oyvindstrommen.be traktningar

I have a feeling that Mark Steyn – “the one-man global content provider” – is a smart man. Of course, I’m not a mind reader, but it seems to me that Steyn sure knows what people want, and that he takes care to give it to them. Steyn is loyal to his fans, always quick to say “Europe is doomed!”, “Multiculturalism is evil!” and “The Liberal Party is bad!” in the form on long and seemingly thoughtful articles.

I admire Steyn. He is an excellent propagandist. But I can’t say I admire his fans. I mean: Why is it that these independent thinkers, the politically uncorrect, never actually care to check out Steyn’s stories? Just a tiny little bit? My theory is that they are willing to accept anything as long as it contains the idea of Europe becoming Eurabia. Anything.

But let’s get started with fisking Steyn, shall we? We will take a closer look at one of his recent prophetic articles – “The future belongs to Islam”:

#1 Stupid demography

This is about the seven-eighths below the surface — the larger forces at play in the developed world that have left Europe too enfeebled to resist its remorseless transformation into Eurabia and that call into question the future of much of the rest of the world.

The larger forces. Sounds scary, doesn’ it? It’s the demography, stupid, as Steyn would say. What he is really talking about is sperm. The larger forces threathening Europe, and the rest of the world, is sperm. It’s not just any kind of sperm, of course, it’s Muslim sperm. Here’s the kind of image you should have of Muslim sperm when you read Steyn:

Little dudes with tails. And long beards. And suicide belts. And the collected writings of Sayyid Qutb. Looking for an egg to… well, maybe not blow up, but… you get the idea.

As many of the people telling us that Europe is doomed, Steyn is a hobby demographer. And, as other hobby demographers he has discovered that Europeans have few children, and that Muslims have many. In this specific piece, he gives two – 2 – examples from the Muslim world. The Gaza Strip. And Yemen.

Anyone wonder why he does not take for instance Tunisia and Turkey? Or for that matter the most important current member of the Axis of Evil(TM), Iran?

I’ll tell you why. It’s because they make horrible examples. Turkish women have 1.92 children in average, Tunisian women 1.74. Iranian women? 1.8 children. If you put that together with Steyn’s comment on American women having 2.1 children in average, the whole point of Steyn’s article suddenly seems… well, lacking? Steyn is concerned about the demographic development in Europe, but he has failed to realise one thing. The biggest demographic revolution at this moment of history has little to do with Europe. It is happening in the socalled developing countries. In 1970, a typical woman in one of these countries bore six children. Today, the rate has tumbled to 2.7. This is true in Brazil. It is true in India. It is also true in most Muslim countries (this makes Ahmadinejad sweat – later note: If something makes Ahmadinejad sweat, it´s most likely good news. Except for global warming, that is. Global warming is bad news).

Notable exceptions? Well, there’s the Gaza Strip. And Yemen. And a couple of other countries in the Arabic peninsula.

That being said: Yes, Europe is changing. In some ways, it is becoming the new America. You remember the poem, don’t you?

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

This is what Europe has to live up to, and I’m not sure it is up to the challenge. Even if it is, it is hardly going to be painfree. Still, closing the borders is not really an alternative, as one look at North Korea should tell you. So, here’s the deal: An increasing number of Europeans will be Muslim. Deal with it.

#2 Muslim + Muslim + Muslim = Eurabia?

Mark Steyn has figured out that Muslims will take over the world soon. Or at least, that is what I think he is saying. Maybe what he is really saying is that we should not let Muslims take over the world. If that’s what he is trying to say, it is not really clear what he wants us to do, though, a striking feature of many of the “Doomed!”-lot.

Anyway, Muslims make up a handy group. You can put everyone in this sack. Take one colonel Gadaffi, with his weird ideological mixture of God-knows-what, and shake him together with one mulla Krekar, the infamous Kurdish islamist living in Norway. Add some “youths” as toppings, even though they probably know more about hash than about hajj.

Steyn’s example – quelle surprise, as he says – is the youths who “stumped” and “kicked” the Belgian train conductor Guido Demoor “to death”:

Three “youths” were arrested, and proved to be — quelle surprise! — of Moroccan origin. The ringleader escaped and, despite police assurances of complete confidentiality, of those 40 passengers only four came forward to speak to investigators.

I would have understood Steyn’s description if it was written months ago. But it isn’t, which makes me wonder… did Steyn even bother to look into the case after reading about it for the first time? Or did he just add it to the notebook called “Good examples for propaganda” and forget about it until retrieving the notebook from under a mountain of books on how alone America is?

No verdict has been passed and many things are not clear about what happened from press reports, but there is a number of things Steyn fail to mention.

First of all, six youths were involved, and all six of them were eventually arrested, though the term “ringleader” does not seem to fit on any of them. Several of these youths have later been released, under various conditions.

Secondly, and more importantly, Belgian media have later reported the incident differently than the initial description Steyn repeats. Here is my translation from an article in De Standaard, a leading Flemish newspaper, from the 29th of September:

[Guido Demoor] asked the youths to act calmer. When they did not listen, he [allegedly] grabbed one of them by the neck, whereupon two of the six suspects hit and kicked the victim. The four others looked upon. The youths then ran away. Demoor did not survice the incident. From the autopsy it was concluded that the victim died of a stroke, caused by agitation in combination with high blood pressure. An experts’ report that was recently added to the case it is said that a connection between the facts [of the incident] and the death can not be ruled out”.

In short, the story is not quite as the story told by Steyn. According to the above variant, mr. Demoor was not simply the victim of aggression, and he was in no way willingly beaten to death. What happened did not last long, giving few people chance to react, and according to some news reports Demoor was still alive and seemingly well when the youths left the bus. Why does Steyn leave all this out? Because it does not fit as well into the myth of the criminal immigrant kid? And allow me to digress, because sometimes I get a feeling that many think, or want to think, that 50% of Europe’s youth of Muslim origin is criminal. That’s all the boys, I assume, since the girls are too busy being suppressed. I sometimes get the feeling that the Europe described at some websites is a Europe where large crowds of Muslim kids shoot bazookas at elderly white ladies. And that it is getting worse. Every year.

I live in a city the local xenophobic party describes as on the way of becoming an Islamic state, and I can’t really relate to their fairytale. Sure, I have experienced noisy sixteen year olds (with an unhealthy interest in literature) on the bus. They were of Moroccan origin, but acted pretty much the same way as I’ve seen noisy sixteen year old Norwegians do in Norway. In fact, the city I live in, while high on Flemish crime statistics, has a relatively small crime problem, and crime is on the decrease. According to statistics the Belgian Federal Police, there are fewer rapes, fewer car thefts, fewer breaking-and-enterings and generally less crime in Belgium now than in 2002.

Don’t expect Steyn to write about that, though. It’s not what people want to hear. People want to hear that Europe is doomed.

The death of a Flemish magazine read only in limited circles is hardly the kind of material that will hit the frontpages of large newspapers around Europe. And in itself, it is also not such an interesting story. A radical nationalist magazine will not be published anymore, after its secretary passed away 78 years old.

There are some things that make the death of Dietsland-Europa worth noticing, though, because the magazine is one of the most obvious links between old-time fascism and the neo-fascism which is now spreading in several European countries. Described as the think-tank of radical Flemish nationalism, by Filip Dewinter of Vlaams Belang no less, the magazine is the not-so-missing-link.

Originally founded by the Jong Nederlandse Gemeenschap, a radical group fighting for a Greater Netherlands, it was edited by Karel Dillen until 1975. By then, it had become the publication of Were Di, a radical nationalist, anti-capitalist, anti-communist and anti-Belgian group. Upon leaving the group, Dillen was to go on to cofound Protea, a Flemish-South African pro-apartheid friendship association. That same year, 1977, he also founded Vlaams Nationale Partij (The Flemish National Party). This party eventually was to grow into Vlaams Blok and later Vlaams Belang.

That very same mixture of nationalism and support of the apartheid regime was also to be found in the columns of Dietsland-Europa. But it does not stop there, you will also find holocaust revisionism, as well as demands for amnesty and attempts at restoring the honour of Flemish Nazi collaborators (some of which, it should be noted, were hardly Nazis).

The magazine has also served as a forum for the ideas of various non-Flemish thinkers: Jean Mabire, Alain de Benoist, Maurice Bardèche, Julius Evola, Robert Faurisson…

Two examples
In 2002, Oswald Kielemoes, who represented Vlaams Blok in the city council of Gent from 1994 to 2002, wrote an article called “The Jews dominate British media”. He wrote:

The Jews have almost complete control over the media in Great Britain [...] trough these media they uniformly, intentionally, systematically, continuously and intensely promote the recreation and the permanent destruction of Great Britain into a multiracial and multicultural state, forcing the needs of Israel upon the Brits, against the will and the interest of the native British. [...] Next to the massive coloured immigration, they also encourage interracial marriages and race mingling, with the extinction of a native race as result. This is a pure genocide”

Kielemoes was thrown out of the VB. Dietsland-Europa also distanced itself from his text, but kept him as a part of their editorial team. He had, after all, been one of their most eager writers for ten years.

An earlier, but equally chocking, example from the columns of Dietsland-Europa is a piece written by Roeland Raes in 1979:

We do not see our most important task in remembering history, but sometimes you have to look back. Especially since cunning businessmen stir up classical themes with the Holocaust fraud: Germany’s sole guilt for the war, the 6.000.000 lost Jews, the atrocities of the Nazis etc. We will not deny that the Germans did not commit serious crimes, that many innocent people were killed, that many died in the concentration camps, but… everything needs to taken back to its original proportions

Raes goes on to praise the book “The hoax of the twentieth century”, written by Arthur Bulz. The book is a holocaust revitionist classic. Raes was a senator for Vlaams Blok from 1995 to 2002. According to an article in the Flemish weekly from 23. May 2006, he remains active in the party. He also remains a holocaust revisionist.

The pictures are taken from blokwatch.be.

When reading and writing on the neo-fascist and xenophobic parties of Europe it is difficult to avoid the term “extreme right”. I have used it before. I will probably use it again. But to be frank, it is quite a meaningless term.

There are parties on the right wing that are truly extreme in their right wing policies, support of an unrestrained market economy, support of privatisation, hardline opposition to the welfare state models of Western social democracies and social liberal countries. However, these people rarely promote xenophobia, often support very liberal immigration policies and believe in the equal value of all people, regardless of skin colour, creed, sexuality or ethnic background. In short, they are what neo-Nazis would describe as race traitors or what the modern-day fascists of suit and ties would instead call “politically correct” and “representative for the traditional parties”.

Some European liberal-concervative parties are of course willing to cooperate with anyone if it puts them in power, but the same is true for left-leaning parties, as seen in for instance Slovakia. But the problem with the term “extreme right” goes further. It gives the left immunity. And the left is absolutely not immune to xenophobic hatred, anti-Semitism or Islamphobia. Neither are its voters. All over Europe, the neo-fascists are winning in what used to be red bastions; Copenhagen, Vienna, Rotterdam, Hamburg, Marseille, Lille, Antwerp, Charleroi.

They are collecting votes from across the political spectre.

Volen Siderov, the extreme nationalist candidate in the Bulgarian presidential elections, lost. That might sound like good news. It is and it isn’t. When twenty per cent of those who vote choose to cast their vote for an anti-Semite, for someone who spreads hatred towards Turks and Roma, that is very worrying. Equally worrying is the election results in Flanders. Six years ago, the fact that 32,95% of the voters in Antwerp chose for the nationalist Vlaams Blok brought large parts of the political establishment into panic. In the elections a few weeks ago, the party grew another half per cent, and even got between 41% and 43.5% per cent of the votes in parts of the city. Yet, this time the reaction in media and other parties was almost euphoric.

Why? Because the social democrats won more votes, and once again became the largest party in town. In all its tragedy, it is almost comical. But it isn’t funny, not really, not when you consider what it actually means. Because what it means is that close to one out of two voters of autochtoon (non-immigrant) background in Antwerp voted for a party that has provable historical ties to fascism, a party which houses holocaust revisionists and racists.

I do not think all the voters of Vlaams Belang or similar parties are fascists. I do not think all their members are fascists, either. Some are genuine conservatives, some are misguided liberals. Some are socialists who have given up faith in the Labour party. And yet, it is of importance to point out that these voters are identifying with parties that hold neo-fascist opinions, and that they are voting for people who have marched with militant anti-parliamentarian nationalists. Still, it is necessary to point out the links to radical white supremacist and neo-Nazi groups.

The ties are there for anyone who is willing to look, and this illustrates two things: the very real danger of the neo-fascists, and the fact that the neo-fascists are right about one thing, namely that the so-called “traditional parties” have failed.

Rinke van den Brink, a journalist and author who has been following the European extreme right (sic) scene for years has written a brick of a book called “In de greep van de angst” (In the hold of fear). The book discusses how social-democratic parties should challenge parties like Vlaams Belang, and contains dozens of interviews. Regrettably, the book is not available in English, because the discussion deserves a wider audience. One of the possible conclusions from reading the book is that Vlaams Belang and similar parties are winning because they are asking the right questions. Where no one but the neo-fascists question failed integration, the neo-fascists will win. Where no one but the neo-fascists confront ghettofication, crime, etc., the neo-fascists will win.

In some countries, other parties have woke up to the realisation that the fascists ask a few of the right questions. As a result, they have started to copy the answers, regardless of how wrong these are. They have started implementing the policies of the xenophobes for them, letting them set the order of the day. In this way the whole mainstream discourse on Islam, for instance, has been poisoned by elements that view Islam as a monolithic construction of Evil.

When Christians start spouting distortions of history that would make Christianity look like a rabid death cult if the same kind of methodology was used, you have reason to be worried. When social democrats throw solidarity over board and liberals sacrifice liberalism, both of them to compete with the xenophobic parties for parliamentiary seats, you should realise that something is wrong. When the media, in spite of the frequent complaints that they are Marxist-dominated propaganda organs of “the cult of multiculturalism”, obsesses with a minority group making up a few per cent of the population to such a degree that you can hardly open a newspaper without some example of a nutty cleric in another country jumping at you… then you should take a deep, deep breath… and think.

Will you reach the conclusion I have? I do not know. But my conclusion is that this problem goes much deeper than to the question of left or right.

Lately I have been thinking about how to become a popular blogger. You know. How can I get tens of thousands of people to visit my website every day, how can I get TIME magazine to quote me, how can I sell my upcoming books “How Blogging will Change Everything” and “Why Bush is a Sissy Liberal”. In this context, I realize that the below text, in all its political correctness is a bit of a tactical bummer. But well, I was quite happy about it, and I do think I make a couple of points, and fools rush in, they say, so I thought I’d just publish it.

Still, I have do something to pull visitors. Hello, Google. Hi, Technorati. Catch this: “Islam is evil”, “Bad Islam”, “Why Robert Spencer is the wisest man on Earth”, “Jihadwatch tells the truth”, “Political correctness sends Europe to hell!”, “New Research: Mythical Norwegian Trolls were in fact Muslims”. That should do the trick – now for my article.

-

Ain’t no Vietcong ever called me a nigger, Muhammad Ali.

I am a European, but – you might call me a sucker for punishment – I sometimes read American books. Lately I have read a whole bunch of books and articles and blog posts all telling me pretty much the same thing. Europe is doomed!

While I try to think off where I have heard this talk before, I have to point out that these books are sometimes almost amusing in the way they twist the tales. In the middle of some examples illustrating the doubtlessly more mainstream (and endlessly more worrying) anti-gay sentiments found amongst Muslims, Bruce Bawer mentions another example he has dug up. And this time he has found a genuine scary bearded fellow, who declared a fatwa against Terence McNally, a death sentence no less (1). The fellow is called Omar Bakri Muhammed, and he was a representative of the Shariah Court of Britain. Wow! That sounds impressive! The Shariah Court of Britain.

I now understand why Booklist said Bawer’s book was full of “almost unbelievable revelations for Americans”. I mean it: The Shariah Court of Britain. Important people!

But here’s one revelation Bawer’s book, unbelievably, did not contain. McNally wasn’t only threathened by the Shariah Court of Britain, he was also threathened by another organisation which I will have to say sounds even more important: the National Security Movement of America. I mean it! The security movement! And while Omar Bakri Muhammed actually warned local Muslims against chopping the head of McNally – he wanted an Islamic state to do that if McNally happened to drop by one – the security movement in a phone threat against the «Jew guilty homosexual Terrence McNally» made it clear that they would «exterminate every member of the theatre and burn the place to the ground».

And this is the security movement of America. By now, you might wonder why they were so much in agreement with the Shariah Court of Britain. Simple reason: McNally’s play Corpus Christi was interpreted as showing Jesus as a gay man.

-

By now, I hope that you’ve realised that the National Security Movement of America is not the NSA, but a bunch of Christian loonies. If you actually thought it was the NSA I suggest you take a good long hard look at your friends and ask yourself: Are these people really sane? Am I?

Here’s another revelation: The Shariah Court of Britain isn’t quite as important as it sounds. And, on the top of that, Bawer pulled exactly the same trick as Norway’s number one newspaper, part of the establishment that he either loves to hate or loves to pretend he hates just so that he can sell more books. In an article so full of factual errors it could make even a journalist blush (2), the newspaper VG told us that «Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad wants to turn Norway into an Islamic state, governed after the sharia laws», before informing us that his organisation is standing very close to bin Laden and his al-Qaeda, ideologically speaking, and that it has already been established in the land of the fiords.

The article went on explaining what the sharia laws would mean, as well as quoting Omar Bakri Muhammed extensively.

- Within one year we will be strong enough to step forward, in public places, in the streets, in the universities […].

That never happened. If you haven’t guessed already, here’s why: Omar Bakri Muhammed is not only a scary bearded fellow, he is also a complete nut! And just like the National Security Movement he’s not a very represantive nut. While the VG article from 2002 describes Muhammeds organisation al-Mujahiroun as the political leadership of Hisb-ut-Tahrir (HT) and HT itself as «a more secret, militant recruitment group» Muhammed in reality left the latter (rather public and quite vocal) group in 1996.

What does that mean?

Imagine someone leaving the Ku Klux Klan because the Klan has gone soft on the importance of white superiority… that’s Omar Bakri Muhammed. Imagine a split inside the National Security Movement of America because someone thought that the threats against McNally weren’t juicy enough. That someone would be Omar Bakri Muhammed! But would VG quote him extensively and put his face on the front page then? Somehow, I just don’t think so.

Scary Muslims sell better! That’s why I have created this scary ASCII muslim:

(__)
(oo)

Oops, wrong drawing. That was just an ASCII cow.

Let’s get back to Bawer. The conclusion of his book «While Europe slept» is almost poetic:

As we walked aorund Amsterdam that March weekend, I thought about those Dutchmen emigrating to Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Unlike Muslims in Europe, they’d integrate quickly – they’d find work, contribute to society, fit in. They already spoke English. Yet what, years from now, would their children think? Their grandchildren? What, for that matter, would they themselves think when they lay in bed at night, far from home, their minds flooding with images when they lay in bed at night, far from home, their minds flooding with images of the small, lovingly tended land of their birth, with its meticiously laid-out roads and walks and bicycle lanes, its painstakingly preserved old houses, its elaborate, brilliantly designed systems of dikes and canals?

[…] They seemed to have brought Western civilization to its utmost pinnacle in terms of freedom and the pursuit of happiness, and the road ahead, very much like the actual roads in the Netherlands, seemed to stretch to the horizon, straight, flat, smooth, and with nary a bump.

Notice the order. Dutch are neat people. And not only that – they speak English. Who would have imagined? Those darn Muslims, on the other hand, represent chaos – they are «the very peril that [will] destroy [the Dutch]».

And they are not productive to society, at all, no sir, and they don’t come to the Netherlands already knowing Dutch, regardless of the doubtless position that language has as lingua franca number one these days (3). Do they learn it after some time? Most do. And if they are crap at it, their children usually aren’t.

In that way they are not much different from any other immigrant. King George I of England, for instance, an immigrant from Hannover, spoke little English and instead used his native tongue. His heir, George II, also preferred German. Even Queen Victoria learnt German before she was taught English. In the BBC series «Blackadder Goes Forth», Rowan Atkinsons role character Captain Edmund Blackadder interrogates Captain Kevin Darling, whom he suspects to be a German spy. Captain Darling says that he is just as British as Queen Victoria. Captain Blackadder retorts: «So your father’s German, you’re half German and you married a German!».

American books aren’t the only source telling me how terrible Muslims are. The order-chaos picture of Bruce Bawer reminds me much off a cartoon made by some funny guy in the cozy Flemish party Vlaams Blok (4).

The top part of the cartoon said «This is the way it is», and was showing a city scene with a mosque in the background, smashed windows, an immigrant mugging an elderly woman, another immigrant apparently shooting up on heroine. The bottom part says «It must become like this», and shows a church, windows full of flowers and only white and happy people. Oriana Fallaci took it another step further and tells me that Muslims are «breeding like rats» (5), that there is only one Islam, a pool of rotten water, and that those who disagree with her are traitors, a fifth column of the West.

Yeah!

-

When Tariq Ali visited Brussels in February 2006, to talk about his Islam Quintet-books, a woman approached him after his talk. – I’m not a racist, she said, – but… Tariq Ali answered: – That makes me very worried, you know. When people say they are not racists, that usually means they are.

All of these people who are not racists love anecdotal evidence. I am not a racist, they say, and then point out that they once experienced a Moroccan stopping in the road in front of them, and buhu – all Moroccans are terrible and bad and they block traffic! I am not a racist, they say, and then go on to talk about the Moroccans they saw throwing the empty wrappings from their frietjes into the river and buhu – all Moroccans are terrible and bad! And if a Norwegian reads in the newspaper that someone «of foreign background» did something criminal, well, he feels sure that he is not a racist, and that the criminal was Pakistani, and it does not really matter if the criminal wasn’t an immigrant at all, but rather a Polish ’tourist’ or a British drunkard.

I like anecdotal evidence too! So, after hearing all these stories I sat down to think long and hard, to come up with stories about how I have been suppressed by mean Muslims. But… eventually… I had to conclude in pretty much the same way as Muhammad Ali. No Muslim has ever done me any harm.

When I was the one no one wanted on the team in the football match in the lunch breaks in my early schooldays, the little Ronaldos that didn’t pick me weren’t Muslim. Not a single one of them.

In fifth grade, my class was to build a neighbourhood out of cardboard and I got into trouble because of a little capitalist enterprise, ironically enough considering my later leftist leanings. Daringly, and revolutionary, enough, I turned my cardboard house into a cardboard shop. The teacher found this to be completely outrageous, since «everyone» had agreed that the neighboorhood was only to have one, presumably state-run, shop; in my opinion little but a laughable kiosk. My shop sold Thai figuralia and antennas for satelite TV, I was a globalist already back then! And the teacher who gave me hell and wanted to turn class into a court session? He wasn’t a Muslim. He wasn’t even a Socialist. He was a Christian.

I could continue like this. The guys who attacked me when I was pushing my bike home one evening in eight grade… they weren’t Muslim either. Actually, I rather suspect that a couple of them have grown into voters for the anti-immigration Progress Party.

The worst experience I have ever had with Muslims, and I am not so sure of their religious conviction, was when a bunch of Pakistani boys came into my motel room during a school trip at 15, stating – in an exaggerated accent – «Hi, we are the new robbers». It was a practical joke. I feel convinced that the one who had the idea wasn’t any of the Pakistani boys, but a certain little blond girl from a Western Norwegian fiord.

Therefore, I’m not anti-Norwegian, but…

What kind of experiences have I had with Muslims?

I won’t let my prejudices rule, some of the people I have met and who came from Muslim countries might have been something else. The guy who prepared a most delicious dinner for the guy living next door on the student home, just to be friendly, could have been Zoroastrian. I only know he sure could cook! The guy who taught me to play «It’s now or never» on the accordion might have been an Atheist, or a Christian, or whatever, but he sure had a lot of patience.

But even with these uncertain examples, the list of Muslims who I’ve met is long – and I never had a problem with any single one of them:

1. Not one of them chopped my head off because I am an infidel.

2. Not one of them sent me letter bombs because I like to drink beer. In fact, a couple of them probably drink harder than I do, haram or no haram.

3. Several of them are almost as good cooks as the guy who might have been Zoroastrian.

4. None of them raped me, nor did they rape any women, sheep, ducks or cartoonists.

5. As far as I know, not a single one of them celebrated the attacks on WTC and Pentagon by eating cake.

6. None of them swindled me. On the other hand, several of them sold me both good and cheap food.

7. None of them were breeding like rats at the time I saw them.

Conclusion: I just wonder about one thing. What the hell is wrong with my Muslims? Why aren’t they evil?

-

Footnotes:

1. Bruce Bawer: While Europe slept (2006), p. 25

2.Vil ha Norge som islamsk stat, VG, 24.04.02.

3. Actually, the Netherlands is home to quite a few Muslims hailing from Suriname, a small Latin American country where Dutch is the official language.

4. Now Vlaams Belang

5. Oriana Fallaci: Fornuftens styrke (Force of Reason), 2004.

Yesterday I posted a link to an article by the German-based freelance journalist Eric Singh in my worth reading section (over in the right column). Singh asks how serious the rise of fascism in Germany is today. He makes a number of points, not all of which I immediately agree with, but the most interesting part of his article is definitely the comments made by Kurt Goldstein (92), one of those who survived Hitler’s concentration camps:

What helped the fascists to such an enormous power was a terrible sense of nationalistic chauvinism, with which we Germans are imbued, and haughtiness towards other nations. Xenophobia was very prevalent in Germany. Unfortunately this did not die with the end of the Second World War. This is precisely the basis being used by the present generation of the rightwing in Germany. It is showing its ugly face once again which represents a great danger for the coming years and decades. Whoever underestimates this, is doomed to a rude awakening when these reactionaries grab power in Germany again.

In spite of anti-Nazi laws, Germany has no better vaccine against neo-fascism than other European countries. In fact, the legislation used against them has helped extreme right movements to win the status of the martyr, the only guy who dares to stand up against “the politically correct”, even though he is punished for it. Both Goldstein and I might sound alarmist, of course, but there are genuine reasons to worry. Two recent news stories from Germany are genuinely horrible.

In the small town Parey a 16-year old was forced to wear an anti-Semitic placard earlier this month. The placard read: “Ich bin am Ort das gro?te Schwein und lass mich nur mit Juden ein!” – “I’m the biggest pig in town, only with Jews do I hang around”. Parents in Parey tell stories of a “hard core” of Neo-Nazis who have been intimidating other youths for some time. The easy way out would be to simply disregard this episode as schoolyard bullying and little else, maybe even as schoolyard bullying blown totally out of proportion by leftist media and authorities obsessed with political correctness. But that’s the easy way out. The hard facts is that police counted 1,100 racist or anti-Semitic crimes last year in the German state of Saxony Anhalt alone. Central German politicians are worried.

Another event earlier this month, largely unreported in media outside Germany, involved something as innocent as a football (soccer) match. The Jewish football club TuS Makkabi, playing in the sixth regional amateur league, were the subject of numerous anti-Semitic chants and, indirectly as a result of this, left the pitch in the 78th minute of their match against VSG Altglienicke from eastern Berlin.

The players complained to the German soccer administration and claimed that the referee refused to intervene when fans shouted at them slurs such as, “gas the Jews,” “Auschwitz is coming back,” “Führer, Führer” and “The NPD [an extreme right party] rules here, not the DFB [the German Football Association]“.

The most worrying of all is, however, that the NPD – another of Europe’s socalled national democratic parties with obvious historical and modern-day ties to Nazism, anti-Semitism and Holocaust revisionism – is winning seats in elections.

Volen Siderov (wikipedia), the Bulgarian ultranationalist who also appeared (and disappeared) in this article, won 22 per cent of the votes in the first round of the presidential elections in his country October 22. Running on a platform of banning Turkish parties and cracking down on the Roma people, Siderov will contest a runoff vote with incumbent president Georgi Parvanov of the Socialist Party.

Read more here:

The Bulgarian April 21st (Focus)

Volen Siderov: I am Voting for Power that Will Oust Corrupted Politicians and Bulgarophobes (Focus)

Russians Salute Siderov’s Result in Bulgaria and Note ‘Globalization and Holocaust’ Conference (Focus)

Prof Kalin Ynakiev: The Attack party is an element of the morass between the left and right (Focus)

FROM ALL SIDES: On the campaign trail with…Volen Siderov (Sofia Echo)

Bulgarian incumbent wins 1st round president vote (Washington Post)

Bulgaria’s run-off vote (euro|topics)

Volen Siderov (Maya’s Corner, Bulgarian blogger)

Dimitar Stoyanov, the child prodigy of Ataka (Maya’s Corner, Bulgarian Blogger)

Europe’s Second-class citizens (Ciaran Parker, Irish blogger)

Bulgarian’s vote for a president (Erik Laakso, Swedish blogger)

Also, it is worth checking out the blog Counter Ataka, although it has not been updated in a long while.

The above picture is quite famous. In 1920, Trotsky was standing next to Lenin (next to the podium, wearing a cap). By 1927, he was quite literally removed from the picture. Through the use of paint, razors and airbrusher Soviet photo retouchers tried to change history when history became too uncomfortable.

Take a look at this facsimile from the website of Vlaams Belang, the Flemish secessionist, far right party (their site). Then take a look at the second facsimilie, showing how it was previously published:

Notice the second picture on the second screenshot? I sure did. It’s a picture of Marie Rose-Morel, a member of the Flemish parliament for the far right party. The man next to her is Volen Siderov, a rather notorious Bulgarian politician. Now he’s there, now he’s gone.

The article does not mention Siderov by name, of course. It simply refers to the interesting chance to get to know politicians from Romania and Bulgaria. This has not been changed. In other words, it seems like it still was interesting to meet Siderov, but his name and his picture is gone. Why? Did Vlaams Belang suddenly run out of server space? Somehow, I just do not think so.

Here’s the rest of the story:

Siderov is the leader of the right-wing party Nacionalen Sayuz Ataka, National Union Attack, often referred to simply as Ataka. He is openly anti-Turk (including ethnic Turks living in Bulgaria for centuries). He is openly anti-Semitic. A former winner of an award of the Union of Bulgarian Journalists, he has written several books, including «Bulgarophobia» and «The Boomerang of Evil», the latter placing the blame for most of the world’s ills on the Jews.

One of his chief opponents is Yuliana Metodieva, a spokeswoman of the Bulgarian Helsinki Commitee for Human Rights. She believes he is a threat to Bulgaria’s democracy. I can understand if that doesn’t stop Morel from smiling. Representing the party targeted by the socalled cordon sanitaire, she is used to that kind of talk. But let us listen a bit longer to Metodieva. In an interview she stated:

- His influence is obvious and damaging for our developing democracy. [His] programmes clearly instigate ethnic hatred and even violence […], he has referred to the Roma as ‘cockroaches and termites’. [He once told] cheering supporters that Gypsies should be sent to camps and Jews and Turks should go home [and in the «Boomerang of Evil], Siderov even calls upon ‘Orthodox believers’ to take revenge on the ‘murderers of Jesus’.

With friends like that, it does not even help to have Guy Verhofstadt as an enemy.

Now, take a look at this picture:

Recognize the guy on the far right? You’re right. Once again, it is Siderov. The picture is taken at a conference taking place in Moscow in January 2002. Siderov is not alone on this picture either. In fact, he is standing in a group of Holocaust revisionist celebrities. In the back you can spot David Duke, the founder of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. All the way to the left you can see Ahmed Rami of Radio Islam, by the E.U. Monitoring Center on Racism and Xenophobia described as “one of the most radical right wing anti-Semitic homepages on the net with close links to radical Islam groups”.

Confused? You wonder why Vlaams Belang meet with Holocaust revisionists? You wonder what the star of the Bulgarian far right, in spite of its very much outspoken sentiments on Muslims, has in common with an anti-Semitic Muslim radio host from Sweden?

To tell you the truth, it is confusing. At least you know now, why Volen Siderov disappeared. It was becoming a tad too uncomfortable for Vlaams Belang to keep his picture on their website.

Bjørn Stærk commented on my recent post “There’s something about Oriana“, and his comment is well worth reflecting over:

If someone says that Oriana Fallaci was a brave person who upheld European values, that could mean one of three things: 1) They more or less agree with everything Fallaci said, including the insane things, 2) they agree with that they think Fallaci was saying, and don’t know about the rest, or 3) they agree with much of what she said, and are willing to forgive the rest, because her intentions were good and she was on the right side. I believe you’ll find all three kinds of Fallaci supporters, from the insane, to the ignorant, to the partisan [...], the one that applies a lower standard to their own side than the other. The one that says it’s okay to be an idiot, as long as you play on my team.

Bjørn Stærk is right in pointing out that quite a number of the fallacists do not really agree with her. In fact both Hans Rustad at document.no and others express scepticism to some of her more conspirational points, at the same time as they excused Fallaci with “her style” and “her project”. Still, she is seen as the brave woman who dared to speak out. In other words, it is okay to be a rabiate, aggressive conspiracy theorist – and to subscribe a thoroughly manichean worldview – as long as you happen to play on the right team.

What I wonder about, though, is how Hans Rustad came to play on the same team as the woman who wrote this:

The truth, that the responsible have not only kept silent about, but kept hidden as if it was a secret of state, is that it is the largest conspiracy of modern history. Through ideological fraud, cultural filthiness, moral prostiution and wicked tricks, it is the scariest complot that our world has ever created. It is Europe with its bankers that have created the farce called the European Union, with its popes that have invented the fable of ecumenism, with its spineless individuals who have invented the lies of pacifism, with its hypocrites who have put into the scene the fraud called humanitary help. It is Europe with its state leaders with no honour and no wisdom, with its intellectuals with no dignity and no courage. It is the sick Europe. It is the Europe that has sold itself as a whore to the sultans, to the caliphs, to the viziers, to the knights of the new Ottoman Empire. It is Eurabia.

(Oriana Fallaci, the Strength of Reason, my translation from p. 141 in the Norwegian edition)

How can liberals become infatuated with this kind of writing? How can the above be defended because of Oriana’s “style” and “project”? How is it even possible to sell the above as something written by a woman characterised by her “loyalty to Europe”? Sometimes I wonder if some of the fallacists have even read Fallaci.

Does the distinction between different kinds of Fallaci supporters matter, asks Stærk:

If you take a long-term perspective to this, and imagine a future Europe created by the conflict between violent Islamists and Fallaci supporters, then the distinction is not so important. Anyone who supports Fallaci will help to create that Europe, no matter why they do it. If this leads to violent conflict and anti-Muslim persecution, future historians may be justified in placing some of the blame on anyone who today promotes the rhetoric of people like Fallaci.

But there are other perspectives, more relevant to ourselves in our time. There’s the moral perspective, which says that there’s a difference between being an Islamophobe and just tolerating Islamophobes, whether it’s because you’re a partisan hypocrite or because you just don’t know any better. They’re all bad, but different kinds of bad. I see no reason to confuse our understanding of this by pretending they’re all the same thing.

Once again, I will have to agree with Bjørn.

There is an obvious difference between being an Islamophobe and just being tolerant to Islamophobia, there’s a difference between subscribing to fascist ideological thought and just failing to confront the same ideas. There is river five miles wide between being critical towards Islam and supporting a ban on the religion, even if your criticism is based on a monolithic understanding. A river five miles wide where some people are setting up a regular ferry service, based on the notion that the guys on the other side are playing on their own team.

And those people running that ferry service really are promoting the kind of hatred that easily can turn into politically motivated violence. They might not want that, but if you promote Oriana Fallaci’s understanding of Islam, that’s what you will get. To some degree, violent conflict is already here, and I do not want to leave it to historians to criticise those who willingly spread the kind of poison Fallaci stoid for. This is the time to pick up the pen. And here’s why:

Middle Eastern men were openly targetted and assaulted. A young Muslim woman wearing a veil was chased into a kiosk on Cronulla beach. Police tried to move her away from the chanting crowd but were unable to reach the security of the command post. While the woman and police officers hid in the kiosk, a crowd surrounded the kiosk and shouted “Kill the Lebs”, while others climbed on top of the kiosk.

As police horses and special operations officers formed a line and pushed the crowd away, they were bombarded with beer bottles. After half an hour, an ambulance arrived at the kiosk and people were loaded into it. The ambulance, transporting six injured youths, escorted by police and police horses, was also bombarded with beer bottles. One struck an ambulance officer on the head. His colleague suffered lacerations to the arm.

(Wikinews: Violence at Cronulla Beach as 5000 people gather)

^{From a video on the Cronulla riots circulating on the Internet.}

Last year, Australians “fought back” at Cronulla beach. That is, they “fought back” by beating up innocent people. Videos are spread on the Internet, telling the stories of bravery, showing pictures of Lebanese Australians being bashed. Of course, the whole thing is portrayed as a reaction to “years of muggings and rapes”. Because of a number of episodes involving Lebanese youth gangs, apologists around the Australian mobs as an “understandable reaction”. It is odd how, on jihadwatch, for instance, things become understandable when the perpetrators are not of Muslim origin.

Still, I do wonder if some people are actually aware precisely what they saw as understandable.

A number of the demonstrators wore clothing bearing racially-divisive slogans such as “We Grew Here, You Flew Here”, “Wog Free Zone”, “Aussie Pride”, “Fuck Allah – Save Nulla”, and “Ethnic Cleansing Unit”. Chants of “Lebs out”, “Lebs go home” and other discriminatory expressions were continuously shouted out by many of the demonstrators, including some families with young children.

[...]

Through the remainder of the day, several more individuals of “Middle Eastern appearance” were assaulted, as well as several others who were not from this background, including a Jewish boy and a Greek girl.

(Wikipedia)
It is said that when fascism comes to America it will come draped in the flag. In Australia, this was doubtlessly true. At Cronulla beach, the Australia First Party, the Patriotic Youth League and Blood and Honour were present. Amongst the Australian flags on video footage from the riots; it is not difficult to spot well-known Nazi symbols. There is also little doubt that white supremacist groups were inciting more violence. Still, they are using Cronulla as a propaganda tool. All you have to do to discover that is to visit YouTube.

^{Screenshots from Cronulla riots footage.}

In this context, the third kind of Fallaci supporter is very dangerous. And the hateful sentiments growing in the public are indeed also a result of their contribution.

Further reading:

Tim Blair: Beach trash duke it out

And while we talk about race riots… was Windsor really burning?

I have noticed one thing about racists. They don’t like being called racist. I am not a racist, they say, but… But what? But you just don’t like foreigners? You are not a racist, but you think it was just a tad annoying that the bus driver spoke Arabic to a passenger, a guy he obviously knew, instead of speaking your language? Let me tell you one thing. I am totally fed up with people that are not racist. It’s just so politically correct – not being a racist, just as politically correct as it has become to hate foreigners.

While some racists dream off being seen as liberals, however, some liberals seem to long for being racist. It’s probably good for the popularity of their weblogs or something. Hans Rustad, editor of the Norwegian web newspaper document.no, according to its front page a web site standing up for liberal values, wrote an article hailing Oriana Fallaci, quoting Pink Floyd while he was at it – «Oriana: Shine on you crazy diamond»(1)

It’s not easy. It is difficult to find words. It’s about courage. Oriana Fallaci is courageous. She is ill, I think I can notice that. That makes her bite like an animal sometimes. But her spirit is winning. Her courage and loyalty. Towards Europe, towards the European culture.

Let us sum up some of the things Oriana Fallaci was saying in her «Force of Reason», shall we?

Thing #1: Muslims breed like rats

It’s just too juicy to leave out. Oriana Fallaci said Muslims are «breeding like rats». It’s on page 53 of the Norwegian edition. I’m sure you can find it if you look for it, even if you don’t happen to speak – or read – my language. If you can’t: well, screw you, foreign bastard!

I have to give Hans Rustad right, though. From a cynical point of view, I guess one could say that things like this is all about being loyal to European culture. The English novelist Charles Kingsley, for instance, wrote the following illuminating passage in a letter to his wife:

I am haunted by the human chimpanzees I saw… I don’t believe they are our fault. . . . But to see white chimpanzees is dreadful; if they were black, one would not feel it so much. (2)

He spoke – as I believe should be obvious to everyone – of the Irish. It’s a long-term hobby for Europeans to speak off people of other ethnicities or religious beliefs as if they were animals of one kind or the other. It’s all part of our heritage, and the ones you should really feel sorry for are probably the chimpanzees.

There are of course those that will say: «But it’s true! They do breed like rats!». Fallaci herself tells us this nice little anecdote of a man she knows about. She does not really know how many wives and children he has, she says. That’s her proof. Now, I could compare this with some nasty literary works in European history, but then – we who dare to criticize Fallaci are often lashed out at because we “do not give any arguments”, “do not take her seriously” or whatever. That’s why I decided to fact-check Oriana Fallacis claim. Here we go.

Rats:

I don’t know squat about rodents. I did however find this very informative Internet site (3) called «Breeding mice and rats», where I read:

We keep a ratio of one male to four females in our boxes. The males are left in the boxes with the females and their litters all the time. The males will help tend the litter (4). Once the male has done his duty with the female, about 21 days later after looking like a furry ping-pong ball you’ll have pinkies. Our average litter size is about 15 pinkies, some of our females continously have 20 in a litter.

Reading this, I got really scared. Muslims have 15 children in average, per litter? And their children are all pinkies? Gee. We’re in deep shit. Then I remembered that this web site wasn’t about Muslims, it was about rats. And mice. So I decided to fact-check the Muslim part too.

Muslims:

In his book «Apres l’Empire. Essai sur la decomposition du systeme americain» the French demographer Emmanuell Todd shows that the birth rate is falling rapidly in most of the Muslim world. There’s simply a demographic revolution going on (5). But of course, Todd is critical towards the Americans and he is French, so he can’t really be trusted. That’s why I checked with the CIA. Here’s the number for total fertility rate – average number of children per woman – in some Muslim countries, taken straight out of their World Factbook:

Tunisia, 1.74; Iran, 1.8; Algeria, 1.89; Turkey, 1.92; Egypt, 2.83; Syria, 3.4; Saudi-Arabia, 4; Iraq, 4.18

Here’s the numbers for some non-Muslim countries: Belgium, 1.64; Norway, 1.78; United States of America, 2.09; Nepal, 4.1

and last but (not) least

Kiribati, 4.16

Of course some might say that Muslim women in Western countries have a higher fertility rate. They are partly right, a report from the French INSEE (Institute National de la Statistique et des etudes Economique) (6), shows that immigrant women of African heritage had around 4 children in average, Tunisians, Turks and Moroccans about 3.3, Algerians 3.2, South East Asians about 2.8 and Portuguese about 2. The report also shows that the number was dropping from 1990 to 1999. Except for the Portuguese, that is.

I tell you, those Portuguese are breeding like rats!

Thing #2: I am a martyr. Everyone who does not agree with me are evil! Evil, I say!

You don’t have to read much of Oriana Fallaci’s book to realize that she was a hero, a Mastro Cecco of our time telling stupid people that the world is round. And around her are heaps and heaps of evil people. The Inquisition were out for Oriana, the modern Inquisition, made up of people dressed in chadors, and pacifists too!

Gee, if I had a bunch of chador-clad pacifists after me, I really would not know what to do.

I’d probably start yelling at everyone, telling them that they are not only grasshoppers – little crunchy insects that taste like peanuts – but also fifth columnists and traitors. Yeah, that sounds cool. Hey you, traitor of Europe! Look at me! I am the one speaking the Truth, I am the one with the Force of Reason! After stating these obvious things, I would continue by putting forth my personal conspiracy theory, and I would include Swiss lawmakers, the European Union, some literary conferences, the Vatican and… hmmm… let’s think – the Illuminati. The Illuminati were always my favourites.

In fact Fallaci did include all of these people when she wrote about the conspiracy to turn Europe into Eurabia, an Islamic province, all of them except the Illuminati, that is. That really ruined her book for me. You can’t even trust conspiracy nuts these days.

There’s another problem with the whole «I am a martyr, poor me!» hypotesis, though. Fallaci said that it is seen as good to paint swastikas on the American flag, and to call Americans murderers and enemies of human kind. «If you do the same thing with Islam, you end up in jail». But Oriana Fallaci was never jailed. She was selling books like crazy, and she was being hailed in the pages of the New York Post, as she gladly pointed out herself. On the cover of the Norwegian translation of Force of Reason, the book was described as a «sharp analysis». So much for some dry academic guy looking into what challenges Europe face as a result of its demographic development (yawn!).

What we need, folks, is a good ol’ conspiracy theory and some nice black-and-white thinking. That will really help. And if it doesn’t, well, at least it’s yet another thing Europeans have good traditions for, isn’t it, Hans?

Thing #3: George Habash is Muslims are bad!

The third and last point on my list is what Fallaci’s book is really all about. Bad Muslims. They are everywhere in her book, there’s just getting more and more of them, and they seem to be much more numerous than they are even when they aren’t that numerous (7). Europe is an Islamic colony. Troy is burning. And there’s only one Islam, «a pool of water that never moves», a quagmire that «loves Death» and «hates Life».

Before she became an Islamophobe prophet, Oriana Fallaci was a journalist. Possibly, this is the reason she knew that she needed some examples to demonstrate this utter evil. There aren’t too many peaceful sufi sheikhs amongst them. Not too many social workers, either. But there is this Palestinian guy called George Habash, who’s even a terrorist and who apparently was quite an eye-opener for Fallaci, because he told her that the Arabs are to «advance step by step. Millimeter by millimeter. Year after year. Decade after decade. Determined, stubborn, patient. This is our strategy. A strategy that we shall expand throughout the whole planet». As Brendan Bernhard writes in the LA Weekly (8)

Fallaci thought he was referring simply to terrorism. Only later did she realize that he “also meant the cultural war, the demographic war, the religious war waged by stealing a country from its citizens … In short, the war waged through immigration, fertility, presumed pluriculturalism.

For Fallaci the statement of George Habash proved that the Muslims have been planning to take Europe over all along. There’s only one tiny little odd thing about it. George Habash is of Christian,Greek-Orthodox background. And his Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine is not a religious group. It’s Marxist-Leninist. An American journalist, John Cooley, also met up with Habash and was told that the Arab defeat by Israel demonstrated the strenght of «the scientific society of Israel [...] against our own backwardness in the Arab world. This called for the total rebuilding of Arab society into a twentieth century society» (9), «We held the Guevara view of the revolutionary human being, a new breed of man had to emerge, among the Arabs as everywhere else».

I have studied Islam. I am baffled by Oriana’s need to identify Habash with the Muslims – there should be plenty of real-world, bad-ass Muslims out there who are not Marxists of Christian background! Please!

Here’s the letter I had planned to send Oriana Fallaci:

Dear Oriana,

I don’t know what kind of stuff you have been smoking. I sure wouldn’t dare to try any of it, because that must be freaky shit. However, I have a couple of friends who probably wouldn’t mind some experimenting (they are musicians), so please do get in touch.

In the meantime I’ll try to figure out why you pick out holocaust revisionists, of all people, when you want to give examples of how terrible the Swiss anti-racism legislation really is, and why you never say that that’s what they are, but just leave an ambiguous statement about how people are not allowed to tell another version of history than the official one. It’s not like you have problems with namecalling, after all.

Kind regards,

Øyvind Strømmen

5^th Column, Army of the North

I am sad to say I never got the chance to send the letter. Oriana Fallaci passed away in September 2006. Somehow, I feel convinced that I can find some other adressee, though.

-

^Footnotes:

1 Oriana: Shine on you crazy diamond!, document.no, 23.01.2005

2 L.P. Curtis, «Anglo-Saxons and Celts», p.84. Quoted here and other places.

3 http://www.geocities.com/happyherps/rodent_breeding.html

4 Huh? I though they were out drinking mint tea and smoking water pipe with their buddies?

5 Emmanuell Todd, «Apres l’Empire», 2002

6 See: http://www.insee.fr/fr/ffc/docs_ffc/IP898.pdf

7 In 2004, Malta had 3.000 Muslims, according to an article – «Lifting the veil» in Malta Today 26. September that year. According to Fallaci, Muslims constitute 13% of the country’s population. Malta has around 400.000 inhabitants. Mathematics was never my strongest subject in school. Can somebody please explain this one to me?

8 «The Fallaci Code», LA Weekly, March 15, 2006

9«Green March, Black September: The Story of the Palestinian Arabs». John K. Cooley, 1973, p. 135

In short, [Muslims] always work upon the essential characteristics that belong to the mentality of each nation. When they have in this way achieved a decisive influence in the political and economic spheres they can drop the limitations which their former tactics necessitated, now disclosing their real intentions and the ends for which they are fighting. Their work of destruction now goes ahead more quickly, reducing one State after another to a mass of ruins on which they will erect the everlasting and sovereign Islamic Empire.

The man who wrote that did of course not speak of Muslims. He spoke of Jews. His name was Adolf Hitler. And before you come dragging with Godwin’s Law, just give it a few moments thought: Are you sure you have not read something similar lately? Are you sure that you have not heard words pretty much like them? And if you do read on in “Mein Kampf”, do you feel convinced that you will not stumble upon more similarities?

A while back I read a story on the website of the Swedish party Nationaldemokraterna. «We have to realise that different cultures are incapable of living together in the same country. The gang rapes will go on as long as the multicultural experiment is allowed to continue», said one of their representatives. There was a picture of the woman, too, and on her lap she had her doughter: as blond as herself.

I really do hope that this girl one day comes home having found herself a black boyfriend, preferably a Muslim. And I also hope that the black guy, let’s call him Abdoulahat, will be a nice guy, brilliant at baking pepparkakor and at preparing avocado with shrimps for dinner, after a good Senegalese recipe. I hope the two of them will have beautiful little children with a dark complexion and curly hair.

- Grandmother, what big teeth you have got! – It’s because I am a racist nut, dear.

With this dream, dear Swedish «National Democrats», you have my contribution to which apparently has «contributed to [HIV] being transferred to [the Swedish] aboriginals».Once again, hatred is becoming popular in Europe. At the website of the Norwegian far right party with the amusing name the Democrats, Bjarne Dahl writes:

It is a fact that through legislation and through decisions of the courts we ethnic Norwegians have become second-grade citizens. Immigrants from Pakistan, Turkey, Somalia and the rest of the Third World have established their colonies on Norwegian earth, and they are know in parliament, in local city councils, everywhere in the bureaucracy. Today, a Norwegian will have to accept having his rights defined by complete strangers, intruders, who rarely let go off an opportunity to demonstrate that they have become masters in our house.

And maybe you even believe Bjarne Dahl. Maybe you have spent so much time surfing the Internet looking for stories about Eurabia, maybe you have started to believe the fairytales of dhimmitude, peddled by the fascists of today? Maybe you too subscribe to ideas of Europe being doomed; if people could only open their eyes before it is too late! Then, perhaps, you should listen more closely to what the fascists of today are saying, because they are mumbling something more, something which we are not always allowed to hear.

They are saying we deserve it.

These racists do not hate anyone as much as they hate their own. And it’s not only about politicians and journalists, whom it would be «understandable» – an expression of «just anger» – if were lynched, to quote from the website of the Norwegian Forum Against Islamisation. Their hatred also targets those of us who do not see multiculturalism as all bad, and those of us who do not think that Afshan Rafiq is the worst Conservative Party-politician ever elected in the Norwegian parliament. In fact it targets all those who are not voting for «national democratic» parties, those who are to blame for a society «in decay».

Maybe democracy itself has become too soft to function, asks Fjordman – the Norwegian superhero of Islamophobia. Secularism is fatal, writes Ohmyrus at FaithFreedom’s website, and democracy is an intolerant, secular ideology. Sometimes, Marxism is given the blame, or pacifism, the Left, “the traditional parties”. Fjordman blames the feminists:

To your surprise, you didn’t enter a feminist Nirvana, but paved the way for an unfolding Islamic hell. It is correct as feminists claim, that a hyper-feminine society is not as destructive as a hyper-masculine society. The catch with a too soft society is that it is unsustainable. It will get squashed as soon as it is confronted by more traditional, aggressive ones.

In fact, these modern-day fascists have so little faith in the socalled Western values that they think it does not take anything more than Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammed saying “Booh!” for Western culture to roll over and die.

I think it will take a lot more than that. I think that these socalled Western values – democracy, freedom-of-speech, religious freedom, secularism, equality of the sexes, etc. – are better than the ideas of Omar Bakri Muhammed and mates. And for that reason, because they’re better, not because they are Western, they will prevail.