Below are translations of two editorials from today’s Danish newspapers. One is from Jyllands-Posten, which is a sane and sensible paper that most of our readers are already familiar with. The other is from Politiken, which is another matter entirely. I’ll let our translator, Kepiblanc, explain:
The readers of GoV deserve some background information.
This weekend a pro-Israel demonstration attracted around 500 people in Copenhagen. They listened to speeches, sang the two nations’ national anthems and had some good conversations among themselves before taking the subway and bus home. During that time some Palestinian “youths” tried to disrupt the demonstration by shouting “Heil Hitler”, “Kill all Jews”, “Down with democracy” and “Down with Denmark”. The police took care of that.
Now — after initially ignoring this — our MSM “suddenly” discovered Ted Ekeroth’s video on Snaphanen, Uriasposten, Hodjas Blog, and others of the same ilk. The furor it caused all over the entire blogosphere couldn’t be ignored any longer, so they decided to print some op-eds on the matter.
The daily Jyllands-Posten is well known to the readers of GoV. Not only for printing the original Motoons, but for its overall reasonable stance on matters such as freedom of speech and its anti-lunatic position generally. (Although the paper lately has deteriorated markedly, for example being vehemently pro-EUSSR).
The daily Politiken — [Among Danes “Samarbejds-Politiken” — “Traitor-Politics” — due to its pro-Nazi stance during WWII] — is another matter entirely. Some would call it ‘left-wing’, but in my humble opinion a better label would be “The Congregational Treatise of All the World’s Do-Gooders, Tree-Huggers, Academicians, Nobles, Loonies, Drug-addicts, Winos, and The Holy, Infallible Nomenklatura”. — Just notice the toddler-lingo in its editorial.
Below is Kepiblanc’s translation of the Jyllands-Posten editorial:
Editorial: “Do not buy from Jews”- - - - - - - - -
When someone uses the search engine Google to look up the words “Kauft nicht bei Juden” [German for “Do not buy from Jews”], it returns 5,650 text references and 569 image references.
Those images — all too well known from our history books — show Nazis with swastikas wearing big placards as well as Nazi bullies painting the walls and windowpanes of Jewish businessmen: “Do not buy from Jews”.
This message belongs to a distant and unpleasant time, and the consequences that it conveyed are one of history’s greatest nightmares. Despite its historical distance the message becomes frighteningly present when reading about the political mob “Boycott Israel”, which is so temptingly attractive to BUPL [Danish union of teachers for children and young people — translator].
Furthermore we see abhorrent images of young Palestinians rising their right arms in Nazi salutes and screaming that the Jews must be slaughtered. Not just in the Middle East, but actually during demonstrations in Denmark as well, where the seriousness of the situation is emphasized with stone-throwing and vandalism.
These scenes did not attract much attention in our domestic media and TV channels, but a quick tour of the Internet confirms that anti-Semitism alive and well.
Here in Denmark a confused Copenhagen professor came forward with some nonsense about Muslims being the Jews of our time” and thus suffering massive persecution and humiliation due to their religion and ethnicity.
The above information from the Internet proves fully that the Jews of our time are — the Jews! From that perspective, it is shameful to see who in the current Middle East crisis will end up in cahoots with “Boycott Israel”. The coupling “Kauft nicht bei Juden” is unavoidable.
Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke [Danish foreign aid organization — translator], which likes to present itself as a neutral humanitarian organization, yesterday arranged afternoon and evening demonstrations against Israel in Copenhagen.
Secretary General Frans Mikael Jansen denied that MS had taken a position on the Israel-Hamas conflict, and he sees no problems in the fact that the President, Trine Pertou Mach, stood on Sunday as a co-signer of an advertisement in the newspaper Politiken, which criticized Israel for “escalating rather than ending the conflict”.
Trine Pertou Mach, who is running for parliament for SF [Socialist Party], besides being an employee of “Danish Institute for Human Rights” is evidently allowed to say and write precisely whatever she likes, but she can expect to be challenged in the same tone. As must Tue Magnussen, working as a press coordinator for “Center for Rehabilitation and Research on Torture Victims”.
It is however more than unusually naïve to think that their clear position does not affect public perception of the organizations and institutions they represent. “Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke” has not launched demonstrations against the Hamas terrorists’ constant missile attacks on Israel — ongoing for many years.
It looks like a number of parties, organizations and prominent individuals who unilaterally criticize Israel also have claimed a trademark on the good, the right, the humane.
Margrethe Vestager, chairwoman of “Det Radikale Venstre” [Center-Left Party], even boasts of having something as noble as a “human stance” — as opposed to those who disagree with her, of course. The domestic hatred towards the only democracy in the Middle East and its struggle for survival can be assigned to political naïveté and unctuous political correctness. Compared to violent Palestinian rhetoric, actual violence, and Nazi symbols, this brings back chilling memories of a dark past not to be forgotten, but to be learned from.
And from the progressive redoubts of Politiken:
Signs of racism disguised as criticism of Israel
Listen up: A couple of Danish school headmasters “advise” Jewish parents not to let their children enroll in the local primary school. Demonstrators at the City Hall Square in Copenhagen shout defaming words against Jews and democracy. Jews are reluctant to wear their skull caps in certain streets of Copenhagen. And sympathizers with Israel are met with anti-Semitic defamations.
Sadly, there is a pattern.
And it’s not just Denmark. Jewish communities in France, Britain and Germany have encountered anti-Semitism in conjunction with — or disguised as — criticism of Israel.
It is not only unpleasant. It is also a real challenge to the sustainability of our democratic society that we should not take lightly.
Danish Jews are not responsible for Israel’s policy. Period. Freedom of speech in this country does not contain freedom of racism. Period. And schools are for everyone. Period. Everything else is explaining things away.
That anti-Israeli demonstrators yell “down with democracy” in the streets of Copenhagen is foolish, but obviously not against the law. But shouting defamations against a religious minority is pure racism.
That Danish school headmasters in 2009 may have to advise a Jewish family against enrolling their children in the local school due to its many children with a Muslim background is perhaps kindly meant. But it is unacceptable. Public school is for everyone. And it is not something to be ‘balanced out’ with examples such as other minority children having been mobbed — quite the contrary. It only stresses that an effort must be made on insisting that the school is for everyone. And if someone is airing anti-Semitism or racism against children, the school’s job is to teach children about tolerance and to address disputes — even if fellow believers beyond of the horizon quarrel themselves.
Well, but the bombs are falling in Gaza and Israel….But No! There are no excuses for racism here.
The conflict between Israel and Hamas is serious enough as it is. We help no one in Israel or Palestine by bending democracy and tolerance in this country. By doing so we risk destroying our own, open society. Anti-Semitism should not be ignored, nor met with a forgiving smile. It should be rejected.
Hat tip: TB.
15 comments:
Linked. We are paying attention. Thank you!
Some "confused Copenhagen professor came forward with some nonsense about Muslims being the Jews of our time”
Perhaps they will be. I have wondered if Europe will have infinite patience with these lunatics or will there be a straw that parts the camel's vertebrae? Terrible things have happened in Europe before. They can happen again.
I'm not trying to be sanguinary,- just observing that history often repeats itself.
I find it difficult to believe that Muslims would ever become the "Jews of our time" simply because they would become violent long before it reached that point.
"Terrible things have happened in Europe before. They can happen again."
I'm not trying to be sanguinary,- just observing that history often repeats itself."
A repeat of history in this case would be kicking the Muslims out of Europe just as they were kicked out of France, Spain, Italy and Greece in previous centuries.
However that is not what you are alluding to. When you say "terrible things" you are alluding very specifically to the Holocaust.
Your unwritten implication is that any European self-defense against an Islamic invasion would amount to Nazi-like persecutions against Muslims.
Considering that almost all Americans (especially conservatives) hold this view it indeed very likely that history (Kosovo) will repeat itself.
islam o' phobe said...
Your unwritten implication is that any European self-defense against an Islamic invasion would amount to Nazi-like persecutions against Muslims.
Considering that almost all Americans (especially conservatives) hold this view it indeed very likely that history (Kosovo) will repeat itself.
Say what??
~I am an American;
~I am a conservative (as in Russell Kirk Conservative).
I do not hold these views, nor do the conservatives that I know hold them.
If you are going to make such sweeping statements, first define what you mean by "American conservative".
Balderdash...
Dymphna,
If you are going to make such sweeping statements, first define what you mean by "American conservative".
It might seem to you that I am engaging in pugilism for the sake of it but that is not the case.
I suppose the correct term for what I mean would be "neo-conservative" though some people consider that label offensive.
By "most" I should qualify that I only mean the vast majority of American conservatives that I have talked to--and by talked to I mostly mean talked to on the internet, so I suppose they could just be random nutcases.
I do not mean you or your husband, all the commenters on this site or various correspondents of mine.
But it seems to be a kind of "meme" popping up everywhere with increasing frequency. Like a chain letter.
The most popular and influential American conservative writer of the moment (though he isn't really American or conservative) is Mark Steyn and this view is the implied subtext and/or explicit text of many of his articles over the last 5-10 years.
Basically this view does not seem to me to be limited to fringe lunatics like Bela. I think I can explain (or at least theorise) why people think this way in much greater detail - though not right now.
I'll get back to this topic tommorrow. Goodnight.
Indeed. We need to go no further than to lizardland to see how popular this notion is in the United States.
Will inexorable fate - that is, murderous anti-Semite hate-mongering on the streets of America, like in Florida and NY, as the number of American Moslems grow, or antisemitic violence like in California - affect the popular American opinion that the come-back of antisemitism in Europe has some sort of historic roots and resonates primarily among natives? I doubt it.
Of course it's hyperbole and exaggeration to suggest all American subscribe to these ideas, especially on this site. But it _is_ widespread, even among the groups who are on board with the problem of islamofascism in general.
Kepiblanc, in your precise and relevant description of Politiken, I think you left out the mock artists...
I agree that JP has been uneven lately.
Without the blogosphere to keep them honest, they'd have lost nerve long aog.
Islamic fury usually targets anything iconic. Big newspapers, big targets.
I think it's safe to say that there plenty of prejudice on both sides of the pond with regards to eachother. I also think it's safe to say that these prejudices will continue to pop up and cause tension between Americans and Europeans. It would probably be a good idea to remember this and be tolerant of eachothers outbursts if a trans-atlantic counter-jihad movement is to survive/evolve.
That's just my 2 cents.
It is interesting how the editorial in Politiken vaguely refers to "anti-Semitic defamations" and does not specify further. Calling for the death of all Jews is hardly an "anti-Semitic defamation." There should be clear laws against this. And I do not mean the recent Orwellian hate-speech laws, but the old and time-honored laws against incitement of violence.
Where are all the mob of "brave" leftist retards who come out to counter demonstrate and block the path of the "right wing" Nazis,when the Muslim racist trash comes out? Their absence proves to me they are not for justice or peace but have simply been taken into a movement which they must not truly understand the imbalance of, besides being cowards and blatantly disingenuous troublemakers only when it is safe, which is why I can't stand them.
I don't know if our European friends here are confused by Islam o' Phobe's post, but I sure am.
Is he saying that if the Europeans were to attempt to expel the moslem populations, American Conservatives would take the side of the moslems, even to the point of military action?
I think most of us would rather hop a plane and come and a hand.
eatyourbeans --
Mr. O'Phobe is referring to the subset of American "conservatives" who demonized the Serbs and promoted the creation of Kosovo and the Bosnian partition. They are a substantial force within the Republican Party -- McCain is one -- and the influence of Saudi money may be a contributing cause. Some of them are eager to re-fight the Cold War, with Russia the successor to the USSR.
Remember, these are the folks who gave us an officially-sanctioned sharia component in the constitutions of Iraq and Afghanistan.
And they call that "liberty".
A pox on 'em.
I think it depends on your definition of "conservative" which, in america, seems to br ratherbroad enough to require sub-categories. Which is good! Ideological purity never helped anyone.
I think in this case the problem is "neo-conservatives" of the sort typified by the crowd over at LGF. They would side with muslims in a shot if we Europeans actually started trying to defend ourselves - indeed they already have in some cases, demanding we "do something" about the jihadi threat but then hooting like chimps about "ethnic nationalism" the moment someone mentions anything like deportation. Many of those call themselves conservative. In belief, manyare conservative, after a fashion, but they have a rather odd streak of liberalism sewn into their make-up and a peculiar lack of historical context. They're conservatives without any institutional memory, so in reality I suppose they're not conservatives at all since they don't have anything to conserve. Their definition of conservative excludes "socio cons" and "paleo cons", and just about every other part of the conservative broad tent they want to eject in their drive to purify conservatism.
Which is the problem, really. They are ideologically driven. Conservatism isn't an ideology. An ideology tried to place rules on the world, whereas conservatism - as I understand it - seeks to understand the rules the world sets out for us. It's like that discussion we had a while back about the "rules of the market", which people tend to assume are a set of regulations designed by conservatives. A lot of conservatives end to think that too, but that misses the point and turns market capitalism into an ideology rather than a methodology.
TO coin a term... :)
I think that's the problem in the end. The "conservatives" islam o phobe is talking about are driven by an ideology created at some point in the USA's history - that immigration is necessary and good and that ethnic nationality is by definition a bad thing - and they are attempting to apply that ideology to places where it has no, ahem, place. It's quite plain that nationality and ethnicity are so tightly bound in Europe that attempting to divorce them will create conflict. The United States don't have this problem on th same level, though ethnic problems are still making themselves felt. That's another argument, though.
The problem, in summary, is that a certain species of conservative believes that the concept of a nation state choosing to define its identity and control its borders in a way that isn't "compatible" with their ideology is immoral in and of itself - and further believes that it is their right and their duty to interfere in that state in order to bring about an ideologically pure outcome. In this case, the conservatives in question would force a state to accept muslims through the use of military strength.
That's the problem, in a nutshell. Ideological purity. And, again, LGF gives us a perfect example in miniature of where a quest for ideological purity eventually leads.
It's true that American Conservatives would have a hard time not supporting the armed forces, particularly in a war, however misguided and crackbrained its objective might be. It's also true that the section of the Republican party most in tune with business interests has very different ideas about immigration than the the rest of us. But to judge by the comments sections in the run of Conservative blogs over here most people are firmly of the opinion that Moslems make trouble wherever they go. So calls to ride to the rescue of Europe's poor oppressed Moslems would get absolutely no traction among rank and file.
But at the moment we are an army of lions led by asses, and asses, as we all know, think asinine thing.
Post a Comment