Posts Tagged ‘Ilmar Reepalu’

Swedish media expressing surprisingly open criticism of Islamism

Wednesday, December 15th, 2010

Last weekend an Islamist blew himself up in Stockholm.

The terror attack in Sweden’s capital city killed only the terrorist, lightly injuring two passersby.

The Swedish Islamist terrorist had a total of 8 bombs with him: one car bomb, which exploded. One explosive backpack packed with sharp nails which he intended to throw into a shop filled with Christmas shoppers but which he failed to detonate. And a total of 6 pipe-bombs packed around his waist, of which only one exploded.

There has been a lot of in-depth speculation here in Sweden about what might have caused a Swedish Muslim to commit such a horrific crime – a crime not only against the innocent passersby he selected for death but also against his own family (he was married with young children) and also of course against Sweden’s Muslim population.

While Sweden’s politicians adopted a predictable and embarrassingly subdued tone framed by political correctness, most of the Swedish media have been surprisingly open, critical and analytical about the attack itself and the Islamist pressure that nurtured it.

Left-wing Aftonbladet, normally a newspaper that makes a living concocting stories about Jews harvesting organs from Muslims in the Middle East, published a refreshingly honest article (link in Swedish) written by Johan Hakelius about the dangers of political correctness strangling our politicians’ analysis of the violent and racist political ideology that is islamism. This is probably the best article written on the subject in Sweden this year.

Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter, not exactly renowned for tackling the issue of Islamism, writes that there is no Swedish plan for dealing with extremists (link in Swedish) and says openly that these extremists are Islamists. There are many vital considerations when drawing up a plan for dealing with Islamist extremists. One of the most important is to tackle the problem without disrupting Swedish society’s relationship with other practitioners of Islam. What is interesting is that ever louder voices are beginning to be heard both in Sweden and abroad about the use of ethnic profiling as one of many parallel methods for dealing with the problem.

Among the very best, open and honest articles written on the subject of Islamism and the groundswell of violence it brings with it is a series of pieces written by Mats Tunehag, International Affairs Editor at Världen Idag. He asks tongue-in-cheek whether the Swedish suicide bomber was perhaps a member of the Liberal Party, or whether in fact he belonged to a political party with a far more sinister world-view. He asks readers to answer a simple question: who would you rather stand beside on a crowded street – a bible-thumping Christian street-preacher or a committed jihadist just out of training camp in Jordan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia. Tunehag asks readers to answer another question: which society and religion preach on a daily basis such tenets as antisemitism, jihad and the murder of those who “insult Islam”. He wants readers to consider who it is who is behind the murder threats against Swedish artist Lars Vilks – were the threats made by card-carrying Conservatives, devout Roman Catholics, peaceful Buddhists, eco-concerned Green Party members? Or by people with an unshakeable conviction that Islam – and their particular interpretation of Islam – shall prevail, whatever the cost to human life?

In another article Mats Tunehag asks the thought-provoking question: “What is moderate Islam? Does it exist?” (link in Swedish). And in yet another article Tunehag writes (link in Swedish) that “Taking Islam out of any discussion on the terrorist act in Stockholm would be like taking communism out of any discussion on Stalin’s terrorism and Mao’s mass-murder.”

The Swedish media, in other words, are by and large doing some pretty thorough soul-searching.

Among the country’s political elite, however, political correctness is preventing the adoption of a cohesive strategy for dealing with Islamism, although thankfully Swedish media and social analysts are showing an interest in discussing and highlighting the problem.

The media appear to realise the importance of differentiating between followers of the religion of Islam and followers of the violent, fanatical and racist political ideology of Islamism, although that difference is often blurred both by Islamists and by followers of Islam.

Islamism without Islam would not be possible. Islamists succeed in gaining ground only because they have understood that the western world’s devotion to political correctness prevents criticism of Islamism because of the similarity of its name to the religion of Islam. A simple ruse – and very effective.

And this is the weakness that social saboteurs and political wannabees such as Sweden’s Jan Guillou (link in Swedish) exploit to support Islamism and attack the fundamental democratic values of Swedish society. Jan Guillou is widely regarded as having been a Soviet spy acting against his own country, Sweden. Guillou refers to the Swedish suicide bomber as a “weirdo”. Watch this film clip about a British Islamist “weirdo” who sent 52 people to their deaths. Guillou, who exploits Sweden’s freedoms to write openly in the press, does not characterise these people as terrorists or mass-murderers who ought to be tackled with the combined might of the Swedish state and Swedish society, but instead as harmless-sounding “weirdos”.

Guillou makes the outrageous claim that these “weirdos” are being targeted by state and society simply because of the colour of their skin. Not because of the bombs they wrap around their torsos, not because people of this ilk favour killing Jews wherever they live – yes, in Sweden – and not because their violence and aggression are making it impossible for Jews to live in Sweden’s third-largest city Malmö.

Guillou is also an avid supporter of Palestinian terror group PFLP. Guillou has taken part in this organisation’s actions and he is more than happy to distribute its propaganda. Among much else, the PFLP killed a large number of civilians – Jews, Christians and Muslims alike – throughout the Middle East and Europe and hijacked a number of civilian aircraft. The PFLP is a racist organisation. Sweden’s Jan Guillou encourages Swedes to support the PFLP. Enough said.

Today we are facing a possible ramping-up of Islamist violence in Sweden. The more responsible media are protesting against the violence and working to spotlight it while at the same time trying to ensure that the rest of Sweden’s Muslim citizens are not drawn into the maelstrom generated by fanatical Islamists. At the same time, we have useful idiots like Jan Guillou doing their immature best to stoke the fires of hatred, violence and death. He appears to believe that the mayhem on Stockholm’s streets is an inspiring theme for a trashy dime novel.

It isn’t. This is serious. This is about Swedish lives and Swedish democracy. Jan Guillou’s track record speaks volumes about his regard for Swedish lives and Swedish democracy. Do we really want to develop in the direction Guillou so eagerly espouses, with overseas organisations and countries issuing travel advisories for Sweden, as did the Simon Wiesenthal Center recently? Guillou is naturally not alone; there are plenty of other Swedish heavyweights who have what can be euphemistically termed an “unorthodox” view of democracy and human rights, such as Malmö mayor Ilmar Reepalu. In Malmö it is the Islamist mob that decides who may and may not live in Reepalu’s city – the city’s Jews, who have lived there for 100 years and more, are leaving in droves. Reepalu says that if Swedish Jews do not publicly criticise Israel, they have only themselves to blame and must understand the treatment meted out to them by his city’s violent Islamists. He makes no corresponding demand of Muslims in his city that they must distance themselves from Islamism, or Iran, or Saudi Arabia, or Somalia, in order to be allowed to live in peace.

This is where the Islamists of Sweden draw their succour.

It is high time that someone with suitable legal clout took a good, long look at these people. Overseas media may also want to contact Jan Guillou and Ilmar Reepalu and ask them about their vision for tomorrow’s Sweden.

Want to find out more about how Sweden is perceived abroad? Watch the clip below.

Mayday, Mayday from Sweden

Thursday, May 6th, 2010

Want to know how Sweden is perceived from its neighbour Finland’s perspective?

Read Tundra Tabloids for a view of how Ilmar Reepalu, the extremist left-wing mayor of Malmö in Southern Sweden, celebrated May Day.

His statements and sentiments are shocking, to say the least.

Related links:

Ilmar Reepalu - from this site

Malmö - from this site

Are the Swedish Pension Fund’s ethics governed by anti-Israel policy?

Wednesday, April 7th, 2010

Ethics aren’t always ethical.

The following is the English translation of an article first published by Lennart Eriksson of Sweden in his blog Sapere Aude!. Mr Eriksson is perhaps best known abroad for having been sacked from his high-level job at the state-run Swedish Board of Migration because his manager found out that in the privacy of his own home, Mr Ericsson maintained a blog in which he claimed that Israel was a democracy that had the right to exist. Following a court case Mr Ericsson was entirely vindicated, fully reinstated and all legal and other fees were paid by his employer, the Swedish Board of Migration - which is a Swedish state authority. The Swedish taxpayers footed the bill for this official venture into Orwellian mind-control territory.

A while ago the Swedish Pension Fund’s Ethical Council announced that it would divest itself of all shares in the Israeli company, Elbit Systems, since the company has supplied monitoring systems for the protective barrier that protects Israeli civilians from terror attacks emanating from the West Bank. Israel is currently constructing this barrier and some of it is routed on land that in some quarters is referred to as ‘occupied territory’.

Sweden’s English-language online paper, The Local, reported on the AP-Fonden Ethical Council’s announcement. And here is what the Swedish Fjärde AP-Fonden itself had to say on its website.

“The Ethical Council has:

“in the first quarter of 2010 recommended the AP funds to exclude the company Elbit Systems Ltd from their portfolios due to the fact that dialogue between the Council and the company has not produced the intended results. All the AP funds have decided to follow this recommendation. The Ethical Council recommended that Elbit Systems Ltd should be excluded from each portfolio because it deems that the company can be linked to violations of fundamental conventions and norms through its active development, delivery and maintenance of a custom-made monitoring system for certain parts of the separation barrier being built on the West Bank. The Council has noted that both the European Union and the Swedish government consider the part of the separation barrier being built on West Bank to be illegal under international law. This position is also supported by the advisory opinion from 2004 by the International Court of Justice regarding the separation barrier.”

Sweden’s Fjärde AP-fonden is thus one of the pension funds that have decided to follow the recommendation. Just like all the other pension funds, this pension fund is a state institute operating under the aegis of the Swedish Ministry of Finance.

So our pension savings are not to be invested in Elbit Systems because the company has developed, supplied and maintains a product used for the protective barrier. That is thus the position of the Swedish state authorities.

There can thus be little doubt that Volvo machines were and still are used in the construction of the protective barrier. So why do the Swedish pension funds exclude only the Israeli company, Elbit Systems, and not the Swedish company, Volvo? Exactly what dialogue has the Ethical Council had with Volvo since 2007? What concrete actions did that dialogue lead to?

Now it turns out that this same pension fund, Fjärde AP-fonden, had no less than twenty million nine hundred and ninetyfour thousand two hundred and ninetyfive (20,884,295) shares in Volvo, valued at more than one billion Swedish kronor, as per January 1, 2010, as can be seen here (in Swedish, pdf).

In fact, as far back as 2007 there was plenty of information about the fact that machines manufactured by Volvo were used for the construction of the protective barrier. This can be read here and here, and it is also possible via these links to see Volvo construction machines in action.

If there is any reasonable consistency in the Ethical Council’s deliberations, it should now immediately recommend that the Swedish pension funds divest all their shares in Volvo, exactly as with the Israeli company. As long as it declines to do so, the Ethical Council’s ethics are seen clearly for what they actually are – a means of discriminating against the Israeli company, rather than having anything to do with ethics. There are many possible names for this, such as anti-Zionism, anti-Semitism or racism. But none of these are matters with which an Ethical Council – or any Swedish state authority – should under any circumstances be associated or for which they should be suspected.

Having said that, of course, when one discovers that one of the board members of the Fjärde AP-fonden Swedish pension fund is the Mayor of Malmö, everyone’s favourite Ilmar Reepalu, the man who not long ago equated Zionism with anti-Semitism, well, it’s perfectly easy to understand just how the Swedish pension fund and the Ethical Council arrived at their decision. For more background on Malmö Mayor Ilmar Reepalu, read here.

The pieces fall into place, the fog lifts, the state authorities’ views in the form of the pension fund decision become increasingly clear. The code-word is anti-Zionism. In their defence, perhaps they understand as little of what they are saying and doing as Reepalu did when he made his infamous remark – something that he did admittedly later withdraw, to his modest credit.

However, an explanation is not an excuse. There is no excuse for anti-Zionism. There is no reason whatsoever to ban Elbit Systems while not banning Volvo. Either divest from both, or from neither. The reasonable conclusion is that both should continue to be worthy of investment since the protective barrier has done more good than harm. It has saved the lives of countless innocent Israeli civilians. It is not routed on occupied territory but rather on disputed territory. Does Israel not have the right to defend itself on the West Bank? Must Israel wait until the enemy attacks in the very heart of the Jewish nation? A ridiculous notion.

Israel’s protective barrier is justified on the basis of every reasonable viewpoint. So it is equally justified that both Elbit Systems and Volvo contribute to its completion and operation.

If there remains a single ounce of ethic in the Ethical Council, it is therefore an absolute demand that both the Council and the pension funds themselves immediately revoke the banning of Elbit Systems. We are, after all, talking about the actions of Swedish state authorities here.

And if the Swedish pension funds cannot recant and revise their decision, it is time for the government itself to step in.

 

Written by Lennart Eriksson, first published in Swedish on his website here. Many thanks to Mr Eriksson for his permission to reproduce his article here in English.

Lennart Eriksson’s other articles in English can be read here.

Translated into English by Ilya Meyer. For more articles on this subject from ilyameyer.com, read how Sweden’s divestment drive fits into a larger EU-coordinated pattern – at taxpayers’ expense:

The drip effect

Spending money in Gaza while divesting from Israel

NGO Monitor: divestment drive has been going on a long time

NGO Monitor: Sweden’s Diakonia and divestment campaign

Visit the Philosemitism blog to find out how Sweden’s Diakonia subverts Israel at Swedish taxpayers’ expense