Fallacies That Deserve Correction

At OSCE meetings, participants may issue responses to issues that come up during the proceedings. At today’s meeting in Vienna on “Confronting Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims in Public Discourse”, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff presented the following intervention.

Pax Europa


Intervention by Bürgerbewegung Pax Europa
Session I
October 28, 2011

On the problematic concept of ‘anti-Muslim discourse’:

I believe that everybody here, both the representatives of the participating states and of non-governmental organizations, shares a common goal of upholding liberty, peaceful coexistence and respect for diversity, in line with the OSCE purpose of upholding democracy and freedom.

This meeting has been called with these objectives in mind.

However, there are in the meeting agenda some fallacies that deserve correction, or the results might end up being counterproductive to the overall objectives of the OSCE. Let me point out the more obvious ones:

  • Trying to steer public discourse is at odds with the core concept of freedom of expression.
  • It is not made clear in the agenda if ‘anti-Muslim discourse’ includes criticizing Islam.
  • Singling out Muslims for specific protection constitutes an act of discrimination itself.
  • Anti-Christian anti-Jewish hate crimes are more common than anti-Muslim ones.
  • National law protecting citizens’ rights apply equally well to Muslims as to others.

In brief, there is no good reason to single out Muslims as being in need of special protection, as Muslims have the same fundamental rights as any other citizen.

No such discussion, however frank and honest, should be considered directed against individual adherents of a faith, and hardly an issue of concern at government level.

Attempting to resolve conflicts in society by controlling the public discourse is usually a futile approach, as we saw in Eastern Europe decades ago, and at odds with the objectives of the OSCE.

With respect to the massacre by Anders Breivik, mentioned by member of the panel, Ms. Fekete:

Mohammed Atta implicated Islam the way Breivik implicates critics of Islam. If you accept that equivalence, which I don’t. We reject it. We judge Muslims by their own behavior, just as we expect to be judged by our behavior, not by Breivik.

So we look at Zarqawi, Qaradawi, bin Laden, Anjem Choudary. We listen to what they say and watch what they so, and make judgments accordingly.

Finally, I am deeply worried about the undemocratic teachings of the Koran, and I will continue to speak out on this topic.



Previous posts about the OSCE and the Counterjihad:

2009   Jul   25   A Report on the OSCE Roundtable
    Sep   30   ICLA Tackles Fundamental Freedoms at the OSCE Meeting in Warsaw
    Oct   1   The ICLA Meets the OSCE, Round 2
    Nov   5   The OSCE: Islam and Violence Against Women
        7   Proposed Charter of Muslim Understanding Under Fire At OSCE Meeting in Vienna
        7   “Hate Speech” Accusations at the OSCE Meeting
        8   What is Medica Zenica?
        10   Report on the OSCE Supplementary Human Rights Dimension Meeting
2011   Oct   28   ESW: Liveblogging In Vienna
        28   Steering Public Discourse

Steering Public Discourse

As mentioned earlier, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff represented Buergerbewegung Pax Europa today at the “Confronting Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims in Public Discourse” conference in Vienna. She issued the following statement at the meeting on behalf of BPE.


Pax Europa

Buergerbewegung Pax Europa

In cooperation with and endorsed by

International Civil Liberties Alliance,
Mission Europa, Wiener Akademikerbund



Today’s meeting is ostensibly concerned with confronting intolerance and discrimination against Muslims in public discourse. Actually, however, it focuses on “Islamophobia”, a term invented by the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1990’s. According to the David Horowitz Freedom Center, “it has become ‘a matter of extreme priority’ for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.” It appears that the UK-based Runnymede Trust in 1996 coined the “accepted” definition, which includes any and all of the following components:

1. Islam seen as a single monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to new realities.
2. Islam seen as separate and other:
  (a) not having any aims or values in common with other cultures,
  (b) not affected by them, and
  (c) not influencing them.
3. Islam seen as inferior to the West — barbaric, irrational, primitive, sexist.
4. Islam seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism, engaged in ‘a clash of civilizations’.
5. Islam seen as a political ideology, used for political or military advantage.
6. Criticisms made by Islam of ‘the West’ rejected out of hand.
7. Hostility towards Islam used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.
8. Anti-Muslim hostility accepted as natural and ‘normal’.

Pax Europa and its affiliations note with grave concern that this definition — or any definition — of Islamophobia cannot and does not address the underlying problems with Islam and its teachings.

For example, Pax Europa believes that Islam denies equal rights to men and women. According to the above definition, this is considered Islamophobia. Pax Europa believes that Islam is a political ideology. Since its ideology informs the doctrine of political organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, it is indeed a political ideology. Pax Europa is accused of Islamophobia for saying so.

Pax Europa is of the opinion that criticism of a religion, including Islam, must remain legitimate. This is echoed by the OSCE: “Criticisms of religious practices (just religious practices, not religions themselves?; BPE) are legitimate speech.” We believe, however, that while Muslims are not a monolithic group, Islam is indeed monolithic, in that all Muslims worldwide, whether they practice their faith in Europe, Asia, Africa, or America, consider the Koran, the Hadith (authentic sayings of Mohammed) and the Sira (Mohammed’s biography) as the basis of their faith.

We furthermore note that the distinction between “acceptable” and “unacceptable” speech is one of grave concern. We would like to recall the OSCE commitments (Copenhagen 1990) which state with respect to freedom of expression:

The participating States reaffirm that

9.1)   – everyone will have the right to freedom of expression including the right to communication. This right will include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. The exercise of this right may be subject only to such restrictions as are prescribed by law and are consistent with international standards.

The participating States express their commitment to

10.1)   – respect the right of everyone, individually or in association with others, to seek, receive and impart freely views and information on human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the rights to disseminate and publish such views and information;

Pax Europa is thus of the opinion that Islam and, by extension, the OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) require public expression to conform to Shariah law. This includes perceived “anti-Muslim discourse” as well as cases of “discrimination”, whether intentional or unintentional. More importantly, trying to steer public discourse is at odds with the core concept of freedom of expression. Attempting to resolve conflicts in society by controlling public discourse is always a futile approach, as evidenced in Eastern Europe just a few decades ago, and is fundamentally at odds with the objectives of the OSCE.

Buergerbewegung Pax Europa and its affiliates strongly discourage pursuing this strategy further.



Previous posts about the OSCE and the Counterjihad:

2009   Jul   25   A Report on the OSCE Roundtable
    Sep   30   ICLA Tackles Fundamental Freedoms at the OSCE Meeting in Warsaw
    Oct   1   The ICLA Meets the OSCE, Round 2
    Nov   5   The OSCE: Islam and Violence Against Women
        7   Proposed Charter of Muslim Understanding Under Fire At OSCE Meeting in Vienna
        7   “Hate Speech” Accusations at the OSCE Meeting
        8   What is Medica Zenica?
        10   Report on the OSCE Supplementary Human Rights Dimension Meeting
2011   Oct   28   ESW: Liveblogging In Vienna

Srdja Trifkovic in Manhattan

Dr. Srdja Trifkovic will give a lecture next month in Manhattan. This just came in from the people at Chronicles:

Chronicles Magazine, in cooperation with the Lord Byron Foundation, presents

The Twilight of the Empire:
Global Consequences of America’s Decline

a lecture by Srdja Trifkovic

Sunday, 13 November 2011, at 2 p.m.
Serbian Orthodox Cathedral of St. Sava
15 West 25th St., New York (25th and Broadway)

Srdja TrifkovicAmerica is no longer able to bear the financial burden of her military and political commitments around the world.

The only solution is to accept the limits of American power and to establish a rational correlation between its ends and means — in other words, to turn America into a “normal” power pursuing limited political, economic and military objectives in a world populated by other powers doing the same.

Washingtonian foreign-policy formulators and practitioners remain wholly unwilling to do any such thing, however, and history teaches us that a declining hegemonistic power is prone to rash gambles.

Can the fatal continuity of imperial assumptions and practices inside the Beltway be broken without a major war?

Dr. Trifkovic, foreign affairs editor of Chronicles, will address this most pressing global issue of our time.

Free entry, donations welcome.

ESW: Liveblogging In Vienna

Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff represented Buergerbewegung Pax Europa at an OSCE meeting in Vienna today. Most of the action occurred while I was asleep, but the sun never sets on the International Counterjihad, and Nilk was able to live-blog the events from her perch in Oz.

I’ve reposted her text below. Visit Right Wing Death Bogan to see the photos.

Another live-blog of the meeting is available at Tundra Tabloids, also with photos.

Update: A longer version on the live-blog, including a video, is available at Europe News.



OSCE logoElisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff is currently sitting in the plenary in Vienna, attending the confab about “Confronting Intolerance and Discrimination against Muslims in Public Discourse”.

She is also pretty much a lone voice in the wilderness that is public discourse in Austria when it comes to going against the current view, and seated with mainly men and mainly muslim ones at that when her views and travails are so widely known has to be challenging.

But… she is nothing if not brave, and more than capable of speaking up if she deems it fit.

I’ve offered to do a bit of a liveblog for her since she can’t be here doing it herself (one of the bonuses of global timezones, I guess).

Well, off to a flying start with the first speech being somewhat uninspiring (direct quote:”[7:16:29 PM] this is terrible”)

Update 1: the conference is to be based upon a forward-looking approach, with recommendations to require work of all stakeholders. Intolerance and discrimination can be overcome only with the co-operation of everyone, and of course, intolerance of islam goes hand in hand with racism.

It is fueled by stereotypes and prejudices, including the identification of terrorism with islam.

It is these sorts of biased views that led to “recent events” in a very tolerant country, and therefore intolerant speech should be avoided because words can do harm.

Finding a fair balance is hard.

Is freedom of expression absolute? When is it necessary to restrict it?

International standards do not provide answers.

The criminalisation of hate speech is a threat and can impede robust debate in a robust society.

OSCE stresses the protection and promotion of freedom of expression, stresses the role of education in shaping the attitude of young minds. Educators must combat these stereotypes.

[yup. get them while they’re young and malleable…nilk]

Update 2: Mr. Omer Orhun, advisor to the Secretary General of the OIC is the next speaker.

[first speaker] identifies intolerance as a problem, what to do to confront instances of this?

There are two points in the field of public discourse:

Political rhetoric — responsible politicians must underline the importance of correct and unbiased discourse.

The media — a positive role in promoting harmony; what is expected of responsible journalists? Media can play a negative and divisive role in projecting messages, and governments must assist the creation of media self-regulation [not very self-regulating in that case, is it?..nilk]

The manifestation of islamophobia in Western Europe and Northern America has the potential to fuel anti-muslim incidents and violence.

The role of the media in preventing hate crimes needs to be explored.

Underlining by the OIC: Respect for cultural diversity.

Differences should not lead to discrimination.

Principles of tolerance lie at the centre of the human rights system. Closely linked to mutual respect, which is based equality and dignity.

Update 3: (same speaker)

Regard for principles of tolerance, democracy, are essential safeguards of tolerance and non-discrimination [apologies for the redundancy ~ just cribbing from skype here..nilk]

More and more people believe that a clash of civilisations is inevitable, and this attitude threatens the international environment.

Mankind must join forces to resist playing one culture against another[umma anyone?..nilk]

With respect to islamophobia, OSCE prefers “intolerance and discrimination against muslims,” but we need a definition.

It is a contemporary form of racism, an unfounded fear of muslims and islam and is an affront to the human rights and dignity of muslims.

1. we must address manifestations of islamophobia

2. analyze current occurrences of stereotypes against muslims

3. share good practices and gather set of recommendations to prevent and respond to manifestations of intolerance against muslims

those are concrete measures (the above 3 points)

[First speaker] states that Jesus was born in Palestine. [sigh. here we go again…nilk]

Just in time for a break before the first session.

Gates of Vienna News Feed 10/27/2011

Gates of Vienna News Feed 10/27/2011The EU summit reached a deal in which Greece’s lenders accepted a 50% writedown, the euro bailout fund was increased to €1.4 trillion, and Italy agreed to new austerity measures. According to the French finance minister, the last-minute deal “saved the euro”. Exultation over the good news cause stock markets to rise dramatically all over the world.

In other news, a French court has ruled that private nurseries, like public institutions, are required to comply with the no-burka law. Also in France, the planned mega-mosque in Marseille — which was to be a proud symbol of Islam’s power and status in the country — was refused a permit by the planning commission, due to zoning considerations.

To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, Egghead, Erick Stakelbeck, Fjordman, Insubria, JP, Kitman, PJ, Steen, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Commenters are advised to leave their comments at this post (rather than with the news articles) so that they are more easily accessible.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Iran and its Latin American Proxies

Below is a video of a joint subcommittee hearing (Oversight and Intelligence) in the House of Representatives concerning the recent attempted Iranian assassination of the Saudi ambassador in Washington, and the terrorist threat posed by Iran.

Historical correction: Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX) was mistaken when he stated that the “assassination of a foreign diplomat” triggered the First World War. The precipitating incident was in fact the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the heir to the Austrian throne, on June 28th, 1914, by a Bosnian Serb named Gavrilo Princip. The Archduke was paying an official visit to Sarajevo in Bosnia (which had been annexed to the Austrian Empire in 1908) when he was killed. (Yes, I know I’m a nitpicker, but I like to get the historical details right.)

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

The Swedish Exception

The following article about the case of Khalid Saeed is based on a story told by Hans Erling Jensen. It was written by the editor of Sappho (the website of the Danish Free Press Society), and was translated into English by Hans Erling Jensen.

Khalid Saeed


Is it an expression of Swedish hypocrisy when their authorities choose to send an apostate that left Islam back to Pakistan? The current case indicates that it is best to be a Muslim if you want to apply for asylum in Sweden.

In Sweden there is room for everyone. Or almost everyone! One of the few who did not merit entry is the Pakistani refugee Khalid Saeed, who has just been refused asylum.

But it is easy to be lured into thinking otherwise, that Khalid is qualified for a place in Sweden’s safe and sound embrace. According to his own statements, he and his family received very serious threats in their homeland.

It is an assertion which seems credible when Khalid also says that he is an apostate Muslim (he calls himself “humanist”). And he has not only distanced himself from his faith, he has done so publicly on his blog.

That should turn on all the warning lights!

In Pakistan he received a visit from several of Allah’s faithful. They maltreated him and threatened his life. Then he (and his family) went underground and escaped through a roundabout route to Sweden. Here he, his wife, and their three children stayed for the two years that the proceedings have been ongoing.

Now the asylum court has spoken and Khalid has to leave Sweden. (Khalid and his family have been underground since September 22nd).

But why do the Swedish authorities not find him worthy of staying?

It’s an absolutely relevant question.

And perhaps the Swedish artist Lars Vilks hits the nail on the head when he ironically writes on his blog:

“Khalid should have known that a Muslim who leaves Islam does not fit into the ‘Swedish folks-home’ (folkhemmet).”

Vilks also notes that none of the media who normally raise their voices to prevent the deportation of Muslim asylum-seekers have been interested in this matter.

A credibility problem

Maybe Vilks is right. Maybe apostate Muslims, Jews, Christians and others who are threatened by fanatical Muslims just do not fit in today’s Sweden?

One might entertain the thought that the aforementioned groups simply hang a credibility problem around the necks of “the PC-elite”.

For is it not true that the recognition of Khalid’s asylum needs would also will be a recognition that Islam — and therefore many Muslims — holds some extremely intolerant concepts?

Is it not easy to imagine that politically correct Sweden, where the belief that Islam is a religion of peace is alive and well, would have difficulty with such a realization?

And could one also imagine that rather than face reality, the same people would choose the easy solution — and turn their backs on a hunted man such as Khalid?

If you know a bit of Sweden’s political tradition, you will know that superficial and opportunistic solutions are unmistakable ingredients.

Here there are seldom protests against those who threaten with violence. Here one chooses the most opportune — some would say cowardly — solution, and then afterwards makes up arguments that explain why this or that was the right and only thing to do.

I wonder how the explanation would sound if something were to happen to Khalid, just like what has happened thousands of other “bad Muslims” — if he is lynched or sentenced to death by a Sharia court?

Would they say that he was a provocateur who in word and deed incited hatred, and therefore not could expect anything else, as he himself had prepared for?



Eticha has a Support Site for Khalid, with a detailed review of the case.

Walking the Lonely Road of his Certainty

EU Skull Dragon

Oh Cassandra, what did you know?
You who bring bad news wherever you go.

                 — From “Helen And Cassandra” by Al Stewart

Since last July we’ve received a lot of email queries from reporters, TV people, writers, and other people who want to get in touch with Fjordman. The media professionals are obviously looking to interview him or write an article about him. The vast majority of non-professionals want to thank him and show their support, while the rest — fortunately a very small number — want to castigate him and revile him for his “racism” and “fascism”.

A self-identified “left-wing” writer from here in the USA wrote to us a few weeks ago with a request to contact Fjordman. Since then she and I have exchanged a series of emails on the situation in Europe. We discussed the blatant attempts to suppress free speech that have come to the fore since the Breivik massacre.

My correspondent is a liberal, but of the old school — she takes the idea of free speech seriously, and reveres the Bill of Rights. She asked me some thoughtful questions, which I did my best to answer. We both expressed our opinions, and the result was a rewarding series of emails.

The post below is condensed and adapted from several of my responses to her. I owe her a debt of gratitude for stirring up my thought processes and causing me to put these ideas into words.



The following quote is from a just-released book (only an e-book so far) entitled On Utøya: Anders Breivik, right terror, racism and Europe:

To refuse the far Right or fascists a platform for their propaganda thus requires a radically different agency, one that seeks to unite ordinary people in robbing the reactionaries of the space to organise. It is a policy that must be enacted by people themselves, as real democracy depends on ordinary people putting their minds and bodies on the line. At times that will expose the Left to claims from mainstream opinion makers that it is being ‘extreme’ or that the Left are just as bad as the fascists. At times the police, as they have done so many times in the past, will intervene to defend Right-wing thugs’ democratic ‘rights’, in stark contrast to their treatment of Left-wing protests.

This is what Fjordman, Jussi Halla-aho, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, and all the rest of the European Counterjihad movement have to contend with. A conservative’s “right” to free speech is understood to appear in scare quotes. It is something that is not really legitimate. Opponents of sharia are seen as using it to gain unfair advantage.

Leftists who believe that the ends justify the means think that silencing people like us through misuse of the law would be a worthy tactic. This isn’t a danger far in the future. This is the reality we face now, especially in Europe.

Fjordman is the “Dark Prophet of Norway”. He can see the grim future that lies ahead, and would like nothing better than to be heard, so that this future might be averted. Five or six years ago, changing course to avoid the coming train wreck might have been at least theoretically feasible. Today there is virtually no chance of escaping it.

So, like Cassandra, Fjordman says, “This is what lies ahead, Western Civilization! Woe unto you!”

The curse that was laid on Cassandra by the gods was that she would be able to see the future, but that her prophetic warnings would never be heeded by her countrymen. Fjordman has been cursed in a similar fashion.

Our critics focus on the term “Eurabia”, which they consider a “conspiracy theory”. But this is a side-issue. There are plenty of people on our side, people whose main goal is to reverse Islamization, who do not place the any particular emphasis on the concept of Eurabia. To focus on any “grand plan” is to miss the point. One may disregard Bat Ye’or entirely, yet look at the current picture in Europe and see exactly what is happening.

Facts is facts, as they say. Here are some:

1. Europe is being Islamized, and the pace of Islamization is accelerating.

This is quite clear. Go through Lexis-Nexis and check what was happening in Britain fifteen or twenty years ago, and compare it with today’s situation. I lived in England during my formative years in the 1960s, so I remember what it used to be. That’s one of the major reasons why this issue is important to me, and why I do what I do.

2. The importation of immigrants and the destruction of European nation-states is deliberate.

Islamization was an unintended consequence of the importation of millions of Third World immigrants. But the process of mass immigartion was a deliberate strategy. Its intentionality is on the public record (especially in the UK) for those who care to look. It was (is) implemented in order to break down the traditional nation-states of Europe. The Socialists and Social Democrats were the main architects, but the so-called “Right” parties largely went along with the policy.

The original motivations for this undertaking were mixed. Many of the postwar architects of the EU thought they were building something that would prevent another catastrophic war in Europe. They thought that nationalism was the biggest threat to peace, so any form of nationalism had to be stamped out at all costs. They understood that popular sentiment would not support such a plan, so it had to be phased in quietly, gradually, and mostly for economic reasons, with the political changes occurring very slowly, over decades.

But the new Europe was also an enormous opportunity for certain favored parties to make lots and lots of money. Corruption was inevitable, since the superstructure of Europe was non-democratic and thus unaccountable. The opportunity for corrupt behavior was made even more irresistible by the deliberate opacity of official doings in Brussels.

Now, more than fifty years later, corruption is virtually all that is left. The European state is a rusted hulk covered with rapacious barnacles. Most activity at the EU level is intended to feather nests, enrich cronies, and entrench the oligarchs even further so that their positions can’t be threatened.

And enormous, apocalyptic conflict lies ahead. The architects of the system wanted to prevent a cataclysmic war, but instead they guaranteed there would be one — just not the type they expected.

This is what Fjordman has warned about, and what he, as the modern European Cassandra — shall we call him “Cassander”? — is powerless to prevent.

3. The Left in Europe is the problem, not Islam.

If the Socialists had not imposed massive immigration on Europe, and had not pushed to destroy traditional institutions and customs (through Multiculturalism and political correctness), Islam would never have been a problem.

The result of all their efforts, after the coming euro-inflation burns out the wealth of most of Europe, will almost certainly be catastrophic violence, the “clash of civilizations”. This is quite obvious — only the thin skein of temporary welfare-state prosperity is holding it back.



The three points above are true, regardless of “Eurabia”. I’ve been educating myself about Europe for the past six years, steeping myself in recent history and political details. It’s all there, in the public record. All one has to do is connect a few dots to see what is happening.

Study the historical record and current conditions, and you’ll see that it’s true: allowing Islam to remain in Europe is all but certain to bring on unimaginable violence and destruction. This is not what Fjordman wants, it’s not what I want, and it’s not what anyone I know wants.

But regardless of what anyone wants, it is likely to happen. The window for avoiding it is rapidly closing.

Oh Cassandra, what did you see
As you walked the lonely road of your certainty?
Gazing at the ruined city
That your warnings could not save.
Oh Cassandra, so still and so grave.

Multicultural Extremists

Fjordman published an article today in the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet. Below is an English translation by Henrik Ræder Clausen, which was posted in a slightly different form earlier today at Tundra Tabloids.

Fjordman notes that “This essay is a reply to attacks from writer Marie Simonsen in the left-wing pro-Multicultural Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet.”

Fjordman


Multicultural Extremists
by Peder Jensen, a.k.a. Fjordman

Being critical of Islam or multiculturalism isn’t right-wing extremism, writes Peder Jensen. Also known as Fjordman.

Fjordman: “It is my opinion, supporters of non-European mass immigration are extremists, not the opponents of this,” writes Peder Jensen.

Dagbladet’s Marie Simonsen has repeatedly attacked me in this newspaper’s columns, most recently on 25 October. She writes that the author “ seems unable to participate in a public debate, where he would meet resistance .” Okay.

I hereby challenge her to show how many places in the world with large Muslim populations have shown the ability to live peacefully with their non-Muslim neighbors over a long period of time. I will respond with an article.

Being critical of Islam or multiculturalism isn’t right-wing extremism. Popular resistance against Islamization is now beginning to spread far into the traditional left. Thilo Sarrazin, for example, is a member of the SPD, the Social Democratic Party of Germany and thus a sister party of the Norwegian Labour Party, and even to those who were at Utøya.

But let’s not talk about such things; it will make it much harder for outlets, including Dagbladet, to demonize people they do not like, and it would be sad.

In my opinion, supporters of non-European mass immigration are the extremists, not the opponents of it. Is it not extreme to displace the native population in many parts of Europe, as is happening now?

An ideology can hardly be more radical than to deprive the indigenous population of its homeland across an entire continent, and then suppress all opposition to this policy.

Marie Simonsen wrote in the spring of 2007 that it should be considered a universal human right for all people around the world to move wherever they want to.

Considering that the world’s population is expected to increase by billions of people over the next decades, and that the population growth in just a single country, Pakistan, is sufficient to crush a tiny country like Norway in just a few years, one is forced to conclude that Simonsen doesn’t like the continuing existence of the Norwegians as a people.

Since hardly anyone in mainstream media contradicted her at the time, as far as I know, one must assume that this view is widespread in the press corps. If that is the case, we have a problem.



For a complete archive of Fjordman’s writings, see the multi-index listing in the Fjordman Files.

Gates of Vienna News Feed 10/26/2011

Gates of Vienna News Feed 10/26/2011Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi was under the gun at the EU summit over the issue of the Italian debt crisis. At the last minute he cut a deal with the Northern League, promising to resign and call early elections in return for the Lega’s approval of a deal to raise the retirement age to 67, which it had previously opposed. The EU believes that the euro may collapse if Mr. Berlusconi fails to deliver.

In other news, the family of the late Col. Muammar Qaddafi is petitioning the ICC in the Hague to have NATO charged with war crimes for the manner of the former dictator’s death. Also, reports indicate that Col. Ghedaffi’s son Saif has taken refuge in Niger.

Meanwhile, a video has surfaced of a Swiss couple who were kidnapped in Pakistan and have been held hostage there for four months.

To see the headlines and the articles, open the full news post.

Thanks to C. Cantoni, CSP, DS, Fjordman, heroyalwhyness, Insubria, JP, Kitman, LN, Nilk, Steen, and all the other tipsters who sent these in.

Commenters are advised to leave their comments at this post (rather than with the news articles) so that they are more easily accessible.

Caveat: Articles in the news feed are posted “as is”. Gates of Vienna cannot vouch for the authenticity or accuracy of the contents of any individual item posted here. We check each entry to make sure it is relatively interesting, not patently offensive, and at least superficially plausible. The link to the original is included with each item’s title. Further research and verification are left to the reader.

Making Room for Al Qaeda in Libya

The Obama administration and its allies in Europe have encouraged and abetted the “Arab Spring” revolts in the Muslim world, enabling the Muslim Brotherhood to play a significant political role in North Africa after the overthrow of the old regimes. In Libya the West went so far as to apply military force to remove Col. Muammar Qaddafi from power and murder him, allowing Al Qaeda to join the new Libyan government.

As Ezra Levant and Daniel Pipes point out in the video below, this is a clear warning to other despots not to dismantle their nuclear programs. If Col. Gedhafi were to appear at a séance and speak from beyond the grave, he would surely say: “Whatever you do, boys, don’t give up your nukes!”

The second half of the video is devoted to a discussion of the re-Islamization of Turkey over the past decade, correctly identifying Turkey as the greatest threat to regional security.

Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for uploading this video:

Pigman vs. SuperJihad

Bosch Fawstin, The Infidel #1

Bosch Fawstin is an accomplished graphic artist whose work is already familiar to many of our readers. His iconic impression of Geert Wilders appears as a logo on the sidebars of numerous Counterjihad blogs.

Mr. Fawstin’s most ambitious work is a comic book entitled The Infidel (#1). It features Pigman, a grim superhero whose mission after 9-11 is to deliver payback to those who wage jihad on America.

Bosch Fawstin, The Infidel #2


The artist outlines the story with this brief description:

The Infidel is about twin brothers Killian Duke and Salaam Duka whose Muslim background comes to the forefront of their lives on 9/11. Killian responds to the atrocity by creating a counter-jihad superhero comic book called Pigman, as Salaam fully surrenders to Islam. Pigman’s battle against his archenemy SuperJihad is echoed by the escalating conflict between the twins.

Bosch Fawstin, The Infidel #3


Mr. Fawstin was born to an Albanian Muslim family in New York, but was raised in a secular American environment. This provided him with a non-Muslim worldview, allowing him to see the evil ideology behind Islam. As a result, he became an apostate.

Bosch Fawstin, The Infidel #5The Infidel #1 is available as a digital comic, and may be downloaded for $2.50.

Those who appreciate the modern comic-book genre — which I do — will be delighted with the visual impact of these pages. The story, of course, is one that will be dear to the heart of any Counterjihad activist. Prepare to see the mujahideen get what’s coming to them!

If, however, you hate “stereotyping of Muslims” and are afraid of being tainted by “racism”, you’ll probably want to look at some of the PC mainstream comics instead. Or even “The 99” — the new Muslim superheroes.

Everyone else is advised to pick up a copy of The Infidel #1 by Bosch Fawstin.

Bosch Fawstin, The Infidel #4