The Non-Innocence of Non-Muslims

From our Swedish correspondent Alfred Fredriksson:

Swedish State radio discussed the attacks on Charlie Hebdo in France yesterday.

Their foreign correspondent, Alice Petrén, made the following remark on state-funded radio:

“In this case it is not directed towards innocent people, but it is directed towards a paper which has attacked using caricatures of the prophet Muhammad, which has created satire pictures and as late as last night posted a caricature.” [emphasis added]

I knew those no-good WAYCISTS at Charlie Hebdo weren’t innocent. Didn’t you?

50 thoughts on “The Non-Innocence of Non-Muslims

  1. I’ve heard this meme repeated on the radio today as well – what they are doing is excusing the inexcusable. If you or I have an issue with someone, a politician or a newpaper editor for example, then we might stop buying the paper, and we’d vote for someone else in the next election. That’s about it – that’s what civilised people do.

    Yet these idiots want us to believe it is acceptable to go around killing people if we have some sort of grievance. If we experience an transient, unpleasant emotion perhaps (aka “be offended”).

    If that’s the kind of society they want to live in, then they better watch themselves. Because the amount of people who despise them and everything they stand for is getting longer with ever hour that passes … and what they’re saying is it would be A-OK for someone to break into their place of work and shoot them dead. These people are absolutely CRAZY!

    • Of course I’m not brown-skinned, I don’t come from the Middle East or North Africa and I’m not a Muslim. But if someone who matches those criteria ever feels ‘offended’ by the patronising tone of that white, privileged, European WOMAN talking about Islam and about Muslims, telling them what they are supposed to believe in, then what she’s saying is that it would be all right for them to stalk her & come to her home and behead her with a rusty knife in front of her children. How multicultural of her. How tolerant. How loving.

    • I may be wrong but is not Sweden the place where Lemmings throw themselves off of a cliff?

      S III

  2. Really? REALLY?

    Wow, by that logic, any Party A gets to murder any Party B if they feel any sense of insult over anything Party B has ever said or published.

    So, if Ms. Petren says something on the radio that gives offense to someone somewhere, she becomes a legitimate target?

    • Kind of gives one the impression that she hasn’t thought this thing through all the way.

    • I wonder what would happen to Swedes who, disgusted and offended by the rape and battery crime waves perpetrated by Islamic immigrants, tried something like this against those immigrants?

      This sort of thing only seems to go one way…

  3. That can be turned around slightly.

    Much ink has been spilled to establish that huge numbers of Germans — if not all of them — in the Third Reich were complicit with the Nazis. Ordinary German citizens had extensive knowledge imputed to them — even if it was not argued that they had actual knowledge — of the Gestapo, the forced labor and extermination camps, and the Einsatzgruppen. German complicity.

    Here Alice Petrén has actual knowledge of an extrajudicial execution effected by three Muslim men but excuses it as having been provoked by people who “attacked” by publishing satires and caricatures — people who were not “innocent.”

    Would she argue that any murders committed by the National Socialists were provoked by the Jews for some similar trivial act? What provision of German at that time then justified killing anyone by an official of the state? What provision of French law today justifies any citizen killing another citizen?

    There was and is no such provision of German or French law. But there is a provision of shariah that permits private citizens who are Muslims to kill others who are guilty of blasphemy. Petrén invents a justification for murder that does not exist in French law and validates a bedrock provision of shariah that has been applied in France.

    In what way can Petrén escape being compared to Germans who were considered to be complicit with the National Socialists? Does she not know of the crimes of these Muslims and excuse them on grounds that have no basis in law?

  4. “…and as late as last night posted a caricature.”

    Reminds me of Monty Python’s Piranha Brothers:

    Vercotti: I was terrified of him. Everyone was terrified of Doug. I’ve seen grown men pull their own heads off rather than see Doug. Even Dinsdale was frightened of Doug.

    Interviewer: What did he do?

    Vercotti He used sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, bathos, puns, parody, litotes and satire.

    • 1. Alice Petren is a morally disgusting human being. If I were a billionaire I’d hire a team of commandoes to abduct her, fly her to ISIS-land and leave her to the tender mercies of the Caliphate for a week. Then after she had experienced a dose of reality, have the team extract her. I guarantee she wouldn’t ever again make a statement absolving Muslims from murdering innocents.

      2. The Piranha Brothers sketch had me, at 12, look up the meaning of the words “litotes” and “bathos”. Litotes was a fascinating find. More generally Monty Python – bless Oxbridge – did more for my own education than 13 years of compulsory schooling. The “Constitutional Peasants” sketch from “The Holy Grail” alone has similarly elevated my children’s intellectual curiosity and vocabulary. And immunized them from smutty and/or intellectually low-grade humour. The “Four Yorkshiremen” sketch taught them much about human nature that they then put into practice in dealing with their peers during childhood.

      • Getting so much info from Python skits and Al Stewart songs, I had little need for school either.

      • In Sweden say nationalists on blogs that we shouldn’t support Charlie Hebdo, ( if the paper will be sold in Sweden) because their paper is leftist trash. So not even right-wing people or Swedish left journalists can think of anything that CH can bite the dust and live with their fate.

  5. In France I keep seeing media people say with one breath “nous somme Charlie” and then talk about an increase in Islamophobia which is of course the word created by Islamists to enable them to stifle free and open speech on Islam, my contempt for such people is enormous.

    But what is interesting is that using the word Islamophobia is akin to accepting Islamic blasphemy laws apply to us all and this woman’s use of the word innocent is now the same as the Islamic concept of innocent which is of course only a practising devout Muslim, she knows not what she says…, but said the reality, in Islamic terms they were not innocent.

    Anyway is it just me but am I right to feel contempt for all those sheep holding up “Nous Somme Charlie” signs as being hollow and empty.

    This act is not enough, the fight back will only start when Islamics start their full on campaign of slaughter in Europe.

    Sorry I stopped really talking about Islam for 5 years, but while more people are aware of what Islam is, the cowardice and stupidity continues, I continue to feel sick at heart.

    • Will those people support Le Pen or their local nationalist party now? No. They’ll turn those “Je suis Charlie” signs over and write their usual message, “Please, Sir. May I have some more?”

      • There is a growth in support of the FN, also Marine Le Pen is trying to develop the appeal of her party across a wider group, they have a gay section, they are a little bit more ambiguous about Islam, they also are working with very socialist economic policies.

        What you would define as right wing in France would be people to the left of Tony Blair, the whole system is built around collectivism of La France. This is one area La Pen is working on, the anti-EU part is getting more and more support.

        But there is a limit to how many people will switch to them, people are trained to look at the FN as racists, its in the schools and its in the media, in the media a few cracks have appeared in that agenda, but its a ceiling that they will not get past.

        My wife’s family believe that the issue is Islamic fundamentalists not Islam, and they stick to that completely, its the approach that the government pushes, plus of course this stupid French Islam.

        All those people holding up the signs will only change their mind and see sense when the real killing starts.

        The people will get more of this, I told my wife’s family that I would be asking for their view on Islam in December 2015, I asked this in early December 2014, I said their views will change when I ask them next year, I said there will be a lot of dead French and it will be so much worse in 2016.

        • That’s startling about right wingers being to the left of Blair. It’s not surprising I could miss that since I still do not grasp the full extent of the ultra left infiltration of American politics. Diana West has done much to point it out, as has Tervor Loudon at his New Zeal blog and KeyWiki site. It’s depressing to read.

          I do see the irony that my # 1 choice for president of France is Le Pen whose politics are socialist. A woman of the “far right” according to Glen Beck.

          The idea of Islamic fundamentalists as being the root cause of the problems in France or anywhere is beyond strange to me. I will always remember the story of the university professor in Egypt, I think, who in recent decades argued in class that Muslims should be able to engage in “interpretation” of the Koran. His student threw him out the window. How high up the window was I don’t know. Physics students in Pakistan stated their belief that recent earthquakes were caused by Allah. Christians in Pakistan dispute minor matters with their Muslim neighbors at peril of their lives lest they find themselves accused of “blasphemy.” And then there’s this classic of classics of the quite reasonable Muslim scientist very gingerly debating a moron on the issue of the earth’s being round. That “fundamentalist” minority beings to look awfully ubiquitous. Saying it’s only the Islamic fundamentalists who are a threat is a lot like saying only a tiny minority of people in the U.S. like to go to McDonalds.

          The point at which number of dead bodies will make an impression on uncomprehending Westerners is difficult one to predict. As of the instant that I write this there website tally is 24,815 killings by Muslims since 9/11/01. Explosion or killing somewhere tomorrow? 99% it will be caused by a Muslim. It’s not at all certain that your wife’s family will appreciate the significance of whatever numbers you highlight.

          • The extremerightwing in Europe cannot be identified by its economic beliefs. All Europeans (Margaret Thatcher aside) are socialists. They really do believe it is the duty of the state to provide services far beyond what Americans would consider appropriate. And they are willing to pay the stultifying price…though none of them asked for mass immigration into their cities and towns.

            Socialism has killed off much of the European’s vitality but no one could have known that as they were lulled by security into their Faustian bargain.

            In the US, our extremerightwing is a different kettle of fish. The Left is Marxist socialist in varying degrees but they are by no means the majority of the population. It’s just that they’re in control of the institutions. Their programs have created a huge dependent underclass, both black and white, by providing the kinds of security Europe offers to all. That in turn created an ever-larger dysfunctional criminal class. It is hard for us to get our head around the idea of an adult who doesn’t work, who has never worked. However with the financial ruin imposed by government in the last 15 years, we are on a slow slide to just that situation. The rich are getting richer while the middle class is shrinking.

            In the midst of all that dystopia stands the extremerightwing in all its variety: the libertarians, the populists, the survivalists, the gun rights folks, the social conservatives. Lots of overlap there but they are all in agreement on one point: large government is evil and has harmed the country. They are divided on how to shrink the behemoth but they want it shrunk.

            The Left is self-righteously arrogant. They are loud and condescending…

            The voice of the extremerightwing (as the Leftist MSM names us) is mostly muted. But the strategies for pushback continue to be devised. We realize that no help will be forthcoming from government nor do we want it. But we also know that our numbers and our determination are far beyond what the jabbering Left can imagine.

            The governmental houses of cards all over the world are headed to collapse. It will probably take the form of erosion, which makes open revolt less desirable. Islam is headed the same way but don’t expect its adherents to go quietly.

  6. Would Swedish state radio be prepared to make a similar remark about the Breivik attacks? (directed at a youth camp raising money for Palestinian terror groups)

    Or would this lady’s career have already been hung out to dry, with perhaps the odd death threat to go with it?

      • Agreed, and while most of us would have preferred him to have hit a full mosque on a Friday, he did indeed have a reason–he loves his country; he just hated what was (and still is) happening to it

        Breivik did a terrible thing, no doubt about it, but those in Arbeiderpartiet at that time and earlier did a much worse thing–they knowingly flooded their country with third world murderous trash and also effectively handcuffed and duct-taped the mouths of their own citizens while allowing the third world rabble to rape and murder their citizens and change Norway forever; for that is what they have done.
        Gone are the days when Norwegians could go walking or cycling alone in their beautiful country, anyone doing that now is asking for trouble–robbed, raped or murdered.

        • I can see national policy makers choosing to pursue solar energy, wind energy, ethanol, Common Core, subsidies for science education, and the like. However misguided a particular policy of that nature might be it, seems there’s at least a putative, identifiable benefit that will or might accrue for the people.

          With mass third-world immigration and equally massive financial outlays for immigrants, I can’t see that there was ever anything that was even remotely of benefit to the natives. Barbara Lerner Spectre says Europe can’t survive without multiculturalism but that’s a patently absurd assertion. For her and millions of others apparently the new idea is that lots of foreigners are a gigantic new kind of benefit. And millions upon millions were allowed to enter Europe without any verification of the supposed benefit at about the 5,000th immigrant mark.

          Nothing you don’t already know, of course.

          • Some of them make -made- the argument that these people needed refuge and Europe needed to replace populations since ethnic Euros weren’t breeding. I prefer Japan’s stance.

    • ” …directed at a youth camp raising money for Palestinian terror groups”

      Unless one reads sites like GoV, one would never know of that aspect of the Breivik murder spree. For months I waited to see mention of it in the MSM – nada. I’d be grateful if somebody could prove me wrong. I also waited to see a speculation that Breivik had been “put up to it” by the Mossad. I’d wager that in Norway that theory has been advanced somewhere. Any Norwegian readers able to help me out here?

      • Yes, that theory was floated immediately, the evening after the attack. I don’t have the documentation at hand, but I remember it well.

        Jew-hating sites immediately identified Fjordman, not just Breivik, as an agent for the Mossad. They said the same thing about me, of course. The first time I saw it was at a Swedish site, early in the morning on July 23.

        Later, after Fjordman was forced to reveal himself, they said his appearance confirmed that he was definitely a Jew.

  7. An interesting project, I say:

    Pick today’s leading progressive mouthpieces, find their pre-WWII Doppleganger, draw parallels, shoot a slick DeSouza style before and after video and post it to YouTube. Could this hoi polloi medium make a difference? Commenting amongst like minded individuals will do little to help enlightened liberals identify and accept their ignorance, they’ll never read our words.

  8. These are interesting times. We really cannot know what twists and turns are going to take place over the next while or beyond. One things for sure and that is the dye is cast and something must be done. For the Muslims as with the Nazis before them see themselves on the cusp of world domination with players like Camelion, Hussain, George and their ilk neutralized by divided loyalties and love of money. Let’s hope we are not so infiltrated that a focused response becomes almost impossible. Stop Muslim immigration. Batten down the hatches and take care of business.

  9. Alfred Rosenburg comes to mind…Hanged in 1945 for similar speech by the Allies. Petren is a modern “Rosenberg”.

  10. This is a pathetic example of political correctist/Cultural Marxist “logic” by trying to defend the indefensible. This construct is often used to appease acts of violence by muslims. It assumes that, by their very nature, muslims will behave violently or commit murder if anyone offends them so, if anyone chooses to commit such offence, they have only themselves to blame.


    Anyone who cannot contain their anger to such a degree that they have to commit acts of gratuitous violence is mentally ill and they must be removed from civilised society.

    • Isn’t their logic also ‘racist’ – according to their own definition. It’s like when the Traitor Class says mass immigration has been beneficial – how can it be beneficial, all races are equal aren’t they?

  11. So she thinks it is acceptable to urge papers to refrain from offending the sensibilities of a 7th century desert mystic who heard voices in his head?

    That’s it, I am never shopping at IKEA again.

  12. The day after she poodled in style and in a credible manner –
    her explanation does not seem completely dishonest. –
    this is a storm in a teaspoon.

    Rrather report about the case Söder vs. Palm.
    in which the intent is crystal clear and typically
    Suede Noveau.

  13. Basically this useful idiot for the Muslim totalitarians is saying that “offending” the most think-skinned fanatics on the planet justifiably can bring out a death squad. This is the attitude of a communist who would love to squelch all opposition the same way. The history of the Left is replete with tens of millions slain. What’s 12 to a woman like that?

      • They don’t think?
        This well-executed attack is going to be very successful at minimal cost to the jihad. After all the je suis charlie posters are put away next week, the MSM are going to clamp down much harder on criticism of Islam and websites like this are going to feel the pressure too. Because the MSM people understand *fully* now that their lives are on the line over this, while all the nice people with their placards are risking nothing. Plus, we don’t want ‘social cohesion’ to be undermined, do we? So our governments will join the MSM in the effort to further suppress criticism of Islam. The Islamists entrenched in the west will be strengthened by this muting of public criticism, and encouraged to continue applying pressure. The alienation as a group they also experience will drive them deeper into Islamic solidarity, and radicals will benefit. Money will probably be thrown at them to wean them away from ‘extremism,’ despite its obvious success as a tactic and attractiveness to a certain kind of young male. The cowards and imbecile invertibrates constituting western electorates will swallow it all as usual and then vote for more of it. And, sorry, they deserve it.

  14. Interesting that the Swedish state-run radio, just like the British state-run radio (BBC), refers to ‘the prophet Mohammed’ and not to ‘the Muslim prophet Mohammed’. Since when did Mohammed become our prophet?

    • As a “devout” Mohammedan was given charge of the Department of Religion at the BBC the agenda no longer represents Chistians, Jews, Atheists or anyone other than the evil doers religion of peace.

  15. And what of the muslim police man outside CH who literally had his hands up and begged for mercy… Was he guilty of something? How about the police woman that was shot dead the next morning… guilty too?

    • The Muslim policeman was guilty of violating sharia law regarding cooperation with the enemy. Though I doubt they asked for his credentials.

      The policewoman was guilty of so many sharia violations – to begin with, what was she doing out in public, uncovered, without a male relative chaperone?

  16. Honestly, this Petren woman must be pissed that she is one of the few ugly women in all Sweden. When the Swedes finally remember who they really are, who Arn Magnusson was, and why their flag has a cross on it – they will remember who are the ‘innocent people” and who was an accomplice.

  17. Only worshipers of Allah are innocent i.e., Muslims who are not apostates. Terrorism, which purpose is to strike fear into the hearts of infidels, is the killing of a Muslim without right. The killing of infidels is licit and Qur’anic. Alice Petrén cannot exempt herself from this category. Sorry! If she chooses to become a dhimmi, and she behaves according to the laws of dhimmitude, i.e. shari’a, she may be protected but never innocent. Or, she can join the counterjihad and fight for the maintenance of her liberty. This contrasts the bravery of Charlie Bebdo and of Alice Petrén.

  18. I think this is a great comparison from Daniel Greenfield’s blog today:
    “If the world’s religions were paintings in a museum, Islam would be a child’s dirty smeared finger painting all in one colour.”

  19. On BBC TV’s “Question Time” on Thursday evening, chairman David Dimbleby quoted BBC guidelines that Mohammed should not be portrayed, and was castigated by some panellists. Today, the National Secular Society reports that the guidelines will be withdrawn.

    One panellist was Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, who said they had been showing one “Charlie Hebdo” cover of Mohammed since around 2011, and he expected more to appear.

        • Indeed, Patrick. Excuse the name-drop, but I was at school with David Starkey, albeit about four years his junior (and delivered his parents’ newspapers); even then, he was the star of the Debating Society, and great things were predicted.

          His ancestry, like part of mine, is Quaker, yet he turned out Conservative… He can be gratuitously rude, though, which I hope I’m not.

Comments are closed.