please your help

[fundiver199]

Apart from the very good reasons, soreng has quoted, there is also a serious practical obstacle. How do you determine, what religion people have? By asking them? Or how? And if you ask them, how do you know, they are not lying? It reminds me a bit of, when I travel to several south east asian countries. Before passing though immigration control, you need to fill out a form and answer questions such as “do you carry drugs” or “do you carry firearms”. Well if I did, I probably would not answer “yes”, would I? So why even bother to ask me?

To solve the problem, nazi Germany mapped the decent (afstamning) of all german citizens to determine, who were jews, and who were not. And those, who very deemed by the government to be jews, then had several of their rights taken away from them, regardless of weather or not they actually considered themselfes as jews or practiced jewish religion. Later and rather famously, the german government went a step further and simply killed most of the people, they had deemed to be "jews".

And do we really want to go down this path again, even though it would hopefully “only” go to the first step of taking some rights away from those people, we deemed to be "muslims" solely on the basis of, who their parents and grandparents are?

I surely dont.

[mh1]

@ Psalm12 - there are millions of Muslims in the world - do you seriously think that your allegation that 'Muslims have openly declared war on Denmark and Europe and the whole free world' is true??

I know a great many Muslims who have NOT declared such a war. Their country has not declared such a war either. The majority of the more than 1 million Muslims in Germany for example have not done so. Neither has the majority of the about 70 million Muslims in Turkey. Christian Germans on the other hand, has declared war on Denmark a great number of times ...

[Psalm12]

@fundiver, I'm not saying I particularly want to go that direction. I'm just asking what keeps the Danish government from drawing those lines when the lives of some of our politicians and leaders have been openly threatened in the name of Islam. I just think it is somewhat hypocritical to make immigration laws that exclude people on the basis of characteristics they think are common to muslims, when the real issue in their mind is that they just don't want muslims. And I am not sure that Denmark doesn't have a legal right based on the publicity muslims have made for themselves. If the threats had not been made, I would understand it.

@mh, war is not what is used to be, it is not confined to countries anymore, which makes it harder to discern who is warring.

[mh1]

Psalm12, that was not an answer to my question.

'Muslims' have NOT declared war on Denmark and Europe and the whole free world.

[Psalm12]

@mh, of course not all muslims go by the book, just as not all Christians, Catholics, Jews, or members of any group go by their books. But I have read the book. And since you insist (I may get in trouble here) I'll go on with this.

After 9-11, there was not one peep from any official spokesman of any muslim group in the USA protesting that action - not until a popular talk-show host ranted and raved about that fact for about a week, and then a guy from some obscure muslim group came on her show and made an anemic effort to appear to say something against it, but when the conversation got down to brass tacks, he revealed that he and they really were not against it. If this is not what Islam is about, why was there not immediately a public declaration from an official representative of Islam in the USA that they do not support such actions? Something to think about, and something to never forget.

I am still searching for it, but there was an article on the net somewhere which I have printed out a few years ago, where Denmark, Europe and the USA were specifically named in that order. If you care to see it, I will post the link when I find it again.

[fundiver199]

@psalm

If you believe, that there exist some kind of emergency situation, which could justify the suspension of normal principles and laws, that is very clearly not the case. In the past 10 years, the number of people killed in Denmark by jihadists is 0, while the number of people killed in trafic accidents is around 3.000-4.000. This is partly due to the good work of the PET. But still it demonstrates quite clearly the real scale of the threat, those people represent. Or rather the lack thereoff.

[mh1]

@ Psalm12, I really don't know which book you are talking about.

And I repeat: there are millions of Muslims in the world who have NOT declared war on neither Denmark, nor Europe nor 'the free world' what ever you mean by that.

As for your allegation that no Muslim leaders spoke out against 9/11, this is just an example:
"Mustafa Mashhur, General Guide, Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt; Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan, Pakistan; Muti Rahman Nizami, Ameer, Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh, Bangladesh; Shaykh Ahmad Yassin, Founder, Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas), Palestine; Rashid Ghannoushi, President, Nahda Renaissance Movement, Tunisia; Fazil Nour, President, PAS – Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Malaysia; and 40 other Muslim scholars and politicians:
“The undersigned, leaders of Islamic movements, are horrified by the events of Tuesday 11 September 2001 in the United States which resulted in massive killing, destruction and attack on innocent lives. We express our deepest sympathies and sorrow. We condemn, in the strongest terms, the incidents, which are against all human and Islamic norms. This is grounded in the Noble Laws of Islam which forbid all forms of attacks on innocents. God Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an: ‘No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another’ "

See: http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statemen ... terrorism/

[Psalm12]

why was there not immediately a public declaration from an official representative of Islam in the USA

Even Saudi Arabia was able to come up with a statement immediately, and way before any of the American muslims did! And before Dr. Laura berated the American muslim community for not saying anything.

Ok, so that answers my question about why DF and possibly others can't come out and say what they really mean, although they have done that once, but they can't do any more than that.

[fundiver199]

The whole point is still, that people are individuals and not members of a certain group. If an individual have expressed points of views, which give the intelligence service good reason to beleive, that he represent a threat against public security, it is of course legal to deny that person a visa or a residence permit. But it is not legal to to so, only because he is jewish, and another jewish man have made threads to kill the prime minister or whatever.

And again: The western counties are not at war with 1,5 billion muslims or with their religion. It is at war with some jihadist rebel groups and terrorist groups around the world, which is completely similar to West Germany being at war with some leftist terrorist groups like Rote Arme Fraction 30 years ago.

And actually former US president George Bush made a quite important point out of expressing that immideatly after september 11 2001. So I am a bit surpriced, this still hasn´t sunk in with some people here in Denmark even now 11 years later.

[fundiver199]

And just to sum it up again:

When we are talking about work related migration, there is nothing to prevent Denmark from giving preference to some nationalities against others, make a quota system for the green card scheeme, or whatever politicians might want to do.

But to say that a danish citizen can not live in Denmark with his spouse, solely because the spouse is from e.g. Turkye, would be a clear violation of human rights, since it would be discriminatory.

Denmark only has an obligation to treat its own citizens equally, but a legislation like that (which is of course, what DPP really want - that is no secret) would lead to indirect discrimination against danish citizens based on their ethnic origin.

Lets take the two kids of my philippine wife and our daugther as an example and say, that the family moved here to Denmark. At the age of 18, all 3 kids would hopefully be danish citizens. But because of their origin, they are far more likely than other danish citizens to find a spouse in the Philippines.

This is not because there is "abuse of the rules" or arranged marriages or anything like that. It is simply because the origin of their mother mean, that they would probably be going on vacation to the Philippines far more often than an average danish citizen, they would have friends and family there, they speak the language, they understand the culture etc.

So a law saying, that you can bring a spouse from the US to Denmark but not a spouse from the Philippines, would expose them to a large degree of indirect discrimination based on their ethnic origin. And for that reason such a legislation would be a violation of fundamental human rights.

The former government claimed, that it was not a violation of human rights to demand philippine spouses to pass the immigration test but not spouses from the US. And as long as the immigration test was only a minor obstacle and inconvenience like having to apply for a visa in advance rather than just getting it at the border, that might be true.

But the former goverment had planned to raise the level of danish language knowledge reguired to pass the test to about 50% of the content of the entire integration programmed, which people would then in essence have to complete by their own initiative and expense before getting their residence permit.

And I am absolutly 100% convinced, this was an illegal legislation. It is in my opinion extremely embassasing for the civil servants in Justitsministeriet, that they allowed this to be passed through. They were simply not doing their job properly, when they said, that this "might" be ok. They were behaving like prostitutes servantly complying with the political wishes of the minister, and not like responsible professionals.

For reference Søren Pind also wanted to exempt citizens of the OECD-countries from some of the other requirements for family reunification, but the civil servants said "no" to that. And to this day it has not been published, what else he exactly wanted to do.

[Psalm12]

And I am absolutly 100% convinced, this was an illegal legislation.

Which is exactly why I could not understand what stopped them from just excluding muslims because they are muslims. Obviously, as mh has pointed out, y'all had a different experience than we did in the USA with regard to 9-11, which explains why it is so hard for them to push their full agenda through, even with some of the public declarations that have been made later.

Perhaps some of the Danes who don't see it the same way as you do have family/friends in the USA who were there at that time. All we heard in our press was "war against terror", which transcends countries and nationalities and points directly to ideologies.

So I am a bit surpriced, this still hasn´t sunk in with some people here in Denmark even now

Besides, there are plenty of people who don't believe that moderate muslims will remain moderate, or that they really are what they represent themselves to be.

[mh1]

@ Psalm12, as-salamu alaykum. I pity you.

[soreng]

@PSalm12 : Can you please take your political oppinions to a place where someone care to hear them? ÆUG is a non political organisation, fighting for danes right to live together with their spouse, and would you please respect that. ÆUG does not, unlike you, have prejudgement about an entire religion, based on bad american press.

These pages will support your view of roughly 1/5 of the earths population.
http://www.dnsb.info/
http://www.danskfolkeparti.dk/

I am sure you know alot more pages than i do. There was just the first two that came to mind.

[Psalm12]

I'm sorry if I have been misunderstood. I was not stating my own personal political opinion, only trying to make sense of the circus created by the DF by ascribing characteristics to entire groups and making legislation that affects their lives and mine, based on their political opinion.

Fundiver thought it was odd that so many people have not shed their prejudices and I thought I had a possible explanation why, since I was in the USA on 9-11 and heard what everyone else there heard.

Please do not read between the lines of what I write. I write what I mean and mean what I write, nothing more. I apologize if I have offended anyone.

[fundiver199]

Which is exactly why I could not understand what stopped them from just excluding muslims because they are muslims.

Because it is equally illegal to discriminate against people based on their religion as based on their national/ethnic origin, its just the same. And because, as I have already explained, there is no easy way to determine, what religion people have.