Friday, November 09, 2007

Naser Khader: Moderate Muslim or Trojan Horse?

The Danish election coming up next Tuesday is a crucial one, because the removal of the Danish People’s Party from the ruling coalition will almost certainly mean a relaxation of the tough restrictions on immigration that have been in place since 2001.

Naser Khader, a member of Parliament and the founder of the Democratic Muslims, may well play a pivotal part. If his new party, Ny Alliance (“New Alliance”), wins enough seats in the election, he stands to gain a role as the power broker of the next coalition to form a government.

Mr. Khader has a reputation as a “moderate Muslim” and a political opportunist, but our regular Danish correspondent Kepiblanc has another view of him. Here’s what Kepiblanc had to say in a comment on a recent Gates of Vienna post:

Naser KhaderNaser Khader is Islam’s Trojan horse in Denmark. “Tongue-in-cheek” they will grant all rejected asylum-seekers a work and residence allowance. In reality this means that any Muslim anywhere who can make it to Denmark and shout “asylum” is granted “work” (Islamo-lingo for lifelong welfare provision) and residence. No need anymore for other regulations such as green-cards or family-reunions with cousins, uncles, extra wives, aunts, parents and grandparents. Just shout “asylum” — that’s all, folks.

If this party “New Alliance” gets any influence at all, Denmark is one step closer to the inevitable civil war. Which isn’t a bad thing entirely — the sooner, the better.

JB, one of my other Danish contacts, wrote me this morning with a somewhat different opinion:

I’ll let you know about Naser Khader (actually I met him in the supermarket the other day :o)). BUT, I’m not sure that I agree on “Khader being a Trojan horse” as Kepiblanc puts it. During the election campaign he has not been as clear in his statements about Islamism as he has been before and I think that is what Kepiblanc must be referring to. On the other hand — the other day he warned people against voting for the Socialists because, as he puts it: “a vote for the red block is a vote for the imams and the fundamentalists”. A Trojan horse is therefore a bit “un-nuanced” if I may say (Hope I don’t have to eat those words after the election) .

Right now, Naser is the key for Anders Fogh Rasmussen to continue as Prime Minister. But that can change if the Conservative, DPP and Venstre get only 1 percent more of the voters. If this happens AFR can continue as of now.

But if it ends up that Naser is going to decide about who is going to be the PM, I cannot in my wildest dreams see him supporting a “red” government. People who vote on Naser (and members of his party) mainly belong to the upper class. The elite. This is his key segment. Upper-class people with a longing for a “nicer tone” in the debate about foreigners.

And more important: These wealthy and famous people who support him have one big thing in common: It is absolutely not in their (read their wallets’) interest to have a government lead by a Social Democrat. Simply too expensive for them and their businesses. :o)
- - - - - - - - -
One key problem arises though from these people. They need more hands for their firms. The production factor called Labor is on a historic low level in Denmark right now. Their solution to this problem is, of course, to change the immigration laws to allow more foreigners to come to Denmark. Besides “the tone in debate”, this is the root of the big clash between Khader’s and Kjærsgård’s parties. And this is what makes it difficult for AFR because he will maybe have to include both parties in his government.

One more thing:

Maybe the North Atlantic will silence all the guessing. In the 1998 election two members from Greenland ended up deciding who won the election. Some discussion is going on right now that this could happen again. I guess AFR better announce a lot of goodies for the big country up north.

I asked Kepiblanc to expand on what he said earlier, and he wrote back with this:

Naser Khader became famous as one of the first — if not the very first — Muslim elected to Danish Parliament. He joined the party called “Det Radikale Venstre” (verbatim: “The Radical Left” — a misnomer if there ever was one).

This party originated around 1905 as a spin-off from the party “Venstre” (verbatim: “Left” — another misnomer) — hence the term “Radical”. That party is notorious for its wishy-washy, on-one-side-and-on-the-other-side, maybe-maybe-not etc. stance on everything. The only issue where the party has a constant opinion and influence is high treason. Whenever our country is at war or in danger the party supports the enemy, starting in WWI (opposing the building of some forty fortresses around Copenhagen and the mining of the belts to the Baltic Sea) — where Denmark could uphold its neutrality due to a strong military.

During the years up to WWII the party tried — with success — to disarm the country. So, when the Nazis attacked, we were almost defenseless. And during the German occupation it collaborated intensively with the Nazis, including Gestapo, trying to undermine the Resistance movement. No member of that party ever became a “Freedom Fighter”.

After the war “Det Radikale Venstre” supported all the various and sundry “peace movements”, tried to sabotage NATO (the so-called period of “Foot Notes”) and opposed our going to war in Iraq. Reluctantly the party accepted our engagement in Afghanistan, because it has a UN blessing (!).

When in government with the “Social Democrats” (yet another misnomer), the party opened all the floodgates to Muslim immigration, resulting in complete chaos, social disorder, skyrocketing crime etc. So no wonder that government lost power in the 2001 election.

The party has always enjoyed a disproportionate influence in Danish politics. Getting only something like six to ten percent of the votes, it has a talent of becoming the “thumb on the scales” — sometimes supporting the left side, sometimes the right. Its original members were the small farmers and homesteaders, but nowadays its electorate is the “Gutmenschen” (a German word meaning “do-gooders”, “tree-huggers”, “better-than-you-humans”, etc.) such as school- and kindergarten teachers, priests, and ‘68-ers hanging out with their ‘lattes’ in smart and trendy cafés in the bigger cities.

So, naturally, getting a real shiny nice and handsome Muslim like our Naser Khader as an MP was a scoop: attracting Muslim voters and old Danish spinsters galore. And when the Motoon affair boomed, Naser actually opposed the Imams. That was a very clever move: he got himself a fatwa and a security detail. But this of course alienated him with his party, so when another useful idiot from the party — Elisabeth Gerner Nielsen — dressed herself up in a headscarf to please the Muslims, he left the party and started his own: “New Alliance”.

So now we have two “Radical Left” parties: the “Sunni-Radicals” and the “Shia-Radicals”. No observable political difference, though. Both hate Denmark and everything Danish and share their main political goal — getting rid of “The Danish People’s Party” — with all the Socialist parties.

But Khader’s new party attracts another segment of voters: the affluent, upper-class but extremely naïve businessmen, professors, actors, and other celebrities. All those people who would never vote for the Socialists, but on the other hand are uncomfortable with the ordinary, plebeian, working-class Danes who vote for Pia Kjærsgård and her “Danish People’s Party”. In that way Khader steals voters from the traditional parties now in government.

Until now our PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s government could rely on support from “The Danish People’s Party” — guaranteeing a majority in Parliament. But if Khader gets just four or five seats, that majority is gone and Khader can dictate conditions for his support of AFR. One of those conditions is to grant “work” (read: permanent social welfare) and “residence” allowances to rejected “refugees” (read: Muslims). In this endeavor Khader got tremendous help from Danish TV. Each and every news broadcast has some story about those unhappy children of parents who refuse to return to their own countries. Pure feel-good child pornography. But it works…

No matter what, if AFR can’t get his majority with “Danish People’s Party” he will have to cave in on that issue if he wants to stay in power (he does). Which means that the word will spread immediately throughout the Middle East that “Denmark is fully open again”. If AFR refuses to open the floodgates, Naser Khader can just point his thumb to the other side of the scales and we’ll have a Socialist PM on our hands.

The net result of all this is that Naser Khader is a Trojan Horse. Any Muslim from anywhere in the world, including the Taliban, escaped Al-Qaeda members, terrorists, and scumbags of all sorts who can make it to Copenhagen Airport and scream “Asylum” will be granted residence in Denmark. Forever.

For an MSM account, here’s what the Grauniad has to say about Khader. Notice key words like “virulent” and “far-right”:

Muslim politician could be kingmaker in Danish elections

Denmark was the crucible for the Muhammad cartoon crisis that enraged the Islamic world. But now a Muslim politician born in Syria may hold the key to victory in the country’s general election

Naser Khader is one of Denmark’s most popular MPs. Raised in a village outside Damascus by his Palestinian father and Syrian mother, the family moved to Copenhagen when he was 11.

Now the 44-year-old politician is set to play a key role in the outcome of next week’s general election. He could be the kingmaker of the country’s next government.

The centrist party he founded six months ago, the New Alliance, currently holds between 4.5% and 5.1% of the popular vote. This puts him in a position either to support the current prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who leads the current governing centre-right coalition, or the social-democrat opposition leader, Helle Thorning-Schmidt.

Mr Khader’s prominence is all the more paradoxical as this Nordic country of 5.4m inhabitants has gone through six years of virulent anti-immigrant rhetoric, led by the far-right Danish People’s party, the country’s third most important political force, and a key parliamentary ally of Mr Fogh Rasmussen’s minority government.

During that time, the DPP was able to push the government into introducing some of the toughest immigration rules in Europe. For instance, it is forbidden for Danish citizens aged 24 or under to bring in spouses from outside Denmark.

The immigration rules are so tough that Danes who marry foreigners often move to neighbouring Sweden because it is easier to get a residence permit for their spouse there than in their own country. Many live in the Swedish city of Malmo and cross the bridge linking Sweden and Denmark to work in Copenhagen.

Whether to relax immigration rules and asylum policies has been one of the main issues of contention in this election — and is one of the issues that will determine who Mr Khader will support.

“We need to have more regular work permits, like the [US] green card, so we can attract highly qualified immigrants,” he told reporters yesterday. “We also need to allow asylum seekers to live among us, and not in asylum centres, where they lose their self-respect and skills, and children suffer [from the situation].”

[…]

Another issue of contention is limiting the influence of the far-right DPP. This was one of the main reasons why Mr Khader quit his original party, the centrist Social Liberal party, to create the New Alliance and try to play a “kingmaker” role.

JB and Kepiblanc: Better chill the bottle of snaps, because come next Tuesday evening one of you will need to kill the taste of crow. For anyone who wants to follow these events, by Virginia dinnertime that night you should be able to find some interesting reading in the English-language version of Jyllands-Posten.

17 comments:

Henrik said...

That's a long-standing debate, also with my CJ friends. My view is that Khader is a friendly, spineless lazyhead not fit for running a political party.

He has some nice habits, like beer, which seem like an excess of taqyya for the trojan theory to be true.

But what makes a real difference is his work against the fundamentalist. That has caused a split in the Muslim society between his democratic-minded 'Democratic Muslims' and the rest of the pack. And has earned him enough death threats to get around-the-clock police protection against the Islamists.

I think our time is better spent going after real targets, like Asmaa Abdol-Hamid, who is clearly an Islamist, and runs on an extreme left platform provided by old communist parties.

Have no time to post documenation right now, gotta go campaigning :)

Anonymous said...

As long as Naser Khader calls himself a Muslim, that means that he pledges allegiance to an evil death cult, Islam, which is incompatible with democracy.

carpenter said...

Guardian's description of the 24-years old rule in Denmark is somewhat misleading.

"During that time, the DPP was able to push the government into introducing some of the toughest immigration rules in Europe. For instance, it is forbidden for Danish citizens aged 24 or under to bring in spouses from outside Denmark.

The immigration rules are so tough that Danes who marry foreigners often move to neighbouring Sweden because it is easier to get a residence permit for their spouse there than in their own country. Many live in the Swedish city of Malmo and cross the bridge linking Sweden and Denmark to work in Copenhagen."


To no one's surprise, Guardian leaves out the fact that many "new Danes" are revealed by the 24 years old rule, and spend their time on studying instead of being beaten by Muslim men.
But of course, they could move to Sweden, and - voila! - "problem" fixed! Malmö's "women's jours" (i.e. women-supportive groups, helping the abused women..) has invented a new term, danska fall (Danish cases,) that is, Muslim women abused by their men, moved across Öresund because here in Sweden, they get a valid marriage with no conflict to Swedish law.

I'd prefer the Danish 24-spare to Swedish law. But at the same time, I must criticize the Danish law; it stinks political correctness. Why should, say an American and a Dane both under the age of 24 who intend to get married and settle in Denmark suffer, just because Denmark wants to prevent Muslim arranged marriages?
(correct me if I'm wrong on something here, Danes!)

anti-uffe said...

Carpenter: "Why should, say an American and a Dane both under the age of 24 who intend to get married and settle in Denmark suffer, just because Denmark wants to prevent Muslim arranged marriages?
(correct me if I'm wrong on something here, Danes!)."

You are absolutely right, but that is unfortunate collateral damage. Just imagine the outcry, not to mention the possibility of international sanctions, if Denmark were to introduce discriminatory laws targeted against Muslims specifically. Not that I would mind, this clearly is an instance where laws and conventions do not reflect the reality of the day.

carpenter said...

anti-uffe:
I know..
It's basically the same thing, when Sweden's minister of school proposes that religious private schools be forbidden. He then includes Jewish & Christian schools, when the real, yet implicit matter is Muslim schools.
And the most pathetic "everyone is just as bad!"-case of Sweden probably was when Nyamko Sabuni, Sweden's minister of integration & equality, proposed that EVERY SWEDISH GIRL should be examined if circumcized, when the intention was to check Somali girls (brutal circumcision of girls is an integral part of Somali-Islamic culture.)
Again: why should Danes, Swedes, Christians - every peaceful being - be examined, close schools down, be refused marriage and you name it, just because we want to stop Islamic barbarism?
But, of course, it's better that something gets done than just ignore the problems.
This is a mind-blower of our time, really...

Henrik said...

Carpenter, making such a law specific for Muslims would be a direct violation of international conventions.

For the record, the 24-year rule works really well. It's annoying for a few, but a *lot* of 2nd-generation immigrants (mainly men) rejoice in the fact that their parents can't force them to marry someone they don't know and don't want.

These teenager marriages usually end up in situations where the young man has to drive taxi at night to feed an unwanted family instead of getting an education.

Anyone who reads this, I suggest to lobby for a similar law in their own countries. It works wonders for integration.

BTW, I agree that it's a problem that Khader still calls himself a Muslim. But my opinion is that's a lesser evil compared to the fact that he has shown to everyone that the fundamentalists are not undisputed leaders of all Muslims in Denmark. If he converted to, say Christianity, this very useful division in the Muslim community would disappear.

Yup, am looking at the bright side of tings. That's because I always look for solutions. Problems we have aplenty...

Chris Bering said...

Khader says he isn't very religious, that he's a "muslim of habit" rather than culture, and that he's very similar to the not-very-christian Danes in that respect.
His words and deeds through the years support this, and I believe him.

Consequently, he has very little support among Danish muslims.
This makes him pretty much worthless as a weapon against crazy imams and as a tool of the integration effort.

However, he's an excellent weapon against dhimmi-danes, like the ones in his old party.

Henrik said...

Latest polls for Khader: A meager 2,9 %

This comes from a variety of lesser scandals and loads of contradictory statements from his party. They're headed for a flop. But falling completely out would strengthen the socialist wing.

I still think he plays a usable role to demonstrate that crazy imams don't have unconditional support from some 'unified' Muslim community.

The campaign is intensely interesting :)

Anonymous said...

I still think [Khader] plays a usable role to demonstrate that crazy imams don't have unconditional support from some 'unified' Muslim community.

That may be, but at the end of the day, the "crazy imams" are the ones who have support from Islam.

Henrik said...

"That may be, but at the end of the day, the "crazy imams" are the ones who have support from Islam."

What is 'Islam', except a pile of strange books and a Byzantine tradition to disguise the truth about the founder?

Without the support of ordinary people, Islam has no power whatsoever. When I talk about teaching democracy, I talk about reaching out to these people, showing that what we think of as 'ordinary' democratic tools and a positive effort can deliver what Islam cannot: Responsibility of their own lifes.

Anonymous said...

Without the support of ordinary people, Islam has no power whatsoever.

The problem is that Islam does have support from ordinary people, because there are people out there calling themselves Muslims, who may not always want to do all the evil things that their religion commands them to do, but who in certain circumstances have to do it nevertheless to avoid suffering the consequences of their apostasy.

Henrik said...

"The problem is..."

Yes. We have work to do.

Anonymous said...

Yes. We have work to do.

Indeed we do. But the important insight is that we cannot rely on Muslims in this struggle - we need to realize that because of the unreformable nature of Islam, no significant number of Muslims can stay in our Western societies, period.

Teaching Muslims about democracy, for example, probably won't help us as long as they remain Muslims afterwards, as then they are still bound by the commitment to their religion, which conflicts with a commitment to democracy. They must either leave Islam, or leave our Western societies.

Michael Tams said...

Good post and good comments. Anonymous is right - an idea that I've heard Lawrence Auster advocate as well is seperationism. It's about the only reasonable means for curbing the growth of Islam.

-MT

Henrik said...

I'd not rely on Khader. I can appreciate him when he does something good, which he did, but his overall direction (or lack thereof) shows little understanding of the deeper issues.

Still, for all the people who call themselves 'Muslims' in some sense of the word, Khader is the most clearly democratically minded of the bunch. All others are worse.

Teaching democracy is not the only thing to be done, far from it. Teaching history, particular of Islam, goes with it.

Showing in paticular the evil nature of some false prophet they've been taught to venerate is important. That'll weaken the spell and disempower the imams.

It's a multi-faceted effort, no silver bullet here. The combination just might work, eventually.

Henrik said...

Uh. Naser Khaders greatest campaign issue, that of the rejected asylum-seekers living in desperate conditions, turned out to be false.

Ny Alliance is certainly headed for a flop. The magnitude of it remains to be seen.

Anonymous said...

there are evil people in all religions, look around.