Dvs. pop musik der ikke gør en udpræget dummere og mere ufølsom, end man i forvejen er. Sam Phillips, det er lige hvad man trænger til sådan en dag, folk på fortovscaféerne, mændene i korte bukser. Bloggen går i sommermode, mindre tekst, flere billeder. Sam Phillips spilles aldrig på DR, én af måderne hvorpå man kan kende udholdelig musik. Tjek hende på You Tube. I TV Avisen sagde en selv lettere infantiliseret, Niels Frid Nielsen, helt højstemt over det historiske dødsfald, at Michael Jackson var “den største af alle, støre end og så videre og så videre” og at “hans musik ville leve endnu mere nu”. Tak for kaffe!

I Sverige trumfer måske kommende statsminister Mona Sahlin Fried Nielsen i pinagtig vammelhed med artiklen: Jag känner kärlek för Michael Jacksons mod att vara annorlunda. Sig det ikke passer, mine tæer vil ikke rette sig ud! Jeg skal fragtes rundt i en kørestol i dag, ligesom “pop-kongen.” Så letter dunsterne først rigtig med Mark Steyn, der ætser det hule hysteri i et veritabelt syrebad, der næsten gør Michael Jackson interesant: “In the years ahead, we’ll remember the freak show, but not much of the music.” Sentimental er det sidste, Steyn er:

Before you judge me
Try hard to love me
Look within your heart and ask
Have you seen my childhood?

“If he was that aware of what was wrong with his childhood, why couldn’t he see his adulthood was even more luridly screwed up? You had to try hard to love the “grown-up” Michael, even before he started outpacing his Fleet Street caricature of Wacko Jacko. He spent his childhood singing adult love songs with the Jackson Five. He spent his adulthood pretending to be a child.” Mark Steyn: Beyond the Pale. Michael Jacksons apotek.

Anstændigheden kamp mod retsstaten

Hjemsendelsen af de afviste irakiske asylsøgere er hverken udtryk for umenneskelighed eller fremmedfjendskhed. Den er ærligt og redeligt selvforsvar og forsvar for retsstaten: Ingen kan vel være i tvivl om, at de afviste irakiske asylsøgere har det skidt. At de selv har bragt sig i situationen, gør ikke medfølelsen mindre. Lykkeligvis er kun få mennesker så følelseskolde, at de ikke er i stand til at have medfølelse med et menneske, der har fået en vanskelig eller ulykkelig skæbne, selv om det er sket ved egen drift. Men et meget stort medansvar for deres tragedie ligger på skuldrene af ’Bedsteforældre for asyl’ og ’Borgere for et anstændigt Danmark’ (sikke nogle navne!) og de andre grupperinger, herunder både BUPL, Socialrådgiverforeningen, LO Storkøbenhavn, Red Barnet med den politiserende og uklart tænkende Mimi Jacobsen og Enhedslistens mediedarling, den uanstændige demagog Johanne Schmidt Nielsen, der har bakket dem op. ’Bedsteforældre for asyl’ og ’Borgere for et anstændigt Danmark’ er mennesker, der uden skrupler har taget de afviste som gidsler i deres politiske kamp mod resten af befolkningen, hele det ægte anstændige Danmark, der anerkender den demokratiske retsstats spilleregler. De har satset og tabt. Og det er synd for dem. Men det kvalificerer ikke til asyl. [..]

Hvis det gjorde, ville den danske velfærdsstat i løbet af ingen tid være rendt over ende på grund af befolkningspresset fra Mellemøsten og Afrika. Ifølge en FN-rapport ønsker hvert andet ungt menneske i de arabiske lande – hvor befolkningstilvæksten er enorm – at udvandre. De 321 palæstinensere, der ikke var forfulgt, men ikke desto mindre fik kollektivt asyl ved den særlov, som Socialdemokratiet, SF og Radikale vedtog uden om den borgerlige regering i 1992 og efter et mediepres, der minder om det aktuelle, var ifølge Weekendavisen (19. juni) pr. 1. januar 2006 blevet til 22.509. Svend Auken gør asylsagen til et spørgsmål om medmenneskelighed. Det er hans ret. Men det er også en forplumring af problemstillingen. Det handler om selvforsvar og forsvar for retsstaten, to sider af samme sag. Hvis vi giver efter her, vil der i løbet af ingen tid komme tusinder af andre, bl.a. via menneskesmuglere. Og at forsvare retsstaten, det vil sige lovens forudsigelighed og lige ret for alle, har intet med fremmedfjendskhed at gøre. Det er civilisation. Det er demokrati. Hvad ’Bedsteforældre for asyl’ og ’Borgere for et anstændigt Danmark’ end er, anstændige demokrater er de ikke. Claes Kastholm: Læst og påskrevet.

Svend Aukens kompis, Olle Svenning, har en leder-kommentar, der ikke kunne  adskille sig mere  fra Kastholms: I Danmark, så sargat av rasism väntar deportation. Spørger nogen sig, hvorfor svenske aviser har kilometervis af egen-produceret opinion, som ingen gider læse, er svaret naturligvis: så slipper man får at bringe læsernes. At have 39 faste “kolumnister” er fuldstændig uset på en dansk avis. Man må betragte dem som værende på en slags kulturstøtte for at give svensk debat et demokratisk skin.

A Study in Defeat

Bruce Bawer calls out Western apologists for radical Islam.

With the release of his new book, Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom, the American writer and critic Bruce Bawer may have committed a crime in his adoptive Norway. In 2005, Norway’s politically correct parliament passed the so-called Discrimination Act, a law that, among other curbs on free speech, criminalized “utterances” that may be “insulting” to those of certain religious beliefs. Since Surrender is a searing indictment of Western opinion makers, especially in the media, for capitulating to the rise of radical Islam in Europe, and since Islamic extremists are bound to take issue with the author’s appeal for a sterner defense of Western freedoms, it’s a real possibility that Bawer could be prosecuted for what he has written. That it has come to this in politically progressive Norway makes Surrender urgent reading. It also serves to bolster Bawer’s chief contention: that many in Europe, and to a lesser extent in the United States, are prepared to roll back essential civil liberties in order to pacify (or so they hope) Muslim radicals. ….

JACOB LAKSIN: Surrender: Appeasing Islam, Sacrificing Freedom, by Bruce Bawer, City Journal.

Burka: Pseudoproblem, pseudoløsning

“The increase in the number of veiled women indicates to everyone the progression of immigration on our territory. This opinion takes on special meaning today. Because these deputies who no longer want to see niqabs or burqas have no intention of defending French identity. They are immigrationists. Their goal, hidden under the cover of an all-purpose “laïcité”, is just that – to hide the progression of the most Islamist immigration and the most radical form of Islam.And they don’t run out of steam when it comes to calling for respect for “laïcité”, when they are the very ones who finance the mosques (…)

If we forbid women to wear the niqab, they will stop, but they will still be on our soil. It is better to know whom you are dealing with, both in this case, and in general. The habit does not make the monk, but the proverb can be reversed: one can be a monk without the habit. Women without their niqab will still be Islamists, and even more so since they will feel persecuted.This is typical of a false problem to which are brought false solutions, based on false principles.
The real problem is one of Islamic immigration. As my good friend Marshall de la Palice says: as long as there is Islamic immigration, there will be a progression of Islamism. Closing your eyes to the truth by banning the niqab changes nothing.” The Burqa – False Problem, False Solutions

Veiled threats: row over Islamic dress opens bitter divisions in France, måske en mere præcis overskrift end Guardian lige havde til hensigt. Antwerp: Following headscarf ban, imam calls to boycott Flemish schools.

Det ukendte Iran: “Korans are being burned”

Det indebærer altid en vis risiko at gengive en beretning om de ‘virkelige’ forhold der angiveligt hersker i et fjernt land, upåagtet af vesterlændinge. Er dette land Iran, hvor der p.t. hersker kaoslignende tilstande, og hvor information og måske disinformation utvivlsomt er en del af konflikten, er påpasselighed en nødvendighed. Fascinerende er det dog at høre om dette skjulte præ-islamiske Persien, men på længere sigt må en skeptisk vesterlænding kræve at se det manifestere sig tydeligt, hvis man skal tiltro det den opbakning som dissidenten i denne artikel tilskriver det (LFPC).

[…] “There are, in fact, two Irans, and the lesser known one to most Americans is undergoing a renaissance that the ruling Iranian mullahs fear the most. If the Persians are awakened to their identity as children of Cyrus the Great, who wrote mankind’s first charter of human rights, these oppressive regimes will topple domino-style. Besides Iran, the Persian heritage is embedded in Iraq and Afghanistan, and were it to be rekindled, a revolution unheard of in scope could occur.”

My new friend and former Muslim, whom I will call Babak Iran, told me that Korans are being burned in Iran, and that there is a strong movement toward the philosophy of Zoroastrianism. This man showed me the pendant he now wears, a symbol of the ancient religion (it is older than Judaism). This symbol, carried by many of the parade marchers in New York City, can be seen at persianparade.org. Slide # 24 in the 2009 parade is where one can see many beautiful Persian women like Neda. […]

“I can tell you that Iranians are infuriated with the message [Obamas tale til præstestyret, LFPC], as am I. Iranians do not think that the Islamic regime of Iran is their government. They look at it as an occupying army of Muslim killers determined to destroy what Muhammad and his killers could not do for 1400 years. The mullahs have done all they can to prevent people from celebrating the norooz and a dozen other celebrations such as Charshanbeh soori (the fire festival) for the last 30 yeas. They hate and try to destroy the Iranian culture, like they did in all other previously known Muslim countries. But the more they try to stop the many celebrations in Iran the more the people resist.” […] Mullahs Cannot Stop the Persian Reawakening