#Jyllands Posten

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Andrew Doyle

Published: Mar 29, 2021

Picture the scene: an idyllic summer landscape populated by those much-loved icons of goodwill, the Care Bears. These instantly recognisable figures, fluffy and colourful and surrounded by butterflies and tiny floating hearts, are indulging in a rare bout of mischief.

One is smashing up a laptop with a hobnailed club. One is dangling on a swing between two freshly hanged corpses. Another is idly reclining on a bed of skulls, while a pair are greeting each other by shaking the hands of two amputated arms. Nearby, one of their friends is having sex with a decapitated head. All are grinning in that cute little Care Bear way.

The Care Bears Movie was one of the first films I ever saw at the cinema, so you can imagine how traumatic it is for me to contemplate my childhood heroes engaged in such wanton depravity. Still, the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo isn’t known for going easy on its targets, and if I’m offended by their Care Bears cartoon I can always choose not to subscribe.

This particular image appeared in an issue last September, and was satirising the practitioners of what has become known as “cancel culture”. The censors of our time, the artist reminded us, are acting au nom du “bien”. People are harassed and threatened, livelihoods and reputations obliterated, and all by those who believe themselves to be allied with the angels. Their language is that of “inclusivity” and “compassion”, even though their ruthlessness and intolerance betray the insincerity of their stated goals — or, at the very least, the way in which self-righteousness can blind people to the evil they commit in the name of a noble cause.

The furore at Batley Grammar School in West Yorkshire is the most recent example of how the lexicon of “social justice” has been weaponised in the name of progress. A teacher who had shown a caricature of the Prophet Mohammed — either from Charlie Hebdo or the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten (reports differ) — has been suspended for causing offence, and has now gone into hiding. Protesters outside the school have stated that they will not disperse until he is sacked.

Given that blasphemy laws no longer exist in the UK, these protestors have largely couched their complaints in terms of “safety and wellbeing”. On Friday, a man arrogantly claiming to speak on behalf of “the Muslim community” read out a statement in which the school authorities were accused of failing in their “duty of safeguarding”, and the teacher himself was charged with “threatening and provocative” behaviour. The Muslim Council of Britain has deployed similar tactics, suggesting that the teacher “created a hostile atmosphere”.

As much as I prefer to take people at their word, it seems unlikely to me that the protestors or the MCB seriously believe that the children’s safety has been compromised by a Religious Studies lesson about free speech. Certainly the pupils don’t appear to agree with those who are speaking on their behalf, which is why some of them have created an online petition to have their teacher reinstated.

What’s striking, though, is that despite all their talk of “safeguarding”, the protestors seem to be oblivious to a far more dangerous trend: that as a result of the various Islamist terrorist attacks in France in recent years — from the massacre at the Charlie Hebdo offices in January 2015 to the beheading of schoolteacher Samuel Paty last October — the right to criticise and ridicule religion has been increasingly under threat.

It isn’t simply the prospect of violent retaliation; it is the climate of intimidation that is fomented by the kind of protests we have seen in recent days. Cancel culture is sustained predominately by self-censorship, by those who see the consequences to others when they step out of line. After the events at Batley Grammar, how many teachers are likely to include the Charlie Hebdo cartoons in their lessons now?

Yet there has never been a more pressing time to engage with these issues in the classroom. If I were a teacher of Religious Studies, I would find it difficult to justify ignoring the question of the perceived conflict between religious faith and free speech, or not to discuss the murders of Samuel Paty and the satirists of Charlie Hebdo. While there is nothing wrong with acknowledging the potential offence that depictions of the Prophet Mohammed might cause, it is not a sufficient reason to avoid the topic altogether. I am sure that many pupils are disturbed by the anti-Semitic Nazi propaganda cartoons that are routinely included in history textbooks, but they serve an important function in the learning process. We know very little about the context in which the images of Mohammed were shown at Batley Grammar, but it is implausible that the teacher’s motives were anything other than educational.

Still, the protest itself is not all that surprising. As someone who attended a convent school as a child, I am all too aware that religious conservatives are often displeased at the contents of school curricula. When I became a teacher, there were often complaints from parents who disapproved of certain books or plays, either on grounds of religious belief or sheer prudishness. Angela Carter’s novel Wise Children was a particular bugbear for some parents, although at no point was the possibility of substituting texts or withdrawing pupils from class ever entertained. They had a right to be offended, but their offence was their own problem. I even taught briefly at a school run by an evangelical Christian who attempted to prohibit the teaching of novels that featured gay characters. It’s the reason I resigned from my post.

Teachers cannot be in the business of tailoring their pedagogic practices in order to appease the most intolerant elements of society. Nor should we be indulging those who feel that their particular worldview should be imposed on society at large. That is why there is more at stake in the case of Batley Grammar than the fate of this one teacher. With the immense publicity this event has generated, the outcome — whatever it is — will no doubt set an important precedent. If the school continues to capitulate to the demands of protesters, it will have a chilling effect on teachers in other schools who might wish to explore tendentious subjects.

But in the coming days, that won’t prevent the usual politicians, commentators and activists from emerging from their dens in Care-a-Lot, thirsting for the blood they can smell in the air. They will be saying things like “freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences”, and other mantras that act as surrogates for thought. They will assert that the teacher is “Islamophobic” and “hateful”, because they are invariably convinced of their own telepathic capabilities. They will accuse the teacher of “bullying” as they sidle up to theocrats calling for his ruination.

Already the protestors have demanded that he face criminal prosecution for “stirring up hatred”, a favoured formulation of today’s “progressives”. Cancel culture is the Inquisition of the digital age; it is how blasphemers are subdued, whether religious or secular. We mustn’t let the Care Bears win.

[mariacallous]

Danish media outlets have demanded that the nonprofit web archive Common Crawl remove copies of their articles from past data sets and stop crawling their websites immediately. This request was issued amid growing outrage over how artificial intelligence companies like OpenAI are using copyrighted materials.

Common Crawl plans to comply with the request, first issued on Monday. Executive director Rich Skrenta says the organization is “not equipped” to fight media companies and publishers in court.

The Danish Rights Alliance (DRA), an association representing copyright holders in Denmark, spearheaded the campaign. It made the request on behalf of four media outlets, including Berlingske Media and the daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten. The New York Times made a similar request of Common Crawl last year, prior to filing a lawsuit against OpenAI for using its work without permission. In its complaint, the New York Times highlighted how Common Crawl’s data was the most “highly weighted data set” in GPT-3.

Thomas Heldrup, the DRA’s head of content protection and enforcement, says that this new effort was inspired by the Times. “Common Crawl is unique in the sense that we’re seeing so many big AI companies using their data,” Heldrup says. He sees its corpus as a threat to media companies attempting to negotiate with AI titans.

Although Common Crawl has been essential to the development of many text-based generative AI tools, it was not designed with AI in mind. Founded in 2007, the San Francisco–based organization was best known prior to the AI boom for its value as a research tool. “Common Crawl is caught up in this conflict about copyright and generative AI,” says Stefan Baack, a data analyst at the Mozilla Foundation who recently published a report on Common Crawl’s role in AI training. “For many years it was a small niche project that almost nobody knew about.”

Prior to 2023, Common Crawl did not receive a single request to redact data. Now, in addition to the requests from the New York Times and this group of Danish publishers, it’s also fielding an uptick of requests that have not been made public.

In addition to this sharp rise in demands to redact data, Common Crawl’s web crawler, CCBot, is also increasingly thwarted from accumulating new data from publishers. According to the AI detection startup Originality AI, which often tracks the use of web crawlers, more than 44 percent of the top global news and media sites block CCBot. Apart from BuzzFeed, which began blocking it in 2018, most of the prominent outlets it analyzed—including Reuters, the Washington Post, and the CBC—spurned the crawler in only the last year. “They’re being blocked more and more,” Baack says.

Common Crawl’s quick compliance with this kind of request is driven by the realities of keeping a small nonprofit afloat. Compliance does not equate to ideological agreement, though. Skrenta sees this push to remove archival materials from data repositories like Common Crawl as nothing short of an affront to the internet as we know it. “It’s an existential threat,” he says. “They’ll kill the open web.”

He’s not alone in his concerns. “I’m very troubled by efforts to erase web history and especially news,” says journalism professor Jeff Jarvis, a staunch Common Crawl defender. “It’s been cited in 10,000 academic papers. It’s an incredibly valuable resource.” Common Crawl collects recent examples of research conducted using its data sets; newer highlights include a report on internet censorship in Turkmenistan and research into fine-tuning online fraud detection.

Common Crawl’s evolution from low-key tool beloved by data nerds and ignored by everyone else to a newly-controversial AI helpmate is part of a larger clash over copyright and the open web. A growing contingent of publishers as well as some artists, writers, and other creative types are fighting efforts to crawl and scrape the web—sometimes even if said efforts are noncommercial, like Common Crawl’s ongoing project. Any project that could potentially be used to feed AI’s appetite for data is under scrutiny.

In addition to a slew of lawsuits alleging copyright infringement filed against the generative AI world’s major players, copyright activists are also pushing for legislation to put guardrails on data training, forcing AI companies to pay for what they use. Additional scrutiny on Common Crawl and other popular data sets like LAION-5B have revealed that, in hoovering data from all over the internet, these corpuses have inadvertently archived some of its darkest corners. (LAION 5-B was temporarily taken down in December 2023 after an investigation by Stanford researchers found that the data set included child sexual abuse materials.)

The Danish Rights Alliance has a notably hard-charging approach to AI and copyright issues. Earlier this year, it led a campaign to file Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) takedown notices—which alert companies to potentially infringing content hosted on their platforms—for book publishers whose work had been uploaded to OpenAI’s GPT Store without their permission. Last year, it spearheaded an effort to remove a popular generative AI training set known as Books3 from the internet. As a whole, the Danish media is remarkably organized in its fight against AI companies using media as training data without first licensing it; a collective of major newspapers and TV stations has recently threatened to sue OpenAI unless it provides compensation for the use of their work in its training data.

If enough publishers and news outlets opt out of Common Crawl, it could have a significant impact on academic research in a range of disciplines. It could also have another unintended consequence, Baack argues. He thinks that putting an end to Common Crawl might primarily impact newcomers and smaller projects in addition to academics, entrenching today’s power players in their current dominant positions and calcifying the field. “If Common Crawl is damaged so much that it’s not useful anymore as a training data source, I think we’d basically be empowering OpenAI and other leading AI companies,” he says. “They have the resources to crawl the web themselves now.”

[uran0824]

Global Anticultism: The Rise of Islamophobia Worldwide

I, an independent researcher of global anticultist activities, am horrified to witness how they are fueling animosity and hatred around the world. Their actions are not limited to simple intimidation - they are laying the groundwork for global conflict, feeding a civilizational war.  And one of their most dangerous tools is the fueling of Islamophobia.

The documentary "The IMPACT" | Groundbreaking Documentary - EXPOSING ANTI-CULT TERRORISM" (actfiles.org), which I recommend to everyone, reveals the terrifying truth: global anticultists, united in a network under the leadership of RACIRS, pursue their global goals using disinformation, provocations, the "puzzle coding" method, psychological influence, physical violence, annihilation, etc..

Let's take a look together at how global anticultists are provoking and fueling Islamophobia worldwide today?

1.  Islamophobia Propaganda: 

Anticultists portray Islam as a threat to Western civilization. They spread false information that Islam is a religion of violence.  

Example: 

Russia: Roman Silantiev, one of the leading Russian anticultists,  considers Islam a "serious threat" to Russia. In his book "The Recent History of Islam in Russia", Silantiev refers to the Tatar politician and historian Rafael Khakimov, who believes that Islam is consistent with European values such as tolerance and democracy. However, Silantiev later claimed that the term "tolerance" failed as a symbol of tolerance for evil and destructive pacifism.

(Pictured: Silantyev, R. A. (2007). Recent History of the Islamic Community in Russia (1989—2004) (2nd ed.). Algorithm and Eksmo)

2. Provocations and Violence: 

Anticultists  provoke  violence against Muslims.  

Example:

 A series of horrifying events involving the burning of the Quran took place in 2023 in many countries: Burning the Quran is not just a manifestation of hatred. It is a deliberate insult to Muslims, capable of provoking a reaction and triggering a chain of violence.

Examples of countries where the Quran was burned:

Denmark:

(Pictured: Screenshot from jyllands-posten.dk)

Germany: 

(Pictured: Screenshot from deKantterkening)

 Sweden: 

(Pictured: Screenshot from Le Monde)

Russia: 

(Pictured: Screenshot from a Russian web resource "News")

Quote from "The IMPACT" film: 

“Although the precedent of burning the Quran has occurred in the past (France in 2010, Russia in 2014, and other countries), the incidents of 2023 are evidence of a deliberate provocation aimed at igniting a larger conflict. Reflecting on the examples of terrorist attacks in France and Russia, where innocent people have suffered, we should ask ourselves: how many more sacred Islamic texts need to be burned to escalate the situation to a critical point? 

How many more mocking cartoons of the Prophet are needed before tensions spiral out of control? How many more terrorist attacks will it take to ignite the flames of total confrontation and split the world in two?”

 Russia: 

The terrorist attack on the Crocus City Hall in Russia is an example of how anticultists use violence for their own purposes.  

USA: 

The fueling of Islamophobia after September 11, 2001, led to an increase in anti-Muslim sentiment and discrimination.

 Global Anticultism: Vandalism and Destruction of Holy Sites

3.  Vandalism and Destruction of Holy Sites:

Anticultists consider Islamic holy sites targets for vandalism and destruction.  

Example: 

Denmark- France- EUROPE: 

A striking example of how global anticultists operate: 

 - After the publication of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005, other publications, including French ones (Charlie Hebdo, France Soir, Libération, and Le Monde), began to reprint these cartoons. 

Since 2006, these cartoons have been reprinted in other countries:

 in Norway by Magazinet, in Germany by Die Welt, in Spain by El País, in Belgium by De Standaard, as well as by newspapers in the UK, Italy, Iceland, Switzerland, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Sweden, Poland, and others. 

In 2007, the Swedish newspaper Nerikes Allehanda published another cartoon depicting the Prophet with the body of a dog. This sparked a wave of protests by Muslims in the East and Europe, escalating into a global intercultural crisis that affected almost all of Europe and Muslim-majority countries.

Also, such cartoons provoked terrorist attacks. Which began on January 7, 2015, in Paris against the editorial office of the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo. The terrorists shouted that they had "avenged the Prophet."

DENMARK: 

On February 12, 2006, vandals from the city of Esbjerg in western Denmark desecrated more than 25 Muslim graves. And on February 16, 2008, five Danish newspapers reprinted a cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad with a turban in the shape of a bomb, one of which was Berlingske Tidende. 

Source: 

4.  Political Manipulation:

Anticultists use their influential connections to promote their ideology in the legislative and political spheres.  

Example:  Anticultists influence laws and public opinion in France, the UK, Germany, and other countries. 

Quote from the film "The IMPACT": “The 2015 terrorist attack in France and the preceding events, illustrate the potential consequences a single publication in one newspaper can lead to when it serves anti-cultists.

 To this day, media outlets across different countries continue to reference Jyllands-Posten18. This is especially true for sources that, like the Danish newspaper, pursue an anti-cult Nazi policy, fight against cults, and serve as conduits for informational terrorism.  In particular, the Czech online publication Seznam Zpravy19,20 has repeatedly relied on this source in its publications.”

That is, global anticultists create an information environment that fuels hatred, and in turn, anticultists use this environment to cause an outbreak of violence and chaos to establish their dominance worldwide.

Anticultists not only incite hatred between religions, they use it as a weapon to establish their own control over the world. Their goal is to create chaos and despair, and then use it to achieve their goals - the creation of a global totalitarian concentration camp.

We must be vigilant! We must know who is fueling hatred and why, to protect ourselves and our loved ones. We must stand up for peace and understanding, and not allow anticultists to manipulate us.

Please be sure to spread this information! Be sure to like it. Repost and comment. DON'T BE SILENT! Applause and the spread of this information leave no room for global anticultists to kill our children.

#GlobalAnticultism #Islamophobia #CivilizationalWar #TheIMPACT #RACIRS #BurningQuran #Vandalism #Provocations #Disinformation

[astriddalum]

Kateryna Kuznetsova, danser.

Jyllands-Posten, september 2023

[cinquecolonnemagazine]

Risate irriverenti con le vignette satiriche

Le vignette irriverenti, icone incisive della satira, hanno un'origine che affonda le radici nei secoli passati. La storia di queste piccole opere d'arte umoristiche è un viaggio attraverso il tempo, illuminato dalla lampada della critica sociale e politica. Esploriamo il cammino delle vignette irriverenti, dal passato al presente, scrutando il sottile confine che le separa dalla volgarità e analizzando alcune opere che hanno sollevato il sopracciglio della società. La satira nelle prime vignette Le prime forme di satira visuale sono apparse già nell'antica Roma, dove graffiti e illustrazioni sui muri erano spesso veicoli di commenti critici sulla politica e la società. Tuttavia, il vero avvio della tradizione delle vignette satiriche si può rintracciare nell'Europa del XVIII secolo. Artisti come James Gillray e George Cruikshank in Inghilterra, e Honoré Daumier in Francia, crearono vignette politiche che penetrarono nel tessuto della vita sociale e politica del loro tempo. L'irriverenza nelle vignette Ma quando possiamo effettivamente definire irriverente una vignetta? L'irriverenza si manifesta quando la satira supera i confini della convenzione e si rivolge audacemente a temi sensibili o autorità costituite. Questa ribellione umoristica può riguardare politici, istituzioni, tradizioni o tabù sociali. Le vignette irriverenti spesso si caratterizzano per il loro spirito pungente, il sarcasmo e l'uso disinvolto di situazioni paradossali o grottesche. Tuttavia, è importante sottolineare che l'irriverenza non è sinonimo di volgarità. Mentre l'irriverenza sfida il status quo con arguzia e audacia, la volgarità si basa su contenuti offensivi o osceni privi di intenti satirici. Il confine tra irriverenza e volgarità può essere sottile, e la sagacia dell'artista sta nel mantenere un equilibrio che sfidi le convenzioni senza scadere nell'offensivo gratuito. Una vignetta irriverente può essere una forma d'arte potente per far riflettere sulla società, ma il rischio di scivolare nella volgarità è sempre presente. Un esempio di questa sottigliezza si trova nell'opera contenuta nella rivista Charlie Hebdo. Questa rivista satirica è nota per le sue vignette spesso audaci e controverse. Vignette irriverenti che hanno scosso il mondo Alcune vignette irriverenti hanno lasciato un'impronta indelebile nella storia, suscitando scalpore e riflessioni. Una di queste è la vignetta di James Gillray intitolata "The Plumb-pudding in Danger" del 1805, che raffigura il leader francese Napoleone Bonaparte e il primo ministro britannico William Pitt che si dividono il mondo come un pudding natalizio. Questo lavoro satirico giocava con la geopolitica dell'epoca, illustrando in modo umoristico i giochi di potere tra le nazioni. Un esempio più contemporaneo è rappresentato dalla vignetta di Kurt Westergaard del 2005 pubblicata sul quotidiano danese Jyllands-Posten. Raffigurante il profeta Maometto con una bomba al posto del turbante, questa vignetta provocò una reazione globale, sollevando questioni sull'equilibrio tra libertà di espressione e rispetto delle credenze religiose. In copertina foto di Bruno da Pixabay Read the full article

[nicdevera]

i notice i’m surprised. dunno if i blogged it but i certainly thought a lot about how the philippines has a significant muslim population, especially in the south, but i did not notice any filipino muslim outcry after the 2005 jyllands-posten muhammad cartoons, or after the 2015 charlie hebdo shooting. so this is probably more political than religious.

edit ISIS claims responsibility for deadly Philippine bombing. several outlets saying ISIS claiming responsibility, but just that it was posted on an ISIS Telegram channel

[dietantehilde]

Erbarmen, die Deutschen (Camper) kommen?

Seit Corona boomt das Thema Camping ohne Ende. Immer mehr Menschen kaufen sich einen Wohnwagen, vor allem aber sind Wohnmobile und erst recht Camper-Vans sehr beliebt. Die Händler haben während Corona gut verdient, die Preise für die Fahrzeuge stiegen in unverschämte Höhen, doch gekauft wurde trotzdem. Und seit dem machen deutlich mehr Deutsche als früher Camping-Urlaub. Und sie fahren dann meist in die Nachbarländer. Ein sehr beliebtes Land ist Dänemark. Doch leider hat das auch Nebenwirkungen, denn dänische Medien berichten immer häufiger von Campern, deutschen Campern, die sich vor Ort massic daneben benehmen und unbeliebt machen. Die dänische Tageszeitung Jyllands Posten hat am 8. August 2023 einen Bericht veröffentlicht, der einige dieser unschönen Entwicklungen auf der sehr beliebten Insel Rømø beschreibt. Die Übersetzung findest Du unten, am Ende des Artikels. es geht dabei um Camper, die ins Land kommen, aber dann möglichst kostenlos ihrem Camping-Spaß frönen wollen. Statt sich auf einen offiziellen Campingplatz zu stellen, der natürlich eine Übernachtungsgebühr kostet, stellt man sich dann auf Parkplätze oder irgendwohin, wo es einem passt. Und auch die Versorgung mit Frischwasser oder die Entsorgung von Abwasser und Fäkalien soll am liebsten nichts kosten. Und da wird dann eben, wie im Artikel beschrieben, mit dem langen Wasserschlauch Abends oder nachts auf dem Friedhof in Rømø einfach mal so Wasser abgezogen und der Tank im Wohnmobil gefüllt. Und die Chemietoilette wird dann auch gleich auf dem Friedhofs ins öffentliche Klo gekippt. Im Artikel wird sogar beschrieben, dass es Camper gibt, die mit ihrem Fahrzeug am Strand stehen und das Chemieklo einfach am Strand auskippen. Dänemark – Gekommen um zu bleiben – eine Buchrezension. Die "Gratister" Camper In Dänemark, so list man, hat sich für diese "sparsamen" Camper mittlerweile das Wort "Gratister" eingebürgert. Schlägt man das Wort nach, kommt das dabei heraus: "Person, die eine Leistung erhält, ohne dafür zu bezahlen, z.B. weil sie eine Freikarte besitzt oder betrügt und sich um die Zahlung drückt". Liest man die diversen Beiträge, oft begleitet von entsprechenden Fotos, auf Instagra, Facebook und Co., dann schwärmen Camper davon, dass sie in Dänemark "so toll" auf dem Autostrand stehen und übernachten. Einer der beliebten und schönen Autostrände ist auf Rømø. Für die Nutzung der Autostrände gelten verschiedene Regel. Eine von viele ist diese hier: "Sauberkeit: Hinterlasse die Autostrände stets sauber und ordentlich, damit auch andere Besucher die Autostände in ihrer vollen Schönheit erleben können." Eine andere Regel, die nicht nur an den Autostränden sondern überall in der Natur gilt ist, das Camping verboten ist. Und damit kommen wir zu einem Gerücht, dass sich mit Hartnäckigkeit hält: Immer wieder wird behauptet, das "überall" in Skandinavien - und damit auch in Dänemark - das Jedermannsrecht gälte und man deshalb überall nach Belieben parken, übernachten und campen könne. Und genau das wird dann von diesen Gratistern betrieben. Sie nennen es "Freistehen" und es ist nichts anderes als illegales Wildcampen. Schauenh wir uns das Jedermannsrecht an. Nein! Das Jedermannsrecht gilt nicht in Dänemark! Auch wenn es immer wieder behauptet wird, in Dänemark gibt es KEIN Jedermannsrecht. Somit ist die oft gehörte Aussage „überall in Skandinavien gibt es das Jedermannsrecht“ definitiv falsch. In Dänemark ist das Wildcampen und Freistehen per Gesetz verboten. Wer das missachtet, riskiert Bußgelder, die bis auf 500 Euro klettern können! Vor allem: Dort wo in den andeten skandinavischen Ländern das Jedermannsrecht gilt, gitl das nur für das Aufstellen eines Zeltes, in dem man dann meist für maximal zwei Tage frei stehen und übernachten darf. Das Jedermannsrecht sieht aber keine Wohnmobile und Wohnwagen vor, denn dieses Jedermannsrecht stammt aus einer Zeit, als Reisende noch mit dem Zelt im Rucksack unterwegs waren und die "rollenden Appartements" noch nicht erfunden waren. das bedeutet, auch MIT dem Jedermannsrecht darf man längst nicht alles, was so viele ganz freizügig tun! Zurück zu Dänemark. Mit anderen Worten: Ob in der freien Natur und erst Recht in Naturschutzgebieten, im Wald, an Stränden - auch den Autostränden - oder am Straßenrand, das Zelten ist dort verboten und erst Recht das Stehen und Übernachten im Wohnmobil oder mit dem Wohnwagen. Auf dieses Verbot wird vielerorts mit Schildern hingewiesen, doch es gilt selbst dann, wenn keine Schilder zu sehen sind. wer es missachtet und erwischt wird, der zahlt Strafen, die deutlich über der Stellplatzmiete auf einem Campingplatz liegen. Und wer dabei auch noch bei illegalen Entsorgungsaktionen erwischt wird, der darf sich vom Großteil seiner Urlaubskasse trennen. Grauzone sind Parkplätze. Wenn dort das Übernachten nicht explizit per Schild verboten ist, darfst Du dort in der Regel eine Nacht stehen und im Wohnmobil übernachten. Man billigt dem Fahrer hier zu, dass er sich ausruhen darf, um seine Fahrtüchtigkeit wieder herzustellen. Aber dort mehrere Tage zu stehen und auch „aktives Campen“, also Stühle und Tisch rausstellen, Markise ausfahren etc., sind verboten. Das Jedermannsrecht für ganz Skandinavien habe ich hier in diesem Artikel und auch in diesem hier ausführlich besprochen. https://youtu.be/-FYRnpox5NU Als ich im Mai 2022 mit einem gemieteten Wohnmobil eine Woche in Dänemark unterwegs war, habe ich auch mal auf einem Parkplatz übernachtet. Und zwar auf solchen, wo dies durch Beschilderung ausdrücklich erlaubt war. Erlaubt bedeutet in solchen Fällen, dass Du als Camper im Auto übernachten und auch kochen etc. darfst. Nicht erlaubt ist das "aktive campen", also Stühle und Tisch rausstellen, Markise ausfaheren oder grillen und Feuer machen vor dem Fahrzeug. Aber man erlebt eben auch Leute, die genau das machen. Auf Parkplätzen - hier ein ausgewiesener Wohnmobilparkplatz bei Skagen in Nordjütland - ist das Parken erlaubt und das Übernachten im Auto auch. (Foto: Andreas Lerg) Ansonsten habe ich auch auf schönen und gut ausgestatteten Campingplätzen gestanden und dort auch die Einrichtungen zur Ver- und Entsorgung genutzt und mit der Stellplatzgebühr bezahlt. Es gibt so viele schöne offizielle Stellplätze, die man für oft geringe Gebühr nutzen und genießen kann. Viele Marinas und Yachthäfen vermieten im Sommer die Winterstellplätze der Boote an Wohnmobilurlauber. Du hast dann dort oft Strom direkt am Stellplatz und die Infrastruktur der Marina mit Toiletten, Duschen oder auch einem Waschsalon stehen dir für das schmale Geld der Stellplatzmiete zur Verfügung. In vielen Marinas gibt es auch Wohnmobilstellplätze und Infrastruktur wie hier eine Entsorgungsstation für die Chemietopilette. (Foto: Andreas Lerg) Ich habe auf dieser Reise viele nette und "normale" Camper aus Deutschland getroffen. Leute, die sich anständig verhalten und Rücksicht nehmen. Mit denen man sich nett unterhält, über die Fahrzeuge fachsimpelt. Ich habe auch "Vanlifer" gesehen, die mit einem selbst ausgebauten Van das "Freistehen" mit allem (unerlaubten) drum und dran praktiziert haben. Und auf dem eigentlich recht schönen Campingplatz "Oasen" auf Rømø - damals im Mai schon fest in deutscher Hand - habe ich auch den deutschen Camping-Spießbürger erlebt, der wie ein Platzwart darüber wacht, dass da keiner auch nur 20 Zentimeter Meter außerhalb der Markierung steht und mit grußlosen Hinweisen im Kommandoton nicht geizt. Alle meine Videos vom Roadtrip durch Dänemark findest Du hier Wer mit dem Wohnmobil oder Wohnwagen unterwegs ist, sollte sich vorab informieren, was in einem Land erlaubt ist und was nicht. Erst Recht bei solchen pauschalen und beharrlichen Behauptungen, das "überall in ganz Skandinavien" das Jedermannsrecht gilt und man als Camper "überall frei stehen und campen" darf. Es gilt die bewährte Regel: Verlasse einen Platz so, als wärst Du nie da gewesen. Dort wo diese Regel nicht befolgt wird, passiert das, was in Dänemark immer wieder passiert: An Plätzen, wo das Stehen mit dem Camper bislang geduldet wurde, wird es explizit verboten. Fazit: Einige schwarze Schafe versauen es für alle anderen Camper Kommen wir zum Fazit. Es sind ja längst nicht alle deutschen Camper, die sich dergestellt unmöglich daneben benehmen. Es gibt viele, die sich an Spielregeln halten und den Urlaub mit Wohnwagen oder Wohnmobil genießen, ohne unangenehm aufzufallen. Aber es gibt eben auch diese "Gratister". Leute, die sich ein Wohnmobil gekauft haben und jetzt damit los ziehen nach dem Motto "die Welt gehört" mir. Die alles haben und nutzen, aber nichts bezahlen wollen. Camper, die dann eben das Chemieklo einfach in den Straßengraben oder - wie im Text hier unten drunter beschrieben - an den Strand kippen. Die schauen, wo sie Ressourcen wie Wasser kostenlos abschnorren können. Die sich in die Natur stellen und dann einfsch ihren Müll hinterlassen. Und diese wenigen schwarzen Schafe hinterlassen dann aber einen so massivenm schlechten Eindruck, dass Sie das Klima und die Stimmmung der dänischen Bevölkerung gegenüber Camping und speziell deutschen Campern für alle anderen versauen. Übersetzung des Artikels aus der Jylands Posten Die steigende Zahl an Wohnmobilen im dänischen Sommerland stößt auf Kritik. Auf der Ferieninsel Rømø erzählt der Friedhofswärter, dass die Camper Wasser für ihre Tanks stehlen und die Toiletten mit ihrem Abfall verschmutzen.Am Rømø Südstrand wurden so viele coliforme Bakterien im Wasser gefunden, dass die blaue Flagge* mehrmals entzogen werden musste. Die lokale Bevölkerung hat dem Gebiet den Spitznamen „Lortestranden“ gegeben. (Das bedeutet übersetzt "Scheiß-Strand").Die Gemeinde glaubt nicht zu wissen, woher die Fäkalien kommen. Hör auf. Ich besitze ein Sommerhaus 150 Meter vom Strand entfernt. Immer wieder habe ich gesehen, wie Camper am Strand ihre Toiletten leerten. In Dänemark gibt es gute Campingmöglichkeiten. Die Nutzung kostet etwas. Vielleicht bevorzugen die „Freebies“ deshalb tagsüber den Strand und nachts die Parkplätze. Sie nennen es Freiheit.Die Zahl der Wohnmobile wächst explosionsartig. Nach Angaben des Instituts Statista waren es im Jahr 2001 circa 50.000 Wohnmobile in Deutschland. In den letzten Jahren ist die Zahl auf 767.000 gestiegen. Auf die Deutschen entfallen circa die Hälfte aller Wohnmobil-Neuzulassungen in der EU. Die deutschen Behörden sind restriktiv und alles kostet Geld. Wohnmobil-Camper müssen einen geeigneten Stellplatz finden. Deshalb nehmen sie Kurs auf Dänemark, wo sie am meisten zu Abfall und Abnutzung auf den Straßen beitragen. Als ich das letzte Mal auf Rømø war, sah ich Touristenbusse am Strand herumfahren. - Die Blaue Flagge ist ein Umweltzeichen aus dem Bereich des nachhaltigen Tourismus, das jedes Jahr an Strände an Küsten, Binnengewässer und Marinas vergeben wird, die in der vorangegangenen Saison Standards hinsichtlich Umweltbildung, Umweltmanagement, Dienstleistungsgüte und Wasserqualität eingehalten haben Lesen Sie den ganzen Artikel

[delectablywaywardbeard-blog]

Danimarca, una boa oggetto misterioso vicino al Nord Stream: 'nessun rischio sicurezza'

Le autorità danesi hanno recuperato a 73 metri di profondità al largo di Bornholm “l’oggetto sconosciuto” scoperto recentemente vicino al gasdotto nordstream 2 sabotato in settembre.  L’agenzia per l’energia della Danimanca, citata dal quotidiano danese Jyllands-Posten, sottolinea che si tratterebbe di una boa fumogena marittima vuota, utilizzata per la marcatura visiva, e “non rappresenta un…

[lboogie1906]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali (born Ayaan Hirsi Magan, November 13, 1969) is a Somali-born Dutch-American activist and former politician. She is a critic of Islam and advocates for the rights and self-determination of Muslim women, opposing forced marriage, honor killing, child marriage, and female genital mutilation. She has founded an organization for the defense of women's rights, the AHA Foundation. She works for the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, and the American Enterprise Institute, and was a senior fellow at the Future of Democracy Project at Harvard Kennedy School. She was elected a member of the House of Representatives, the lower house of the States General of the Netherlands, representing the center-right People's Party for Freedom and Democracy. She is a former Muslim who rejected the faith and became an atheist and has been a vocal critic of Islam. She collaborated on a short film with Theo van Gogh, titled Submission. The film led to controversy and death threats. She maintains that "Islam is part religion, and part a political-military doctrine, the part that is a political doctrine contains a world view, a system of laws and a moral code that is incompatible with our constitution, our laws, and our way of life." In her book Heretic, she calls for a reformation of Islam by defeating the Islamists and supporting reformist Muslims. She was named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world. She has received several awards, including a free speech award from the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, the Swedish Liberal Party's Democracy Prize, and the Moral Courage Award for commitment to conflict resolution, ethics, and world citizenship. Critics accuse her of having built her political career on Islamophobia, and question her scholarly credentials "to speak authoritatively about Islam and the Arab world". Her works have been accused of using neo-Orientalist portrayals and of being an enactment of the colonial "civilizing mission" discourse. She migrated to the US and became a citizen in 2013. She married British historian Niall Ferguson (2011) and has two sons. #africanhistory365 #africanexcellence https://www.instagram.com/p/Ck5_7uDLqBm/?igshid=NGJjMDIxMWI=

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

By: Andrew Doyle

Published: Dec 12, 2023

Towards the end of Christopher Marlowe’s play Tamburlaine Part Two, our marauding anti-hero burns a copy of the Quran, along with other Islamic books, as a kind of audacious test. “Now, Mahomet,” he cries, “if thou have any power, come down thyself and work a miracle.” Two scenes later, he is dead.

We might see this as a cautionary tale for our times. After all, it isn’t only Turco-Mongol conquerors who find themselves punished for Quran-burning. Last week, the Danish parliament voted to ban the desecration of all religious texts following a spate of protests in which copies of the Qur’an had been destroyed. Inevitably, the new law has been couched as a safety measure. This burning of the book, claims justice minister Peter Hummelgaard, “harms Denmark and Danish interests, and risks harming the security of Danes abroad and here at home”.

He has a point. Even unconfirmed accusations of Quran-burning can be sufficient to prompt extremist violence. In 2015, being accused of defiling the holy book, Farkhunda Malikzada was beaten to death by a ferocious mob in Afghanistan while bystanders, including police officers, did nothing to intervene. Many filmed the brutal murder on their phones and the footage was widely shared on social media. In 2022, a mentally unstable man called Mushtaq Rajput was similarly accused and tied to a tree and stoned to death in Pakistan. Earlier this year in Iran, it was reported that Javad Rouhi was tortured so severely that he could no longer speak or walk. He was sentenced to death for apostasy and later died in prison under suspicious circumstances.

But while we might anticipate that the desecration of the Quran would be proscribed in Islamic theocracies, it is troubling to see similar laws being passed in secular nations such as Denmark. The government had not been so faint-hearted when faced with similar problems in 2005. After cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed were published in Jyllands-Posten, a global campaign from Indonesia to Bosnia demanded that the Danish authorities take action. The government stood firm and the judicial complaint against the newspaper was dismissed.

In a free society this is the only justifiable response, albeit one that takes considerable courage. And the climate of intimidation that has descended since is a product of our collective failure to defend freedom of speech against the demands of militants. When the Ayatollah Khomeini pronounced his fatwa on Salman Rushdie for his novel The Satanic Verses, one would have hoped for a unified front on behalf of one of our finest writers. Instead, much of the literary and political establishment abandoned or even censured him. In the Australian television show Hypotheticals, the singer Yusuf Islam, formerly known as Cat Stevens, implied that he would have no objections to Rushdie being burned alive.

That a work of fiction such as The Satanic Verses could not even be published today gives us some indication of the extent to which we have forsaken the principle of free speech. If we are so squeamish about the burning of Qurans, why were so many of us indifferent to the burning of Rushdie’s book on the streets of Bolton and Bradford? Yusuf Islam’s remark about the author’s immolation might have been flippant but, as Heinrich Heine famously wrote: “Where they burn books, they will in the end burn people too.”

The ceremonial burning of books in Germany and Austria in the Thirties has ensured that the act will always have a unique charge, and a disquieting, visceral effect. It is why, for instance, the most memorable scene in Mervyn Peake’s Titus Groan is when the villain Steerpike sets fire to his master’s library. It is a gesture designed to repudiate the very heights of human achievement, to hurl his victim into a spiral of despair. When Rushdie saw his own novel publicly incinerated, he confessed to feeling that “now the victory of the Enlightenment was looking temporary, reversible”.

The burning of the Quran leaves many of us similarly troubled. We do not need to approve of the contents to sense that the destruction of a book is symbolic of a desire to limit the scope of human thought. When activists post footage of themselves gleefully setting fire to copies of Harry Potter, one cannot shake the similar suspicion that they would happily substitute the books with the author herself.

But while many of us find the burning of books instinctively rebarbative, to outlaw this form of protest is essentially authoritarian. And to reinstate blasphemy laws by specifying that only religious books are to be protected is fundamentally retrograde. Of course, such laws already exist in most Western countries in an unwritten form. In March, a 14-year-old autistic boy was suspended from his school in Wakefield, reported to the police, and received death threats after he accidentally dropped a copy of the Quran on the floor, causing some of the pages to be scuffed. He may not have committed a crime, but many people behaved as though he had.

And the same unwritten laws are in force in the fact that few would be brave enough to publish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed after the massacre at the offices of French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in 2015. Five years later, the schoolteacher Samuel Paty was beheaded on the streets of Paris simply for showing the offending images during a lesson on free speech. Closer to home, a teacher at Batley Grammar School in West Yorkshire is still in hiding after showing the images to his pupils and stirring the ire of a righteous mob.

The failure of the school’s headmaster, as well as the teaching unions, to support this man against the demands of religious fundamentalists is revealing. Why must those who claim to be defending the dignity of Muslims treat them as irascible children? At the same time, as Sam Harris recently pointed out, there is an oddity in the fact that so many Muslims do not appear to be alarmed that “their community is so uniquely combustible”.

The bitter reality is that terrorism works, particularly when so many governments across the Western world are seemingly willing to fritter away our bedrock of liberal values. This has been actuated, in part, by an alliance of two very different forms of authoritarianism: ultra-conservative Islamic dogma and the safetyist ideology of “wokeness”. The latter has always claimed that causing offence is a form of violence, and the former has been quick to adopt the same tactics. This is why protesters outside Batley Grammar School asserted that the display of offensive cartoons was a “safeguarding” issue, and the Muslim Council of Britain criticised the school for not maintaining an “inclusive space”. The same censorious instincts have been updated, and are now cloaked in a more modish language.

In a civilised and pluralistic society, the burning of a holy book might provoke a variety of responses — anger, disbelief, or just a shrug of the shoulders — but it should never lead to violence. Back when The Onion still had some bite, the website satirised this “unique combustibility” through the depiction of a graphic sexual foursome between Moses, Jesus, Ganesha and Buddha. The headline said it all: “No One Murdered Because Of This Image”.

Freedom of speech and expression still matters, and if that means a few hotheads and mini-Tamburlaines might burn their copies of the Quran then so be it. It is unfortunate that we have reached the point where Islam must be ring-fenced from ridicule or criticism, whether due to fear of violent repercussions or a misguided and patronising effort to promote social justice. But for this state of affairs we ultimately have only ourselves to blame, and in particular our tendency to capitulate to religious zealots when they seek exemption from the liberal consensus.

==

[trustburger]

Prophet artoon

#Prophet artoon trial#

#Prophet artoon free#

In 2010, he described his then home in the east coast city of Aarhus as a “fortress without a moat”. He said he was responding to the drawings.Westergaard had been living under police protection ever since, living at multiple addresses. Three weeks into the trial, a man armed with a knife seriously wounded two people in a suspected terror attack outside Charlie Hebdo's former offices. Al-Qaeda again threatened to attack its editorial staff.

#Prophet artoon trial#

On September 2, as the trial of men accused of being accomplices in the massacre of the newspaper's staff opened, the newspaper republished the caricatures, to the ire of several Muslim states. The publication a week later of an edition of the newspaper featuring a drawing of the prophet on its cover led to violent demonstrations around the Muslim world, during which 10 died in Niger. The attackers were shot by police on their third day on the run. Then on January 7, 2015, two French jihadists killed 12 people, including five artists, at the offices of the weekly, which had received death threats for its publication of caricatures of Mohammed. In November 2011, an arson attack was carried out at the headquarters of Charlie Hebdo, in response to its edition renamed "Charia (Sharia) Hebdo" with the prophet caricatured on the cover. One of the invitees was the Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, who had made a film in 2008 linking terrorism and Islam. In May 2015 in the United States police shot dead two armed men who opened fire in a Dallas suburb in Texas near to a centre hosting a competition of Mohammed cartoons organised by the American Freedom Defense Initiative.

#Prophet artoon free#

In February 2015, Danish-born Omar El-Hussein shot dead a filmmaker outside a free speech event attended by Swedish artist Lars Vilks - who in 2007 portrayed the Prophet Mohammed as a dog - hours before killing a Jewish man outside a synagogue. In early 2010, Danish police caught a 28-year-old Somalian armed with a knife in the artist Westergaard's house, where he was planning to kill him.Īlso Read: Why the hatred? Jewish victims of 2015 Paris attack ask In June 2008, a suicide attack claimed by al-Qaeda against the Danish embassy in Islamabad left six dead. In February 2008, just when the situation seemed to have calmed down, the re-publication by 17 Danish newspapers of the most controversial cartoon after a failed attack on the artist revived anger in numerous Muslim countries. They included Philippe Val, the then chief at Charlie Hebdo in March 2007, followed by Algerian public television journalists in October. In Beirut, Damascus and Tehran, in Indonesia, Somalia, Nigeria and Afghanistan, violent demonstrations, attacks and torchings of European embassies left dozens dead.Ī number of journalists and the chiefs of the publications concerned were taken to court, but acquitted. In Gaza, armed groups threatened to vent their anger on Western journalists. Several European newspapers, including a Norwegian Christian newspaper called Magazinet and the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine in Paris also ran the drawings, in the name of freedom of expression. On the internet, several Danish sites were targeted by hackers.Īlso Read: Paris attack suspect wanted to target Charlie Hebdo with arson In early 2006, Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Copenhagen and a boycott of Danish products spread through the Arab world, hitting the country's exports. Muslim officials demanded an apology from Denmark and Muslims demonstrated in Copenhagen in their thousands. The most infamous of the drawings was that by Danish artist Kurt Westergaard, which showed the prophet concealing a bomb inside a turban. On September 30, 2005, the conservative Danish daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten published the drawings under the headline "The Face of Mohammed". The anger spread as other publications followed suit, defying a Muslim religious convention that forbids visual depictions of the prophet, seen as idolatry and thus blasphemous. The publication 15 years ago by a Danish newspaper of controversial drawings representing the Prophet Mohammed was just the beginning of a wave of outrage in the Muslim world.

[astriddalum]

Søren Gade på stemmejagt

Jyllands-Posten, oktober 2022.

[rivaltimes]

Gas leak detected in a section of Nord Stream 2 on a Danish island

Gas leak detected in a section of Nord Stream 2 on a Danish island

Nord Stream 2 facilities in Germany – Stefan Sauer/dpa A Danish F16 plane has detected and photographed a gas leak on Monday in one of the sections of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline on the Danish island of Bornholm, as confirmed by the Joint Operations Center (JOC) to the newspaper ‘Jyllands-Posten’. After detecting the leak, the Danish maritime authorities have issued a navigation warning and…

[blixtbaby]

undefined