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
There 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.