A man in Paris, France was reportedly beaten for walking arm in arm with his boyfriend Olivier early Sunday morning. Wilfred de Bruijn, a French resident, says he was assaulted while walking in Paris’ 19th arrondissement. De Bruijn was beaten unconscious near his home early Sunday sustaining five fractures in his head and face, fractured pieces of bone in his skull.and a lost tooth. His boyfriend, who was also beaten up, said he witnessed three to four men shouting “Hey, look they’re gays.”
He posted a photo of his wounds on his Facebook page with the caption “Sorry to show you this. It’s the face of homophobia”. Paris beating gives a face to homophobia, Photo of Gay Man Who Walked Through Muslim Suburb of Paris With Boyfriend Causes Shock, Wilfred de Bruijn, French Gay Attack Victim, Becomes Cause Celebre
Jeg har skiftet ‘homophobia’ ud med ‘hate’, hvorfor psykologisere had og overlagt vold? Det lugter af indlevelse og undskyldning, skrot de fobi-udtryk! Gerningmændene er ikke fanget, men findes på video. Franske medier kobler det sammen med de store demonstrationer mod homoægteskaber. 19 arondissement er tungt befolket af indvandrere fra Nordafrika, så der er som en af artiklerne antyder også andre mulige motiver, nemlig dem en god Radikal ikke taler om. 19 er ikke en forstad, men lige inden for Boulevard Périphérique. de Bruijn har stillet op i TV med sit smadrede hoved – video, fransk, utekstet.
Dalrymple: Thatcher, the greatest reformer in Argentinian history
Vi har set den afstumpede pøbel hvortil slynglen George Gallloway hører, og vi har set panegryrikken. Her er nuancer, indsigt og humor:
Such was the force of her personality that, according to a paper published in the British Medical Journal in 1985, she was able to impress herself even upon the memory of people suffering from Alzheimer’s disease.
In foreign affairs she was partly successful. She did nothing to halt the European juggernaut with its preposterously square wheels; but she played a major role in ending the Cold War and she was undoubtedly the greatest reformer in Argentinian history, destroying the political influence of the military in that country for a long time to come, if not for ever. It is unlikely, however, that many statues of her will be erected to her in gratitude in that country.
Strident in rhetoric but timid in practice where it mattered most, Mrs Thatcher managed to discredit in the minds of many the very necessary reforms that never took place. Her memory, hated by many, thus stands in the way of real change.
For all that, however, she was undoubtedly a towering figure. Personally she was far more charming than most people would have suspected. If her rhetoric provoked disproportionate hatred, it at least raised important questions and awoke many from their mental slumbers. For a time she restored faith that decline was not inevitable. But one of the lessons of her life is that one person in a democracy, however remarkable, cannot singlehandedly change a nation. We in Britain are firmly back to square one, with a public sector proportionately larger than when she came to power 34 years ago.
Grammar schools existed in all areas, and selected the children, about 10 per cent, who were most gifted academically (Mrs Thatcher had attended one herself). They had high standards and virtually guaranteed the social ascension of the children of the poor who went to them. Their closure, in which Mrs Thatcher played the very important role of non-resistance, was an educational, social and cultural disaster: educational because academic standards quickly fell; social because grammar schools were the most visible institutions of elitism based upon ability rather than social exclusivity, whose closure helped to turn a class into a caste society; and cultural because their closure symbolized a loss of faith in the idea of higher and lower cultures, the latter soon triumphing over and swamping the former. Liberty and Law
Det skal tilføjes, at Thatcher ramte nogle rene toner efter 9/11:
By then she was called Lady Thatcher, and she wrote an op-ed article that was published in the New York Times on February 11, 2002 a few months after the Sept. 11th attacks. The title of the piece was, Advice to a Superpower. She was characteristically direct describing the ideology behind the attacks and the on-going threat. Her words from that article will probably not be highlighted in the media today—likely not even mentioned. But her focus on the Islamist threat drew a clear, unmistakable warning from the past. Thatcher wrote:
Perhaps the best parallel is with early communism. Islamic extremism today, like bolshevism in the past, is an armed doctrine. It is an aggressive ideology promoted by fanatical, well-armed devotees. And, like communism, it requires an all-embracing long-term strategy to defeat it. Townhall