Webster said. “They can’t seem to get their heads round the fact that racism can come from the other side. I now know a lot more about the disciplinary problems with some of the Asian boys. If they had been white, I think they would have been kicked out.”

THE mother of a 15-year-old boy left with brain damage by an Asian gang is blaming multi-culturalism for the way ethnic minorities get away with violent bullying in schools.

Liz Webster, 43, from Swindon, whose son Henry nearly died in the attack, believes a “culture of timidity” among teachers is stopping them clamping down on ethnic minority bullies because they fear accusations of racism. She also accuses teachers of failing to recognise that ethnic minorities can exhibit racism against whites. Her son, who was a pupil at Ridgeway comprehensive, near Swindon, was set upon by a 16-strong Asian gang, smashed on the skull by repeated blows from a claw hammer and left for dead. Last week 13 of the gang were convicted of charges relating to the attack.

Times Online : Mother slams multiculturalism as cause of Asian bullying of her son causing brain damage , se videre Foreigners carry out one in every five killings in Britain. In one area of London, the figure is one in three. og Elever slår og sparker lærere

Så tror fan´de elsker døden

When they [the virgins]  get hold of you, they will push you onto your back, on the musk cushions. Theywill push you onto your back, Jamal! Allah Akbar!

Video: Breathing heavily, Islamic cleric imagines the virgins of Paradise

Svensk politi – ak, ak und kein Ende……………………..

Underdimensioneret og overbebyrdet.  Morderen fik sin første seksualdom i 1995 (!) – sin næste i 1998 – og siden en lind strøm. Alligevel er det en tilfældig fotograf ,der fælder ham. Leder : En polisskandal  og  Sentimentalt svammel om brutalt mord, 

som svenske tabloider  svælger i til kvalmepunktet. Den har sin parallel i Danmark pt. i journalisternes  overvældende, kritikløse og småperverse  interesse for den – lad os udtrykke det mildt – karaterafvigende, tragedie Peter Brixtofte.

Bjerrehuus: “I Danmark er jeg født”

I VÆRTINDEGAVE FIK jeg en cd med ‘I Danmark er jeg født’, sunget af Isam B fra Outlandish. Manden er 2.-generationer, født i Danmark. Hvor sang han smukt. Jeg blev helt blød om hjertet. Her stod en fyr, som var muslim, og sang, at han elskede Danmark – sit fædreland. Han kunne lide vores land –.hans og mit. Godt han fornyr danskheden, tænkte jeg.

Og så fik jeg at vide, at han havde nægtet at optræde ved siden af en pige med bare skuldre. Oveni havde han deltaget i en islamistkonference. Og det med Danmark mit fædreland…. han mener nok nærmest, at ‘islamister er en del af Danmark, og I kan ikke gøre en skid ved det’. Det var vist ikke sådan H.C. Andersen havde forestillet sig kærligheden til fædrelandet.Suzanne: Se også heltens svage side , “Outlandish – islamismens musikalske budbringere”

Sweden’s Press Ombudsman Wants to Prosecute Bloggers

Fjordman med fyldig baggrund:

Yrsa Stenius, the Swedish press Ombudsmann, wants to press charges against certain bloggers. She is worried about developments on the Internet, where anybody can just write anything they want. She says this has gone too far. She fears this trend could even spread to the mainstream media, unless something is done and a legal precedent is established to rein in unruly bloggers. Brussels Journal

»Demokrati er en sporvogn. Når man kommer til stoppestedet, står man af«

Daniel Pipes : Is Islam Compatible with Democracy?

There’s an impression that Muslims suffer disproportionately from the rule of dictators, tyrants, unelected presidents, kings, emirs, and various other strongmen – and it’s accurate. A careful analysis by Frederic L. Pryor of Swarthmore College in the Middle East Quarterly (“Are Muslim Countries Less Democratic?”) concludes that “In all but the poorest countries, Islam is associated with fewer political rights.”

The fact that majority-Muslim countries are less democratic makes it tempting to conclude that the religion of Islam, their common factor, is itself incompatible with democracy.

I disagree with that conclusion. Today’s Muslim predicament, rather, reflects historical circumstances more than innate features of Islam. Put differently, Islam, like all pre-modern religions is undemocratic in spirit. No less than the others, however, it has the potential to evolve in a democratic direction.

Such evolution is not easy for any religion. In the Christian case, the battle to limit the Catholic Church’s political role lasted painfully long. If the transition began when Marsiglio of Padua published Defensor pacis in the year 1324, it took another six centuries for the Church fully to reconcile itself to democracy. Why should Islam’s transition be smoother or easier?

To render Islam consistent with democratic ways will require profound changes in its interpretation. For example, the anti-democratic law of Islam, the Shari‘a, lies at the core of the problem. Developed over a millennium ago, it presumes autocratic rulers and submissive subjects, emphasizes God’s will over popular sovereignty, and encourages violent jihad to expand Islam’s borders. Further, it anti-democratically privileges Muslims over non-Muslims, males over females, and free persons over slaves.

For Muslims to build fully functioning democracies, they basically must reject the Shari‘a’s public aspects. Atatürk frontally did just that in Turkey, but others have offered more subtle approaches. Mahmud Muhammad Taha, a Sudanese thinker, dispatched the public Islamic laws by fundamentally reinterpreting the Koran.

Atatürk’s efforts and Taha’s ideas imply that Islam is ever-evolving, and that to see it as unchanging is a grave mistake. Or, in the lively metaphor of Hassan Hanafi, professor of philosophy at the University of Cairo, the Koran “is a supermarket, where one takes what one wants and leaves what one doesn’t want.”

Islam’s problem is less its being anti-modern than that its process of modernization has hardly begun. Muslims can modernize their religion, but that requires major changes: Out go waging jihad to impose Muslim rule, second-class citizenship for non-Muslims, and death sentences for blasphemy or apostasy. In come individual freedoms, civil rights, political participation, popular sovereignty, equality before the law, and representative elections.

Two obstacles stand in the way of these changes, however. In the Middle East especially, tribal affiliations remain of paramount importance. As explained by Philip Carl Salzman in his recent book, Culture and Conflict in the Middle East, these ties create a complex pattern of tribal autonomy and tyrannical centralism that obstructs the development of constitutionalism, the rule of law, citizenship, gender equality, and the other prerequisites of a democratic state. Not until this archaic social system based on the family is dispatched can democracy make real headway in the Middle East.

Globally, the compelling and powerful Islamist movement obstructs democracy. It seeks the opposite of reform and modernization – namely, the reassertion of the Shari‘a in its entirety. A jihadist like Osama bin Laden may spell out this goal more explicitly than an establishment politician like Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, but both seek to create a thoroughly anti-democratic, if not totalitarian, order.

Islamists respond two ways to democracy. First, they denounce it as un-Islamic. Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna considered democracy a betrayal of Islamic values. Brotherhood theoretician Sayyid Qutb rejected popular sovereignty, as did Abu al-A‘la al-Mawdudi, founder of Pakistan’s Jamaat-e-Islami political party. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Al-Jazeera television’s imam, argues that elections are heretical.

Despite this scorn, Islamists are eager to use elections to attain power, and have proven themselves to be agile vote-getters; even a terrorist organization (Hamas) has won an election. This record does not render the Islamists democratic but indicates their tactical flexibility and their determination to gain power. As Erdogan has revealingly explained, “Democracy is like a streetcar. When you come to your stop, you get off.”

Hard work can one day make Islam democratic. In the meanwhile, Islamism represents the world’s leading anti-democratic force.

Mr. Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org), director of the Middle East Forum, is the Taube/Diller Distinguished Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution of Stanford University during the spring semester.

FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, April 15, 2008

Daniel Pipes i Sydney:  In front of a packed audience of 1200 passionate souls, a panel of experts on politics and Islam opened the Intelligence2 debate series by ripping into the proposition that Islam is incompatible with democracy.  The Australian