Jussi Halla-aho’s argumentation concerning the Finnish state’s illogical choice of prosecuting him for daring to insult Islam, is simply brilliant. Both the Finnish state prosecutor’s office and its judicial system, have managed to place their institutions in the undesireable position, of being seen as totally incompetent to the international community at large.

Any judicial ruling that serves to further cloud the issues (based on bad law to begin with) than to reveal clarity in the case it was prosecuting, speaks for itself. Please take the time to go through the entire three part interview, and pay special attention to the 2nd and 3rd, for in these two videos, the brillaince of Halla-aho’s argumentation comes shining through. Indeed, Jussi is the Finnish version of Geert Wilders, and in a fair court system, his case would either be won….or not even tried at all. It’s that crystal clear. Interview with Jussi Halla-aho, 3 videos ,  english subtitles

Aggressive bønner

Ingen tvivl om at disse symbolske manifestationer i eller ved centrale vestlige institutioner er noget der giver blod på tanden [billede: Muslimsk fællesbøn udenfor Milanos katedral] (LFPC)

Tirsdag aften festede flere fremtrædende socialdemokrater med tyrkisk violin, æble- og appelsinjuice samt tre tyrkiske retter på Christiansborg. DF kalder festen »fejltænkt integration.«

Der var langt til tonerne af “Der er et yndigt land”, svinesteg og snaps under gårsdagens ramadan-middag på Christiansborg. I stedet blev de 150 gæster budt på tyrkisk violin, æble- og appelsinjuice samt tre tyrkiske retter. […]

S fejrer ramadanen på Christiansborg

Muslims who are working to stage the “Our Day Has Come” day of prayer at the U.S. Capitol have discussed views that include an Islamic takeover of the White House, from where they say President Barack Obama is providing their inspiration.

Building on the Islamic interest in Obama’s inauguration, when Muslims claimed in a magazine that “It’s our time,” the event planners are calling for 50,000 Muslims to attend the 4 a.m. event on the National Mall on Sept. 25. […] Obama inspires Islamists’ D.C. prayer rally – Shariah experts to proclaim ‘Our Day has Come’

Skabelsens sangerinde

En helt speciel eksklusiv digtoplæsning fra 1962, hvor Inger Christensen pludselig bryder ud i sang. En optagelse, der har været forsvundet i årtier og kun ved et tilfælde blev fundet. Digteren Morten Søndergaard har monteret digtet fra digtsamlingen “Lys” med lyd. Den 2 Radio og You Tube 1 og You Tube 2. Europas Inger Christensen,Eine Sängerin der Schöpfung

Så ligger fremmedpolitiken fast ?

“Fremmedpolitik” er  et ord vi bruger for at drille. I Sverige er “fremmed” et fy-ord på linje med “neger” og “sigøjner”, “fremmed” skal i citationstegn. Selv “araber” må man ikke sige, skønt de  kalder sig selv det. Den store stilhed venter, til slut mimer vi allesammen og stumfilmen får sin store renaissance. Alt er så ømt og følsomt, at det er sikreste er at tie. Sprog er politik.

Halvdelen af socialdemokraternes og SF’s vælgere vil have partierne til at lave udlændingepolitik med de radikale. Ifølge målingen støtter 48 procent af S-vælgerne, at en ny regering skal føre udlændingepolitik med Det Radikale Venstre og Enhedslisten, mens 22,2 procent helst ser et samarbejde med DF, og 16,7 procent vil danne udlændingepolitikken i samarbejde med V og K.I SF-lejren er det over 60 procent af vælgerne, der helst ser, at udlændingepolitikken bliver dannet i et samarbejde mod venstre.Socialdemokraternes politiske ordfører Henrik Sass Larsen lader sig ikke rokke af sine vælgeres ryst.

Sass: 24-årsreglen bliver: »Vi har sagt, at vi vil lave regering bestående af S, SF og R. Det betyder selvfølgelig, at vi vil samarbejde med R – også om udlændingepolitikken. Men når det gælder den stramme udlændingepolitik, så ligger den fast«, siger Sass.Udlændingepolitik splitter S-vælgerne

Patriotisme og fædrelandskærlighed

“Patrioter”, det er noget man har i krig op på psykatriske afdelinger. Nå ja, og så lidt flere i Sverige, som Ulf  Nilson også har kaldt  “Sverige Sluten Anstalt” pdf. Men stadig et mindretal af hel- og halvnazister. Derfor er jeg aldrig stødt på nogen andre patrioter end forhenværende, nemlig frihedskæmperne, og de er ved at være væk. I Danmark har vi haft en sund og tempereret fædrelandskærlighed, der ganske vist er søgt kompromitteret af luftige ideer, men fuldstændig forgæves. Den er her ikke desto mindre endnu uafficeret, ja forstærket, og politikere gør klogt i at kalkulere med den. Spørgmålet Melanie Phillips rejser er: kan man have en fungerende nation, uden borgere der identificerer sig med den ? Og – er vi  i virkeligheden ved fabrikere patrioter og voldsparate neonationalister i disse år, som svar på en indtrængende kultur, der ikke  har tænkt sig at underlægge sig vores normer og vurderinger? For megen fædrelandskærlighed, chauvinisme, fører til krig. Det ved vi. For lidt gør det tilsyneladende også. Det vidste vi ikke. Vi kunne have vidst det, hvis vi ikke vi levede i glemsel, hvis ikke vores parlamenter havde tunnelsyn af fire års varighed. Der er foruroligende tegn på, at netop radikaliseringen  bestemmer den retning, vi har vi har i øjeblikket. Går vi ind i patrioternes tid, så Gud nåde og trøste os. Det vil i givet fald være militante antinationalister, der skaffede os  fædrelandskærlighedens vrangside på halsen. Vi vader i symptomer på det hver dag, her, her og her. Vi har lagt tynd is ud under vores børn.

If children are taught that patriotism is wrong, Britain’s very identity is at stake
By MELANIE PHILLIPS

A survey found three-quarters of teachers believed it was their duty to warn pupils about the danger of patriotism (posed by models).One of the most startling aspects of our society at present is the way things that were once considered to be virtues have now become the object of intense disapproval, and vice versa.A recent survey of teachers by London University’s Institute of Education found that some three-quarters of them believed it was their duty to warn their pupils about the dangers of patriotism.

Once upon a time, loving your country enough that you were prepared to die for it was held to be the highest virtue.
Indeed, without patriotism there would be no one serving in the Armed Forces.
For the past 1,000 years, it has given the people of these islands the strength and courage to repel invaders and defeat the enemies of liberty.
Is it not extraordinary that such affection for your country should now be considered so objectionable that children should be told it is positively dangerous?
One teacher said that praising patriotism excluded non-British pupils.
‘Patriotism about being British divides groups along racial lines, when we aim to bring pupils to an understanding of what makes us the same.’
But on the contrary, patriotism is what binds us together through a shared sense of belonging and a desire to defend what we all have in common.
What this teacher seemed to be saying was that children from immigrant backgrounds can’t have that shared sense of belonging because they are not really British. Is that not itself a racist attitude?
And if such children really are merely foreign visitors, it is even more extraordinary that teachers should tailor the education of children who are British to suit the few who are not.
But then, some of these teachers seemed unwilling to acknowledge the concept of citizenship at all, spouting idiotic nonsense instead about promoting ‘universal brotherhood’ or the need to ‘identify as humans’.
With no awareness of any irony (they probably don’t understand what that means either) some said promoting patriotism was a form of ‘brainwashing’.
So what, pray, is promoting ‘universal brotherhood’? Planet earth to teachers: make contact, please!
As the researchers who conducted this survey point out, much of history and politics is incomprehensible without understanding the power of patriotic sentiment.
Accordingly, they say, schools should ensure that pupils not only understand what patriotism is, but are also ‘equipped to make reasoned judgments about the place it should occupy in their own emotional lives’.
Surely that’s the point. Teachers should not set out to put across one point of view, which replaces education with propaganda. Instead, they should be giving pupils both knowledge and the ability to think about it and learn from it so they can arrive at their own conclusions.
But on the grounds that love for your country is wrong, many teachers have long stopped passing on to children the knowledge they need if they are to admire and identify with Britain. Somehow this has got mixed up with racism, xenophobia and the BNP.

Nick Griffin, leader of the BNP – Are teachers confusing the ability to admire Britain with xenophobia and racism?
Perverse though this may seem, it is not actually a surprise. It is merely the latest stage in the deconstruction of education that has been going on for the past three decades – and at the heart of which lies the teaching of history.
Back in the Eighties and Nineties, history teaching was at the centre of a tremendous battle over British national identity.
In one camp were those who believed that it meant transmitting to pupils the story of this nation and its institutions; in the other camp were those who said that to do so was racist.
That was because they subscribed to the view that Britain was itself intrinsically racist: that it had a history of colonial exploitation and that a new society had to be created that would treat the culture of every incomer as equal to the culture of the indigenous British.
More fundamentally even than that, they believed the very idea of a nation with a distinct identity at all was racist.
According to their reasoning, the nation led to nationalism, and nationalism led to prejudice and war. So destroying national identity would eradicate all such horrors and create the brotherhood of man on earth.
Of course, this was ridiculous. Such a utopian vision was likely to result in more prejudice and war, since without the glue of shared national identity a society fragments into warring factions. Moreover, the pose of ‘neutrality’ that teachers adopted in denouncing patriotism did not prevent them from telling children that Britain had a past of which it should be ashamed.
Despite their Far Left provenance, these destructive, even nihilistic views captured the education world. In part, this was a reaction to mass immigration. Teaching Britain’s national identity was thought to discriminate against foreign-born children.
But the surest way to ensure that immigrant children are excluded from a society is to fail to teach them to know and admire the country of which they are now citizens.
Native-born children have been left equally bereft of anything in their country with which they can feel a proud sense of identification. These teachers have produced equality, all right: an equality of rootlessness.
They have also produced widespread ignorance. No longer telling the coherent story of the nation, history teaching took instead the form of disconnected episodes that made little sense.
No wonder a major study is now warning that in some state secondary schools the subject faces extinction altogether.
Thousands of pupils are being allowed to drop history at the age of 13, with fewer than a third of pupils studying it to GCSE.

This ignorance is affecting even the intellectual cream of the crop. Professor Derek Matthews, an economics lecturer at Cardiff University, was so concerned at his students’ lack of historical knowledge that he set them four simple questions.
He discovered that only one in six knew that the Duke of Wellington led the British Army in the battle of Waterloo; only one in ten could name a single 19th-century British prime minister; some of his students had never heard of the Reformation; and one thought Martin Luther was an American civil rights leader.
Yet these students were probably in the top 15 per cent of their age group for educational success.
Despite – or perhaps, because of – this collapse of knowledge in the schools, there is a tremendous appetite for history among the general public.
TV historians turn into superstars; genealogy has become a craze as more and more people search for their family histories, and even the six novels shortlisted for the Man Booker Prize are all in different ways rooted in the past.
People are usually desperate if they cannot root themselves. Yet for ideological reasons, the teaching world decided unilaterally to deprive children of the ability to do so.
Gordon Brown has spoken in favour of encouraging pupils to be patriotic, calling for ‘Britishness’ lessons to be part of the curriculum. He is right to be concerned about the erosion of national identity.
What he is reluctant to acknowledge, however, is that the root cause of this is the promotion of multiculturalism, which has turned patriotism into a dirty word.
But without patriotism, a society starts to die. If the core purpose of education is to transmit a culture down through the generations, it is not patriotism that is a menace to this country, but the teachers whose real target is Britain’s identity itself.

Melanie Phillips Daily Mail