Thursday, August 10, 2006

Are We Ready for Confrontation?

Vigorous and open debate seems to be the norm in the Danish press nowadays. Zonka has translated an opinion piece from a Danish newspaper (a version of the same translation is posted on his own blog).

First, his remarks from his cover note to us:

Below is an article from Jyllands-Posten on Aug. 7, 2006. I believe that it is important on several issues, foremost because I think it is a correct assessment of the situation… uh duh :-) But also because it shows that the Danish media climate is (with a few regrettable exceptions, Thøger Seidenfaden’s Politiken comes naturally to mind) such that these issues can be stated openly and without being censored by the media PC police. The big question though is how many are listening and taking the warnings seriously. In my opinion a growing number of people… but as the author of the article states: Are they willing to do what is necessary?

And now the article itself:

Are We Ready for Confrontation?

By Ole Hasselbalch, professor, Doctor of Laws — Jyllands-Posten, August 7, 2006

Dr. Ole HasselbalchThere is no more breathing room for being slow on the uptake or fickle. He who neither understands the foundations for the benefits he enjoys nor is willing to act accordingly is bound to lose them.

It isn’t written anywhere that the West and our model of society will win. Thus there is no basis for dialogue with Islam, as long as that faith’s practitioners only consider such as a tool for deception, says the author of today’s article.


The waters have been parted after the Mohammed Affair. Those who do not now understand what the situation is will probably never understand.

It wasn’t a case of a spontaneous and popular indignation over some not very sensational cartoons: The affair started months after the publication, the Egypt government acted as midwife, and the authentic cartoons were supplemented with a set of fakes and lies. And one doesn’t burn embassies and flags in that part of the world without governmental approval.

Within the Arabic cultural sphere a feigned anger over an alleged offense is a well-known trait. Last winter there were many reasons to invent such an outrage: Egypt was facing a parliamentary election, and the regime needed a cause to boost their image. Iran needed a diversion from the Western attention to the nuclear ambitions of the country. Syria needed to have the pressure lifted after the involvement in the assassination of the former Lebanese prime minister. The negotiations about Kosovo’s future were imminent. The new Palestinian government needed legitimacy. Finally there was a need for tougher blasphemy laws to cap the increasing tendency in the Western European media to occupy themselves with the unacceptable parts of Islam — the British parliament was about to discuss “The Religious Hatred Bill”.

In short, the Mohammed Affair wasn’t set off by an offense. It was created in the expanding Muslim world in use for the conflict with the West.

This conflict is fundamentally about whether a political ideology clothed in a religious mantle will be allowed to force its dogma upon others, and even dictate that this must replace empirical knowledge. If this succeeds, we’re back to the times when Copernicus and Galileo were facing the Inquisition. On such a foundation no decent society can be built.

As the Mohammed Affair shows, the means that are employed against us are unusual.

The core element is the demographic trend. As Per Stig Møller noted in JP Jul. 7:

“In the middle of this century half a billion Europeans — included herein a large number of Muslim immigrants — will be facing a Middle-East and Northern Africa with four times as many people.”

He could have added that demographers at Copenhagen University have predicted a Muslim majority in Denmark within this century. (Berlingske Tidende August 8, 2005).

This situation is being exploited by the frontrunners of Islam. In Norway the resident fundamentalist, Mullah Krekar, says it this way: “Look at the development in Europe’s population, where the number of Muslims is growing like mosquitoes. Each western woman in the EU produces on average 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries is producing 3.5 children. In 2050, 30% of the population in Europe will be Muslims” (Dagbladet March 13, 2006). Libya’s Gadaffi states it this way: “We have 50 million Muslims in Europe. They are a sign that Allah will give Islam victory over Europe — without swords, without cannons, without conquest. The 50 million Muslims in Europe will turn Europe Muslim within a few decades. Allah is mobilizing Muslim Turkey to adds that to the European Union. That is an addition of 50 million more Muslims. Then there will be 100 million Muslims in Europe. Albania, which is a Muslim country is already in the EU. Bosnia which is a Muslim country is already in the EU. 50% of the population in those countries are Muslim.” (Memri-TV)

It is further known which currents that dominate the Muslim immigration groups. Based on the Mohammed Affair one can mention the survey LO published in Ugebrevet A4 on March 13, 2006: Under half would distance themselves from the anti-Danish riots in the Middle-East — 11% even fully endorsed flag-burnings, the destruction of embassies, and boycotting Danish goods.

The so-called moderate Muslims are insignificant. Only 1,000 signed up for “Democratic Muslims” in four weeks — the same number as the fundamentalists at any time can muster in Nørrebrohallen (Meeting place of Hizb-ut-tahrir — translator). The moderates will thus very likely be silenced in the long run, simply because there will be insufficient police resources to protect them.

Now it is certainly not a law of nature that the most populous cultures always are victorious. The Spaniard Cortez toppled the mighty Inca empire with a few hundred soldiers. The people behind the Mohammed Affair know that they can neither defeat the West militarily or economically. This is why they operate on the psychological level by inventing fictitious offenses and demand “respect” for their “religion”. They need our passivity, until the population increase makes it impossible to stop them.

Therefore criticism of Islam is characterized as smear campaigns and hatred, natural defenses are called “discriminatory”, and those who for 25 years have warned about what is going on, are being labelled and stigmatized with the aid of Danish collaborators as “rightwing extremists”.

If we for that reason allow ourselves to be sucked into debates about the “tone of the debate”, we lose precious time — and at the same time overlook how the respect for other religions are being practiced the deeply intolerant Middle-East, where in the last 100 years they have virtually succeeded in wiping out the Christian and Jewish societies.

The status today is that Europe is about to be lost because of European leaders who lack the ability to identify the character of the threat, or at least are looking the other way, who are fickle, reluctant to say things clearly, and dislike taking the unpleasant steps now that will prevent something even worse later on.

As a consequence of this a society after Middle-Eastern fashion with corruption, nepotism and religious madness is waiting at the door. Along the way the rights of freedom will be suppressed — first because he who risks being suicide bombed would usually rather give in on the ideals than lose his life. Taxation will break down as the conditions in the kiosks and small shops (mostly owned by Muslim immigrants, and known for cheating on taxes — translator) will spread to other branches of commerce. The Police will not be able to enter increasingly larger geographical areas. The social structure will collapse as a result of the Muslims’ family structure, their views on women’s place in society, and a lack of understanding among too many of them about the connection between giving and receiving benefits. The consequence will be worse that the medieval Black Death, since our successors will be a suppressed minority who will not have the ability to rebuild what has been lost.

Humans often have difficulties imagining calamities that haven’t happened yet, and the many influential Seidengfadens and Skov Christensens (multi-cultural Islamic apologists — translator) will, with their fantasy tales, pull the wrong way.

There is however, no more breathing room for being slow on the uptake or fickle. He who neither understands the foundations for the benefits he enjoys nor is willing to act accordingly is bound to lose them. It isn’t written anywhere that the West and our model of society will win.

It is thus damaging to continue to support the establishment of a culture here, whose supporters considered as a group haven’t — and after all human experience never will understand — the preconditions for the peace and prosperity that they enjoy. Such an “integration” is the same as a retreat of the Western order on our own soil. We have both a right — and to our descendants a duty — to protect ourselves from this.

Therefore the awarding of citizenship to persons who cannot be expected to respect our values must stop — and those who have received citizenship anyway must be motivated to strike camp. Likewise, the current influence of Middle-Eastern culture in the daily life of Danes must be opposed and not supported. When Jewish high-school students are being harassed and threatened in school, their parents should not be advised to transfer their children to other schools, but rather the school needs to be cleared of Muslims who can’t behave. And if Muslim ladies can’t bathe together with others in swimming pools, they are to be referred to the Red Sea instead.

It is furthermore important to gain insight into how much influence has been purchased by petrodollars on the press, the bureaucracy and politicians who are pushing in the direction of where we are heading, and how much manipulation of Middle-Eastern origin the public is exposed to. It is known that the oil-sheiks have bought not only American ambassadors, but even a former president. How is the situation in this country? NATO can resist a frontal tank battle, but the Western leaders have been completely unprepared for the scams and tricks behind the Mohammed Affair. Are they better prepared today?

Last but not least, respect for Islam’s wickedness isn’t promoting any Islamic soul searching. Islam as of today contains some serious systemic problems: It interferes aggressively, and without paying attention to the means, in other peoples lives in the same way as totalitarian ideologies. Other world religions had to be re-interpreted before they — in the past — could be used in the same way.

There is thus no basis for a dialogue with Islam, as long as this belief’s practitioners just consider such dialogue as a tool for deception.

Note that Dr. Hasselbalch asserts that a violent and extremist minority in Islam is capable of cowing and eventually destroying the “moderate Muslims”. There’s no way to tell what percentage is necessary — 10%? 15% 20%? — but it will take far less than a majority of Islamists within Islam to marginalize the moderates and make Jihad the norm.

Bolshevik means “member of the majority”, and Lenin’s cadres acquired that cognomen because they represented the majority when the revolutionary Marxist Social-Democrat Party in Russian split along ideological lines at the Party Congress in 1903.

But the Bolsheviks were never more than a tiny minority within Russian society. Even so, their total devotion to ideology, fanatical zeal, and absolute ruthlessness allowed them to take control of Russia, destroy its political culture, and terrorize and massacre their countrymen for seventy-four years.

Seventy-four years of Islam would leave Europe in a far worse condition than the Bolsheviks left Russia. Denmark — and Europe — would be wise to heed Dr. Hasselbalch’s advice.

20 comments:

Evan said...

First, thanks to Zonka for the terrific translation. Second, that a leader like Qaddafi has no idea that Bosnia and Albania are not EU members is in some minor sense part of the problem, I suppose.

Third, there is some evidence that immigrant fertility converges fairly quickly toward native European norms. If so, immigration becomes the biggest channel for demographic transformation. Beyond Denmark, what other European nations have decided to sacrifice some of their unsustainable welfare states by keeping out immigrants who are young and theoretically (reality is another matter) will pay taxes to keep the Ponzi scheme going?

Finally, how important a paper is Jyllands-Posten? Is it a fringe voice, dismissed as "extreme right," or do a lot of Danes read it?

Zerosumgame said...

Baron:

Bolshevik means “member of the majority”, and Lenin’s cadres acquired that cognomen because they represented the majority when the revolutionary Marxist Social-Democrat Party in Russian split along ideological lines at the Party Congress in 1903.

That actually is not correct. In one of the first cases of Marxist-Lenninist Orwellian perversion of language, the Bolsheviks were actually a minority, but as a propaganda coup, took the name Bolshevik.

The real stupidity was Trotsky, who in fact having a majority at that Congress, taking the name Menzhevik.

Zonka said...

Evan,
"Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten" wehich is the full name of the paper is the largest regular newspaper in Denmark, so it is not some fringe newspaper it is among the trendsetters of Danish Newspapers. It is viewed as a right-wing newspaper, but not an extreme one except by the leftwing and the multi-cultural elite, who will usually read "Politiken" or "Information" as these cater more to their flavor!

chuck said...

The Spaniard Cortez toppled the mighty Inca empire with a few hundred soldiers.

Just to quibble, but I believe Cortez also had lots of help from non-Aztec tribes in the area. The Aztecs had not made themselves popular, all those sacrifices came from their neighbors after all, and there seems to have been a wholescale rebellion of which the Spaniards were just a part. That is not to say that Cortez and his few hundred soldiers didn't catalyse the whole thing. And indeed, that is just what Al Qaeda and other such groups are seeking to do, catalyse the Muslim population as a whole.

Zrinyi's Last Stand said...

The article hit on something important but misses what be more important. It does not take a majority to rule a country. This fallacy of majoritarianism- as long as there's more of us we'll be okay- blinds people of brute reality: force, not numbers, rules. Like the bolsheviks or nazi's, a forceful, violent minority can easily rule a docile majority. What the article misses is that the violent minority is already in Europe, and is unlikely to leave peacefully. Should European trust their collaberationist governments to stand up against the violent minority? Or is it time for citizens to think about what it would take to reclaim their country from the violent minority and the traitorous bureaucracy?

A Free Man said...

The bolsheviks were a minority of Rusians, a tiny minority, but with their allies(such as modern day leftists) they grabbed control of Russia and raped it and left it the husk it now is!

The Nazis were never a majority, always a minority, again with allies they gained control of Germany and left half the world in ruins.

The same goes for the French Revolutionaries, the Maoists in China, the Baathists in Iraq and Syria etc...

The lesson is minorities are dangerous. When they take control for a cause, one can only expect ruin!

Apparently 25% of British Muslims can justify the 7/7 attacks in London. That is a minority, but a substantial minority and a dangerous one!

Chip said...

Without immediate changes in European policy completely at odds with 30 years of momentum Europe will be lost. Demographics are chilling already. I read the average Muslim immigrant has an average of five children (per wife?), most getting maximum welfare benefits - not providing the labor, the ostensible reason for uncontrolled Muslim immigration. Perhaps bankrupting the social welfare systems will cause Europeans to throw of the yoke of their EU oppressors?

Politics certainly won't. The socialists will never give up their base. Expecting the average European to turn from socialism is a tall order. France is one the test cases, losing the demographic battle rapidly. I'm not sure about other nations.

Evan said...

Chip:

Perhaps bankrupting the social welfare systems will cause Europeans to throw of the yoke of their EU oppressors?

I hadn't thought about it that way, but it seems to me that it's also possible that the desperate desire for young people to keep the system going in the face of cratering native European birthrates might make politicians reluctant to restrain immigration. The welfare state appears to be sacrosanct; I recall a German politician recently saying something like "We know what we have to do, we just don't know how to win an election after doing it."

Fellow Peacekeeper said...

Is Ole Hasselbalch regarded as mainstream expressing a wider opinion, or is he somewhat marginalized like Andrew Frazer in Australia (swimming against the PC tide in academia there)?

Don Miguel said...

Just a little more to quibble, Cortez conquered the Aztec empire with a few hundred soldiers (and with local help); Pizarro conquered the larger Inca empire with even fewer soldiers (and a whole lot of luck and timing).

Zonka said...

Fellow Peacekeeper,
I don't think you could call Ole Hasselbalch mainstream, he is a former chairman of Den Danske Forening and is generally being viewed as being part of the "extreme" right-wing, at least what concerns immigration policies, and is being constantly demonized by the lefties and the multi-cultural crowd. So yes he is being marginalized and demonized, but he has occasionally been vindicated by being right on the money before most other people saw the problem. He started out writing about the dangers of immigration back in 1987 in a political climate that was comparable to the current Swedish political climate, namely that you don't talk about this or you will be ostracized by everybody politician, media etc.

kepiblanc said...

Ole Hasselbalch used to be a prominent member of "The Danish Society" (Den Danske Forening) - normally considered a ultra right-wing group. I've heard that he quitted - or the group dissolved itself. Anyway, times have changed and what used to be "ultra" is merely "mainstream" nowadays. We have some real "ultra" groups here like the "Danish Front" (Dansk Front) and "NSDAP" (National Socialistisk Dansk Arbejder Parti - Nazi's) - totalling up to maybe 300 members, max. Those two groups - sects - are anti-semitic and nothing but jokes. Ole Hasselbalch is a respected professor of jurisprudence and a regular in "Jyllands-Posten".

"Jyllands-Posten" is - by a comfortable margin - the largest daily in Denmark. Especially strong in matters such as business, foreign affairs and politics generally. Weaker in "cultural" stuff, fine arts and sociology. Very influential and few factual errors (as opposed to "Politiken" - a.k.a. "Samarbejds-Politiken" (due to its history of collaboration with the Nazis) which is the dhimmi-opposition's daily).

anti-uffe said...

Very true, kepiblanc, let med just add that Jyllands-Posten and the sickening dhimmi Politiken rag are merged formally with respect to printing and distribution, something which got quite a few people worried on behalf of the latter, the fear being that the alleged right-wing politics of Jyllands-Posten would contaminate the sensitive, humanitarian editorial line of the dhimmi rag. Quite the contrary proved to be the result, as the two papers were aggressively at each other's throats during the Motoon rage.

ScottSA said...

As Bawer said, if the liberals can't fix this problem, someone will come along who can, and it won't be nice.

Unfortunately what seems to happen in revolutionary times is that the political 'center' shifts too rapidly for the system to accomodate it, while the old order refuses to move, leading to a clash. From what I hear, the former 'right' has now become centrist while the old center is striving to enforce its hegemony.

The problem is not the right swing of the center; the problem will come from the right and left fringes, who will attempt to fill the vaccuum by force. In this case the 'left' is Islamofascism.

Profitsbeard said...

The danger in our opposition to Imperialistic Islam is that our vision of our Culure is weaker than theirs.

Even though the jihadists' 'culture' is sadistic and nihilistic, it is intense. And intensity is more alluring than the weak wattage soup of the West. A galvanic twitch of cliches about "liberty" and "democracy", but little real heart behind it.

The 'leadership' will have to get the hell out of the way.

They don't seem to grasp the value of our Civilization in their nerves.

Half the fight is inspiration.

Phanarath said...

Profitsbeard..

I dont think our vision of our culture is weaker then theirs in any way.

The danger is infact that our vision of our culture is so much stronger, that many of us wiew fighting for ourselves as something rude, brutal and totaly uncalled for.

Its the same with our vision of Israel. We see Israel as an imortal a demigod and its enemies as weak and fragile things. And so its allways Israel that we ask to hold back.

You seem to mistake fear for strengt. Its true that fear will make people do things that others would not. But it is not strength, it is desperation.

If you take a lot of fear and oppresion and mix it with an old dream you still dont get a strong vision.

I hope, thats a little inspiration for you :-)

rocketcuckoo said...

A sidenote on the Spanish conquests of the Americas; the single most powerful weapon they had was viral: smallpox (and other nasty Eurasian diseases, why the Spanish infected Native Americans and not vice versa is even more beside the point in this discussion). Cortéz was forced to flee in 1520 and returned later to conquer a nation decimated by the virus and for all purposes unable to fight back. Smallpox also spread into the Incan empire before Pizarro arrived and plunged the nation into a costly civil war. Pizarro was able to capture the young Sapa Inca by deceit and in a few years up to a staggering 90% of the Inca population had been annihilated by smallpox and weakened by other diseases.

When European explorers first reached inland North America they found dead ghost cities and remains of cultures they never came face to face with. Again, the disease had marched before them. Smallpox wiped out entire populations, killing millions.

What is the smallpox radical Islam would inflict upon us? Immigration?

Dunno. This calls for a beer.

Alexis said...

It looks like time for some shameless self-promotion. If you ever want to see a satirical cartoon lampooning Mr. Nasrallah, here's your chance. I'm also inclined to agree with Joha that a refusal to criticize Islam means the effective dehumanization of Islam.

http://cybersym.blogspot.com

ScottSA said...

"satirical cartoon lampooning Mr. Nasrallah"

bearded butterball turkey in a turban

Ydragsil said...

I my opinion the weakness of european culture is the basic problem.

The solution to the Muslim problem is quite clear if ou actually know what you are talking about. Let me illustrate:

European states are all basically modelled on ideas made by Aristotle. In Aristotles book "Politics" he more or less defines the state we have today. He defines democracy, the institution of law, education, private ownership and so on.

This basic knowledge is however more or less forgotten in european politics today (even though it actually got the name from the book, politics is means how to rule a citystate, Polis being a city)

In the book definition of citizenship is quite clearly defined as persons who are able to carry out a job in the service of the law - being a judge, advocat or the like.

Since Shaira, the lawsystem of the muslims, quite clearly makes it impossible for a believing muslim to carry out a job in the service of the law - muslims cannot be citizens.

So, if you are serious about a lawstate you should obviously uphold some protection of it - talking away citizenships from people who want to tear the state down.

Now the EU and the UN often point to the human rigths, an idea that was put forth in the latest reneassance, inspired by the antique romans. However, it is quite obvious that Aristotles conception is supreme to the idea of the human rights - the theoretical quality i simply better and based on thorough scientific and biological research.

So the obvious medication to the european problems, is to reeducate the society on its own roots - making another renaessance. To do this however, you need philosophers, not just wannabee philosophers, but real, believing philosophers who believes in democracy, freedom of speech, and in the idea of a philosophic God.

And right now, the are very few places that still carries this tradtion on. Luckily Denmark does - through its proud traditions in the Højskole. (The prime minister and the minister of education are both from the Højskole environment)

So maybe Denmark can carry its philosophic treasures to the rest of Europe, though I doubt it. The experience tells us that the US likes us better than the rest of Europe - well we all just have to see.

To quote Storm P. a wise danish writer - the hardest thing to prophesize on is the future.