Now here is a leftist politician that gets it. Villy Søvndal, leader of the Socialist People’s Party tells it like it is, responding to a demonstration held by the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir in Denmark last Friday, the socialist leader stated on his blog that:

“the group was to ’seek other pastures’ and that their ‘undertakings had no perspective, nor future, in Denmark’.”

Now if only other European socialists and politicians across the political spectrum, were to get on board and confront the Islamists with the same line of reasoning, we would see a dramatic shift away from the moronic political correctness that currently blankets the political atmosphere in Europe. Søvndal also adds:

“‘If they want to live in a religious dictatorship so badly, they can go to those countries in the Middle East where such dictatorships exist.”

Right again, and how refreshing! About a proposed banning of the group:

‘Instead of turning them into martyrs with a ban, they must be put in the spotlight. It would expose their completely ridiculous views”

Instead of practicing selfcensorship and fawning gross tolerance towards the intolerant, we should be actively engaging these religious fascists in open, public debate. The more we dare to draw the public’s attention to the lunacy of Islamism, and unfettered immigration for people who come from a part of the world that traditionally resists modern thinking and modern living,…the better.

Villy Søvndal then levels his disgust at Birthe Rønn Hornbech, Denmark’s integration minister, for meeting with Kassem Ahmad, [spokesperson for the Islamic Society in Denmark] behind closed doors. Ahmad had participated in the march, being seen walking alongside Fadi Abdullatif, leader of the Hizb ut-Tahrir in Denmark:

‘It is strange that religious representatives should be given preferential treatment in a secular democracy. If the minister wanted to speak with ethnic minorities, she could have spoken with members of city council who were democratically elected.’

This shows that some Leftists actually do understand what’s at stake, and that Islamism has no place within the democracies of Europe. Only when the Left becomes more engaged with the dangers Islamism poses for western societies, can any headway be made. This is all very good news. Once again Denmark shows the rest of Europe the mess it has gotten itself into, and most importantly…the way out. More here.

On February 5 and 6, Patrick Sookhdeo of the Barnabus Fund will be interviewed on Focus on the Family - a must-hear interview:

Radical Islam’s Threat to the Western World (Part 1 of 2)

Patrick Sookhdeo, a renowned authority on radical Islam, discusses the threat jihadist ideology poses to Christianity and western society. (Part 1 of 2)……[.........]

Guest Biography

Patrick Sookhdeo is an international authority on Islamic jihadist ideology, serving as a consultant for the British and NATO militaries. He is also an author, a lecturer and the International Director of the Barnabas Fund, a relief and development agency supporting persecuted Christian minorities around the world. Sookhdeo holds a Ph.D. from London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies and two Doctor of Divinity degrees from other institutions. His books include Global Jihad, A Christian’s Pocketguide to Islam, and Islam: The Challenge to the Church.

Get Sookhdeo’s best-selling book Global Jihad here:

Danish MP and moderate muslim Naser Khader, (who you would see on the PBS special Islam Vs. Islamists if the Corporation for Public Broadcasting would release it) has been attracting attention lately. Blogger Exile took note of a speech in which Khader called for the need for a  Muhammad cartoon incident in America. GOV, who always has the pulse of all things Danish, also has noted Khader’s message and its importance.

What struck me was Mr. Khader’s statement that it was the cartoon controversy which spurred Danish democratic muslims to action. In absurdity lies truth, I suppose. Time and again we have seen that the islamists will always, without fail, over-react. If the incident might call for a polite discussion between neighbors, its a lawsuit. If a well written op-ed would suffice, its the threat (or practice) of decapitation.

This is of course why the political correctness crowd in general, and the grievance industry, in particular, is a massive threat to the counter-jihad movement. A simple search reveals the number of times the word “offensive” appears on the Council of American-Islamic Relations Website. The word “Hate Crime” is even more common.

This reminds me of an incident in Tennessee, which was related to me by Christine this afternooon, which occurred a while ago, and which she blogged about here. Bacon is not, cannot, be a hate crime. Neither can cartoons, or the use of ACTUAL Koran quotes. Free speech, and its consquences, are our very best weapon. The Islamists know this, and are coming for it.

The wider the gulf between a rational response to a provocation, and the Islamist response to a provocation, the more people awake to the simple fact, that a large number of people out there subscribe to a violent, intolerant and anachronistic ideology. And, perhaps as Mr. Khader suggests, such provocations can also awaken a large number of otherwise passive muslim immigrants to point out that it is time for a real “islamic revolution.” As Exile says of Khader:

Could it be that this relatively quiet man, in his modest way, can start the revolution that Islam is so seriously in need of? Someone has to. If it should be him, then I can only applaud him and continue to support him.

Anyone else would recieve my blessing too.

To that I would add not only “Anyone” else, but ”Everyone” else.

Exile at On The Wing, an intrepid blogger in Denmark, has the latest on EU baseless attacks and general lack of common sense:

Denmark has been pointed out, once again, as being racist toward its overwhelming hordes of unwanted, unloved, unwashed and misunderstood muslims. Yet again, we are intolerant, ignorant of their special needs and unwilling to accomodate them. We have adopted a harsh tone when discussing, no, condemning is a better word, our wonderful culturally enriching muslim population.

My only comment is; “Hallelujah”. In that case, we are doing something right over here.

This new accusation comes from yet another European watchdog social democratic package of initials calling itself the OSCE. Another overpaid and idiotic edict-producing body of know alls that sit in Brussels. The OSCE is the “Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe”. You can add it to my list of hate-entities like the ECRI (European Committee against Racism and Intolerance) and CERD (Committee for the Eradication of Racial Discrimination).

The OSCE report states that Denmark is limiting the amount of social benefits available to muslims, allows no mosques, no burial grounds and that we rarely invoke the racism paragraphs of of our legal system. All of the above statements from the OSCE are untrue. The government here is livid and, frankly, so am I.

So who wrote this anti-Danish society report? Let me tell you….”

More….

Note: This is the bulk of the newsletter, some contact information or other details have been removed for public presentation.
________________________________
The 910 Group Newsletter
10 February 2007: Volume 1, No. 6
Protect Liberty, Counter Sharia, Defeat Jihad: Powered by the 910 Group
www.910group.com

You are receiving this email newsletter because you registered with the 910 Group.  …

To join the 910 Group, please REGISTER at www.910group.com/forum . You contributions are needed! Send contributions to Center for Vigilant Freedom, P.O. Box 2773, Fairfax, VA 22031, USA.

CONTACT US WITH ACTION ALERTS AND UPDATES FROM YOUR ORGANIZATION:
In the forum, post your suggestions for the newsletter here: http://forum.910group.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=61

< <<<<<--------------------------------------->>>>>>

In this Issue

ACTION ALERT #1: Saturday Feb 10 and Sunday, Feb 11, CNN:
Documentary “The Journalist and the Jihadi,” about the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl when he tried to interview Sheikh Gilani, a muslim cleric with links to Al Qaeda

ACTION ALERT #2: Attend February 20 Rally: Red House, Virginia, to Protest Road Named for Sheikh Gilani

ACTION ALERT #3: Attend March 17 Rally: Protect Viet Nam Memorial from Anti-War Protest

ACTION ALERT #4: Need Law Enforcement Members to Verify Report of Terrorist Plans to Attack Schools

ACTION ALERT #5: Find Koran-Swearing Bills

UPDATE & FOCUS ON INTERNATIONAL FORUMS: UK 910 Group members meeting regularly to stop the Mega Mosque. Scandinavian and Australia Group rooms also active.

< <<<<<--------------------------------------->>>>>>

ACTION ALERT #1: SATURDAY, FEB 10 AND SUNDAY, FEB 11: WATCH CNN DOCUMENTARY ON SHEIKH GILANI AND THE DEATH OF JOURNALIST DANIEL PEARL

Saturday Feb. 10 and Sunday, Feb. 11, CNN: Documentary “The Journalist and the Jihadi,” about the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl when he tried to interview Sheikh Gilani, a muslim cleric with links to Al Qaeda. On both nights at 8:00 p.m. EST.

If you can provide video and edit clips of this, please contact … (username in forum) or post directly to the 910 Video Media Group Forum.

< <<<<<--------------------------------------->>>>>>

ACTION ALERT #2: FEBRUARY 20 RALLY IN RED HOUSE, VIRGINIA TO PROTEST ROAD NAMED FOR SHEIKH GILANI

To all who are on the East Coast of the USA – please go to this event in Virginia on Feburary 20th. … If you can attend, contact Baron Bodissey … The demonstration will begin … before the scheduled meeting … Charlotte Court House, Virginia …

Background:
On February 6, 2007, the Charlotte County, Virginia Board of Supervisors voted to name a local road to honor Sheikh Gilani. The road is an access road to the Red House, Virginia compound of Jamaat ul Fuqra, aka “The Muslims of America”. This group has been listed as a terrorist group – until removed from the list by the Clinton administration in 2000. Join several 910 Group members and participate in the Christian Action Network’s public demonstration at the February 20, 2007 Charlotte County Board of Supervisors Meeting to demand removal of the Sheikh Gilani road sign.

The road sign, “Sheikh Gilani Ln” is in front of the “Muslims of America” compound in Red House, Virginia. This terrorist-recognizing road name also appears on the public maps of Charlotte County. “This road sign is named after Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, a known international terrorist. It must come down,” said Martin Mawyer, president of the Christian Action Network. “Sheikh Gilani is the head of a Pakistani terrorist organization called ‘Jamaat al-Fuqra’, which has been responsible for numerous fire bombings and murders inside the United States.”

During the 1980s, Sheikh Gilani entered the United States and began forming guerilla training camps that go by the name of “Muslims of America” and “International Open Quranic University.” Sheikh Gilani has established at least two-dozen guerilla compounds inside America and claims to have between 10,000 and 15,000 followers in 22 states.

For more information on the Red House, Virginia, Jamaat ul Fuqra compound and others throughout the USA: Christian Action Network: http://www.christianaction.org/sheikh_gilani_runs_terrorist_compounds_in_america.htm
Gates of Vienna: http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2005/10/jamaat-ul-fuqra-in-virginia-part-1.html
Politics of CP: http://politicsofcp.blogspot.com/2005/10/digest-of-jamaat-ul-fuqra-coverage.html

< <<<<<------------------------------------->>>>>>

ACTION ALERT #3: MARCH 17, 2007 RALLY TO PROTECT VIET NAM MEMORIAL

On March 17, Cindy Sheehan and other anti-war activists will meet at the Viet Nam Memorial to begin a protest march on the Pentagon. Ted Samply is organizing a counter protest to protect the Wall from possible vandalism, called “A Gathering of Eagles“. Vietnam veterans and supporters will gather to show support for U.S. troops. Details here: http://www.usvetdsp.com/eagle/index.php and at this site: http://euphoricreality.com/2007/02/08/to-protect-the-vietnam-wall/

Among those attending on the anti-war side: Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark (who offered his services to defend Saddam Hussein), Ultra-liberal Congresswoman Maxine Waters, Former Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney, Mahdi Bray, executive director, Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, Waleed Bader, vice chair of the National Council of Arab Americans and former president of Arab Muslim American Federation, Medea Benjamin, co-founder, CODEPINK and Global Exchange, Free Palestine Alliance, Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation, Islamic Political Party of America, FMLN (Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front), Islamic-National Congress, Gay Liberation Network, Muslim Student Association, Jibril Hough, chairman, Islamic Political Party of America.

To join up with other members of the 910 Group to attend, contact Christine …

< <<<<<------------------------------------->>>>>>

ACTION ALERT #4: REQUEST TO LAW ENFORCEMENT MEMBERS TO VERIFY REPORT ON TERRORIST PLANS TO ATTACK SCHOOLS IN USA.

If you are in law enforcement, we need your help. In the last month, several members sent us excerpts from a three-part report from well-known law enforcement author Charles Remsberg. http://www.americandaughter.com/index.html?http://frontpage.americandaughter.com/?p=1135

The report concerns known terrorist plans to attack U.S. schools. This report was presented by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Todd Rassa, a trainer with SigArms Academy and advisory board member for The Police Marksman magazine, at a three-day conference on terrorist issues sponsored by the International Assn. of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors (IALEFI) in Atlantic City.

If you are in law enforcement, you may be able to register to view Remsberg’s article at the original site and help verify the accuracy of the report – see “Mass Slaughter in our Schools: The Terrorists’ Chilling Plan”: http://www.policeone.com/writers/columnists/CharlesRemsberg

< <<<<<------------------------------------------>>>>>>

ACTION ALERT #5: CHECK FOR KORAN-SWEARING BILLS IN YOUR STATE LEGISATURE

On February 7, a bill was filed in the North Carolina State Senate permitting Courtroom oaths to be taken on the Koran and other sacred texts besides the Bible. In mid-January, the North Carolina State Appeals Court ruled that a Muslim woman’s lawsuit to swear on the Koran in court can continue through the courts.

The problem with swearing on the Koran is that it represents the separate constitution of political Islam, not just a religion, and it specifically permits believers to lie. When one of these bills appears, usually more will follow rapidly. Please post any information you find to the 910group.com/forum, or contact Christine directly.

You can check for state legislative contacts and some info on bills here: http://votesmart.org/index.htm . A concise, fact-filled article on the political aspects of the Koran is here at Front Page magazine at http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26769 , on the latest work from the Center for the Study of Political Islam, found here: http://www.cspipublishing.com/

< <<<<<--------------------------------------->>>>>>

UPDATE – NEW NATIONAL CHAPTER ROOMS: UK, SCANDINAVIA, AUSTRALIA

We have expanded the forum to include specific rooms for more national chapters. The Danes, as ever, have been a strong presence in 910, and we now have rooms especially for Northern European and Scandinavian issues, Australia, and for our UK members.

FOCUS ON BRITAIN – UK 910 GROUP MEMBERS TO COUNTER MEGA-MOSQUE

This 910 subgroup, of nearly 30 identified members to date, are having regular online meetings and are developing a campaign to oppose the mega mosque in London.

The UK Group, we recall, spearheaded the distribution and transcription of the London Debates, ‘Clash of Civilization’, with Mayor Livingston, Daniel Pipes, and Murray Douglas. …

All Brits, and everyone from any country are invited to help; we are all Londoners on this one!
Contact (usernames in forum) who are coordinating the group. If all British members would please indicate their country in their profile and join the UK usergroup, that will assist Aeneas in ensuring you are contacted on relevant issues. There will be opportunities to meet in person, likely in London and Yorkshire.

One new UK member is Britney British, she has provided us with this view on the proposed Mega Mosque.

Close your eyes, project into the future and imagine you are a bird flying high over London. The most noticeable natural thing you see is the Thames as it meanders its way from left to right. The most noticeable unnatural thing you see is not London Bridge, Westminster Abbey, The London Eye or Saint Paul’s Cathedral; it’s the mega mosque in Newham, the largest mosque outside of the Middle East.

The mega mosque, if constructed, will dominate our capital city. It will not only be a landmark; it will be a symbolic message to the world. It will send out the message Britain’s religious identity has reached its turning point and will never be the same again.

The group behind the mega mosque is Tablighi Jamaat, the largest group of religious proselytizers of any faith and largely responsible for the explosion of Islam. Generally assumed to be peaceful missionaries, they are members of the most secretive of Islamic organisations publishing nothing, keeping its membership anonymous and hiding its finances. If I had a past like Tablighi Jamaat, I too would be quiet about my activities and would certainly not reveal to the world my true intentions …

** to read the entire piece,
visit the 910 Group, UK Forum
www.910group.com/forum **

… Despite the evidence of the wolf beneath the sheep’s clothing, given the level of active disgust from the public and the never-ending desire of the British government to please muslims, the mega mosque is as good as built. The saying ‘Detach the head from its body’ should explain why our efforts need to be fused on saving London. If the mega mosque goes ahead, London’s future will not only be bleak but will set the scene for Britain.

More information on the mega mosque, Tablighi Jamaat and the active disgust can be found on the 910 forum, UK Group. Please devote some time to the cause which affects not only London but Britain and the Western World. Let’s all hope and pray the birds of the future see what we see today.

Britney British,
http://godhelpbritain.blogspot.com

< <<<<<------------------------------------->>>>>>

Contact Us:

…
If you have contributions for this newsletter, the 910 blog, or if you can help in developing our website – contact Vicktorya

With questions about your membership or anything at all, write to Vicktorya in the 910 Forum.  [To join, register at the 910 Group and DO fill out your profile.]

If you aren’t registered yet, or if you are registered on the forum yet, or have not logged on, or just haven’t visited lately – we are very active; join the action here www.910group.com/forum

…

The 910 Group Newsletter is an educational service of The 910 Group, a program of the non-profit * Center for Vigilant Freedom, Inc., P.O. Box 2773, Fairfax, VA 22031-9998, USA. TEL: +1.703.879.1784. Privacy policy here: http://www.910group.com/Documents/910grouppolicies.pdf

The following is a translation by a feature article from the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, and is crossposted here and on Gates of Vienna as well as on The New Zonka Blog, I have used the Baron’s corrected and improved version of my translation here.

Naïvists and Human Nature

Kai Sørlander, Author and Philosopher

When democracy let the optimists succeed in classifying the pessimists as xenophobes and Islamophobes, it embarked upon a catastrophic course. And the media who have aided to maintain the illusion bear a particular part of the blame, says the writer.

Political discussions often take place on two levels: a substantial level where the parties have differing opinions about some concrete issue, and a secondary level, where the aim is to get your political opponent classified in a way that implies that you yourself are right on the substantial level.

If you can affix your own labels on your opponent, then you can make it impossible for him to voice his substantial arguments. It is a tactical game which is part of the democratic game.

This game can thus also be found in the political disagreement about the last thirty to forty years of immigration policy.

This was a case in which anyone should have known in advance that there would be serious consequences for Danish society, and thus it should have been discussed openly and in all of its aspects. All parties should have had the opportunity to be as clear as possible in presenting their opinions of how many immigrants from relatively distant cultures they thought that Danish society could manage to integrate. And then they should have been required to argue their position, why they believed that their answer was the right one. But at the same time they should also have recognized that there would be a major uncertainty about the answer. Nobody could be sure that his own answer would be superior in the long run.

The optimists should thus also have recognized that there could be a certain amount of rationality in the pessimism, however that recognition was held back. The optimists avoided entering into a serious debate with the pessimists.

Instead they made being a pessimist equivalent to being xenophobic. Those who didn’t share the optimists’ belief in how many immigrants it was possible to integrate into society were classified as xenophobes.

In this the optimists were the ones who ruined the debate, and were greatly helped along the way by the media. Instead of entering an equal debate with the pessimists, they rendered them morally unworthy.

The same rhetorical game also marks a more particular aspect of the political discussion about the conditions for immigration. As an consequence of the fact that many of the immigrants that came into the country in that period were Muslims, it was rational to consider the issue of Islam and democracy. Then one began by recognising that democracy as a rational political order requires a realisation that the laws are made by humans and have to be approved through a parliamentary decision.

Thus one has to recognize that a democratic order more easily integrates a religion that itself recognizes that the laws of society have to be made by humans, than a religion that wants to decide itself how the laws should be. And isn’t that the main difference between Christianity and Islam? Isn’t that exactly the explanation why democracy has been able to develop within Christianity but not within Islam?

Who knows what is right? Under all circumstances we are talking about real problems, which for the sake of democracy there was every reason to seriously discuss in connection with Muslim immigration. But was it done?

No, here also the optimists, who couldn’t see any problem, skipped over the pessimists. Instead of an equal debate, the pessimists were labelled Islamophobes. They suffered from a phobia; they were sick; there was no reason to debate with them.

In this way the optimists succeeded for a long time in creating a climate that made it impossible to take seriously the problems that resulted from liberal immigration policy. Because even to take them seriously was labelled as an expression of xenophobia and Islamophobia.

The consequence then was that nothing was done, and the problems were allowed to grow. Therefore they have also become harder to ignore. And thus it is not quite as easy for the optimists to block serious debate about immigration policy by calling their pessimistic opponents xenophobes and Islamophobes.

On the contrary, the pessimists can now begin to win in the media for their interpretation of the consequences of the immigration policy. And what are the pessimists doing? They naturally uses the same rhetorical trick as the optimists.

They label the opponent in such a way that it is implied that they are mistaken. This can be seen in the title of Karen Jespersen’s and Ralf Pittelkow’s recently published book Islamists and Naïvists. Here the optimists are labelled as naïve, gullible, simple-minded, or even foolishly kind.

Thus the scenario is in place.

In the center is the question itself about the consequences of the liberal immigration policy, surrounded by the two parties, which look with their differing seriousness on these consequences, and which are characterizing each other as xenophobes and naïve. Who is right in this conflict? Are the optimists right that the pessimists are xenophobic? Or are the pessimists right that the optimists are naïve?

A complete answer to that question can naturally only be given once history has taken its turn, and we can’t wait that long when we have to make a political decision. But the answer also requires that we have our concepts in place, and that is something that we don’t need to wait for.

We can get our concepts in place immediately. And on the face of it there is one thing that sticks out: the obvious asymmetry between the way that optimists and pessimists are labelling each other. Where the optimists make the pessimists xenophobic and thus evil, the pessimists only makes the optimists naïve. The demonizing is one-way.

What is the cause of this asymmetry in the parties’ judgment of each other?

The answer must be found the different views of human nature. When the optimists doesn’t see any serious problem arising from the immigration of people from alien cultures, it is because they assume that man by nature is good, and that it is culture that makes people narrow-minded and self centered. In that light multiculturalism is positive, because it sets everybody free from their primary culture and gives them the possibility to live out their natural goodness towards one another. Thus the deconstruction of the prevalent culture is a beneficial project, and those who resist it are evil. They are demonized as xenophobic.

When the pessimists looks quite differently at the consequences of the immigration of people from alien cultures, it is because they have another view of the nature of man. To them man by nature isn’t good, he is combative, and has the potential for both good and evil. And cultural education is necessary to give man the means to interact in such ways that he can suppress his combativeness and live in peace with those in his society.

It is this difference between the optimists and the pessimists in their views of the nature of man that results in the demonization of the pessimists and not the other way around.

For the optimists the pessimists appear dangerous, because they do not believe enough in the goodness of man. For the pessimists the optimists appear dangerous because they believe too much in the goodness of man. And when the optimists then make the act of believing in the goodness of man a requirement for being good, there follows the demonization of the pessimists.

But who is right? Which view on the nature of man is the right one? If we ask soberly, then there is no reason to believe the optimists. Then all experience and logic says that reality is with the pessimists, and since it is dangerous to build your policy on an illusion, it is imperative that the truth be heard in the political debate.

When democracy let the optimists succeed in labelling the pessimists as xenophobes and Islamophobes, it took a catastrophic course. And the media, particularly the taxpayer-subsidised media who have participated in maintaining this illusion, have a particular part of the blame. If democracy is to get back on track, then rational pessimism has to be at the helm again.

That point of view sees the naïveté behind the optimism. And here Jespersen’s and Pittelkow’s book is an essential contribution.

When so many have shared the optimists’ belief that man by nature is good, it is because one saw a connection between oneself being good and believing in the natural goodness of man.

Anyone who didn’t believe in the natural goodness of man had to be evil. And that connection is simply not going to hold.

As an individual, one doesn’t become good by believing in the natural goodness of man, but by being good and helpful, although one realizes that one also has many impulses in the opposite direction.