Danish Muslim cannot coexist with Lars Hedegaard, reports him to the police for “racist comments”

Geert Wilders & Lars Hedegaard

The Muslim happens to be on the same Free Press Society board as Lars Hedegaard. He would like to see that the FPS becomes just a little less free and a little bit more politically correct. He is just doing his Islamic duty.

Islam, however, is not a race but a violent political ideology in the guise of religion….

Denmark: “Muslim girls aren’t human beings” (UPDATED)

Danish Muslim:

“Hedegaard is not accepting the basic premise that one should make a distinction between Islam and Islamism.”

That, in itself, is a rather strange claim, given that only Allah is all knowing. But since  ”moderate Muslims” like Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s PM,  insist that  ” The term “moderate Islam” is ugly and offensive — Islam is Islam and that’s it”- why should it be Lars Hedegaards obligation to sort the hardcore from the -not so- hardcore Muslims?

With thanks to Islam in Europe

Not so moderate Syrian-Danish Muslim Nasr Khadr

Søren Pind (Liberal Party) and Naser Khader (Conservative Party), announced that they’re quitting the Free Press Society’s advisory board.

“Lars Hedegaard’s regret isn’t good enough, since he’s still not accepting the basic premise that one should make a distinction between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religious, while the latter is a dangerous ideology we should fight,” says Naser Khader. Khader adds that he also saw that Hedegaard’s original statement were supported by DPP members, which shows that the Free Press Society is a branch of the DPP.

In his announcement Søren Pind pointed out that he’s never actually been a member of the Free Press Society, but only served on its advisory board. (DA, DA)

There is also a very excellent interview with Lars Hedegaard here, well worth your while, which shows that the man is very knowledgeable and outspoken.

Update 3:

Yilmaz Evcil, deputy chairman of Århus’s integration council, lodged a complaint by the police against Hedegaard.

Evcil wrote in an email that Hedegaard was reported for his racist comment on Muslims on his blog snaphanen.dk and parliamentarian Søren Espersen of the DPP was also reported for racism.

Parish priest Katrine Lilleør demands that Hedegaard quit as head of the Free Press Society, or else she will quit the society’s advisory board.

“I don’t want to be a background group in a society where Muslims are being generalized in any way and shoved aside as an extremist group. Therefore I think that she should quit as chairman, and if he doesn’t quit, then I will quit.” (DA, DA)

Update 2:

Lars Hedegaard regrets his controversial statement that Muslim men rape their female family members and see women as less-worthy birth-machines.

“First, I will apologize, if I gave the impression that I wanted to accuse all Muslims – or most of them – of abusing their children. That of course wasn’t my intention,” writes Lars Hedegaard in a press release.

He emphasizes that his statements are ‘about Islam and not Muslims’, which he says is a crucial distinction.

“Muslims aren’t responsible for being born into a certain religion, and I am completely aware that many of them would like to reform the religious practice and make it conform to Western norms. Unfortunately it’s difficult, what one can convince himself by studying Islam’s canon writings and listening to statements by Islam’s authoritative interpreters – the imams and the ulema.”

Hedegaard says that he’s speaking on his own behalf, and is threatening to sue 180Grader.dk and Berlingske Tidende’s blogger Niels Krause-Kjær, if they don’t retract that he’s calling for lynchings in the following quotes from the interview:

[…] Our leaders do not take this seriously and I am afraid that it will take a public uprising before they will take this seriously. But they must. After the German occupation of Denmark there were quite a few who had collaborated with the enemy who came into very hot water. The same thing could happen here… This cannot be solved with a compromise, it’s either our civilisation or their non-civilisation and barbarism. Our two ways of life are like fire and water. One of them must be victorious.” (DA)

Update: Naser Khadder, integration spokesperson for the Conservative Party, is threatening to quit the Free Press Society. Khadder says that he can’t live with Hedegaard being so generalizing. He feels offended and says that when he started on the Free Press Society’s advisory board, one of his conditions was that it would be more politically open, and not only have DPP members. (DA)

———-

Søren Krarup of the Danish People’s Party (DPP) completely supports Lars Hedegaard’s criticism of Islam. Lars Hedegaard, head of the Free Speech Society, said in a recent interview that Muslim girls were raped by their family.

“He’s absolutely right, and the outrage is wholly because of the ignorance of you journalists,” says Søren Krarup.

In the interview Hedegaard said as follows: “Girls in Muslim families are raped by their uncles, their cousins or their father [...] They are not human beings. They have a function as a a womb – they bear the offspring of the warriors and create new warriors, other than that.. well, they can be used for sexual purposes, but they have no value.”

According to Krarup the evidence can be found in the book “Mødom på Mode”. “It’s a Danish immigrant girl who tells about how she was raped by her uncle, and how she didn’t dare say anything to her own family. He’s absolutely right,” says Krarup.

Jette Dali of the Free Speech Society, who is also a candidate for parliament for the DPP, also agrees with the substance of Hedegaard’s statements, but says that people shouldn’t generalize.

“There’s a kernel of truth in it. There’s more which have been shown in the past,” she says, and adds that there was once a study in Denmark which showed their [ed: Muslim girls and women] loneliness and isolation. It’s obviously not only in Muslim community, but in addition to the attacks, they have to deal with it on their own and can’t count on anybody’s support. Also not from their own parents.

Q: But according to Krarup there’s no issue of generalization

A: It’s not generalizations, because he’s not speaking about Muslims in general, he’s speaking of what Islam says, and what Islam expresses, she says.

Source: Berlingske (Danish)

There is an update here from the Tundra Tabloids:

THE PARALYZING NOTION OF ISLAMISM AND MODERATE ISLAM….

The Paralyzing Notion of Islamism and Moderate Islam
In the on-going public outrage in Denmark about the Danish Free Press Society’s public face, Lars Hedegaard’s, comments about Muslim girls, where he stated that they have no value inside Islam except for creating new warriors for the jihad, and the fact that they can be used as sexual objects, something interesting caught my eye: It was the comment of Naser Khader, who resigned from Free Press Society’s advisory board because of Hedegaard’s statement.

Naser Khader’s comment was as follows:

“Lars Hedegaard’s regret isn’t good enough, since he’s still not accepting the basic premise that one should make a distinction between Islam and Islamism. Islam is a religious, while the latter is a dangerous ideology we should fight.”

Although Hedegaard’s only regret was concerning the fact that his statement had been misunderstood, and not about his statement in itself, the point I want to make lies elsewhere.

Now, if I was to formulate my own view about Islam and Islamism in a similar phrasing as Naser’s, it would be something like this:

“Islamism is just a western word for the aspects in Islam which are not compatible with western values. Islam is a religious, dangerous ideology that we should fight.”

What struck me was the similarities between these two opposing views: The former is the publicly accepted and politically correct view, where Islam itself is refused to be seen as the problem, and the latter is the politically forbidden view, where Islam itself, is seen as the problem.

Actually these two sentences neatly show the whole debate about Islam in the west in a nutshell: On the one hand we have the equation where Islam, as a major religion can not be a problem, but because some kind of a problem clearly exists in connection with Islam, the concept of Islamism is created – and on the other hand we have the equation where Islam equals the problem.

What is interesting in these two equations is that if you take away the concept of Islamism, the first equation automatically turns into the second equation.

So how to take Islamism out of the equation?

If we look at the concept, it becomes apparent that Islamism – with it’s many different names like radical Islam, political Islam, or militant Islam – is just a made-up concept created in the west for the purpose of supporting another, equally imaginary concept called moderate Islam – also known as true Islam or worldly Islam.

It is obvious that these two imaginary concepts were created together, as a pair, as neither of them can exist without the other. However, as both of the concepts support each other, it is clear that moderate Islam is the actual concept that is at the heart of this whole thing, and that the concept of Islamism is created to support the concept of moderate Islam.

After all, Islamism is just a word that was made up for the aspects inside Islam that we don’t agree with in the west: For example, even as the Quran tells him do so, if a Muslim kills infidels, it is Islamism. On the other hand, if a Muslim that treats other Muslims well, as advised in the Quran, he is practicing the so-called true, or moderate Islam.

In other words, everything in Islam that is not compatible with western values is Islamism – and everything else in Islam is moderate Islam.

The only problem is that we can not divide Islam in this way: Islam is a religion that is based on holy scriptures and these holy scriptures simply contain what they contain – everything they contain is Islam, regardless of how we categorize it in the west.

So, as psalmists base their actions on the holy scriptures of Islam, it’s completely absurd to claim that their Islam would not be true Islam.

Actually, if we use the simplified example I gave above, the Muslim who kills infidels and treats other Muslims well, is in fact practicing a more “true” Islam than the Muslim who is only treating other Muslims well, because the latter is putting into effect the commands of the Quran only partially, whereas the former is doing everything that the his holy scriptures are commanding him to do.

On the other hand, as the Quran really commands Muslims to kill infidels, a moderate Islam can not even exist by definition, as long as this and similar commandments stand.

Moderate Muslims of course do exist, but if we were to say it more precisely, we would have to call them bad or lazy Muslims.

And exactly here, I think, lies the key to this whole optical illusion where Islam mystically turns into Islamism and moderate Islam: People do not understand that the fact that moderate Muslims exist, does not in any way prove that moderate Islam exists.

Actually this misconception is very understandable and it goes somewhat like this: “There’s a lot of Muslims in the world who are not terrorists – they are all practicing moderate Islam.”

What these people do not understand is that the Qurans in the homes of those nice Muslims says the same thing about killing infidels than the Qurans of the terrorists: Regardless of whether you find the Quran in a home of a nice, moderate Muslim or in the ashes of a suicide-bomber, it says the same thing – Kill the infidels.

So Islam itself doesn’t become more moderate no matter how many Muslims are nice, as I am sure many Muslims of course are.

In other words, moderate Islam does not exist before the parts of the Quran that are not compatible with western values are either removed, or until somebody from inside Islam, who has the authority to do so, says that those parts are no longer relevant in today’s world.

Until one of the above-mentioned scenarios become reality, moderate Islam does not exist – and it must be mentioned here that in the case of the second scenario becoming a reality – where the person with the necessary Islamic authority would be discarding central parts of the Quran as outdated – this person must have considerable support from inside the Muslim population before we can start talking about a moderate Islam with any relevance.

The situation being such, and as at least I personally have never heard of any kind of moderate Islam that would have any relevance, we will proceed from the basic premise that no such thing exists as moderate Islam.

The concept of Islamism is also a totally absurd concept as Islamism (in the sense as the word is commonly used) is included in Islam and can not be separated from Islam before somebody from inside Islam does it in one of the above-mentioned ways.

So, regardless of which side we approach the subject from (meaning from the concept of moderate Islam or Islamism), in the end we end up with the holy scriptures of Islam. For this reason I advise everybody who might find themselves talking about the subject to really read at least the key-points in the Quran, or at the very least, to read the chronologically latest part of the Quran, that is, to read the so-called sura of the sword. Also abrogation is a concept one should be able to explain. As an absolute minimum, we should at least be able to explain the difference between Muslims and Islam.

The misconception about Islamism and moderate Islam must be corrected. It must be corrected because if we can not prove the existence of moderate Islam, and Islamism is just a name we have invented in the west for the un-acceptable actions of Muslims done in the name of Islam, the whole conceptual structure that is preventing people from seeing the connection between Islam and the things done in the name of Islam will break, and when it breaks, it will take out the foundation of everything that is harmful in today’s political correctness.

Now let’s go back to the publicly accepted equation that the politicians and the media is using:

“Islam is a religious ideology which we should support, while Islamism is a dangerous ideology that we should fight.”

Then, let’s add a new factor into the equation:

Islamism = Islam And suddenly the equation changes into:

“Islam is a religious, dangerous ideology that we should fight.”

- WFT

Tagged as: cannot coexist, free speech, Islam & Islamism, Lars Hedegaard, moderate Islam, moderate muslims