Ten days ago Fuat Deniz, a professor of sociology at the University of Örebro, was stabbed in the neck and murdered. Dr. Deniz was an Assyrian Christian, and had previously investigated the Ottoman genocide of the Assyrians.

After he was murdered it was revealed that he and some of his colleagues had received threats from Turkish sources because of their public statements about the genocide. Since then, despite the possibility that the murder of Fuat Deniz was a political act, the Swedish authorities have been unable to come up with any significant leads in the case.

Most of the news that has emerged in the aftermath of Dr. Deniz’ murder is in Swedish. Gates of Vienna is fortunate to have several contacts who read Swedish; our Danish correspondent Kepiblanc volunteered for the latest tasks. He has taken a look at an article from Thursday’s Nerikes Allehanda and provides this summary:

This is not about the intimidation of actual witnesses, only potential ones. The Örebro Police talk — in general terms — about why some witnesses refuse to come forward, such as fear of being identified , thinking their information is unimportant, etc. The police promise anonymity.

They have lots of witnesses, but nothing substantial. Then the article says that a surveillance camera recorded a bloodstained man entering a food store about forty-five minutes after the killing. The movie is not sharp and has been sent to experts in an attempt to enhance the recording. No results so far…

Kepiblanc adds his own opinion:

My personal take on this is that they’ll never find the killer. He is obviously some Turkish agent, and Sweden will never risk upsetting the Turkish government — or any Turk, for that matter. If they cannot avoid finding the man, it will be hushed up.

Kepiblanc has also provided a complete translation of this article from yesterday’s Aftonbladet:
– – – – – – – – –

So far no one has been arrested for the murder of Fuat Deniz in Örebro. To the contrary, the police have made a number of mistakes, for example turning down a renowned expert who offered his assistance.

The National Bureau of Investigation acknowledges his competence, but it is clearly insufficient for the Örebro Police, writes Nuri Kino.

(Photo caption: Madness. Fuat Deniz was stabbed outside the University of Örebro by an unknown cutthroat. Today’s columnist, Nuri Kino, wonders why the Örebro Police have been allowed to make so many mistakes in their investigation. In particular he wonders why they turned down an offer for help by a specialist in interpreting blurry recordings from surveillance cameras.)

Wake up, Cops!

Nuri Kino, freelance journalist: “Fuat Deniz deserves a professional investigation”

Tuesday, December 11th university professor Fuat Deniz politely opened a door for someone. A single stab in the neck and he was dying.

I went to Örebro the day after the murder of Fuat Deniz. No one in his family had been offered protection or any help at all. His family and friends, most of them academics, accused the police of having made several mistakes. Those questioned by the police were shocked by the interrogator’s professional incompetence

At the university I tried to find out if someone was aware of any threats against Deniz. I stood at the door to his office, should I enter or shouldn’t I? His colleagues told me that the room hadn’t been sealed off; it had been cleaned, and several other persons had visited the room. I entered. The police had taken his hard drive into custody. His car keys and cigarettes were lying on the desk as well as his mail. Three of his colleagues had not even been questioned. One of them, a researcher in the same field as Deniz, was also living under threats. He had called the police and asked for a meeting. Following that, he was shocked by the police’s ignorance of ethnic, political and religious conflicts

I went to Deniz’ house. His wife showed me into his study. The police had confiscated his hard drive here as well. I noticed a card, clearly of some interest to a detective. His wife opened a drawer containing all his calendars and appointments for the last five years. At the same time we heard the radio talking about how the “police are doing everything possible to establish an exact picture of Fuat Deniz”. The door bell rang. His wife became nervous. The police hadn’t offered her any protection. The guest was yet another friend returning from a police interrogation, feeling betrayed. The radio and the police spoke about some photos of a blood-stained man entering a store the same day Deniz was killed, but the pictures were useless.

When reading my mail I noticed that an expert in biometrical recognition had mailed the police and offered his help. I had received a carbon-copy. The expert opined that the police shouldn’t discard the photos until he had seen them. He is one the world’s leading experts in analyzing such pictures. In the evening the police still hadn’t contacted him. That was after forty-eight hours. I called the specialist. He felt like he was being ignored and humiliated. The National Bureau of Investigation had used his expertise, but not the Örebro Police.

Rumors about the killer of Fuat Deniz are spreading like wildfire all over the world. Many human rights activists and researchers of Middle-Eastern heritage are shocked and scared: “I have not left my home since that day”, and “my brothers have moved in here” says a well known author and historian.

Many of us hope that this is an act of insanity; anything else is unbearable. Deniz once wrote: “democracy is not a condition, it is action”. The Örebro Police must act. On December 20th I was informed that the Örebro Police had asked the National Bureau of Investigation for help. I called the police. The police press officer was on vacation and some woman said the prosecutor in charge of the investigation wasn’t available either. He had reported in sick and they had no one to replace him. She said that the Örebro Police had to cut spending during holidays. I ask her how things are going, if they are making some progress. The answer: “We haven’t got a Colombo or some such snooping around, but we have competent personnel.”

I asked her if they had sealed off his office, but she didn’t know, but she thinks so. Neither did she know why they requested the National Bureau of Investigation. “We consider ourselves sufficiently competent. We do not need them yet, that’s why they will not join us until first thing in the new year. They are too busy right now.” At the National Bureau of Investigation the message is: “The special agents are on Christmas leave and will not be available until January 2nd. They are on vacation and they deserve it since they’re so seldom at home”.

Yes, they deserve it, but Fuat Deniz’ family, his friends, colleagues, and everyone else in search of the truth deserve a professional investigation. Someone, I don’t care who, but someone must see to it that the Örebro Police get the much-needed help ASAP, regardless of holidays.

Hat tips: Steen.

Previous posts on this topic can be found here, here, here, and here.

It’s become evident that the West is going to do nothing about Iran’s imminent acquisition of nuclear weapons. The NIE simply supplies the fig leaf, a nice little rationale for a done deal.

Meanwhile, Europe is being rapidly Islamized. The EU and the USA pretend that there’s nothing going on, but the Muslims are well aware of what’s happening, and state their goals clearly.

And not just the Wahhabi Sunnis of the Muslim Brotherhood, but also the Shiite theocrats of Iran. According to AKI:

Iran: Europe will become a Muslim continent, says Khamenei’s spokesman

Europe will eventually become a Muslim continent, according to a representative of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei.

“In a dozen years, Europe will be an Islamic continent,” said Rasul Jalilzadeh on Friday as he was speaking to the basiji, a voluntary organisation in the capital Tehran.

Actually, the Basiji are a “volunteer” goon squad of Islamic thugs. Their mission is to rough up women who don’t wear the hijab and torture journalists in prison.

“The Islamisation of the European continent is imminent and this step favours the arrival of the Mahdi,” he said, referring to the 12th imam of Shiite Islam.

It’s important to remember what will portend the arrival of the Twelfth Imam: massive, violent chaos.

First we must have the chaos, and then #12 brings an end to the chaos:
– – – – – – – – –

Shiites believe that the Imam Mahdi, who disappeared as an adolescent, will return to bring an end to chaos and bring universal justice.

Rasul Jalilzadeh believes that “the Islamisation of Europe is one of the consequences of the Islamic revolution in Iran” in that “the messages and values that this revolution has transmitted to the Europeans, to convince them “to abandon their current faiths and convert to Shiite Islam.”

Mr. Jalilzadeh is wrong about one thing: most Europeans already have abandoned their current faiths. The Shiites and the Sunnis are simply engaging in a little friendly competition to see which version of Islam will be the new European faith.

Just think about what this man is saying:

• There will come a time of war, destruction, and chaos.
• It is the duty of every devout Shiite Muslim to hasten that day.
• Then the Twelfth Imam will return.
• Then the world will become an Islamic paradise.

The people who believe this dangerous nonsense rule a country with a population of almost seventy million people, and they want to get their hands on nuclear weapons.

And we’re going to let them.

Hat tip: insubria.

Only three more shopping days until Saturnalia the Solstice Celebration Winterval Kwanzaa whatever offensive holiday it is that the kuffar are about to celebrate.

For a last-minute gift, the Counterjihad 2008 Calendar is just the thing!

It will come in very handy for keeping track of events in 1429 2008.

Seriously…

The Counterjihad Calendar was designed to supplement the Brussels conference in October. Some of the same design elements used for the Brussels logo went into the front page of the calendar.

You can buy it at our Café Press store, or go straight to the calendar page at this link.

The purpose of the calendar is twofold:

1.		To enhance a sense of community among the inhabitants of the countries of the West. We can show solidarity with one another even as we remain nationalists within our own countries. The West doesn’t require an artificial and corrupt empire like the EU or the UN to maintain its collective identity. There is something that binds us together, a common heritage that enables us to resist Islamization.
2.		To facilitate a greater awareness of the struggle we are all facing and how it is approached in different countries, by listing Counterjihad blogs and websites on the sidebar for each country.

– – – – – – – – –

Before the call of the muezzins from the minarets echoes across the monuments of the West…

Before the icons of Christianity, Hindusism, and Buddhism are pulled down, burned, or blown up…

Before the right to speak freely about all these things is taken from us…

Use these twelve months of images to remind yourself what’s at stake.

A couple of weeks ago Gallia Watch posted part of an interview with a magistrate named Jean de Maillard that was published in the wake of the riots in Villiers-le-Bel. GW translated and abridged the text from a French original. Here are some excerpts:

I have to admit that I would not like to be in government today. Nor would I want to live in Villiers-le-Bel. Even less to be a member of the riot police. For I fear that the riots at Clichy-sous-Bois two years ago are only the appetizer of what we are going to have to swallow in the near future.

I am not trying to throw oil on the fire, at any rate these lines fortunately have no chance of being read in Seine-Saint-Denis and other districts scattered throughout the suburban landscape of our beautiful France. But I believe that we must call a spade a spade. When two schools, a library, a police station, a garage and several other buildings on a list already forgotten are set on fire, not to mention dozens of vehicles each day, we are used to it. It has become almost a routine.

However, the second night of Villiers-le-Bel marks an escalation that the media and the government would probably prefer to hush up, but which may be the start of a new stage: the use of firearms. In truth, the surprise is not that the rioters began to use them, but first, that they hadn’t done it sooner (…) and second, that they are still confining themselves to hunting rifles and lead shot. The suburbs however have been armed for a long time with caches of quality war weapons, lethal weapons, against which the bullet-proof vests will be useless.

In other words the situation is explosive in both meanings of the word. It seems that from one riot to the next the techniques harden, the methods become more professional and the police and gendarmes will soon have to confront, if they have not already, experts in urban guerilla warfare…

– – – – – – – – –

[…]

I think that what I’m about to say may shock you, and it is not with pleasure that I say it, nor out of provocation. But this is a grave moment. I am convinced that up until now we have been lucky that the thugs and future murderers in the suburbs have not yet dared to use their fire power. I hope that the public authorities will become aware of the imminence of calamity and especially that they will finally seek solutions. I would not like to be in their shoes, for the margin of maneuverability, if there is one, will be very narrow. Yes, the perpetrators must be mercilessly punished. But repression, in the long term, solves nothing.

And people must stop dreaming, those on the Left and the others: neighborhood police are not a panacea either. You cannot graft an ethnic police force (“police communautaire”) on a society that is this sick and torn apart, in which the members are in open rebellion against society.

There’s more at Gallia Watch.

Hat tip: Kepiblanc

That’s the appellation assigned to President Bush by Michael Freund.

Former Ambassador John Bolton seems to concur in this interview with Spiegel Online. While the interviewer, Cordula Meyer, definitely thinks she is playing a condescending game of hardball with these questions, Bolton easily lobs them off the wall.

The thing is, when a person of integrity plays the game, none of the questions are ducked. Freedom’s just another word for nothing left to lose…watch what he says about world public opinion regarding U.S. policies.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Ambassador, you worked closely with the president and you shared his hawkish views on Iraq. But your new book is fiercely critical of George W. Bush. Why?

Bolton: His foreign policy is in free fall. The president is turning against his own best judgment and instincts under the influence of Secretary (of State Condoleeza) Rice. She is the dominant voice, indeed, almost the only voice on foreign policy in this administration.

SPIEGEL: The popular reading of her looks a bit different. She is presumed to be weak and not particularly efficient.

Bolton: No. Rice is channeling the views of the liberal career bureaucrats in the State Department. The president is focusing all his attention on Iraq and, by doing so, has allowed the secretary to become captured by the State Department. He is not adequately supervising her. It is a mistake.

SPIEGEL: Could it be that your pique really comes from the fact that the president doesn’t seem to be listening to neoconservatives like you anymore?

Bolton: The vice president (Vice President Dick Cheney) is still there. But the idea that somehow the neocons were so powerful is a myth — I mean, it was five or six people, for God sakes. I am not a neoconservative. I am pro-American.

SPIEGEL: You have said that the new moderate foreign policy currently being followed by Bush compromises the security of the United States.

Bolton: Well, I think so. North Korea is going to get away with keeping its nuclear weapons. I think the (National Intelligence Estimate) sends Iran a signal they can do whatever they want…

[…]

SPIEGEL: In the past, you argued for a military intervention in Iran. Do you still consider that an option?

Bolton: I don’t have the same high confidence these intelligence analysts do that, in fact, there was a full suspension of the military program in Iran. This is not like those claims about Cheney pressuring the poor intelligence community to spin intelligence on Iraq. This is politicization from the other side — people in the intelligence community allowing policy preferences to affect their analysis and judgments about the intelligence.

SPIEGEL: And where is the president? Is he merely a puppet?

Bolton: Look at the North Korean policy. The North Koreans certainly were involved in that facility in Syria that was raided by the Israelis. The North Koreans renege on their commitments and we still negotiate.

SPIEGEL: What do you see as the alternative — bombing Pyongyang? [snarky little interviewer isn’t she?]

Bolton: I’m not running around the world looking for ways to create hostilities. The solution to North Korea is the reunification of the Korean Peninsula. China could influence the North; it supplies 80 to 90 percent of North Korea’s energy. The United States have to put pressure on China in order for China to pressure North Korea.

SPIEGEL: Do you have any second thoughts about the American engagement in Iraq?

Bolton: It was right to overthrow Saddam Hussein. It was the regime itself that was a threat. I think in hindsight, what I would have done is turn authority back over to Iraqis much more quickly and say: “Your country, you figure out how to run it.”

SPIEGEL: Would you say the world is now a safer place than before the Iraq war?

Bolton: Yes. There is now no possibility that Iraq is going to have weapons of mass destruction. We had the ancillary strategic victory when (Libyan leader) Moammar Gadhafi gave up his nuclear weapons program as well. When he looked at Saddam, he concluded — incorrectly — that he might be next.

SPIEGEL: You don’t seem to doubt the go-it-alone approach of the United States although anti-Americanism is rising across the world. Doesn’t such a negative view of America weaken US power?
– – – – – – – – –
Bolton: I don’t think so. I have looked at public opinion polls in France in the late 1940s and early 1950s during the height of Marshall Plan aid. They had a very negative attitude towards the United States then. There were negative attitudes towards the United States because of Vietnam. There were negative attitudes about the United States when Reagan wanted to deploy intermediate range ballistic missiles. I don’t think the president should base his foreign policy on American public opinion polls, let alone foreign public opinion polls.

SPIEGEL: What kind of foreign policy will the next president pursue?

Bolton: If you get a President (Hillary) Clinton, you might well find, just as after Vietnam, that there is a retraction from Iraq and of American influence in the world. And in a couple of years the Europeans will be complaining about that too. See how long American troops last in Europe under an administration that thinks it is time for America to come home.

SPIEGEL: Is that a threat? [she still thinks she’s in the game. Watch him hit this one right back at her]

Bolton: No. The European Union can now act like a major power, at least that is what the European Union tells us. So they should do so — they can experiment with Russia.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Ambassador, thank very much for taking the time to speak with us.

Heh. It looks like she made the decision to terminate the interview when she ran out of balls.

Now if Bolton were running for President, I’d actually be happy to talk about campaign politics…at least there would be some meat in the meal rather than the flat, cold, syrupy pancakes on offer at the moment.

In his book, Surrender Is Not An Option, Bolton dissects the State Department:

…anyone who has ever engaged in an internal turf struggles with State bureaucrats knows the true meaning of street fighting. Instead of fighting with ourselves, however, in a circular firing squad, we should be directing our energies against our foreign adversaries, which we are certainly not now doing adequately. This cultural problem is solvable, although we need to understand that, because it developed over decades, it will take decades to cure…

[…]

Diplomacy should come to mean advocacy. Advocacy for American interests must be the priority, not compromise and conciliation for their own sake. Disagreement with foreign friends or adversaries is not itself distasteful, nor simply an unpleasantness to be overcome as rapidly and quietly as possible without regard to substantive outcomes. Disagreement reveals underlying issues that should be resolved consistently with our own interests…”Argument,” which lawyers do all the time, but which diplomats shy away from, I neither unpleasant nor disagreeable, but actually critical to making the case for the interests we are advancing…(pages 454-455)

I doubt any candidate has the wisdom or guts to put Mr. Bolton in charge of the State Department. That’s unfortunate for us, since the current machine is a creaky, dysfunctional and toxic mess. The EPA ought to clean it out first, before anyone tries to reform it.

Meanwhile Secretary of State Rice continues to give away the family silver…she is definitely a living illustration of the Peter Principle.

John Bolton doesn’t actually say that the State Department is a seditious albatross hanging from the neck of American policy…since he doesn’t say this, I’ll say it for him: for heaven’s sake, will anyone show some spine and cut that cord?

If reform doesn’t start soon, it doesn’t matter which cardboard cutout we elect in 2008.

We’ve had a number of emails regarding the U. S. presidential campaign, asking why we haven’t addressed it. This comment, from Sodra, covers the basics very well:

I’m terribly confused at the moment. I don’t like any of the Democratic candidates. On the Republican side, Tancredo is bowing out, Thompson never got there, Giuliani seems a bit canned and too attached to urban values, and Huckabee is far too soft on terrorism. In fact, I just went over to Ron Paul’s site, someone I initially dismissed as a nut, and I must admit that on the issues he’s starting to make a lot of sense. I’m not sure I’m ready to vote for him yet, but my opinion of him is growing.

I’d like to get input from other GoV readers.

To all our commenters and readers who’ve asked about this issue, I’ll give the unspoken-till-now reasons that we don’t cover the presidential campaign:

• Everything we’ve heard so far is boringly predictable.
• Watching a campaign for two years is excruciating to endure, never mind having to talk about it.
• Despite their physical differences, these people are cookie cutter candidates (except, of course, for the one Sodra mentioned, Ron Paul. He is idiosyncratically himself).
• The non-stop discussion of the subject in the MSM trivializes the process of selecting a president.
• In fact, these are not candidates with any gravitas, they are entertainment “personalities.”
• the eternal jostling for position and sound bites — not to mention throwing tacks in the road where other candidates are traveling — is embarrassing to watch. These people actually want to assume the office of President. So far all they’ve done is muddy the Oval Office.

When October, 2008 rolls around…
– – – – – – – – –
…we will have plenty of time to look at whoever remains standing. Then we’ll be ready for a lively, engaged discussion with our readers. At that point, it will be one Republican, one Democrat — and who knows, maybe a third party will present some dark horse for your consideration.

Until then, however, it’s best to avert your eyes from the fracas. Having to watch the cool-on-the-surface-frantic-underneath swagger and posturing that is a constant in every medium available can’t be good for your mind. Or your spirit.

And don’t forget: every politician practices taqiyya in the cause of their ambition. When the time comes, we simply have to pick the candidate least likely to cause us any further harm.

Anyway, you could probably guess for yourselves our political preferences and make a good stab at who we’d endorse next October. Until then, we’re just as confused as Sodra.

Recommendation: avoid all media with regard to this particular circus and get engaged again with your real life. You can bet these jokers aren’t going anywhere in the meantime.

An avid follower of American politics once said that whoever wins in any given presidential campaign is always the candidate that our country deserves.

I concur.

According to CNS news, the UN General Assembly has passed a resolution against the “defamation of religions”, especially Islam.

I’ve never felt a particular need to defame Islam, since Islam is perfectly capable of defaming itself.

But this, of course, is hate speech, not to mention racism and xenophobia, and is thus defamatory in its own right. Once the UN gets its way, I won’t be able to say it anymore.

The anti-religious defamation resolution was introduced by the OIC as a corrective to the Islamophobia revealed by the Mohammed cartoon crisis in Denmark. It has been kicking around the UN in committee for a couple of years, and generally flew under the radar until it was passed by the General Assembly this week without attracting any undue attention.

There’s almost no information about it on the web, and it’s very difficult to find the exact text of the resolution as passed. As far as I can tell, this Word document is the current version, even though it dates from the end of 2006. I’ll reproduce it at the bottom of this post so that readers and fellow bloggers can have an HTML version to refer to. If anyone finds a different and more current version of it, please let me know.

The UN resolution dovetails perfectly with the Framework Decision and the European Parliament resolution on combating the rise of extremism in Europe. The UN is Sauron to the EU’s Saruman, but both organizations are working the same evil magic and reading from the same book of spells. Similar American versions of this mischief have been floated in Congress since the Democrats took over.

What makes the UN resolution different from the EU’s initiatives — and what probably caused some European countries to vote against it — is that the UN version mentions Islam as a specially protected religion. No other religion is specified in it. The United Nations now makes it official: Islam has been elevated above other religions, and has effectively become the established religion at the UN.

The Islamic countries of the OIC are well-versed in human rights jargon, and have used it to great effect in this resolution. The text asserts that “respect for cultural, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity, as well as dialogue among and within civilizations, is essential for peace, understanding and friendship among individuals and people of the different cultures and nations of the world”, and wants “to promote greater harmony and tolerance in all societies”.

But the wording leaves no doubt about which religion and culture it intends to protect. The resolution:
– – – – – – – – –

• Opposes “the introduction and enforcement of laws that specifically discriminate against and target Muslims”;
• Points out “the increasing trend in recent years of statements attacking religions, Islam and Muslims in particular, especially in human rights forums”;
• Asserts that “Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism”; and
• “Stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions, Islam and Muslims in particular, especially in human rights forums”.

The camel’s nose under the UN human rights tent is the concept of “racism and xenophobia” as a violation of human rights. Conflating the fear of Islam with racism and/or xenophobia is a well-established technique for placing criticism of Islam out of bounds. Such logic is fundamentally flawed — Nigerian Christians are, after all, the same race and nationality as the Muslims who burn their churches, but any mention or criticism of such an issue will be forbidden under the UN’s guidelines.

Simply collecting and publishing data on atrocities committed in the name of Islam will become “hate speech” once the would-be despots at the UN and the EU have their way.

A bomb explosion in Varanasi that kills hundreds of Hindus will be a “tragedy”.

Any newspaper report stating that Muslims are claiming responsibility for the deed will be a crime.

Wake up! It’s a brave new world out there.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

December 7, 2006

Resolution on Combating defamation of religions
(Words bolded by Gates of Vienna)

The General Assembly,

Recalling that all States have pledged themselves, under the Charter of the United Nations, to promote and encourage universal respect for and observance of all human rights and fundamental freedoms without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,

Recalling also the relevant resolutions of the Commission on Human Rights in this regard,

Recalling further the United Nations Millennium Declaration adopted by the General Assembly on 8 September 2000, welcoming the resolve expressed in the Millennium Declaration to take measures to eliminate the increasing acts of racism and xenophobia in many societies and to promote greater harmony and tolerance in all societies, and looking forward to its effective implementation at all levels, including in the context of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action adopted by the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, held in Durban, South Africa, from 31 August to 8 September 2001,

Recalling the proclamation of the Global Agenda for Dialogue among Civilizations, and inviting States, the organizations and bodies of the United Nations system, within existing resources, other international and regional organizations and civil societies to contribute to the implementation of the Programme of Action contained in the Global Agenda,

Welcoming the launch of the Alliance of Civilizations initiative, intended to respond to the need for a committed effort by the international community, in order to promote mutual respect and understanding among different cultures and societies,

Welcoming also the progress achieved in the follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action,

Underlining the importance of increasing contacts at all levels in order to deepen dialogue and reinforce understanding among different cultures, religions and civilizations, and noting with regret in this regard the cancellation of the meeting on “Civilization and harmony: values and mechanisms of the global order”, which was to be held in Turkey in 2004 as a follow-up to the Organization of the Islamic Conference-European Union Joint Forum on the theme “Civilization and harmony: the political dimension”, held in Turkey in 2002,

Reaffirming that discrimination against human beings on the grounds of religion or belief constitutes an affront to human dignity and a disavowal of the principles of the Charter,

Convinced that respect for cultural, ethnic, religious and linguistic diversity, as well as dialogue among and within civilizations, is essential for peace, understanding and friendship among individuals and people of the different cultures and nations of the world, while manifestations of cultural prejudice, intolerance and xenophobia towards different cultures and religions generate hatred and violence among peoples and nations throughout the world,

Recognizing the valuable contributions of all religions to modern civilization and the contribution that dialogue among civilizations can make to an improved awareness and understanding of the common values shared by all humankind,

Reaffirming the need for all States to continue international efforts to enhance dialogue and broaden understanding among civilizations, cultures and religions, and emphasizing that States, regional organizations, non-governmental organizations, religious bodies and the media have an important role to play in promoting tolerance, respect for and freedom of religion and belief,

Underlining the important role of education in the promotion of cultural and religious tolerance and the elimination of discrimination based on religion or belief,

Alarmed at the continuing negative impact of the events of 11 September 2001 on Muslim minorities and communities in some non-Muslim countries, the negative projection of Islam in the media and the introduction and enforcement of laws that specifically discriminate against and target Muslims,

Alarmed also at the serious instances of intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence based on religion or belief, intimidation and coercion motivated by extremism, religious or otherwise, occurring in many parts of the world and threatening the enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Noting with concern that defamation of religions is among the causes of social disharmony and leads to violations of human rights,

Deeply alarmed at the rising trends towards discrimination based on religion and faith, including in some national policies and laws that stigmatize groups of people belonging to certain religions and faiths under a variety of pretexts relating to security and illegal immigration, and noting that the increased intellectual and media discourse is among the factors exacerbating such discrimination,

Noting with deep concern the increasing trend in recent years of statements attacking religions, Islam and Muslims in particular, especially in human rights forums,

1.		Expresses deep concern about the negative stereotyping of religions and manifestations of intolerance and discrimination in matters of religion or belief still in evidence in some regions of the world;
2.		Strongly deplores physical attacks and assaults on businesses, cultural centres and places of worship of all religions as well as targeting of religious symbols;
3.		Notes with deep concern the intensification of the campaign of defamation of religions and the ethnic and religious profiling of Muslim minorities in the aftermath of the tragic events of 11 September 2001;
4.		Expresses its deep concern that Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism;
5.		Also expresses its deep concern about programmes and agendas pursued by extremist organizations and groups aimed at the defamation of religions, in particular when supported by Governments;
6.		Deplores the use of the print, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination against Islam or any other religion;
7.		Recognizes that, in the context of the fight against terrorism and the reaction to counter-terrorism measures, defamation of religions becomes an aggravating factor that contributes to the denial of fundamental rights and freedoms of target groups, as well as their economic and social exclusion;
8.		Stresses the need to effectively combat defamation of all religions, Islam and Muslims in particular, especially in human rights forums;
9.		Emphasizes that everyone has the right to freedom of expression, which should be exercised with responsibility and may therefore be subject to limitations as provided by law and necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others, protection of national security or of public order, public health or morals and respect for religions and beliefs;
10.		Urges States to take resolute action to prohibit the dissemination of racist and xenophobic ideas and material aimed at any religion or its followers that constitute incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence;
11.		Also urges States to provide, within their respective legal and constitutional systems, adequate protection against acts of hatred, discrimination, intimidation and coercion resulting from defamation of religions, to take all possible measures to promote tolerance and respect for all religions and their value systems and to complement legal systems with intellectual and moral strategies to combat religious hatred and intolerance;
12.		Urges all States to ensure that all public officials, including members of law enforcement bodies, the military, civil servants and educators, in the course of their official duties, respect different religions and beliefs and do not discriminate against persons on the grounds of their religion or belief, and that any necessary and appropriate education or training is provided;
13.		Underscores the need to combat defamation of religions by strategizing and harmonizing actions at the local, national, regional and international levels through education and awareness-raising;
14.		Urges States to ensure equal access to education for all, in law and in practice, including access to free primary education for all children, both girls and boys, and access for adults to lifelong learning and education based on respect for human rights, diversity and tolerance, without discrimination of any kind, and to refrain from any legal or other measures leading to racial segregation in access to schooling;
15.		Calls upon the international community to initiate a global dialogue to promote a culture of tolerance and peace based on respect for human rights and religious diversity, and urges States, non-governmental organizations, religious bodies and the print and electronic media to support and promote such a dialogue;
16.		Affirms that the Human Rights Council shall promote universal respect for all religious and cultural values and address instances of intolerance, discrimination and incitement of hatred against any community or adherents of any religion;
17.		Calls upon the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to promote and include human rights aspects in the dialogue among civilizations, inter alia, through:
(a)		Integrating them into topical seminars and special debates on the positive contributions of cultures, as well as religious and cultural diversity, including through educational programmes, particularly the World Programme for Human Rights Education proclaimed on 10 December 2004;
(b)		Collaboration by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights with other relevant international organizations in holding joint conferences designed to encourage this dialogue and promote understanding of the universality of human rights and their implementation at various levels;
18.		Requests the Secretary-General to submit a report on the implementation of the present resolution, including on the possible correlation between defamation of religions and the upsurge in incitement, intolerance and hatred in many parts of the world, to the General Assembly at its sixty-second session.

Hat tip: Steen. Thanks to Eye on the UN for the text of the resolution.

We’re talking prison conversion experience here:

One of Al Qaeda’s senior theologians is calling on his followers to end their military jihad and saying the attacks of September 11, 2001, were a “catastrophe for all Muslims.”

In a serialized manifesto written from prison in Egypt, Sayyed Imam al-Sharif is blasting Osama bin Laden for deceiving the Taliban leader, Mullah Omar, and for insulting the Prophet Muhammad by comparing the September 11 attacks to the early raids of the Ansar warriors. The lapsed jihadist even calls for the formation of a special Islamic court to try Osama bin Laden and his old comrade Ayman al-Zawahri.

The disclosures from Mr. Sharif, also known as Dr. Fadl and Abd al-Qadir ibn Abd al-Aziz, have already opened a rift at the highest levels of Al Qaeda.

Be glad you don’t have to pay this man’s insurance premiums:

The group’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, a former associate of the defecting theologian in Egypt, personally mocked him last month in a video, remarking that he was unaware Egyptian prisons had fax machines. Meanwhile, leading Western analysts are saying the defection of Mr. Sharif indicates the beginning of the end for Al Qaeda.

An expert on Islamic terrorism with the Jamestown Foundation, Steven Ulph, also said the defection of Mr. Sharif could hemorrhage support for Al Qaeda. “The important point to make, when you have the combination of a respected ideologue, plus someone who was in the field, say these things it is more important than having a Saudi sheik that moderates his message,” he said.

[…]

Mr. Sharif, currently serving a life sentence in an undisclosed Egyptian prison, wrote in the 1980s two of the modern seminal texts for Sunni jihadism and in particular Al Qaeda, in “Fundamental Concepts Regarding Jihad” and “The Five Ground Rules for the Achieving of Victory or Its Absence.” Those books are scholarly justifications, citing the Koran and Hadiths, for joining a war against Muslim apostates such as the Egyptian ruling class and for a broader jihad against the far enemy of America.

This is better than any gossip coming out of the U.S. Who cares about the She-cat, or whether John Edwards keeps his trousers zipped and his hair combed? What is important is that Sharif has decided to open his mouth:

His latest texts are a renunciation of his earlier work, saying the military jihad or war against apostate states and America is futile. But the ex-jihadist also calls into question the virtue of Mr. bin Laden and Mr. Zawahri. In some ways the manifesto reads in parts like a spicy Washington memoir by an embittered former official.

Of his old associates he writes, “Bin Laden, al-Zawahri, and others fled at the beginning of the American bombing [in Afghanistan], to the point of abandoning their wives and families to be killed along with other innocent people,” according to a translation provided by the Middle East Media Research Institute. It goes on, “I think that a sharia court should be established, composed of reliable scholars, to hold these people accountable for their crimes – even if in absentia – so that those who are ignorant in their religion do not repeat this futility.”

So the worm turns…and al Qaeda in Iraq continues its downward spiral…
– – – – – – – – –

On Monday, an American intelligence official familiar with the interrogation of Mr. Sharif said that in 2004 the Al Qaeda cleric was tortured. “All I am saying is that screw drivers were involved,” this official, who asked to be anonymous, said. When asked if Mr. Sharif was tortured, Mr. Gunaratna responded by saying, “He spent time in an Egyptian prison.”

But Mr. Gunaratna also said he believed Mr. Sharif’s conversion was genuine. “He has had a genuine change of heart because we are seeing a trend today in Egypt where the original members of both of the major jihadist organizations are turning, the senior members of these groups, many have gone back and been remorseful,” he said. “He is not an exception because there is a trend. . . The traditional jihad movement is almost coming to an end. What has it accomplished in more than 25 years?”

Is this a rhetorical question?

Would anyone care to answer it? I could begin by enumerating all the Arabic words I’ve learned. “Allahu Akbar” comes to mind.

And how about those missing towers in New York City and their impact on the past and future US presidential elections?

Or we could consider the Christmas festivities for all the families in London and Madrid who will be observing the “celebration” without their loved ones.

Hat tip: Captain’s Quarters

The latest information on last week’s murder of Fuat Deniz is that there isn’t much information. A criminology expert at the University of Stockholm thinks it’s unlikely that there was a political element to the murder of Dr. Deniz.

Well… Read all the material and decide for yourself. There’s not much to go on, except for the fact that Dr. Deniz and other Assyrian Christians in Sweden had been warned that bad things would happen to them if they didn’t leave off their preoccupation with the Ottoman genocide of the Assyrians.

Previous posts on this topic are here, here, and here.

Many thanks to Henrik for translating the following article from today’s Örebro Expressen:

“The killer knew what he was doing”

Time may be running out for the police in the hunt for the killer of Fuat Deniz.

So says Jerzy Sarnecki, professor in criminology at the University of Stockholm.

“Had you asked me on the day of the murder, I would have been sure the murderer would be caught. Now I’m not quite so sure,” says Sarnecki to Orebro.expressen.se.

The knife murder of the university professor Fuat Deniz last week is a mystery.

There is much leading to the conclusion that the police are groping in the dark in their investigation. Tips are flooding in, but officially there are as yet no hot leads as to the identity of the culprit, and the motive is as yet unknown.

Many suspect political disagreement, pointing to the research that Deniz amongst others did on the Assyrian genocide in the Ottoman Empire, a very controversial topic in some circles.

Planned murder

But Jerzy Sarnecki doubts that.

“I don’t think that is terribly believable. That type of forceful confrontation does not exist in Sweden, and I don’t believe a foreign power has sent a secret agent.

– – – – – – – – –

“But of course you can’t rule out a political motive. Both the murder of Anna Lindh as well as Olof Palme, if you — as do I — think Christer Pettersson was the killer, were in some ways political even if they were about insane acts without big conspiracies behind them.”

There are also circumstances that point towards the murder being planned, Sarnecki thinks.

“If it is true that there only was one stab in the neck, you can see that as indicating the murderer knew what he was doing.”

“Significant power”

His teaching position could also have been a source of conflict.

“Professors have significant power. They decide the grades and within boundaries decide the future of people. Historically, this has led to violence,” Sarnecki asserts, while he agrees that the case of Fuat Deniz is significantly more complex than other Swedish murders.

“Obviously it is a special case; there are indications in very many directions. He could have become the victim due to belonging to a minority, being a researcher, a teacher, or a private person.

“Murders in Sweden mostly happen in connection with family- and love-related disturbances or in scenes with intoxicated people. None of this seems to be the case here.”

The murderer still on the loose

That more than a week has gone by without the police having any solid leads as to the culprit is disheartening, thinks Sarnecki..

“Had you asked me on the day of the murder, I would have been sure that the culprit would be apprehended. Now, I’m not so sure.

“In most cases, the murderer is caught relatively fast, but every day that goes by makes the chances for his capture smaller.”

Hat tip: Steen.

In Merrye Olde Yorkshire, not everyone is singing Christmas carols:

…a “sing-along” DVD for children which appears to glorify suicide bombing was last night under police investigation after being found on sale in Yorkshire.

The Yorkshire Post has obtained a disc of music videos – part of an Egyptian-made series – in which a young girl sings about following in the footsteps of her suicide bomber mother. A group of self-proclaimed orphans also rail against the West over the plight of the Palestinian people.

[…]

All three of the DVD’s tracks are sung by children in Arabic with English subtitles.

The first song is about two children who lose their mother when she becomes a suicide bomber. It believed to be a reference to Reem al-Reyashi, a 22-year-old Palestinian mother-of- two who blew herself up on January 14, 2004, at a crossing, in the Gaza Strip, killing four Israelis.

The video begins with an Arab woman playing with her two children, then leaving her home with dynamite tucked in her dress, blowing herself up after being challenged by uniformed soldiers, and her children and husband finding out about her death on TV.

The elder of her two clearly upset children, a girl, asks why their mother would leave them and says of her toddler brother: “He doesn’t eat except in your arms. Everything for him is you (sic).”

But there is a disturbing change of tone towards the end of the track. Rummaging around her mother’s wardrobe, the girl finds a stick of dynamite hidden in a drawer and, turning to look at the camera, concludes with a steely gaze and the chilling words: “My love will not be by words. I will follow my mother’s steps.”

The small video (available at the news site) is truly disturbing. Officials say it is aimed at young children, but I disagree. I think it highly likely that the propaganda is aimed toward mothers of young children. And that is disturbing.

Meanwhile, Bradford Muslims are equally upset:

Bradford Council for Mosques spokesman Ishtiaq Ahmed said: “We are very concerned about the fact that this material is on sale and could prove to be provocative. Children and families are being exploited and it is not something we encourage or support.

[…]

“It is not something we have been aware of before. We have seen people distributing leaflets but not DVDs like this.”

As the Yorkshire Post revealed yesterday, the DVD was bought in Bradford – home to two of the four July 7 suicide bombers and the location of a bomb factory for the attack – and distributed by a Leeds firm whose address and telephone number are on the cover.

Click on the first link above and watch the video. It is brief, slickly done and compelling.

[post ends here]

A reader has asked for help:

If you would have any information about any Dutch (or European) magazine interested in publishing color artwork/cartoons asking questions about Islam, I would be grateful for your assistance. Thanks.

If you have any ideas to help him, please post them in the comments or send me an email.

[Nothing follows]

This is a post…or most of it…by a blogger named Dennis the Peasant. As you can tell, he loathes us with panache and vitriol.

That’s a shame, as I often find him entertaining and witty. Alas, we do not entertain him. Rather, we seem to raise his blood pressure to the stratosphere.

What follows has been redacted in keeping with our PG-13 code for visiting homeschoolers. Other than the several fallacies of debate he resorts to in his effort to make his point, this is entertaining and, in its own way, educational.

Can You Guess Why James Lileks and Gates of Vienna Are Alike? Sure You Can…

Well, when it comes to Sharia finance, neither of them have a [freaking] clue. That’s one reason.

And neither seem to understand the value of fact-checking. That’s another.

Not that a couple of details like those would stop either of them from spouting on the subject, mind you.

From the noted counterjihadist Baron Bodissey’s Sharia Financing in Minneapolis? at Gates of Vienna:

Thanks to the alertness of James Lileks, we now know that Sharia finance – loans made without interest, as prescribed by Islamic law – is being officially promoted by the mayor of Minneapolis.

And as the Baron goes on to note, Lileks is outraged:

Unless no-interest business loans are available to religious believers whose doctrines do not forbid interest – not to mention anarchists – this would seem to be Flamingly Unconstitutional, to use the legal term. Does one have to prove one holds this particular religious belief? Would they bring in someone to test you? It seems absurd to expect the government to validate your piety to make sure you qualify for benefits.

And since Lileks is outraged, Herr Baron decides he’d better get outraged as well:

– – – – – – – – –

Sharia-based finance is rapidly gaining ground in the United States. The most effective means to combat it is to denounce it vigorously, loudly, and repeatedly as blatantly unconstitutional.

It’s pretty clear from what both Lileks and Baron Bodissey have written that they are assuming that Sharia financing equates to “no cost” financing. They both assume that “no interest” financing means that Muslims will have the use of these city monies free of charge. And, just to make sure we understand the situation, they both clearly assume that such “no interest, no cost” financing will provide an unfair (or “unconstitutional”, as they both so charmingly assert) competitive advantage to the business interests of The Muslim Menace_TM.

There’s only one problem with this: They’re both dead wrong. [whew! at least they’re just “dead wrong”….beats being really dead —D]

Had either James Lileks or Baron Bodissey googled “Sharia finance” and spent, say, twenty minutes reading several of the many links provided on page one, our intrepid journalist and our equally intrepid counterjihadist would have discovered that “no interest” Sharia finance does not equate to “no cost” non-Sharia finance, and that both of them were completely, totally and embarrassingly wrong in their respective hyperventilations. But as we all know, saving the world from The Muslim Menace™ can really eat into your free time if you let it, so sometimes something has to give… In this case, as in most, what actually does give is any semblance to factual accuracy.

I now understand why Lileks was so desperate to avoid returning to reporting news for a living.

Here are the facts:

Islamic law requires three elements to be present in any financial contract to qualify as Sharia-compliant:

1) All parties share in the profits and losses associated with the transaction,

2) Investors in the transaction cannot charge interest, and

3) Uncertainty (returns determined by possible future outcomes) is prohibited in the terms of the contract.

(Other elements, such as prohibited investments (haram) and form/elements of Sharia-compliant contracts need not be addressed here.)

The key to understanding Sharia financing is this: Muslims believe that money, in and of itself, has no value. All value derives from trading, and the risk associated with trading. Therefore, making money from money is prohibited because it is viewed as being a risk-free transaction with unearned reward. So, for any transaction to meet the requirements of Sharia financing, it must be structured in a way that risk and reward are fairly shared by all parties to the contract. Thus, where the Western investor would receive interest income, the Muslim investor would receive a stated portion of the profit or loss. Where the Western borrower would pay interest, the Muslim would pay a stated portion of the profits (if any) of the transaction.

The bottom line is this: When the mayor of Minneapolis stated that the city would make available “alternative financing loans with no interest to business owners whose religious beliefs restrict them from receiving traditional interest-based financing”, what he was not saying was the Muslim business owners would receive “no cost” loans. What he was saying is that they would be receiving traditional Islamic financing where profit-sharing is substituted for the paying of interest. Not that either Lileks or the Baron would know this, but what the city will most likely offering is a Murabaha contract, which Westerners usually consider to be a form of cost-plus financing, through a third-party agent.

In any event, it’s clear that neither James Lileks, professional journalist, nor Baron Bodissey, fearless counterjihadist (whatever the heck that is) couldn’t be bothered to get their facts straight before wailing the wail of impending doom before the sinister forces of The Muslim Menace(tm). Then again, as neither Lileks nor the Baron have any grounding in Sharia law, banking systems or international finance, it’s completely understandable that they’d [mess] this story up from top to bottom. After all, these are men who are far more interested in stoking the wellsprings of their own paranoia than actually coming to an understanding what actually does, or does not, constitute a credible threat to either themselves or us.

In other words, they’re Pudknockers. And that’s the primary reason why these two are alike…[oh, I don’t know…I think that both the Baron and Mr. Lileks have a certain je ne sais quoi –D]

An Aside: I find it amazing that someone (the Baron) who co-authors a blog on the apolcalyptic [sic] threat that is Islam doesn’t have the faintest idea of what constitutes Islamic finance. Makes you wonder just how much he knows about anything else connected with Islam, doesn’t it? And I don’t know about you, but knowing he couldn’t tell Sharia finance from the South of France doesn’t exactly inspire any confidence in moi that he’s gonna get The Muslim Menace(tm) under control any time soon, either. [oh dear. The Baron has been to the South of France, but he’s never taken out a sharia loan so we can’t really compare here. Perhaps he would find the two so similar as to be unable to choose one. On the other hand, he would be happy to do some landscapes in the former; I doubt the latter lends itself to painterly composition. However, given our ignorance, perhaps Mr. Peasant is correct in his comparison, though this common fallacy – an appeal to ridicule – does weaken his argument a bit –D ]

Another Aside: Two test questions: Anyone want to guess how many U.S. companies doing business abroad are using Sharia-compliant financial instruments on a routine basis? Anyone want to guess how long many of these companies have been using said instruments? If your answers aren’t “thousands” and “decades”, you just flunked the test. So by all means, get all flustered about the threat of Sharia finance…

A Note To My Friends At GulfCoastPundit: I see I have several folks claiming my assertion that the Sharia financing offered by the City of Minneapolis isn’t “no cost” is just an example of me running my mouth. Sorry, kids, but Dennis – unlike Lileks and the Baron – actually does his [freaking] homework. Here is a link to the City of Minneapolis web site page that explains the Sharia finance program in detail. It is “low cost”, not “no cost”, and mirrors the City of Minneapolis’ non-Sharia 2% Revolving Loan funding that is available to dhimmis. Remember this: What I’m interested in is facts, so before you accuse me of not doing my homework, make sure you’ve done yours. I smoked Michelle Malkin’s, Charles Johnson’s, Markos Moulitsas’, Duncan Black’s, Josh Marshall’s and Ed Morrissey’s a**es over Dubai Ports World… I’ll be more than happy to smoke yours over this.[one of Mr. Peasant’s admirable qualities is his across-the-spectrum spanking of us ignoramuses. He’s definitely an equal opportunity “a** smoker,” whatever that is. No doubt it’s less harmful than smoking, say, cigarettes. He certainly appears to derive the same satisfaction from his past-time of a**-smoking as my brother-in-law does from tobacco –D]

I’m sure you are thankful for this lesson in finance. Mr. Peasant is an accountant, I believe. And despite appearances to the contrary, he is capable of real wit. In fact, back in the days when I was on the Watcher’s Council, I nominated one of his posts in the non-Council group. I thought he was every bit as funny as P.G. Wodehouse, but he says this is not the case.

Ah, well, chacun a son goût…I’m afraid my fond regard for Mr. Peasant is unrequited. Sigh….

In the spirit of the season, please drop by Mr. Peasant’s hovel and share some eggnog with him.

Thanks to Fausta for bringing it to our attention that Time magazine has named Vladimir Putin their “Man of the Year”.

When I looked at the story on Time’s website, I thought at first it must be some kind of satire, like the Onion version of the “Man of the Year”.

First there’s the photo of Vlad looking like an ineptly-sculpted dummy at Madame Tussaud’s. Or is he auditioning for the part of the corpse in an Agatha Christie production? In any case, his cadaverous appearance makes it look like he was propped up in a chair in the funeral parlor for family viewing night.

Then there’s the title of the story: “A Tsar is Born”. Great gag! Wish I’d thought of that one.

And the prose in the story itself — surely this is deadpan satire at its finest…?

No one is born with a stare like Vladimir Putin’s. The Russian President’s pale blue eyes are so cool, so devoid of emotion that the stare must have begun as an affect, the gesture of someone who understood that power might be achieved by the suppression of ordinary needs, like blinking. The affect is now seamless, which makes talking to the Russian President not just exhausting but often chilling. It’s a gaze that says, I’m in charge.

There’s something about an American opinion magazine that loves a Russian despot. ’Twas ever thus.

When you arrive at the dacha’s faux-neoclassical gate, you have to leave your car and hop into one of the Kremlin’s vehicles that slowly wind their way through a silent forest of snow-tipped firs. Aides warn you not to stray, lest you tempt the snipers positioned in the shadows around the compound…

– – – – – – – – –

Vladimir Putin gives a first impression of contained power: he is compact and moves stiffly but efficiently. He is fit, thanks to years spent honing his black-belt judo skills and, these days, early-morning swims of an hour or more… The successor to the boozy and ultimately tragic Boris Yeltsin, Putin is temperate, sipping his wine only when the protocol of toasts and greetings requires it; mostly he just twirls the Montrachet in his glass. He eats little, though he twitchily picks the crusts off the bread rolls on his plate.

Whatever happened to the suave, jazz-loving, sportscar-driving men of the world featured in Time puff-pieces during the Soviet years?

Now we have to settle for steely-eyed twitchy KGB veterans. Well, as long as they’re Russian autocrats, we still love ’em.

Here’s how the AP summarizes Vlad the Twitchy’s moment in the media sun:

The nod went to the Russian leader because of Putin’s “extraordinary feat of leadership in taking a country that was in chaos and bringing it stability,” said Richard Stengel, Time’s managing editor.

Ah, stability. The perennial favorite of the diplomat class. Was James Baker on the selection committee at Time?

As Fausta points out, Cuba is nice and stable. So is North Korea. How come Fidel and Kim Jong-il were left standing at the church door?

Putin probably makes the trains run on time, too. Was Mussolini “Man of the Year” in 1923?

“Stop highlighting the genocide or your people will get hurt.”

A week ago today Dr. Fuat Deniz, a professor of sociology at the University of Örebro in Sweden, had his throat slit by an unknown assailant.

Dr. Deniz was an Assyrian Christian, and was known for his studies of the genocide against the Assyrian Christians committed by the Ottoman Turks during and after the Great War. Although his murderer has yet not been found, there are reasons to believe that he was killed for political reasons.

According to Nerikes Alhehanda, people will be demonstrating tomorrow all over Sweden in memory of Fuat Deniz (translation by Kepiblanc):

Demonstration in memory of Fuat Deniz

Tomorrow, Wednesday at 6 PM o’clock, a demonstration against public violence is scheduled at Olof Palme square in Örebro. The demonstration will be arranged in memory of the late university professor Fuat Deniz. So says a press release by University of Örebro and the recently established society “Friends of Fuat”.

“The murder of the university professor, columnist, and author Fuat Deniz has shocked Sweden. When a teacher is killed on the job it’s a signal to the entire society that we must remember to stick together and defend values such as democracy, openness, and security. As Deniz himself states in his upcoming book, democracy isn’t a condition, it’s action,” says the press release.

The Minister of the Environment will speak

Speakers will be Deniz’ family and colleagues as well as spokespersons from the academic world, idealistic organizations and the state police. The Minister of the Environment, Mr. Andreas Carlgren (center party) is an example of the participants at the demonstration.

According to the press release anyone who wants to support an open society will be welcome. It will begin with a silent minute of commemoration. Other places where such demonstrations are planned: Stockholm, Göteborg, Uppsala, Lund, Linköping, Jönköping, and Norrköping.

AINA has this report on the upcoming demonstrations:
– – – – – – – – –

The murder of Fuat Deniz, a senior lecturer and researcher at Sweden’s Örebro University has prompted action against violence and what is seen as an attack on the open Swedish society. Eight Swedish university towns have prepared for ceremonies to be held simultaneously on Wednesday 19 December at 18.00 Swedish time.

“We want to honour the memory of Fuat Deniz and what he stands for: peace, democracy and dialog”, says Afamia Maraha from the newly established committee “Fuat’s Friends” who are organizing the events together with the University of Örebro.

The following towns will hold a ceremony: Örebro, Stockholm, Jönköping, Uppsala, Lund, Linköping, Gothenburg and Norrköping. Colleagues and family members of Fuat as well as politicians and writers will deliver speeches on the murder which has shocked many in Sweden.

“Fuat and I met each other through the passion we both shared. I will continue to work for free debate and tolerance”, says Runa, the wife of Fuat Deniz.

For more information about the events in Swedish visit www.hujada.com.

Swedish Assyrians are planning to build a monument to the Turkish genocide in Södertälje, but have been obstructed by Swedes of Turkish origin, who are trying to block construction of the monument. Since the murder of Dr. Deniz, Assyrians have told the press that they have been threatened by the Turks, according to AINA:

Former head of the Assyrian Federation in Sweden, Simon Barmano, revealed in an interview today with Swedish paper Länstidningen that he received threats from Turkish officials.

The threat was delivered to Barmano during a meeting this summer he had with four Turkish governors who were on a visit to Sweden.

On 31 August he met the governors in their hotel in Täby, north of Stockholm.

“I wanted to discuss issues concerning Assyrian lands in south eastern Turkey, but the governors were only interested in one thing: The anticipated memorial monument on the Turkish genocide against Assyrians [to be erected in the Swedish city of Södertälje, hometown of some 20,000 Assyrians since the 70s], and our efforts for recognition of the genocide,” says Simon Barmano.

The governors, from Mardin, Dyiarbakir, Giresun and one of Ankaras districts, told Barmano to stop the monument because it would “not serve any good purpose anyway”. When Simon Barmano said that the monument is important and that the Turkey should acknowledge the genocide the Turkish governors changed their tone, telling Barmano to “stop highlighting the genocide or your people will get hurt”.

“You have already hurt our people so much, in which more ways can you hurt us?” Barmano replied.

The strong objection Turkey has towards the anticipated monument was revealed when it recently became known that people with Turkish origin had influenced Swedish politicians to stop the monument. Assyrian groups in Sweden are however continuing to push for the installation of the monument.

Hat tip: Paul Green.