectively a nation on a permanent high state of alert, was for a long time unable to prevent suicide bombers from carrying out their acts.

    All this is just my own very superficial reading of history, but I just cannot see any positive examples anywhere of democracies we would like to live in which have been able to coexist in a tolerable way with Islam. All evidence points to the contrary.

  • Janne

    LFPC skriver:

    “They seem to assume that if only we would talk nicely, things would turn out fine. In my experience, the barriers against getting the obvious point across that this is not the case are insurmountable. For whatever reasons, suppression of unpleasant facts or whatever, most people do not want to face this fact, but will have to learn the truth the hard way.”

    (Jeg skriver på dansk for det er jeg helt klart bedst til)

    Udover tone-tyranni og en udbredt respektfetichisme der stadigvæk får lov til at stå i vejen for at flere får øjnene op for det reelle problem med indvandring af den karakter som vi nu står med, så er der også det at vi har partier som f.eks. socialdemokratiet der efter at der har været antændt mere end 700 hærværksbrande i Danmark og efter de mange trusler op til og efter Fitnas frigivelse, så snakker socialdeemokraterne stadigvæk kun om pension og skattepolitik. Det er ufatteligt.

  • Janne

    Det jeg gerne vil sige, er, at nogen gange når politikere træder frem i medierne, så opfører de sig og taler de som var vi stadigvæk i 1960’erne. Det er lidt som at se en “Far til fire” film lavet om til politisk satire. Det er ret enfoldigt, synes jeg. Og fatalt.

  • Yngvar

    “What we lack is a counter example of a Western democracy that consistently and assertively has kept Islam within well defined limits, and rejected attempts to accommodate demands for concessions.”

    Bulgaria? 12,2% muslimer.

  • Fremragende. Det er alles frygt. Og fordi at man kan nævne et par eksempler, hvor det her og nu ikke ser så sort ud er odds’ene stadig utålelige. De gode eksempler er anomalierne.

  • Bulgaria, an interesting example. From what I have found doing a bit of searching is that Islam was quite brutally suppressed during Communism, with Muslims being ‘encouraged’ to assimilate with the ethnic Bulgarians. Hence relations with the non-Communist Muslim world largely do not predate 1989, when the Iron Curtain fell, and Bulgaria opened its borders to Europe. Until then, the Sunnis of Bulgaria appear to have developed their own peaceful identity, with no outside wahabist imams and jihadists being able to ‘radicalize’ them, i.e., turn them back to ‘pure’, doctrinal Islam.

    The crucial issue now, post-1989, is whether this traditional, peaceful identity can survive being exposed to influence from Arab jihadists. So holding up Bulgaria as a positive example should be seen in this light: only 18 years of religious freedom to judge from, and no dogmatic bulwark – no doctrinal, ‘Bulgarian’ version of Islam – to refute jihadists from the outside with.

    I don’t know the answer to this, but I see nothing that can shield Bulgaria from experiencing exactly the same growing influence of Islam in the coming years. This article hints at some emerging, and to us familiar, conflicts.