oyvindstrommen.be traktningar

Walid al-Kubaisi is a Norwegian-Iraqi and a well-known critic of both Islamism and conservative Islam. He has gotten coverage in the Brussels Journal for expressing support for publishing the infamous Muhammed cartoons, and in Frontpage Magazine because he has focused on problems of lacking integration.

At document.no, mostly a one-man project, but still the closest you get to a Norwegian FrontpageMag, he has been described as “a brave soul”, “unafraid”, “just getting better and better”. One commenter at the website referred to him as “having more integrity than the naïve Norwegian politicians”.

Even Fjordman, the Norwegian superstar of Islamophobia, has stated that he usually likes al-Kubaisi. In short, al-Kubaisi – not a Muslim, although Brussels Journal claimed so – has been a posterboy Middle Eastern man for the Islamophobes; just what they need to pretend they’re not racist.

That won’t last. In a recent op-ed in one of Norway’s leading tabloids, al-Kubaisi wrote:

The caricature case culminated in a wave of xeno- and islamophobia. And, as a result of the non-functioning integration, scary characters come forth from the shadows. They use the debate as a feint to market a frightening message and they fill a large hole in the public opinion. Hans Rustad [document.no, my note] and the Anfindsen brothers [honestthinking.org] are good examples.

[...]

If you disregard the lessons of history, you will refuse to see in the shadows of future a repetition of the darkest chapters of the past. The message of hatred that viewed Jews as an ethnic threat, led the Jews to Holocaust. In those days, the word “race” had still not been dirtied. So they used that word, rather than speaking of “ethnicity”. Anfindsen uses “ethnicity”. [...] History repeats itself only when people worship stupidity.

Unsurprisingly, neither Rustad nor the Anfindsen brothers are all too happy. Rustad sees it as a “psychological riddle”, no less, that al-Kubaisi has “turned 180 degrees” from criticising Islamism in “a brilliant manner” to attacking Anfindsen. A riddle? Or has al-Kubaisi simply stated the obvious?

If you constantly speak of Muslims in a negative context and constantly speak of them as a source of problem, it does not help that you say that what is needed is a “respectful, but critical evaluation of Islam”.

Honestthinking.org has more than hinted at Tariq Ramadan being a “janus face” of Euroislam. In fact, the Anfindsen brothers are at least as guilty of double discourse. They do their best at being seen as nuanced and balanced, but just can’t keep themselves from spouting thinking that is nothing but manichean, whether on multiculturalism – described as a betrayal – or on Islam. At the same time completely senseless interpretations of concepts such as ketman is dispersed.

Speaking with two tongues, treating Islam as a monolith and spreading pure fear propaganda or demographic magic work does not make you a fascist. But it does make you an errand boy for that new kind of fascism, that fascism that is clad in suit and tie, and in an academic language, too, that fascism which is becoming increasingly salonfähig. In short, Walid al-Kubaisi, once again, has a point. If you speak of Muslims in the way that the Anfindsen brothers do, you are creating an atmosphere where even the unborn child of a Muslim woman is a threat.

Hans Rustad of document.no does not see Walid al-Kubaisi as a brave soul anymore:

He brands Anfindsen in a way that could be dangerous. What do you do with people who are laying the foundations for a new holocaust in Europe?

The answer is actually quite simple. First of all, it is essential that these voices are not given a monopoly in raising important issues concerning immigration and integration. Secondly, is is crucial that they are not allowed to dress up in the robes of liberalism or concervatism, but that the actual meanings of their words are being exposed, that the actual ideological consequences are being pointed out.

Tags: In English, Politikk