14. juni 2017

“Man kan regulere ozonlaget… men man kan ikke forhindre folk i at gå på motorvejen i Sønderjylland”

For et par uger siden valgte præsident Donald Trump, at trække USA ud af Paris-aftalen, en global juridisk bindende aftale om nedsættelse af kultveilte-udledning baseret på frivillighed. De rige lande skal understøtte de fattige – Global omfordeling med CO2 som stikord. Det er 100 år siden bolsjevikkerne tog magten i Skt. Petersborg, og vi døjer stadig med reminiscensen fra Lenins imperialismeteori.

Lidt i samme boldgade. Da jeg i fredags rastede i Vejle under et skybrud, forklarede en ikke helt appelsinfri mand mig, at vandmængderne skyldes ‘chemtrails’, de der kemiske striber i luften. Forskellen på ‘videnskabens ideologiserede kompromis’ og det ikke-orienterede suger til sig på nettet i sene nattetimer, er ikke altid så stor.

Niels Lillelund kommenterer i Jyllands-Posten – Er danske politikere for fine til at tage vare på Danmark? (kræver login).

“Vreden, gudinde, besyng, som greb samtlige danske politikere ved den vældige Trumps trækken sig ud af klimaaftalen, eller var det vrede? Det var vrede iblandet tårer, i hvert fald, tårer på klodens vegne, intet mindre, og det var da også uretfærdigt; nu havde vi lige reddet kloden i Paris efter først at have made this banging i København, og så kommer den dumme Trump og ødelægger det hele.

Som den ofte så skarpe Mark Steyn sagde det, så er det påfaldende, at venstrefløjen mener at have styr på himmelske forhold, herunder ozonlag og temperaturen i himlen, men ikke mener, at jordiske grænser lader sig kontrollere. Til venstrefløjen hører her næsten samtlige danske politikere, ingen nævnt, ingen glemt; man kan regulere ozonlaget i 2050, men man kan ikke forhindre folk i at gå på motorvejen i Sønderjylland. Man kan skrue ned for varmen på hele kloden, men man kan ikke holde orden på Christianshavns Torv. Og så videre. …

Det store billede og et globalt udsyn er det fineste, at tage vare på Danmark er ikke fint nok til rigtige politikere anno 2017.”

(Mark Steyn i debat om Paris-aftalen, Fox news, 1. juni 2017; Foto: Youtube)

Mark Steyn: … this sums up the absolute decadence of the political class. If you are blown up at a Ariana Grande-koncert, the mayor of London, and the primeminister of Britain says, ‘Get used to it, we can’t to anything about it. But if want us to lower the thermostat of the planet a third of a degree in 2100, that we can do. Spending trillions, its bunkers. Fix the Ariana Grande-problem. You should be able to do that, and if that works out, then adjust the planet.

[…]

Mark Stey: This isn’t even a tough call. Its a meaningless agreement… I think precisely because it is so meaningless. Because if you say to them, ‘Let’s enforce the border’ — ‘What? Are you out of your mind? That’s just a natural phenomenon. We can’t enforce the border. People are going to be coming in anyway.’ But if you say to them, ‘We can control the very heavens,’ that, we can do. And it’s actually literally insane. The less it has to do with your life, the more the left is invested in it.



2. oktober 2015

Steyn: “.. man har denne forestilling om, at islam skal være 50,1 pct. af det hele, før vi har situationen”

Jyllands-Posten bragte torsdag et læseværdigt interview med Mark Steyn, der har en særlig evne til at skære igennem. Citater fra ‘Vi magter ikke at forsvare os, for vi har glemt hvorfor …’ (kræver login; v/ Niels Lillelund).

“Vi har nogle af verdenshistoriens mest mislykkede stater, som befinder sig en kort sejltur fra verdenshistoriens mest succesriger stater, men disse succesrige, fremgangsrige stater er svage. Om de har den militære kapacitet er ikke spørgsmålet, for de savner den kulturelle vilje til at forsvare grænsen. Befolkningstallet eksploderer i Afrika, og alle disse mennesker ser på deres tablets, deres fjernsyn, deres Facebook, og de ser, at Europa er lige til at snuppe – man kan bare vade ind. Så hvorfor skulle de ikke gøre det? Hvorfor skulle Monte Carlo være en enklave for verdens mest velhavende mennesker, når man bare kan komme og tage det?”

“Og Angela Merkel siger, at alle er velkomne, og ophæver dermed egentlig forestillingen om en nationalstat, hvis ledere er forpligtet på at varetage borgernes interesse – dette er egentlig slutningen på forestillingen om en nation. …”

“Ja, men hvad har Europa med Syrien at gøre? Vi havde en ikke-interventions politik, som kom oven i USA’s frygtelige fejltagelser, som fik Syrien til at implodere, men hvordan er det Europas ansvar? Jeg spørger helt alvorligt, for hvis det er vores ansvar, må det jo ordnes på åstedet. Man kan ikke løse problemet ved at flytte hele Syrien eller Libyen eller hvilket land, der nu måtte kollapse næste gang, til Europa. At det er vores ansvar, er et imperialistisk argument, det er den hvide mands byrde. Og sjovt nok, alle disse steder var faktisk bedre steder at være i gamle dage, i imperialismens dage, de er forbi nu, men vi føler os stadig moralsk ansvarlige, men hør nu her: Hvis man er moralsk ansvarlig, så gør man verden til et bedre sted. Man flytter ikke bare problemer fra de kollapsede lande og hertil. Det er ikke en løsning.”

“… Den hvide mands byrde – det er faktisk en ærligere betegnelse for situationen, fordi den anerkender, at Danmark har været i stand til at opbygge en bedre og mere effektiv samfundsorden end f. eks. Syrien; så hvis man tager sin humanitære forpligtelse alvorligt, er det til Syriens fordel at blive mere som Danmark og mindre som Yemen. Men vi har ikke den kulturelle selvsikkerhed til at gøre det. Du kan ikke have en humanitær forpligtelse uden at være villig til at intervenere, du løser ikke en humanitær forpligtelse ved at invitere Syrien til Danmark – og ødelægge Danmark.”

“… vi magter ikke nationbuilding – og alle disse afghanere og irakere i Europa er i virkeligheden et billede på den moderne amerikanske form for imperialisme. Men vi magter ikke opgaven i de lande, vi invaderer. Vi ser stiltiende til, mens voksne mænd misbruger drenge, for det er deres ‘kultur’, vi bestikker landsbyhøvdinge med Viagra, så de kan voldtage deres niårige brude.Hvor er da vores moralske, humanitære ansvar? Jeg er en gammeldags kolonialist i den henseende. En ordentlig kolonimagt bygger veje, skoler etc. og ikke korstogsfæstninger med Dunkin’ Donuts og McDonald’s, mens resten af landet kan få lov at henligge i ruiner.”

… man har denne forestilling om, at islam skal være 50,1 pct. af det hele, før vi har situationen, men se på Nordirland, hvor nogle få dusin, hvis navne man kendte, var i stand at skabe et ustabilt, kaotisk samfund. Problemet er, at lige fra Muhammedtegninger til grænsekontrol, så magter vi det ikke, for vi forstår ganske enkelt ikke, på hvilket grundlag vi skal protestere og forsvare os. Vi har glemt det, så vi accepterer alt.”

Oploadet Kl. 19:12 af Kim Møller — Direkte link10 kommentarer


30. september 2015

Mark Steyn i Danmark, 26. sep. 2015: “… this issue has to be won before there’s nothing left to win.”

Jeg er ikke fan af nogen, men der er noget over Mark Steyn. Herunder en række citater fra lørdagens 49 minutter lange tale i Landstingssalen på Christiansborg. Talen kan ses på Youtube, og det kan kun anbefales.

“… I can tell you what a thrill it is. Just a few years ago you had to be in this much danger, you had to go to the sunni-triangle or Helmand province, now you can just go to Copenhagen.”

“The television show South Park had a very mild Muhammed joke in it. In fact they had a joke about not showing Muhammed – thats another of the changes now. Its not that you can’t make a joke showing Muhammed, you can’t make a joke about not showing Muhammed.”

“She thought that making a joke about Muhammed, was like making a joke about Mormon underwear. Everybody will found it hilarious. Instead she found out that people are far more sensitive about Muhammed, than they are about Mormon underwear…”

“… I have to say, that their is no greater betrayal of western inheritance, that the words president Obama used in United Nations three years ago.”

“… we managed to insult them in death, as Douglas was talking about. We demonstrated how much we value free speech by having a hashtag, and carrying a pencil, and none of those people who seized on ‘Je suis Charlie’ cause de jour from Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande to George Clooney, he waved a pencil. Dame Helen Mirren from the artier end of the british filmindustry she wore a little pencil decorative brosche – thats how much that she was Charlie. … Thousands in the streets of Paris, the millions across the internet none of them were villing to do the one thing that would have mattered and show the reason why they died.”

The cowardly and evasive support the world showed this january, I think it was a very clear message to working cartoonists and writers in the limits of global solidarity for free speech, and what its likely to go on next time: ‘Oh, oh, don’t worry. We’ll be sad when you die too. Maybe maybe maybe, not quite as sad as Charlie Hebdo, because like, been there done that, but don’t worry we will still be a little bit sad.”

(Mark Steyn i Landstingssalen, Christiansborg, København, 26. september 2015)

“Security has effektively become the new shut-up… Security grounds are the new shut-up, and that is why this issue has to be won before there’s nothing left to win.”

“… but when a few brave people, like Lars Hedegaard and other actually point out that the emperor has no clothes, that the emperor of multiculturalism stands entirely naked, people don’t thank the little boy for pointing him out, they club him to a pulp, they don’t wonna hear from him. They have no desire for the little boy to speak up. That is why, whats going on with the refugee crisis, is like a perverse inversion of the Emperors New Clothes. … We have entirely inverted the basic principle of Hans Christian Andersens story, and we know punish every little boy that point out that our rulers have no clothes.”

“Shortly after the cartoon crisis I had the honour of meeting president Bush in The Oval Office. And I know that people think, that president Bush nok are the most articulate of american leaders, he didn’t have the sophisticated wit of Monsieur Sarkozy for exsample. So people have mixed views about president Bush, but I asked him about these islamic provocations, and he said a marvelous line to me, that he wasn’t really interessted in trying to worry what upset muslims. He said ‘Its always something. If its not the Crusades, then its the cartoons.’ And I thought that it was a terrific line and that it actually should be on a bumpersticker because it capsulates entirely Islams lack of proportion in its response. It doesn’t matter what you do…” (Youtube)

“… the reason it has been a disastrous ten years, its because we utterly failed”

“A guy who died 1300 years ago, he’s not in the witness protection program. Its Lars who’s in the witness protection program, but nobody in the rotten media here pixelate his face. We pixelate some bloke who died in the seventh century.”

“And even when they all wound up dead because the New York Times, London Times, Le Monde haven’t had the courage to show those cartoons ten years ago, and then placed the burden om Charlie Hebdo. Even when they are lying in a pool of blood in their offices of Paris, all the bigfoot media went on and made the same mistakes all over again: They wouldn’t show us the Charlie Hebdo covers. As Douglas said, these are people who congratulate themselves, its an industry that gives themselves awards back in full for bravery and courage, courage and bravery, all the time. Far more than soldiers and firemen do. Soldiers and firemen don’t hold award nights giving themselves – ‘You incredibly brave, you singlehandedly challenged the Taliban machinegun nest’, they don’t hold award nights for themselves, the way the media do. When they had one opportunity to show bravery they failed ten years ago, and they failed again in january…”

“Our approch now is not to win the debate, but to ensure the debate not taking place, because we don’t want all this unpleasant terorism.”

“A nation… way out of the perifery of the horizon somewhere up near the arctic circle.”

(Se evt. No Pasaran og Trykkefrihed.dk: I, II)

“The cartoon crisis confirmed to our enemies, that we dont really believe in our selves anymore. That we don’t defend our core liberties, and that you can steal them from us, one little bit at a time. A cartoon is a small thing, its not the decline and fall of the Roman Empire… A joke is an important signifier of a society. A joke is a small thing, but its part of the societal glue…”

“The head of jokes at the Metropolitan Police in London will determine whether its illegal for people to see this joke. They might be laughing at the wrong joke.”

“You should just say: Look we are in a free society, and we dont regulate jokes. You wanna live somewhere where they regulate jokes, go to Zimbabwe where its illegal, there’s so many jokes about Mugabes penis falling of due to syphilis, and it being placed by a rubberdick made by the chinese. They pasted a law saying: ‘You cant make a joke about Mugabe having a chinesemade rubberpenis’.”

“In free societies we do not regulate jokes. If you dont like the joke, fine! But if you wanna get upset about it… grow up, get a life, as president Bush said, if its not the Crusades, its the cartoons.”

“The veil is descending on us, and we are staggered around like a batterede wife trying to persuade ourselves that the person slugging us in the kisser means well and is only doing it because they care about us.”

“… these muslim readers are so sensitive that all over the internet you can be chopping some guys head of in Syria or Iraq and it will go viral, and recruit hundreds of thousands people around the world to support your cause.”

“… so its starts in Denmark, this peripheral nothing little country up near the arctic circle, then they move to Canada, this peripheral nothing little country up near the arctic circle, next you know, Yale University has turned Connecticut into some obscure peripheral country up near the arctic circle. How far does it have to creep? How far does it have to creep – This is how we loose!”

“People said to me, why are you having it in Copenhagen… Why dont you just hold it on the internet. We can hold it on the internet, but then its just ‘Je suis Charlie’ oh, I got a cute hashtag. Its like when Michelle Obama when the nigerian girls were kidnapped by Boko Haram and she held up a hasthtag on a piece of cardboard. I didn’t even know they worked on cardboards, hashtags, I thought you had to be on a computer to get them to work. Bring back our girl – The hashtags did not work. The girls have alle been sold into sexslavery.

“Then they said to me, don’t hold it in Copenhagen… Why don’t you hold it in Texas or New Hampshire, where, if someone goes ‘Allah u-Akbar’ everybody will fire back and shoot him dead, and there will be no problem. I kind of like that one to be honest, but I am not prepared to surrender an inch of the civilized world to barbarians, which is the choice we have been faced with.”

“I’ll take the same view to the civilized world as Islam take to the Dar al-Islam. Once we hold this, we hold this forever, and we will not surrender it.”

“They represent us, they do not represent some abstractions like one world multiculturalism, they do not represent foreign people… They represent the citizenry of the nation that they are elected to and one day western leaders will learn that lesson.”

“… all we can do is live as free people, and refuse to accept this malign alliance of soft totalitarians and hard totalitarians telling us we cant live as free people.”

“No matter how many people they kill, it will never be enough because they gonna have to kill everyone. .. Live as free people and don’t let the hatespeech-fairies and the islamic enforcers, you know, the good cop bad cop of totalitarism. Don’t let them tell you, that you’re not free. You are free…”

Oploadet Kl. 14:29 af Kim Møller — Direkte link12 kommentarer
Arkiveret under:
Denne weblog er læst af siden 22. juni 2003.

 



 

Vælg selv beløb



Blogs


Meta
RSS 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0
Valid XHTML
WP






MediaCreeper