Jeg passerede de to unge violinister, der brugte Regensens (1623) søjlegang som ræsonnanskasse til Bach. De ville kun have  lyden med på videoen, ikke deres kontrafejer. Mobiletelefonen er jo ikke  high fidelity, så her er en rigtig koncertoptagelse af violinsuiten.

En opmærksom og venlig læser har set os dette foto fra Købmagergade før 1907, da søjlegangen blev klistret udenpå Regensen. Faktisk kunne man godt fjerne den nu, havde det ikke været for musikernes skyld. Fotoet ser ud som om det der fra  før år 1900 og bygningerne er  helt  sorte af det kul man fyrede med dengang.

Tillidstab: Fra mångfald til portvagt

Sverige havde en usædvanlig høj social kapital,(nu til kendt som “sammenhængskraft”) inden masseindvandringen. Derfor er det specielt interessant at studere dens effekter dér. For interessant, af og til:

En av tre svenskar vill bo i ett inhägnat område med portkod eller lås. Det framgår av en rapport som presenteras idag om svenskarnas behov och önskemål kring sitt boende. Göran Cars, professor i samhällsplanering, befarar att så kallade ”gated communities” kommer att dyka upp på flera håll i Sverige.Undersökningen genomfördes i augusti månad och bygger på svar från 5002 svenskar mellan 18 och 70 år som då bodde i lägenhet eller i framtiden skulle kunna tänka sig att bo i lägenhet. De har fått svara på en rad påståenden, bland annat om hur deras ideala bostadssituation ser ut.

Hela 33 procent av de tillfrågade vill bo extra säkert, till exempel i ett inhägnat område med portkod eller lås. Men andelen varierar bland de tillfrågade – bland kategorin unga singlar svarade 41 procent att det är viktigt, men bara 26 procent av småbarnsfamiljerna.  –Jag skulle tycka att det vore djupt tragiskt om vi fick en spridning av ”gated communities”. Då skulle min stad tappa det som är dess attraktionskraft, mångfalden av människor och aktiviteter. Staden skulle utarmas på service och förlora i internationell konkurrens, säger han. En av tre vill bo inhägnat,  Gated communities framför mångkultur ,  Sveriges første ægte “Gated Community” bygges i Malmø

“Utilpassede” unge antænder brande i Greve – de satans Jehovas Vidner igen?

Tja, artiklen fortæller os intet, men husk at der er brådne kar i alle lejre, og man skal ikke udtale sig om folk der ikke er dømt, måske prøver disse “utilpassede” unge bare at slette sporet efter hærværk, og hvad med slaveriet, borgerkrigen i Nordirland, Timothy McVeigh, heksebrændingerne og de dræbte abortlæger i USA? Ikke sandt, vi er jo ikke spor bedre selv. En fremmed er en ven du ikke har mødt (LFPC).

Stort politiopbud er afsendt til Askerød-bebyggelsen i Greve, hvor unge ifølge politiet løber rundt med benzindunke og påsætter ild i gaderne. […]

“Det er nogle utilpassede unge, der har samlet nogle bildæk, indkøbsvogne og noget skrammel og sat ild til det. Og det skal vi ned og have stoppet,” forklarer Bent Stavad fra Midt- og Vestsjællands Politi.

I øjeblikket brænder det tre steder i området, men Bent Stavad forklarer, at flere borgere har fortalt, at de unge løber rundt med benzindunke, så politiet frygter, at flere små brande kan opstå. […] Unge tænder bål i gaderne i Greve

Juridisk loonisme: Konsekvens over for tuneser udtryk for “blodrus”

Polariseringen af Danmark er en fremadskridende proces på mange fronter. Selv har jeg, der engang var lige ved at indmelde mig i Amnesty International, udviklet en decideret afsky for ordet ‘menneskerettighedsadvokat’. I min bog er ordet muteret til at betyde ‘slyngeladvokat’ eller ‘redepisser’, en person der gennem juridisk nidkærhed prøver at stadfæste sin egen godhed ved at modarbejde danskernes menneskerettigheder. En sådan nidding er Tyge Trier dog næppe – tværtimod vidner hans retorik her om et stort, varmt hjerte der banker for verdens svage og forfulgte – incl. tuneseren der ikke er dømt for noget, men bare blev fundet i besiddelse af tegninger af Kurt Westergaards hus. Ikke sandt? (LFPC)

Advokat Tyge Trier, som er ekspert i menneskerettigheder, er kritisk overfor regeringens og forskellige politikeres ønske om at presse den tuneser, der er udvist af Danmark, fordi han er mistænkt for at ville slå tegneren Kurt Westergaard ihjel.

– Jeg vil opfordre politikerne til at tale varsomt. Man kan ikke sætte tuneseren i bås med folk, som er dømt for noget kriminelt. Tålt ophold rummer forskellige personager. Minsteren har ikke grundlag for at sige, at tuneseren har begået noget kriminelt. Hvis de mener det, så skulle de køre en straffesag imod ham, ligesom man har gjort i sagerne fra Glasvej og Vollsmose, siger han til Ritzau. […]

Tyge Trier advarer imod “blodrus” og “statslig mobning” af en person, som ikke er dømt. Han vurderer, at menneskerettighedsdomstolen ikke vil have megen sympati for markante indgreb over for en ikke dømt person. Ekspert advarer imod blodrus

Bruce Bawer: European Muslims Debate: Should Gays Be Executed?

(fra Norge  bemærkes det: Men fremdeles har ingen norske forlag henvendt seg til Bawer for å kjøpe rettighetene til utgivelse av bestselgeren.)

One of the pillars of the future totalitarian state in 1984 is the practice of doublethink, which Orwell defined as “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. … To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary.”

As it happens, this is a precise description of exactly what’s been going on in many parts of Europe in recent years, as multicultural ideology has been confronted by realities about Islam that, in a doublethink-free world, would send that ideology crashing to the ground in flames.

For a case in point, I will refer the reader to an episode I’ve mentioned previously in this space – an Oslo debate last November at which the deputy chairman of Norway’s Islamic Council, Asghar Ali, refused to reject the death penalty for gays. When Senaid Kobilica, the head of the Islamic Council (which represents 60,000 Muslims), was asked where he stood on the question, he replied that he couldn’t give a definitive answer until he got a ruling from the European Fatwa Council. This week it was reported that he’s still waiting.

But not to worry! Kobilica added that he’s “100 percent certain that the fatwa council will not come out in favor of something which conflicts with European law.” Meaning that while the death penalty for homosexuals is, indeed, an orthodox Islamic position – one about which the Fatwa Council’s head, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has himself written sympathetically – Western Muslim leaders, in accordance with the Koran (and with good strategy), prefer in such controversial cases not to challenge infidel law. (There will, after all, be time enough to execute gays in the coming decades, as the Muslim population attains critical balance in one country after another – first, most likely, in France and Sweden and the Netherlands, and in Norway some time after that.)

What’s most chilling about all this, however, is not the positions of these Muslim leaders but the reactions of the Norwegian establishment. Or, one should say, the lack of reaction.

Consider this. After last November’s debate, it emerged that Asghar Ali not only was deputy chairman of the Islamic Council but was also on the board of the Oslo Arbeidersamfunn, the largest and most influential association within Norway’s ruling Labor Party. Asked about Ali’s views, the head of the Oslo Arbeidersamfunn, Anne Cathrine Berger, lamented that some people “can’t see the difference between a board member’s views and the organization’s views.” Despite scattered calls for his dismissal, Ali remained on the board. (When a new board election was held in February, Ali chose not to run again.)

That’s not all: Ali is, in addition, secretary of the 37,000-member Electricians’ and IT Workers’ Union. After the November debate, the union’s website posted a “clarification” by Ali saying that “as a Norwegian Muslim” he in fact rejected the death penalty for gays. The words “as a Norwegian Muslim” amount to a disingenuous dodge – they’re the rhetorical equivalent of keeping your fingers crossed behind your back. To state that one rejects the death penalty for gays “as a Norwegian Muslim” isn’t the same as saying that one rejects it, period. Like what Kobilica said about European law, it’s simply an Islamist’s way of affirming that he accepts infidel law as it now stands; such a statement reveals absolutely nothing about his real position on the question, or about whether he is, in fact, dedicated to the goal of ultimately changing this and the rest of Norwegian law to conform with sharia. At this point in the ongoing Islamization of Europe, the slipperiness of Ali’s “clarification” should be manifest to any infidel who’s made an effort to understand how Muslims think about these matters. Yet the head of the Electricians’ and IT Workers’ Union , Hans Olav Felix, pronounced himself satisfied with Ali’s “clarification,” and Ali remains in the #2 spot at the union.

As for the Norwegian government, there has been no serious effort, as far as I know, to rescind from the Islamic Council its half million kroner a year in state support.

And the media? After a news cycle or two had passed, the Norwegian media dropped the whole pesky little business of Muslims executing gays down the memory hole and resumed treating the members of the Islamic Council as if they were congenial folks who are model immigrants, lovers of Norway, and (that magic word) moderates. When Norwegian security services expressed concern in February about the possible role in terrorist funding of money sent abroad by Norwegian Muslims, Dagsavisen went straight to Asghar Ali for a quote pooh-poohing the idea. Dagsavisen’s article ended as follows: “Ali emphasizes that the Norwegian Muslim community has definitively rejected extremism.” The fact that Ali himself had refused only weeks earlier to reject the death penalty for gay people had already been deep-sixed.

In the same month, Muslims rioted in Denmark, and Aftenbladet ran a piece portraying Kobilinka as an embodiment of moderation and reason. He was quoted as calling on Muslim youth in Norway to control themselves and blaming the riots in Denmark on “inequality and discrimination.” His argument that Muslims are the victims of bigotry, and that this bigotry is the cause of any unrest by Muslim youth, was treated as self-evident; meanwhile, the fact that this self-proclaimed opponent of discrimination had recently refused to reject the death penalty for gays went unmentioned.

As if all this weren’t enough, in April Aftenposten ran a profile of Kobilica by Kristin Høiland. Her headline: “Travel-Happy Imam.” The subhead: “He loves the mountains, enjoys skiing – and considers his journey to Norway among the most important of his life.” Høiland’s text glowed with enthusiasm for this exemplary “new Norwegian”: “We have seldom met anyone so happy to be living in this country. … Kobilica could be mistaken for an unusually well-dressed Norwegian … [he’s] a young, modern imam, dressed in suit and tie, and available by cell phone and e-mail.” Also, he’s “hospitable,” he’s a “bridge-builder,” the atmosphere in his office is “informal and friendly.” When he tells Høiland that he wants “to show that Islam is an inclusive religion” that “adapts to the society we live in,” you might expect her to reply with a query about executing gays, but no: her next question is “Do you have any dream destinations?”

A search through all the major Norwegian papers and several lesser ones shows that none has been moved in recent days to editorialize about the Islamic Council’s continued on-the-fence posture about executing homosexuals. On the contrary, instead of acknowledging that more than a few Muslim leaders in Europe are well on their way to being the continent’s new Nazis, the Norwegian media have continued, in the face of all evidence, to cling to the mantra that Muslims are Europe ‘s new Jews. To read the Norwegian media, you’d think European Muslims are huddling together in their homes, trembling in terror that an Islamophobic mob will break down the door any second and drag them out to be lynched. The media make no effort to reconcile such fantasies with the reality that Muslim leaders are out there every day, throwing their weight around with increasing self-assurance and being increasingly open about their devotion to even the most brutal parts of sharia law.

As it happens, the news that the Islamic Council was still awaiting the Fatwa Council’s verdict on gays came a day before a report that Mullah Krekar, Norway’s #1 resident terrorist, was suing Norway in the European Court of Human Rights because he wanted “to see that I’m getting everything I have a right to.” What both of these stories underscore is that on every front, and with every weapon they can find – lawsuits, veiled threats, guilt-tripping, and puff pieces masquerading as journalism – Islamists are poking and prodding at the edifice of European democracy in a tireless effort to weaken the system and bend it ever more surely toward sharia. They’ve realized that the work of jihad – of restoring the caliphate, of making Europe a part of the umma – doesn’t require suicide bombs and airplane missiles; for the prevalence in the West of useful idiots who’ve been brainwashed by multiculturalism makes such weapons superfluous. European Muslims Debate: Should Gays Be Executed?