Seneste opdatering: 13/8-15 kl. 2026
5 kommentarer - Tryk for at kommentere!

henryk broder

Oprindeligt publiceret i Die Welt. Tak til Gates of Vienna for oversættelsen. En del af min optakt til konferencen i København med Mark Steyn, Douglas Murray, Henryk Broder og Flemming Rose. Foto © Snaphanen.dk – taget i Krudttønden iøvrigt, dengang forsamlingsfriheden også gjaldt der.

The problem of refugees should be solved where it originates — in accordance with the principle of who caused it — and with the aid of organizations responsible for “Islamic solidarity.”

Recently, the actor Benno Fürmann was a guest on “aspects” — the cultural magazine show on ZDF (German Television II). Not to promote a new film or a new book, but to report on his trip to the island of Lampedusa, whither he had traveled to put a face on an action by Amnesty International. His face.

Fürmann was not pleased by the reporting about the people “who are chipping away at our status quo.” He does not see “this humanism we talk so much about and do so little for.” Lebanon has taken in one million Syrians; and all of Europe just 140,000. These numbers are out of proportion to the fear that is being “stirred up” against the refugees. This, he said, cannot go on. “As Germans and Europeans, we are to blame.”

Then, in a video clip, the internal European statistics are given. “In Sweden, 1,960 refugees per 1 million residents are taken. In Germany, 470 per 1 million residents.” That was what Benno Fürmann meant when he spoke of “lack of support.” “What we are doing is not good enough, considering how well off we are right now and what we are capable of doing.”

According to estimates by the UN refugee aid organizations, the civil war in Syria alone has “forced almost ten million Syrians to flee.” In a population of 21 million, that means that almost every second Syrian has had to flee from the violence committed by one side or the other. Three million are living/camping in neighboring countries — in Turkey, in Lebanon, in Jordan and in Iraq. Approximately seven million of them are wandering around in their own country. It is a once-in-a-century catastrophe — a genocide.

The “Peaceful Solution” Was Not a Good Idea

How many of these people should “we” take in so as not to be guilty of “lacking in support” as Benno Fürmann puts it? A million? Two million? How about all of them? What would be appropriate and sufficient, measured on the scale of how well off we are and what we are capable of doing?

Genocide is not a natural event with deadly consequences — not an earthquake, not a volcanic eruption, not some accident where a ship collides with an iceberg. It is a drama in several acts with an announcement and a prelude. Should the, let us say, “performance” be interrupted in time, there would be neither a bloody crescendo on the battlefield nor an epilogue in refugee camps.

Seen that way: Over three years ago, when the civil war began, “we” — Germany, Europe, NATO, the USA, the UN — had the choice to intervene or observe. And “we” decided to wait and watch, out of fear that an intervention would set off a “spiral of violence” and lead to a “firestorm.” President Obama talked about “red lines,” which he instantly forgot. The spiral of violence began and now we have the “firestorm,” which has left us aghast. How could it come to this?

The advocates of a “peaceful solution” are dumbstruck. More and more moralists are being heard from, who say we are guilty “as Germans and Europeans.” Unfortunately, they neglect to say guilty of what and in regard to whom. Even if it is possible, with a strain, to make the case that without the Holocaust carried out against the Jews, Israel would not have been founded, and therefore “we” are somehow complicit in the fate of the Palestinians (“victims of the victims”), there is no justification at all for assigning us guilt for the Syrian civil war.

Likewise in Iraq, where Shi’ites and Sunnis are maintaining a thousand- year tradition by fighting each other. The fact that several hundred German citizens have joined the army of the Islamic State could possibly justify a minimal attribution of guilt. All there is, is a general duty to help people in trouble, as the captain of a ship is obliged to take shipwreck survivors on board, to drop them off at the next harbor.

In dealing with the victims of wars in Iraq and Syria, the principle should be: You break it, you fix it. Unless, that is, you make “colonialism” and “arbitrary borders” responsible for all the ills of the world and fantasize that, without colonialism, heavenly conditions would prevail in Africa and the Middle East.

At some point, societies as well as individuals will mature and be responsible for their own actions. Especially if they have declared themselves states, elevated “sovereignty” as a principle, and have a seat in the UN, in the WHO and in the Universal Postal Union.

Naturally the law of causality is more difficult to enforce on the international stage than in the law governing corporations and other associations. But there are organizations that would be in a position to intervene if one of their members could not cope with a situation.

What is the Arab League Doing?

For example, The Arab League, founded in Cairo in 1945. Twenty-one African and Asian nations belong to it, including Syria and Iraq. Among the tasks of The Arab League is “Furtherance of the relationships of members in the political, cultural, social and economic areas,” which can certainly be interpreted as an obligation to help in emergencies.

Then there is the Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), previously the Organization of the Islamic Conference, an amalgamation of 56 states “in which Islam is the state religion, the religion of the majority of the population or the religion of a large minority.” It was founded in 1969 in Rabat, Morocco. The original concern of the Organization of the Islamic Conference was freeing Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa mosque from the Israeli occupation. Its platform was expanded in 1972.

The foreign minister of the OIC issued a charter in which “Promotion of Islamic solidarity and political, economic, social, cultural and scientific cooperation among member states” was named the top goal. Further, the intent was to support Muslims in their efforts to achieve “dignity, independence and national rights.”

In 1969, the “Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam” was agreed upon, which deviated in one essential point from the UN’s “General Declaration of Human Rights” of 1948: Sharia would be the basis for interpreting human rights. And human rights in general were thus relativized.

It is difficult to judge what The Arab League and the OIC are accomplishing today. It looks as if they are holding pompous conferences and calling for resistance against the rampant Islamophobia in Europe.

So it is that much more incomprehensible that they should encourage victims of the wars in Syria and Iraq in their dangerous flight to an Islamophobic Europe, instead of taking them in themselves. Even if they are not able to put together a pan-Arabic army to pacify Syria and Iraq, they should at least take the lead in the acceptance and integration of the refugees. It would be a tailor-made task for the countries of The Arab League and the OIC. Thus far, only Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan have been prepared to do that.

This kind of temporary solution would be better for the refugees. It is more than doubtful whether they will ever be able to return to their homeland. Settling them in Europe would be risky — not just climatically and culturally — and would be beneficial only for the aid industry.

Europe is not managing its self-made problems. The euro is approaching its limits, economic production is decreasing, social tensions are increasing. Only two of the eighteen euro countries are still credit-rated “triple A” — Germany and Luxembourg. Even Finland, Holland and Austria were recently downgraded.

Anyone Can Make His Cottage Available

The only ones who spread any confidence are Brussels bureaucrats like Martin Schulz, who believes that the problem can be solved by a “reform of our immigration laws.” Aided by an “allocation formula” for regulating the acceptance of immigrants among the countries of the EU.

But we are dealing not with immigrants, but with refugees. And they know exactly where they want to go. Not Bulgaria, Poland or Romania…not even Greece or Portugal or Spain, but Germany and Sweden, and for good reasons, which have to do with social welfare legislation.

It is not necessary to be as extreme as Australia, attempting to scare off potential refugees by convincing them that they would not feel at home there. But we should think about urgently asking the Arab League and the OIC to take on the problem, to solve it regionally and permanently. Where it started.

Anyone who does not find that to be sufficient is free to offer his cottage in Bogenhausen or in the Grünewald to a refugee family. And guarantee that he won’t worry about them for the next ten years.

Med tak til Gates of Vienna for oversættelsen

Donér engangsbeløb?Kan du forpligte dig til fast betaling?

  • Niels Henriksen

    Nogle kunstnere kan åbenbart stadig tænke selv og vover endog at have en holdning, der afviger væsentligt fra det, man ellers bare skal mene i de kunstneriske miljøer. Måske er der alligevel håb
    forude trods alt?

    ‘Lord of the Rings’ Actor Says Islamic Terrorism and Political Correctness Could Equal the End of ‘Our Civilization’ in Blunt Interview

    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/08/12/lord-of-the-rings-actor-say s-islamic-terrorism-and-political-correctness-could-equal-the-end-of-o ur-civilization-in-blunt-interview/

    “There is an extraordinary silence in the West,” the Welsh thespian observed on Adam Carolla’s podcast Monday. “Basically, Christianity in the Middle East and in Africa is being wiped out. I mean not just ideologically but physically, and people are being enslaved and killed because they are Christians. And your country and my country are doing nothing about it.”

    “Fascism in Europe was destroyed,” Rhys-Davies said. “Japanese imperialism in the Far East was wholly destroyed. They were the greatest generation. They knew what they were fighting for, and they won.”

    He then turned his attention to today’s elected officials: ”It’s an age where politicians don’t actually say what they believe. They are afraid of being judged as being partisan. Heaven forbid that we should criticize people who, after all, share a different value system.”

    “But it’s all relevant,” he said, mocking politically correct talking points. “It’s all equally relative, isn’t it? We’re all the same. And God and the devil, they’re the same aren’t they, really? Right and wrong? It’s really just two faces of the same coin.”

    Rhys-Davies added that “we have lost our moral compass completely,” and if we don’t find it “we’re going
    to lose our civilization. I think we’re going to lose Western European Christian civilization, anyway.”

  • Niels Henriksen

    Peter Sutherland – once again 😉

    Hvor mange “kulturberigere” har denne dybt usympatiske fedebasse *) mon boende i sine egne paladser
    eller på sine grunde? Hvor langt er der mon fra hans bolig(er) til den nærmeste “kulturberigede” no-go-zone?

    *) Hvor mange ÆGTE flygtninge kunne man mon fodre og huse under ordentlig forhold i fx. Syrien
    eller nabolandene for bare det enorme beløb han æder og drikker for under sine store luksusmiddage
    med EU’s, FN’s og alle de andre internationale pinger på et år eller bruger på anden overflødig luksus –
    fx dyre hoteller og overflødige rejser på første klasse eller business-class? Formentlig rigtigt mange tusinder – og så skal vi ghm. høre på denne gennemførte hykler og EU-fantast og alle hans uforskammede moralprædikerner over for EU-landene og over for de måbende borgere i EU-landene gang på gang – ?

    Hvor ufatteligt mange millioner € har han mon fået i hyre fra bla. BP & Goldman Sachs og mange andre store virksomheder – bla. for at hjælpe dem til at undgå at betale fuld skat af deres indkomster, der hvor pengene reelt blev tjent eller på lobbyisme og venneaftaler under bordet ? – samt fra EU, FN og diverse konsulentjob for grupper af lande over årene?

    Måske var det på tide, at denne verdens lalleliberale og kulturrelativistiske Peter Sutherland’er
    snart SELV begyndte at betale regningen for de meget alvorlige konsekvenser af deres groft
    uansvarlige vanvidseksperimeter i fuld skala med vore engang så fredelige, sikre og velfungerende
    lande i Europa – og at de så for én gangs skyld begyndte at foregå med et godt eksempel ved SELV – sammen med deres familier – at bo op ad “kulturberigelsen” og dens massive og yderst skræmmende medfølgende problemer – i stedet for altid bare at dyrke deres endeløse selvgodhed og skovle penge
    ind i deres dybe lommer på andre europæeres meget tunge bekostning?

    http://samtiden.nu/18751/fn-representant-britterna-ar-framlingsfientli ga/

    FN-representant: Britterna är främlingsfientliga

    Publicerad 31 juli av Annika Hansson i Utrikes

    Att britterna inte vill ha in asylsökare beror på främlingsfientlighet och debatten om Calais är grovt överdriven. Detta enligt FN:s Peter Sutherland. Yttrandet fälls samtidigt som krisen vid engelska
    kanalen tilltar och brittisk ekonomi förlorar 250 miljoner pund om dagen.


    På den brittiska sidan är lastbilsköerna i det närmaste ofattbart långa. Chaufförerna, som sitter fast, på M 20, – pulsådermotorvägen som leder till Calais – säger att det kommer att ta 18 timmar att nå fram
    till kanaltunneln eftersom ytterligare 6 000 fordon på torsdagskvällen anslöt sig till kön, uppger Daily Mail.
    Flyktingkaoset innebär också ett hårt slag för brittisk ekonomi. Redan nu räknar man med ett tapp på 250 miljoner pund varje dag, en situation som inte förbättras av att den nattliga godstransportsverksamheten
    kraftigt har reducerats just för att ge fripassagerare färre möjligheter.
    Samtidigt med detta signalerar grevskapet Kent att de sociala myndigheterna inte längre klarar den ekonomiska börda som ett ständigt växande antal ensamkommande asylsökande minderåriga innebär.
    I det brittiska parlamentet haglar anklagelserna både mot Frankrike, som man menar inte gör tillräckligt, och mot David Cameron som sägs ha tappat kontrollen helt.


    Mitt i detta kaos, som närmast får beskrivas som totalt, kommer då irländaren Peter Sutherland,

    sedan 2006 FN-chefens särskilda representant i frågor om internationell migration och utveckling,

    med uttalanden som retar gallfeber på britterna. Och det är för övrigt inte första gången som han
    gör minst sagt kontroversiella uttalanden och frikostigt delar ut råd om fördelarna med immigration
    och multikulturalism.

    I juni 2012 lät han i ett tal i det brittiska överhuset förstå att etnisk homogenitet är av ondo [!!!!!]
    och att EU måste göra allt för att medlemsländerna ska underminera den. [!!!!!] Enligt Sutherland
    riskerar unionens framtida välstånd att braka ihop om inte mångkulturalism införs tillräckligt snabbt.
    Men nu är det britterna som han tar i upptuktelse. Skälet till att de vill hålla ekonomiska flyktingar borta
    från Storbritannien är enligt Sutherland bara ett:

    − Ett främlingsfientligt svar på frågan om fri rörlighet. Och min uppfattning är att debatten om Calais
    är grovt överdriven, säger han och fortsätter:

    − Vi talar här om ett antal människor – ett relativt sett litet antal sett till vad andra länder måste göra –

    som lever under fruktansvärda förhållanden och som måste hanteras av Frankrike och/eller

  • Seen that way: Over three years ago, when the civil war began, “we” — Germany, Europe, NATO, the USA, the UN — had the choice to intervene or observe. And “we” decided to wait and watch, out of fear that an intervention would set off a “spiral of violence” and lead to a “firestorm.” President Obama talked about “red lines,” which he instantly forgot. The spiral of violence began and now we have the “firestorm,” which has left us aghast. How could it come to this?

    In Al Jazeera’s latest Head to Head episode, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Michael Flynn confirms to Mehdi Hasan that not only had he studied the DIA memo predicting the West’s backing of an Islamic State in Syria when it came across his desk in 2012, but even asserts that the White House’s sponsoring of radical jihadists (that would emerge as ISIL and Nusra) against the Syrian regime was “a willful decision.” Amazingly, Flynn actually took issue with the way interviewer Mehdi Hasan posed the question—Flynn seemed to want to make it clear that the policies that led to the rise of ISIL were not merely the result of ignorance or looking the other way, but the result of conscious decision making: Former DIA Chief Michael Flynn Says Rise of Islamic State was “a willful decision” and Defends Accuracy of 2012 Memo.

    Of 4 Million Syrian Refugees, The U.S. Has Taken Fewer Than 1,000.

    • Peter Zichau

      Det er fuldstændig ligegyldigt. Hele vesten – ja, hele verden – burde efterhånden snart have fået øjnene op for hvad islam er for en størrelse. Hvordan USA tramper rundt i deres ubehjælpsomme forståelse af verden, med dertil hørende idiotisk udenrigspolitik, spiller ikke den store rolle længere. USA har aldrig forstået hverken Mellemøsten eller islam overhovedet. Hvis de mente Assad skulle fjernes ved at støtte en flok kalifat-tilhængere – ja, så siger det jo bare alt. De lavede jo det samme stupide nummer i Afghanistan, da russerne skulle bekæmpes. Og det på trods af, at russerne ikke engang gad invaderer det land. De kom kun på opfordring fra en socialistisk regering der var trængt. Fuldstændig ligegyldigt pjat – men her skulle USA , med CIA i spidsen – også udstille deres totale uvidenhed.
      I øvrigt er det vel værd at bemærke, at Assads far havde advaret Frankrig om det der nu sker i Syrien. Det store kludetæppe af drusere, alavitter, yasidier, kristne, jøder, asyrere, shiiter og sunnier som Syrien bestod af, kunne kun holde sammen hvis Assad kørte en fuldstændig diktatorisk linje. Det gjorde han meget klart, da Frankrig trak sig – og det ville de da skide på. Men pludselig kommer der altså et “arabisk forår” – århundredes joke forøvrigt – og så skal alle diktatorerne jo væltes. Gud fri mig vel – sikken en uvidenhed den unge generation af politikere udviser.
      Hvis ikke menigmand vidste bedre, var det jo pinligt..!!!