Gjorslev (1396) , Vemmetofte (1356) og Bregentved, (1650) , fotos © Snaphanen
In an interview with Jörg Plath, Nobel Prize winner Imre Kertesz talks about the “Apocalyptic abysses” that have opened in Europe â they were also the subject of his speech at the conference “Perspective Europa.”
“I don’t want to argue politically. Politics is like soccer: everyone thinks they understand it. I don’t understand politics at all. But I think the abysses have not been closed again, not even in Yugoslavia. And they can open anywhere. These days, as London is living in a state of shock, we see how vulnerable everything is. How vulnerable civilisation, how vulnerable daily life. One must be conscious of the dramatic side of life. Every day, every moment. Europe is in fact a cheerful, wise and strong entity â and has been since the ancient Greeks. I think Europe represents something that no other civilisation represents: the freedom of awareness. Freedom period. It mustn’t betray that.”
Stunde der Wahrheit, Neue ZĂŒrcher Zeitung
The case for mistrusting Muslims
The latest terror plots are confronting tolerant Britons with uncomfortable choices.
By Theodore Dalrymple, July 8, 2007
ARRIVING IN BRITAIN by air the day after two men crashed a gasoline-laden Jeep Cherokee into the main terminal at Glasgow’s international airport, and a couple of days after two car bombs were discovered in the heart of London, I was surprised by how calm everybody was. Apart from the prohibition of passenger drop-off and pickup next to the terminal building at Birmingham Airport, everything was as usual. Men and women in Muslim garb mingled in the crowd with perfect tranquillity, expecting neither violence nor even verbal reproach.
Was this a sign of the admirable tolerance of British society, or of its bovine complacency born of an inability, or unwillingness, to make the effort to defend itself? Was it decency, cowardice or stupidity?I really don’t know anymore, which is an indication of the problem: Only time will tell, and by then it might be too late.[..]
The fundamental problem is this: There is an asymmetry between the good that many moderate Muslims can do for Britain and the harm that a few fanatics can do to it. The 1-in-1,000 chance that a man is a murderous fanatic is more important to me than the 999-in-1,000 chance that he is not a murderous fanatic: If, that is, he is not especially valuable or indispensable to me in some way.And the plain fact of the matter is that British society could get by perfectly well without the contribution even of moderate Muslims.
The only thing we really want from Muslims is their oil money for bank deposits, to prop up London property prices and to sustain the luxury market; their cheap labor that we imported in the 1960s in a vain effort to bolster the dying textile industry, which could not find local labor, is now redundant.
L.A. Times
Julelys
»NÄr man rejser rundt i MellemÞsten eller Latinamerika eller for den sags skyld i andre dele af Den Tredie Verden og fortÊller, at man kommer fra Danmark, og at man er socialdemokrat, fÄr folk julelys i Þjnene. Det gÊlder alle, lige fra den fattige skopudser til den rige oliesheik.« Egon Balsby, Groft Sagt
Not so amazed
Those who eagerly follow the sayings of Inayat Bunglawala, the media secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain whose claimed âmoderationâ has been repeatedly exposed as an aspiration that has yet to be realised (see here, here and here,) might be interested to hear him on last nightâs BBC Radio Four Moral Maze (1:36) declaring that he is committed to the Islamisation of Britain. Non-violently. So thatâs all right. Melanie Phillips
Terrorism awareness – David Horowitz , video 6 min.
Ăresundsbroen
set fra indsejlingen til Falsterbo kanalen, foto © K.D.
RĂžgslĂžr i “Det Ă„bne samfund”
Politiken kalder altid Sverige “mere Ă„bent” end Danmark. Fordi man kan gĂ„ pĂ„ nettet og lure pĂ„ hvad naboen har af formue og betaler i skat ? Smag og behag. LĂŠg mĂŠrke til uigennemtrĂŠngeligheden i Irak beslutningen. Alle henviser til alle andre. Hvis dagens beslutning er “lovlig”, sĂ„ mĂ„ den hidtidige altsĂ„ have vĂŠret “ulovlig”, for alle andre faktorer er de samme. Men lad vĂŠre med at prĂžve at trĂŠnge igennem rĂžgslĂžret, det nytter intet, det er netop derfor det er udlagt.
I de senaste Irak-besluten frĂ„n Migrationsverket och Migrationsöverdomstolen framgĂ„r det att det inte rĂ„der en vĂ€pnad konflikt i Irak “i utlĂ€nningslagens mening” och inte heller i “folkrĂ€ttslig mening”. Men vad beslutsfattarna stödjer sig pĂ„ framgĂ„r inte av besluten. Migrationsöverdomstolen hĂ€nvisar till Migrationsverket och tvĂ€rtom. Det vore mera rĂ€ttssĂ€kert för alla beslutsfattare pĂ„ Migrationsverket att veta vilken rĂ€ttskĂ€lla som bör hĂ€nvisas till dĂ„ det gĂ€ller att bedöma om det rĂ„der en “vĂ€pnad konflikt” eller inte.Vi Ă€r beslutsfattare och vi vet inte. Bör inte den svenska regeringen ha en klar stĂ„ndpunkt i denna frĂ„ga?
LÀs hela texten av beslutsfattarna Birgitta Elfström och Arne Malmgren pÄ Migrationsverket hÀr.
Ministeren er en mand med hÄr pÄ brystet. Han reder trÄdene ud sÄdan her:
Migrationsminister Tobias Billström (m) sÀger att han har förstÄelse för att mÀnniskor inte Àr tillfredstÀllda med de beslut som fattas.
-“SĂ„ hĂ€r kommer det alltid att vara, mĂ€nniskor kommer inte att kunna erbjudas ett system som alltid gör som man sjĂ€lv vill,” sĂ€ger han.
Hvis ikke de har siddet i ministeriet og talt pÄ knapper og set at EU lader Sverige aftage borderparten af irakerne, sÄ er de dummere end politiet tillader. Men derfra til ligefrem at sige det hÞjt. SÄ hellere lÞbe an pÄ at befolkningen er idioter.
In February, Swedish government officials asked European Union members to receive more Iraqi asylum seekers, saying Sweden alone could not assume the responsibility. Iraq updates
Merit Wager
HĂ„rd kritik mot nytt Irak-beslut
Morten ĂstergĂ„rd, R
som ingen kan beskylde for at vĂŠre tynget af bare den blegeste viden om Sverige, siger til Berlingske Tidende:
” Men svenskerne er i bevĂŠgelse, og det er vel ikke unaturligt, nĂ„r landene omkring dem, b.la. Danmark behandler asylansĂžgerne sĂ„ dĂ„rligt, at svenskerne er kommet til at stĂ„ med hele byrden. Det her understreger behovet for en fĂŠlles europĂŠisk tilgang til dette problem for at komme ud af en negativ spiral, som gĂžr de irakiske flygtninge til de sikre tabere.”
man spĂžrger sig om Ăstergaard har gjort sig klart, at der findes ca. 23 mio. potentielle irakiske flygtninge endnu ? Hvor mange skal bo permanent i Europa, R ?
Svenske lederskribenter i moralsk oprustning
Vad beror denna folkvandring pÄ?
Varför vĂ€ntas ytterligare 24 000 irakier hit? NĂ€r den svenska juristprosan sĂ„ entydigt slĂ„r fast att i deras land pĂ„gĂ„r ingen inre vĂ€pnad konflikt.Visst har Sverige gjort mer Ă€n mĂ„nga andra lĂ€nder. Och visst Ă€r det en pĂ„frestning för Malmö att man tagit emot fler flyktingar Ă€n Tyskland, Storbritannien, Danmark, Norge och Irland tillsammans. Men att blunda för vĂ„ldet och skicka hem dem till ett levande helvete kan inte â fĂ„r inte â vara lösningen.
OmÀnskligt
Nordisk RĂ„d og Foreningen Norden
synes at vÊre udenfor pÊdagogisk rÊkkevidde hvad angÄr Sveriges indtag af 3 verdensborgere, fremtiden i Norden og SÞren Espersens advarsler. Heldigvis savner de begge enhver betydning. Jeg tÞr godt spille pÄ at den dag kommer , hvor Danmark og mÄske Norge, vil vÊre nÞdt til at krÊve visum af svenske statsborgere. Lidt lyrik her:
Dansk folkepartis utspel om att invandringen till Sverige skulle utgöra en tickande bomb för Danmark kÀnns lite löjevÀckande med tanke pÄ att vi lever i en globaliserad vÀrld med en stÀndigt ökande rörlighet av mÀnniskor, varor och tjÀnster. Sverige Àr ju inte heller den enda EU-grannen som har land- eller sjögrÀns med Danmark. TvÀrtemot Dansk folkeparti anser vi att de regler om fri rörlighet mellan de nordiska lÀnderna som gÀller för de nordiska medborgarna ocksÄ bör utvidgas till att gÀlla tredjelandsmedborgare.
“Löjligt danskt utspel”
“Islamophobia” idiocy
THE car-bomb/suicide-terror operations in London and Glasgow should have provided a fresh opportunity for reminding everyone, especially Muslims in Britain, that terrorism in the name of Islam still poses a major threat to public peace and safety. Yet this is not what is happening.
Prime Minister Gordon Brown keeps repeating that the attacks have nothing to do with Islam – but, at the same time, keeps inviting “Muslim community leaders” to Downing Street to discuss how to prevent attacks. If the attacks have nothing to do with Islam, why invite Muslim “leaders” rather than Buddhist monks?
Brown hasn’t deemed fit to tell it like it is: that Muslims in Britain, indeed all over the world, must come out and condemn terrorism in unambiguous terms.
Instead, we are hearing that the attacks may have been prompted by “Muslim bitterness” about Salman Rushdie’s knighting, the latest addition to the Islamist litany of woes. Some “moderate community leaders,” like a certain Baroness Uddin, drop hints that Muslims have “foreign-policy issues” that might make them unhappy. The barely coded message: Unless Britain reshapes its foreign policy to please al Qaeda, it must expect to be attacked.
Amir Taheri i New York Post
