Uriasposten Writes About Anti-Jihad Denmark

Below is my translation of an article posted today at Uriasposten, one of the top two blogs in Denmark (along with Snaphanen).

It’s all about the smear job done on Anders Gravers and SIAD by the newspaper Nyhedsavisen yesterday. See our earlier posts on the same topic for more information.

There are two reasons for posting it here: first, to present a view of the whole affair from an entirely Danish perspective, and secondly as an exercise in improving my Danish — and boy! was it a big job. Thanks to Phanarath for helping me correct my mistakes.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *
Nyhedsavisen’s radical leftist Rune Eltard-Sørensen: “SIAD is militant”

Imagine what would happen if critical journalists went over Nyhedsavisen’s Rune Eltard-Sørensen’s work thoroughly. Today he delivers an article of the sort that cries out to heaven. Here it is, at full length…

[text of the entire article follows]

Fact: the new organization called ‘Anti-Jihad Denmark’ has been founded. Within this coalition are, among others, SIAD, Frie Danske Nationalister and Frit Danmark. The chairman of Frie Danske Nationalister, Julius Børgesen was earlier convicted of unlawful possession of weapons. This chairman anounces that his group are armed at their meetings.

Postulate: ‘Anti-Jihad Danmark’ is a militant organization.

It goes without saying that a newly-formed organization cannot be militant when its mission statement indicates otherwise. Nothing in the article supports the headline, and the final quote from Frit Danmark’s chairman all but indicates the opposite. It should also come as a surprise that SIAD became a partipant in a militant network virtually overnight. In Århus SIAD could only assemble twelve or thirteen spectators for a demonstration, and according to the newspaper most of those were old-age pensioners.

SIAD has a prominent place in the story, and it says, among other things, that “they had been subject to a ban on demonstrating for fear of trouble”. Not incorrect, but the basis for prohibition has always been the circumstance that the police cannot guarantee their security during the demonstration. (example). Several months after it became a group, SIAD was attacked with bottles during a meeting in Valby. Just because the Reds and Greens failed to acknowledge the premises of democracy does not mean that SIAD became militants.

Rune Eltard-Sørensen quotes SIAD’s chairman Anders Gravers as saying “Criminal immigrants must be kept behind bars, have their citizenship removed and be sent out of the country”. Not exactly an indication that SIAD is armed… with anything but words.
- - - - - - - - - -
At Nyhedsavisen’s web page there is quite a lively debate about the article. Most interesting is the snip from SIAD’s website to the press…

Anders Gravers emphasized again and again in a telephone interview on May 7th that we operate lawfully… Anders Gravers did not mention a word about being armed, but explained that the anti-jihad proceeds at a verbal level and absolutely lawfully. But that was not something that was ever explained to your readers.

To bash the radical right is a discipline that journalists love, and it is not the first time headlines have been written before the research is done, but since it is known that the journalist Rune Eltard-Sørensen is a radical leftist and has physically attacked the people’s elected politicians, the newspaper cannot be said to be acting in good faith. Editor-in-Chief David Trads markets his news as independent, but a man who appoints the radical left to write about the radical right, and approves “Armed network wants to stop Islam in Denmark”, is not acting in good faith.


Hat tip: Steen.