“Ikke fordi hans tegninger ikke er kriminelle, men fordi det er fem år siden nogen har klaget”. Skulle han have mødt i retten, havde han måttet vise sit ansigt, en de facto dødsdom. Hollandsk retsvæsen trækker sig baglæns ud af en blindgyde.

Controversial Dutch cartoonist Gregorius Nekschot will not be prosecuted for publishing discriminatory depictions of Muslims online. The Public Prosecutor’s Office said on Tuesday it had dropped the case because the contentious drawings were no longer shown on Mr Nekschot’s website.In addition, the Prosecutor’s Office says that Mr Nekschot has already spent a day and a half in jail, and that no new complaints have been lodged against him since 2005, in what the prosecutor called a dated case.Reacting to the dismissal of the case, the artist’s lawyer told reporters that Mr Nekschot was satisfied that he does not have to reveal his real name, “Gregorius Nekschot” being a pseudonym. There is some disappointment, the lawyer added, that “what is and what is not allowed in cartoons remains ill-defined” because there will be no judgement in the case.Case against Dutch anti-Muslim cartoonist dropped.Gregorius Neckshots tale i København den 11 september 2010: Fra den socialistiske til den multikulturelle utopi.

Ayaan Hirsi Alis tale på Dansk Folkepartis landsmøde, 18.9. 2010
vimeo version II Ayaan Ali Denmark from Vlad Tepes on Vimeo. Talen findes også i 5 dele på You Tube. Pia Kjærsgaard indleder. Den indledende kameragyngning holder hurtigt op.
Sort på hvidt: Nogle offergrupper er mere værdige end andre

Backspin points to an interview with Fred Gottheil, concerning an experiment he undertook this year. Here’s how he described it in an article earlier this month:

A year and a half ago, January 2009, David C. Lloyd, Professor of English at the University of Southern California, wrote a three-page petition concerning U.S. relations with Israel, which he addressed to incoming President Barack Obama. His petition was endorsed by nine hundred signatories, most located at universities and colleges in the United States, but some affiliated with academic institutions in Canada, United Kingdom, and even Israel.

Lloyd’s petition was notable not only for its criticism of Israeli policy — that is standard fare among the set of academics who subscribe to a post-colonial view of the world — but rather for its demonizing of the Jewish state.

…[A]ccepting as genuine the petitioners’ stated goal of seeking social justice in the Middle East, I thought it fitting to contact the signatories of the Lloyd petition to offer them yet another opportunity to express their commitment to social justice in the region, this time by endorsing a Statement of Concern regarding human rights abuses practiced against gays and lesbians and against women in general in many of the Middle Eastern countries, including the territories controlled by the Palestinian Authority. The idea was really uncomplicated: Since they expressed a concern about social injustice in Israel, they might also be willing to express their concern about human rights abuses practiced against women, gays, and lesbians in other parts of the Middle East.

…Only thirty of the 675 self-described “social-justice seeking academics” responded, 27 of them agreeing to endorse the Statement. But these 27 signatories represent less than five percent of the 675 contacted. In other words, 95 percent of those who had signed the Lloyd petition censuring Israel for human rights violation did not sign a statement concerning discrimination against women and gays and lesbians in the Middle East.

Surprised? If so, prepare for yet a bigger surprise. As many as 25 percent of the Lloyd petition-signing academics were faculty associated with gender and women studies departments. Yet of these, only 5 endorsed the Statement calling for attention to the discrimination against women in the Muslim countries of the Middle East. Put more bluntly, 164 of the 169 faculty who had chosen to focus their life’s work on matters affecting women, and who felt comfortable enough to affix their names to Lloyd’s petition censuring Israel, chose not to sign a Statement of Concern about documented human rights violations against gays, lesbians, and women in the Middle East.[…] A unique experiment on anti-Israel academics

Debunking af islamiserings-debunking

Via Gates of Vienna:

Edmund Standing: Debunking the ‘Islamisation’ Myth

Summary:

In the post-9/11 West, we have seen the worrying growth of a paranoid, bigoted approach to Muslims which increasingly views them as an undifferentiated mass, as an inherent Other, and as a powerful fifth column conspiring to destroy the West and enslave it to Sharia law. […]

The ‘Islamisation’ myth is a dangerous myth, and a myth that must be repudiated if we are to develop as a nation and articulate a positive vision for the future.

[From the comments section]

Don’t lecture me.

I live in a Northen town. Over the last 20 years I’ve seen it completely transformed. I would go as far as to say that the local culture has been completely supplanted. My local Bycicle shop has become the towns Muslim forum. My Gym is now a Mosque. My local pub is now an Islamic girls School. Green grocer is now an Islamic book shop, the local butchers is now the Al Jubail hairdressers. There are eleven Mosques within a half mile radius of my house, three of which are fighting to expand. My high street now consists of a plethora of dingy halal takeaways… The local coal merchant is now a Halal meat processing plant that gets routinely busted for employing illegals. The once football hostel is now accommodation for visiting clerics and local Imams. The RAF club is now a Pakistani resurant. MY local confectioners is now another Curry house, as is the Sweet shop.Two local bookmakers are now asian boutiques and due to flight I am one of two of the original people left on my street. I was born in the house that I currently live in and I am 38 years old. I don’t recognise the local people anymore and I feel estranged to the place I grew up. Islamisation is a myth? No it isnt. UK: New Report: Debunking the “Islamisation” Myth

Tæl mandaterne Vesselbo!
af Poul Vinther Jensen

Venstremanden Eyvind Vesselbo, der jævnligt er kommet med nogle gode artikler omkring udlændingepolitikken, har ifølge Sveriges Radio, advaret den svenske statsminister Fredrik Reinfeldt om at indgå et samarbejde med Sverigedemokraterna i Rigsdagen.

Vesselbo henviser her til Dansk Folkeparti, der efter hans mening har fået alt for store indrømmelser.
Til programmet Ekot mandag siger han følgende:

”- Undgå Sverigedemokraterna. Det har kostet, at arbejde sammen med Dansk Folkeparti .
– Jeg synes, det er et problem, at udlændinge i Danmark hver morgen skal vågne op og høre, at de er et problem i Danmark.
– På en lang række områder er vi gået for langt. De (DF, red.) presser og presser, og vi er gået for langt i vores indrømmelser til dem.”

Vesselbo tror at Sverigedemokraterna vil gøre det samme og presse Reinfeldts regering.

Ja, naturligvis vil de det. Sådan er det i den politiske verden, – her stævner man magten efter evne. Ingen har foræret Sverigedemokraterna noget. De er ved hårdt arbejde igennem en del år nået frem til Talerstolen i den svenske Rigsdag.
Den aristokratiske statsminister F.Reinfeldt vil erfare, at Sverigedemokraterna vil handle lige så køligt som han selv gør.

Vesselbo tilføjer , at hans egen regering burde have sagt nej til DF´s retorik og mange af partiets krav, for Dansk Folkeparti vil aldrig vælte en borgerlig regering.

”- Derfor har jeg aldrig forstået, at min egen regering ikke har sagt nej til langt flere ting. De kunne have sagt nej, slutter Eyvind Vesselbo.

Dette spørgsmål kan nemt besvares.
Lars Løkke Rasmussen og Anders Fog Rasmussen, har aldrig været i tvivl om, hvordan man tæller til 90.

Poul Vinther Jensen.