Thank you Esther (and Roughdoggo) for giving me some further insight into what Fjordman is writing about here.

 

ps 'Islam in Europe' has now been added to my favorites list.

(fixing formatting..)

Did you read the entire article?  Fjordman writes that it calls for cooperating with the Muslim Brotherhood.  I agree that it doesn't say that specifically "You should cooperate.. etc", but to say that this is misrepresenting what the article says?

First, you're missing the byline:

"Can solve the conflict between the West and Muslim countries," researchers think.

Who can solve the conflict?  For that we have the headline: "Moderate Muslims to the rescue".

The entire article deals with the Muslim brotherhood and Islamist movements.  Whoever reads it will most certainly come away with the feeling that they might be the answer to the conflict and that they are moderate.  Doesn't that mean a call for cooperation?

Note also that Norwegian researchers are brought to say that actually the Islamist movements are not as bad as they seem and they are even more democratic (?!) than the corrupt undemocratic regimes.  I'm not sure what they mean by that.  Sharia law is more democratic than current day Egyptian law?

Take a look here "Norway is going too far"  (with my translation) for more on Norway's attitudes towards Islamist movements.
 

Islam In Europe

 

Background of the muslim brotherhood:

http://www.coptsunited.com/sreport/sreport.php?subaction=showfull&id=1184411320&archive=&start_from=&ucat=8&

"breaking the monopoly on the debate ..... belonged to far-right and ultranationalist groups"

If this is so it is primarily due to European socialist organizations having refused any debate about this issue.
A proeminent element of the youth organization of Social Democrat party of Sweden stated not long ago "if the issue of the debate is the problems brought by emigration, we dont want such debate"

And they still refuse the debate. Did they spoke something about consulting european people on such issue? NO!

"wants to “listen” to the 20 million Muslims now living in Europe ....... alleviate their grievances."

What about listening to europeans and alleviate their grievanves? No!?

Go on and get ready to have more and more far-right an ultranacionalists MEPs in parliament.

'roughdoggo' (see, below, "Shooting the messenger") mentioned a FOREIGN AFFAIRS article by Robert S. Leiken and Steven Brooke.  The title of that article is "The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood" (pdf full text available free, online at http://www.nixoncenter.org/publications/LeikenBrookeMB.pdf).

It is a MUST READ piece of propaganda.  I'm sure it's no coincidence that the Bush administration, reportedly, has lately initiated formal diplomatic contacts with representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood.

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

On the face of it,roughdoggo would appear to be making the case(with some justification) that Fjordman doesn't know Jack Chick either.

[http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jack+shit]

I am sure that I am not alone in thinking that somewhere along the line,something  would appear to have been,shall we say," lost in translation",and that this is a state of affairs which has potentially dire  implications for the perceived integrity of all future articles written by Fjordman.Therefore,perhaps it would be as well if Fjordman responded to the roughdoggo post,and that he should do so at the earliest opportunity.

  

What Fjordman says about the quasi-left Norwegian tabloid (I hate to dignify the name of this rag with the word 'newspaper') Dagbladet is all well and good, except for one thing: nowhere in the article he hotlinks in support of his piece, does the newspaper state that we should cooperate with the Muslim Brotherhood!

Oh, I'll grant you that the headline says, loosely translated, "Moderate islamists are the solution". But to identify this as the newspaper's own statement is like a peacenik taking the New York Times to task for heading an article with "More Troops Necessary in Iraq" when reporting a statement by President Bush.

Were one to actually read the Dagbladet article, one finds that it is a report about a position taken by American (note that!) researchers Roberts S. Leiken and Steven Brooke writing in the influential American magazine Foreign Affairs. Dagbladet then goes on to interview several Norwegian researchers who support the Leiken/Brooke position to some extent. One of them, however, clearly makes the point that the election of Muslim Brotherhood to power might result in the suppression of democracy in some countries - in other words, a definite risk is involved.

The further point is made that while the Brotherhood might moderate itself in some political spheres for pragmatic purposes, it very well could compensate for any perceived loss of (fanatical) credibility amongst its followers by becoming even more repressive in other areas, as - for example - women's rights. The article ends with the opinions of the Egyptian feminist and writer Nawal el Saadawi, former member of the Brotherhood, now living in Belgium.

In short, although left-slanted in its choice of theme, the article nowhere says what Fjordman claims it does. Is Fjordman really a Norwegian living in Norway, or does he only purport to be? Given his odd take on the Dagbladet article, I'm beginning to wonder.

The final area where they might cooperate could be in the field of media (e.g.book) censorship.

 

Visit: http://hotair.com/archives/2007/08/02/hot-air-audio-how-one-wealthy-jihad-supporter-is-using-uk-courts-to-kill-american-free-speech/

 

 

You see,Fjordman,it's already happening.

 

Perhaps the Blogosphere IS our only remaining hope.

Another way EUrabians could show their multi-culti Islamist credentials  as well as their rapprochement with with "traditional" mainstream Euroislam is to continue to propagate their common conspiracy themes.

Visit: http://www.theaugeanstables.com

 

See: 9-11 Conspiracy and the Post-Modern Mutation.

 

I tell you ,Fjordman,this IS doable.

Socialists in the EU Parliament are pushing for a "Judeo-Christian-Islamic" Europe,whatever that is.Islam has nothing to do with European culture,regardless of what the European Union might say...

 

Not so fast,Fjordman, old chap.I think I might have stumbled upon a way for the Eurabians to sell their revisionist Euro fantasy of a shared common heritage between Judeo-Christian Europe and Islam,and this version pre dates even that of the mythical "Golden Age" of al-Andalus.

 

First,they get those 20 million Muslims on board with the idea that Jesus was the proto Marxist revolutionary they all believe him to have been.Next,they convince them of the clear link between their leftist views on such matters as 'diversity','secularism',the 'rule of law' and the 'place of women in society',and the Koran's teachings on these matters.Finally,they hit them with this:

 

http://www.squidoo.com/vaticanislamconspiracy/

 

I know it's a long shot but I think just about anything is possible in Eurabia today,save for the teaching of authentic history,culture  and everyday common sense. 

Does the PC left crowd REALLY think when islam takes over Europe they will be left to continue their insane PC correct attitudes? Some politician in Sweden said, "We must be nice to the muslims because when they are the majority they might be nice to us". Does this person in his wildest fantasies REALLY believe that? Does the current intoxication of political power the PC left now has blind them to historical reality? Does the desire for power today while ignoring the fact that you will loose your head tomorrow justify what you are doing today? Or does the PC left have a plan to convert to islam at the last second to save themselves while sacrificing everyone else? Can the PC left really change their ideology which is against EVERYTHING islam stands for or will it seep from their skin like sweat on a hot day exposing them for what they are until they have all lost their heads?

And if they were boths religions?

"Why does 'the left never learn?'....for the same reason Christianity never gives up on the second coming, the end of days, and so on....it is a religion."

You  need to learn the difference between an ideology and a religion.

Given the immense complexity of human affairs, emotions, economics, politics,....the biggest mistake one can make is to look for a single underlying answer to why this nexus exists. I can, off the top of my head, give a number of reasons, each of which has some validity; and I am sure there are many other reasons.

Why does 'the left never learn?'....for the same reason Christianity never gives up on the second coming, the end of days, and so on....it is a religion.

The left supports the moslems because (1) the European right bears the major historical guilt for murderous racism (esp. Nazism) and history has a very long memory. (2) They both hate America albeit for somewhat different reasons. (3) They both are statist. (4) They share a conviction and desire to spread their respective faiths.(5) The Nazis successfully spread their ideology to the mid-east before and during WW2, especially their intense anti-semitism.

Think of any reason youy like...it is bound to have some truth to it.

about Islamism that so attracts people of the left? One would think that the two groups would be anathema from their very beliefs to their ultimate solutions.

And this isn't even the first time: the left never learns.