Friday, February 29, 2008

Human Rights Conventions are not Divine Obligations

I try to write about other things besides Denmark. I really do. But then more good news keeps coming from the Danes, and I can’t just ignore it, can I?

Holger Danske VågnerIt seems that the whole of the Western World is asleep. “Don’t bother us — it’s a nice pleasant flower-strewn meadow, this multicultural dream we’re having. Don’t wake us up.”

But for some reason Denmark, alone among Western nations, has decided to wake up. Holger Danske has one eye open, and the other one will be popping open soon enough.

The latest news concerns a representative from the ruling coalition of the Danish government who has spoken out against the European Human Rights Court for its pernicious decision to deny European governments the right to deport dangerous foreign terrorists. Zonka has kindly translated the article for Jyllands-Posten:

Pind: Insult against Denmark if Tunisians can stay

If the European human-rights convention prevents Denmark from expelling Tunisian terror suspects, Denmark must reconsider whether we should continue to endorse them. Thus says Venstre’s foreign affairs spokesman Søren Pind.

Several experts in human rights believe that a current ruling from the European Human Rights Court means that it will be difficult for Denmark to deport the two Tunisians who are under suspicion for wanting to kill the Mohammed cartoonist Kurt Westergaard, since Tunisia uses torture against prisoners.

However, that is an insult against Denmark, says Søren Pind, who calls for a rebellion against the conventions.

“It makes our affiliation of the European Human Rights Convention a parody. It enforces us an obligation to protect people who want to kill us,” writes Søren Pind on his blog.

If the judicial interpretations are correct, then the consequence, according to Søren Pind, could be a Danish showdown against the convention.

“Conventions are not divine obligations. They are agreements between countries. Agreements that are entered into can be terminated, But it shouldn’t have to come to that. Thus the question must be asked again and again to those who reject deportation: Give us a usable answer, one in which the evil in our midst won’t be tolerated. Where blatant and reckless offenses against our hospitality aren’t just ignored. Where the sanction gives meaning,” says Søren Pind.

Zonka includes his commentary on the situation:
- - - - - - - - -
We are seeing an unprecedented political unity at the moment against the more radical Islamic demands and what have you, from the left to the right.

Things that Pia Kjærsgaard (DPP) would be ridiculed for saying a couple of weeks ago are being uttered by the Socialists (Villy Søvndal, Socialist People’s Party), and the common people are waking up to the fact of the Islamic salami-strategy of threats and demands.

The sleepwalking politicians and bureaucrats are being admonished. Former foreign minister Uffe Ellemann-Jensen (Venstre) recently stated that the re-publishing of the cartoons was an unnecessary provocation, and that he wished that people wouldn’t use their freedom of speech, so that it could flourish better in places where it really was needed… (??? I think he has been brain-damaged by being such an enthusiastic Eurocrat; he thinks freedom of speech should be harmonized, so that we all end up on the average “Freedom of Speech”-ness.)

So we also have our dhimmis still, but there are fewer of them, and fortunately they are more and more isolated and alone in their views. Venstre’s political spokesperson Inger Støjberg said, “Jeg kan kun sige, at Uffe Ellemann skal være glad for, at han har sin ytringsfrihed, og at jeg er lodret uenig med ham.“ (“I can only say that UEJ ought to be happy that he has his freedom of speech, and that I’m totally in disagreement with him.”)

And then there is the police chief in Copenhagen (Per Larsen) who believes that we ought to have some tea-meetings with the troublemakers and enter an endless and fruitless dialogue, instead of giving consequences, which leads more and more people to turn against that policy lest common people lose faith in the police, and resort to vigilantism.

So, yes, things are moving quickly at the moment here in Denmark. Not only does Holger have one eye squinting open, he is beginning to stir in the dungeons of Kronborg… There is something rotten in the state of Denmark, and the Danes are beginning to realize that it isn’t the Danes, and they want to get rid of not just the smell, but the gangrene-infected parts!

12 comments:

songdongnigh said...

Denmark is not the only country stuck with Islamic terrorists it wants to get rid of. Evidently, all member of the EU are subject to the whims of the European Court of Human Rights.

Except for Denmark, it's not surprising that the rest of the EU is rushing to bow down to Sharia. Since they've given up national sovereignty to the EU, why not to Islam?
From the Daily Mail

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled hate preachers such as Abu Qatada should stay in the UK.
Britain could be stuck with more than a dozen international terror suspects after a devastating ruling by the European Court of Human Rights.
Judges said the right of a fanatic to be protected from torture in his homeland was "absolute".

laine said...

It's complete BS to claim that these terrorists are in danger if they are returned to their homelands.

Who there is going to torture these fine Muslim jihadists whom they suckled and exported? They'll just be given another assignment of murder and mayhem elsewhere.

As for the terrorists themselves, whatever happened to stoically accepting your fate, whatever it is? Insh'allah, right?

And for any non-suicidal Europeans left, who do not want to drink the Kool-Aid, a court that commands you to clasp a viper to your breast to protect the viper deserves no obedience.

Henrik said...

"It's complete BS to claim that these terrorists are in danger if they are returned to their homelands."

Actually, it isn't. It turns out that one of the would-be terrorists have a 20 year prison sentence waiting for him in Tunesia!

Now, I've never been to that country, much less visited its jails, but I'm not sure I'm able to even imagine how bad it may be. These guys certainly would be in danger if returned.

And know what? It doesn't matter.

These persons are, for obvious reasons and as decided by the Danish intelligence and government, Persona non Grata in Denmark, and we want them out. That's it. Whatever should happen to them after they're kicked out should not be the concern of Denmark in any fashion.

That it is anyhow constitutes a problem.

What we see here is a significant erosion of the nation-state in the name of 'Human rights'. We in Denmark want to protect our citizens, and not least our media people and politicians.

Yet, stupid Gutmenschen (bleeding-hearts) take the human rights and use them by the letter for exactly the purpose they were not intended, to protect real crimnals. The human rights conventions are designed to protect reasonable people from unjust governments, not the other way round.

This issue has been hotly debated the last couple of weeks in Denmark, and I believe that what happens here erodes our confidence in the concept of human rights as such, as the system apparently is taken as a divine reveleation (no pun intended - or then, OK :) not to be changed for for any concievable reason.

If we can agree on actually modifying some impractical aspects of the human rights conventions, we could fix this. Otherwise, this is one step towards secession.

[on Uffe Elleman-Jensen]
"I think he has been brain-damaged by being such an enthusiastic Eurocrat."

We've been wondering about his psykological state for quite a while, like 2+ years, and this seems the most plausible explanation. Apart from some real physical brain damage, which may be there without being realized.

He was a stout fellow standing up against the Soviet Union and did us all lots of great things, spearheading in particular the freedom of Estonia, Lativa and Lithauania. But now his courage and/or good intentions seem to be completely washed away with age.

There really is something about this being a die-hard Eurocrat. It seems to dissolve ones will, and even the perception of the need for, doing something for your own country.

The 'Bilderberg' meetings, where all the bigshots (politicians, newspaper editors) from EU gather to 'coordinate their views' may be at heart of this. They seem to be talked out of standing up for their own countries and instead seduced to seek 'Unity' (that ol' fascist thing), which in turn makes them commit more and more mistakes.

Anders Fogh Rasmussen seems to be in danger of going down this path, possibly due to the lure of becoming EU president or something. We may do well in paying more attention to these meetings.

You'll also notice the caveat at Helle Thorning-Schmidt and her reaction to the Islamic enforcement of censorship: She does the somewhat cowardly thing of referring it to the EU level. EU has been rather inept, to put it mildly, at handling any of the challenges posed by Islam and immigration. I'm not expecting anything of significant to come from that level.

What matters, of course, is that she does speak up. Now we have all major parties on record on this, and it's free-for-all to point out more cases of intimidation and 'religiously' based censorship.

Not that I even consider Islam to be a religion pe se, but that's a challenge for another day. This February 2008 has been interesting indeed.

As for the Danes always being ahead on this, well... I was trying mildly yesterday to pursuade the Baron to not single us out all the time - I mean, we're all in this together - but he's apparently right, Danes seem to be taking the obvious 'next step some 80 % of the time... Perhaps it's because we love our flag and hate to see it burned?

What we need now is for everyone else to do the same, and the Islamists will be rendered powerless. Following that, I expect Islam to be exposed for the fraud it really is.

Also worth remembering is the groundwork behind the politicians taking a stand on these issues. Reporting, blogging, writing. Arguing the fine points of this being primarily an ideological problem. Emphasizing that Muslims are free to leave their ****** religion, and rehashing that this is a fight for freedom vs. reactionary superstition.

ENGLISHMAN said...

What happens to violent medieval scum once they are returned to thier wonderful countries of origin , is really beside the point,they have chosen thier way and must accept the consequences,we on the other hand have every right to protect ourselves,and for politicians to say there is nothing that we can do,is an abdication of responsibility,the only thing that will happen when the eu are told to stuff thier human rights as far as they can get it ,is that these politicians will be barred from the euro-trough ,and the fabulous amounts of money that they steal from us,all it needs is for some-one to say ,this is absurd and we will not implement it,after all are we not men?

Henrik said...

"violent medieval scum"

I'm offended by this comparison of our fine Middle Ages to reactionary Arabian religion.

Think I'll go draw a Motoon :)

Matt said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Baron Bodissey said...

Matt --

Gates of Vienna's rules about comments require that they be civil, temperate, on-topic, and show decorum. Your comment violated the last of these rules. We keep a PG-13 blog, and exclude foul language, explicit descriptions, and epithets. This is why I deleted your comment.

Use of asterisks is an appropriate alternative.

--------------------------

Matt said...

To be honest who really gives a f*** if they're totured if they're deported to the savage, backward nation from whence they came....oh yeah the EU. Silly me.

Lets be fair until we in the West start making it clear that there will be severr, and I mean REALLY severe consequences, every time the islamist cause trouble, they'll keep doing it. It's aboutntime we went after their financial backers ie the saudi whabbi-ists(sic). "Use your influence on these c***s or enjoy the sight of cruise missiles in landing in Riyahd".

Appeasement didn't work against Hitler and it won't work against these f***ing idiots.

Rier said...

Not to get sidetracked by partisan issues, but this discussion does have ideological aspects, so speaking as part of "the left that gets it", my response to concern that these poor fellows will be tortured is simply this:

That's no concern of ours!

Although I think of myself as a Social Democrat - the intentions of the idea were honorable, even if the current program and its results are a complete mess - I'm only too happy to see the Left dropping like flies in recent European elections such as the Swedish and the French. Hopefully Britain's Labour will be the next get the axe.

The humane welfare state was never envisioned as a safe zone for sectarian thugs or any other criminal riff-raff looking for sanctuary for the consequences of their misdeeds. (It's one thing to intervene forcefully with the governments they're being sent back to, pressuring them - and this we definitely should do - to exercise restraint and non-violence in their interrogations and incarcerations, but to shelter these vermin at the expense of our own citizens and risk to our own security - definitely not!).

That Europe's and Canada's Social Democracies (and even America's to the extent that it actually exists there) have become such an appalling cesspool is an absolutely damning indictment of the Left-leaning governments that built them and the cynicism that their ideology has degenerated into. "Social Democratism" (if I can call it that in order to make a valuable distinction between the ideology in the abstract, and the program and policy of Social Democracy in practice by the governments of real states) needs to be utterly scrapped in its present form if it's to have anything worthwhile to offer citizens in the future. I would go so far as to say that it has to cut itself free from classic "Socialism" entirely, and seek to redesign and rebuild itself on an entirely new foundation. Such an extensive renovation requires the kind of lengthy and intense soul searching that can only be accomplished in the political wilderness.

As for the concrete matter of abrogating human rights conventions and other treaties in the interests of the security of the state and its citizens, Conservative governments are better inclined by temperament to be able and willling to do this. And so I say that Left-wing voters who truly care about the future of their societies - rather than just partisan advantage - ought to resign themselves to acceptance of an opposition role only for their parties (a muted, moderate and cautious one at that) until these parties can complete their own badly needed internal work.

I hope leaders like Willy Sorvndal will urge his own party, and his counterparts in other Left-wing parties in the West to make that kind of renewal of their parties, and the corresponding renewal of their respective societies, a greater priority than simply pursuing the reigns of political power. And a good start in this would be to add their voice to that of Soren Pind, and anyone else speaking up in favour of this kind of common sense measure.

Rier said...

Who there is going to torture these fine Muslim jihadists whom they suckled and exported?

Posted by Laine

That's easy. Just about anyone who happens to be in power in their countries. Look at the situation in Iraq, where its the traditional bloodbath between Shi'a and Sunni, or the recent history of Afghanistan, where the Taliban (Wahabbist Sunnis) have, since the 1990s, been slaughtering those deemed not zealous or observant enough. The vast profusion of Muslim sects are nearly all equally violent. The Saudis have indeed "suckled" their own Wahabi terrorists - whose thanks are to turn against them and try to overthrow the Saudi Royal government - but they are not exactly known for pampering them in prison. Even in the reputedly secular regimes of Islamic countries like present-day Turkey (not for much longer perhaps) or Iraq under Saddam Hussein, the ruling figures were at least nominally Muslim, and look at how they treated their prisoners and their opponents. Nationalist, secularist and socialist regimes (the Alawite regime of present day Ba'athist Syria comes to mind) are not known for their humane treatment of prisoners, even if they're not particularly devout or observant Muslims.

I think the point for us in the West should be - "Who cares?". We can not possibly solve all of the world's problems, including its human rights travesties. Who helped us? No one! Through a long history of tremendous violence and bloodshed we figured out that we needed to develop notions of human rights, mutual obligations, and democratic institutions so that we could resolve our disputes sensibly. The Moslem countries of the world are simply going to have to do the same - or suffer accordingly. We can not save them from themselves. We can express moral outrage with these governments, and perhaps boycott them economically, but we owe these terrorist troglodytes no more than that. Like Willy Sorvndal said to HuT: "Get out of the role of victim!" In other words, "Take responsibility for yourselves. Don't expect others to do everything for you".

Zenster said...

It enforces [upon] us an obligation to protect people who want to kill us

Somewhere, George Orwell is smiling.

When individuals arrive in a host country seeking asylum they are usually sworn not to participate in any criminal enterprise or conspiracy as a condition of their admission. The Tunisian thugs who sought to murder cartoonist Kurt Westergaard clearly abrogated that oath.

If these Islamic terrorists were really so afraid of being abused during imprisonment in their home country they would not have engaged in any activity that could get them ejected from their place of asylum.

In defiance of such vital logic, these Tunisian scumbags went right ahead and plotted to murder a Danish citizen in cold blood. This can only mean that any claims by them of fearing torture upon deportation were either falsified or overstated. Otherwise they damn well would have kept their noses clean, now wouldn't they?

These cretins most certainly did not and such self-repudiation should serve to invalidate any credibility regarding their fears of political or physical oppression. Clearly, they did not fear such repercussions anywhere near enough to stay out of trouble.

The State's first and foremost obligation is protecting its legitimate LAW-ABIDING citizens. Concerns over international politics or the care and feeding of aliens who wash up on their shores must remain entirely secondary.

If there are Human Rights that the State should concern itself with they must, above all, be those of its own native population. The well-being and safety of a government's electorate is its sole raison d'être. The least pretense of placing the welfare of aliens before that of its own natural citizens is outright TREASON.

Once again we are provided with a vivid portrait of what happens when people serve the State instead of the State serving its people. If the EU is so concerned about Human Rights in Tunisia and elsewhere, it can set about deposing such tyrannies or boycotting all diplomatic and economic ties with these regimes.

For any government to turn the State into a refuge for terrorists and murderers goes beyond malfeasance of office. It is a direct betrayal of their primary charter and an act of war against its own citizenry.

The EU Human Rights Commission's ruling against these Danish deportations epitomizes altruistic self-immolation in its most destructive form. Such moral preening in the face of a direct and violent threat plumbs the very depths of depravity. A tumbrel and guillotine should await all such ministerial scum who indulge in this sort of dilettantish sophistry.

These are not mere heedless Neroes—fiddling as Rome burns—but dedicated arsonists flinging torches onto the rooftops. They are traitors to mankind for whom a swift demise would be far too merciful.

Zonka said...

Zenster,

It is even worse than what you describe, the Tunesians themselves have not said anything about the matter, except to claim that they're innocent of the charges. The outcries came from "concerned Danes" and the Goodness-industry and the elite...

And two of the three Tunisians weren't asylum seekers in the first place, they were here with a staying permit, meaning that they most likely were brought here as part of a family reunion program. So they were guests pure and simple. The last Tunesian had gotten a Danish citizenship, and as the Police Intelligence didn't want to reveal their sources and how they caught them, there wasn't enough to get this guy convicted, so he was released with the notification that the Intelligence service would keep an eye on him for a long time.

So as guests it should be fairly simple to say, you're no longer welcome here anymore... And it is according to the terror-laws instigated by a broad majority of the Danish parliament, but the "do-gooders" won't take that lying down, how dare we show certain guests the door without going through a full court procedure, with generous appeal rights etc.

Zenster said...

Zonka, it sounds like the best thing would be for all three of these Tunisians to experience mysteriously fatal "accidents".

As I have mentioned numerous other times, progress will come when jihadis must first look over their shoulder before shouting "Death to America!"